Five British judges began hearing Jason Jones's appeal on July 8, 2026, in a case that will decide whether Trinidad and Tobago can keep its colonial-era law that criminalizes consensual sex between men. The hearing took place in the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council — a court that shares judges with the UK Supreme Court and serves as the final court of appeal for several Caribbean nations The Guardian.

The panel, which includes Lord Reed, Lord Sales and Lord Lloyd-Jones Supreme Court, framed the case around three main legal questions about sections 13 and 16 of Trinidad and Tobago's Sexual Offences Act from 1986 JCPC. The core question is technical but with real consequences: Did the 1986 law merely copy an older 1925 law, or did it substantially rewrite it? This matters because of something called a "savings clause" in Trinidad and Tobago's Constitution — a rule that shields old laws made before the country gained independence from being challenged as unconstitutional. If judges find that 1986 law was truly new legislation rather than just a repackaging of the old one, the savings clause's protection disappears, and the court can examine whether the law violates people's constitutional rights. The second question asks directly whether the law breaches the country's guarantee of fundamental rights. The third asks whether, even if it does, the law can be justified as reasonable in a society that respects individual freedoms.

This fight has been running for years. Jones, now 61, first challenged the law in 2017 The Guardian. In April 2018, a High Court judge ruled the law violated his constitutional rights to privacy and equality. That victory held for seven years. But in March 2025, an appeals court reversed the decision after the government's Attorney General intervened. A second appeals court ruling in January 2026 noted the case was already heading to the Privy Council, effectively putting other related legal challenges on hold.

The stakes reach far beyond one man's case or one country's law.

Trinidad and Tobago's Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar told The Guardian the Privy Council's reasoning about savings clauses could affect how courts treat many other old colonial-era laws across the Caribbean region. She framed it this way: if judges decide that a 1986 update counts as "new" legislation, they narrow what older laws get protected by savings clauses everywhere. That would shake the legal ground under dozens of inherited statutes that Caribbean nations have amended or reorganized since independence. This is why the government is fighting so hard — it is not chiefly defending the sex offense law itself, but defending the broader shield that savings clauses provide across the region's inherited legal code. One of the Prime Minister's lawyers called the hearing a "very good exercise" The Guardian.

For Jones, the argument is simpler. Parliament has had over a decade to repeal the law and has not. Under current statute, conviction carries up to five years in prison for consensual same-sex relations. The government's choice to appeal the 2018 court ruling — rather than accept defeat — signals, in his view, institutional resistance rather than simple legislative neglect.

The regional picture is mixed. The Bahamas decriminalized homosexuality in 1991; Britain itself repealed anti-homosexuality laws in several Caribbean territories in 2001. Courts in Barbados, Dominica, St Lucia, and Antigua and Barbuda have since struck down equivalent laws. But Grenada, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, and St Vincent and the Grenadines still criminalize anal sex as of now. A Privy Council ruling against Trinidad and Tobago's government would not automatically change law elsewhere, but as the final court for several Caribbean nations, its reasoning carries weight as persuasive guidance in comparable cases.

The technical question — whether a 1986 restatement of a 1925 law counts as new legislation — is old territory in Commonwealth legal tradition. Courts across the Caribbean have disagreed on this point before, which is precisely what makes this appeal significant. A clear ruling from the Privy Council on when a savings clause stops protecting old legislation would offer needed guidance for the entire region, settling a question that has produced contradictory answers so far.

The court is expected to issue its decision within three to six months The Guardian. Until then, the 2025 appeals court ruling — reinstating the law — remains the legal reality in Trinidad and Tobago.