‘No criminal offence disclosed’ on town-hall organisers urging protection for family, marriage in mulling repeal of Section 377A: MHA

  • 📰 TODAYonline
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 85 sec. here
  • 3 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 37%
  • Publisher: 99%

Law Law Headlines News

Law Law Latest News,Law Law Headlines

SINGAPORE — The police will not be taking action against the organisers of a town hall attended by 1,200 people that called for a 'new political package' to protect marriage, family and children before the Government considers repealing a law that criminalises gay sex. The police is saying that the gathering&nb

SINGAPORE — The police will not be taking action against the organisers of a town hall attended by 1,200 people that called for a"new political package" to protect marriage, family and children before the Government considers repealing a law that criminalises gay sex. The police is saying that the gathering has not broken any laws.

Mr Wong is the founder of both the Dads for Life movement and the Yellow Ribbon Project to help ex-offenders, while another organiser, Mr Mohamed Khair, is the chief executive officer of SuChi Success Initiatives training company. This means that participants are free to use the information discussed but cannot reveal the identity of the speaker.

Under the Public Order Act, a police permit is required for a public assembly if its purpose is to remonstrate support for or opposition towards the views or actions of any persons, group of persons or any government, to publicise a cause or campaign, or mark or commemorate any event, the ministry added.

Still, he said the organisers of the town hall while not surprised, were nonetheless disappointed that some members of the public had called for police reports to be made over the town hall for promoting hate and “espousing religious views”.“Even if there were, religious people do have a say in society, considering that a majority of Singaporeans are religious,” he added.

On his end, Mr Wong said he has already been branded as “homophobic”, “discriminatory”, and “divisive”. Said Mr Wong: “I don’t think I can be accused of creating such division if I’m explaining why we should keep status quo.” He added that while these were not yet violent or threatening in nature, some callers cited"religious verses", suggesting that they were echoing what they read and heard from their community leaders.

Meanwhile, Mr Clement Tan, speaking on behalf of LGBTQ+ advocacy group Pink Dot SG, said no one community should have the power to define what another community can or cannot do.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 1. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines