| Font Size |
A section in the government thinks that by linking the issue to one of civil rights and Constitutional guarantees, the court has made it relatively easy for the government to move on what is a political hot-button issue and more difficult for it to be seen as “actively opposing it.”
Sources said “no decision would be taken in a hurry” and that the Home Ministry is considering placing the matter before the Union Cabinet to evolve a “wider consensus” on the next step given the storm of protest from religious groups and conservatives.
The first step that the MHA will take is to organise a meeting of the Ministers heading three key ministries — Law, Home and Health and Family Welfare — as desired by the Union Cabinet at a meeting last year. The three ministers had been asked to sit together and iron out their differences.
While then Home Minister Shivraj Patil and Law Minister Hans Raj Bhardwaj were vehemently opposed to any dilution of the law, Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss strongly supported the law being amended. In fact, Ramadoss’s ministry even filed a separate affidavit in the High Court stating that it was in favour of the contentious law being repealed, even though the Home Ministry, the nodal ministry for IPC, was against it.
All three are, significantly, no longer part of the government.
The government, or for that matter any other party, has 90 days within which it will have to move the Supreme Court if it wants to appeal against the High Court judgment. If it decides to go by the High Court direction, it will have to amend the IPC to bring it in tune with the verdict. But since IPC is on the Concurrent list, the government is also expected to hold consultations with state governments to gauge their stand. And, if the past is an indicator, this process could take quite a while.
The Government is also considering the option of waiting for a private party — which could be either BJP leader BP Singhal or the Joint Action Council Kannur (JACK), both of whom had intervened in the case — to file an appeal and then formulate its stand. “We are waiting for a copy of the High Court judgment. A final decision on such a sensitive subject can’t be taken overnight. There will have to be wider consultations,” said a source.
Discuss this story on expressindia forums
|
|
Many writers/authors/scholars who have commented on equality of sexes and have shown sympathy on the sexually weak gay and lesbians. To start with basically men and women are equal, bit by functions and mentality there are very many differences. The whole argument boils down to yielding to empty modernity and blind imitation of the Western culture. (1) Every day we read in the news about kidnapping, robbery, burglary, rape etc in cities. There are millions of people who hold jewellery and cash exceeding 5 lacs, why not follow the American law and allow people who want to defend themselves to buy, hold and carry guns? This may reduce the crimes. Or Will it increase? Same thing with loosening laws on sexual behaviour. Present exclusive men and women hostels are likely to become hostels of mixed sexes as we remove the stigma attached to sex behaviour.
(2) India has followed the law in the West that is allowing free sexual intercourse between consenting adults. Result, 45% of the children in the West are born outside the Wedlock. Soon we will catch up with the West in moral decadence if we follow the Western Culture. (3) Some husbands and wives get fed up with having sex between the same partners. Why not the law allow changing partners: the so called wife swapping in the West? Is it different from adultery. Why not we follow the American culture of Wife Swapping Clubs and bring a law to legalise it? Why not we pass a law legalising adultery if some husbands and wives like adventurous, indiscriminate dogs like sex life? Man thinks is he wiser than God Almighty and too proud to admit his weaknesses.
(4) Who says that a 15 year old girl does not have knowledge about sexual intercourse? Since she knew all about it having read about it seen on the millions of pornographic sites on the internet, why not we in India change the law allowing a 15 year old girl to have premarital sex relation with other married menor unmarried men if there is consent and consensus? (5) Will the law on legalising same sex relation, also allow heterosexual relation? Many writers think they are extraordinarily intelligent and great philosophers and hence logically argue against God given law are non-sense.. This is simple ignorance and arrogance on the part of man. Some men ignornatly think that they are wiser than our sages and prophets and they can challenge God Almighty. THINK FOR A WHILE WHERE WILL ALL THESE LEAD TO AND WHERE WILL IT END. HUMANITY WILL DESTROY ITSELF DUE TO ITS OWN HEAD WEIGHT.
Although it has already indicated that it’s not averse to the idea of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) being amended or repealed, the Union Home Ministry on Thursday decided to tread cautiously on the next steps after the landmark Delhi High Court ruling. A section in the government thinks that by linking the issue to one of civil rights and Constitutional guarantees, the court has made it relatively easy for the government to move on what is a political hot-button issue and more difficult for it to be seen as “actively opposing it.”
It is quite common in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait why muts in india are against it????
Those who think that gays are mentally sick, i think thy should their brain checked up. Sexual activity is not only for reproduction, then homosexuality is not unnatural. it should treated at par with homosexuality. Namely preformed by adults with mutual consent.Though it is a land marked step. More efforts are required to make people come out their closet. Think the reaction of sons and daughters to come to know that their one of the parent has been gay,
Our religious leaders follow ancient texts and want to adhere to the teachings contained in it. Keeping with the times, there has not been any sweeping changes in the religious guidelines for one's behaviour in the society. These religious heads need some education and convincing by our modern society first then the laws will have to be changed accordingly.
Sir,While a private party can oppose any of the Law passed by the Legislature or any particular provisions in such a law, the private party cannot insist that a particular law should be there. It is the prerogative of the Legislature to enact a law. Having enacted a law, if a competent Court (on the basis of any petition preferred by private individual(s)/organizations), strikes down either the law itself or any of the provisions contained in the law, then it is for the Government of the day to prefer an appeal against such an order or to simply keep quiet. If simply keeps quiet (without appealing or repealing the provisions), the ruling of the Court will hold the field and to the provision will only merely remain in the statute book to take care of the situations (e.g. non-consensual gay act etc) not covered by the Court verdict.At best Ashok Singhal and other conservatives may continue to practice what they preach, but they cannot insist that others should follow them.
Our's is a flip flop Government. It toggles. Those who studied Electronics will know what a flip flop gate means in digital Electronics. If you give a certain input - output is reversed. Our Govt. supported 377(input), (output) after judgement it has devloped cold feet under the presuure from Minorities and specially Catholic Church. How can our Government ignore the hen that lays golden eggs for them? Minorities ruling over the majority - is continuing from centuries in India.