NDR 2022: Singapore to repeal Section 377A, amend Constitution to protect definition of marriage

In February, the Court of Appeal dismissed the latest challenges to Section 377A but reaffirmed that the law was “unenforceable in its entirety” and posed no threat of prosecution.

Following the ruling, Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam said in March that the Government was considering the “best way forward” on Section 377A while respecting different viewpoints.

The minister then said in July that the Government was looking at how it could safeguard the current legal position on marriage against challenges in the courts, while it considered the next steps for Section 377A.

The Government had also held extensive discussions with religious groups, grassroots leaders, Singaporeans from different backgrounds, as well as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) groups, he said.

Mr Lee said on Sunday that Mr Shanmugam and the attorney-general have advised that there is a “significant risk” of Section 377A being struck down in a future court challenge, on the grounds that it breaches the equal protection provision in the Constitution.

“We have to take that advice seriously. It would be unwise to ignore the risk, and do nothing,” he said, noting that there have been several unsuccessful court challenges to Section 377A seeking to declare the law unconstitutional.

“For these reasons, the Government will repeal Section 377A and decriminalise sex between men. I believe this is the right thing to do, and something that most Singaporeans will now accept. This will bring the law into line with current social mores, and I hope, provide some relief to gay Singaporeans.”

Mr Lee said that most Singaporeans do not want the repeal to trigger a “drastic shift” in Singapore’s societal norms across the board, including in issues like how marriage is defined, what is taught in schools, and what is shown on television and in cinemas.

The Prime Minister said such sentiments had “come through very clearly” in the Government’s engagements over several months, and some of those with reservations “feel strongly” about the law itself.

On Jul 23, the Protect Singapore Townhall – which its organisers said was attended by more than 1,200 people – was held to call for Section 377A to be retained and the definition of marriage to be protected.

“But for most, their main worry is what they feel Section 377A stands for, and what they fear repealing it may quickly lead to,” Mr Lee said.

“They also worry that this may encourage more aggressive and divisive activism on all sides. And this is not only the concern of those with religious objections, but is shared by many non-religious people.

“Even many Singaporeans who support repeal want to maintain our current family and social norms.”

Mr Lee said the Government understands these concerns and does not want the repeal to trigger “wholesale changes” in society, and that it will maintain its current family-oriented approach and prevailing norms and values of Singapore society.

“Hence, even as we repeal 377A, we will uphold and safeguard the institution of marriage,” he said, highlighting that Singapore only recognises marriages between one man and one woman.

“Many national policies rely upon this definition of marriage, including public housing, education, adoption rules, advertising standards, film classification. The Government has no intention of changing the definition of marriage, nor these policies.”