State Responses to Anti-LGBT Violence

This introductory chapter lays the groundwork for a comprehensive analysis of the challenges in developing state responses to anti-LGBT hate crimes. Integrating key findings from queer politics and criminological studies that examine the complex interactions between LGBT communities and the state, the chapter explores the intricate dynamics between state policies, societal attitudes, and activism in the formulation and implementation of the hate crime policy model. This analysis is placed within the broader context of how Western democracies address various threats and uncertainties. The primary argument suggests that “progressive” states exhibit a complex and contradictory approach to anti-LGBT violence. Despite advancements in legal protections, internal inconsistencies and inflammatory rhetoric fuel societal polarisation, casting doubt on efforts to eradicate discrimination, hate speech, and violence against LGBT individuals.

This chapter offers an overview of factors influencing the acceptance of anti-LGBT hate crime policies, including political circumstances, public opinion, economic status, global rights norms, European unification, and inter-state operations. Additionally, it contemplates deterrents to adoption such as issue prominence, normative conflicts, and the influence of religious entities and gender-focused movements. An exploration of both internal and external determinants deepens our understanding of hate crime norm transition, supplementing existing explanations. The chapter reveals that combined considerations of both determinants prove most effective, particularly in newer adopter nations and less receptive societies. It suggests that the conditions under which the law is endorsed affect the enactment of the hate crime model. Democratic, affluent states supportive of LGBT people tend to make more substantial advancements in fighting hate crimes. Lastly, the chapter acknowledges the escalating influence of transnational opponents who mobilise against what they categorise as gender/LGBT ideology.

This chapter probes the complexities of the internationalisation of anti-LGBT hate crime as a policy issue, focusing on the responses of international bodies. It introduces a fresh analysis of international standards, shedding light on both the prevailing normative diversity and the intensifying focus on anti-LGBT hate crimes from international organisations. The research indicates that much of the present protection arises from soft law or reinterpretations of codified international law. This makes the safeguards for anti-LGBT hate crimes less robust than those for crimes prompted by racism, xenophobia, misogyny, or disablism. Despite these challenges, the chapter notes the beginning of the development of a multi-tiered governance framework for anti-LGBT hate crime. This structure comprises increasingly harmonised legal standards, monitoring and complaint mechanisms, financial incentives, and technical assistance, which are all advantageous for LGBT victims. The chapter further explores the impact of this evolution on national policy and practice.

This chapter undertakes a comprehensive analysis of European countries’ approaches to addressing anti-LGBT hate crimes. Moving beyond simplistic analyses focused solely on policy adoption, the study compares legal frameworks with data on law enforcement and criminal justice effectiveness, as well as the lived experiences of LGBT people. The objective is to provide a thorough, nuanced, and realistic assessment of the actions taken by states in response to anti-LGBT hate crimes. The chapter maps out the strategies employed by different governments and categorises countries into three groups: (1) comprehensive protection (nine countries); (2) partial protection (34 countries); and (3) limited protection (six countries). This categorisation facilitates the formulation of hypotheses regarding the combination of factors (identified in Chapter 2) that potentially account for the observed outcomes within each group. In conclusion, the chapter discusses the diffusion patterns of the international hate crime model and highlights the significance of conducting an in-depth analysis of Poland as a deviant case.

This chapter combines a review of existing literature with new research to scrutinise the multifaceted elements that shape the approach to anti-LGBT hate crime in Poland. It uncovers that the combined influence of sociodemographic factors, political transformation, European Union membership, party politics, constitutional crises, the politicisation of LGBT issues, and the rise of the anti-gender movement has fostered an environment where LGBT rights have become a primary moral issue that politicians exploit to create divisions. Despite pressure from non-governmental organisations and international entities, and amidst the liberalisation of society, no government has advocated for the amendment of the Criminal Code to acknowledge anti-LGBT hate speech and hate crimes in this high-stakes context. Further, by mapping the distinct political paths of various LGBT rights legislative proposals, the chapter reveals a nuanced landscape of opposition. In this landscape, the ambiguous position towards hate speech and hate crime laws differs from the complete dismissal of legislation pertaining to same-sex partnerships. The chapter highlights the importance of this granular approach in assessing the adoption of the hate crime model and lays the groundwork for more comprehensive analysis of the problems and opportunities related to combating anti-LGBT hate crimes and the effects of these initiatives.

