The case for repeal of India's sodomy law

South Asia: Journal of South Asia Studies

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 304-317

  Joshi, Yuvraj ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CRIME; HOMOSEXUALITY; LAW ENFORCEMENT; LEGAL SYSTEM; LITERATURE REVIEW; PARADIGM SHIFT;

INDIA;

EID: 77954680856     PISSN: 00856401     EISSN: 14790270     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00856401.2010.493283     Document Type: Review

References (64)

1. V. Seth and others, 'Open Letter' [http://p2.voicesagainst377.org/, accessed 1 Apr. 2008].
2. A. Sen, 'Open Letter' [http://p2.voicesagainst377.org/, accessed 1 Apr. 2008].
3. A. Gupta, 'Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals', in Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 41 (2006), p. 4816.
4. Law Commission of India, '172nd Report on Review of Rape Laws April, 2000' [http://www.lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/rapelaws.htm, accessed 1 Apr. 2008].
5. Hijra is an indigenous gender identity that is regarded as being a 'third sex' that is neither man nor woman.
6. Kothi is an indigenous gender identity that includes feminine boys or men.
7. Queer here refers to sexual identities, indigenous sexualities, and other practices that do not conform to hetero-patriarchal notions of gender and sexuality.
8. This does not mean, however, that these issues have received sufficient or the right kind of attention. As we will see, s.377 raises important issues for women and children that have remained unaddressed.
9. Gupta, 'Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals', p. 4816.
10. State of Kerala v. K Govindan (1969) Cri. L. J. 818 at [20]: 'the male organ is "inserted" or "thrust" between the thighs, there is "penetration" to constitute unnatural offence'.
11. Gupta, 'Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals', p. 4816.
12. Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, Ministry of Home Affairs, 'The Indian Penal Code, 1860' [http://www.mha.nic.in/acts-rules/E-Website-2007-0107- act&rules-fullact1-pdf.pdf, accessed 1 Apr. 2008].
13. Gupta, 'Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals'.
14. Gupta, 'Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals'. Ibid.
15. Gupta, 'Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals'. Ibid. Ibid., p. 4817.
16. Ibid., p. 4819. As s.377 cases involving same-sex sexual relations are never appealed, they remain unreported.
17. N. Dave, 'Between Queer Ethics and Sexual Morality: Lesbian and Gay Activism in New Delhi, India', unpublished PhD thesis, University of Michigan, 2006, pp. 316-7.
18. Gupta, 'Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals', pp. 4819-20.
19. Voices Against 377, Rights for All: Ending Discrimination against Queer Desire under Section 377 [http://www.voicesagainst377.org/images/voices-report. pdf, accessed 1 Apr. 2008].
20. S. Bhaskaran, Made in India: Decolonizations, Queer Sexualities, Trans/national Projects (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), pp. 106-7.
21. See also Voices Against 377, Rights for All: Ending Discrimination against Queer Desire under Section 377.
22. Dave, 'Between Queer Ethics and Sexual Morality', p. 315.
23. Naz Foundation v. Govt. of N. C. T. of Delhi & Ors (2001).
24. In cases of child sexual abuse involving female victims, s.375 (rape), s.354 (outraging the modesty of women), or s.377 can be used. In cases involving male victims, only s.377 can be used.
25. Dave, 'Between Queer Ethics and Sexual Morality', p. 320.
26. See N. Menon, 'How Natural is Normal? Feminism and Compulsory Heterosexuality', in A. Narrain and G. Bhan (eds), Because I Have a Voice: Queer Politics in India (New Delhi: Yoda Press, 2005), Ch.1.
27. Dave, 'Between Queer Ethics and Sexual Morality'.
28. See G. Bhan, 'Challenging the Limits of Law: Queer Politics and Legal Reform in India', in A. Narrain and G. Bhan (eds), Because I Have a Voice: Queer Politics in India (New Delhi: Yoda Press, 2005), Ch.2.
29. A. Parashar cited in B. Cossman and R. Kapur, Subversive Sites: Feminist Engagements with Law in India (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1996), p. 314.
30. Fundamental rights include the legal and human rights of sexual minorities.
31. According to the Naz petition, s.377 violates the right to equality before law (Article 14), prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex (Article 15), freedom of speech (Article 19) and protection of life and personal liberty (Article 21).
32. NGOs that argue for the repeal of s.377 on grounds of human rights include Amnesty India, Human Rights Watch and UNAIDS.
33. S. Baudh, 'Sodomy in India: Sex Crime or Human Right?', in Institute for Development Studies Bulletin, Vol. 37 (2006), p. 60.
34. See also Cossman and Kapur, Subversive Sites: Feminist Engagements with Law in India, p. 294.
