The Independent Expert on SOGI’s report on LGBT+ people in displacement: A welcome spotlight, with more work to do
In June 2025, the International PRIDE team attended the 56th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, where we were privileged to see the UN Independent Expert on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), Graeme Reid, present his report on the rights of LGBTQ+ people in displacement. The discussion around this report was the first time the intersection of LGBTQ+ rights and displacement has been discussed at the level of the UN Human Rights Council, marking a momentous occasion for displaced queer populations around the world. Just weeks later, the renewal of the Independent Expert’s mandate came as a welcome and much-needed affirmation of the importance of this work.
In this blog, we welcome the report of the Independent Expert; draw attention to some of the evidence gaps that remain; and offer our own additional recommendations, specific to humanitarian contexts.
The focus of the Independent Expert’s report
While the Independent Expert frames his report broadly around forced displacement, its primary emphasis is on people seeking international protection due to their SOGI – especially those going through asylum and refugee resettlement processes. The report does acknowledge that those displaced by war, natural disaster, or climate-related crises include a certain percentage of people from SOGI minorities, and notes that these people are generally “acknowledged only to a limited extent within the overall scope of the displaced population.” It also makes clear that these populations often struggle to access support from humanitarian actors, and recognises that aid agencies themselves can contribute to the marginalisation of these communities.
The brevity of the references to these experiences, however, perhaps indicates that the Independent Expert did not receive extensive information about LGBTQ+ people in internally displaced person (IDP) and refugee camps, settlements, and other displacement contexts in the Global South. This is to be expected, given that these populations face formidable challenges in engaging with UN processes – from language barriers, to lack of internet access, to unfamiliarity as to how it all works. The multi-lateral system does not always make itself easily accessible to local communities. This limited visibility is itself part of the problem: amongst displaced queer populations around the world, those living in IDP and refugee camps and settlements are amongst the least spoken about, and the hardest to reach.
But they are also the majority. Each year, of everyone identified as being in need of resettlement by the UNHCR, around 5% are actually resettled in a permanent host state. Just like everyone else in need of asylum, the vast majority of queer refugees and IDPs remain within their own countries or surrounding region.
When the Independent Expert made his call for input for the report, the International PRIDE Centre was only a month old! Since then, we have spoken to LGBTQIA+ organisations, activists, and refugees in Kenya, Uganda, Malawi, Burundi, and Nigeria. The information we have gathered allows us to add to that presented by the Independent Expert, contributing towards a more comprehensive picture of the experience of displaced queer populations around the world.
Evidence gaps: humanitarian contexts
As the bulk of the Independent Expert’s report centres around the experiences of LGBTQ+ refugees during and after resettlement, its sections on access to services largely focus on contexts where the service providers are either governments or private actors. For displaced people living in refugee or IDP camps, by contrast, the primary service providers are generally UN agencies and international NGOs. Though the report does not go into detail about how accessible humanitarian services provided by these organisations are to LGBTQIA+ populations, its description of the barriers faced by SOGI minorities in non-humanitarian contexts sounds all too familiar. Across the countries we have visited, LGBTQIA+ people describe being denied shelter, education, and appropriate healthcare; experiencing discrimination and abuse from those charged with providing them services; and facing disproportionate levels of exploitation and general lack of access to opportunities and resources in comparison to their cis and heterosexual neighbours.
The Independent Expert also described the heavy burden borne by local LGBTQ+ CSOs in providing services to SOGI minority populations, their limited access to funding and resources, and the fractured coordination between them, UN agencies, and other international partners – dynamics that are also mirrored in displacement settings in the countries we work in.
Perhaps the greatest difference between queer individuals undergoing resettlement and those living in camps or settlements in their own regions, however, is the level of risk they are exposed to on a daily basis. Most people in such settings mask or hide their identities, often at great psychological toll. For those who do not, the spectre of violence is a constant reality. Amongst the openly LGBTQIA+ refugees we spoke to in a refugee camp in Malawi, for example, 100% reported having been subject to violent attacks. In 2023, Kenya’s National Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (NGLHRC) and Amnesty International issued a report documenting abuses against LGBTQIA+ people in Kakuma refugee camp, and concluding it was not safe for them to continue living there. As of 2025, this group continues to live in the camp, experiencing regular violence and abuse – mirroring the experiences of many queer refugees around the world.
Recommendations for humanitarian actors
Despite the difficulties faced by the Independent Expert in putting together a comprehensive picture of the situation for SOGI minorities in IDP and refugee camps, we were glad to see a number of recommendations in the report that speak directly to humanitarian contexts. These include calls to:
Avoid encampment policies that restrict freedom of movement.
Create safe spaces and protection mechanisms for LGBTQ+ people within camps.
Include LGBTQ+ CSOs in international coordination mechanisms; and
Continue supporting humanitarian programmes that provide specialised support to CSOs working with LGBTQ+ persons.
In the countries we work in – with the arguable exception of Kenya – “humanitarian programmes that provide specialised support to CSOs working with LGBT persons” are rare. If international organisations are providing assistance to LGBTQIA+ CSOs in these countries, it is usually through HIV-focused donors such as PEPFAR or the Global Fund, or through international LGBTQIA+ networks. Most international humanitarian aid agencies are neither funding LGBTQIA+ CSOs, nor proactively serving LGBTQIA+ populations.
But they could be. The other recommendations relevant to humanitarians on this list, relating to safe spaces and coordination mechanisms, are just two strategies of many that could be employed to do so. Below, we add our own recommendations, specific to UN agencies and humanitarian organisations:
Design and implement targeted interventions that address the specific vulnerabilities of LGBTQIA+ people in camps and other displacement settings.
Fund and partner with LGBTQIA-led organisations, including those led by refugees and IDPs.
Invest in staff training on SOGIESC inclusion and protection.
Integrate voluntary, confidential, and ethical SOGIESC-disaggregated data collection into needs assessments, and M&E processes.
Review and revise referral mechanisms so that LGBTQIA+ individuals can safely access gender-based violence (GBV) response, mental health support, healthcare, and legal aid.
Challenge donor and coordination frameworks that exclude LGBTQIA+ populations.
Conclusion
The Independent Expert’s report is a very welcome step forward, and a breakthrough moment for the recognition of the issues affecting displaced queer people at the UN. But the situation for displaced LGBTQIA+ people in humanitarian contexts remains little understood – and the role and obligations of aid organisations in serving these populations is yet to be fully interrogated.
The International PRIDE Centre supports humanitarian actors working in camps, settlements and other displacement settings to build inclusivity into programming planning, design, and evaluation. To see specific recommendations for Malawi, you can read our legal analysis here; and attend an online webinar we will be holding with practitioners in September (contact us for details). Specific recommendations for Burundi will be released this month, with a webinar to follow. If you would like to speak to us about a specific country you are living with, working in, or focusing on, please email us. We would be glad to collaborate with you on this important work.