Legal Battlegrounds

Over the past decade, LGBTI+ rights have faced an alarming wave of legal and political regression worldwide. Legal Battlegrounds, the first working paper of the Global LGBTI+ Rights Commission, documents how governments across every region have introduced or reinstated laws that curtail equality, expression, and safety for LGBTI+ people.

This landmark consultation paper analyses global rollbacks across 2016–2025. By drawing on legal analysis, policy data, and lived experience, the report identifies recurring justifications that underpin a growing international playbook of repression.

This report is accompanied by a global consultation inviting activists, civil society, researchers, and policymakers to contribute evidence and insights. Their input will shape a future White Paper outlining strategies to defend and advance global human rights.

🔗 Read the report and respond to the consultation questions below
🔗 Learn more about the Global LGBTI+ Rights Commission

Legal Battlegrounds Report Consultation Questions

The evidence and perspectives gathered through this consultation will inform and refine the next iteration of the report and contribute to the development of future advocacy strategies by the Commission’s Advisory Council. In the interest of transparency, a summary of responses will be published, setting out the key themes raised. Where permission is given, case studies and direct testimonies may be incorporated into future publications and associated communications.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.

– Step 1 of 9

Respondent Information

Please note that all questions in this section are optional.

Name

First

Last

Job Title

Organisation

Country

Email

Consent

You have the right to decide how your identity is handled in this research.

Please indicate how you would like your information and responses to be used. If you choose public attribution, we will always double-check with you prior to final publication.

Anonymity preferences: *

• Attribution Requested | Please attribute my responses to me wherever possible.
• Attribution Permitted | My responses may be attributed to me in publications or other materials related to this research.
• Partial Anonymity | Details about me (e.g., age range, profession, nationality) may be included, but nothing that can directly identify me.
• Full Anonymity | Quotes or data from my responses may be used without any identifying information.

Can we keep in touch? *

• I would like to sign up to the Kaleidoscope Trust newsletter for organisational and commission updates
• I would like to hear about open programmatic opportunities
• I am happy to receive follow-up communications about this consultation response
• I prefer to not be contacted at all

I confirm that I am legally able to provide consent. *

• Yes

This consultation is only open to participants aged 18 or above. Please confirm your eligibility.

Signature *

Clear Signature

I have read and understood the consultation information and agree to participate.

NextSave and Resume Later

Demographic Questions

We want to understand who is participating in this consultation to help ensure diverse representation and inform future outreach. Please note that all questions in this section are completely optional.

Age18-2526-3536-5051-6565+Would rather not say

Gender

• Female
• Male
• Transgender
• Non-Binary
• Agender
• Genderfluid
• Queer
• Other
• Prefer not to say

Sexual Orientation

• Lesbian
• Gay
• Bisexual / bi
• Pansexual / pan
• Asexual
• Heterosexual/straight
• Queer
• Prefer not to say

If you prefer to use another term you can provide it here:

If you prefer to use another term you can provide it here):

Gender Identity: Do you identity as trans?

• Yes
• No
• Prefer not to say

Disability: Do you consider yourself to have a disability?

• Yes
• No
• Prefer not to say

Ethnicity:

• African / of African descent
• Arab / Middle Eastern / North African
• Asian (South Asian) – e.g., Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan
• Asian (East Asian) – e.g., Chinese, Japanese, Korean
• Asian (Southeast Asian) – e.g., Filipino, Thai, Vietnamese, Indonesian, Malaysian
• Pacific Islander / Native Hawaiian / Polynesian / Micronesian / Melanesian
• White / European / Caucasian
• Latino / Latin American / Hispanic
• Indigenous / First Nations / Aboriginal – e.g., Native American, Adivasi, Māori, Sami, etc.
• Mixed or Multiple ethnic backgrounds
• Prefer not to say

Religion or belief:

• Buddhism
• Christianity
• Hinduism
• Islam
• Judaism
• Sikhism
• Baháʼí Faith
• Jainism
• Shinto
• Taoism
• Traditional / Indigenous spiritual belief system
• Atheist
• Agnostic
• Humanist / Secular / No religion
• Other religion or belief system
• Prefer not to say

Prefer to self-describe:

If you prefer to use another term you can provide it here):

NextSave and Resume Later

Section 1: Executive Summary & Introduction

This section invites your views on how the report defines “LGBTI+ rights rollbacks” and whether this framing is useful or needs refinement. We welcome feedback on alternative definitions, relevant examples, and additional evidence to strengthen future reports of the Commission.

There is currently no universally agreed definition of “LGBTI+ rights rollback.” Do you agree with the report’s definition of “LGBTI+ rights rollbacks” as either: (i) the reduction of existing rights or (ii) the introduction of new restrictions?

• Yes
• No
• Maybe
• I don’t know

Is this definition useful for your work?

• Yes
• No
• Maybe
• I don’t know

Are there alternative definitions or frameworks you believe should be considered in monitoring global rollbacks?

What evidence – or examples – not captured in this report should be included in future iterations?

This report only focuses on legal cases which resulted in a rollback. Do you have examples of legal cases where an attempt to roll back LGBTI+ rights failed?

Useful Links

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Add


Remove

Additional supporting evidence

Click or drag files to this area to upload.

