Madagascar Faces Criticism After Rejecting LGBT+ Rights Recommendations at UN Review
Madagascar has come under renewed international attention following its latest review before the United Nations Human Rights Council, where the country’s human rights record was examined as part of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process.
A key human rights assessment at the UN
Madagascar has recently been examined under the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR), a mechanism used to evaluate the human rights situation in member states.
The session, held on 27 January, reviewed a wide range of civil and political rights issues in the country. A total of 235 recommendations were issued by UN member states. The Malagasy delegation, led by Justice Minister Benjamin Alexis Rakotomandimby, accepted 178 recommendations, rejected 10, while 47 others received no official position.
Authorities stated that many of the accepted recommendations were already aligned with reforms initiated after the previous UPR cycle in 2019.
Progress on civil liberties and judicial reforms
Among the accepted recommendations, several focused on strengthening fundamental freedoms, particularly freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.
The government also expressed support for measures aimed at protecting journalists, civil society actors, and human rights defenders from intimidation, arbitrary detention, and judicial harassment.
A draft law aimed at reinforcing protections for human rights defenders and whistleblowers under discussion since 2021 was also referenced as part of ongoing reform efforts.
LGBT+ rights recommendations rejected
Despite these advances in some areas, Madagascar rejected all recommendations related to the protection of LGBT+ individuals.
These proposals called for stronger measures against discrimination, violence, and hate speech based on sexual orientation and gender identity. They also urged legal reforms to ensure equal protection under the law, including the harmonisation of age-of-consent legislation regardless of sexual orientation.
The government justified its position by referring to existing national laws and cultural norms, a stance that has drawn criticism from rights advocates.
Strong reaction from civil society groups
The decision has triggered disappointment among several Malagasy organisations working on human rights and gender equality, including Queer Place Madagascar, Mifoha Olo Mazoto, Divers’ Unité, Justice Egalitaire, Men Engage Madagascar, and Madagascar LGBT+.
These organisations argue that rejecting such recommendations highlights a persistent gap between international human rights standards and the realities faced by LGBT+ people in Madagascar.
Activists denounce reliance on “tradition”
Speaking under a pseudonym, a representative from Queer Place Madagascar, known as Diamond, expressed deep concern over the government’s justification.
According to the activist, invoking tradition to justify the absence of legal protections risks leaving LGBT+ individuals exposed to discrimination and abuse.
A country at a crossroads on human rights
The UPR outcome reflects a broader tension in Madagascar’s human rights trajectory.
While progress is reported in areas such as civic freedoms and legal protections for activists, the issue of LGBT+ rights remains highly sensitive and unresolved, highlighting the gap between international expectations and domestic political and cultural positions.
Call to Action
At Voices for Democracy and Human Rights in Africa, we believe that human dignity is universal and non-negotiable. The protection of LGBT+ individuals is not a question of culture versus rights, but of equal justice under the law.
We call on:
- Malagasy authorities to revisit their position and align national legislation with international human rights standards
- Civil society across Africa to strengthen solidarity with LGBT+ communities facing discrimination
- International institutions to continue monitoring and supporting inclusive human rights reform
Silence and stagnation are not neutral choices—they have real consequences for those who remain unprotected. A democratic society is measured by how it protects its most vulnerable, not by how it excludes them.
