Singapore to repeal colonial-era law against gay sex: PM

France24 – AFP,  21 August 2022 

Gay rights campaigners have long said Singapore's law runs afoul of the
affluent city-state's increasingly modern and vibrant culture Roslan RAHMAN AFP

Singapore (AFP) – Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced Sunday the country will repeal a colonial-era law criminalising gay sex, though he maintained that the government will continue to "uphold" marriage as between a man and a woman. 

Inherited from the British colonial era, section 377A of Singapore's penal code penalises sex between men with up to two years in jail. 

Gay rights campaigners have long said the law runs afoul of the affluent city-state's increasingly modern and vibrant culture, and had mounted two unsuccessful legal challenges. 

During a major policy speech Sunday, Lee said attitudes have shifted since 15 years ago when the government decided the law should remain, although it has not been actively enforced. 

Gay people "are now better accepted" locally, especially among younger Singaporeans, he said. 

"It is timely to ask ourselves again the fundamental question: Should sex between men in private be a criminal offence?" Lee said. 

"The government will repeal section 377A and decriminalise sex between men. I believe this is the right thing to do, and something that most Singaporeans will now accept." 

He added: "This will bring the law into line with current social mores, and I hope, provide some relief to gay Singaporeans". 

However, the repeal of section 377A stops short of full marriage equality. 

Lee said the government recognises that "most Singaporeans do not want the repeal to trigger a drastic shift in our societal norms across the board", including how marriage is defined and how it is taught in schools. 

"Hence, even as we repeal section 377A, we will uphold and safeguard the institution of marriage," he said. 

He stressed that under the law, "only marriages between one man and one woman are recognised in Singapore". 

The government will amend the constitution to protect the existing definition of marriage from being challenged constitutionally in the courts, Lee added. 

'Long road to equality'

The first attempt to overturn the law was rejected in 2014. The Court of Appeals dismissed the second challenge last February. 

Gay rights campaigners on Sunday expressed "relief" over the government's decision. 

"The repeal of Section 377A is the first step on a long road towards full equality for LGBTQ+ people in Singapore," they said in joint statement signed by more than 20 groups. 

But "the true impact of repeal will be determined by how the people of Singapore respond to it, and treat each other, in the days and months to come". 

Ahead of Lee's speech, an alliance of Protestant churches in Singapore had warned Friday against removing the law, which it described as a "marker for many social and moral considerations". 

In 2018, India's Supreme Court decriminalised gay sex by overturning legislation from its own period under British rule -- a decision that spurred campaigners in Singapore to renew their efforts to challenge the law. 

The following year, Taiwan took the unprecedented decision in May to legalise same-sex marriage, becoming the first place in Asia to do so.

Queen was not warned of Australia PM's 1975 sacking, letters show

Yahoo – AFP, July 14, 2020

The British monarch's representative in Australia, governor-general John Kerr, sparked
a constitutional crisis when he fired Gough Whitlam (AFP Photo/Adrian DENNIS)

Sydney (AFP) - Queen Elizabeth II was not informed in advance about the 1975 dismissal of Australia's prime minister by her representative in country, letters kept secret for decades and released Tuesday revealed.

The British monarch's representative in Australia, governor-general John Kerr, sparked a constitutional crisis when he fired Gough Whitlam, the democratically elected leader of the centre-left Labor party.

In May the High Court ruled more than 200 letters between the queen's private secretary and Kerr -- including many addressing the controversial affair -- should be made public.

Although the correspondence shows the queen was not told immediately prior to Whitlam's sacking, it confirms Kerr had exchanged extensive letters with the palace for months about his powers to oust the prime minister.

The queen, who is Australia's head of state, is supposed to stay above politics and make no decisions about government appointments.

Suspicion the palace played a direct role in Whitlam's ouster has long been cited by Australian Republicans arguing the country should break with the monarchy.

Historians are now combing through 1,200 pages of the so-called Palace Letters to see if the UK government tried to influence events in its former colony and what role the queen, her son and heir Prince Charles, and top royal advisers may have played.

'Skill and wisdom'

One extract shows Kerr informed the queen he had fired Whitlam shortly after taking the action on November 11, 1975.

