Lawmakers lift gay sex ban, keep marriage status
Moves described as ‘political accommodation’ to balance different views
Singapore’s parliament has voted to decriminalise gay sex but also amended the constitution to maintain the status-quo definition of marriage, ending months of public debate over the longtelegraphed legislative moves.
The repeal of Section 377A of the penal code, and the introduction of an Institution of Marriage clause in Singapore’s constitution, will take effect after the bills receive presidential assent.
Top government officials have stressed the dual moves were the best way to deal with the striking down of the colonial-era law, which had not been enforced for years but was a source of deep frustration for LGBTQ citizens.
The constitutional amendment assuages widespread concerns among residents across religions, ethnicities and age groups that the decriminalisation would eventually lead to marriage equality, officials said.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had characterised the dual approach as a “political accommodation” that balanced different legitimate views on the matter.
Most residents supported repealing Section 377A but also preferred that Singapore upheld the traditional definition of marriage, ministers said during a twoday parliamentary debate.
“The time has come for us to remove Section 377A,” said the Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam, who had spearheaded a months-long public outreach effort over the matter.
“It humiliates and hurts gay people. Most gay people do not cause harm to others, they just want to live peacefully and quietly and be accepted as part of society the same as any other Singaporean,” he told parliament on Monday. The minister said the law had been a “daily reminder” to gay men that “every time he engages in private sexual activity behind closed doors, in the sanctity of his bedroom, he is nevertheless a criminal”.
The ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) also made the case that if the law were not struck down by parliament, the courts would have eventually done so.
Activists have mounted multiple legal challenges over the years to scrap the legislation. In March, Singapore’s highest court upheld the law – as it had done in previous occasions – maintaining its position that any change to the status quo would require a decision by the executive branch.
The stance was in line with that of the PAP – which has long argued that consequential and polarising social matters, such as gay rights, were best left to the consideration of the legislative and executive branches of government rather than the judiciary.
In parliament this week, Shanmugam and other PAP officials said if the law had been struck down by the courts, the knock-on effects on media, housing and education policies would lack legislative assent.
“The position with 377A is like a train approaching. The question is whether we have the courage to act or rather dive for cover to protect yourself and leave society to face the train wreck,” he said.
The PAP imposed a whip on its 83 MPs to support the changes, though they were free to air their views. The bills passed with overwhelming majorities yesterday due to the PAP’s supermajority.
Wrapping up the government’s position, Shanmugam took aim at the main opposition Workers’ Party (WP), which opted not to impose a whip on its MPs.
Shanmugam said the WP’s lack of an official collective position on the legislative changes was reflective of its wish to “be all things to all men, and not too much of anything to anyone”.
Two WP MPs, Gerald Giam and Dennis Tan, voted against the repeal of 377A. Another, Muhamad Faisal Manap – who was absent due to illness – would have also voted against striking down Section 377A, the party said.
Homosexuality is still prohibited in 69 countries, including 11 where it is punishable by death, the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association said in a 2020 report.