Connect with us

News

Homosexuality neither a disease of the mind nor an offence, says court 

Published

on

The Wattala Magistrate’s Court has dismissed a case filed against a lesbian from Welisara – Mahabage.The case was dismissed after the court had accepted the submission of the defence counsel that homosexuality is neither a disease of the mind nor an offence. A case was filed at the Wattala Magistrate’s Court against a 22-year-old lesbian woman. The parents of the victim, with the help of the Welisara Mahabage Police, had filed a motion in Court seeking a declaration that she was mentally ill because she was a lesbian.

The parents of the victim had been illegally confining the adult woman and subjecting her to abuse, harassment, and forced conversion services after she informed them of her sexual orientation and that she was in a consensual and loving, same-sex relationship.

The matter was initially raised with the Welisara Mahabage Police when a friend of the victim made a complaint to the Welisara Mahabage Police after receiving an email from the victim explaining her illegal confinement.

The victim and her parents were then summoned to the Police for further inquiry. Here, the parents of the victim informed the Police that the victim was suffering from a mental illness as a result of her homosexuality. The Police then further discriminated against the victim based on her sexual orientation. The Police, on the request of the parents of the victim, subjected her to a psychiatric evaluation with a psychiatrist suggested by the OIC. The parents of the victim then made a complaint against their daughter stating that she was in a same-sex relationship and suffered a mental illness therefore they wished that she be produced before a Judicial Medical Officer for psychiatric evaluation. The victim objected to this examination on the ground that no court order was issued.

One week later, the Police summoned all parties back to the Police station stating that there was no evidence of an offence being committed on the part of the victim and they wished to release her possessions back to her. The counsel appearing for the parents of the victim then contested the ownership of the possessions. The Police then stated that this dispute should be resolved by the Magistrate and presented the facts to Court.

On 21 March 2022, the case was taken up before an Interim Magistrate at the Wattala Magistrate’s Court. Appearing on behalf of the parents, the parents’ lawyers, a President’s Counsel, made an application to the Court that the victim suffers from a mental illness and should be subjected to a psychiatric evaluation by a Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) because of her homosexuality. Despite there being no specific offence charged and no legal basis for a medical examination, the Interim Magistrate had ordered the victim to be produced before a JMO for examination before the next hearing.

Following this decision by the Interim Magistrate, the victim’s lawyers filed a revision application to the High Court of Negombo to contest the Interim Magistrate’s decision. The lawyers argued that the Interim Magistrate had reached her decision merely upon submissions provided by the complainant and not upon any legal reasoning.

Magistrate’s often issued orders subjecting LGBT people to anal and vaginal examinations and STI testing purely at the request of the Police. Such decisions can be challenged through revision applications. This case highlights this possibility.

In August 2021, the Sri Lanka College of Psychiatrists also issued a statement that homosexuality was not a mental illness. They further went on to state that the myth of homosexuality being a mental illness lacked any scientific-based evidence and called on the relevant authorities to repeal S.365 and 365A of the Penal Code.

Sections 365 and 365A of the Penal Code do not expressly criminalise homosexuality but are misapplied and misinterpreted by law enforcement to persecute LGBT people. The case was called again recently by the Wattala Magistrate Court. The Magistrate was then informed of the revision application that was made against the order of the Interim Magistrate. Further allegations were then put forward by the complainant’s lawyer that the victim had been ‘brainwashed’ and ‘abducted’ by her partner, despite the victim’s claims of being in a consensual relationship. This was despite the victim having earlier made a statement to the Mahabage Police Station that she does not wish to live with her parents.

Arguments were then raised by the victim’s lawyer that since the victim was of 22 years of age, she is an adult and is in full capacity to make her own decisions. The victim’s lawyer also informed the court of the statement issued by the Sri Lanka College of Psychiatrists, which rejected homosexuality as a mental illness. Furthermore, evidence was provided to the fact that the victim did not suffer from any mental illness that warranted her confinement since she was holding a Bachelor’s Degree in Business and was employed as a teacher.