"I should say I decided to take the step I took without informing the Palace in advance because, under the Constitution, the responsibility is mine, and I was of the opinion it was better for Her Majesty not to know in advance, though it is of course my duty to tell her immediately," he wrote.

The decision capped a protracted political stalemate after the opposition-controlled Senate refused to pass the government's budget, severely weakening Whitlam's position.

The letters confirm the palace knew Kerr had been considering the options available to him under his constitutional "reserve powers", which included dismissing Australia's leader -- an action no other governor-general has taken before or since.

Gough Whitlam, pictured here in 2004, was fired in 1975 after leading
Australia for three years (AFP Photo/TORSTEN BLACKWOOD)

"I'm also keeping my mind open as to the constitutional issues," Kerr wrote to Martin Charteris, the queen's private secretary, on September 12, 1975.

"If the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition get into a battle in which the Senate has defeated the budget, the Prime Minister refuses to recommend a dissolution, my role will need some careful thought," he wrote.

Charteris later praised Kerr for his approach, writing a week before the dismissal he was "playing the vice-regal hand with skill and wisdom".

"The fact you have powers is recognised. But it's also clear you will only use them in the last resort, and then only for constitutional -- and not for political -- reasons," he said.

'Highly contested'

The palace said the release of the letters "confirms that neither Her Majesty nor the Royal Household had any part to play in Kerr’s decision to dismiss Whitlam".

"Throughout her reign, Her Majesty has consistently demonstrated... support for Australia, the primacy of the Australian constitution and the independence of the Australian people, which the release of these letters reflects."

But Professor Jenny Hocking, a biographer of Whitlam who took the case to court, said the political nature of the correspondence was "startling" given the requirement for the head of a constitutional monarchy to remain neutral.

Hocking said the discussion of reserve powers in particular was "scandalous" because its existence in Australia is "highly contested" by legal and political scholars.

After sacking Whitlam, Kerr appointed opposition Liberal leader Malcolm Fraser as interim prime minister, sparking chaos in Canberra and protests on the steps of parliament.

Fraser went on to win a landslide election victory later that year.

Australia became independent in 1901 but retained the British monarch as head of state.

A referendum on becoming a republic failed in 1999, but republicans hope recent royal scandals could help revive efforts to cut ties with the monarchy.

China replaces top envoy to crisis-hit Hong Kong

Yahoo – AFP, January 4, 2020

Luo Huining (pictured) has replaced Wang Zhimin as China's top envoy to Hong 
Kong (AFP Photo/RAVEENDRAN)

Beijing (AFP) - China has replaced its top envoy to Hong Kong, state media reported on Saturday, the most significant personnel change by Beijing since pro-democracy protests erupted in the city nearly seven months ago.

The removal of the head of the Liaison Office, which represents the central government in semi-autonomous Hong Kong, comes as the city grapples with its biggest political crisis in decades.

"Wang Zhimin has been dismissed from his position as head of the Liaison Office" and replaced by Luo Huining, state broadcaster CCTV said, without giving details.

Millions have come out on the streets since June last year in a wave of protests sparked by opposition to a now-abandoned proposal to allow extraditions to mainland China.

But they soon morphed into a larger demand for greater democratic freedoms in the starkest challenge to Beijing since the former British colony was returned to Chinese rule in 1997.

The demonstrations have often descended into violent clashes between hardcore protesters and the police, and Wang had condemned them as "rioters" that needed to be brought to justice.

Hong Kong has been shaken by nearly seven months of pro-democracy protests 

(AFP Photo/ISAAC LAWRENCE)

The Liaison Office, whose director is the highest-ranking Chinese political official in Hong Kong, was targeted in July by protesters throwing eggs and graffitiing the building.

Hong Kong is ruled under the "one country, two systems" principle, which gives the territory rights unseen on mainland China -- but demonstrators say these are being steadily eroded by an increasingly assertive central government in Beijing.

Protesters are demanding fully free elections to elect the city's leadership, amnesty for the thousands arrested during the protests, and an inquiry into the conduct of the police.

'Positive development'

While the extradition bill that started the protests was eventually withdrawn, the Chinese government and the Hong Kong administration have since refused further concessions.

