The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) issued a decisive judgment on 10 November 2026 that struck down the criminal provisions targeting consensual adult same-sex intimacy in Trinidad and Tobago. The ruling declared sections 13 and 16 of the Sexual Offences Act 1986 unconstitutional, ending a legal framework that had labelled LGBTQ+ people as criminals for over three decades. The judgment marks a turning point for a nation that, until now, was among roughly 34 Commonwealth countries still enforcing colonial-era bans on homosexuality.
Legal journey from the High Court to the Privy Council
In 2018, human-rights activist Jason Jones filed a pioneering suit in the High Court of Trinidad and Tobago, challenging the constitutionality of the 1986 Act’s sections 13 and 16. Section 13 criminalised “buggery” with a maximum sentence of 25 years, while section 16 outlawed “serious indecency” – punishable by up to five years – and uniquely extended the ban to women. The High Court ruled in Jones’s favour, finding the provisions violated the constitutional guarantee of respect for private and family life.
The Government appealed the decision, and in 2025 the Court of Appeal reversed the High Court’s outcome on the basis of the Constitution’s Savings Clause, which shields statutes dating back to colonial rule. Unwilling to accept that reversal, Jones escalated the case to the JCPC, the final appellate body for the twin-island republic. This was the first instance in which the Privy Council examined a decriminalisation challenge for LGBTQ+ rights.
Reasons behind the Privy Council’s ruling
The JCPC, sitting as Lord Reed, Lord Sales, Lord Burrows, Lord Briggs and Lady Rose, unanimously concluded that sections 13 and 16 of the 1986 Act were not protected by the Savings Clause. The judges held that the provisions represented new legislation enacted after the Constitution came into force, and therefore could be scrutinised against the fundamental rights enshrined in section 4(c) – the right to respect for private and family life. By applying the “reasonably justifiable” test in the constitutional proviso, the Court determined that criminalising private consensual same-sex conduct could not be justified in a society that respects individual freedoms.
The judgment stressed that the interference with an individual’s intimate life was “too severe” to satisfy the balance required by the proviso. No evidence was presented to show that the statutes served a legitimate aim beyond preserving outdated colonial traditions. Consequently, the JCPC affirmed the High Court’s view that the statutes must be disapplied.
Reactions and broader impact
Jason Jones welcomed the decision, stating, “Whilst I welcome this judgment, it does not, however, address the main issues of human rights and equality for LGBTQ+ people… They told LGBTQ+ people that we were criminals in our own country. That message ends today.” The ruling was hailed by Bell Ribeiro-Addy MP as a victory not only for Jones but for LGBTQ+ individuals across the Commonwealth, emphasizing the responsibility of former colonial powers to support ongoing de-criminalisation efforts. Mr Anand Ramlogan SC, counsel for the Attorney General, described the outcome as “a landmark victory for gay rights, equal dignity and respect for private and family life in Trinidad and Tobago.”
Beyond the courtroom, the judgment signals a shift in public policy and societal attitudes. It dismantles a legal tool that had justified discrimination, harassment, and violence – experiences Jones himself endured after fleeing the country in 1996. With the statutes rendered void, law-enforcement agencies are now required to cease prosecutions for consensual adult same-sex activity, and the Equal Opportunity Commission of Trinidad and Tobago is poised to promote equal treatment under the law.
Several civil-society groups intervened in the case, including Colours Caribbean, The Silver Lining Foundation, OutBermuda, United Belize Advocacy Movement, and ILGA-NAC, underscoring a regional network committed to LGBTQ+ rights. While the JCPC’s provisional view upheld the High Court’s order, the Court will consider further written submissions before finalising any modifications to the offending sections.
The decision also reverberates across the 34 Commonwealth nations that continue to enforce similar colonial statutes. Legal scholars anticipate that the JCPC’s reasoning may influence future challenges in other jurisdictions, potentially accelerating a wave of de-criminalisation throughout the region.
