Singapore says repeal of anti-gay law ‘right’ move that averts constitutional challenges

The ruling PAP will vote to strike down the colonial-era Section 377A law that bans gay sex, while also upholding the traditional view of marriage

The proposed ‘Institution of Marriage’ article will clearly state it is parliament’s prerogative to make laws to define and safeguard marriage, including pro-family policies

3-MIN READ3-MIN

Attendees at the “Pink Dot” pride event in Singapore on June 18, 2022. Photo: AFP

Published: 7:36pm, 28 Nov 2022Updated: 10:39pm, 28 Nov 2022

The Singapore government on Monday said the decision to strike down a colonial-era law that criminalises sex between men was “the right thing to do”, while warning that keeping the legislation on the books carried major legal risks.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in August first announced the ruling People’s Action Party’s (PAP) plan to repeal Section 377A, while also amending the constitution to protect the status quo definition of marriage.

The dual legislative moves – to be voted on separately – is expected to be passed into law as the PAP is electing to whip its MPs into backing the changes. It occupies 83 seats in the city state’s 103-seat parliament.

Speaking in parliament on Monday, Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam cited how Section 377A had been challenged in the courts twice in recent years on the basis that it violated the Singapore constitution, and there was a possibility that it could be ruled unconstitutional in future challenges.

“I can give an analogy. [It] is like letting a small boat sail in choppy waters surrounded by rocks and hoping that the boat won’t crash into the rocks,” he said during the start of an expansive parliamentary debate on the repeal that is expected to stretch into the week.

“If we engage in wishful thinking and if Section 377A is struck down in the courts, that could lead to a whole series of consequences which would be very damaging to our Singaporean society,” Shanmugam said.

Singapore’s Minister of Law K. Shanmugam. Photo: AFP

If the courts indeed ruled the archaic legislation as unconstitutional, it could bring about challenges to the heterosexual definition of marriage, which would have an impact on existing policies in housing and media, he said.