Report of the Conference SESSION 7: CLOSING ADDRESS AND REMARKS Keynote closing address Sonia Onufer Corrêa, Co-chair of Sexuality Policy Watch Closing reflections • Luc Stevens, UN Resident Coordinator and UNDP Resident Representative • Midnight Poonkasetwattana, Executive Director, APCOM • Nadika Nadja, Working Group Member, Sampoorna • Hiker Chiu, Founder, OII Chinese Moderator Pip Dargan, Deputy Director, Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions The closing session was aimed at reflecting on the challenges and exploring the way forward – “where to now?” To start the session, Sonia Onufer Corrêa addressed a number of key challenges and potentialities in the revision and application of the Yogyakarta Principles in the future, with a clear linkage between the past and the present. The importance of retracing the genealogy of the Yogyakarta Principles in relation to human rights epistemologies as well as the articulation of human rights, genders and sexualities was highlighted. The contribution of feminist theory on sexuality constructs, heteronormativity and bodily integrity was emphasised, alongside the trans-theorising critique of the gender binary in the common human rights language. The world conditions were not exactly perfect when the Principles were crafted ten years ago. Obstacles in respect to adopting language on human rights and sexual orientation and gender identity in these intergovernmental negotiations were massive, as it became clear in the episode of the failed resolution tabled by Brazil in 2003. However, the landscape still remains challenging, as indicated by the continuing violence and discrimination in many parts of the world. The shrinking civil society spaces, the continuous growth and diffusion of politicised religious dogmatism and morality, the erosion of secularity, and increasing violations by non-state actors are among these challenges. Increased inequalities and contradictory logics of inclusion and exclusion deriving from the ways in which late capitalism orders the world, have been feeding the revivals of entrenched sovereignty, populism and authoritarianism and the potential threats against international and regional human rights systems. The need to use more energy and inspiration to continue to move forward in promoting the Principles and the necessity to expand and intensify horizontal cross-boundary communication about losses, gains and strategies of resistance cannot be ignored. Bringing the Yogyakarta Principles closer to the people on the ground and especially to those who most need it was underlined. Translating the principles to more accessible language, and to transcribe them in an emotional language are expected to enhance their ownership. The gap between norms and reality needs to be bridged. While converting the Yogyakarta Principles to a binding international instrument may help in this regard, there do not seem to be the right conditions for such a change. Rather, making the Principles more ‘binding’ through the work of Human Rights Committees, Universal Periodical Review processes and other mechanisms may be the way forward. Similarly, infusing or spreading the spirit of the Principles within the existing international instruments may be more effective. In view of the many intractable challenges in realising human rights in many parts of the world, we must remind ourselves that human rights are at once indispensable and often insufficient. Yet, there is also the need to conceptually and programmatically revise the Principles. 41