The coordination committee of all district court bar associations of Delhi said on Monday the issue of same-sex marriage being heard by the Supreme Court should instead be decided the legislature.
The apex court is hearing a clutch of petitions seeking legal sanction for marriage between homosexual couples.
The coordination committee of all district court bar associations of Delhi said on Monday the issue of same-sex marriage being heard by the Supreme Court should instead be decided the legislature.
The apex court is hearing a clutch of petitions seeking legal sanction for marriage between homosexual couples.
In a resolution, the committee said the social ramifications of the ongoing proceedings before the SC are colossal and have the potential for an unintended impact on the social fabric.
“It is important that issues that have the potential to affect society at large are discussed and debated in the Parliament where elected representatives can take into account the views and concerns of their constituents,” the resolution said.
It said the issue is deeply entrenched in societal norms, values, and beliefs and a decision made in isolation, without the benefit of the view of the society, is likely to be ineffective and may even be counterproductive.
The resolution also said the issue required careful consideration and public debate.
“The regulation and legalization of marriage can only be determined by the legislature through due legislative process, which involves consultation with all relevant stakeholders as the legislative body reflect the collective wisdom and conscience of the nation and take into account cultural values, social standards, and other factors that define acceptable human behaviour when making decisions about regulating, permitting, or prohibiting human relationships,” it added.
The issue cannot be adjudged by means of judicial interpretations because it requires a more extensive consultation process, the resolution added.
“This issue should be referred to parliament, where a more extensive consultation process can take place,” it added.
It said the matter required a wide consultative process and cannot be encompassed within the limited judicial adjudicatory precincts. Therefore, it said, judicial intervention in the matter is not advisable.
“There is no gainsaying that the legislature, while drafting the various laws pertaining to marriage, never envisaged the issue of marriage between same sexes. Hence, any judicial endeavour to interpret the ‘legislative intent’, when none existed, would be rendered nugatory,” it added.