This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/12/un-asks-india-review-gay-sex-ban

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
UN asks India to review gay sex ban UN asks India to review gay sex ban
(about 1 hour later)
The UN has called on the Indian government to seek a rapid review of the country's supreme court's decision on Wednesday to criminalise gay sex.The UN has called on the Indian government to seek a rapid review of the country's supreme court's decision on Wednesday to criminalise gay sex.
The decision by the court to reinstate a ban on same-sex relationships overturned four years ago by a lower court represents a "significant step backwards for India" and violates international law, Navi Pillay, the UN high commissioner on human rights, said.The decision by the court to reinstate a ban on same-sex relationships overturned four years ago by a lower court represents a "significant step backwards for India" and violates international law, Navi Pillay, the UN high commissioner on human rights, said.
"Criminalising private, consensual same-sex sexual conduct violates the rights to privacy and to non-discrimination enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which India has ratified," Pillay, a south African former judge, said in a statement issued in Geneva. "Criminalising private, consensual same-sex sexual conduct violates the rights to privacy and to non-discrimination enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which India has ratified," Pillay, a South African former judge, said in a statement issued in Geneva.
The international support will hearten stunned local campaigners who have waged a long battle for same-sex relations to be legalised in the world's biggest democracy – though it could strengthen opposition from conservatives who have described homosexuality as a "disease" imported from the west.The international support will hearten stunned local campaigners who have waged a long battle for same-sex relations to be legalised in the world's biggest democracy – though it could strengthen opposition from conservatives who have described homosexuality as a "disease" imported from the west.
Anjali Gopalan, an activist, said she had been "horrified by the judgment".Anjali Gopalan, an activist, said she had been "horrified by the judgment".
"It reflects a conservative mindset. After so much effort we are back to square one. Whatever we have gained over the years we seem to have lost," Gopalan, director of the Naz Foundation Trust, told the Guardian."It reflects a conservative mindset. After so much effort we are back to square one. Whatever we have gained over the years we seem to have lost," Gopalan, director of the Naz Foundation Trust, told the Guardian.
Dozens of Bollywood stars have now come forward to criticise the supreme court's decision to reinstate Section 377 of India's penal code which bans "sex against the order of nature" and is widely interpreted to mean gay sex. The colonial-era rule was introduced under British rule in the 19th century.Dozens of Bollywood stars have now come forward to criticise the supreme court's decision to reinstate Section 377 of India's penal code which bans "sex against the order of nature" and is widely interpreted to mean gay sex. The colonial-era rule was introduced under British rule in the 19th century.
Aamir Khan, one of India's biggest film celebrities, described the judgement as "very intolerant and violative of basic human rights". Aamir Khan, one of India's biggest film celebrities, described the judgment as "very intolerant and violative of basic human rights".
Frieda Pinto, who starred in the Oscar-winning Slumdog Millionaire, said on Twitter she was "absolutely appalled by such narrow mindedness". Freida Pinto, who starred in the Oscar-winning Slumdog Millionaire, said on Twitter she was "absolutely appalled by such narrow mindedness".
The supreme court judges argued that the Delhi high court had overstepped its powers with the decision four years ago as only India's government could change the law. Section 377 should therefore be reinstated, they said.The supreme court judges argued that the Delhi high court had overstepped its powers with the decision four years ago as only India's government could change the law. Section 377 should therefore be reinstated, they said.
Sonia Gandhi, the president of the ruling Congress party on Thursday called on the national assembly "to address this issue and uphold the constitutional guarantee of life and liberty to all citizens of India, including those affected by this judgment".Sonia Gandhi, the president of the ruling Congress party on Thursday called on the national assembly "to address this issue and uphold the constitutional guarantee of life and liberty to all citizens of India, including those affected by this judgment".
Gandhi described Section 377 as "an archaic, repressive and unjust law that infringed on basic human rights" and said that [the Indian] constitution "has given us a great legacy … of liberalism of openness, that enjoin us to combat prejudice and discrimination of any kind".Gandhi described Section 377 as "an archaic, repressive and unjust law that infringed on basic human rights" and said that [the Indian] constitution "has given us a great legacy … of liberalism of openness, that enjoin us to combat prejudice and discrimination of any kind".
