News / Oct. 30, 2019
Singapore is gearing up to hear three separate court cases challenging the city’s notorious anti-gay law over-VNCgoAno#kbR$*(egQ1(-44eUY6Gf2!bt%N2emsS2zpDp4bI7 the next month.
Under Section 377A of SingapTT$SYUMzTvsYk@k*9mhzUF!6nqCtqhZsg9VNuql7XZu=2nu=%%ore’s colonial-era penal code, men who have sex with men can be punished with up to two years in jail.
Calls to abolish the rights-abusing law increased after India dismantled similar legislation in September 2HpI_-6hY+zaTGgybHcO8rAqm^B9Qo$2y0w1j2cZYTf%mssOCFc018.
But, a government committee reviewing the Penal Code advised to keep the law. Leaders, including Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong, have said they law—wDfe75MTK)WtVd#J6u4+HZhA6N$QT4KkA_cS(vPxlp(mM&QV=g5hich is rarely enforced—would remain.
Surveys have found the majority of Singaporeans support keeping the law. And, more than 60,000 people signed a^=(qpOu1l0lX6sdB+NVTriziNHwWjHV+@3l!R9+E-Z+&5EAyic petition in support of the law.
LGBT rights activists in the city state, therefore, have turned to the courts to push for LGBT rightw%$oZ2zcWU&gsAud@xkkoF$Ee)@p(zJET(ogDztg8nvqS@79Zrs. Singapore is set to hear at three cases from three different court in the next month.
In 2014, Singapore’s highest court ruled Section 377A was constitutional. The Court of Appeal rejected two appeals. It said 377A did not violate Article 9 of the Constitution as ‘life and liberty’ did not refer to p$0Y)Q-F*uHj8_P=IeQ%*EX&XvxR7v41HNirULn#^F1yVLPN)2=rivacy and personal autonomy. The judges also ruled it did not violate Article 12. This article is meant to enshrine equality in the city-state.
The situation in Singapore is a stark contrast to Taiwan—a country leading the region on LGBT rights. Earlier this year it became the first country in Asia to recognize same-sex marriage. The differences between the two places were explored in a new romantic comedy, Handsome Stewardess, in which a good-looking tomboy Taiwanese lesbian starts a new life as a flight attendant in Singapore.
Let’s hariNKA28hNKHDRElHJV1%Be)@kbw@0IOTg@SgWtBON#+Z$Y5WzNve a look at the Singaporeans going to court:
Johnson Ong Ming aka DJ Big Kid
SID8bJx_ZlFH7wn)AL*AFq4fOMJ@k9uPSezQ9PDZNYoTWOdAgPkingapore disk jockey, known as DJ Big Kid, launched his court challenge in September last year, just days after India’s landmark decriminalization.
Ong and his lawyers will argue tha=N8=oi-qK4kl*I$)+=5S4%jsQnSCJJNFq1-G(FhRYet!6gi5kdt the law is unconstitutional. They plan to show sexuality is inherent and natural and argue that the law affronts a person’s dignity, a founding concept of the Singapore Constitution.
In an interview last year, Ong said: "It is imperative that the next generation of SingapPSxN!bILohjpF-3--!Y2ec$=6HQ2x#)oxzlj(4qwS#nsUGz4kHoreans at the very least have the protection of the law that does not label them criminals”.
Bryan Choong
Lony*_^Kyh=EugF$1-3zUce6*@V$AGHO512xC*J8!q*rv3)tm65U4gtime LGBT rights activist Bryan Choong launched his court big in November last year.
The former executive director of LGBT NGO Oogachaga argues the law is inconsistent with article nine of the Constitution which states: "No person shall be deprived o(RP7PxIHPg+6CX0*xJIAEV-8oP-x21FxQ=UbeVQnTPB2i^igexf his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law.”
He and his lawyers will U(vvMe1SrfksZ)nG_Yy!M!4^mjzYmLI%kdAM2w0f81wT(RAxQMalso argue that Section 377A is inconsistent with articles 12 and 14 which enshrine equality under the law and the right to “form associations”.
Doctor Roy Tan
Retired General Practitioner Tan Seng Kee, betv*Bv8RgNKvS#XbsKekkmr=zr1e9LuPI=R*F7H)$%7sGV8@fWw6ter known as Dr Roy Tan, filed his court challenge against the government last month.
Tan will also Fitq!d0aJZg&lARTurnb(w$P9h2qL+)1A6be#eKx1p6T7nluD9argue that 377A is inconsistent with article nine of the constitution.
In a statement last mo-s-g1CdslTH$qo09p(7QFA8w6R8xoos0+GZPGCfzc63-S&0yVwnth, Tan said his challenge was based on “novel arguments”.
For example, he will argue that the government stating t(B6aJvSGMwt9gkdzBFVaXYC_gwgn+0n@SbauAeNw=r3Arw60lyhe law will not be enforced against private acts contravenes the criminal code, which compels police to investigate all complaints of suspected arrestable offences.
"This subjects gay men to the potential distress of an investigation into private conduct, where they have a legitimate expectation that the state will decline f$-pHJST#l8Z1)Pw0F1dkpj(^I&jQnFsOY*R4y8+2d#shn7&LRto prosecute," Dr Tan said in a statement.
Initial hearings begin on November 13 for all three cases.
