This forced the current attorney general to clarify that the government has not removed or restricted prosecutorial discretion for Section 377A. Rajah, have pointed out, the government’s assurance that section 377A will not be enforced casts doubt on the attorney general’s independence from the government and undermines the rule of law.
Second, as two former attorneys general, Walter Woon and V. If he were a victim of rape, domestic violence, or harassment would the judicial system be able to afford him the same protections a straight man would get? Would a gay man be willing to submit to the court evidence that revealed a criminal act even if he is not prosecuted for it? This, however, raises a number of issues.įirst, with section 337A in place, a gay man is not only afraid of being prosecuted, but of being given equal protection under the law. The Singapore government, on its part, has promised not to proactively enforce 377A. Shanmugam, for the first time, shared his personal opinion on section 377A, noting that when it comes to “people’s lifestyles … sexual attitudes … really should be careful in treating them as criminal or criminalizing that.” The recent Indian Supreme Court’s decision has ignited another round of debate in Singapore. The number of people attending the annual gay pride rally in Singapore has grown steadily over the last decade. Keeping section 377A is not going to silence a growing minority in Singapore who support the LGBT community. Singapore will have debates on such issues when it is ready.įurther, the suggestion that gay rights advocates are pushing to “criminalize” those who do not support homosexuality is disingenuous. The fear that the repeal of 377A will quickly and automatically lead to equal rights for same-sex couples in all other aspects is misguided.
Get the Newsletterįor instance, the Archbishop of Singapore said he would support the repeal of 377A if “…no further demands made to legalize same-sex unions, adoption of babies by same-sex couples, surrogacy, or to criminalize those who do not support the homosexual lifestyle.”Įnjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access.
Get briefed on the story of the week, and developing stories to watch across the Asia-Pacific. The majority of Singaporeans, however, have wrongly conflated the repeal of the section with acceptance of marriage equality or adoption of children by same-sex couples, and that is what they see it as a threat to traditional family values. (The law is silent on sexual activity between two women, making it all the more unusual). Most people opposing the repeal of section 377A do not necessarily think gay men should be thrown in jail.
Still, it has remained a conservative society where the majority have been slow to accept the LGBT community. Singapore has a highly educated, discerning, and pragmatic population, with few people holding radical views on religion or ideology. Last month, India’s Supreme Court unanimously struck down a colonial-era law criminalizing consensual gay sex, calling it “indefensible.” The decision paved the way for citizens in other former British colonies, including Singapore, to challenge the constitutionality of similar laws in their own countries.įor all its economic success, first-world healthcare, and a top of the class education system, the Singapore government remains behind in protecting its LGBT community by retaining section 377A, an outdated law that criminalizes sex between men, on its books.