The EU has been courageous in championing gay rights up to now. So why the backtracking on an important piece of anti-discrimination law?

A few years ago, I met two Northern Irish men who had recently wed in Brussels. They weren't hosting the dinner party at which I first encountered them. But they were certainly the centre of attention as they humorously answered questions about who had proposed to whom and whether their parents approved of a "mixed marriage" (one was Catholic, the other Protestant).

Because this was not long after Belgium became the second country in the world to legalise same-sex marriages, there was naturally something exotic about my compatriots availing themselves of a right denied to them at home (on either side of the Irish border). With gay marriages or civil partnerships now allowed in over one-third of the EU's 27 countries, their novelty status has probably faded slightly in the interim.

Of course, the wider recognition of gay rights by officialdom is something to be applauded. But that doesn't there are any grounds for complacency, as has been illustrated this week by the European commission backtracking disgracefully on a pledge - contained in its 2008 work programme - to extend the scope of EU anti-discrimination law.

At the moment EU legislation in this area only covers discrimination in employment. To remedy this situation, the commission was supposed to come forward with a proposal to ban other forms of discrimination based on religion, sexual orientation or age to prevent, say, a landlord rejecting potential tenants simply because they are too effeminate for his liking. Instead of taking this comprehensive approach, the commission is saying that it will now only recommend that binding EU measures be introduced to outlaw bias against people with disabilities.

The reason cited by Brussels officials for this capitulation is that they do not believe a wider law would win sufficient support from EU governments. That is a lame excuse for breaking a promise.

The urgency of having comprehensive protection for gay men and women was underscored earlier this month by the European court of justice, in a case (pdf) taken by a German man who was refused a survivor's pension following his partner's death. According to the court, this constituted direct discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.

There is also a deep irony behind the commission's volte-face. To their credit, both EU governments and the commission have hitherto demonstrated some courage in defending gay rights. In 2005, the EU was the first bloc of countries to urge that abuses faced by homosexuals should be dealt with by the UN's top human rights body. A year later, Vladimir Spidla, the European commissioner for social affairs, told the Polish government that its efforts to ban the promotion of homosexuality by teachers were unacceptable.

I fear that the commission's more recent pandering towards the homophobes of this continent could be part of a pattern. At present, there is a vacancy in the EU executive thanks to the departure of Franco Frattini, who is returning to his old job as Italy's foreign minister. One man touted as a possible replacement for Frattini is the MEP Mario Mauro, a vociferous opponent of calls for same-sex marriages to be allowed across the EU.

The only good thing is that the commission has ruled out giving a new Italian nominee responsibility for the justice portfolio that Frattini held. Given that Mauro has a warped sense of justice, we can be thankful for that small mercy.

 Source: http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/david_cronin/2008/04/keep_on_moving.html