On Oct. 30, 2025, a same-sex couple in South Korea filed a petition with the country’s human rights commission after a public institution denied marriage leave to one of the men and later reduced his pay and performance bonus for taking time off for their wedding ceremony. The commission last month completed its investigation and continues to consider the case.

The petition comes as South Korea’s same-sex couples have won a series of legal victories in recent years, even though the country does not extend marriage rights to them. Courts have increasingly been asked to decide whether existing laws and workplace policies can extend equal treatment to LGBTQ+ people, often in the absence of legislative change.

The employer’s policy granted marriage leave, but it did not define marriage or specify who could claim the benefit. After the employee submitted a wedding invitation and requested a brief leave for a ceremony with his same-sex partner, the institution denied the request and treated his absence as unauthorized.

The South Korean Supreme Court ruled on July 18, 2024, that denying dependent health insurance benefits to same-sex couples while extending them to opposite-sex couples amounted to discriminatory treatment. The court said the unequal treatment infringed on human dignity and the right to pursue happiness.

South Korea’s marriage equality movement has evolved gradually, moving from social taboo and legal nonrecognition toward greater public visibility and limited judicial victories. 

In 2004, a same-sex couple unsuccessfully sought a division of assets under a de facto marriage. Nearly a decade later, filmmaker Kim Jho Gwang-soo and his partner, Kim Seung-hwan, applied to register their marriage, but South Korean courts rejected their bid, as well as subsequent attempts by same-sex couples to gain legal recognition.

In February 2023, the Seoul High Court ruled that the National Health Insurance Service must extend dependent health insurance benefits to same-sex partners, marking a landmark legal victory for LGBTQ+ couples. The Supreme Court’s 2024 decision made it final.

Under South Korean law, a de facto marriage generally refers to a couple who live together and hold themselves out as married without formally registering their union. While such relationships may receive limited legal recognition in certain circumstances, a marriage is not legally recognized unless it satisfies legal requirements and is registered with the government.

In a ruling made public on June 5, a Seoul court found a same-sex couple had built a life partnership similar to a common-law marriage and deserved legal protection. The court ordered a third party whose affair led to the relationship’s breakdown to pay 10 million won ($6,611.59) in damages.

The court, however, said existing law did not allow it to recognize the relationship as a common-law marriage, underscoring the legal limits that same-sex couples continue to face.

“There is no evidence that the plaintiff and the former partner held a wedding ceremony or revealed their relationship to acquaintances outside their families,” said the court. “From September 2019, when they shared their finances, or at the latest from June 2023, when they lived with the plaintiff’s family and received engagement rings from the plaintiff’s parents and were recognized as a couple, they shared an emotional, physical and financial relationship with a mutual intent to marry, forming a life partnership similar to a common-law marriage.”

On May 31, 2024, South Korean lawmakers introduced the country’s first marriage equality bill. Former Justice Party member Jang Hye-yeong proposed the legislation that 12 lawmakers from across the political spectrum co-sponsored. and co-sponsored by 12 lawmakers from across the political spectrum. The legislation failed later. 

While consensual same-sex relations are not criminalized in South Korea, marriage equality remains unrecognized. Reports suggest many LGBTQ+ people continue to live with limited public visibility.

Recent opinion surveys suggest public support for marriage equality in South Korea has declined. 

A 2025 Hankook Research poll found that 31 percent of respondents supported extending marriage rights to same-sex couples, down from 36 percent in 2021. A separate Gallup Korea survey found that 34 percent backed marriage equality while 58 percent opposed it, reversing gains in public support and returning attitudes to levels seen nearly a decade ago.

The report attributed the decline in support to South Korea’s broader social and political climate. 

Activists told the publication that far-right mobilization, heightened political tensions, and growing online radicalization among some young men had likely contributed to the shift. They also argued politicians routinely cite a lack of public consensus to delay measures such as the Life Partnership Act and the Marriage Equality Act, describing the argument as an excuse for inaction.

Kiyong Shim, an activist with Chingusai, a Korean gay rights group, told the Los Angeles Blade that the marriage leave dispute illustrates the challenges same-sex couples continue to face in South Korea. Shim said the country’s Civil Act contains no provision that explicitly prohibits same-sex marriage, but that marriage registrations by same-sex couples are refused as a matter of administrative practice.

“Because their relationships have no legal standing, exclusion arises in nearly every area of daily life: marriage leave, family allowances, medical decision-making, inheritance, housing, and more,” said Shim. 

