FROM THE DESK OF THE SPEAKER

Honorable delegates, Firstly, I would like to extend our warm welcome to all of you and
congratulate you on being members of the All India Political Parties Meet of IIM Rohtak MUN
2020. Our committee is an Indian based committee and will be deliberating on matters, which
are presently the need of the hour in our nation. The agenda as stated “” is the issue that needs to
be given adequate attention for its success. All of you, being not only responsible citizens but also
leaders of the nation will be expected to perform to your utmost ability in the committee. The
following background guide will give you the basic perspective of what the committee will be
discussing on the two of this conference and will help you understand the areas wherein you would
be required to focus your research. You are expected to be well researched and abide by the rules
and procedures of the committee. I hope to witness intense debate and heated discussions in the
committee during this two-day parties meet.

Speaker
 INTRODUCTION TO AIPPM

An All India Political Parties Meet is a meeting between all the political parties of the nation. It is
a platform to discuss various political issues faced by the country, combined with varied
perspective of politicians and carefully analyzed decisions which are of national importance. It
was introduced in order to emulate political realities by bringing to light various layers of polity
and governance in India. Typically called before the session of the parliament or before the
introduction of a bill, it aims to arrive at a consensus before the sessions began. It is meant to
provide better insight into the issues of the nation and providing a diverse viewpoint before the
actual law-making procedure begins. The committee normally includes participants from political
parties though the moderators can invite certain other belligerents with a non-political affiliation.
It is meant to provide better insight into the issues of the nation and providing a diverse viewpoint
before the actual law-making procedure begins. It is a non-technical, yet powerful committee
introduced in order to emulate political realities by bringing to light various layers of polity and
governance in India. The agenda for this meeting is completely specific. It is a meeting of all-
important political parties in India who convene to discuss matters of critical national importance
and thereafter come to consensus on solutions for them. It is quintessential that members be
thoroughly researched about all the current political happenings around the country and the
members are also required to be aware of their character’s political affiliations, interests, ideology
etc.

\
 RULES OF PROCEDURE

The All India Political Parties Meet is a non-technical, yet powerful committee introduced in order
to emulate political realities by bringing to light various layers of polity and governance in India.
It helps participants grasp the multi- layered processes that go behind policymaking and
governance in India, providing them with a hands-on approach to the impediments and
challenges that confront political parties in modern times.

PROCEDURAL CONSTRUCT
• Members have the liberty to speak either in English or Hindi

• All documentation will be only in English.

• At the beginning of each session, the executive board calls committee member in English
alphabetical order to state their attendance with a clear present.

• It is mandatory for all committee members to vote.

• All the Committee members will be invited to give their Introductory Statements. The default
time period, for the same will be 90 seconds. Committee members are expected to list out their
current Line of Policy and that of their political party, towards the Agenda at hand. The member,
granted the right to deliver the Introductory Statement, may yield after his/her speech in one of
the three ways: Yield to Comments such a yield can be used to invite comments from other fellow
members on the Line of Policy, presented by the speaking member. Yield to Points of
Information/Questions. The Executive Board, who has the right to call to order any member
whose question is rhetorical and/or not designated to elicit information, may select questioners.
Follow-up will be allowed only at the discretion of the Executive Board. Yield to the executive
board, such a yield should be made if the Committee member does not wish to yield to
questions/comments by other members. Members must declare any yield by the conclusion of his
or her speech. If the time runs out, the Executive board will make the speaker aware about it and
the speaker should wrap up with their speech within 10 seconds after it.

SUBJECT DISCUSSIONS
Once the Introductory Statements have been successfully delivered, the floor shall be made open
for motions, leading to Formal Discussions called Moderated Caucus. This shall be used by the
Committee members to debate/discuss specific subtopics under the broader agenda, subject to
stipulated time limits and the strict moderation of the delegate who raised the subject discussion.
Every proposal for a moderated caucus must be accompanied by the specification of the Topic to
be discussed under the slot, framed concisely and holistically. Every speech made during a Subject
Discussion will be subject to a specific time limit, not exceeding 90 seconds, which is to be
specified by the Member proposing the motion. Speeches made during the Subject Discussions
are NOT open to questions or comments by other committee members. Committee members are
requested to behave in a parliamentary way.