In November, Hong Kong's pro-democracy camp scored a landslide victory in a municipal-level vote -- seen as a referendum on the city's Beijing-backed government.

China has denied allegations that it is clamping down on the city's freedoms, has dismissed the movement's political grievances and painted it as a foreign-backed plot.

It has also continued to back Hong Kong's deeply unpopular leader Carrie Lam.

Protesters in Hong Kong are demanding an inquiry into the conduct of the police (AFP 

Photo/Philip FONG)

The city leader said in a statement that she had "no doubt" the new head of the liaison office would help "promote the integration of Hong Kong into the overall development of the nation and the positive development of the relationship between the Mainland and Hong Kong".

She also thanked Wang, who had served for years in a number of positions at the Liaison Office before his appointment as its director, for giving her government "staunch support" and "a lot of confidence and encouragement" during the crisis.

In early December, following media reports that Beijing was considering replacing him, Wang had vowed to continue.

Luo, his replacement, previously served as governor of Qinghai province, and was also appointed to senior Communist Party positions in Qinghai and Shanxi provinces, according to state-run China Daily.

His Hong Kong appointment comes a week after he was made vice-chairman of Financial and Economic Affairs Committee of the National People's Congress, China's national legislature, according to China Daily.

Archbishop of Canterbury prostrates over 1919 India massacre

Yahoo – AFP, 11 September 2019

Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby paid tribute to the hundreds of people
killed at Amritsar in 1919

Britain has never apologised for the 1919 massacre at Amritsar in India but the head of the Church of England prostrated himself to say sorry in a personal capacity and "in the name of Christ".

British troops fired on thousands of unarmed men, women and children in Amritsar on April 13, 1919, killing 379 people according to colonial-era records. Indian figures put the total closer to 1,000.

"I can't speak for the British Government as I am not an official of the British Government. But I can speak in the name of Christ," Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said as he visited the location in northern India on Tuesday.

"I am so ashamed and sorry for the impact of the crime committed. I am a religious leader, not a politician. As a religious leader, I mourn the tragedy we see here," he added at the site, known in India as Jallianwala Bagh.

Welby visited the Sikh Golden Temple in Amritsar

On Facebook he added that his visit aroused "a sense of profound shame at what happened in this place. It is one of a number of deep stains on British history. The pain and grief that has transcended the generations since must never be dismissed or denied."

The event 100 years ago marked a nadir in Britain's occupation of India, and served to boost Indian nationalism and harden support for independence.

In 1997 Britain's queen laid a wreath at a site during a tour of India. But her gaffe-prone husband Prince Philip stole the headlines by reportedly saying that the Indian estimates for the death count were "vastly exaggerated".

In 2013 David Cameron became the first serving British prime minister to visit Jallianwala Bagh. He described the episode as "deeply shameful" but stopped short of a public apology.

Ahead of centenary commemorations earlier this year, Cameron's since-resigned successor Theresa May on told parliament that Britain "deeply regretted what happened and the suffering caused." But she too didn't say sorry.

Thousands of Hong Kong lawyers march against China extradition plans

Yahoo – AFP, June 6, 2019

Thousands of legal professionals marched on the Central Government Offices in
Hong Kong to protest against a proposed extradition law (AFP Photo/ISAAC LAWRENCE)

Thousands of black-clad Hong Kong lawyers took to the streets Thursday in a silent march against a controversial extradition law proposal, as the city's last colonial governor slammed the plan as "a terrible blow".

The city's pro-Beijing government is pushing a bill through the legislature that would allow extraditions to any jurisdiction with which it doesn't already have a treaty -- including mainland China for the first time.

The proposal has sparked some of the biggest protests the city has seen in recent years as well as criticism from influential legal groups, business associations and western diplomats.

This week has seen escalating criticism from the city's influential legal communities, including the Law Society -- which published a detailed critique of the proposals -- adding to opposition already voiced by the Bar Association and multiple chambers of commerce.

Critics fear the law, if passed, will entangle people in China's opaque and politicised court system.

The lawyers, mostly dressed in black, walked in silence from the Court of Final Appeal to the government headquarters, where they gathered to observe three minutes of silence.

Organisers said around 2,500 to 3,000 people attended the march.

