In recent months much attention has been given moral dilemma of deporting gay individuals to countries where they face persecution. In early March a gay Malaysian man was denied asylum by the Canadian government and forced to return home; he is currently being sought by the Malaysian police. This sort of story undoubtedly strikes a chord with LGBT South Asians: issues of immigration, rejection, and persecution fall close to many of our personal experiences.
The UK is now reviewing the government's deportation order of Medhi Kazemi, a 19-year-old gay Iranian. His family says Medhi faces execution if he is sent home, where his former boyfriend has already been hanged. UK's Guardian today published an introspective piece on what Britain should recognize as torture to grant asylum. The writer, Scott Long, criticizes the nation for taking steps to disambiguate their definition of torture, sending back individuals who will unquestionably face grave danger.
The article is lengthy, but interesting. Long calls for the UK relieve the burden of proof from Kazemi. Any law "prescribing death or torture for gay Iranians, [those in question] need not demonstrate the details of past persecution" by the State. After reading this article, we'd like to see what you think. What constitutes torture? Is Britain justified in deporting Kazemi? Does Long's argument deserve merit and attention from lawmakers?
The Issue of Torture
Image take from: http://www.slapupsidethehead.com/