You are on page 1of 1
practice,py most authorities in the European Union to use the argument of ‘discretion _fequirement” inforder to deny asylum to LGBTL asylum seaken (Jansen & Spijkerboer, 2011). The argumentation is based on the thought that if the asylum applicant conceals the LGBT identity inthe country of origin, then the persecution wil be prevented (Jansen & Spiikerboer, 2011), Offenthe discretion requirements pased onthe argumentation that there is an internal protection alternative inside the country of origin, that maybe in another place inside the country the person could start anew ‘sree life Jansen & Sperber, 2011). ‘The theoretical background of the discretion requirement, pitctiog dangerous forthe LGBTI asylum seeker because there is always a risk of discovery even if they are “discrete” about their identity. InSrder to protect LGBT asylum seeker, the UNHCR ( uae States that there i always the risk of voluntary discovery. Even where asyjum seer copleFGvoid the discovery, the state of living in constant fear of discovery that-may place ‘hem atrisk of harm isnot bearable fra lifetime. As Jansen and Spijkerboer 2011) gues” reasonably, even if it would be possible to conceal the LGBT] identity, shirwould stil be an a inhumaresituation in the permanent psychological state of fear. ‘The UNHCR drawgattention to this problematic practice and states in the UNHCR Guidance ‘Note on Refugee Claims Relating to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in the paras 25- 26

You might also like