Elections 2014: AAP's Mumbai manifesto supports LGBT rights

Apr 11, 2014, 08:37 IST | Varun Singh

While the party’s national agenda did not address the issue, its city-centric manifesto opposes Section 377, which criminalises homosexual relationships

After the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) faced the ire of the LGBT community for not including opposition of Section 377 in their national manifesto, they have added it in the Mumbai manifesto.

IN MUMBAI, FOR LGBT RIGHTS: Aam Aadmi Party’s Medha Patkar, Mayank Gandhi and Meera Sanyal release the party’s manifesto for the city at a press conference yesterday. PIC/PTI

On Thursday, six candidates of the AAP released the ‘Mumbai-centric’ manifesto of the party. While reading out key points of their declaration, AAP member Medha Patkar highlighted their support for equal rights. She stated that the party would oppose criminalisation of Section 377 that does not allow an individual to choose a partner of their choice.

When asked if the party is also in favour of gay marriage in the country, both Patkar and Meera Sanyal said that they would support it. 

A few weeks back, when the party had released their national agenda, there was a major uproar by the community for non-inclusion of their issues in the manifesto. 

However, its addition in the city’s manifesto may pacify the LGBT community. 

Aside from Section 377, the AAP also included the issue of housing, asking to increase the 269 square feet area of houses under the slum rehabilitation scheme, to 450 square feet. The party advocates that instead of giving free houses, the aim should be to provide affordable houses. 

During the release, Patkar also addressed the Ram Mandir issue that is part of the BJP’s manifesto, stating that it was an attempt to disrupt communal harmony. 

The agenda also spoke about minorities and OBCs and bringing abused and oppressed people at par with the rest of the country.

AAP against 377
Oppose criminalisation of homosexual acts under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, and reaffirm that the state should not infringe on the sexual rights of the consenting adults


Go to top