ESTABLISHING THE SESSIONS

These sessions can be established by proposing a motion to establish a particular session, which
will be followed by a vote. The motion should be able to secure a simple majority. Sessions are of
two types:

• Moderated Caucus: In order to discuss various sections of the agenda, a separate time frame is
allotted for the members to put their views on the floor of the house. A moderated caucus session
can be of 10-15 minutes, but the individual speaker’s time can vary from 60-90 seconds.
Everything in a moderated caucus session is in public domain and is in the presence of the media.

• Unmoderated Caucus: A Representative may move for an unmoderated caucus thereby

suggesting a change from formal to informal debate. The Representative who makes this motion
must suggest a length and justification for it. The Executive Board may suggest a more appropriate
session length and put it to vote or may rule it.

POINTS
• Point of Personal Privilege: A Representative may rise to a Point of Personal Privilege if a matter
impairs him/her from participating fully in council activities. The Executive Board persons shall
try to effectively address the source of impairment. A Point of Personal Privilege may only
interrupt a speaker if the Representative speaking is inaudible. Otherwise, the Representative
rising on the Point of Personal Privilege must wait till the end of the speech to raise the Point. This
is the only point which can disrupt a speech.

• Point of Order: A Representative may raise a Point of Order if he/she believes that the rules are
being violated. The Executive Board will then immediately rule on the Point of Order. This point
can interrupt a speaker. This point cannot interrupt a speaker.

• Point of Parliamentary Inquiry: A Representative may rise to a Point of Parliamentary Inquiry

requesting an explanation from the Executive Board on the Rules of Procedure. This point may
not interrupt a Speaker.
• Point of Information: When a delegate wishes to ask a question about a speech given by a fellow
delegate, then the delegate may rise to the point of information.

• Right of Reply: A Representative whose personal integrity has been impugned by another
Delegate’s comments may rise to a Right of Reply. Disagreement with the content of a Delegate's
speech is not grounds for a Right of Reply. The Executive Board will recognize the Right of Reply
at his/her discretion as well as decide on how to resolve the motion. This point may not interrupt
a speaker but should be addressed the moment he/she has finished his/her speech. Should the
Executive Board rule the Right of Reply out of order, his/her decision cannot be appealed. (No
Representative may call for a Right of Reply on a Right of Reply).

COMMITTEE DOCUMENTATION
• Resolution: A written, Document, which is a set of Operative Clauses. Requires at least one
sponsor and three signatories, to be considered. Dissent Notes: If any particular member or party
is in disagreement with a specific clause of the Resolution, it may issue a 'Dissent Note' in writing,
addressed to the Executive Board.

• Communiqué: An official declaration or announcement in writing, non- binding in nature, which

is drafted in joint consensus of the entire Committee and is passed without a formal vote. A
communiqué is a more informal and non-binding alternative to a resolution, intended for
common understanding of Committee and press members.

• Written Statements: Written statements shall be used to apprise the Executive Board, of any
Policy Line, that could not be done through speeches, due to the limited time available. The
Executive Board may read out the statement to the Committee, if it deems fit to do so.

• Press Statements: Statements, either written or in verbal, directly to the national press.

OUTCOME
The main purpose of this All India Parties Meet is to ensure that all the participating members
come down to consensual solutions with respect to the issues at hand. For which the final
document of this meeting would be solutions in the form of recommendations to the Government
to solve the existing issues for which all the political parties have arrived at a consensus. And for
such document/s to be passed a 2/3rd majority of all the members present and voting is
necessary. Unfortunately, Political Parties would not have an option to abstain, thereby requiring
them to come up with alternative voting strategies.
 INTRODUCTION TO THE AGENDAS

CAA through the lens of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution

Background
Citizenship: the position or status of being a citizen of a country

Persecution: Hostility and ill-treatment, especially because of race or political or religious beliefs
Immigrant: A person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country

Migration in India
India as a nation has seen a high migration rate in recent years as well as time taking back to 12th
-20th century which observed a huge migration of Parsi population from Iran. Over 98 million
people migrated from one place to another in 1990s, the highest for any decade since
independence according to the 2001 census details. However, in 1970s migration was slowing
down. The number of migrants during 1991-2001 increased by about 22% over the previous
decade an increase since 1951.

