Share

Share this

Share on Facebook Share on Facebook Tweet Share on Twitter Share on WhatsApp Share on WhatsApp

SUBSCRIBE TO THE NEWSLETTER

Seventeen years have passed since the day Crissthian Olivera and his then-partner (who passed away in January 2020) were discriminated against and removed from a supermarket. They were showing affection in front of everyone, just like other heterosexual couples who were also there and whom no one singled out .

Outraged by the injustice they were experiencing, in 2004 they became the first Peruvians to denounce an act of homophobic discrimination in a social context that was highly repressive for LGBTQ+ people. State institutions ultimately reflected what society held: that homosexuals could not "show themselves" in the streets, that they had to be locked in their homes or hotel rooms to love each other.

“It was the first case of discrimination based on sexual orientation that came to light in 2004, and there wasn't the awareness that exists now regarding the rights of LGBTI people. There was this situation of stigma and discrimination that exists at the societal and cultural level, and the legal system, the administration of justice, Indecopi (the consumer protection agency), and the Judiciary reproduced it, and that's why we didn't win and we didn't find justice, because a set of human rights and judicial guarantees were not respected throughout the entire process,” Crissthian told Presentes.

The path in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

On September 16, after the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) decided to review his case, Olivera's defense team submitted the ESAP report (Written Statement of Requests, Arguments, and Evidence), in which the petitioning entities and the victims detail their reparations and the structural issues underlying the case. This report was also sent to the Peruvian State, which has two months to respond. The IACHR then makes several decisions in preparation for a hearing on the case, which is expected to take place in March 2022.

Crissthian's lawyer, Carlos Zelada, pointed out that the case provides the Court with an opportunity to address the issue of public displays of affection by LGBTQ+ people. This is particularly important now, given the attacks against progress in protections and guarantees for sexual and gender diversity. Excuses such as "the best interests of the child" or "morality and good customs" are used to restrict, limit, obstruct, or deny rights.

“We seek justice for Crissthian, who has shown great strength and resilience in a very difficult context to sue a company. This marks a milestone not only for him to receive reparations, but also for achieving justice for so many people who have gone through worse situations and were unable to speak out. We hope that the Peruvian State will apologize to him for what they failed to do at the time. The case also raises the issue of mental health care for those who have been discriminated against and follows the precedent set by other landmark cases, such as the Atala case ,” Zelada told Presentes.

A favorable ruling will change paradigms

This is a new case for the Court's jurisprudence, which has never had a case concerning public displays of affection by LGBTQ+ people, nor the actions of companies in these circumstances, so its decision will be of regional interest and will impact all the countries involved.

If the Inter-American Court of Human Rights rules in favor of the case, it will establish jurisprudence on public affections and change paradigms in the judicial system regarding the standard of proof in discrimination cases . It will also pave the way for the Peruvian State to design policies for the LGBTQ+ population, designate an entity responsible for developing and implementing these policies, and assess the impact of discriminatory acts against LGBTQ+ people on their mental health.

“I encourage everyone to always report any instances of discrimination they may experience in their lives, and not to be intimidated by either the aggressors or the system that sometimes pushes you to give up, to throw in the towel. We know that justice delayed is justice denied, but it's never too late for equality. Despite all the years that have passed, it has been worth it for the results we will reap,” Crissthian concludes.