An LGBTQ+ report separates the law on paper from what happens in practice. It sets out the current legal position in the country concerned, including section 377 of the Penal Code in Bangladesh, criminalisation in Sri Lanka, India's 2018 decriminalisation in Navtej Singh Johar and the limited reforms in Nepal, and then documents how people are treated regardless of that position.
Because the HJ (Iran) approach asks how the appellant would live on return and why, the report addresses the consequences of living openly, including family honour violence, exclusion from the community and loss of work. It does not assume that a change in criminal law removes risk.
The report is drafted so it can sit alongside the appellant's own evidence about their identity without commenting on credibility, which is a matter for the tribunal.
Law versus practice: India
India reports note the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar judgment and then focus on family, community and workplace treatment, which is where most risk now arises.
Related Case Types
Questions solicitors ask
- Is a report needed for India now that same-sex conduct is legal?
- Often yes. Decriminalisation in 2018 changed the criminal law but not family or community attitudes in many areas. A report documents those non-state risks and whether police would realistically protect the appellant.
- Does the report comment on whether the appellant is gay or transgender?
- No. Identity and credibility are for the tribunal. The report assesses the risk that would arise for a person with the profile the appellant describes.