No of Migrants (in million):

Years No. of Migrants

1951 – 61 66
1961 – 71 68.2
1971 – 81 81
1981 – 91 80.9
1991 – 2001 98.3

Articles 5-11 of Constitution of India

Article 5 speaks about the citizenship of India at the commencement of the Constitution (Nov
26, 1949). Article 11 gave powers to the Parliament of India to regulate the right of citizenship by
law. This provision resulted in the enactment of Citizenship Act 1955 by the Indian Parliament.

Article 5 – Citizenship at the commencement of the Constitution

Article 6 – Rights of the Citizenship of certain persons who have migrated to India from Pakistan

Article 7 – Rights of Citizenship of certain migrants to Pakistan

Article 8 – Rights of citizenship of certain persons of Indian Origin residing outside India
Article 9 – Persons voluntarily acquiring citizenship of a foreign state not to be citizens

Article 10 – Continuance of the rights of citizenship

Article 11 – Parliament to regulate the right of citizenship by law

Citizenship Act 1955

In exercise of its power the Parliament has enacted the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955. This Act
provides for the acquisition and loss of Indian citizenship after the commencement of the
Constitution. This Act has been amended four times so far by the Citizenship (Amendment) Acts
of 1986, 1992, 2003 and 2005. The Citizenship Act, 1955 provided for the Commonwealth
citizenship according to which every person who is a citizen of a Commonwealth country, shall by
virtue of that citizenship, have the status of commonwealth citizenship in India. But this provision
was repealed by the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2003. The Citizenship Act 1955 provides for
the acquisition of Indian Citizenship after the commencement of the Constitution in five ways; i.e.
birth, descent, registration, naturalization and incorporation of territory.

Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019

The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 of the Parliament of India amended the Citizenship Act
of 1955 providing a path to Indian citizenship for religious minorities from Pakistan, Bangladesh
and Afghanistan. The religious minorities given eligibility were listed as Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists,
Jains, Parsi and Christians. Muslims were not given such eligibility. The beneficiaries had to have
entered India on or before 31 December 2014 and should have faced “religious persecution or fear
of religious persecution” in their countries of origin. The Act also relaxed residence requirement
for naturalization from 11 years to 5 years for these migrants.

Articles 14 of Constitution of India

According to Article 14, “the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or equal
protection of the laws within the territory of India”. While the concept of “equality before the law”
was borrowed from the Common Law upon which English Legal System was founded, the phrase
“equal protection of laws” has its link with the American Constitution. Both the phrases advocate
“equality to status and of opportunity.” In fact, “equal protection of laws” also emphasizes on
equal treatment under equal circumstances. Thus, Article 14 stands against any arbitrary or
discriminatory laws passed by legislatures.
Problems Arising due to CAA
With the approval of the Rajya Sabha, the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019, (CAB) has finally
been passed. To take a historical view, the unfinished agenda of India’s independence struggle has
now been completed. Doing justice to the refugees who — believing in the solemn assurance
enshrined in the Nehru-Liaquat Pact — chose to stay back in regions that were earlier parts of
India, was our historic national commitment and the government has dutifully abided by the
same.

Fear mongering
The CAB, now formalized as an Act, will facilitate Indian citizenship to several lakh refugees who
were compelled to seek refuge in India for the sake of protecting not only their identity but their
very existence in their respective home countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh.

Many perversions which crept in with India’s Partition on religious grounds have now been
corrected – at least partially. Justice has been delivered to those hapless Hindus and other
minority groups from these three countries, who had to pay the price for breach of trust on the
part of rulers in some neighboring countries.

While this law has paved the way for the fulfilment of the aspirations of lakhs of refugees, parties
that have thrived only on the basis of vote bank politics, are stoking needless fears in the minds
of a few sections in certain parts of the country. Having realized that the days for vote bank politics
are now numbered, interested political groups are spreading canards and engaging in calumny.

