Onir reacts to SC’s same-sex marriage ruling: ‘What a shame’ Bollywood

Bollywood October 17, 2023

[ad_1]

Filmmaker O’Neill expressed disappointment with India’s Supreme Court’s decision on Tuesday that refused to legalize same-sex marriage. “I am disappointed… The cisgender world could not be better,” he said shortly after the verdict by the five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by India’s Chief Justice DY Chandrachud. Mr. O’Neill posted on X (formerly Twitter). (Also read: Onir: Major filmmakers need to be more considerate towards independent films to succeed)

O’Neill has directed films about homosexuality, including “My Brother Nikhil” and “Pine Cone.”

The filmmaker, who explored same-sex relationships in My Brother Nikhil and Pine Cone, also posted on the X app: “What a shame.”

In a majority verdict, the Supreme Court ruled that LGBTQIA+ couples do not have an unconditional right to marriage and that civil unions can only be given legal status by enacted legislation.

“I think the Supreme Court’s decision has been made, but the decision was very disappointing because there were a lot of positive things that were discussed from the beginning. The court said that the government should accept and support this decision. But the decision was in the hands of Parliament,” O’Neill told ANI after the Supreme Court’s verdict.

“The Supreme Court took this decision in 2018, and it was a positive decision because courts take human rights into consideration when making decisions,” the filmmaker said.

“The struggle that has already taken place will continue with the hope that we will get justice soon. There was a lot of hope this time, but unfortunately it did not happen in our favor.” said O’Neill.

“This is a human rights issue and no culture, religion or tradition is above human rights, so I would like to ask the government why there is a discussion about the well-being of local communities,” he added.

The Constitution Bench, comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaur, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, Hima Kohli and Justice PS Narasimha, released its pending verdict on May 11 this year. I put it down.

However, the court said the ruling does not interfere with the right of homosexuals to have romantic relationships.

The Supreme Court also said that a challenge to the Special Marriage Act (SMA) on the ground of underclassification cannot be entertained.

Justices Ravindra Bhat, Narasimha and Hima Kohli agreed with these positions, while CJI Chandrachud and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaur took a different stand.

In his judgment, the CJI directed that the federal and state governments must ensure that there is no discrimination against the gay community.

The CJI said it should be ensured that there is no discrimination in access to goods and services for the gay community. We need to raise public awareness about queer rights. Federal and state governments should establish hotlines for the gay community to prevent harassment. Governments must create safe homes for gay couples. Governments also need to ensure that intersex children are not forced to undergo surgery.

The CJI said there was a need to ensure that no person was forced to undergo hormone therapy. Don’t harass the gay community by calling them to the police station just to ask about their sexual identity.

The CJI directed the federal government to set up a commission to determine the rights and entitlements of people in gay unions.

The Constitutional Court began hearings on the matter on April 18, and the hearings lasted almost 10 days. The court had made it clear that it would deal with the issue based on the provisions of the Special Marriage Act and would not refer to personal law in this regard.

The Center opposed the petition, saying Congress, not the courts, should consider the issue. The Center called this the urban elite concept, but the courts disagreed.

During the hearing, the center agreed to consider issues related to granting certain rights to LGBTQIA+ people, but opposed legal recognition of same-sex couples.