The initiative wants the Constitution to define marriage as a heterosexual union.
Committee chair Pedja Grbin of the ruling coalition's Social Democrats (SDP) said he was moving the adoption of the HDZ's amendments to eliminate suspicions, voiced during a plenary discussion yesterday, that the SDP wanted to obstruct the people's referendum will, contrary to a decision by the Constitutional Court.
"We all stated that we would honour the Constitutional Court's decision, even when we disagree with it," he said.
The committee also adopted an HDZ amendment whereby the definition of marriage as a heterosexual union, if citizens voted for it at the referendum, would be included in the Constitution article on the protection of the family, as requested by the initiative.
Goran Beus Richembergh of the ruling coalition's Croatian People's Party requested that parliament ask the Constitutional Court whether the referendum question, if citizens wanted the Constitution to define marriage as a heterosexual union, was in compliance with the Constitution.
"I feel sick to my stomach to have to participate in something that in the end means legitimising a dangerous movement... Various interpretations are possible as to the prevention of the further democratic development of society. What's worse, the door is open to numerous much worse initiatives. One has already been announced and I, as a member of a national minority, feel concern and shame that it occurred to someone to propose such a referendum question," he said.
Milorad Pupovac of the opposition Independent Democratic Serb Party said the Constitutional Court should have stated already if the referendum question was constitutional.
Nenad Stazic of the SDP was against asking the Court's opinion on the question. "The Constitutional Court spoke about the procedure of its own accord, without being asked. It did not speak about the question and evidently believes that the Constitution should limit the rights of a minority."
Vladimir Seks of the HDZ said there was no need to ask the Court if the referendum question was constitutional, while external committee member Ivan Kopric disagreed, saying the question was "quite complex" and that it should be considered "thoroughly and without exaggerated political emotions."
The committee also formed a 13-member working group to draw up constitutional changes, including on the SDP's proposal to lift the statute of limitations on politically motivated murders.