Finally! Equal Age of Consent!
Aug. 25th, 2005 08:34 amUnjust law for gay men repealed

This is a historical moment for the Hong Kong gay community. An
apartheid based on sexual orientation that has existed for 14 years since the
decriminalization of male homosexual conduct in 1991 is eliminated
today by the High Court. In a judicial review application filed by a
20-year-old gay man, the High Court ruled that 4 sections of the Crimes
Ordinance (namely, sections 118C, F, H and J), relating to intimate conduct
between men, are unconstitutional by having different treatment for gay
men as opposed to heterosexuals.
The Court ruled that the unequal age of consent for male homosexuals at
21 as opposed to that of 16 for heterosexuals contravenes the equal
protection provisions in the Bill of Rights as well as the Basic Law. The
law was discriminatory on the ground of sex as well as sexual
orientation. The Court further ruled the offence of gross decency which lacks a solid definition outlawing intimate behaviour between men to be
unconstitutional as well.
The unjust law will have to be struck down from statute books by a
legislative reform. Before that happens, the High Court judgment renders
it unenforceable, taking Hong Kong down from the list of places having
the highest age of consent for homosexuals in the world. However, 63
men were arrested, some prosecuted and convicted under that law between
1998 and 2003. These men are barred from working as teachers, social
workers, in health care and other caring professions. As the law is
unjust and repealed, the criminal records of these men should be
eliminated.

This is a historical moment for the Hong Kong gay community. An
apartheid based on sexual orientation that has existed for 14 years since the
decriminalization of male homosexual conduct in 1991 is eliminated
today by the High Court. In a judicial review application filed by a
20-year-old gay man, the High Court ruled that 4 sections of the Crimes
Ordinance (namely, sections 118C, F, H and J), relating to intimate conduct
between men, are unconstitutional by having different treatment for gay
men as opposed to heterosexuals.
The Court ruled that the unequal age of consent for male homosexuals at
21 as opposed to that of 16 for heterosexuals contravenes the equal
protection provisions in the Bill of Rights as well as the Basic Law. The
law was discriminatory on the ground of sex as well as sexual
orientation. The Court further ruled the offence of gross decency which lacks a solid definition outlawing intimate behaviour between men to be
unconstitutional as well.
The unjust law will have to be struck down from statute books by a
legislative reform. Before that happens, the High Court judgment renders
it unenforceable, taking Hong Kong down from the list of places having
the highest age of consent for homosexuals in the world. However, 63
men were arrested, some prosecuted and convicted under that law between
1998 and 2003. These men are barred from working as teachers, social
workers, in health care and other caring professions. As the law is
unjust and repealed, the criminal records of these men should be
eliminated.