You can upload up to 15 files.

NextSave and Resume Later

Section 2: Legislative Approaches and Phases of Rollbacks

This section seeks your feedback on the report’s three-phase framework for understanding LGBTI+ rights rollbacks over time. We invite reflections on how well this framework aligns with developments in your country or region, examples that illustrate different patterns, and insights into how civil society and activists have responded at each stage.

From your experience, does the three-phase framework (2016–2020 broad restrictions; 2021–2022 targeted exclusion; 2023–2025 criminalisation) reflect developments in your country/region?

• Yes
• No
• Maybe
• I don’t know

Are there examples or evidence that suggest a different sequencing or categorisation of rollbacks?

How effective have activists’ or civil society’s responses been at each stage? What lessons should be drawn?

What could have been done differently to support civil society actors fighting against rollbacks at the time in which they happened?

Useful Links

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Add


Remove

Additional supporting evidence:

Click or drag files to this area to upload.

You can upload up to 15 files.

Please feel free to submit additional documents to support your response.

NextSave and Resume Later

Section 3: Legal Rollbacks Over Time and Regions

This section explores how LGBTI+ rights rollbacks evolve across different countries and regions. We invite your insights on the political, social, and international factors that shape these trends, key turning points you have observed, and how national or regional dynamics influence the timing and spread of rollbacks.

What contextual factors (e.g., political change, international influence, social movements) explain peaks and troughs in your region?

Are there particular years or moments where you witnessed a turning point in your country/region (for example, a ‘first law’ or a symbolic case) that marked the beginning of a wider rollback?

Do you consider the increase in rollbacks to be cumulative (building steadily), or cyclical (linked to changes in government or external shocks)?

What role do international developments (e.g., foreign court rulings, global movements, geopolitical shifts) play in accelerating or delaying rollbacks over time?

In your experience, do rollbacks in one jurisdiction trigger copycat laws or legal arguments in another? If so, please provide examples.

What regional or national dynamics are missing or under-explored?

Useful Links

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Add


Remove

Additional supporting evidence:

Click or drag files to this area to upload.

You can upload up to 15 files.

Please feel free to submit additional documents to support your response.

NextSave and Resume Later

Section 4: Trends in Legal & Political Justifications

This section examines the narratives and arguments used to justify rollbacks of LGBTI+ rights. We welcome your reflections on which justifications are most prominent in your context, any emerging or region-specific trends, and effective strategies used by activists and organisations to challenge these narratives.

The report identifies recurring justifications: traditional values, religious freedom, moral decency, protection of children, censorship, national security, and democratic will. Are these the most significant?

Are there cross-regional alliances or patterns (e.g., policy diffusion, influence from international movements) that should be highlighted further?

Are there additional arguments (e.g., public health, economic, sovereignty) you have observed in your context?

How can activists and organisations most effectively counter these narratives?

Useful Links

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Add


Remove

Additional supporting evidence:

Click or drag files to this area to upload.

You can upload up to 15 files.

Please feel free to submit additional documents to support your response.

NextSave and Resume Later

Section 5: The Playbook (Advocacy Strategies of Opponents)

This section focuses on the strategies and tactics used by actors opposing LGBTI+ rights. We invite your observations on how these movements operate, the role of external crises in advancing restrictive measures, and the broader political or social conditions that enable rollbacks to occur.

From your perspective, what are the most effective tactics being used by anti-LGBTI+ movements?

To what extent did external shocks (e.g., COVID-19 or natural disasters) create opportunities for governments to curtail LGBTI+ rights in your context?

Are there other crises (economic, security, political) that have been used to justify rollbacks?

Useful Links

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Add


Remove

Additional supporting evidence:

Click or drag files to this area to upload.

You can upload up to 15 files.

Please feel free to submit additional documents to support your response.

NextSave and Resume Later

Section 6: Conclusion

This section provides an opportunity to share any additional insights, examples, or lessons learned. We welcome reflections on effective advocacy strategies, ways international actors can support local efforts, and ideas for tools or mechanisms that could strengthen responses to LGBTI+ rights rollbacks. Your input will help shape actionable recommendations from this consultation.

Do you have additional comments or case studies that should be considered?

Which advocacy strategies have proven most effective at resisting or reversing rollbacks in your country or region?

How can international actors (e.g., UN, regional organisations, donor states) better support local activists?

How could the findings from this consultation be used to best support your advocacy work?

Useful Links

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Single Line Text

Add


Remove

Additional supporting evidence:

Click or drag files to this area to upload.

You can upload up to 15 files.

Please feel free to submit additional documents to support your response.

NextSave and Resume Later

Single Text evidence

Thank You for Your Contribution

Thank you for taking the time to share your insights and experiences. Your feedback is invaluable in helping us understand and respond to global rollbacks of LGBTI+ rights.

Please note:

Individual contributions will not be identified without your consent.

Partial responses are welcome, and all input will help inform future updates and reports of the Global LGBTI+ Rights Commission.

If you have provided contact details, we may follow up for clarification or to share the outcomes of this consultation.

When you are ready, click Submit to send your responses.

Updating preview…

This is a preview of your submission. It has not been submitted yet!
Please take a moment to verify your information. You can also go back to make changes.

Previous

SubmitSave and Resume Later