Kapil Sibal, minister of law, said that the government was "considering all possible options" but that time was short.Kapil Sibal, minister of law, said that the government was "considering all possible options" but that time was short.
However it appears unlikely that parliamentary time will be found soon to debate new legislation though It would be unusually bold for an administration widely seen as weak to take on such a controversial issue months before what promises to be a tricky battle to retain power at a general election due next spring. However, it appears unlikely that parliamentary time will be found soon to debate new legislation. It would be unusually bold for an administration widely seen as weak to take on such a controversial issue months before what promises to be a tricky battle to retain power at a general election due next spring.
There has been no clear indication of the position of the opposition Bharatiya Janata party, which has roots in deeply conservative Hindu religious and cultural organisations, on the supreme court judgement. There has been no clear indication of the position of the opposition Bharatiya Janata party, which has roots in deeply conservative Hindu religious and cultural organisations, on the supreme court judgment.
The fierce debate, at least among metropolitan elites in India, over the last 24 hours is a further example of how sexuality has become a battleground in the fast-changing country, often revealing cultural splits between generations, between urban and rural dwellers and between those who invoke a "traditional past" contaminated by western influences and those who stress a local history of pluralism and tolerance.The fierce debate, at least among metropolitan elites in India, over the last 24 hours is a further example of how sexuality has become a battleground in the fast-changing country, often revealing cultural splits between generations, between urban and rural dwellers and between those who invoke a "traditional past" contaminated by western influences and those who stress a local history of pluralism and tolerance.
Few expected the legal challenge launched by conservatives – including Muslim and Christian religious associations, a rightwing politician and a retired government official-turned astrologist – against the 2009 decision to succeed. The supreme court is known for its broadly progressive judgments that often order politicians or officials to respect the rights of the poor, disadvantaged or marginalised communities.Few expected the legal challenge launched by conservatives – including Muslim and Christian religious associations, a rightwing politician and a retired government official-turned astrologist – against the 2009 decision to succeed. The supreme court is known for its broadly progressive judgments that often order politicians or officials to respect the rights of the poor, disadvantaged or marginalised communities.
Gay rights activists say that gay people face significant discrimination and police harassment, even if prosecutions for same-sex activity have been rare. Criminalising gay sex makes them vulnerable to blackmail, they say, and causes misery for many who already face prejudice from even close family members.Gay rights activists say that gay people face significant discrimination and police harassment, even if prosecutions for same-sex activity have been rare. Criminalising gay sex makes them vulnerable to blackmail, they say, and causes misery for many who already face prejudice from even close family members.
On Wednesday Vikram Seth, the Indian author, spoke of many gay men in India living lives of "quiet desperation".On Wednesday Vikram Seth, the Indian author, spoke of many gay men in India living lives of "quiet desperation".
Defenders of the supreme court decision said the objections of the judges to the repeal of section 377 were "constitutional and legal, not moral".Defenders of the supreme court decision said the objections of the judges to the repeal of section 377 were "constitutional and legal, not moral".
However, critics said that the wording of the judgment – which refers to the "so-called rights of LGBT persons", describes same-sex relations as "against the order of nature" and says that "lesbians, gays, bisexuals or transgenders constitute only a miniscule fraction of the country's population" – reveals deep prejudice.However, critics said that the wording of the judgment – which refers to the "so-called rights of LGBT persons", describes same-sex relations as "against the order of nature" and says that "lesbians, gays, bisexuals or transgenders constitute only a miniscule fraction of the country's population" – reveals deep prejudice.
Pillay, the UN human rights commissioner, said she hoped the supreme court might now exercise its review procedure, in effect agreeing to re-hear the case before a larger panel of judges.Pillay, the UN human rights commissioner, said she hoped the supreme court might now exercise its review procedure, in effect agreeing to re-hear the case before a larger panel of judges.
However activists are not hopeful of any swift reversal of Wednesday's decision. "I'm not holding my breath," said Gopalan, of the Naz Foundation.However activists are not hopeful of any swift reversal of Wednesday's decision. "I'm not holding my breath," said Gopalan, of the Naz Foundation.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.