Panel Section 377a and 377b

This is 1 of the case our lecturer showed us during the lecturer class.

Man fails in bid to legalise sodomy

PUTRAJAYA: A Kuala Lumpur City Hall worker convicted of 22 counts of sodomy wants the Court of Appeal to declare as unconstitutional the provision that criminalised the act.

Abdul Rahim Abdul Rahaman contended that it was biased against the male gender.

The submission was made by Abdul Rahim’s counsel Fahri Azzat in his appeal to set aside the 60-year jail term and 22 strokes of rotan meted out to him by the Shah Alam Sessions Court in 2007.

However, Abdul Rahim — a HIV patient — failed to convince Jus­tices Datuk Suriyadi Halim Omar, Datuk Hasan Lah and Datuk Ahmad Maarop who dismissed his appeal and upheld his sentence.

Fahri argued that Sections 377A and 377B of the Penal Code which make committing carnal intercourse against the order of nature a crime infringed Article 8 (1) and (2) of the Federal Consti-tution, which states that all persons should be treated equally and prohibits discrimination against citizens.

He said a scrutiny of Section 377B clearly showed that the provision only applied to males because it referred to a person introducing his male organ into the anus or mouth of another person.

Fahri said the provision so narrowly define “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” that only males could be charged with such an offence.

If a woman uses a vibrator to penetrate a man’s anus and she derives sexual pleasure from it, would that not be ‘carnal intercourse against the order of nature’ in the ordinary sense of the word?” he said.

Fahri argued that the section invaded the right to privacy provided under the Federal Consti­tution as it criminalised consensual sexual acts between two persons.

This led Justice Suriyadi to ask: “Are you saying that homosexuals among consenting adults is legal? In other words, what happens in the bedroom is none of the Government’s business?”
Abdul Rahim, 39, pleaded guilty to committing the offences at a flat in Gombak in Selangor between April 18 and May 8, 2007.

Deputy Public Prosecutor V. Shoba submitted that the argument on the constitutionality of the sections was unfounded, noting that the victim was a 15-year-old boy, who, according to the law, was incapable of giving consent to such an act. — Bernama

This case had argues about carnal intercourse against the order of nature. Actually this issue is quite interesting because a lot of people do not realise what they done on the bedroom may contrast with the law in our country although it is only applied on man.

What is Panel Code Section 377a and Section 377b? I think this is a lot of people feel curious about this 2 Panel Code. This is because this 2 Panel Code control them when they are in orgasm.

Panel Code Section 377A - Carnal intercourse against the order of nature.
Any person who has sexual connection with another person by the introduction of the penis into the anus or mouth of the other person is said to commit carnal intercourse against the order of nature.
Explanation - Penetration is sufficient to constitute the sexual connection necessary to the offence described in this section.

Panel Code Section 377B - Punishment for committing carnal intercourse against the order of nature.
Whoever voluntarily commits carnal intercourse against the order of nature shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to twenty years, and shall also be liable to whipping.

I think those panel codes are very important to everyone especially man because they have to think before do. If they not concern about it, they may be have to pay for their behaviour.

Prepared by,

Fong Yok Yan (1071120015)