Govt spells out plans to safeguard family as it repeals Section 377A

As it repeals Section 377A of the Penal Code, the Government will make clear in the Constitution that it is Parliament's prerogative to define marriage as being between a man and a woman and to make other pro-family policies on that basis, Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam said yesterday.

This is different from enshrining the definition of marriage in the highest law of the land, which some religious groups and conservative Singaporeans have pushed for.

But Mr Shanmugam said the move will stave off legal challenges on the definition of marriage.

His comments, in an interview with The Straits Times and Lianhe Zaobao, come a day after Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said at the National Day Rally that Section 377A, which criminalises sex between men, would be repealed.

In tandem, the Government would move to safeguard marriage, PM Lee said. As the law stands, he added, marriage as it is now defined can be challenged on constitutional grounds in the courts, just like Section 377A was challenged.

Religious and conservative groups, some of whom see the colonial-era law as a moral marker, have welcomed this guarantee, and suggested that marriage will be defined in the Constitution.

To this, Mr Shanmugam said: "The definition of marriage is not going to be in the Constitution. That's not the intention."

Instead, the Government plans to explicitly state in the Constitution that Parliament can define marriage in the way it has been defined in the Women's Charter, and can make other pro-family policies based on that definition.

This will make it difficult to challenge the definition of marriage and policies that rely on it, he said.

In a separate interview with CNA, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said the Government was fully committed to upholding the current definition of marriage.

"This will not change... under the watch of the current Prime Minister, and it will not happen under my watch - if the PAP (People's Action Party) were to win the next general election," he said.

"Likewise, we will not change the laws and policies that rely on this definition of marriage, and that relates to public housing, adoption, what we teach our children in schools, advertising standards, film classification, and so on. Basically, the overall tone of society will not change - our laws and policies will remain the same," he added.

The Ministry of Education said its policies on the issue would not change, and the Ministry of Communications and Information said its approach to regulating media content would remain.

Mr Shanmugam said that if the proposed amendments to the Constitution are not made, the prevailing definition of marriage risks being challenged on the basis of being discriminatory under Article 12 of the Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law.

If this happens, "everything could go in one sweep", including many laws and policies built on the current definition of marriage, such as public housing, education and media policies, he said.

The danger of this happening became clear when the Court of Appeal said in a February judgment that Section 377A could be discriminatory under Article 12 of the Constitution, he noted.

Keeping quiet and letting the courts deal with it would have been more politically expedient, he said. But if Section 377A or the definition of marriage were struck down, it would risk damaging the fundamental fabric of society, he added.

Such political issues should not be decided by the judiciary, but by the legislature, he stressed.

Asked when the repeal would happen, he said: "I do not expect that it will be very long."