He said the marriage equality movement is advancing along two tracks: one is public campaigning, lectures, workshops, and community networking centred on the Marriage for All Korea campaign and the second is through litigation. Fourteen same-sex couples are now plaintiffs in various lawsuits that have been before South Korean courts since 2024.

Shim told the Blade that change is also beginning to take root in South Korea’s judiciary, pointing to the Supreme Court’s July 2024 ruling that recognized dependent health insurance benefits for same-sex partners.

“Those holding political responsibility — in the legislature, the executive, and beyond — continue to turn away from the rights of LGBTQ+ people,” said Shim. “LGBTQ+ individuals remain exposed to discrimination and hatred in everyday life, and many live by painfully concealing who they are. This is precisely why the campaigning cannot stop, and why the work of organizing must continue.”

Shim told the Blade that public opinion is moving in a more favorable direction, albeit gradually. He said attitudes toward homosexuality, sexual minorities, and marriage equality have steadily become more accepting.

“The problem lies in politics,” said Shim. “In Korea, the forces driving anti-homosexuality sentiment are largely conservative Protestant church groups, and these church groups are deeply entangled with politicians in the ruling Democratic Party. As a result, even within the ruling party, this issue is difficult to address. So we are in an asymmetric situation: the judiciary and public opinion are moving forward, while the very political actors charged with legislation and administration remain stationary.”

Taiwan, Nepal, and Thailand have extended marriage rights to same-sex couples. Shim told the Blade there is a growing sense that South Korea is falling behind.

“Society’s perceptions shift most deeply when the fact that LGBTQ+ people are right beside us becomes a natural part of daily life, but this cannot be left to those individuals alone,” he said. “The conditions that make coming out possible must be built by allies together with the community — building workplaces, schools, families, and neighborhoods where discrimination and hatred need not be feared.” 

“What Korea needs right now is exactly this kind of broad, everyday solidarity,” added Shim. “Change in the law and change in daily life have to move together, and that is why the work of campaigning and organizing must not stop. There are already many same-sex couples in Korea living as families, caring for one another. The question is not whether they exist — it is when the state will finally recognize this reality in law.”

Niger is the latest African country to recriminalize consensual same-sex sexual relations.

The Associated Press on June 12 reported the country’s military junta announced a new penal code under which anyone who “commits or attempts to commit an immodest or unnatural act or practices lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual (LGBTQIA+) acts” will face between five and 10 years in prison and a fine.

“This same penalty is applicable to persons who officiated the marriage, to the witnesses of the alleged spouses, as well as to persons who have given their consent for the celebration of the marriage and to the organizers,” reads the new code that took effect on June 11.

Niger borders Nigeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali, Algeria, Libya, and Chad.

The AP notes homosexuality had not been criminalized in Niger. Anti-LGBTQ+ stigma, however, was widespread.

Lawmakers in Burkina Faso last September recriminalized homosexuality in the country. Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye on March 31 signed into law a bill that increased the penalty for anyone convicted of engaging in consensual same-sex sexual relations from one to five years in prison to five to 10 years.

Ghanaian lawmakers late last month approved a bill that would, among other things, criminalize LGBTQ+ allyship.

A German advocacy group on the eve of the 2026 World Cup sharply criticized the Trump-Vance administration over its anti-LGBTQ+ policies.

The World Cup will take place in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico through July 19. The tournament began on Thursday in Mexico City with Mexico beating South Africa 2-0.

“In the USA, democracy is being gradually dismantled,” said Julia Monro of Federation Queer Diversity, a German LGBTQ+ and intersex rights group known by the acronym LSVD, in a statement released on Wednesday. “In particular, the human rights of trans, intersex, and nonbinary individuals, as well as other queer people, are facing massive attacks and political instrumentalization by the Trump administration.”

The LSVD statement notes sports “has a special responsibility in this situation because it conveys values ​​worldwide that extend beyond the playing field: fairness, respect, and inclusion.”

“This must apply to everyone, including trans* and nonbinary people,” says LSVD. “Those who love sport must also protect those who can only experience it under difficult circumstances.”

“The public visibility of queer people is being pushed back, companies and organizations with diversity strategies are being pressured, and laws for trans*, intersex, and nonbinary people are being tightened,” added the group. “This is not a fringe issue, but directly affects everyday life, mobility, and safety. The way minority rights are treated is a measure of the state of a democratic society. Inhumane measures must not be normalized. The international community must not remain silent as attention on the host country, the USA, increases. The Trump administration could exploit this media platform for further inhumane purposes, in order to transfer its homophobic agenda to other countries.”

