MHA's giant flip-flop on homosexuality

The home ministry today told the Supreme Court that it was opposed to the decriminalisation of consensual homosexual sex and later put out a release stating it had no stance on the issue. Additional Solicitor General (ASG) P P Malhotra, appearing for the ministry, told the Supreme Court that Indian society is different from other countries and it cannot imitate the practices prevailing in foreign countries. [caption id=“attachment_222692” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“The SC was hearing petitions challenging the 2009 Delhi High court verdict. Reuters”]  [/caption] “Gay sex is highly immoral and against social order and there is high chance of spreading of diseases through such acts,” ASG Malhotra contended before a bench of justices G S Singhvi and S J Mukhopadhaya. “Our Constitution is different and our moral and social values are also different from other countries, so we cannot follow them," the ASG said, adding that societal disapproval of gay sex is strong enough reason to criminalise it. However, later in the day the Ministry of Home Affairs put out a press release stating that it has not taken any position on homosexuality The ministry said that it had not given any instruction to the Additional Solicitor General. The ministry said it had only conveyed a Cabinet decision to the Attorney General to assist the Supreme Court in deciding the legal questions involved. The Supreme Court was hearing a petition challenging the decriminalisation of the gay consensual sex by the Delhi High court in 2009. The Delhi High court had struck down provisions of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code which criminalises consensual sexual acts of homosexual adults in private as it violated their constitutional rights. Discrimination on sexual orientation is not permitted under the constitution, the high court had said. The court had said its judgement did not affect the provisions of the law which continue to govern non-consensual gay sex and child sex abuse. Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code states that any individual who voluntarily has intercourse ‘against the order of nature’ with a man, woman or animal could face imprisonment and a fine. Religious organisations like All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Utkal Christian Council and Apostolic Churches Alliance, political leaders and social organisations have also opposed the High Court’s verdict before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court had earlier asked the petitioners challenging the high court’s decision to explain how gay sex is against the order of nature and also about laws in other parts in the world regarding consensual homosexual sex.   E_ntire text of the press release by the MHA:_ After the judgment of the High Court, Delhi decriminalizing homosexuality was delivered, the matter was considered by the Cabinet. The decision of the Cabinet was that Central Government may not file an appeal against the judgment to the Supreme Court; however, if any other party to the case prefers an appeal, the Attorney General may be requested to assist the Supreme Court to examine the matter and to decide the legal questions involved. Ministry of Home Affairs conveyed this decision to the Attorney General. Ministry of Home Affairs has not taken any position on homosexuality as is being reported in the media (Television channels). Ministry of Home Affairs has also not given any instruction apart from conveying the decision of the Cabinet.   with inputs from PTI