Unfortunately, not often where one would most like to find it. The best remark to come out of the latest shenanigans (Is he or isn’t he? Did he or didn’t he?) involving our one time Deputy P.M. was in the letters to the editor in The Star newspaper.
Writes one Sim Wee Lee of Kuala Lumpur:
“Instead of asking what Anwar did in his bedroom, we should be asking whether the government has the right to impose legislation concerning sex between consenting citizens of legal age in private.
As we aspire to become a developed nation, we have to improve on many aspects we find lacking – government transparency, freedom of the press and, lately, courteous taxi drivers – but nary a word has been said regarding our criminal code which still categorises sodomy as a criminal offence.”
Hooray for a bit of sanity, and someone who has the guts to go to the heart of the matter and put it in perspective.
Ig the govt. decriminalises it, I hope they have the sense to do it in such a way as to prevent the religious courts from claiming jurisdiction.
Ah – there you have fingered another facet entirely. The religious court would instantly claim jurisdiction as far as Muslims are concerned.
Any kind of sex for a Muslim outside of man-woman (or man-two-three-or-four women) marriage is subject to religious court charges. And punishment.
Not wanting to turn the subject gross, but … as far as I can recall, if a man performs buggery on his wife here she can use that as lawful grounds for divorce (if she wants to). Any similar provision where you are?
What ru, even if she consents? I have no idea what the laws are here?
Not certain, but suspect she would have grounds here, yes.
I’m no laywer, jo, so I don’t know for certain. I imagine that if she had enjoyed it for twenty-odd years but then wanted out it might weaken her case a little. But then the Court might take a view similar to its stance on sex with a minor – i.e. that whether she consented or not, the Court doesn’t condone his doing it anyway. (Redneck? Who said that? heh)