A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Dhananjaya Yashwant Chandrachud in India’s top court is hearing appeals asking for same-sex marriage to be recognised. This case has been garnering attention both in the media and on social media, with many interested parties offering their opinions on the issue.
The federal government has already opposed the appeals, citing that same-sex marriages are not “comparable with the Indian family unit concept of a husband, a wife and children.” Some of the appeals have been brought by gay couples themselves.
However, Bhupender Yadav, a cabinet minister in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government, has written an opinion piece in the Hindustan Times newspaper stating that parliament, not the court, is the best place to debate the issue. Yadav argues that “any debate over which union constitutes a marriage is, in essence, a legislative function and should not be a matter of judicial adjudication.” He is also a general secretary of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.
Yadav goes on to argue that the issue of marriage concerns society and its opinions on this issue should be reflected in parliament. He believes that the voice of society is best reflected in the legislative body, rather than in the courts.
This case is seen as an important development for LGBT rights in the country, following a historic verdict in 2018 when India’s top court decriminalised homosexuality by scrapping a colonial-era ban on gay sex.
While courts around the world have been examining the issue of same-sex marriage and whether such unions can be recognised by law, Asia largely lags behind the West in this regard. The federal government has also informed the court that it would seek the views of states on the matter, as marriage is also a state subject.
The debate on the recognition of same-sex marriage in India continues, with questions remaining as to whether parliament or the court will have the final say.