THE highest court in Singapore has upheld Section 377A of the Penal Code, the law that criminalises sex between men, rejecting arguments that the provision contravenes the Constitution. The three-judge Court of Appeal ruled that Section 377A did not violate the Constitution. The judgment added: "(The appellants') remedy lies, if at all, in the legislative sphere." The case came after a gay couple, and a man charged with having oral sex with another man in a public toilet, applied to the courts to void S377A, arguing it was discriminatory. In November last year, Mr Gary Lim, 44, and Mr Kenneth Chee, 37, who have been partners for more than 16 years, challenged S377A, arguing, for one thing, that it was discriminatory since it only targeted men and not women. It therefore breached the couple’s constitutional right to equality. There has been much debate in the Singapore Parliament and public sphere with regard to Section 377A. The two articles provided reflect the debate regarding this issue. Do you think that Section 377A of the Penal Code should be repealed? In about 1000 words, develop an essay that applies persuasive argumentative writing strategies to defend your position on this issue. Other than citing sources to provide supporting arguments for your position, you MUST anticipate objections and provide counterarguments to write the paper. Relevant information for you to evaluate and synthesise would be:  Definition of Section 377A of the Penal Code  Issues (moral, ethical, social and etc.) surrounding Section 377A of the Penal Code  Arguments for upholding Section 377A of the Penal Code  Arguments against upholding Section 377A of the Penal Code (100 marks)COR160 Tutor-Marked Assignment SIM UNIVERSITY Tutor-Marked Assignment – Page 4 of 7 Guidance Notes 1. Your reasoning must be good. 2. Strengthen your argument by using examples and illustrations. 3. You may include any additional but relevant information to the ideas that have already been given in the scenario and articles. 4. You should use at least 7 research sources to help you write your essay. The given articles are considered as a separate research source each and can count towards the 7 research sources. 5. You are to use credible and reliable sources to help you write this essay. Marks will be deducted for non-credible and unreliable content. 6. Remember to use accurate grammar, correct sentence structures and a tone appropriate to academic writing. Marks will be deducted for poor English.COR160 Tutor-Marked Assignment Article 1: Court upholds law banning gay sex It rejects case that Section 377A of Penal Code is unconstitutional THE highest court in Singapore has upheld Section 377A of the Penal Code, the law that criminalises sex between men, rejecting arguments that the provision contravenes the Constitution. In ruling that the provision is constitutional, the three-judge Court of Appeal yesterday rejected two separate challenges to strike down the law. Mr Gary Lim, 46, and Mr Kenneth Chee, 38, as well as 51-year- old Mr Tan Eng Hong, argued that the provision was discriminatory and should be declared void. Their case was that Section 377A infringed their right to equal protection under the law, as guaranteed by Article 12 of the Constitution, and violated their right to life and personal liberty, as guaranteed by Article 9. The offence carries up to a two-year jail term for men who commit acts of "gross indecency" with other men, in public or private. Mr Tan first filed a challenge against the statute in 2010 after he was charged with having oral sex with a man in a public toilet. Mr Lim and Mr Chee later filed their own challenge. Their cases were separately dismissed by the High Court last year but their appeals were heard together in July. Yesterday, in a 101-page written judgment delivered by Judge of Appeal Andrew Phang, the court held that "personal liberty" in Article 9 refers only to the liberty of a person from unlawful incarceration. The court rejected the arguments of the couple's lawyer, Senior Counsel Deborah Barker, that the phrase should be interpreted to include the right to privacy and personal autonomy of an individual to express love towards another person. As for Article 12, the court held that Section 377A passed a classification test used by the courts to determine whether a statute that differentiates between classes of persons is constitutional.COR160 Tutor-Marked Assignme