The Federal Shariat Court (FSC) was apprised by the Ministry of Human Rights on Friday that it would amend its response within the given two-week period, a day after the bench grilled it over its reply that appeared to endorse homosexuality and same-sex marriages.
A three-member bench, headed by FSC Chief Justice Muhammad Noor Muskanzai and comprising Justice Syed Muhammad Anwar and Justice Khadim Hussain, heard the petitions filed against the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act 2018.
During the hearing, the director general of the human rights ministry said that the response did not endorse same-sex marriages and that the impression that the court got from it was wrong.
Justice Syed Muhammad Anwar said the ministry mentioned “Yogakarta” agreement which supported homosexuality.
“I do not think the federal government will endorse homosexuality,” Justice Anwar remarked.
The ministry official said that they wanted to amend the response with the permission of the court.
“Why are you linking the rights of transgender persons with homosexuals,” the FSC judge questioned. The DG said that the ministry as well as the state could not even think of endorsing homosexuality in Pakistan.
The FSC judge said that the rights ministry did not consult the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) while drafting the law for the protection of transgender persons and questioned why the ministry lied about seeking the CCI’s suggestions for the law.
“The transgender community is oppressed and it should not be linked to homosexuality,” the judge said. “No other religion has given more rights to the transgender community than Islam.” The court gave the ministry two weeks to submit its amended response. A day earlier, the FSC grilled the rights ministry over the response submitted regarding the law for protection of eunuchs.
Justice Anwar had asked if the human rights ministry was endorsing homosexuality, adding that its reply mentioned “Yogakarta”. “Do you know what Yogakarta is,” he rhetorically asked. “It is a law that seeks to end legislation against same-sex marriage across the world.” Justice Anwar said the government also mentioned LBGT rights in its response. “Who wrote this letter,” he asked. “Do you know what LGBT rights are,” the judge asked the legal adviser. “Is the Ministry of Human Rights supporting LGBT rights in Pakistan?”
Meanwhile, Ayesha Mughal, a transgender lecturer, raised questions over the maintainability of the petition challenging The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2018.
In her response submitted through her counsel Asad Jamal Advocate, she said that the petitioner had approached the FSC to challenge a duly passed law merely on the basis of his personal fears and apprehensions.
“The petitioner has thus failed to provide any ground whatsoever to invoke the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, the titled petition is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed on this ground alone,” it stated. “The claims of the petitioner are frivolous and malicious. It is an obvious attempt to abuse the constitutional jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. In this regard, it would be sufficient to draw the attention of this court that the petitioner’s claim that ‘the definition of transgender person is not limited to real transgender persons but also includes lesbians and gays’ [sic] is not entirely unfounded but is, in fact, a malicious attempt to make controversial a law which is meant to ensure fundamental rights of Pakistan’s marginalised communities of transgender persons,” it added.
"The fact is that the act did not even remotely, directly or indirectly, refer to or imply ‘lesbians and gays’. Such inferences are baseless and frivolous, thus the petition merits dismissal,” it stated.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