The complainant’s lawyer argued that releasing the victim to the public would endanger children as she was a teacher.The victim’s lawyer further stated that the victim’s sexual orientation as a lesbian does not constitute an offence under the Penal Code of Sri Lanka. In a U-turn for the Police, the final report submitted by the Welisara Mahabage Police Station also stated that there was no evidence of any offence being committed by the victim.

Following these arguments, the Magistrate stated that there was in fact a lack of evidence of any mental illness and that no offence had been committed by the victim. The Magistrate dismissed this case on the grounds that a JMO examination was not warranted since there was no evidence that the victim was suffering from a mental illness, thereby accepting that homosexuality was not a disease of the mind.The victim was supported by a collective of pro-bono lawyers working with legal probono organisation iProbono. Lawyers included President’s Counsel Dilrukshi Wickremasinghe, Erandhi Abeynake, Thishya Weragoda, Jerusha Thambiah, and Shevindri Manuel.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Gul, Kharote spin Afghanistan to victory over Japan in Asian Games opener

Published

on

By

(File pic) Arab Gul took 4 for 8 in the opening match of the men's cricket competition ( Cricinfo)

Right-arm wristspinner Arab Gul,  took 4 for 8 on T20I debut and left-arm spinner Nangeyalia Kharote  picked up 3 for 19 as Afghanistan successfully defended a modest 129  against Japan   to open their Asian Games men’s competition  campaign with two points in Group A.

Two days after nearly beating India  in a rain-shortened game in Sano, hosts Japan made a steady start to the chase and reached 53 for 2 in the eighth over before losing their way.

Gul did much of the damage, taking two wickets apiece in the 12th and 14th overs as Japan slid from 60 for 4 to 63 for 8. Abdollah Ahmadzai and Kharote then finished off the lower order, with Japan bowled out for 81 in 19.3 overs.

Asked to bat first, Afghanistan had posted 129 for 6, with Mohammad Akram making 34, captain Darwish Rasooli 29 and Karim Janat 21.

But it was Mohammad Ishaq’s unbeaten 25 off 17 balls from No. 6 that provided the late impetus after Japan had kept Afghanistan to under six an over for the first 15 overs. Right-arm seamer Shoma Sugaya-Slater and offspinner Ibrahim Takahashi took two wickets apiece for Japan.

The two sides have games against Nepal lined up in Group A. The top two teams from the group will proceed to the quarter-finals.

Scores:

Afghanistan 129 for 6 in 20 overs  (Mohhamad Akram 34, Karim Janat 21, Darwish Rasooli 29,  Mohammad Ishaq 25*; Reo Sakurano Thomas 1-05,  Shoma Sugaya-Slater 2-18, Ibrahim  Takanashi 2-19) beat Japan 81  in 19.3 overs (Reo Sakurano- Thomas 23, Kendel Kadowwaki Fleming 14, Benjamin Ito Davis 17; Arab Gul 4-8, Abdullah Ahmadzai 2-13, Nangeyalia Khan 3-19, Najibullah Zadran 1-07 ) by 48 runs

(Cricinfo)

Continue Reading

News

BASL calls for conscience vote on 22nd Amendment

Published

on

The Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) yesterday called on all political parties, represented in Parliament, to allow their members to vote on the proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution according to their conscience, stressing that the responsibility for deciding whether the Bill should be enacted now rests with Parliament.

In a statement issued after the Supreme Court’s determination on the 22nd Amendment Bill, BASL President Rajeev Amarasuriya and General Secretary Nalin de Silva have said the SC’s determination should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the proposed constitutional amendment as a matter of policy.

The BASL has said the SC’s jurisdiction, under Articles 120, 121 and 123 of the Constitution, was to determine the constitutional requirements for the enactment of the Bill, including whether the Bill, or any of its provisions, required approval at a referendum under Article 83.

“The determination is therefore not a determination as to whether the proposed amendment is good or bad policy, desirable or undesirable, wise or unwise, or whether Parliament ought to enact it,” the BASL said.

