Announcements A Joint Statement on Technical, legal, ethical and implementation concerns regarding Aarogya Setu and other apps introduced during COVID-19 in India by Jan Swasthya Abhiyan (JSA), Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), Forum for Medical Ethics Society (FMES), and All India People’s Science Network (AIPSN)   |   Submission to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) on behalf of Hub5 (HEaL Institute, APU, Seher-CHSJ, and IAPH) – COPASAH on human rights issues confronted by ASHAS and ANMs during the Covid-19 pandemic | Aug 7, 2020   |   Letter to MMC by FMES, PUCL-MH, FAOW, and MFC urging to restore its order suspending licenses of two doctors accused of abetting the suicide of Dr Payal Tadvi
Dublin Core PKP Metadata Items Metadata for this Document
1. Title Title of document Section 377 and The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017: Breaking barriers
2. Creator Author's name, affiliation, country Arjun Kapoor; Law and Policy, Indian Law Society, Pune 411 004 India
3. Subject Discipline(s)
3. Subject Keyword(s)
4. Description Abstract The Supreme Court of India recently decriminalised homosexuality by passing a landmark judgment in the case of Navtej Johar and Others v. Union of India. In its judgment, the Court held that Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is unconstitutional in as much as it criminalises consensual sexual acts between two adults. The Court held that Section 377 discriminates against persons of the LGBTIQ community based on their sexual orientation and violates their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. The Court arrived at this conclusion after considering established principles of constitutional law, foreign precedents and expert opinions. However, a crucial part of the Court’s reasoning was based on a close reading of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017. The Court relied on the anti-discriminatory provisions of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 to observe that homosexuality is not a mental illness or mental disorder, and that LGBTIQ persons cannot be discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation. The Court’s reading of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 and Section 377 is significant as its rationale can be extended further to challenge other laws which discriminate against persons with mental illness. The Court also highlights the responsibilities of mental health professionals and counsellors while providing mental healthcare to LGBTIQ persons. Finally, the Court’s reading of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 is also a recognition of its commitment as an anti-discrimination legislation which upholds constitutional values and protects the rights of persons with mental illness.
5. Publisher Organizing agency, location Forum for Medical Ethics Society
6. Contributor Sponsor(s)
7. Date (YYYY-MM-DD) 2018-11-26
8. Type Status & genre
8. Type Type
9. Format File format HTML , PDF
10. Identifier Uniform Resource Identifier
11. Source Title; vol., no. (year) Indian Journal of Medical Ethics;: Hope lies in informed struggle
12. Language English=en en
13. Relation Supp. Files
14. Coverage Geo-spatial location, chronological period, research sample (gender, age, etc.)
15. Rights Copyright and permissions

All articles published in IJME are available on its website free of charge. The copyright for published material belongs to IJME/FMES. IJME freely permits the reprint (or reproduction on a website) of articles from the journal, as long as this is for non-commercial use and appropriate credit is given to the author and the journal and publication details are mentioned. The commercial use of our content can be made only after obtaining permission from and on payment to IJME. This is intended to support production of the journal.