"As you can all see that they come out for one reason and one reason only, because they see there is a threat to the rule of law in Hong Kong," said lawmaker Dennis Kwok, who organised the march.

"This extradition bill, if passed, would do irreparable damage to our legal system, to the rule of law, to the values that we treasure."

Legal professionals have gathered to protest only five times since the former British colony was handed to China.

Pro-democracy heavyweight and lawyer Martin Lee said: "Once the bill becomes law, we can not guarantee the safety of any person living or working in Hong Kong, or even passing by Hong Kong."

Another former lawmaker, Audrey Eu, added: "This amendment is being rushed through with indecent and inexplicable haste. There is absolutely no justification for pushing it through like this."

Earlier, Hong Kong's last British governor, Chris Patten, described the plans to allow extraditions to China as "a terrible blow" to the financial hub's reputation.

"It's a proposal, or a set of proposals, which strike a terrible blow... against the rule of law, against Hong Kong's stability and security, against Hong Kong's position as a great international trading hub," he said in a video statement.

The government has argued the proposal is needed to plug existing loopholes and that the law needs to be passed quickly in order to extradite a Hong Kong man who is wanted in Taiwan for murdering his girlfriend.

But critics fear the Taiwanese case is being used to ram the law through the city's parliament at the behest of Beijing.

Patten described the move as an attempt "to remove the firewall between Hong Kong's rule of law" and China "where there aren't any independent courts, where the courts and the security services and the party's rules... are rolled all together".

#UPDATE A huge peaceful protest in Hong Kong against controversial plans to allow extraditions to the Chinese mainland descended into violence early Monday as police clashed with small pockets of demonstrators outside the city's parliament https://t.co/Jd1HHaHwYF pic.twitter.com/0I1taJTOgO

— AFP news agency (@AFP) 9 juni 2019

Brunei says death penalty moratorium to cover sharia laws

Yahoo – AFP, May 5, 2019

Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah's remarks on capital punishment appeared aimed at
assuaging worldwide criticism (AFP Photo/Andrea VERDELLI)

Bandar Seri Begawan (Brunei) (AFP) - Brunei's sultan said Sunday a moratorium on capital punishment will also extend to sharia laws that include stoning to death for gay sex and adultery, after a furious backlash against the punishments.

It was the first time Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah had commented publicly on the new penal code since it fully entered force last month, and his remarks appeared aimed at assuaging worldwide criticism.

The laws, which also include amputation of hands and feet for thieves in the tiny sultanate on Borneo island, sparked fury from celebrities, including actor George Clooney, the United Nations and rights groups.

In a televised speech ahead of the start of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, the sultan said: "I am aware that there are many questions and misperceptions with regard to the implementation of the (sharia penal code)."

"There should not be any concern on the sharia law as it is full of Allah's mercy and blessings," he said, according to an official translation of his address.

"As evident for more than two decades, we have practised a de facto moratorium on the execution of death penalty for cases under the common law.

"This will also be applied to cases under the (sharia penal code), which provides a wider scope for remission."

He also vowed Brunei would ratify the United Nations convention against torture which it signed several years ago.

Muslim-majority Brunei operates a dual-track legal system with civil courts operating alongside sharia courts that handle issues such as marital and inheritance cases.

Some crimes were already punishable with death by hanging under the civil code but Brunei has not executed anyone for decades, and the sultan's comments suggest this will not change with the introduction of the new sharia laws.

Rape and robbery are also punishable by death under the sharia code and many of the new laws, such as capital punishment for insulting the Prophet Mohammed, apply to non-Muslims as well as Muslims.

The sultan -- one of the world's wealthiest men -- announced plans for the sharia penal code in 2013.

The first section was introduced in 2014 and included less stringent penalties, such as fines or jail terms for offences including indecent behaviour or skipping Friday prayers.

But the introduction of the harsher punishments in the former British protectorate of about 400,000 people was repeatedly delayed after they sparked criticism.

