Although the Singapore High Court last week affirmed an earlier decision to dismiss the case, it also found that while the original 377A charge had been withdrawn against Tan Eng Hong who filed the constitutional challenge, he has indeed a legitimate interest in pursuing the case.
According to local media reports, the Supreme Court on Monday said it would start the process to hear the petitions filed by various individuals and organisations, who are opposed to the Delhi High Court's decision to decriminalise consensual same-sex sex between adults, on April 19.
Lawyer M Ravi, who had filed the legal action on behalf of his client seeking to challenge the constitutionality of Section 377A, tells Fridae that he plans to appeal the High Court's decision.
A lawyer in Singapore who intends to challenge the constitutionality of Section 377A may be unable to do so if the challenge is dismissed on the basis that the charge brought against his client has been amended. Alex Au considers the issues.
Despite the Prime Minister’s promise not to proactively enforce Section 377A which criminalises sex between men, a man is facing charges under the law while another two were convicted last week.
A man who brought the first constitutional challenge against the ban on sodomy in Malaysia and who was appealing against his conviction of 60 years in jail and 22 strokes of rotan for sodomising a 14-year-old male lost his appeal.
Dr Kua Kia Soong, director of SUARAM or Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Voice of the Malaysian People), issued a press statement calling on "progressive Malaysians, political parties and organisations to stand up for the rights of all LGBT and the abolition of our outdated sodomy laws."
RSS Feed: 
