Homo-lobby wants Commission to prohibit pro-family ECI Mum Dad & Kids

jCO3-CW4It has transpired that the LGBT lobby group ILGA-Europe is working on a secret plan to undermine the pro-family citizens’ initiative Mum Dad & Kids.

As one can read in a circular letter that ILGA-Europe’s Advocacy Director, Katrin Hugendubel, has written in early February to the pressure group’s affiliates all over Europe, “the decision of the European Commission to grant this ECI to be eligible to be registered came a big surprise and disappointment.” (sic)

She goes on:

“So far, we have not reacted publicly to this decision… but we felt it was high time to update you on what we are doing in relation to this ECI, even if, deliberately, not in the public eye for the moment.

It certainly does not come as a surprise that ILGA-Europe is horrified by the idea that ordinary citizens might get a chance to express their opposition against the re-definition of marriage and the family by law-givers and the judiciary, be it through a European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) or otherwise. Wherever such a re-definition has taken place, it was either through the blatant and deliberate misuse of judicial authority (like in the United States), or through parliamentary votes from which the public has been widely shut out. The homo-lobby has all reasons to be afraid of public debate, because it knows it would lose it.

Katrin Hugendubel has a master plan.

As one reads in Mrs. Hugendubel’s paper, ILGA-Europe’s strategy consists of the following four points:

First, the group is attempting to prevent the ECI from happening. To achieve this purpose, it has written a complaint letter to the Commission’s Secretary General, Alexander Italianer, demanding that the Commission withdraw its decision to register the Mum Dad & Kids ECI.

At the same time, an Italian homo-lobby named Certi Diritti, one of ILGA’s affiliates, has allegedly filed a legal action with the CJEU to obtain the annulation of the Commission’s decision.

Second, ILGA-Europe is “working on a statement that we can use to gather widespread support against the ECI, as well as collecting information and arguments around the ECI to equip allies on EU level, but most importantly also organisations on national level with the right arguments to counter the initiative.”

It may be presumed that “collecting information and arguments around the ECI” means in fact the preparation of some kind of defamatory campaign against the organizers of the ECI. As Mrs. Hugendubel writes to her crowd: “If in the meantime you have information for example about the people behind the ECI (all known “friends”;) ), please do not hesitate to send this to me.”

Third, Mrs. Hugendubel plans to “reach out to other NGO networks, including children’s rights organisations, and will seek support from MEPs as well as supportive governments against this ECI.” The stated intention to invoke “children’s rights” reveals a particular degree of cynicism, given that Mum Dad & Kids precisely has the purpose of defending the right of children to know, and live together with, their parents, whereas ILGA-Europe is well known to be pushing for a supposed “right” of same-sex couples or single persons to get control over other people’s children, be it through adoption, or surrogacy, or IVF with sperm or egg-cell donation, or a combination of all this. In all these cases, the children are deprived of their fundamental right to know, and live with, their own parents, which is enshrined in the UN Children’s Rights Convention. In other words, while hypocritically claiming to be concerned over children’s rights, ILGA-Europe in fact pursues the most radical anti-children’s-rights agenda.

Lastly, ILGA plans to run, at some later stage, a public campaign against the ECI: “We are still keeping our work on this low profile, not to draw unnecessary attention to the ECI at this stage…. At this stage, I would like to ask all of you to alert us when the ECI starts to appear in your countries. We expect the organisers to use the ECI as another occasion to collect support for their discriminatory agenda. And to argue that this time, they even have the support from the EU.”

It is quite remarkable, and indeed self-defeating, for a self-described “civil society” group, to call for the cancellation of a legitimately registered citizens’ initiative. Fighting against democracy, ILGA-Europe is ultimately unmasking itself. As readers of this blog know very well, the group has no claim to be representative of civil society, or even of homo- or bi-sexuals. It is a group artificially kept alive by the European Commission, which provides 70% of its operative budget, the Dutch government, and two or three wealthy donors (one of them being financial tycoon George Soros). Maybe this is also the reason why the CJEU complaint has been filed not by ILGA itself, but by one of its Italian affiliates: ILGA-Europe suing its main financier, the European Commission, would definitely look funny.

Be that as it may, if ILGA-Europe has, as one reads in the Hugendubel letter, taken legal advice, then one must urgently recommend them to look for better advisers. Even though the friendship between the homo-lobby and Commission Vice-President Frans Timmermans seems to be a very close one, the Commission simply cannot cancel its own decision to grant the registration of the ECI, and it seems really unreasonable to expect it to do so. The ECI organizers could easily challenge such a reversal of the registration in court, and such a challenge would certainly be successful – resulting in a public humiliation of both the Commission and ILGA-Europe and at the same time providing some additional public attention to the ECI.

The proper way to challenge a Commission decision is to lodge a request for annulation with the CJEU, as appears to be the intention of Certi Diritti. However, such a lawsuit, if considered admissible, would take many months to decide, so that the ECI would nevertheless go forward. But there are great doubts as to the admissibility of the lawsuit, given that the complainants are neither the addressees of the Commission decision they want to overturn, nor directly concerned by it. And if, contrary to all expectations, the complaint were admitted, it would inevitably result in the very scenario that the homo-lobby is so afraid of: the ECI organizers could not be denied to intervene in this lawsuit as a third party in support of the Commission, so that it would be the Commission and Mum Dad & Kids jointly defending their cause against the homo-lobby.

We are keenly awaiting to see this happening…