Trinidad and Tobago's long-running legal dispute over the criminalisation of consensual same-sex relations has reached a significant stage following a unanimous judgment by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on November 10, 2026.
The Privy Council, which serves as Trinidad and Tobago's final court of appeal, ruled in favour of Jason Jones, who challenged provisions of the country's Sexual Offences Act 1986 on constitutional grounds.
Editorial Insight
Key Highlights
Important points readers should notice.
The Privy Council delivered its judgment on November 10, 2026.
The case was brought by Jason Jones against the Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago.
Five judges unanimously allowed Jones's appeal.
The Attorney General's cross-appeal was dismissed.
The case concerned Sections 13 and 16 of the Sexual Offences Act 1986.
The court rejected the constitutional protection arguments under Sections 6 and 13 of the Constitution.
The case concerned Sections 13 and 16 of the legislation. Section 13 criminalises an offence described as buggery, while Section 16 addresses serious indecency. The provisions had been used to criminalise private, consensual sexual activity between adults of the same sex.
Jones argued that the provisions violated fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago, particularly the right to respect for private and family life under Section 4(c).
The five-member Judicial Committee unanimously allowed Jones's appeal and dismissed the cross-appeal filed by the Attorney General.
Editorial Analysis
Why This Matters
The judgment is significant for Trinidad and Tobago's constitutional and legal framework because it addresses the relationship between individual privacy rights and criminal legislation. It clarifies that laws enacted after the adoption of the Constitution cannot automatically receive protection from fundamental-rights challenges simply because similar offences existed under earlier colonial legislation. The decision also draws attention to the continuing legal consequences of colonial-era laws in Caribbean countries. For LGBTQ+ communities, the ruling addresses the criminalisation of private, consensual relationships between adults of the same sex. However, broader questions involving discrimination, equal treatment and social acceptance remain separate issues.
In its judgment, the court rejected the argument that Sections 13 and 16 of the 1986 legislation were protected from constitutional challenges as existing law under Section 6 of the Constitution.
The judges concluded that the provisions constituted new law rather than simply repealing and re-enacting earlier colonial-era legislation with modifications.
The court also considered whether the provisions could remain protected under Section 13 of the Constitution, which allows certain legislation passed through a special parliamentary procedure to operate despite inconsistencies with fundamental rights, subject to a constitutional test.
The Judicial Committee concluded that the criminalisation of private, consensual same-sex relations between adults was not reasonably justifiable in a society that respects individual rights and freedoms.
The judgment therefore resolved the central constitutional issues in Jones's appeal. However, the formal remedial process remains pending.
The court has invited further written submissions from the parties before making its final order concerning the modifications required to Sections 13 and 16. Its provisional view is that the order originally made by the High Court should be upheld.
The legal challenge began in 2017 when Jones filed proceedings against the Attorney General. The High Court ruled in his favour in 2018, finding that the disputed provisions violated constitutional protections. The Court of Appeal subsequently overturned important parts of that decision, leading Jones to appeal to the Privy Council.
The November 2026 judgment has brought renewed attention to the legal treatment of same-sex relationships in the Caribbean and the continuing influence of colonial-era legislation on constitutional rights.
