Hong Kong government loses appeal against gay sex law

Hong Kong court upholds decision against saying sodomy laws
The Associated Press
Published: September 19, 2006

HONG KONG The Hong Kong government lost an appeal Wednesday of a High Court ruling against a law that says men younger than 21 who engage in sodomy should be jailed for life.

A panel of three Court of Appeal judges upheld the original decision issued by the lower court in August 2005, the court's ruling said.

The laws were first challenged by William Roy Leung, a then 20-year-old gay man who argued he should be able to have a loving relationship without the fear of imprisonment.

In last August's ruling, High Court Judge Michael Hartmann sided with Leung, saying the laws against sodomy infringed on the rights of privacy and equality for gay men.

While gay men caught engaging in sodomy when either is under 21 face life imprisonment, heterosexual couples can legally have sex at age 16.

The government appealed the August ruling after it stirred an uproar among Christian groups, who have vigorously campaigned against gay sexual rights.

On Wednesday, the Court of Appeal dismissed the government's appeal.

"At one stage, societal values dictated that buggery was some form of unnatural act, somehow to be condemned and certainly not condoned. These values have changed in Hong Kong," Chief Judge Geoffrey Ma said in the judgment.

"I cannot see any justification for either the age limit of 21, or, in particular, for the different treatment of male homosexuals compared with heterosexuals," Ma said.

Leung did not appear in court Wednesday, but said in a statement issued by his lawyer: "This is a victory not only for me and the gay community in Hong Kong.

"It's a victory for all of us in Hong Kong, gay and straight alike who all have fundamental human rights," he said.

Leung's lawyer, Michael Vidler, said he was satisfied with the result.

"It's the second time the government has comprehensively lost in this case," he told The Associated Press.

"If a law is unconstitutional and discriminatory, the sooner it is changed the better," he said.

Wednesday's ruling does not erase the law — the legislature would need to remove it from the statutes first — but it does make it technically unenforceable, Vidler said.

Connie Lam, a spokeswoman at the Security Bureau, said the Department of Justice was carefully studying the judgment. She declined to say whether the government would further appeal the case.

HONG KONG The Hong Kong government lost an appeal Wednesday of a High Court ruling against a law that says men younger than 21 who engage in sodomy should be jailed for life.

A panel of three Court of Appeal judges upheld the original decision issued by the lower court in August 2005, the court's ruling said.

The laws were first challenged by William Roy Leung, a then 20-year-old gay man who argued he should be able to have a loving relationship without the fear of imprisonment.

In last August's ruling, High Court Judge Michael Hartmann sided with Leung, saying the laws against sodomy infringed on the rights of privacy and equality for gay men.

While gay men caught engaging in sodomy when either is under 21 face life imprisonment, heterosexual couples can legally have sex at age 16.

The government appealed the August ruling after it stirred an uproar among Christian groups, who have vigorously campaigned against gay sexual rights.

On Wednesday, the Court of Appeal dismissed the government's appeal.

"At one stage, societal values dictated that buggery was some form of unnatural act, somehow to be condemned and certainly not condoned. These values have changed in Hong Kong," Chief Judge Geoffrey Ma said in the judgment.

"I cannot see any justification for either the age limit of 21, or, in particular, for the different treatment of male homosexuals compared with heterosexuals," Ma said.

Leung did not appear in court Wednesday, but said in a statement issued by his lawyer: "This is a victory not only for me and the gay community in Hong Kong.

"It's a victory for all of us in Hong Kong, gay and straight alike who all have fundamental human rights," he said.

Leung's lawyer, Michael Vidler, said he was satisfied with the result.

"It's the second time the government has comprehensively lost in this case," he told The Associated Press.

"If a law is unconstitutional and discriminatory, the sooner it is changed the better," he said.

Wednesday's ruling does not erase the law — the legislature would need to remove it from the statutes first — but it does make it technically unenforceable, Vidler said.

Connie Lam, a spokeswoman at the Security Bureau, said the Department of Justice was carefully studying the judgment. She declined to say whether the government would further appeal the case.




AFP
Hong Kong government loses appeal against gay sex law
by Stephanie Wong
Wed Sep 20, 10:28 AM ET

Hong Kong's government lost an appeal against a landmark ruling which struck down a law saying gay men under the age of 21 should be jailed for life for acts of sodomy.

The three judges at the Court of Appeal unanimously upheld a ruling issued last year that a higher age of consent for homosexuals than for heterosexuals and lesbians was discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Heterosexuals and lesbians face a maximum of five years in jail if they have sex before the age of 16, but homosexuals who have sex before they are 21 risk life in prison.

"I fail to see on any basis the justification of this age limit," Chief High Court Judge Geoffrey Ma wrote in his judgement.

"No evidence has been placed before us to explain why the minimum age requirement for buggery is 21 whereas as far as sexual intercourse between a man and a woman is concerned, the age of consent is only 16," he said.

Ma said the current law "does not justify in any way" life imprisonment and added that there was sufficient cause for a judicial review of the law.

The case was originally brought by 21-year-old homosexual William Roy Leung. On holiday in Japan, he hailed the decision in a city that only decriminalized homosexuality in 1991.

"This is a victory not only for me and the gay community in Hong Kong, it is a victory for all of us in Hong Kong, gay and straight alike who all have fundamental human rights that the courts here have shown us they are prepared to uphold," he said in a statement read out by his lawyer Michael Vidler.

Taiwan, South Korea, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia and the Philippines all have equal ages of consent.

He said the judgement means the law, as it applied to gay sex, was unenforceable and the next step would be for the administration to introduce legislation to remove the provision from the statute book.

The Security Bureau said it was studying the court's judgement in detail and would not say whether it planned to appeal the ruling.

Law Yuk-kai, director of Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor, welcomed the judgement.

He said: "Such discrimination is unjustifiable. It's very clear that, in accordance with international jurisdiction, it is an intrusion of privacy and discriminatory.

"The current law is disrespectful to people's privacy and should be removed."

The Society for Truth and Light, a conservative Christian pressure group, said the verdict was "regrettable" and set a "dangerous precedent".

Choi Chi-sum, the group's general secretary, said sodomy should not be classified as sexual intercourse as it involved high health risks.

"The focus of this case was wrong. It should not be on whether this is discriminatory, the focus should be on whether there were moral and hygienic problems in buggery and whether it should be encouraged."

"This shouldn't be for the court judges to decide, they are not doctors," he said, urging the government to take the case to the Court of Final Appeal and call for public consultation on the issue.

The government had argued that there was no inequality on the restriction on buggery as it was different to sexual intercourse between a man and a woman.

The arguments were dismissed by Ma, who said courts around the world have consistently treated sodomy as a form of sexual intercourse.

"Sexual intercourse between men and women is not just for the purposes of procreation. It also constitutes an expression of love, intimacy and constituting perhaps the main form of sexual gratification," Ma wrote.