In Fedotova and Others v. Russia, (ECHR, Jan. 17, 2023), the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights held that Russia violated the rights of three same-sex couples when it refused to permit them to marry. The court said in part:
206. The Government argued, firstly, that it was necessary to preserve the traditional institutions of marriage and the family, these being fundamental values of Russian society that were protected by the Constitution....
209. Given that the Convention is a living instrument which must be interpreted in the light of present-day conditions, the State, in its choice of means designed to protect the family and secure respect for family life as required by Article 8, must necessarily take into account developments in society and changes in the perception of social and civil-status issues and relationships, including the fact that there is not just one way or one choice when it comes to leading one’s family or private life....
212. In the present case, there is no basis for considering that affording legal recognition and protection to same-sex couples in a stable and committed relationship could in itself harm families constituted in the traditional way or compromise their future or integrity..... Indeed, the recognition of same-sex couples does not in any way prevent different-sex couples from marrying or founding a family corresponding to their conception of that term. More broadly, securing rights to same-sex couples does not in itself entail weakening the rights secured to other people or other couples. The Government have been unable to prove the contrary.
213. Having regard to the foregoing, the Court considers that the protection of the traditional family cannot justify the absence of any form of legal recognition and protection for same-sex couples in the present case....
219. ... [T]he allegedly negative, or even hostile, attitude on the part of the heterosexual majority in Russia cannot be set against the applicants’ interest in having their respective relationships adequately recognised and protected by law....
Law & Religion UK reports in greater detail on the decision.
