Hong Kong Debates Same-Sex Partnership Registration Amid Fiery Legislative Remarks, Contrasting with Asian Peers

The Hong Kong government tabled a bill in the Legislative Council (LegCo) proposing a “same-sex partnership registration scheme” to comply with a landmark 2023 Court of Final Appeal (CFA) ruling in Sham Tsz Kit v Secretary for Justice. The CFA mandated that by October 2025, the government must establish a legal framework to recognise same-sex partnerships and safeguard their fundamental rights, following years of legal battles highlighting the lack of legal protections for same-sex couples in areas like housing, inheritance, and medical decision-making. The proposed scheme aims to address this by allowing same-sex couples legally married overseas to register in Hong Kong, granting limited rights such as medical decision-making, hospital visitation, and handling of posthumous affairs, but excluding inheritance, housing, or tax benefits. The bill, driven by the need to uphold the CFA’s ruling and avoid further judicial challenges, sparked heated debate during a special LegCo Constitutional Affairs Committee meeting on 3 July, with some lawmakers’ provocative remarks drawing public attention. Meanwhile, other Asian jurisdictions like Taiwan, Thailand, Japan, and Singapore offer contrasting approaches to same-sex partnership recognition.

Government’s Position and Proposal Details

Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Chris Tang stressed that the government is constitutionally obliged to implement the CFA ruling, which found that the absence of a legal framework for same-sex partnerships violated couples’ rights under the Basic Law. The registration scheme, Tang clarified, is “entirely distinct from same-sex marriage” and does not undermine the “one husband, one wife” marriage framework. The proposal imposes six conditions, including that applicants must be at least 18 years old, at least one partner must be a Hong Kong resident, and the couple must have a valid overseas same-sex marriage. Tang urged lawmakers to respect the CFA’s ruling to ensure compliance with the rule of law, a call that met fierce resistance from some pro-establishment figures.

Lawmakers’ Outburst: Junius Ho’s Controversial Remarks

Election Committee lawmaker Junius Ho vehemently opposed the proposal, warning it would “harm generations to come” and questioning the CFA’s legitimacy. In a fiery outburst, he remarked, “Is the CFA always right? Under national security principles, if we can’t comply, just seek an interpretation from the NPC and sort it out. Why not consider that?” Ho dismissed Tang’s call to respect the judiciary, stating, “Why should I respect it? They [the CFA] got it wrong.” Labelling the bill’s timing—tabled near the end of the LegCo session—as “hasty and irresponsible,” he accused the government of “passing the buck.” Ho previously wrote to LegCo in November 2023, urging an appeal to the National People’s Congress (NPC) for a reinterpretation, arguing the CFA ruling “effectively legitimises overseas same-sex marriages” and contradicts Chinese cultural values and traditional family norms.

Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) lawmakers echoed Ho’s opposition. DAB lawmaker Starry Lee cautioned that failing to uphold traditional marriage could lead to a future where “a mum might not be a woman,” stressing the need to preserve the “one husband, one wife” framework. Lee criticised the government for insufficient public consultation and questioned the bill’s impact on family values. Fellow DAB member Priscilla Leung called the proposal a “dark day for traditional values,” decrying the CFA for “forcing” the government to legislate and asserting that rejecting the scheme would still “uphold the rule of law.”

Moderate Voices and LGBTQ+ Response

In contrast, Election Committee lawmaker Ronny Tong adopted a more temperate stance, acknowledging Hong Kong’s reputation as a civilised society that should humanely address same-sex couples’ needs. He described the scheme as offering “the most basic” rights and urged colleagues to respect the CFA ruling to avoid undermining the judiciary. “I don’t support same-sex marriage either, but in this dilemma, how do we take this half-step? Colleagues should show more respect for humanity and civilisation,” Tong said.

LGBTQ+ advocacy groups offered mixed reactions. Critics argued the scheme’s restrictive scope—excluding inheritance and housing rights and requiring an overseas marriage—disadvantages couples with limited financial means and falls short of the CFA’s requirements. Activist Sham Tsz Kit, who attended the LegCo meeting, stressed that the community seeks only basic protections and urged society to understand their “modest demands.”

Same-Sex Partnership Policies Across Asia

Hong Kong’s proposed registration scheme aligns with a broader, uneven movement toward LGBTQ+ rights in Asia, where only Taiwan and Thailand have legalised same-sex marriage nationwide. Taiwan became the first Asian jurisdiction to legalise same-sex marriage in 2019, following a Constitutional Court ruling that declared the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples unconstitutional. The law grants same-sex couples most rights afforded to heterosexual couples, including adoption, though transnational marriages face restrictions. Thailand followed in January 2025, becoming the first Southeast Asian nation to legalise same-sex marriage after its parliament passed a bill redefining marriage as a partnership between two individuals, granting full legal rights like inheritance and adoption. Nepal also recognises same-sex marriages registered abroad, following a 2023 interim court order, though implementation remains inconsistent.

In contrast, Japan has made incremental progress without nationwide marriage equality. Several prefectures issue non-binding partnership certificates, offering limited benefits like hospital visitation rights, but the central government has not legalised same-sex marriage despite court rulings deeming the ban unconstitutional. Public support is strong, with nearly 70% favouring marriage equality, yet the conservative ruling party resists change. Singapore, while decriminalising same-sex acts in 2022, amended its constitution to block marriage equality, maintaining a stance against same-sex unions. Couples in registered marriages enjoy housing and adoption benefits unavailable to same-sex partners. Other countries like Cambodia offer limited local partnership recognitions in some cities, while places like Malaysia and Indonesia remain hostile, with homosexuality criminalised and minimal public support for same-sex marriage.

Public Reaction and Outlook

The debate has ignited widespread discussion in Hong Kong. Online, some netizens lambasted Ho’s remarks as divisive, with one user joking that his comments, if subtitled in English, could serve as a “reverse advertisement” for Hong Kong’s international image. LGBTQ+ groups, while welcoming the scheme as a small step towards equality, emphasised that full equality remains a distant goal, particularly compared to Taiwan and Thailand’s more comprehensive frameworks.

The bill awaits further deliberation in LegCo. The government faces a tight deadline to enact legislation by October 2025 to meet the CFA’s mandate, failing which it risks further legal challenges stemming from its failure to provide a framework that adequately protects same-sex couples’ rights. As Asia sees gradual progress in LGBTQ+ rights, Hong Kong’s approach—cautious and limited—reflects its balancing act between judicial obligations and conservative societal pressures, lagging behind regional pioneers like Taiwan and Thailand.