Writing in last weekend’s edition of the Mirror Newspaper, Ramkarran went as far as voicing support for same-sex marriages though he acknowledged that the conservative society here would be unlikely to agree to this.
The Guyana Government committed at a Geneva human rights forum two years ago to holding consultations on decriminalizing same-sex relations but these are yet to start.
Noting that the current laws against gay sex are a colonial artifact and pointing to US President Barack Obama’s recent declaration of support for same sex marriages, Ramkarran declared that the present laws are archaic and should be expunged from the statute books.
“Homosexuality and lesbianism are now recognized as alternative lifestyles and people should be free to conduct themselves as they see fit providing they do not harm others”, he said.
He added: “Homosexuality and lesbianism are as normal to the adherents of this lifestyle as heterosexuality is normal for the majority of people who are practicing heterosexuals. They do not see themselves as `ill’ or as having a `condition’ that ought to be `cured’ by counseling or some other similar means”.
The first senior person in the party to call for a repeal of the anti-gay sex laws, Ramkarran said of gay people “They are normal, regular people who would, like all of us, like to live their lives in peace and harmony with themselves and the rest of the world. Our society does not permit them to `come out’ and say so. I therefore say these things on their behalf, assuming even if arrogantly, that I have their permission to do so”.
He argued that the perpetuation of discriminatory practices harms the society and criminalises people who choose to live differently from the majority while making as important a contribution to society as anyone else. He said it was time to bring this matter out of the shadows.
Adverting to the deeply conservative nature of Caribbean societies, Ramkarran traced the history of attempts to have a constitutional amendment here banning discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.
He pointed out that while he was chairing the constitution reform process in 2000 a proposal to include an article in the constitution outlawing discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation was unanimously passed only for it to be rolled back after several churches lobbied former President Bharrat Jagdeo. After opposition to the provision gathered, Ramkarran wrote that the President “no doubt influenced by this opposition, did not sign it into law.” It was returned to the National Assembly for debate where Ramkarran said that the government and opposition in “weak kneed genuflection to so-called popular opinion, changed their positions and voted against the measure”.
The former speaker of the National Assembly noted that the Canadian Supreme Court recently upheld the right of two men to get married on the basis of the country’s bill of rights provisions which are similar to the fundamental rights provisions here.
“If our courts were to follow the Canadian Supreme Court then it would hold that two persons of the same sex have the right to get married”, he stated.
Ramkarran said it is incumbent upon the government and the opposition to boldly lead public opinion in this matter.
“We must lead the way in the Caribbean region and lead the way in dispensing with the outdated notion that heterosexuality is the basic premise of masculinity for the male and femininity for the woman”. He argued that discrimination has no place in Guyana and that the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender community is crying out here for recognition and an end to ridicule, violence and discrimination.
On March 21 this year, Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Dr Roger Luncheon had said that Guyana will soon be holding public consultations on the decriminalization of gay sex and other matters in keeping with the country’s commitment at the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in 2010.
Asked why it took so long to commence the consultations, Dr Luncheon said that the issues are the kinds of matters that one would deal with “within an extremely elaborate and well thought out way.”
He said Guyana has about nine months to hold the consultations and he believes that the country can provide to everyone’s satisfaction “a pretty reasonable national effort at defining where we stand on these issues.” Those consultations are still to start.
In a letter following Luncheon’s statement, the Society Against Sexual Orientation Discrimination (SASOD) had said that “Having identified itself as the facilitators of this process, the government’s actions raise questions as to whether its intentions to consult are genuine, and whether it can be trusted to lead this process. We therefore recommend a more inclusive framework which includes the parliamentary opposition and can also minimize partisan positions when these reforms reach the National Assembly.”
The letter added “SASOD would like to make its position unequivocally clear, that consultation does not mean referendum, and reiterate our stated position that the Guyana constitution is the ultimate guide on matters of citizen participation in decision-making. As Article 13 states, `the principal objective of the political system is to establish an inclusionary democracy by providing increasing opportunities for the participation of citizens and their organizations in the management and decision – making processes of the State with particular emphasis on those areas of decision – making that directly affect their well-being.’ The key stakeholders of this consultative process are lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Guyanese citizens as these discriminatory laws affect our everyday lives and lived experiences. Our communities and organisations must therefore be able to manage and take centre stage in this process as these decisions affect our identities and citizenship and our views must be heavily weighted.”
In a statement in April, the Guyana Human Rights Association, referring to Luncheon’s disclosure, had said that Guyana does not need consultations which encourage divisiveness, and the body criticised Dr. Luncheon for being “disingenuous” in seeking to project the impression that the government is “starting from scratch” in bringing up public consultations on capital punishment, corporal punishment and discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.
GHRA noted that widespread consultations on the latter issue took place during the constitutional reform process of 2000 and the Constitutional Reform Commission comprised representatives of every sector of civil society, labour, religious groups, Bar Association, Youth, Amerindians, etc.
“Members fanned out all over the country for consultations and received at sittings opinions from groups and individuals on that issue. At the end of the day the CRC unanimously recommended that in Guyana there should be no discrimination against anyone on the ground of that person’s sexual orientation.
“The recommendation was forwarded to Parliament and unanimously accepted by members of the Assembly. The Bill was then sent to President Jagdeo for the formality of assent but he refused to assent to it when faced with religious opposition.”
According to the GHRA, “what the society now needs from the government is positive leadership in these areas. What the society does not need is yet another demonstration of how indifferent certain factions of the society are to the consequences of violence against children (corporal punishment), or to deliberate cruelty (capital punishment) or to stigmatize people with sexual orientations different to our own.”