LSVD also stressed the “safety of trans* and nonbinary soccer fans is currently not guaranteed in the USA.”

“We advise all queer fans to inform themselves carefully beforehand and to take precautions for their safety,” it said.

The Council for Global Equality is one of the more than 100 organizations that issued a travel advisory for the U.S. ahead of the World Cup.

LSVD in its statement pointed out the German government in 2025 issued a travel advisory for trans and nonbinary people who are planning to visit the U.S. The warning specifically noted President Donald Trump’s executive order that banned the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers.

InterPride, the organization that coordinates WorldPride events, issued a travel advisory for trans and nonbinary people who planned to travel to the U.S. for WorldPride that took place last summer in D.C.

“Due to an executive order issued by the U.S. president on Jan. 20, all travelers must select either ‘male’ or ‘female’ when applying for entry or visas. The gender listed at birth will be considered valid,” read the InterPride advisory. “If your passport has ‘X’ as a gender marker or differs from your birth-assigned gender, we strongly recommend contacting the U.S. diplomatic mission before traveling to confirm entry requirements.”

LSVD notes the German government reiterated its 2025 travel advisory ahead of the World Cup.

“Anyone traveling with a different gender entry, with an ‘X’ marker in their passport, or who does not conform to the state’s expectations during checks, must expect problems in the USA,” said LSVD.

Hungarian authorities on Thursday dropped charges against Budapest Mayor Gergely Karácsony over his role in organizing the city’s 2025 Pride march.

Karácsony spoke at the event, even though then-Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government banned it.

More than 100,000 people defied the ban and participated in the march that took place on June 28, 2025. The Associated Press notes the Budapest Chief Prosecutor’s Office in January charged Karácsony with “organizing the unlawful assembly despite a prohibition order.”

Karácsony, who has been Budapest’s mayor since 2019, described himself as a “proud defendant” after his indictment.

“It seems that in this country, this is the price you pay if you stand up for your own freedom and the freedom of others,” he said in a statement, according to the AP. “If anyone thinks they can ban me, deter me, or prevent me and my city from doing so, they are gravely mistaken.”

Budapest is Hungary’s capital and largest city.

Prime Minister Péter Magyar took office last month after his center-right Tisza party ousted Orbán’s Fidesz-KDNP coalition in elections that took place on April 12.

Hungarian police on May 29 announced they will allow the Budapest Pride march to take place this year.

The European Union’s top court, the EU Court of Justice, days after Orbán’s ouster struck down Hungary’s anti-LGBTQ+ propaganda law that MPs approved in 2021. The BBC notes Hungarian authorities cited the decision in their decision to drop the charges against Karácsony.

Authorities in Pécs, a city near Hungary’s border with Croatia, have also dropped charges against Géza Buzás-Hábel, who organized a 2025 Pride event.

Hungarian police on May 29 announced they will allow the annual Budapest Pride march to take place.

“The Budapest Metropolitan Police has approved the 2026 Budapest Pride Parade and also has issued restrictive orders in relation to three counter-demonstrations,” a Budapest Metropolitan Police spokesperson told Politico.

Budapest is Hungary’s capital and largest city.

Hungarian lawmakers last year passed a bill that banned Pride events and allowed authorities to use facial recognition technology to identify participants. MPs later amended the Hungarian constitution to ban public LGBTQ+ events.

More than 100,000 people defied the ban and participated in last year’s Budapest Pride parade. The event became one of the largest protests against then-Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and his government since he took office in 2010.

Prime Minister Péter Magyar took office last month after his center-right Tisza party ousted Orbán’s Fidesz-KDNP coalition in elections that took place on April 12. The European Union’s top court, the EU Court of Justice, days after Orbán’s ouster struck down Hungary’s anti-LGBTQ+ propaganda law that MPs approved in 2021.

The EU on May 29 announced it will release more than €16 billion ($18.59 billion) in funds to Hungary that it withheld while Orbán was in office.

The Budapest Pride march will take place on June 27.

“We will march freely in fresh air for our rights, for the democratic Hungary,” said Budapest Pride on its Facebook page.

Former Bogotá Mayor Claudia López on Sunday finished fifth in the first round of Colombia’s presidential election.

López, a centrist who ran as an independent, received 225,517 votes. This figure is .95 percent of the total votes cast.

