Taipei, May 24 (CNA) Two of the 15 grand justices on the Constitutional Court that ruled in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage on Wednesday expressed dissenting opinions on the decision.
The Constitutional Court ruled that the Civil Code provisions that do not allow same-sex marriage are unconstitutional and asked the government to amend relevant laws within two years to protect gay couples' rights.
Article 972 of the Civil Code states that an agreement to marry "shall be made by the male and the female parties in their own concord."
Of the 15 grand justices on the Constitutional Court, Justice Wu Chen-huan filed a dissenting opinion, while Justice Huang Horng-shya filed a dissenting opinion in part.
According to Huang, it is a logical fallacy ruling that the Civil Code provisions are unconstitutional. She said that same-sex marriage is not a fundamental human right to be universally protected.
Citing Constitutional Interpretations No. 242, No.365, No.552, No.554 and No. 647, Wu said all of them state that a marriage is created by the consent of a male and a female.
While the Civil Code does not stipulate that a marriage is allowed to be between a man and a woman, it is established on the basis of union between a man and a woman, Wu said.
Huang said in her opinion statement that she supports legislating a law to give legal protection of civil union right to same-sex adults, but is not in favor of treating a union between two same-sex adults the same as a marriage between a man and a woman.