35. Baudh, 'Sodomy in India: Sex Crime or Human Right?'.
36. Cossman and Kapur, Subversive Sites: Feminist Engagements with Law in India, p. 123.
37. Bhan, 'Challenging the Limits of Law: Queer Politics and Legal Reform in India', p. 46.
38. Dave, 'Between Queer Ethics and Sexual Morality', p. 322.
39. Ibid. Feminist legal scholars have critiqued the public/private distinction in law, arguing that the law creates rather than reflects these separate spheres. Some argue that since the private sphere has been a primary site of injustices against women, the law's production of this sphere should be challenged.
40. See, for example, Lawrence v. Texas (539 U. S. 558, 2003);
41. and Dudgeon v. United Kingdom (Appl. No. 7525/76, Council of Europe, European Court of Human Rights, 22 October 1981).
42. Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss put forward a similar argument. See K. Sinha, 'Legalise Homosexuality: Ramadoss', The Times of India (9 Aug. 2008) [http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-3342815.cms, accessed 1 Nov. 2008].
43. P. Chatterjee, 'AIDS in India: Police Powers and Public Health', The Lancet, Vol. 367, no. 9513 (11 Mar. 2006) pp. 805-6.
44. A. Divan, 'Human Rights versus Section 377', The Hindu (12 Oct. 2006) [http://www.hinduonnet.com/2006/10/12/stories/2006101201611000.htm, accessed 1 Mar. 2008].
45. High Court of Delhi, Naz Foundation v. Govt. of N. C. T. of Delhi and Others (Special Leave Petition No. 7217-7218 of 2005, Counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no. 5) [http://www.lawyerscollective.org/sites/default/ files/Home%20Ministry's%20reply.doc, accessed 1 Apr. 2008].
46. Gupta, 'Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals', p. 4819.
47. High Court of Delhi, Naz Foundation v. Govt. of N. C. T. of Delhi and Others (Special Leave Petition No. 7217-7218 of 2005, Counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no. 5).
48. Gupta, 'Section 377 and the Dignity of Indian Homosexuals', p. 4816.
49. MSM or men who have sex with men is an epidemiological category used in HIV/AIDS discourse.
50. N. Iyer, 'Categorical Denials: Equality Rights and the Shaping of Social Identity', in Queens Law Journal, Vol. 19 (1993), p. 107.
51. M. Minow, 'Source of Difference', in Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion and American Law (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990), p. 56.
52. High Court of Delhi, Naz Foundation v. Govt. of N. C. T. of Delhi and Others (Special Leave Petition No. 7217-7218 of 2005, Counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no. 5).
53. Voices Against 377, Rights for All: Ending Discrimination against Queer Desire under Section 377, p. 3.
54. S. Kidwai and R. Vanita, Same-Sex Love in India: Readings from Literature and History (New York: Palgrave-St Martin's Press, 2000 and New Delhi: Macmillan, 2002).
55. S. Kugle, 'Colonial Homophobia and the Persian-Urdu Literary Tradition', in R. Vanita (ed.) Queering India: Same-Sex Love and Eroticism in Indian Culture and Society (New York and London: Routledge, 2001), p. 30.
56. For tolerance see Voices Against 377, Rights for All: Ending Discrimination against Queer Desire under Section 377, p. 3.
57. On ambivalence see P. Boyce, 'Moral Ambivalence and Irregular Practices: Contextualizing Male-to-Male Sexualities in Calcutta/India', in Feminist Review, Vol. 83 (2006), p. 79.
58. In England, the 1957 Wolfenden report recommended the decriminalisation of homosexuality on the basis that conflict with morality is not enough to warrant legal prohibition. This contention was challenged by Lord Patrick Devlin, who argued that society has the right to punish any kind of act which is generally accepted by its right-minded members as grossly immoral. See P. Devlin, The Enforcement of Morals (London: Oxford University Press, 1965).
59. B. Cossman and R. Kapur, Secularism's Last Sigh?: Hindutva and the Misrule of Law (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 6.
60. Nonetheless, the government asked the Delhi High Court to ignore Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss' statement favouring the repeal of s.377. See 'Govt to HC: Ignore Ramadoss' Views on Allowing Gay Sex', The Times of India [http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-3541330.cms, accessed 1 Nov. 2008].
61. Special Correspondent, 'Advocates for New Law to Deal with Child Abuse', The Hindu (20 Nov. 2003) [http://www.hinduonnet.com/2003/11/20/stories/ 2003112005481200.htm, accessed 1 Apr. 2008].
62. Legal obligation to introduce an adequate child sexual abuse law may arise under sections 3, 6 and 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children (1990).
63. Bhan, 'Challenging the Limits of Law: Queer Politics and Legal Reform in India'.
64. Baudh, 'Sodomy in India: Sex Crime or Human Right?', p. 61.