López was the Colombian capital’s mayor from 2020-2023. She was a member of the Colombian Senate from 2014-2018. López, whose wife is outgoing Colombian Sen. Angélica Lozano, would have become the country’s first female and first lesbian president if she would have won the election.

The LGBTQ+ Victory Institute honored López in D.C. in 2024.

“We need to listen to each other again, we need to have a coffee with each other again, we need to touch each other’s skin,” she told the Los Angeles Blade during an interview. She hadn’t yet declared her candidacy, and did not specifically discuss her plans to run.

Runoff to take place June 21

Abrelardo de la Espriella, a far-right lawyer who has praised U.S. President Donald Trump and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, on Sunday finished first with 43.74 percent of the vote. Senator Iván Cepeda, a member of outgoing President Gustavo Petro’s Historic Pact party, came in second with 40.9 percent of the vote.

Neither men received a majority of votes. A runoff between them will take place on June 21.

Ghanaian lawmakers on Friday approved a bill that would, among other things, criminalize LGBTQ+ allyship.

Reuters reported MPs approved the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, 2025, in a voice vote after parliament’s Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee backed it.

MPs in 2024 approved a similar bill, but it faced legal challenges and then-President Nana Akufo-Addo didn’t sign it. Lawmakers last year reintroduced the measure after President John Dramani Mahama took office.

The bill awaits his signature.

Rightify Ghana, a Ghanaian LGBTQ+ advocacy group, in a series of social media posts notes MPs passed the bill days before the 4th African Inter-Parliamentary Conference on Family Values and Sovereignty will take place in Accra, the country’s capital.

Nine LGBTQ+ groups in Russia have been banned so far this year after authorities deemed them as “extremist.”

Human Rights Watch on Thursday noted courts in seven regions between March and May banned Coming Out, the LGBT Resource Center, Parni Plus, the Moscow Community Center for LGBT+ Initiatives, Irida, the Russian LGBT Network, the Kallisto movement, T9 NSK, and Center T. Human Rights Watch also pointed out a lawsuit has been filed against the Alliance of Straights and LGBT for Equality.

Parni Plus is an LGBTQ+ media outlet.

“Russian authorities are intensifying their criminalization of those who provide critical support to the very LGBT people they have systematically persecuted,” said Human Rights Watch Europe and Central Asia Director Hugh Williamson in a press release. “Authorities should vacate all court decisions and criminal convictions based on these spurious ‘extremism’ charges.”

The Kremlin over the last decade has faced global criticism over its crackdown on LGBTQ+ rights.

The Russian Supreme Court in 2023 ruled the “international LGBT movement” is an extremist organization and banned it.

The country in January designated ILGA World, a global LGBTQ+ and intersex rights group, as an “undesirable” organization. ILGA World in response to the designation noted Russians who are found guilty of engaging with “undesirable” groups face up to six years in prison.

China’s Supreme People’s Court on May 8 issued a rare response to a petition involving LGBTQ+ discrimination.

In a surprising response; it discussed sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression. The response also mentioned workplace discrimination, public humiliation, and school bullying, language considered uncommon from China’s legal system.

The response stemmed from a proposal submitted by a postgraduate student in Qingdao through China’s xinfang petition system on March 25, urging the court to establish clearer judicial standards against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Six weeks later, the Supreme People’s Court Research Office issued a written reply.

The Research Office is an internal legal and policy body within the Supreme People’s Court. It studies legal issues, drafts judicial guidance, and responds to legal inquiries submitted through official channels. Its responses do not carry the same legal weight as a judicial interpretation or court ruling.

“The opinions and suggestions you raised are of great value,” reads a translated version of the Supreme People’s Court Research Office response. “In order to thoroughly implement the Constitution, Civil Code, Employment Promotion Law and other legal provisions, and effectively protect citizens’ personality rights from infringement, the Supreme People’s Court has guided local courts at all levels to handle a number of related cases, and through typical cases and other forms has clarified adjudication rules.”

The response stated that courts may determine public insults, defamation and, discriminatory conduct targeting sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression as infringement of personality rights. It also said employers treating individuals differently in hiring, employment, transfer or dismissal based on those characteristics could face employment discrimination claims. Schools could also bear legal responsibility for improper discipline or bullying involving students based on sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, according to the response.

“It’s not a systematic change from the authorities recognizing LGBTQ rights,” said Renn Hao, an LGBTQ+ activist in China. “However, it’s an informal statement from the Supreme Court. According to a scholar researching LGBTQ legal cases in China, courts are recognizing more cases involving LGBTQ discrimination and same-sex partners through their verdicts.”

