This is with reference to the recent Supreme Court’s judgment on the Naz Foundation case, where our top most Court thought it fit to criminalize consensual sex amongst homosexual adults.

Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights (DCPCR) was the only government body that had challenged the progressive Delhi High Court judgment in the Supreme Court, and in the aftermath of the judgment, the Ex- Chairperson of DCPCR was widely quoted by reporters to be welcoming the judgment. He said that banning homosexuality is the key to ensuring children's normal development and protecting their rights to family, and that S.377 of the IPC was the only protection for sexual offences against a male or a male child.

We at HAQ: Centre for Child Rights would like to clarify that this view is not shared by us. As an organization committed to the cause of protection of the rights of a vulnerable and neglected section of society, we recognize and respect the rights of people with alternative sexuality.

We believe that the rights of one section of society cannot prevail at the cost of another. Further, it is indeed absurd to state that the draconian and archaic S.377 of IPC is the only protection against sexual abuse of minors. We now have a gender neutral law that deals specifically with the abuse of minors (POCSO Act, 2012).

We believe that our stand on this issue must be clarified and it is imperative that the voice of one person should not be confused for the voice of the child-rights sector at large.