Singapore High Court Justice Quentin Loh today released a judgement in the Constitutional challenge of statute 377A of the Singapore Penal Code, upholding the law which criminalises sex between men and provides a jail term of up to two years.
In a 54-page judgment, Justice Loh has "found that the statute has not infringed the rights of the plaintiff, Tan Eng Hong, and is not inconsistent with Articles 9 and 12 of the Constitution of Singapore, which ensures that one will not be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law and that all persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law, respectively," according to a media statement issued by Tan's lawyer, M Ravi.
While Justice Loh responded to wide-ranging arguments from decisions made by foreign courts to decriminalise male to male sex to criminalising a "natural and immutable attribute" made by M Ravi, he also said of section 377A: "The purpose and object of s 377A when its very first predecessor was enacted in 1938 was to respond to a prevalence of grossly indecent acts between makes – whether in public or in private – which the Legislature deemed a regrettable state of affairs that was not desirable... The purpose and object of s 377A remains the same today."
In response to today's judgment, M Ravi, who has been working on the case for more than three years, told Fridae that his team will study the judgement before a decision is made whether to appeal the ruling.
In April this year, Justice Loh dismissed a legal challenge filed by a gay couple Gary Lim and Kenneth Chee. The two men, who have been partners for 15 years, had sought to challenge the constitutionality of section 377A of the Penal Code.
打印版本
RSS Feed: 
读者回应
We, the citizens of Singapore,
pledge ourselves as one united people,
regardless of race, language or religion,
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and
progress for our nation.
I ask, personally, really? One united people, based on equality?
More like Animal Farm... "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others'...
Nelson Mandela fought and lost many battles in his war against apartheid in South Africa. He spent at least 2 decades incarcerated but never lost hope. The same can be said of Mahatma Gandhi in his non-violent stand against the oppressive British Raj in India. In the end, both Mandela and Gandhi came out the victors. But, along the way, they did lose many battles. The massacre at the Golden Temple in Amritsar is a case in point. Yet, that sad event did not make Indians lose heart in their fight against the colonial yoke although many innocent civilians had lost their lives.
The same analogy can be drawn in the LGBT community's fight for equality in Singapore. This is but one battle out of many we will have to fight in this war against deliberate and premeditated state oppression.
As the great Mahatma Gandhi once said : "In the end, tyranny and oppression cannot stand up against the TRUTH".
However the real hearings will be in the Court of Appeal. It is a great shame that Lord Goldsmith, QC has been snubbed there, the presence of such a senior international advocate and former Attorney General would have added gravitas to the whole proceedings. But at least his written arguments are being presented, and there is every reason for optimism.
it was minority status of religion when first come to our country.
and religion is not social value at that time.
Religion is immoral value in regard to Human right and Human existency.
In accordance with equal justice,
If there Anti gay law
There must be Anti Religion Law
Anti Malay Law
Anti Black men Law, Etc.
Judgment should be wise
we are not animals that refer to forest Law
Religion indicate that you faith to satan.
it is like Bread consist poison Jam inside.
Mean that exterior is bread, but when you eat..you will get harmful, discriminate your self.
Mean..it look like faithful to God in exterior
But Satanic interior
请先登入再使用此功能。