China decriminalized consensual same-sex sexual relations in 1997 and removed homosexuality from the country’s list of mental disorders four years later. Chinese law, however, does not recognize same-sex relationships.

Public advocacy involving LGBTQ+ issues also remains tightly controlled. Authorities in recent years have continued restricting community organizing, public events, and online expression involving sexual minorities.

Discussions involving LGBTQ+ issues are also frequently censored on Chinese social media platforms. 

Activists and advocacy groups say Chinese authorities in recent years have removed online content, shut down LGBTQ+ student group accounts and restricted public discussion involving sexual minority issues. After the Supreme People’s Court response began circulating online, related posts and articles were also removed from some Chinese platforms.

“It may still be too early to fully assess the long-term impact, as this development has only just happened and the situation is still unfolding,” said Xiaogang Wei, a Beijing-based LGBTQ+ rights activist, filmmaker, and founder of the China Rainbow Collective Foundation. “Although the reply is not legally binding, it represents a rare form of institutional acknowledgment of SOGIE-related discrimination in China. For Chinese LGBTQ people and advocates, this could become a meaningful reference point for future legal advocacy, public communication, and community awareness.”

Wei said the rapid removal of related posts and articles limited the development’s broader public impact and underscored how fragile LGBTQ+ visibility remains in China. 

“This is why we believe it is important to continue sharing verified information and ensuring that this development is not erased from public understanding,” Wei said.

Chinese courts in recent years have also heard a number of LGBTQ+-related employment discrimination cases, despite the absence of explicit nationwide protections based on sexual orientation or gender identity. In one notable case, the Supreme People’s Court in 2018 formally recognized “equal employment rights disputes” as a legal cause of action, allowing some discrimination-related cases to proceed through the courts.

Chinese courts have previously handled several LGBTQ+-related disputes involving employment discrimination, custody, and so-called conversion therapy. In 2024, a Beijing court drew attention after recognizing visitation rights for a child involving a same sex couple, a decision activists described as a milestone for LGBTQ+ families in China.

Kenya’s High Court has ruled the country’s government cannot refuse requests to amend gender markers on birth certificates and other ID documents.

Audrey Mbugua, a prominent transgender activist, and two other people in 2020 sued Attorney General Dorcas Oduor, the Registrar of Births and Deaths, the National Registration Bureau, and Immigration Services Director General Evelyn Cheluget after they did not receive amended birth certificates.

The Washington Blade previously reported the three plaintiffs argued documents that do not correspond with their gender identity “has denied them opportunities and rights.” Oduor, for her part, in response to the plaintiffs’ claims argued “a person’s gender is based on fact — not feelings — and the plaintiffs at birth were registered and named based on their gender status.”

High Court Justice Bahati Mwamuye ruled on May 20.

“The silence and delay cannot defeat rights,” ruled the court, according to the Daily Nation, a Kenyan newspaper. “Constitutional rights cannot be delayed over administrative convenience.”

The court in 2014 ordered the Kenya National Examinations Council to change Mbugua’s name on her academic diplomas and to remove the male gender marker from them.

Kenya’s intersex rights law took effect in 2022. The government in February 2025 announced intersex people can receive birth certificates with an “I” gender marker.

The Daily Nation notes Mwamuye ordered the Registrar of Deaths and Births and other government agencies to “begin receiving and considering applications for gender-marker changes within” 60 days.

“Access to legal identity documentation is not just a human rights issue; it is a foundational pillar of socio-economic inclusion,” said the Initiative for Equality and Non-Discrimination, a Kenyan advocacy group, in response to the ruling. Without accurate IDs or passports, individuals face severe barriers to employment, financial systems, global business travel, and participation in governance and democratic processes.”

“This ruling marks a critical step forward in reducing administrative discrimination and fostering an inclusive environment where every Kenyan citizen’s legal identity aligns with their dignity,” added INEND.

Outright International, a New York-based global LGBTQ+ and intersex advocacy group, in a statement described Mwamuye’s ruling as “a meaningful shift towards aligning Kenya’s legal framework with constitutional guarantees of equality, privacy, and human dignity. Outright International also applauded Mbugua and other activists who fought for this change.

“Today, we celebrate a milestone — one achieved through resilience, solidarity, and an unwavering belief in justice,” said the group. “Outright International stands with transgender and intersex Kenyans in honoring this victory and reaffirming our commitment to advancing rights, recognition, and equality for all.”