Centred on how advocacy priorities and framing tactics influence public discourse and political outcomes, this chapter initiates a two-part analysis of the complexities of advocating against anti-LGBT hate crimes in Poland. The investigation shows that the appeal for the recognition of registered partnerships entered the political agenda prior to the call to broaden hate speech and hate crime laws, and that the organisational frameworks advocating for marriage equality are more established than those campaigning for improved anti-hate crime measures. The chapter delves further into how anti-LGBT hate crime is characterised as a policy issue and asserts that the bundled framing of LGBT rights is less than ideal, as opposition to one element could lead to the rejection of the entire package. Lastly, the chapter explores the link between hate crime and hate speech, contending that the emphasis on broadly defined hate speech, albeit unintentionally, has adversely impacted the acknowledgement of hate crime as a policy concern. The chapter underlines the necessity for enhanced framing and heightened visibility of hate crime in advocacy campaigns to effectively tackle this problem.

This chapter is the second part of a two-part analysis of anti-LGBT hate crime activism in Poland. It focuses on international advocacy efforts to improve legal protection against anti-LGBT violence. Using Keck and Sikkink’s “boomerang” model, the chapter explores how local activists employ the UN and Council of Europe human rights machinery to pressure the government to amend hate speech and hate crime laws. The author argues that the externalisation of anti-LGBT hate crime as a policy issue is a result of the closing of political opportunity structures in Poland and the appearance of advocacy opportunities abroad. This is further enabled by transnational and intersectional coalitions and increased resources available to the LGBT movement. Although there is currently no political will to recognise SOGI grounds in hate speech and hate crime laws in Poland, the chapter notes signs of progress as bureaucrats in Warsaw begin to take note of international trends and recommendations for improved legal protection from hate crime.

This chapter uses original data to scrutinise the official efforts towards the proposed expansion of hate speech and hate crime laws to include grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity in Poland between 2005 and 2022. The analysis reveals a façade of work that primarily aims to maintain the status quo, a strategy driven by the prevailing fear that criminalising hate speech might legitimise further rights for LGBT people. Beyond the anti-LGBT attitudes, the study uncovers specific norms within criminal law that act against the adoption of the international hate crime model. These traditional, offender-focused norms, entrenched since the Second World War, aim to prevent extremism and preserve peace by punishing acts of racism and xenophobia, thus posing a challenge to the recognition of additional protected grounds. The chapter argues that, while the adoption of the international hate crime model hinges on political opportunities, lawmakers should facilitate a smooth norm transfer. This implies that the extant narrow norm should be replaced with a broader, rights-based approach centred on victims and their needs. Such a shift requires a nuanced evolution in law-making, replacing paternalism with a commitment to rights and inclusivity, thereby ensuring consistency within legislation and legal practice.

The chapter delves into how homophobia and transphobia have been acknowledged by Polish authorities in specific hate crime policing practices and data gathering endeavours, despite the failure to enact legislation against anti-LGBT hate speech and hate crimes. The analysis singles out a range of internal and external factors that enabled the adoption of the international hate crime concept in law enforcement and criminal justice policy and practice. These include criticism for neglecting to counter racism and allowing extremism to spread; political windows created by the planning for a substantial international event; capacity enhancement opportunities offered by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights; and characterising modifications in policy and practice as technical improvements in alignment with the current policy course. The chapter illustrates the roles of policy learning and socialisation as conduits for norm transmission and accentuates the contribution of advocacy communities—dedicated public officials, international intermediaries, and NGOs—in driving these changes. Utilising data from interviews and archival research, the chapter illuminates the complex dynamics of hate crime policy and practice in Poland.

This chapter concludes a comprehensive study on Poland’s response to anti-LGBT hate crimes, highlighting a unique discrepancy where such crimes are recognised in practice but not codified into law. Despite advancements in data collection and some police practices, until the end of 2023 Poland remained without legal provisions specifically addressing hate crimes based on sexual orientation and gender identity. This situation reflects a broader, complex interplay of international policy influences, societal liberalisation, and the LGBT community’s activism. Key findings suggest that Poland’s approach, while indicative of subtle progress, underscores the challenges of aligning practice with policy in a conservative political climate. The implications of these findings extend beyond national borders, offering insights for global queer politics and the study of hate crimes. They emphasise the importance of considering local contexts in global policy transfers, and the potential for research to inform more effective, inclusive hate crime legislation and enforcement strategies worldwide.

This book adopts a tri-level approach to analysing state responses to hate crime in the context of global queer politics. At the macro level, the analysis focuses on international governance.