#UPDATE Brunei's sultan has announced that a punishment of death by stoning for gay sex and adultery will not be enforced in the sultanate after a global backlash, but critics Monday called for harsh sharia laws to be abandoned entirely. https://t.co/Pz1DSJiNjr

— AFP news agency (@AFP) 6 mei 2019

British PM voices regret over 1919 India Amritsar massacre

France24 – AFP, 10 April 2019

An Indian girl looks at a painting of the Amritsar massacre in 1919 when British troops
opened fire on Indian protesters in the northern city, killing 400 according to colonial
era records. India puts the toll much higher, at nearer 1,000 (AFP)

London (AFP) - British Prime Minister Theresa May on Wednesday expressed regret for a massacre by British troops in India in 1919 but stopped short of a full apology.

"We deeply regret what happened and the suffering caused," May told the British parliament, as India prepares to mark the 100th anniversary of the killings.

Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the main opposition Labour Party, called for "a full, clear and unequivocal apology".

The April 13, 1919 Jallianwala Bagh massacre, in which British troops opened fire on thousands of unarmed protesters, remains an enduring scar from British colonial rule in India.

Colonial-era records show about 400 people died in the northern city of Amritsar when soldiers opened fire on men, women and children in an enclosed area, but Indian figures put the toll at closer to 1,000.

Former British prime minister David Cameron described it as "deeply shameful" during a visit in 2013 but also stopped short of an apology.

A ceremony was due to take place at the site of the massacre on Saturday.

Maldives applies to rejoin Commonwealth: president's office

AFP – MSN, 9 Dec 2018 

Solih took office last month after winning a landslide election victory (AFP)

The Maldives has applied to rejoin the Commonwealth, reversing a policy of isolation under autocratic leader Abdulla Yameen who suffered a shock defeat in September.

His successor, Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, wrote to the 53-member bloc on Friday seeking readmission two years after Yameen pulled the atoll nation out of it, the president's office said Sunday.

Yameen withdrew the Maldives, an archipelago of 340,000 Sunni Muslims, from the Commonwealth after it mounted pressure on him to protect human rights and ensure the rule of law amid a ferocious crackdown on dissent.

Solih's office said the new president's administration believed in the values of the bloc, which consists mainly of former territories and colonies of the British empire.

"The Maldives' interest in re-joining the Commonwealth stems from a deep conviction that the values and principles enshrined in the Commonwealth Charter are more vital than ever," the president's office said in a statement.

The 54-year-old took office last month after winning a landslide election victory despite Yameen waging a crackdown on his political rivals and jailing most of the opposition.

The former British protectorate faced persistent international pressure during Yameen's iron-fisted tenure. The strongman accused the London-based Commonwealth Secretariat of interfering in the nation's affairs.

During Yameen's reign, the United States had repeatedly warned democracy was under serious threat in the strategically-located archipelago sitting on key international shipping lanes.

Since Solih's election, political prisoners have been freed and opposition figures in exile have returned home.

Solih has warned of a "dire" economic crisis in the Maldives and asked regional power India for help. Yameen had drifted closer to China and the Maldives saw its foreign debt balloon under his leadership.

India's top court rules adultery no longer a crime

France24 – AFP, 27 September 2018

India's Supreme Court has ruled a century-old adultery law is unconstitutional
and discriminatory against women (AFP)

NEW DELHI (AFP) - India's top court Thursday ruled that adultery is no longer a crime, declaring a colonial-era law that punished the offence with jail time unconstitutional and discriminatory against women.

The more than century-old law prescribed that any man who slept with a married woman without her husband's permission had committed adultery, a crime carrying a five-year prison term.

"Thinking of adultery from a point of view of criminality is a retrograde step," unanimously declared the five-judge bench of the Supreme Court.

Women could not file a complaint under the archaic law nor be held liable for adultery themselves, making it solely the realm of men.

The court said the law deprived women of dignity and individual choice, and treated them as the property of men.

It also said that adultery, while valid grounds for divorce, was a private matter.

The court upheld the legality of the crime in 1954, arguing that in adultery "it is commonly accepted that it is the man who is the seducer, and not the women".

A petitioner had challenged the law earlier this year, describing it as discriminatory.

India's top court expected to rule on gay sex

France24 – AFP, 5 September 2018

 An Indian supporter of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) community
takes part in a pride parade in Bhopal in July: the supreme court is about to
pass judgement on laws outlawing homosexuality. AFP/File

NEW DELHI (AFP) - India's Supreme Court is likely on Thursday to deliver an eagerly awaited judgement on colonial-era legislation criminalising homosexuality, lawyers said.

