St Vincent upholds legislation criminalizing same-sex marriages, sparks outcry

The St Vincent High Court ruled against equal rights for same sex marriages, the decision was met with mixed reactions from the general public; pro-LGBTQ activists expressed disdain.

Two homosexual men Javin Kevin Vinc Johnson and Sean MacLeish set out to challenge the law with the argument that the fundamental rights protected by the St Vincent and the Grenadines constitution, namely the right to privacy, equality and freedom from discrimination.

Their argument leaned heavily on the potential negative implications for the LGBTQ community, suggesting that such laws can increase stigma, fear, violence and even limited access to healthcare, financial concerns and so on.

The government of St Vincent and the Grenadines defended the laws in question, with the argument that the laws were brought into existence to honour the country's religious and moral values, they also went on to argue that the laws were put in place to protect and defend the general population from health concerns, namely that of HIV/AIDS.

Justice Esco Henry was empathetic, understanding and acknowledging of the plaintiff's claims, however, he still ruled in favour of the government under the pretense that the law has a “legitimate aim” of protecting public health and morality, to the extent that it outweighed the individual rights of the plaintiffs.

The primary defence of the ruling surrounded concerns about HIV/AIDS, although international health organizations have debunked the link between criminalization and an improvement in public health.

The ruling was also defended when Justice Henry stated that repealing the law would have huge implications for social and cultural norms, suggesting that the laws may change after the culture undergoes a collective shift; in other words, until the nation undergoes a cultural shift big enough for the majority to ask for revision of the legislation the laws will stay in place.

The court's decision has been widely criticized by legal professionals and human rights experts who believe the ruling was based on inaccurate information and diminishing stereotypes.

LGBTQ allies believe this ruling can potentially set back progress for human rights in the Caribbean by setting a poor precedent. However, more conservative residents took a sigh of relief when the verdict was given.