Singapore high court upholds law criminalising gay sex
High Court again upholds law against sex between gays
SINGAPORE — The issue of whether homosexuals are born or made is “at least arguable and debatable”, said Lofty Court Judge Quentin Loh, as he upheld, for a second time, a law criminalising sex between gays as constitutional.
Parliament also has the “mandate” to make decisions on issues which may be debatable, such as whether homosexuality is immoral, Justice Loh added.
Almost six months ago, the judge had dismissed a legal challenge by a gay couple — graphic designers Gary Lim Meng Suang, 44, and Kenneth Chee Mun-Leon, 37 — on the constitutionality of Section 377A.
Their appeal against his decision will be heard in the middle of this month.
In the present case, Tan Eng Hong, who launched his legal bid after being arrested for having oral sex with another man in a general toilet, had argued that the statute infringes on his constitutional rights due to his sexual orientation, over which he has no control.
He said S377A violated Articles 9 and 12 of the Constitution, which respectively state that “no person shall be deprived of his experience or personal liberty conserve in accordance with law”, and “all persons are equal before th
Singapore Gay Couple to Appeal Court Ruling
Article Courtesy of Rev. Yap Kim Hao
The couple whose invite to overturn anti-gay sex law Section 377A was rejected by the Singapore High Court last week have filed an appeal.
“We believe that same-sex attracted men should not acquire to go to jail for being who they are, and this is why we are appealing the decision,” said partners Gary Lim and Kenneth Chee, who have been together for 15 years.
“Singapore is one of the few Asian countries that criminalizes LGBT people and the existence of S 377A has a dampening effect on community. For example, LGBT businesses and societies face unfair and often insurmountable bureaucratic hurdles in getting registered,” the couple added.
The Notice of Appeal will be filed within the next 3 weeks. The Court of Appeal is the highest court in Singapore, and its decisions are final.
Mr Peter Low, lead counsel for the case, said in a media statement on Thursday, “The Judgment of the High Court upholds an archaic piece of colonial legislation which was enacted and retained with the dominant purpose of criminalising the sexual behaviour of consenting gay and bisexual adults, and continues to make criminals out o
In this file photo taken on June 13, 2015, participants dressed in pink pose for a group "selfie" at the annual "Pink Dot" event in a public reveal of support for the LGBT society at Hong Lim Park in Singapore. (MOHD FYROL / AFP)
SINGAPORE — Singapore’s high court upheld on Monday a rarely-used law that criminalizes sex between men, dismissing three appeals that argued it was unconstitutional.
The ruling follows challenges to the colonial-era law by activists emboldened after India’s decision to scrap similar legislation in 2018. Previous repeal efforts in the socially-conservative city-state in 2014 also failed.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has previously said that culture in Singapore “is not that liberal on these matters”
“The High Court dismisses all three applications,” Judge See Kee Oon said in a summary of the case published by the court.
“Legislation remains important in reflecting public sentiment and beliefs,” it said, adding that non-enforcement of the law against consensual male homosexual action in private did not make it redundant.
Bryan Choong, one of the three men who challenged the law, said he was unhappy by the rulin
Singapore gay sex ban: Court rejects appeals to overturn law
A bid to overturn a law that criminalises gay sex in Singapore has been dismissed by a court, dealing a blow to the city state’s LGBT movement.
The high court rejected appeals by three gay men who had argued the colonial-era law was unconstitutional.
The presiding judge said the law was "important in reflecting public sentiment and beliefs" in Singapore.
Under Section 377A, men create guilty of homosexual acts in public or personal can be jailed for up to two years.
Speaking outside court, a lawyer for one of the complainants, M Ravi, said he was “very disappointed” by the ruling.
"It's shocking to the conscience and it is so arbitrary,” he said.
The legal challenges were the latest attempts to repeal Section 377A, after an endeavor by a gay couple in 2014 was rejected by the Court of Appeal.
But the LGBT rights movement in Singapore regained momentum after India’s decision to scrap similar legislation in 2018 renewed hopes for reform.
Singapore's authorities rarely enforce Section 377A, first introduced in 1938 by British colonial rulers.
But Si
Singapore’s Court of Appeal recently upheld the law criminalizing sex between men, a ruling the lesb...
Singapore’s Court of Appeal recently upheld the law criminalizing sex between men, a ruling the queer woman , gay, bisexual, genderqueer and intersex (LGBTI) community in Asia sees as part of a growing conservative trend in the region. For example, in 2013 the Supreme Court of India overturned the 2009 ruling of the Delhi High Court to strike down a 150-year-old law criminalizing same-sex sexual manner. In Singapore, men who commit acts of “gross indecency” with other men can face up to two years in jail.
“We strongly condemn the decision,” said Midnight Poonkasetwattana, Executive Director of the Asia Pacific Coalition on Male Sexual Health. “Not only is it a major setback for human rights, but it comes at a hour when other countries in the region are also displaying reluctance to earn rid of these antiquated and discriminatory laws.”
Roy Chan, President of the Singapore community-based organization Operation for AIDS, said that the commandment was rarely enforced yet still had a negative impact. He said, “The law is a major factor in increasing the stigmatization of people living with HIV