Countries around the world celebrate Human Rights Day today — but in Bermuda a basic human right for all citizens is still not on the statute books. The Premier has promised that a long-awaited change to the Human Rights Act to outlaw discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation will soon be debated in Parliament. The Royal Gazette looks at why the amendment matters.

Former Premier Alex Scott says he had a simple reason for not supporting an amendment to the law to protect people from discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation when he was in charge of the country.

He told The Royal Gazette in an interview last month: "It was my view at the time that everyone was protected by the language currently expressed in the Human Rights Act but should there prove to be a case or an event or an incident or an individual who brought a case to the court and it was decided that they were not protected by the Act that currently exists, then we would take it under review."

It is a view which was also held by Mr. Scott's Cabinet but not one which any of them felt the need to explain publicly when a private member's bill from MP Renee Webb seeking an amendment came before the House of Assembly in May 2006.

Perhaps that's because it contains an inherent contradiction, one which will not have escaped those who believe they have been discriminated against because of their sexual orientation in Bermuda.

Such citizens — be they gay, straight or bisexual — have no legal recourse on the Island and no local agency they can turn to for help, making it difficult, if not impossible, to bring the kind of test case which might have propelled Mr. Scott's government into action.

The Human Rights Commission, the body tasked with making the Human Rights Act 1981 work for the benefit of all Bermudians, has to — and does — turn away anyone complaining about discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Chairwoman Venous Memari explains that the quango has neither the power to help them, nor the resources to even keep a tally of the number of such grievances.

She says the pro-amendment argument has often been viewed as one about gay rights — and the "curious" counter argument from those against changing the Act has been that gays are already protected.

"It should be pointed out that no one in Bermuda has the protection of the law on the basis of his or her sexuality," she insists.

The Human Rights Act as it stands does not include sexual orientation as a prohibited ground of discrimination.

The Bermuda Constitution guarantees protection against discrimination only on the grounds of race, place of origin, political opinions, colour or creed.

"In short, we have no rights or redress under the laws of Bermuda in respect of our sexual orientation," says Ms Memari.

"At best, a person who has been discriminated against because of his or her sexual orientation can seek relief before the European Court in an action against the United Kingdom claiming that the Constitution and the Human Rights Act do not conform with the European Convention.

"This remedy is most impractical given the time, effort and expense that an aggrieved party would be forced to undergo in order to protect a fundamental right guaranteed by all other western democracies."

The idea that the law must be changed is one which has apparently been taken on board by the current Premier.

Insiders say that though the Human Rights Act amendment is not number one on Ewart Brown's list of priorities, he has absolutely nothing against a change in the law.

His spokesman Arnold Minors confirmed last month, after a promise was made in the Throne Speech: "The Act will be clear that you will not be able to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation."

But the views of Dr. Brown's Cabinet members may be quite another thing. Culture Minister Neletha Butterfield — who will be responsible for tabling the amendment — revealed last month that the Cabinet had previously rejected it.

She has ignored numerous requests from this newspaper to outline her own stance on the matter.

Her predecessor Dale Butler told this newspaper that Cabinet knocked it back twice when he held the ministerial brief.

Opponents of the amendment have claimed that the addition of "sexual orientation" to the Human Rights Act is not needed because discrimination on that basis doesn't happen in Bermuda. Does that view hold any water?

Progressive Labour Party activist and avid blog-poster LaVerne Furbert has this to say online recently on the issue of renting out property to gay tenants: "I can tell you that I personally would have a problem renting my apartment to two gay men or two lesbian women who were open with their sexual orientation.

"Whether I will still feel that way in five years time, I don't know. But I do believe presently that I should have some choice as to who I want to live in the building that I own."

It works the other way too. Peter Carpenter, who campaigned in the early 1990s in favour of the Stubbs Bill, which legalised homosexual acts, says: "Some day I'm going to have a house to rent and, as the law currently stands, I can advertise this house for only a gay couple.

"I can't legally advertise for only a black couple or for only a married couple. That would be discriminatory in terms of race and marital status.

"But I can legally advertise the rental of my house for a gay couple only."

Another online post — this time on Dr. Brown's Facebook page by a male writer — provides a poignant example of prejudice suffered in Bermuda.

The man told the Premier last month: "I am Canadian, gay and legally married to a wonderful, intelligent beautiful Bermudian man.

"My husband and I have been struggling with same-sex human rights in Bermuda for close to a decade."

He added: "We encounter incredible challenges due to Bermuda's archaic thinking around same-sex issues within the ability to satisfy immigration in Bermuda.

"Dr. Brown, I encourage you to be a leader and lead this issue to where it needs to be in the year 2010."

He continued: "I have not posted a picture of myself for fear of being harmed in Bermuda. My fear is real, my heart is real, and my love for my husband is real."

Sylvia Hayward-Harris, from campaign group Two Words and A Comma, says a survey done here a couple of years ago revealed that 16 percent of people felt they had been discriminated against on the grounds of their sexual orientation.

Hearteningly, 93 percent of respondents thought discrimination ought to be outlawed.

Ms Hayward-Harris, a pastor for the Vision Church of Bermuda, says: "There's a lot of fear that it's going to lead to gay marriage.

"People will say that the Bible expressly forbids gay relationships. It doesn't — but that's a different argument."

She explains that all an amendment would do would be to ensure that citizens could not be discriminated against in terms of employment, accommodation and certain services, based on their sexual orientation. "Why should anybody be singled out for any reason to be discriminated against?" she asks. "Everyone has a sexual orientation. It could just as easily be someone who is so-called straight who is discriminated against because they are straight.

"We ask that that not [be allowed to] happen either. All people should be protected." The May 2006 amendment failed after only two MPs — including Ms Webb — stood up on the floor of the House to speak on the bill.

Members of the African Methodist Episcopal Church opposed the change and an article was given to MPs in Parliament that day declaring: "Devil spirits are the true cause of homosexuality."

Mr. Carpenter, who is gay, recalls once being told by a waitress in a Hamilton restaurant that she couldn't serve him because of her religious faith.

"I found it interesting that a woman should justify her discrimination to me according to a circumstance about herself which is protected by the Human Rights Act," he says. "That's what I find shameful about any religious argument against a group that does not have protection. You have the protection that I can't discriminate against you but I have no protection, so you discriminate against me."

Parliament finishes on Friday for the Christmas holidays and campaigners hope the amendment will be tabled early in the New Year.

Ministry of Culture permanent secretary Wayne Carey would not give a date yesterday, saying only that: "We intend to make amendments to the Human Rights Act sometime during this parliamentary session."

Three-and-half years on from Renee Webb's bill, no one is certain exactly how the new amendment will be worded, when it will appear or whether MPs will have the courage this time to share their views with voters.

As Ayo Johnson, from Two Words, says: "The amendment is not rocket science. Nor is it something that threatens the social fabric. It is a simple non-discrimination provision that will benefit all of us."

¦ Visit www.twowordsandacomma.com to find out more about the campaign.