There are four major points that are being made and used to ignite the fires of misunderstanding,
mutual distrust and suspicion. The first fear is that lakhs of Bangladeshis would now become legal
migrants in Assam and other states. This is far from reality. There is absolutely no question of
granting citizenship to all illegal migrants from any of the three neighboring countries. The Act
facilitates citizenship only to the refugees who were forced to leave their country because of
persecution on religious grounds and essentially from only specified religious communities who
are a minority in those countries. Opposition is also making a noise about the alleged
discrimination on religious grounds as only Hindus, Sikhs, Jain, Buddhists, Christians and Parsis
will be easily getting Indian citizenship.

However, it is a fact that all Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh are avowedly Islamic with their
constitutions proclaiming Islam as their official religion. So, to preempt that adherents of Islam
would be facing persecution is an affront to the neighboring countries and a blatantly flawed
approach.
Unfounded concerns
The third major objection is about a selective approach since only three neighboring countries are
going to be benefitted. Honestly, there is nothing unusual in this approach. In the past too,
refugees or persons displaced because of wars and social strifes from only specified countries were
granted citizenship.

Tamil refugees who crossed over to India from Sri Lanka or say from an African country like
Uganda were granted citizenship with a standalone approach, without any blanket generalization.
Fourthly, the government, with due consideration to the concerns of our brethren from the north-
eastern states, has ensured that this act will not be made applicable to most parts of the Northeast.

As rightly pointed out by Union Home Minister Amit Shah, this government could also have slept
over the decades-old issue of persecuted minorities from neighboring countries. It is easy to
spread disinformation and create a fear psychosis about this law.

Not unexpectedly, interested groups are working overtime to spread disinformation and create
problems for the government. So, continuing to brush the issue under the carpet and promoting
status -quo was always an option available to previous governments. However, conscious of the
huge backlog of unfinished promises, the Modi government has decisively moved ahead and
resolutely tried to solve an issue that was considered unsolvable.

A law in good faith Doomsayers have now started asking questions that are ignorance based.
Would the government keep the illegal migrants — who are not eligible for citizenship even after
this act — in detention camps?

To set the record straight, the exercise of National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the resultant
setting up of the detention camps is completely, and only, in accordance with the directives of the
High Court or Supreme Court and Central as well as State governments. The only objective behind
the Act was humanitarian justice for the most deprived section, that is stateless, at times
unnamed, for decades unrecognized and also neglected. Minorities from these three neighboring
countries were forced to flee and enter India simply to save their life, dignity and freely pursue
their aspirations. To compel them to move from the frying pan to the fire is against the grain of
the idea of India. This Act provides them a human touch and much-needed safety, security and
dignity. With the principles of refoulment and fundamental rights against discrimination based
on religion have gone for a toss, the CAB has also in a way hit Article 14 of Constitution.
Review of Sedition Laws with respect to speech and literary
freedom in India

In India, section 124A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with the ‘sedition’ which was enacted by
Britishers to crush the voice of dissenting freedom fighters. It is very surprising and shocking that
this provision is still very active in the atmosphere of fundamental freedom like freedom of speech
and expression.

The freedom of expression guaranteed under article 19 (1) (a) of Constitution of India, includes
the right to express one’s views and opinions freely. It also covers the right to criticize the
government, the requisite of a healthy democracy. In Terminiello v. Chicago, Justice William O.
Douglas had explained the rationale behind the freedom of speech as: “a function of free speech
under our system of government is to invite dispute; It may indeed best serve its high purpose
when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even
stirs people to anger”.

However, “the liberty of the individual to do as he pleased even in innocent matters is not
absolute” but, limited to only grounds listed in article 19(2) of Constitution of India. International
law provides a general ‘three-part’ test for assessing restriction on the freedom of expression., Any
restriction of the freedom of expression must be cumulatively as such; it must be provided for by
law, have legitimate aims and must be ‘necessary in a democratic society’

A sedition law, even if manage to pass the two previous tests unable with third one. It is because
it cannot be in any circumstances ‘necessary in democratic society’. While describing Section 124A
Mahatma Gandhi in 1922 said “prince among the political sections of the Indian Penal Code
designed to suppress liberty of the citizen.” He further said that “Affection cannot be
manufactured or regulated by law”. Therefore, this provision of sedition is against the notion of
democracy because the right of freedom should be promoted to the maximum extent possible
given its critical role in democracy and public participation in political life.

