How did CoAL begin?

(Photos © Sand Hall)

(Gabby C, Australia)

CoAL was formed in Australia in late 1993 to work towards the end of discrimination against lesbians. We work with the UN Convention to Eliminate All forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). We want lesbian concerns to be specifically addressed by the articles in CEDAW.

(Eileen Pittaway and others marching for Lesbian Visibility at the Beijing Conference)

CoAL was the first lesbian NGO (non-government organisation) to gain UN ECOSOC (Economic and Social Council) accreditation as a Civil Society Participant with accreditation for Consultative Status.

(Bev Ditsie, South Africa, in the Lesbian Tent)

We were active at the NGO gathering of the Fourth World Conference on Women convened by the United Nations in Beijing in 1995, contributing to the first overtly lesbian presence at a UN NGO Conference, including the Lesbian Tent.

(Lesbian Tent Commitee meeting)

This required great preparation beforehand. Firstly, in 1993 a small group of lesbians worked on wording for the Platform of Action. Then in 1994 a CoAL member (Eileen Pittaway) attended the Asia/Pacific Forum in Manila to work on a draft action plan and areas important for women. This draft plan was then worked on by Australian NGOs through CAPOW (Coalition of Australian Participating Organisations of Women) and meetings were held in various locations to pool ideas. A final compromise on language was to use the term ‘sexual orientation’ when discussing lesbian issues, which was written into parts of the sections in the NGO Platform for Actions.

Dyke TV US interview)

CoAL had a high profile in Beijing both at the NGO gathering and at the Conference where CoAL members Barbara Palmer and Eileen Pittaway represented lesbian issues and lobbied hard, but with little success.

There are currently 6,494 NGOs in active consultative status with ECOSOC, and even in 1995, with fewer accredited NGOs, they had a hard battle to influence governments participating in the Conference.

The final version of the Platform for Action produced by the Conference did NOT specifically recognise that lesbians face barriers to full equality. The specific reference to ‘sexual orientation’ was omitted  and replaced with the term ‘other status’ in the key statement #46 in Chapter IV STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS of the Report of the Conference:

“46, The Platform for Action recognizes that women face barriers to full equality and advancement because of such factors as their race, age, language, ethnicity, culture, religion or disability, because they are indigenous women or because of other status. Many women encounter specific obstacles related to their family status, particularly as single parents; and to their socio-economic status, including their living conditions in rural, isolated or impoverished areas. Additional barriers also exist for refugee women, other displaced women, including internally displaced women as well as for immigrant women and migrant women, including women migrant workers. Many women are also particularly affected by environmental disasters, serious and infectious diseases and various forms of violence against women.”

A close reading of the Report reveals that many governments sought and were granted a large number of amendments to various sections. Only three nation states supported the rights of lesbians: Israel, South Africa and the United States.

The final Report and Platform for Action of the Conference notes:

“1. At the 16th plenary meeting, on 15 September 1995, the Conference considered agenda item 10 (Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action of the Fourth World Conference on Women). The Chairperson of the Main Committee of the Conference, Patricia B. Licuanan (Philippines), made a statement.

2. At the same meeting, the representative of the Philippines, on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the Group of 77, introduced a draft resolution (A/CONF.177/L.9) whereby the Conference would adopt the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action and recommend them to the General Assembly for endorsement at its fiftieth session. The Conference then adopted the draft resolution (for the text, see chap. I, resolution 1).

3. After the draft resolution was adopted, representatives of the following States made general and interpretative statements or expressed reservations on the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action: Peru, Kuwait, Egypt, Philippines, Holy See, Malaysia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Ecuador, Indonesia, Mauritania, Oman, Malta, Argentina, Brunei Darussalam, France, Yemen, Sudan, Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, Bahrain, Lebanon, Tunisia, Mali, Benin, Guatemala, India, Algeria, Iraq, Vanuatu, Ethiopia, Morocco, Djibouti, Qatar, Nicaragua, Togo, Liberia, Syrian Arab Republic, Pakistan, Nigeria, Comoros, Bolivia, Colombia, Bangladesh, Honduras, Jordan, Ghana, Central African Republic, Cambodia, Maldives, South Africa, United Republic of Tanzania, Brazil, Panama, El Salvador, Madagascar, Chad, Cameroon, Niger, Gabon, United States of America and Canada. The observer for Palestine also made a statement. Reservations and interpretative statements on the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action 4. The representatives of a number of countries made statements which they requested the secretariat of the Conference to place on record. Only 3 objected to the lack of  specific language to include lesbian rights and their statements are set out below.

17. The representative of Israel submitted the following written statement:

The delegation of Israel to the Fourth World Conference on Women wishes to submit the following interpretative statement on paragraph 46 of the Platform for Action. Israel would have preferred that explicit reference be made to the particular barriers faced by women because of their sexual orientation. However, in light of the interpretation given to the words “other status” by, inter alia, the United Nations Human Rights Committee, we interpret the words “other status” to include sexual orientation.

30. The representative of South Africa submitted the following written statement:

The South African delegation interprets paragraph 96, which reads, “The human rights of women include their right to have control over and decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality, including sexual and reproductive health, free of coercion, discrimination and violence”, to include the right to be free from coercion, discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation.

The South African delegation wants to make it very clear that it does not want to be associated with any form of discrimination

32. The representative of the United States of America submitted the following written statement:

Interpretative statement on the Beijing Declaration The United States understands that the phrase “hereby adopt and commit ourselves as Governments to implement the … Platform for Action” contained in the Beijing Declaration, and other similar references throughout the texts, are consistent with the fact that the Platform, Declaration and commitments made by States (unless such States indicate to the contrary) are not legally binding, and that they consist of recommendations concerning how States can and should promote the objectives of the Conference. The commitment referred to in the Declaration, therefore, constitutes a general commitment to undertake meaningful implementation of the Platform’s recommendations overall, rather than a specific commitment to implement each element of the Platform. Accordingly, the United States accepts this phrase on this basis, on the understanding that it does not alter the status of the documents, or the recommendations contained therein.

Paragraph 46 The United States Government has a firm policy of non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and considers that the omission of this reference in paragraph 46 and elsewhere in the Platform for Action in no way justifies such discrimination in any country.

There was no Statement by the Australian Prime Minister. The Fourth UN Conference on Women had been held in September 1995; Keating’s Labor government lost the election in March 1996, bringing in the conservative John Howard.

COAL continued to attend meetings of the UN CSW (Commission on the Status of Women) and was instrumental in drawing up the report from Australian NGOs to rebut the Howard Government’s report to the Australian OSW (Office of the Status of Women). It created publicity in Australia when Barbara Palmer presented it to delegates in New York in 1996.

In 2021 we amended the capitalisation of the organisation(from COAL to CoAL). UK