Section 377: Last victory will be ours, says gay rights lawyer

The Supreme Court today refused to accept a petition seeking a review of its judgement on Section 377. The apex court in December 2013 had struck down an earlier Delhi High Court decision that de-criminliased gay sex.This leaves the LGBT community with only two options — a curative petition in the Supreme Court or legislation by the Parliament de-criminalising homosexuality.[caption id="attachment_1363833" align="alignleft" width="380"] Representational image. AFP[/caption]Does the refusal of the SC leave the LGBT community disheartened?Human Rights Lawyer, Anand Grover, during a debate on CNN-IBN, said, "I am convinced that the last victory will be ours, this is a small set back. There are other avenues open like a curative petition.""We are trying to convince Parliament members also," he said.After the SC's refusal to hear the verdict, lawyer Harish Salve tweeted saying, "Fundamental right to freedom of choice and conscience is to protect those in minority from majoritarianism. Another petition should be now filed asserting that the earlier judgment is not a binding authority being violative of art. 145(3) which mandates 5 judges."And Grover agreed with Salve's opinion. "He is absolutely right, but that was turned down by the court. It should be heard by a Constitutional bench."Despite some political parties coming out in support of decriminalising Section 377, some others have refused to touch the issue. In such a case it may be difficult for a legislation to be passed in the Parliament.Gay rights activist Aditya Bandopadhyay said, "The SC verdict against decriminalisation of Section 377 opened a lot of support for us. Especially from political parties like the Congress. We will speak to the Congress and bring state legislations in states ruled by them."While the Congress may have supported the issue, religious groups have been dead against the LGBT community.Spokesperson of the Archdiocese Father Dominique Emmanuel said, " I am equally disappointed with the SC judgement. It is not a criminal act."However, he disagreed that this law was denying the LGBT community its fundamental rights. "They are not denied fundamental rights. In fact psychiatrists have made clear that this is unnatural. President of the Indian Psychiatric Society herself said it," he said.To Father Emmanuel's statment, Bandopadhyay said, "We were very enthused by Pope Francis's statement. But people down the line in the church do this flip flop. We agree that any religion has got the right to oppose homosexuality. Our stand is it does violate the dignity of individuals. But, we can live with the fact that the Catholic church says that they are against criminalising it."So is it time for those who have opposed the criminalisation to become more vocal?"The Catholic community in court opposed our plea, and our demand is only decriminalisation. People should be told that this is the official stand. It is not about marriages right now, that is another issue. It has also recriminalised even hetrosexual people," argued Grover."Indira Sharma, by the way is a known exception among psychiatrists who is against homosexuality. She said that gay people talking openly embarrasses her. What is she talking about?"When it came to standing up for the LGBT community in court, Father Emmnuel said, "The church goes as far as saying that it is not against decriminalisation and it cannot go beyond that because they do not want legalisation of homosexuals." and added, "As far sex outside of marriage, it is considered immoral and bad. That applies for homosexuals as well. This is a disordered behaviour and that is the stand of the church."As a conclusion to the debate, Bandhopadyay, in reply to Father Emmanuel said, "This flip flop needs to stop. If you are for human rights then you are for human rights."