Genderinfo.nl
News

UN Resolutions on Gender

The hall of the United Nations General Assembly in New York
Photo: Basil D Soufi, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Through the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly, the United Nations has adopted several resolutions addressing violence and discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI). These resolutions are not legally binding and — contrary to what is sometimes suggested in Dutch policy documents — there is no global consensus on the term 'gender' or on recognizing 'gender identity' as a protected ground. The UN discourse surrounding gender is politically contested, and voting patterns in Geneva and New York reflect this.

The UN system in brief

The relevant bodies are:

  • The Human Rights Council (HRC): an intergovernmental body that adopts resolutions and commissions reports.
  • The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR): the secretariat that conducts research and reports.
  • The General Assembly: the plenary body that issues broad declarations.
  • Treaty bodies: supervisory bodies established under treaties such as the ICCPR and CEDAW.

Important Human Rights Council resolutions

Resolution 17/19 (2011) was the first UN resolution to explicitly draw attention to human rights violations on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity. The resolution was adopted by 23 votes in favour, 19 against and 3 abstentions — hardly an overwhelming majority. Subsequent resolutions (27/32 in 2014 and 32/2 in 2016) established an Independent Expert on SOGI and extended the mandate. Each time, they were adopted by narrow margins and faced substantial opposition from African, Asian and Islamic member states. The mandate of the IE SOGI is not a treaty provision; in principle, it can also be withdrawn.

More information can be found on the OHCHR website.

The contested nature of 'gender' in UN documents

The word 'gender' is politically charged in UN terminology. Negotiations over conference declarations involve intense annual debate about its meaning. Two positions stand opposed to one another:

  • An interpretation in which 'gender' refers only to the social dimension of men and women — effectively synonymous with 'sex' in a sociological context. This interpretation is explicitly set out in the Rome Statute, which was adopted on 17 July 1998 at a UN diplomatic conference in Rome: 'the term "gender" refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society.'
  • A broader interpretation in which 'gender' also includes 'gender identity' irrespective of biological sex. This view is advanced by Western states, NGOs and the Independent Expert on SOGI, but is not accepted by a considerable proportion of UN member states.

The Russian Federation, a number of African and Asian countries and the Holy See repeatedly advocate reaffirming the narrow definition. There is also tension in the CEDAW context: the treaty protects 'women', which various states interpret as referring exclusively to biological sex, while the CEDAW Committee adopts a broader interpretation in its General Recommendations.

Women's rights and the term 'gender'

An important criticism that is underrepresented in the Netherlands comes from feminist circles. As 'gender' in the UN context gradually came to include 'gender identity', data and rights that had previously focused on 'women' (in the sense of biological sex) became conceptually blurred. A number of feminist thinkers and organizations (DBT, Women's Declaration International, and many rapporteurs in the CEDAW context) point out that precise terminology is necessary to continue addressing issues such as female genital mutilation, maternal mortality, unpaid care work and sexual violence in a coherent manner.

The Independent Expert on SOGI

The IE SOGI reports annually to the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly. The position is not uncontested; whenever the mandate is renewed, motions are introduced to abolish the function, each time receiving substantial opposition. Some states view the expert's substantive output as policy proposals rather than interpretations of human rights. For example, in 2020 the expert called on all states to ban conversion therapy; see ban on conversion therapy. Why extending such a ban to gender identity is controversial is explained on conversiewet.nl, in the article on gender identity in the conversion therapy law.

Treaty bodies

Treaty bodies such as the Human Rights Committee (ICCPR) and CEDAW make recommendations to states. These 'concluding observations' are not binding, but are presented as authoritative interpretations. The same applies to the Yogyakarta Principles, which do not have treaty status. The broader framework is set out under international rights. A number of states, including the United States and the United Kingdom, have explicitly objected to interpretations that expand upon the original treaty text.

The Netherlands and the UN

The Netherlands voted in favour of the SOGI resolutions and provides financial support for the mandate of the IE SOGI. At the same time, the Netherlands itself receives recommendations from treaty bodies, for example concerning the position of women in employment and violence against women — areas in which the conflation of 'sex' and 'gender' in official statistics has by now become a methodological challenge.

See also