A few examples of the incidences regarding the theme:

In February 2016, police in Delhi arrested Kanhaiya Kumar, a student union leader at the
Jawaharlal Nehru University, after members of the student wing of the ruling Bharatiya Janata
Party (BJP) accused him of making anti-national speeches during a meeting organized on campus.
The public meeting was held on February 9 to protest the 2013 hanging of Mohammad Afzal Guru,
who was convicted for his role in a December 2001 attack on parliament that killed nine people.
Afzal Guru’s execution remains a matter of intense debate in the country. The Delhi police
admitted to the court that Kumar had “not been seen” raising any anti-national slogans in the
video footage available. The Delhi High Court granted him bail in March. Five more students were
booked in the case; two, Umar Khalid and Anirban Bhattacharya, were also arrested and later
released on bail.
In May 2012, the police in Tamil Nadu filed sedition complaints against thousands of people who
had peacefully protested the construction of a nuclear power plant in Kudankulam. According to
S.P. Udaykumar, founder of the People’s Movement Against Nuclear Energy, which led the
struggle against the project, 8,956 people face allegations of sedition in 21 cases. A public hearing
organized by activists belonging to the Chennai Solidarity Group in May 2012, which included a
former chief justice of the Madras and Delhi High Courts, found that the state had denied the
protesters both freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. A report by a different fact-finding
team in September 2012 alleged that state authorities had used “unjustified” force against
peaceful protesters to silence dissent. As that report concluded:

If people who have resisted and protested peacefully for a year can be charged with sedition and
waging war against the nation in such a cavalier way as has been done here, what is the future of
free speech and protest in India?

In September 2012, the authorities in Mumbai arrested political cartoonist Aseem Trivedi on
sedition charges after a complaint that his cartoons mocked the Indian constitution and national
emblem. The charges were dropped a month later following public protests and furor on social
media.

In March 2014, authorities in Uttar Pradesh charged over 60 Kashmiri students with sedition for
cheering for Pakistan in a cricket match against India. The Uttar Pradesh government dropped
the charges only after seeking a legal opinion from the law ministry.

In August 2014, the authorities in Kerala charged seven youth, including students, with sedition,
acting on a complaint that they refused to stand up during the national anthem inside a movie
theater.

In October 2015, authorities in Tamil Nadu state arrested folk singer S. Kovan under the sedition
law for two songs that criticized the state government for allegedly profiting from state-run liquor
shops at the expense of the poor.
 POSITION PAPER
The position paper it is particularly significant to stress that it must be written in accordance of
your given portfolio. Essentially, the paper requires you to write out your party’s viewpoints in
paragraph form. As this document will be your guideline for action throughout the entire
conference, it’s in your best interests to give an accurate portrayal of your party’s stance on the
issues at hand.

HOW TO WRITE IT

You first mention the following details and then make your position paper with reference to the
given pointers – Agenda: Portfolio: Party:

1. Topic Background The first section serves the purpose of outlining the topic in general and
providing insight into the root of the conflict. It should state the problem and express why it is
significant.

2. Past Party Actions The second section is where you put the past actions of your party for the
agenda and also mention the actions of the government from the past.

3. Possible Solutions The third section has some possible solutions to the problem in hand.
Finally, conclusion should be written to restate your position and sum up what you hope to
achieve throughout the duration of the conference. The position paper is supposed to be typed in
a word document and should be attached to the email. It should not exceed two pages. The official
font face of the document is Times New Roman and font size is 12. Please note that the position
papers need to be submitted latest by
 RESOLUTION PAPER

A resolution is a document that contains all the issues that the committee wants to solve and the
proposed solutions to that issue. It’s called a resolution because that’s what the United Nations
calls the documents they produce. Resolutions are usually written during unmoderated caucus
(sometimes called informal caucus) where delegates are free to roam around the committee to
collaborate on ideas with each other. The ultimate purpose of a committee session is to pass a
resolution. All the speeches, debate, negotiation, and teamwork are supposed to lead up to a
resolution which contains all the proposed solutions to the issue. The resolution(s) that the
majority of the committee agrees upon will be passed during voting bloc and the sponsors will be
informally commended for building consensus on good ideas.

HOW TO WRITE A RESOLUTION

It has three main parts: the heading, the pre-ambulatory clauses, and the operative clauses.

1. HEADING

The heading contains four pieces of information: the committee name, the sponsors, the
signatories, and the agenda.