Section 377 of the Indian penal code, a relic from 1860s British legislation, bans gay acts as "carnal intercourse against the order of nature" and allows for jail terms of up to life.

The country's top court began hearing petitions against the ban in July, beginning an emotional debate in the world's largest democracy over the right to freedom and privacy.

Tripti Tandon, a lawyer for one of the petitioners in the case, confirmed to AFP the judgement was listed for Thursday.

Her client Aris Jafer was arrested and sent to prison for 50 days in 2001.

"We have high hopes from the Supreme Court," said Rituparna Borah, a co-director of Nazaria, which describes itself as a queer feminist advocacy group.

"This law should not have been there is the first place. This should have gone long back. We are asking for our basic human rights, nothing more," she told AFP.

Utsav Maheshwari, a 20-year-old gay college student, said he was "super excited" and hoping the "court will legitimise the community by acknowledging their existence".

The Delhi High Court effectively decriminalised gay sex in 2009, but the Supreme Court reinstated legal sanctions four years later after a successful appeal by religious groups.

Gay sex has long been taboo in conservative India -- particularly in rural areas where nearly 70 percent of people live -- and homophobia is widespread. Some still regard homosexuality as a mental illness.

According to official data, 2,187 cases under Section 377 were registered in 2016 under the category of "unnatural offences". Seven people were convicted and 16 acquitted.

Globally 72 countries criminalise same-sex relationships, according to a 2017 report by the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association.

VIDEO: India's Supreme Court strikes down a ban on gay sex after a decades-old campaign against a colonial-era law used to hold back homosexual rights pic.twitter.com/Ckm2aqV3bI

— AFP news agency (@AFP) September 6, 2018

Members of India's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community have vowed to use the historic ruling to push for greater rights including same-sex marriage in the South Asian nation 🏳️‍🌈 https://t.co/7d4H8uVPMj

— AFP news agency (@AFP) September 6, 2018

India's top court reviews homosexuality ban

Yahoo – AFP, July 10, 2018

Section 377 of India's penal code, a relic from 1860s British legislation, bans gay
acts as "carnal intercourse against the order of nature" and allows for jail terms of
up to life, although prosecutions are rare (AFP Photo/DIBYANGSHU SARKAR)

India's top court began reviewing Tuesday petitions against a colonial-era ban on homosexuality, in the latest chapter of a legal tussle between social and religious conservatives and more liberal Indians.

Section 377 of the penal code, a relic from 1860s British legislation, bans gay acts as "carnal intercourse against the order of nature" and allows for jail terms of up to life, although prosecutions are rare.

In 2009 the Delhi High Court effectively decriminalised gay sex, saying a ban violated fundamental rights, but the Supreme Court reinstated it in 2013 after religious groups successfully appealed.

The Supreme Court said the High Court had overstepped its authority and that the responsibility for changing the law rested with lawmakers not the courts. Efforts to introduce legislation however came to nothing.

In January this year however, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge by a clutch of high-profile Indians who said the law created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation in the world's largest democracy.

A ruling was not expected imminently, with Tripti Tandon, a lawyer for one of the petitioners in the case, saying the hearing would last "two weeks if not more".

Her client, Aris Jafer, was arrested and sent to prison for 50 days in 2001.

Manvendra Singh Gohil, an openly gay Indian prince who is an ambassador for the AIDS Healthcare Foundation charity, said on Tuesday he hoped the "draconian" law would be changed.

In January this year the Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to the ban on homosexuality by
 a clutch of high-profile Indians who said the law created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation
in the world's largest democracy (AFP Photo/SAJJAD HUSSAIN )

"The law doesn't affect only the gay community," he told AFP. "In fact it violates the fundamental right of every Indian."

"(If) this law continues it would mean we are still slaves of the British."

The gay community was emboldened last year when the Supreme Court referred explicitly to the issue in a landmark ruling upholding the right to privacy.

Gay sex has long been taboo in conservative India, particularly in rural areas where nearly 70 percent of people live, with homophobia widespread. Some still regard homosexuality as a mental illness.

Hindu right-wing groups supportive of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have been especially vocal, calling gay relationships a disease and a Western cultural import.

