Attorney-at-law Danielle Archer
Attorney-at -Law Danielle Archer has observed that the decision to change Jamaica's law against buggery a matter for Parliament.
She was responding to the Supreme court's ruling on Friday, dismissing gay rights activist Maurice Tomlinson's challenge to the controversial buggery law.
"Parliament makes laws; they craft the policy, and it must be done in conjunction with the Constitution, she said, noting however that "the Constitution can place limits on certain things, and that what has happened in this case."
Miss Archer, speaking on Radio Jamaica's Beyond the Headlines, stressed that "it is for Parliament now to make a decision as to whether or not the legislation is to be changed," to facilitate what Tomlinson aimed to achieve; the de-criminalization of buggery.
For a change to be made to the law, "it has to be done actively by Parliament, she concluded.
Mr. Tomlinson had asked the court to decide whether the judiciary has the power to enquire into the constitutionality of sections 76, 77 and 79 of the Offences Against the Person Act.
But Jamaica's Constitutional court ruled that the constitutionality of the three sections cannot be enquired into, in light of the saving clause, which prohibits any disturbance of the particular legal provision by subsequent statutory changes, except for specific constitutional amendments.
Justice David Batts, who handed down the ruling, said constitutional amendments to the Jamaican Constitution in 2011 indicate "that the Parliament intended to protect laws related to sexual offences from review for unconstitutionality".
Sections 13(12) and 18 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, protects existing laws that criminalise same sex relations between men and preclude legal recognition of homosexual unions from constitutional challenges.
Existing laws refer to those in existence before the charter came into force.
???????
comments powered by Disqus