MEDIA RELEASE: A Response to Court of Appeal Ruling in Attorney General v Jason Jones
For Immediate Release | March 27th, 2025
SLF Calls on Political Parties to Commit to Protecting LGBTQI+ Rights:
A Response to Court of Appeal Ruling in Attorney General v Jason Jones
The Silver Lining Foundation (SLF) acknowledges, with concern, the ruling delivered by the Court of Appeal in Attorney General v Jason Jones but expresses profound disappointment in the judgment. This decision is not a victory; it reflects a complex interplay between judicial restraint, legislative authority, and the fundamental rights of the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago. This case continues to be of historic significance for LGBTQI+ people in Trinidad and Tobago and the wider Caribbean as these archaic laws do not only oppress the LGBTQI+ community but also undermine the fundamental freedoms of every individual. This ruling is a troubling setback – a direct threat to equality, human rights, and the dignity of all citizens in Trinidad and Tobago. As the matter now moves to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, we remain steadfast in our commitment to a more just and inclusive society where everyone is treated with fairness and respect.
“This ruling highlights how the law, even when unenforced, can still be a weapon of shame and fear against LGBTQI+ people,” said Jeremy Edwards, Executive Director of The Silver Lining Foundation. “While we await a final ruling from the Privy Council, we cannot forget that real lives hang in the balance. It is not enough to say ‘let the courts decide.’ Our leaders must act. Silence is not neutrality – it is complicity.”
What Was This Case About?
This case challenged Sections 13 and 16 of the Sexual Offences Act, which make it a criminal offence for two consenting adults of the same sex to engage in certain private sexual acts, most notably what the law refers to as “buggery” and “serious indecency.”
In 2018, the High Court ruled that these laws were unconstitutional because they violated rights to privacy, dignity, and equality – essentially saying that it should not be a crime for LGBTQI+ people to love or be intimate with one another in private.
The State appealed this ruling and now the Court of Appeal has issued a split decision:
- The majority judges (Justices Bereaux and Pemberton) said that these laws remain valid because they are protected under a section of our Constitution called the “savings clause,” which shields old colonial laws from being struck down as unconstitutional. However, the court did reduce the punishment from 25 years to a maximum of 5 years, acknowledging that the original penalty was excessive and unfair – especially in cases involving consenting adults.
- The dissenting judge (Justice Kokaram) disagreed and argued that the laws are unconstitutional and discriminatory. He said that the courts should strike them down because they violate basic human rights.
What Does This Ruling Mean Right Now?
No one should panic; this ruling does not mean that police will start arresting LGBTQI+ people. The court’s decision reflects legal technicalities, not a return to active persecution. While the penalty has been reduced, showing that the courts have recognized that the punishment was unjust, the ruling means that Sections 13 and 16 of the Sexual Offences Act remain on our law books. This means that same-sex intimacy between consenting adults remains criminalized, even if enforcement is rare. This alone continues to stigmatize and marginalize LGBTQI+ people in our country.
What Do We Need Now?
SLF calls on all political parties, especially in this election season, to go beyond legal technicalities and show moral and civic leadership by:
- Publicly committing to amend the Equal Opportunity Act to include sexual orientation, gender identity and expression as protected grounds from discrimination.
- Reviewing and reforming old laws – including the Sexual Offences Act – that criminalize and endanger LGBTQI+ people, even if they are rarely enforced.
- Creating safe, affirming spaces where all people can live with dignity, privacy, and equality – regardless of who they are or whom they love.
The judgment may have upheld outdated laws, but it also made it clear: it is Parliament’s responsibility now to fix this. The judiciary has done what it can within the limits of the Constitution — it is time for our elected leaders to act. The law may still criminalize us but human rights must protect us. We urge Parliament to prioritize the reform of outdated and discriminatory laws that do not reflect the values of a just and inclusive society. It is imperative that our legal framework evolves to protect the dignity and human rights of all citizens.
While we recognize the court’s acknowledgment of disproportionate sentencing, we remain deeply concerned that the underlying criminalization of consensual same-sex relationships perpetuates stigma, discrimination, and inequality. Justice Kokaram’s dissent reflects the progressive interpretation needed to safeguard human rights in Trinidad and Tobago. His acknowledgment of the unconstitutional and discriminatory upholding of these laws serves as a beacon of hope for those who continue to face marginalization and discrimination.
SLF remains committed to advocating for a more just, inclusive, and compassionate society – one where LGBTQI+ people no longer live under the shadow of criminalization, fear, or silence.
The Silver Lining Foundation
*****
About SLF
The Silver Lining Foundation (SLF) is a non-profit organisation registered in Trinidad and Tobago that works towards preventing bullying, suicide, and discrimination related to sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression (SOGIE) issues. SLF aims to empower youth, create safer classrooms and strengthen family relationships through a three-pronged approach of support, education, and advocacy, enabling youth to lead more fulfilling, sustainable, and functional lives.
– END –
CONTACT – Jeremy Steffan Edwards, Executive Director | 1-868-470-1967 | thesilverliningfoundation@gmail.com