Last month, a lesbian couple committed suicide by jumping into a river in the western state of Gujarat, in just the latest tragedy as gay men and women struggle to conform to societal norms.

According to official data, 2,187 cases under Section 377 were registered in 2016 under unnatural offences. Seven people were convicted and 16 acquitted.

Globally 72 countries criminalise same-sex relationships, according to a 2017 report by the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association.

India's highest court to review colonial-era law criminalising gay sex

Supreme court to re-examine legislation activists say is used to blackmail LGBTI Indians and block HIV and Aids initiatives

The Guardian, Michael Safi , Mon 8 Jan 2018

Activists on a gay pride parade in Delhi in November. Section 377 of the
penal code bans homosexual intercourse. Photograph: AP

India may be on track for a major victory for gay rights after the supreme court agreed to re-examine a colonial-era law outlawing sex between men.

The court said on Monday that it would refer the question of the validity of section 377 of the Indian penal code to a larger bench for examination before October.

Section 377, modelled on a 16th-century British law, bans “carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal”, and is punishable by life imprisonment.

About 1,347 cases were registered in 2015, most in regards to alleged sexual offences against children.

The supreme court observed in 2013 that fewer than 200 people had been convicted of homosexual acts under the legislation, but activists claim it is regularly used to blackmail and intimidate LBGTI Indians, and stymie HIV/Aids prevention efforts.

Harish Iyer, an activist, said he was “cautiously optimistic” that the court would scrap the 150-year-old law. Another LBGTI advocate, Aditya Bondyopadhyay, said the court had already signalled an intention to hear challenges to section 377, “but at least now we know when it is going to happen, we have a date”.

A three-judge bench of the court was responding to a case lodged by gay activists arguing that the ban had put them at constant risk of arrest. “A section of people or individuals who exercise their choice should never remain in a state of fear,” the justices said.

“Choice can’t be allowed to cross boundaries of law, but confines of law can’t trample or curtail the inherent right embedded in an individual under article 21 of [the] constitution.”

Article 21 of the Indian constitution says: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”

The ban on gay sex was overturned by the Delhi high court in 2009, but reinstated by the supreme court four years later in a judgment that drew widespread condemnation, including from the UN.

The law was thought to be vulnerable to legal challenge since a landmark judgment in September, which recognised that article 21 guaranteed a right to privacy. Several supreme court judges noted that sexual orientation fell under the privacy umbrella.

Anand Grover, a senior lawyer who argued the case that initially overturned the law, said the latest challenge had “no choice but to succeed”.

Bondyopadhyay said it was clear the court had been increasingly bothered by its earlier judgment upholding the ban and was looking for an opportunity to correct it.

“There has been so much criticism of the judgment, and mobilisation on the ground and acceptance levels have gone up by a lot, [despite] the conservative forces in the ruling party,” he said.

The ruling Bharatiya Janata party is seen as generally hostile to gay rights, while Congress, India’s main opposition party, placed the overturning of section 377 in its most recent election manifesto.

But with the exception of one MP, Shashi Tharoor, the party was unwilling to burn political capital on the issue, Bondyopadhyay said.

India remains a conservative society, but the visibility of LBGTI Indians has grown in the two decades since the first gay pride parade attracted a few dozen marchers in Kolkata in 1999.

LBGTI scenes quietly thrive across the country, though some gay dating apps still flash with warnings that users may be committing criminal acts punishable by a life sentence.

A comprehensive survey of young Indians by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies last year found 61% regarded homosexual “acts” as wrong. Respondents aged 15-17 were most accepting, while contrary to trends elsewhere, young Indians in villages were more accepting (29%) than their counterparts in big cities (21%).

Prominent Hindu spiritual gurus such as the retail and yoga magnate Baba Ramdev are vocal opponents of homosexuality, but Iyer said the majority religion in India had no official injunction against it.

Some scholars have argued that Hindu scriptures and epics repeatedly reference, though do not necessarily endorse, same-sex intercourse, and comfortably accommodate the idea of people transitioning gender.

“I think respect for homosexuality is part of Indian culture and homophobia is a western import,” Iyer said. “I am fighting for the right to be Indian, to love everyone.”