inquiry by the New Zealand Human Rights Commission documented for the first time the obstacles to dignity, equality and security for transgender people in that country, recommending changes in a range of areas including discrimination law, legal recognition and the provision of health services. 77 These developments have however been limited and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people continue to face a broad range of laws, policies and practices that deny or impinge upon their human rights – Limitations In Australia, the Australian Human Rights Commission’s recent 2007 report on the discrimination experienced by persons in same sex relationships provides a stark illustration of the very broad range of institutional discrimination endured by persons of diverse sexual orientation and gender identity. First and foremost, the report highlighted the absence of equal recognition of same-sex relationships, and documented discriminatory treatment in relation to: the recognition of children of same same-sex couples; employment; workers’ compensation; tax; social security; veteran’s entitlements; health care costs; family law; superannuation; aged care; and migration. While its findings were specific to Australia and led to significant changes in that jurisdiction, there is no doubt that similar forms of discrimination occur in many other countries. A graphic illustration of some of the more egregious practices that occur in many countries was highlighted by the Chief Justice of the Philippines Supreme Court in the Ang Ladlad case. 78 The judgment documents the violence and discrimination experienced by the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community in the Philippines citing amongst other things: • • • • • • the murders of gay men; parents or guardians beating effeminate or gay youth to ensure gender conformity; fathers allowing lesbian daughters to be raped to cure them; the use of an anti-kidnapping law to break up adult consensual same sex partnerships; the performance of exorcisms and other religious practices to cure LGBT persons; and forced psychiatric therapy and counselling to ‘cure’ young gays and lesbians. Again, while these examples were specific to the Philippines, there is no doubt that similar forms of discriminatory treatment occur in many other countries. In undertaking the reference, the ACJ noted in particular the impact of other laws, policies and practices impinging on rights to equality before the law, freedom from arbitrary detention and human treatment in detention, freedom from torture, privacy, health and freedom of expression, association and assembly. The impact on other rights is discussed further in the ACJ Background Paper in Chapter 2. 77 To Be Who I Am. Report of the Inquiry into Discrimination Experienced by Transgender People. Human Rights Commission of New Zealand. May 2009. Available at: www.hrc.co.nz/home/hrc/humanrightsenvironment/actiononthetransgenderinquiry/resources/transgenderinquirysummaryofsubm issions/transgenderinquirysummaryofsubmissions.php accessed on 21 May 2010. 78 Ang Ladlad LGBT Party Vs. Commission On Elections. G.R. No. 190582, April 8, 2010. Available at: http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/april2010/190582.htm accessed on 30 May 2010. ACJ Report: Human Rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity 26