Wednesday, August 24, 2022

377A, the potential political hot potato nobody wants

So in the National Day Rally 2022, PM announced that Section 377A is finally being repealed. It's been a slow, gradual process laying the groundwork for the dissolution of a legacy law that we inherited from the Brits, made in times long past from which society has grown and changed. To put it simply, 377A criminalises the act of sex between men, and in these more open times is seen as an oppression of homosexuality, although the same law makes no provision for lesbian sex.

Despite times being more inclusive, there are still strongly vocal components of our society who believe same-sex sex is unacceptable, hence the need for years of groundwork: discussions, consultations and reassurances that all interested parties on both sides of the divide will get a fair hearing. For a time, the status quo held that although the law exists, it would not be enforced. But now, this archaic law is about to become moribund, with the compromise that only heterosexual marriages will be recognised and protected by our Constitution. One step forward, and one step back.

But is it, though? Because what I see is a mistaken conflation between the repeal of a defunct law and the implied support for the group the law penalised. The next step on this slippery slope would be that if this once-penalised group has gained even implicit support from the authorities, then the upholding of its asserted rights (in this case to marriage) should follow. That is not what's happening here.

Repealing 377A has nothing to do with supporting homosexuality. Rather, it simply gets rid of a potential political hot potato that creates unnecessary division between people who feel they must draw a line in the sand over the issue. As long as the law exists, no matter how much it is promised to be 'unenforceable', at any time, any zealot from either side wanting badly enough to make a statement could make a big enough fuss over an incident, and demand prosecution. Given how divisive the issue is, and that there are respectable, contributing members of society on both sides of the fence, any decision the courts are forced to make is bound to favour one side over the other, splitting society over a rift of no return.

To repeal 377A is nothing more than a pragmatic decision. It is a recognition that whatever goes on sexually between consenting adults in private is their own business, and not the government's. If someone gets injured, or dies during the act of whatever variety of sex, there are laws that deal with assault or murder. If a sexual act is done in public and is complained about, there are laws governing public nuisance. With 377A gone, anyone charged with such crimes makes for a clearly criminal case, instead of being charged with a law designed to target a specific group of people, raising accusations of unfairness, repression and the violation of human rights. For a Democratic society, such repercussions can be severe and difficult to recover from.

The LGBTQ+ community are disappointed that their right to marriage remains denied to them for now. But this discussion is for another time and cannot be a logical follow-through from the decision to repeal 377A.


No comments: