The Singapore Parliament passes a law to decriminalize sex between men and another to protect the definition of marriage which can only be the union of a woman and a man.
The repeal of Section 377A (which dates from the colonial era) passed Parliament with 93 votes to three while a constitutional amendment passed with 85 votes to two.
This discriminatory and stigmatizing law for the LGBT community provided for a maximum sentence of two years in prison but was no longer applied.
“I think it’s a good thing” according to a member of the gay community in Singapore, “but to hear what some politicians are saying in parliament shows us that we still have a long way to go when it comes to real change. Don’t begrudgingly repeal it, or impose conditions. Insincerity is appalling.”
Concerns about traditional family values
During the two-day debate on the two bills, nearly 40 MPs from both sides of the House rose to speak, many expressing concern about the protection of traditional family structures and values, as well as social policies.
Others stressed the need to prevent discrimination against those who believe in defining marriage as the union between a man and a woman.
On the other hand, some have also urged the government not to discriminate against people outside the traditional institution of marriage, such as single, divorced or widowed people.
In his speech, the Minister of Justice and Home Affairs, K Shanmugam mentioned that there were a “small” number of individuals who were convicted between 1988 and 2007 for consensual and private homosexual acts between adults. He said he had asked his department to consider how their records could be deleted.
He also told the House that there were no plans to let individuals remove their registered gender from their NRIC or passport.
In 2007 Singapore reformed sex laws – but not for gay people
Singapore MPs in October 2007 legalized oral and anal sex for adult heterosexuals, but upheld the ban on same-sex relations, saying the bill was what citizens of the conservative island state wanted.
The offense of “gross indecency” carried a maximum sentence of two years in prison, although it was rarely enforced in Singapore, which already had a thriving gay community.
These reforms represented at the time the most significant overhaul of the conservative city’s penal code in more than two decades.
Right to freedom of religion
Social and Family Development Minister Masagos Zulkifli’s wrap-up speech also addressed MPs’ concerns about religious freedom.
He stressed that there were no plans to change the definition of marriage to include same-sex marriages, adding that it would be against the law for religious leaders or any licensed officiant to solemnize the marriage of a same-sex couple.
Regarding schools, Masagos said Singapore’s education policies and programs remain rooted in family values and prevailing social norms.
These include the family as the cornerstone of the country’s social fabric and marriage between a man and a woman, he said.
It is the strength of our system in Singapore when each branch – the legislature, the executive and the judiciary – does its part fully and does it well, it does what is right for Singapore and Singaporeans.
Namely, homosexuality remains prohibited in 69 countries, including 11 where it is punishable by death, according to a report by Ilga (international association of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex people) of 2020.
Testimonial and reaction from a member of the LGBT+ community in Singapore to the repeal of Section 377A of the Singapore Penal Code
It was high time to decriminalize relationships between males. Singapore was one of the few developed countries to have retained this remnant of British law dating from the colonial era, which was introduced only belatedly, between the two world wars, to deal with a surge in male prostitution.
The official reason that led to this repeal (fear of a legal challenge that could lead to repeal through the courts) is probably not the most important, but it makes it easier to sell this measure still contested by a large minority of Singaporean society.
Many other reasons militated in favor of this repeal. That this law is maintained without being applied, as the government had promised, was already an anomaly in a state that wants to be “by law”. The fact that this measure only concerned relations between male homosexuals, while relations between lesbians remained free from all constraints, constituted a clear inequality between men and women.
But above all, this law, although not enforced, held a sword of Damocles over the heads of the gay community and contributed to social pressure from the conservative part of Singaporean society. LGBT people already find it difficult to accept their condition when they discover it, and even more difficult to exteriorize it vis-à-vis those close to them, fearing a negative reaction. Section 377A made this process even more difficult for gays, thus qualified as “criminals”. Thus some could hide their sexual preference all their life, lying to others and to themselves, pretending to be “normal”, and living in permanent frustration. Some accepted their difference, but did not dare to show it, which led them to lead a double life that was not always easy to manage. Only a few ended up openly living their difference.
Will this change anything?
The evolution of the law will not necessarily change much in the short term.
First of all, its non-application allowed homosexuals to lead an almost normal life, provided they remained discreet. For example, there are many gay bars and gay saunas in Singapore, which, it should not be forgotten, hosted Asia’s biggest gay party in the early 2000s. In addition, every year since 2009 (except during the pandemic), the LGBT community gathers on a Saturday in June in Hong Lim Park.
Surveys have shown that LGBT people are increasingly accepted by Singaporean society, especially the younger generations. But social pressure will remain, from older generations and religious organizations (except Buddhism). This will continue to make it difficult for LGBT Singaporeans to fully live out their personality, as they are still very respectful of their parents’ opinions and many are committed to religious communities.
Conservatives feared that the repeal of Section 377A would open the door to trivializing same-sex relationships, spreading them by example, or even making them official. The government responded to these concerns by enshrining in the constitution that everything related to marriage should be regulated by parliament, so as to avoid legal procedures affecting this area. But he did not want to enshrine the heterosexual character of marriage in the constitution, as some demanded, thus leaving the way open for a future parliament to go further in opening up according to the evolution of the public opinion.
It is likely that this will happen one day or another, because LGBT people are also human beings, social animals, and the couple is one of the basic bricks of socialization. Being gay or lesbian is not just about sexuality; it is above all the possibility of choosing the person with whom one wishes to share one’s life.
But that won’t be for tomorrow. Let us remember that, if, in France, homosexuality was decriminalized in 1791, it took more than two centuries for homosexual relations to be formalized, through the PACS in 1999, then marriage for all in 2013 .
In the meantime, LGBT couples will continue to be denied the same rights as married couples, for example, to access housing, adoption, or assisted reproduction. Nursery and primary school curricula will not have to mention homosexual couples and films showing LGBT characters will keep their high level of restriction. All this does not promote the development of LGBT people.
For people of the same sex married in countries accepting this type of union and residing in Singapore, the marriage is not recognized there and the two people are considered strangers to each other. In addition to the constraints affecting Singaporeans, this complicates immigration procedures: if one of the spouses is an expatriate in Singapore, there is no status for the other, unless he can also benefit from a expatriation. The divorce procedure is also particularly complex, because it must be pronounced in the country where the marriage was established.