← All Authorities
Singapore convention rightsgrounds illegality

Ong Ming Johnson v Attorney-General

[2020] SGHC 63
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore High Court
Year2020
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Singapore High Court upheld constitutionality of Penal Code s 377A criminalising male homosexual acts under Art 12 equal protection rational basis test.

Key Principle

Penal Code s 377A; Art 12 equal protection; rational basis for criminalising male homosexual acts; not unconstitutional (pre-repeal)

Area of Law

constitutional

Related Cases

NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (2023) 97 ALJR 1005

Indefinite administrative detention of a non-citizen with no real prospect of removal is unlawful as punitive and contrary to Ch III of the Australian Constitution, overruling Al-Kateb v Godwin.

Farm Transparency International v NSW (2022) 276 CLR 81

HCA upheld NSW ag-gag laws as valid notwithstanding a burden on the implied freedom of political communication, applying the structured proportionality test.

Palmer v Western Australia (2021) 272 CLR 505

HCA upheld WA COVID-19 border closure legislation as valid under s.92, finding restrictions on interstate movement were reasonably necessary and proportionate to protect public health.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Ong Ming Johnson v Attorney-General and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Ong Ming Johnson v Attorney-Ge...