| Click here for a summary of Tonga’s review at the second cycle and/or third cycle. |
2nd UPR session
Date of review: 14 May 2008
Date of report adoption: 5 June 2008
Document number: A/HRC/8/48
|
SUMMARY SOGIESC issues during Tonga’s 1st UPR review |
I. SOGIESC issues/recommendations identified by NGOs
Right to privacy
16. According to the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA), Tonga maintains criminal sanctions against sexual activity between consenting adults, citing in particular the Laws of Tonga Criminal Offences [Cap 18] 1988 Edition, articles 136, 137, 139 and 140. “Whoever shall be convicted of the crime of sodomy with another person or bestiality with any animal shall be liable at the discretion of the Court to be imprisoned for any period not exceeding ten years and such animal shall be killed by a public officer.” (Substituted by Act 9 of 1987). Art.137. “It is an offence for a person to assault another person with intent to commit sodomy.” (Inserted by Act 9 of 1987). Art. 139. “Whoever shall attempt to commit the said abominable crime of sodomy or shall be guilty of an assault with intent to commit the same or of any indecent assault upon any male person shall be liable at the direction of the Court to imprisonment for any term not exceeding 10 years.” Art.140. “On the trial of any person upon a charge of sodomy or carnal knowledge it shall not be necessary to prove the actual emission of seed but the offence shall be deemed complete on proof of penetration only.”
II. Excerpts on SOGIESC issues from the national report
No references.
III. Excerpts on SOGIESC issues by UN agencies
No references.
IV. References to SOGIESC issues during the Working Group review
28. Although Tonga is not party to ICCPR, [the Netherlands] (b) recommended that Tonga amend legal provisions that criminalize some forms of sexual activity between consenting adults and decriminalize sexual activity between consenting adults.
31. [Canada] noted that Tonga maintains criminal sanctions against some forms of sexual activity between consenting adults and (b) recommended that Tonga amend its criminal laws so that sexual activity between consenting adults is not a criminal offence.
39. The Czech Republic […] also (b) recommended the decriminalization of consensual same-sex activity between adults.
45. On the issue of the right to privacy and sexual activity between consenting adults, she noted the concerns raised with regard to the legislation and indicated that Tonga is an inclusive society with tolerant Christian values that require respect across differences.
58. [Bangladesh] indicated that the purpose of UPR was not to impose the values of one society on another and noted that if the traditional society of Tonga does not permit consensual sex between two men or two women, one should refrain from imposing this on them, as it is outside the purview of universally accepted human rights norms. As there is no treaty obliging Tonga to do otherwise, it (b) recommended that the Government continue to criminalize consensual same sex, which is outside the purview of universally accepted human rights norms, according to Tonga’s national legislation.
V. Conclusions and/or recommendations
Tonga noted the following recommendations:
28.(b) To amend legal dispositions and decriminalize sexual activity between consenting adults (Netherlands);
31.(b) To amend its criminal laws so that sexual activity between consenting adults is not a criminal offence (Canada);
39.(b) To decriminalize consensual same-sex activity between adults (Czech Republic);
58.(b) To continue to criminalize consensual same sex (Bangladesh).
VI. Further information
You will find all documents relating to Tonga’s first review at UPR-Info and OHCHR’s websites.