Minister for Law and Home Affairs K Shanmugam stated in Parliament on Monday (Apr. 4) that the government is evaluating the "best course of action" with reference to Section 377A of the Penal Code, which criminalizes intercourse between males.
He was replying to parliamentary questions asked by Members of Parliament (MPs) Yeo Wan Ling of the People's Action Party (PAP) and Hazel Poa of the Progress Singapore Party (PSP).
Shanmugam then requested clarification on PSP's view on the topic from Poa or her colleague PSP NCMP Leong Mun Wai.
There are two primary perspectives on 377A: Shanmugam
Yeo inquired in her parliamentary question about "how the government is and will engage various organizations in determining the appropriate course of action on Section 377A of the Penal Code."
Shanmugam responded to Yeo's question by restating what he said in Parliament on Mar. 3 — that public attitudes against homosexuality had steadily altered since the subject was debated in 2007.
Currently, Shanmugam explained, there are two "major opinions" and "many subsidiary viewpoints." The two "primary viewpoints" are as follows:
"On the one hand, the overwhelming majority of Singaporeans believe that heterosexual marriage between men and women must continue to be the backbone of our society.
On the other side, many Singaporeans — including some who adhere to the conventional family structure — agree that men's private consensual sex should not be criminalized."
He noted that the government has spoken with and will continue to meet with "various groups of Singaporeans" in order to gain a better understanding of their perspectives.
The administration will "seriously analyze the many positions and choose the appropriate course of action that attempts to balance the numerous viewpoints."
Poa or Leong were asked to state the PSP's view on Section 377A.
Shanmugam then observed that Poa had requested a written response to a relevant parliamentary inquiry.
Poa had inquired as to what signs the government uses to determine if society is prepared to abolish Section 377A, as well as how these indicators are monitored, in light of the Court of Appeals' February dismissal of three challenges to the statute.
'Shanmugam' enquired "Given the gravity of this matter, I would want to invite Ms Poa and any other member of her party — primarily Mr Leong — to explain their view on Section 377A. That will be beneficial to know."
Poa responded, "As the Minister has indicated, there are two distinct factions with opposing viewpoints on this specific problem."
She said, "And within the party itself, we have individuals with divergent viewpoints. As a result, this is not a topic on which we currently agree."
Then Shanmugam said, "There are several ways to express 'I'm not sure.' Thus, I infer that Ms Poa is implying that the party either lacks a viewpoint or is unsure of its position."
Comments