Full text of the BASL statement: The Supreme Court has now delivered its Determination on the Twenty-Second Amendment to the Constitution Bill and determined that the Bill does not require the approval of the People at a Referendum.

In terms of Articles 120, 121 and 123 of the Constitution, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in relation to the Bill is to determine the constitutional requirements for its enactment, including importantly whether the Bill, or any provision thereof, requires the approval of the People at a Referendum by virtue of Article 83.

The Determination is therefore not a determination as to whether the proposed Amendment is good or bad policy, desirable or undesirable, wise or unwise, or whether Parliament ought to enact it.

This distinction is also evident from Sri Lanka’s previous constitutional amendments. During the 48 year history of the second republican Constitution there have been many amendments which passed constitutional muster but nevertheless had a negative effect on democracy, constitutionalism, the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.

The question that now arises is whether Parliament ought to enact the proposed Amendment. That responsibility rests with Parliament and with each individual Member of Parliament when they vote on the Bill.

In making that decision, Members of Parliament should be mindful of the possible and probable consequences the 22nd Amendment will have on our nation. They should also consider the lack of transparency and a proper consultative process in the introduction of the 22nd Amendment. As representatives of the people they should also consider the concerns that have been expressed in relation to the proposed Amendment by a broad cross-section of society including the Maha Nayakes of the Three Nikayas, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference in Sri Lanka, the Church of Ceylon, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka, the Judicial Service Association, the Commonwealth Lawyers Association, LAWASIA, the International Association of Judges, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, the French National Bar Council, and more than 40 Professional Associations and Unions, including the Government Medical Officers’ Association and other leading professional bodies.

Accordingly, the Bar Association of Sri Lanka calls upon all the political parties in Parliament to allow the Members of Parliament to speak and vote on the 22nd Amendment according to their conscience.

The responsibility now lies with Members of Parliament, when called upon to vote, to take a principled position according to their conscience giving due consideration to their constitutional responsibility, their representative capacity and most importantly their duty to the sovereign People of Sri Lanka.

Continue Reading

News

IMF: Sri Lanka on course for 2027 market return

Published

on

SL to regain access to international financial and capital markets next year in line with IMF projections

Sri Lanka is on course to regain access to international financial and capital markets around 2027, in line with the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) current economic projections, IMF Mission Chief Evan Papageorgiou said yesterday.

Papageorgiou said the IMF’s core assumptions under Sri Lanka’s economic programme continued to envisage the country returning to international capital markets in 2027.

“Our previous assumption that Sri Lanka will go back to capital markets still stands. We still have a good trajectory to achieving this in 2027 or thereabouts, and that should be the goal,” he said.

Papageorgiou stressed that Sri Lanka could not rely solely on domestic sources of financing to build long-term economic resilience and would need a diversified funding strategy.

“Every country needs to have a good ability to access funds both in domestic markets, as it already has, as well as international markets for eurobonds and other modes,” he said.

He said a return to international capital markets would have significant implications for Sri Lanka’s external debt composition, while strengthening foreign exchange reserves would remain essential as the country prepares to meet future debt-servicing obligations.

The IMF’s assessment comes amid improving international investor sentiment towards Sri Lanka and positive developments in the country’s sovereign credit ratings.

Papageorgiou cited Fitch’s recent upgrade of Sri Lanka’s credit rating as a positive development, saying global investors were increasingly viewing the country from a more constructive perspective.

Sri Lanka remains under the IMF’s Extended Fund Facility (EFF) programme, which is scheduled to continue until March 20, 2027. Regaining access to international capital markets remains a key milestone under the country’s broader economic recovery.

The IMF has stressed the importance of rebuilding Sri Lanka’s foreign exchange buffers and maintaining stability in domestic financial markets as the country approaches substantial external debt repayments.

A sustained improvement in these areas would help strengthen the country’s capacity to return to international markets while safeguarding macroeconomic stability, the IMF has indicated.

Continue Reading

Trending