"The bill, which would have given limited rights to couples whose marriage or civil union was registered overseas, was in answer to a September 2023 ruling by the court of final appeal. The landmark case, brought by activist Jimmy Sham, affirmed that the city's laws defined marriage as between a man and a woman, but also said the government was obliged to create an alternative framework which recognised the core rights of same-sex couples."
"Advocacy group, Hong Kong Marriage Equality, said the veto sent a troubling signal to both local and international communities that court rulings may be disregarded and the dignity of individuals overlooked. We commend the government for taking initial steps towards fulfilling its constitutional obligation to implement the court of final appeal's decision on establishing a legal framework for the recognition of same-sex relationships. At the same time, we express our profound regret that lawmakers have chosen to ignore clear evidence and public sentiment."
Human rights groups say Hong Kong failed to provide minimum rights to same-sex couples after lawmakers rejected a bill meant to comply with a top court order. The unicameral Legislative Council voted 71-14 to reject the bill following months of debate between opponents claiming threats to family values and advocates pointing to majority support for same-sex relationships. The bill would have granted limited rights to couples whose marriage or civil union was registered overseas in response to a September 2023 Court of Final Appeal ruling. Rights groups and advocates criticised the proposal as insufficient and condemned the legislature's veto as disregarding court rulings and public sentiment.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]