2. PRE-AMBULATORY CLAUSES

The pre-ambulatory clauses state all the issues that the committee wants to resolve on this issue.
It may state reasons why the committee is working on this issue and highlight previous actions on
the issue.

3. OPERATIVE CLAUSES

Operative clauses state the solutions that the sponsors of the resolution propose to resolve the
issues. The operative clauses should address the issues specifically mentioned in the pre-
ambulatory clauses above it.
 SAMPLE PRE-AMBULATORY PHRASES

Noting with approval Acknowledging Noting with deep

Expressing concern Acting concern
also
Expressing concern Affirming Noting with regret
Expressing its Alarmed by Noting with satisfaction
appreciation Alarmed Observing
Expressing its Anxious Reaffirming
satisfaction Appreciating Reaffirming also
Expressing satisfaction Approving Realizing
Firmly convinced Aware of Recalling
Fulfilling Bearing in Recalling also
mind
Fully alarmed Believing Recognizing
Fully aware Cognizant Recognizing also
Fully believing Concerned Recognizing with
Further deploring Confident satisfaction
Further recalling Conscious Referring
Guided by Considering Regretting
Having adopted Contemplating Reiterating
Having considered Convinced Reiterating its call for
Having devoted attention Declaring Reminding
Having examined Deeply concerned Seeking
Having heard Deeply conscious Seized
Having received Deeply convinced Stressing
Having reviewed Deeply disturbed Taking into account
Having studied Deeply regretting Taking into
Having adopted Deploring consideration
Having Desiring Taking note
approved
Having considered Determined Taking note also
Having decided Emphasizing Taking note further
Keeping in mind Encouraged Underlinin
Noting Expecting g
Welcoming
Noting further Expressing appreciation Welcoming also
 SAMPLE PRE-AMBULATORY PHRASES

Accepts Demands Recalls

Acknowledges Deplores Recognizes
Adopts Designates Recommends
Advises Directs Regrets
Affirms Draws the attention Reiterates
Also calls for Emphasizes Reminds
Also recommends Encourages Renews its appeal
Also strongly condemns Endorses Repeats
Also urges Expresses its Requests
Appeals appreciation Requires
Appreciates Expresses its hope Solemnly affirms
Approves Expresses its regret Stresses
Authorizes Further invites Strongly advises
Calls Further proclaims Strongly condemns
Calls for Further recommends Strongly encourages
Calls upon Further reminds Suggests
Commends Further requests Supports
Condemns Has resolved Takes note of
Confirms Instructs Transmits
Congratulates Introduces Trusts
Considers Invites Underlines
Decides Notes Underscores
Declares Proclaims Urges
Declares accordingly Reaffirms Welcomes
 SAMPLE RESOLUTION
Resolution 1.1
Committee: All India Political Party Meet XXXX
Topic Area: Article 377 of the Indian Penal Code
Sponsors: Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Mamata Banerjee, Digvijay Singh,
Sitaram Yechury
Signatories: Mani Shankar Aiyer, Jyotiraditya Scindia, Raj Thackrey

• Approves the2nd July 2009 Delhi High Court verdict on Article 377 of
the Indian Penal
• Condemns the discrimination faced by lesbian, gay, bisexuals
and transgender in India,
• Emphasizes the need of increased medical assistance to be provided to
the LGBT community to prevent HIV-AIDS,
• Condemns the physical, mental, economic, and emotional violence on
the LGBT community;

• Congratulates the state of Tamil Nadu to be the first to

provide Transgender rights in India,
1. Supports the repeal of Article 377 and decriminalize homosexuality in India;
2. Proclaims to let the able-bodied members of society (LGBT community
sor the minority community who want to work in any sphere of the
employment sector against discrimination;
3. Encourages sex education in the school level and online or personal
counselling to help the LGBT community to overcome hurdles in life;
4. Requests the recognition of same sex couples and child adoption by same
sex couples;
5. Further requests access to IVF for lesbians and commercial surrogacy
for gay male couples;
6. Urges local authorities, policy makers, schools, and families need more
education on accepting gender-variant children, and in treating people of
different sexualities and gender identities equally, and in applying policies
and programs in a friendly manner, rather than being hostile.