Language Switcher

SOGI Casebook chapters Archives: Decriminalisation

Tan Eng Hong v. Attorney General, High Court of the Republic of Singapore (15 March 2011)

Procedural Posture The plaintiff was originally charged with an offence under Section 377A of the Penal Code (gross indecency between males) and he challenged the constitutionality of that provision. The Section 377A charges were later dropped, however, and the plaintiff pled guilty to Section 294(a) (Obscene Acts), to which he pled guilty. However he pursued […]

In Re: Article 534, Criminal Court of Al-Bitroun (2 December 2009)

Procedural Posture The defendants, both male, were charged with having “unnatural sexual intercourse” under Article 534 of the Lebanese Penal Code. Facts On 29 February 2007, members of a police patrol found the defendants in a car that was parked by the side of the road and took them to the Al-Bitroun Police Station on […]

Naz Foundation v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Others, The High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, India (2 July 2009)

Procedural Posture In 2001 a writ petition was filed by Naz Foundation, an NGO working in the public health field, to challenge the constitutionality of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalised as “unnatural offences” consensual oral and anal sex between adults in private. In 2004, the Delhi High Court dismissed the writ […]

Secretary for Justice v. Yau Yuk Lung Zigo and Lee Kam Chuen, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Court of Final Appeal (17 July 2007)

Procedural Posture The respondents were charged with having committed buggery “other than in private”, in violation of Section 118F(1) of the Crimes Ordinance. They pleaded not guilty on the ground that the law was unconstitutional. Finding the law unconstitutional, the magistrate dismissed the charges and the government appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Court […]

Leung v. Secretary for Justice, High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of Appeal (20 September 2006)

Procedural Posture In the trial court the applicant challenged the constitutionality of Section 118C of the Crimes Ordinance of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The Section criminalised anal intercourse between males where one partner was below the age of 21. Where one partner was under the age of 21, both partners would be criminally […]

McCoskar and Nadan v. State, High Court of Fiji at Suva (26 August 2005)

Procedural Posture The authorities charged Thomas McCoskar and Dhirendra Nadan with having or permitting carnal knowledge of the other against the order of nature, in violation of Section 175 (a) and (c) of the Fijian Penal Code. They were also charged with gross indecency between males, in violation of Section 177. The magistrates’ court sentenced […]