National

In February 2011, Film Censors announced its decision to not only rate The Kids Are All Right R21, but also confined it to one print for the whole of Singapore, effectively making it impossible to screen the movie at more than one cinema at a time. The censors claim the film "normalises" the "homosexual lifestyle" [R1.3].

In April 2008, Singapore City's State Regulator fined a television station £5000 for featuring a gay couple in way that makes them look 'normal' [R1.2].

In September 1996, Internet service providers were given a deadline of September 14 to funnel customers' Internet connections through special filtering sites that will block access to a wide variety of sites outside of Singapore, including those with contents that "depict or propagate sexual perversions such as homosexuality, lesbianism and paedophilia" [R1.1].

National

In April 2004, the Singapore government reportedly denied freedom of association to a gay rights group People Like Us and warned it to halt all activities [R1.3]. In 1998, it was denied registration with the government's Registrar of Societies.

In July 2003, the Government was reportedly openly employing gays, even in sensitive jobs, although homosexual acts remain an offence [R1.2].

As at July 2001, gays and lesbians had no legal protection against employment discrimination on grounds of their sexuality [R1.1].

National

In January 1996, the government announced that post operative transsexuals would be free to marry people of the opposite sex [R1.1].

National

In February 2000, Singaporean authorities said the island state will require all expatriates and long-term visitors to pass medical examinations before they are granted permits to work or live there, from March [R1.1].

Courts & Tribunals

On 18 January 2012, an HIV-positive man was reportedly sentenced to 18 months jail for failing to inform another man of his status before they had sex. The Infectious Diseases Act was amended in 2008 to increase the maximum punishment to a jail term of ten years and a S$50,000 fine [R2.1].

National

On 01 February 2008, the Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2007, No. 51 came into force, repealing Section 377: Unnatural Offences. Section 377A remains extant [L1.5], [R1.6]

Chapter XVI. Offences Affecting the Human Body. Sexual Offences

Section 377A: Outrages on Decency

"Any male person who, in public or private, commits or abets the commission of or procures the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with another male person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2 years" [L1.5].

Chapter XIV: Offences Affecting the Public Tranquility, Public Health, Safety, Convenience, Decency and Morals [L1.5]

Section 294: Obscene songs

"Whoever, to the annoyance of others —

(a) does any obscene act in any public place; or

(b) sings, recites or utters any obscene song, ballad or words in or near any public place,

shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 months, or with fine, or with both.

On 18 February 2013, Singapore's law minister Kasiviswanathan Shanmugam affirmed to an influential Christian group that while Singapore will not repeal the anti-sodomy law that criminalizes gay sex, it would not enforce it [R1.3].

In October 2007, a bill was introduced which would, if passed, decriminalise oral and anal sex between heterosexuals [R1.2].

In October 2007, the Singapore government declared that private, consensual, adult homosexual sex would no longer be prosecuted but that its illegality would remain [R2.2].

In July 2001, it was not illegal to be gay or lesbian in Singapore, but homosexual sex acts are illegal and can land people in jail – even if they take place in private [R1.1].

Courts & Tribunals

On 10 April 2013, the High Court dismissed two legal challenges in which plaintiffs gay couple Gary Lim and Kenneth Che sought to have the country's anti-gay sex law declared unconstitutional [R2.17].

On 14 February 2013, Justice Quentin Loh in chambers heard the case of Gary Lim and Kenneth Chee v. The Attorney General OS 1135/2012 – seeking an order that Section 377A of the Penal Code is void by virtue of Article 4 of the Constitution. Judgment was reserved [C2.16], [R2.15].

On 30 November 2012, gay couple Gary Lim and Kenneth Chee filed a constitutional challenge in the High Court aimed at repealing Section 377A, the long-standing law that criminalizes gay sex [R2.14].

On 21 August 2012, the Court of Appeal, presided by Judge of Appeal Andrew Phang, Judge of Appeal V K Rajah and Justice Judith Prakash, said in a 106-page judgement that they found that Tan Eng Hong had an arguable case on the constitutionality of Section 377A that ought to be heard in the High Court [C2.13], [R2.12].

On 27 September 2011, the Court of Appeal reserved its decision in Tan Eng Hong's appeal challenging the constitutionality of Section 377A of the Penal Code that prohibits sexual relations between men, to be delivered on a later date [R2.11].

On 27 September 2011, the Court of Appeal was expected to hear Tan Eng Hong's appeal challenging the constitutionality of Section 377A of the Penal Code that prohibits sexual relations between men [R2.10].

Previously:

On 15 March 2011, the High Court High Court judge Lai Siu Chiu dismissed the first appeal relating to the constitutional challenge against Section 377A of the Penal Code [C2.9], [R2.8].

On 14 December 2010, Tan Eng Hong was fined S$3,000 by a district court for performing fellatio on another man in a public toilet in Citylink Mall under Section 294A of the Penal Code [R2.7].

On 08 December 2010, the High Court of Singapore rejected an application filed by lawyer M Ravi who sought to challenge the constitutionality of Section 377A of the Penal Code that prohibits sexual relations between men [R2.6].

On 10 November 2010, 40-year-old Chin Chee Shyong was convicted under Section 294 of the Penal Code for having oral sex with another man in a shopping mall toilet cubicle on March 9 [R2.5].

On 24 September 2010, lawyer M Ravi filed an application in the High Court to challenge the legality of Section 377A of the Penal Code. A hearing will be fixed for the Court to rule whether the law should be deemed unconstitutional if the act is between consenting adults [R2.4]. The hearing was fixed for 07 December 2010 [R2.3].

The Singapore Court of Appeal found that penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary for the offence in [the now repealed] Section 377 . It has also been found that in certain circumstances oral sex contravened the section. Other forms of genital contact would be sufficient to found a charge of gross indecency [Citation required].

In April 2008, the City State Regulator fined a television station £5000 for featuring a gay couple in way that makes them look 'normal' [R2.2].

In February 1997, an appeals court ruled oral sex is illegal in the island state unless it is as a prelude to full heterosexual intercourse [R2.1].

National

In July 2001, self-declared gay men in the military were reportedly relegated to administrative or logistics work [R1.1].