Publication Type

Journal Article

Version

acceptedVersion

Publication Date

8-2025

Abstract

The Singapore Court of Appeal held a law prohibiting male–male sexual intercourse (s 377A of the Penal Code) unenforceable on non-rights-based grounds. The court's remarks about the rights to life and liberty (including whether sexual orientation is mutable), freedom of expression, and equality are obiter. But they are significant, since in Singapore, there are few constitutional rights cases and the courts focus on spelling out the limits to executive and legislative power without necessarily striking down exercises of such power on rights grounds. Indeed, the obiter dicta prompted the Legislature to repeal s 377A. Given the repeal, the obiter dicta about constitutional rights have receded into the background of public discourse. This article refocuses attention on these dicta, unpacking them in their constitutional, sub-constitutional, and societal context and critically analysing their implications, and presenting them as a case study about the role of obiter dicta in rights adjudication generally.

Keywords

Singapore, obiter dicta, right to life, freedom of expression, equality, separation of powers, LGBTQ, 377A

Discipline

Asian Studies | Constitutional Law | Courts

Research Areas

Public Interest Law, Community and Social Justice; Asian and Comparative Legal Systems; Public Law

Areas of Excellence

Sustainability

Publication

Common Law World Review

First Page

1

Last Page

29

ISSN

1473-7795

Identifier

10.1177/14737795251369885

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Additional URL

https://doi.org/10.1177/14737795251369885

Download

Share

COinS