Member of the Dutch parliament, Boris Dittrich is now based in New York as the advocacy director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Program at Human Rights Watch. In Kathmandu recently, he spoke with Laxmi Murthy.

How did you go from politics to be an advocate of the rights of sexual minorities?
I served as a Member of Parliament for more than 12 years with Democrats 66, a socialist party and was the leader of the party for three years from 2003. Wanting a break from active politics, I did not stand again, and decided instead to focus more on human rights work. My involvement with the European Parliament continues, and in September we are trying to lobby for a resolution to endorse the Yogjakarta principles [which codify the rights of people with different sexual orientation or gender identity].

How did you come to visit Nepal?
In 2006, during the HIV/AIDS conference at the UN, I led the team from Netherlands and, thanks to alphabetical listing of countries, sitting next to me was the team from Nepal. During the long sessions, I got talking to Sunil Pant, Director of the Blue Diamond Society (BDS). During the last few months, with all the churning that is going on in politics, identity and inclusion in Nepal, groups such as BDS working on the rights of marginalised sexualities, have also been taking the discussion forward. I was approached by the embassy of the Netherlands to come to Nepal, since I was also vice-chairman of parliament and of the Standing Committee on Justice, heading the constitutional affairs branch. Since Nepal is going through a process of constitutional revision, I was invited to share my experience of the Dutch Constitution and the European Constitution with Nepali parliamentarians.

Do you think such issues will get a hearing?
I individually met several ministers across parties. Everyone I met was supportive, and agreed that discrimination against sexual minorities (for instance the metis) is very wrong. They expressed their concern about recent incidents of metis being beaten up by the police. However, some senior leaders I met said that they were not aware of the issues of sexual minorities, whereupon, I tried to discuss ‘non-discrimination’, which is a very universal concept.

But why do sexual minorities need to be specifically mentioned in the new constitution?
Well, I am not here to tell politicians what to do. I can only share the European experience where it has been important to name sexual minorities to share a core value of inclusion, a sense of identity, and feeling of belonging. How this can be operationalised in Nepal needs to be worked out locally by organisations working with sexual minorities, such as the Blue Diamond Society, and the political parties. Because, if there is inclusion only in the Constitution, and the reality on the streets is different, it reduces inclusiveness to just a word on paper.

The most important is for society to recognise that it is wrong to discriminate against sexual minorities. As long the police can beat up metis and there is no public outcry, simply including some words in the constitution will not help. A just, wise, and sound constitution, is a constitution that serves as a unifying factor in society. It should reflect values that are non-negotiable. Especially in countries like Nepal where there is a great diversity of cultures, religions, race, people from different ethnic origins, castes, beliefs, sexual orientation and gender identity, an overall inclusive constitution plays a major role in bringing all these differences together.

Related Article
• Out of the closets