#Section377 Respondents state that the Yogyakarta principles are not a treaty or a law and it has no value. Nariman J. followed by saying that they apply to us as per the NALSA judgment of this court. #LGBTQ
On a break from the Supreme Court's #Section377 hearings, a very unexpected barometer of change. (1/5)
Six years ago, as the hearings in Suresh Kumar Koushal began, I came out to my parents. They reacted with anger and sorrow, then took me to a psychiatrist who informed all of us that homosexuality was a mental disorder which he could cure with aggressive treatment. (2/5)
I stormed out of the doc's office, and their house. Something broke between myself and my parents that day, a rift that has gradually been broached over the years with my mother's gentle efforts. My father has maintained a silence on this front. (3/5)
The third day of the #Section377 Constitution Bench hearing was a mix of pointed arguments from the lawyers arguing for decriminalization and horrific hate speech masquerading as submissions from the respondents who finally began their arguments. Thread on Respondents' arguments.
As with the 2012 hearings, there was little substance in what they actually had to say. Unlike the 2012 hearings, the judges did not allow these digressions to go on for long.
“How can we promote bestiality” began one lawyer, to which he was swiftly cut off by Justice Nariman – “Nobody has argued bestiality!”.
#Section377 Day 3 Session 1 : Shyam Divan, Senior Advocate, has resumed arguments. He is appearing for intervenor "Voices Against 377" #LGBTQ
Divan emphasises on positive dimension of Article 14, states that it includes 'equal protection of law'. Refers to Justice Nariman's judgment in Triple Talaq case case to highlight 'equal protection of law'
Divan bats for "Right to Intimacy" quoting from South African Constitutional Court that right to privacy covers right to maintain intimate relations unaffected by law #Section377#Sec377IPC
Day 2 of the #Section377 Constitution Bench hearings also featured some of the most powerful court craft I have had the privilege of witnessing, courtesy @MenakaGuruswamy (Thread)
It wasn’t the fact that she was the first female lawyer to speak in a testosterone packed litigation (and courtroom), though that was crucial. It wasn’t the fact that she made it a point to address the sole female judge on the Bench time and again, though that was significant.
It was rather the sheer force of her arguments that seemed to rip through the tangles of legal discourse and force the Court to confront the human cost of this case.
Right to choose your partner is a fundamental right, however in case of LGBTQ community, it’s not a matter of choice but it’s innate - Justice Chandrachud #Section377
So far as the constitutional validity Section 377 to the extent it applies to “consensual acts of adults in private” is concerned, the Union of India would leave the said question to the wisdom of this Hon’ble Court - Affidavit by Union of India. #Section377
ASG Thushar Mehta submits that Union of India will leave the matter of constitutionality of #Section377 to be decided by the Court. #Sec377#LGBTQ
ASG further submits that the practises like incest should not be promoted. CJI allays such apprehensions by retorting that such relationships are void under law
CJI states that Court is considering only the issue whether homosexual practises should be treated as a crime. ASG replies that Union of India leaves this issue to the wisdom of the Court, but if the Court is considering larger issues Union of India will file detailed statement
#Section377 UOI, Adv Tushar Mehta began by submitting that the UOI will not contest and leave the Constitutional validity of consensual sex on the Bench.
#Section377 TM: submitted that the center acknowledges J. CJ understanding that right to choose your partner is a FR.
J. Chandrachud clarified that right to choose your partner is a FR, however in the matter of LGBTQ community, it’s not a matter of choice but it’s innate.
Today's #Section377 hearing at the Supreme Court was empathetic and invigorating, a far cry from the 2012 hearings that reduced the LGBT community to a series of acts, then refused to provide any kind of safeguards against state abuse because who after all was targeted? (Thread)
In the Koushal Court in 2012 , the two judges constantly interrupted counsel with outright irrelevant digressions on what constituted "carnal intercourse against the order of nature", the fig leaf of a phrase that targets LGBT persons under section 377 #Section377
Today, instead, there were many minutes of humdrum monologue, that bordered on boredom, as the lawyers submitted their arguments at length, as the affirmative words of Naz Foundation, Lawrence and Puttaswamy were spoken unchallenged in a court of law. #Section377
2. In 2002, some 30-odd health workers from Naz Foundation were picked up by cops for counselling gay men. They were booked under #Section377 & obscenity laws. They remained in jail for over a month for basically telling gay men to use condoms! #HIVHistory#India
3. This was also the time of global panic about the HIV epidemic. #Cipla was yet to start rolling out low cost generic anti reterovirals.. so.. prevention was the only intervention. #Section377#HIVHistory#India
1. #TimesUp for #Section377!
Today the Supreme Court will begin historic hearings on what kind of #SexualExpression consenting adult Indians can have, whether the court can decide for us what "unnatural sex" is & to what extent the courts can penetrate our sense of self.
2. Section377 criminalizes "unnatural sex," idea being that the only "natural sex" is that b/w man & woman, involving penile-vaginal-penetration.
We will be live tweeting the Supreme Court proceedings on petitions challenging the constitutionality of #Section377 starting tomorrow. You may catch all our tweets at @SFLCin. Here is a short message from us and Ishan @TheDeltaApp about the impending proceedings. #LGBTQI
The Constitution Bench comprising of - CJI Dipak Misra, J. RF Nariman, J. Khanwilkar, J. DY. Chandrachud & J. Indu Malhotra will be hearing the matter in the CJI's court. #Section377#LGBTQI@TheDeltaApp
The Bench will be hearing 6 petitions clubbed together, they are as follows: Navtej Singh Johar v. UOI, Akkai Padmashali v. UOI, Keshav Suri v. UOI, Arif Jafar v. UOI, Ashok Rao Kavi & Ors. v. UOI and Anwesh Pokkuluri & Ors. v. UOI. #Section377#LGBTQI@TheDeltaApp