Follow us on Telegram for the latest updates: https://t.me/mothershipsg

On Aug. 21, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong shared in his National Day rally address to the nation that the government will repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code and decriminalise sex between men.

He added that the government will also amend the constitution to protect the legal definition of marriage as between a man and a woman from court challenges, so as to ensure that the repeal was carried out in a "controlled and carefully considered way".

The topic of repeal and the amendment to the constitution will be subjected to a "full debate" at an upcoming Parliament sitting, which will likely happen in the first week of September or October.

In response to the repeal of 377A, some opposition parties have released statements clarifying their stance on the matter.

Workers' Party

In a statement released on Aug. 21 evening, the Workers' Party (WP) said that it "recognises the fundamental right of people to live free from fear and discrimination", and to be treated equally under the law.

It added that it was also important that Singaporeans respect the right of different groups to "hold and discuss positions according to their conscience", given that Singapore is a pluralistic society.

However, the WP stopped short of revealing its position on the repeal and any proposed amendment to the Constitution pertaining to marriage:

"We will participate in the debate in Parliament on the repeal of Section 377A of the Penal Code and the proposed change to the Constitution relating to marriage, in light of the amendments that the government will table."

Progress Singapore Party

In response to Mothership's queries, the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) declined to comment but added that it will take in the debate when it happens in Parliament.

Non-Constituency MP Leong Mun Wai told the reporters on Aug. 21 that PSP is happy that the Government has come up with a clear position that appears to balance the interests of both sides very well, but added that it will have to look at the details of the legislation.

In a parliamentary debate earlier this year, PSP was questioned on their position on the issue, by Minister for Law and Home Affairs K Shanmugam.

One of the party's two Non-Constituency Members of Parliament (NCMP), Hazel Poa, said then that there remained people with different views within the party, and that there was no consensus on the issue at that moment in time.

Shanmugam then responded, "There are many different ways of saying 'I don't know'. So I assume that Ms Poa is saying, either the party has no position, or they don't know what their position is."

Reform Party

In a Facebook post on Aug. 21, The Reform Party (RP) came out to reassert the party's manifesto – which has "consistently" called for the abolition of 377A since 2011.

The party added that it has always viewed 377A as "incompatible with equality and human rights".

In a post to his own Facebook account, Kenneth Jeyaretnam, secretary-general of RP, stated that he felt "vindicated" following the announcement of 377A's repeal:

"This [referring to an article authored by himself on 377A in 2021] has stood the test of time with today's news. I am vindicated in pushing for it consistently over the last 12 years and that it is inconsistent with our role as a global city in the 21st century."

Red Dot United

Red Dot United (RDU) wrote in an Aug. 22 Facebook post that there were "no changes" to the party's position on 377A.

The opposition party stated that it was happy the government had "finally made up its mind" about the law. However, just like the wider community, RDU members have differing views on the issue, informed by cultural and religious opinions.

It noted: "During the last GE, RDU said that the government should decide if Section 377A should stay or be repealed. To have a law which the government is not going to enforce brings the law into disrepute".

If elected to Parliament and if the issue comes up for debate, RDU will allow its politicians to vote "according to their conscience and in reflection of their constituents on the ground".

"There are no changes to our position. [...] RDU promises to continue listening to all constituents on the ground in forming and advocating for policies which will put strong families as the cornerstone of our society."

Singapore Democratic Alliance

The Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) said that with regards to the repeal of 377A, the "key issue is whether the government is willing to be transparent with Singaporeans".

It noted that the repeal seemed like "lip service to earn political mileage" because the courts have stated that the law will not be enforced.

Noting that the constitution could be amended and "block the LGBTQ+ community from fighting for their right to formal partnerships in an impartial court", SDA added that it sought an open dialogue by the government on the issue of LGBTQ+ rights for Singaporeans.

It wrote: "This is not just an LGBT issue, but a litmus test of whether the government is willing to be transparent with Singaporeans and accountable for its decisions. We are a democracy, and after 57 years of independence Singaporeans young and old are mature enough to engage in such discussions civilly and respectfully."

Singapore Democratic Party

In response to Mothership's queries, the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) declined to comment on the repeal of 377A at this point in time.

A spokesperson for the SDP referred to its previously-stated stance on 377A which has remained the same since 2011, that it is against discrimination – "whether it be religious, social or racial".

Speaking to Mothership, Paul Tambyah, Chairperson of SDP, shared the following, reaffirmed by an SDP spokesperson: "The SDP values human rights, and therefore respects the fundamental rights of the individual, as enshrined in our Constitution."

Related stories:

Top images via Pink Dot and Parliament of Singapore Facebook pages