Population should have a say in move to decriminalise homosexuality |30 March 2016

Reference is made to the article published in the March 7 issue of Seychelles NATION with the title ‘Decriminalising homosexuality is in line with the constitution’. I will be extremely grateful if I could be granted some space to express my views on this matter.

One of the main reasons given for the decriminalisation of homosexuality is due to international pressure from other countries who are asking us to repeal this law as mentioned by the Attorney General Rony Govinden. The other reason given in the same article by the  anonymous spokesperson in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Transport, “is a sound demonstration of Seychelles’ compliance with our human rights obligations under various international instruments, including the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhumane and Degrading Treatment or Punishment”.

This was further reinforced in your article on March 1, 2016 which stated “The Cabinet also approved two amendments to the Penal Code. The first of these would decriminalise homosexuality, bringing Seychelles in proper conformity with its international obligations under United Nations Declaration of Human Rights which requires that there be protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity”.

After pondering on both articles I have a serious concern regarding the sovereignty of Seychelles as an independent state. My understanding of the definition of sovereignty is the “Supreme, absolute and uncontrollable power by which an independent state is governed and from which all specific political powers are derived. The intentional independence of a state combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign interference” (thefreedictionary.com). Based on this definition how much freedom do we have in Seychelles to regulate our laws on this issue without foreign interference?

I acknowledge the fact that the term Sovereignty is one of the most controversial ideas in political science and International law. Today in this modern world with the emergence of many international watchdogs such as the United Nations there is probably no absolute or unlimited sovereign power of States but what is termed “divided Sovereignty”. However this theory makes it clear that new rules cannot be imposed on states without their consent, hence the concept of signing or ratifying conventions and other international agreements. Obviously in this case we have signed and we have to abide. Nevertheless I believe that we need to learn from this experience and we should not be hasty to sign future international agreements.  The same sex marriage which was conducted on the premises of the British high commission in 2015 stands as a perfect case study in which the Vienna Convention took precedence over the constitution and the Penal Code of Seychelles.   

Decriminalisation of homosexuality will require a repeal of section 151(a) and (c) of the Penal Code especially the removal of the part which states that the person committing such act “is guilty of a felony, and is liable to imprisonment for fourteen years”. Once done, this will “effectively remove this private and often moral and religious issue out of the purview of the legal system and the courts”, as stated in your article.

According to the Attorney General, decriminalisation does not necessitate a referendum. However, judging from the experiences of other countries, the LGBTI community is fighting to remove all forms of discrimination against them. This includes the right for same sex marriage, the right to adopt children and the right to form families etc.

Same sex marriage is prohibited in the constitution of Seychelles and therefore sooner or later this matter will require a referendum.

With Seychelles being a democracy, we are to be represented by our members of National Assembly. This matter of decriminalisation will be brought to their attention for approval or rejection. Unfortunately I have no knowledge of any consultation meetings or forum that they have organised at district level to seek the views of their constituents on this matter. This leads me to wonder who they will be representing when deciding on this issue. Will it be their respective parties, their personal views or the voice of their constituents?  I stand to be corrected but I do not recall hearing any MNA stating that they have decided to either vote yes or no on any motion based on the consulted request or based on the majority consulted opinions of their constituents. Should they not do so on matters of such importance?

Mr Editor, to conclude I believe firmly that we should as a formally secular democratic and sovereign state consisting of about 95% of population who profess affiliation to a religious faith, seek the voice of the people at district level and organise a referendum on such matters which has the power to transform the societal fabric of Seychelles as we have always known it.

 Robert Moumou

A concerned Seychellois