Big win for LGBT community as Brazil's apex court criminalises homophobia

Brazil now joins a growing number of countries in the typically conservative and Catholic-influenced Latin American region that have passed measures in favour of LGBT rights.

Business Standard : Brazil's Supreme Court voted Thursday to criminalise homophobia, an important step for sexual minorities in one of the most dangerous countries for LGBT people in the world.

The Supreme Federal Court (STF), which voted eight to three in favour of the measure, classified homophobia as a crime similar to racism, until Congress -- which is held by a conservative majority and is strongly influenced by evangelical churches -- passes a law specifically addressing such discrimination.

Brazil now joins a growing number of countries in the typically conservative and Catholic-influenced Latin American region that have passed measures in favour of LGBT rights.

"All prejudice is violence. All discrimination is a cause of suffering," said judge Carmen Luzia while voting in favour of the measure.

"But I learned that some prejudices cause more suffering than others." According to the NGO Grupo Gay de Bahia, which has collected national statistics for the past four decades, there were 387 murders and 58 suicides over "homotransphobia" in 2017, a 30 percent increase from 2016.

This works out to one LGBT death by suicide or murder every 19 hours in Brazil.

The country's highest court considered it neglect of legislative power not to have outlawed such discrimination until now. But the three judges that voted against the measure insisted that criminalizing homophobia was Congress's job, not the court's.

"Only Congress can approve (the definition of) crimes and penalties; only Congress can pass laws on criminal conduct," said judge Ricardo Lewandowski.

Acts of racism, and now acts of "homotransphobia," in Brazil face one to three years in prison or a fine.

The STF's decision has caused tension within Congress, with some legislators feeling stripped of their powers.

With a large group defending their interest in Congress, the Pentecostal churches -- whose following has grown exponentially in

Brazil, the country with the most Catholics in the world -- are expected to try to slow down initiatives such as that passed by the STF.

Criminalising homophobia could restrict church leaders, many of whom fear being penalized for rejecting same-sex unions by invoking religious texts.

History owes apology to LGBT persons for discrimination: Key points SC made

A five-judge constitution bench concurred on the matter and presented their opinion with various philosophical and constitutional rationale.

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down Section 377 ofthe Indian Penal Code, decriminalising homosexual relationships between consenting adults. The judgement is being held as historic by the civil society as the apex court has for the first time ruled in favour of same-sex relationships.

A five-judge constitution bench concurred on the matter and presented their opinion with various philosophical and constitutional rationale.

ALSO READ: Supreme Court rules it's not a crime to be a homosexual in India anymore

Key takeaways of the historic verdict:

History owes an apology to LGBT persons for ostracisation, discrimination, the Supreme Court of India said

LGBT community possesses the same human and fundamental rights as other citizens

Sexual orientation a biological phenomenon, any discrimination on this grounds is violative of fundamental rights

So far as a consensual unnatural sexual act in private is concerned, it is neither harmful nor contagious to society

Courts must protect the dignity of an individual as the right to live with dignity is recognised as a fundamental right

CJI Dipak Misra, speaking for himself and Justice A M Khanwilkar, says denial of self-expression is akin to inviting death

Section 377 of IPC was a weapon to harass members of the LGBT community, resulting in discrimination

Any kind of sexual activity with animals shall remain penal offence under Section 377 of the IPC

SC partly strikes down Section 377 as violative of the right to equality

IPC's Section 377, which criminalises consensual unnatural sex, irrational, indefensible and manifestly arbitrary

Homosexuality is not a mental disorder. It is a completely natural condition

Society cannot dictate sexual relationship between consenting adults as it a private affair

Denial of right to sexual orientation is akin to denial of right to privacy

Section 377 of IPC is violative of Right to live with dignit

India is signatory of international treaties on rights of LGBT and it is obligatory to adhere to treaties.

Article Source BS

SC judgement on Section 377 today; A look at the history of the archaic law

Amish Tripathi, a noted Indian mythologist, argues Section 377 does not reflect the traditional Indian attitude towards sex.

Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code is a relic of British India, having been introduced way back in 1861. It was modelled on a 16th-century British law called the Buggery Act, which was the first such civil law that criminalised certain kinds of sexual intercourse.

The Supreme Court is expected to pass its judgement on the legality of the section on Thursday. It has heard arguments representing all sides of the issue over the last few months.

Even though homosexuality was partially legalised in England more than fifty years ago, it stayed on as an illegal act in India. The Guardian reported last year that 72 countries and territories worldwide continue to criminalise same-sex relationships, including 45 in which sexual relationships between women are outlawed.

Amish Tripathi, a noted Indian mythologist, argues Section 377 does not reflect the traditional Indian attitude towards sex. It is, instead, he argues, a reflection of the British colonial mindset, influenced by medieval interpretations of Christianity.

He cites several examples and anecdotes from Hindu religious texts to make his point -- that LGBT rights were accepted in ancient India.

"Purush napunsaknarivajivcharachar koi / Sarv bhavbhajkapattajimohi param priy soi. (Any man, any transgender, any woman, any living being, as long as they give up deceit and come to me with love for all, they are dearest to me.)"

"These lines were said by Lord Ram in the Ramcharitmanas. He did not differentiate between man, woman or transgender. What does this mean? According to me, this shows our liberal ancient attitude towards LGBTs. And there are other examples in the Mahabharata too. Such stories were celebrated in ancient India and this, to my mind, reflects the liberal attitude we had towards LGBT communities," he elaborated.

Naz Foundation vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi

A historic judgement delivered on 2 July 2009, Delhi High Court overturned the 150-year-old section, legalising consensual homosexual activities between adults. The court said that the section goes against the fundamental rights of citizens while striking it down...Read More

Article Source BS