Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

India bans gay sex in Supreme Court shock ruling

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Shame on backward India.

    Economic sanctions now.

    1. Economic sanctions because of anti-gay laws? Dream on. If that were to happen we should have started with Saudi Arabia quite some time ago (and we know how likely that would have been, don’t we?).

  2. Given that a lot of European and American conglomerates with full equal opportunities policies in force operate in this dump, this will make it extremely awkward for them to claim that those polices are applied across the board.

  3. Does India have a case of Russia Envy? Time to direct the FURY of Big Gay against an even bigger (more populous) target. JUSTICE&EQUALITY for LGBTs, EVERYWHERE!!!!

  4. Backward Superstition is to blame for this violation of basic human rights – Consensual Love is not just for bigoted breeders!!

    If this world seeks to evolve Religion MUST be marginalised.

  5. Cardinal Fang 11 Dec 2013, 10:29am

    *coincidentally* this is the line being taken in Singapore, which has a similar case coming up. Singapore has wealthy anti gay forces.

  6. Helge Vladimir Tiller 11 Dec 2013, 10:39am

    SAD ! But friends, we continue to fight. There is more to learn from one defeat than from ten brilliant victories !

  7. “The Supreme Court stated that only India’s Parliament could change the law”

    And what are the courts for exactly?

    1. “And what are the courts for exactly?”

      Implementing the laws created by parliament.

      1. Maybe it’s some kind of creepy deformation of democracy in India, but generally this task goes to the government, not to a court.

        1. In most democracies courts can effectively strike down laws.

      2. And ensuring those laws are compliant with the constitution, and overturning those which are not:

        “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.”

  8. Mihangel apYrs 11 Dec 2013, 10:57am

    ‘…Section 377 of India’s penal code bans “sex against the order of nature”…’

    Since it is seen in “nature” that same-sex acts occur, it is totally natural.

    A “QED” defense supported by videos and documentation – which isn’t to say that bigots woun’t try it on

  9. Funny to hear often complaints in this country about the EU partnership…….Well at least the EU partners (e.g. France, Spain, Sweden…a many others) have same value and LGBT law ( including marriage). I’m not so sure that they can say the same about their Commonwealth partners ( India today is just an example…what about Pakistan, Ghana, Nigeria, Uganda? and many others) This country should be truly aware which partnership between the two and how strengthen it

  10. Those wanting to target the Winter Olympics for protest should look nearer to home at the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow. There will be a number of countries competing who have homophobic legislation (dating back to colonial days).

  11. Helge Vladimir Tiller 11 Dec 2013, 11:40am

    Drop this colonial-era law where it belongs : The TRASHBOX of History !

  12. I’m no scholar, but I’m fairly sure Hinduism contains nothing against homosexuality, in fact there are myths and stories that show gay sex in a positive light , it’s entirely a relic of colonialism. I’m not sure what to think about it to be honest, on the one hand I think we should do what we can to help lgbt Indians, but on the other we have to realize that it is the British state’s fault that these laws exist in the first place, in the greater scheme it must seem a bit rich for us to force these laws on them and then condemn them for it.

    1. Although plenty of the endemic problems in India (and elsewhere in the Commonwealth) an be traced quite legitimately back to colonialism, something as simple as repealing a law targeting gay people is something I think a 60 year-old state can assume responsibility for.

  13. GingerlyColors 11 Dec 2013, 12:06pm

    Stop all aid to India now and ban them from next year’s Commonwealth Games – better still suspend them from the Commonwealth until they come to their senses. India is home to the second largest population in the world and therefore the second largest gay population as well.
    11 December 2013 will go down as a sad day in human and LGBT rights.

    1. If we banned India we’d have to ban all countries where being gay is illegal from the Commonwealth Games. I think there’d only be about 15 countries which showed up. It seems unlikely that a majority of Commonwealth members would vote to exclude themselves from the games, amusing though the thought is.

    2. UK aid to India will cease once the present 8-year package comes to an end in 2015. As lalocura has said, the likelihood of India being suspended from the Commonwealth on the basis of its anti-gay laws is nil.

  14. de Villiers 11 Dec 2013, 1:11pm

    I have just read the judgment here: http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=41070

    The Court appears not to have accepted an argument that gay sex should be banned – merely that the High Court had no power to strike down the law according to the Indian Constitution. Its final paragraph stated:
    .
    While parting with the case, we would like to make it clear that this Court has merely pronounced on the correctness of the view taken by the Delhi High Court on the constitutionality of Section 377 IPC and found that the said section does not suffer from any constitutional infirmity. Notwithstanding this verdict, the competent legislature shall be free to consider the desirability and propriety of deleting Section 377 IPC from the statute book or amend the same as per the suggestion made by the Attorney General.

    1. As I quoted above, the constitution guarantees equality.

      “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.”

      The ruling to me seems effectively to be a judgment that gay people aren’t included under said definition. In that sense it’s a moral judgment that the state has the right to discriminate against gay people. It’s also free not to, but it’s still a retrograde decision for a 21st century court in a democracy to arrive at.

      1. de Villiers 11 Dec 2013, 3:07pm

        I think that the court was saying that everyone was equal under the law and had the law’s equal protections – that the law on sodomy applied to everyone equally. It also reviewed the English and American legal decisions on this.

        In all case, the Supreme Court has not “decided to ban gay sex”. It has allowed an appeal of the High Court. It is the Parliament that has permitted the ban on gay sex to continue. Although the result is a shame, perhaps the political route will prove more solid.

    2. Frank Boulton 13 Dec 2013, 9:55am

      As I posted about the other article on this subject, the Supreme Court’s ruling includes the following words: “Notwithstanding this verdict, the competent legislature shall be free to consider the desirability and propriety of deleting Section 377 IPC from the statute book or amend the same as per the suggestion made by the Attorney General.” It does not have the power to dictate to the politicians how they should legislate but these words offer a clear encouragement to repeal Section 377 IPC. These words certainly do not fix this problem but they offer some hope of a remedy.

  15. Just imagine the justified global outrage there would be if this court had decided to outlaw a nationality. That is the scale of the decision the Indian supreme court has made. Because with somewhere near a billion people living within it’s borders, the gay minority of India is probably bigger than the entire population of the UK. Every last one of them has suddenly been turned into criminals for doing nothing more than existing.
    I am willing to bet that American mega-churches are involved here, and if they aren’t, they soon will be, lobbying for further Uganda style criminalization.

  16. It looks as though the real issue is that the various courts are squabbling among themselves over which has what power/s, and that suggests that the British did far worse than just Section 377 by bequeathing India a labyrinthine, positively Dickensian, legal system.

  17. Ward and George, Stewart-Vye 11 Dec 2013, 2:39pm

    Quite simply, hideous and cruel — stupid too!

    Ward and George
    54 years together
    and yet
    Strangers before the law.

  18. Its wrong but to be fair all the court did was reiterate the fact that its the role of parliament to make or change laws and the role of courts to interpret or enforce them. Shame on the Indian parliament rather for not simply changing the law completely

  19. India is the cess pool of the world anyways. Should have been nuked years ago.

    1. Take all the gay people in Russia and India, move them to the US or Canada and then for the countries of Russia and India, Nuke the low life bastards once and for all.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all