EHRC Chair Says Questioning Integrity Of Supreme Court Is "Unacceptable"
Campaigners from Sex Matters and For Women Scotland stand outside the Supreme Court as the hearing on the definition of 'woman' begins, November 2024 (Credit: Vuk Valcic/Alamy Live News)
3 min read
Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) chair Baroness Falkner has said it is "unacceptable" for people to "question the integrity of the judiciary, or indeed the regulator, as some have done" in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling on biological sex.
In mid-April, the UK Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a woman is defined by biological sex under the Equality Act, in a case brought and won by campaign group For Women Scotland against the Scottish government.
Scottish ministers had argued that trans people with gender recognition certificates (GRCs) had the same sex-based protections as women born female, but the Court's interpretation of the law disagreed with their view.
After the ruling, the EHRC published an interim update setting out its implications. For example, the regulator explained that in workplaces and services open to the public trans people should only be permitted to use the single-sex facilities of their biological sex.
The Green Party described the information in the EHRC update as "ill-considered and impractical", said it would cause "further confusion", and called for its withdrawal.
In messages leaked from the Labour MPs' LGBT+ WhatsApp group, minister Angela Eagle said the EHRC update could be "catastrophic" while minister Chris Bryant appeared to agree with Labour MP Steve Race that Falkner had been "pretty appalling" in a BBC Radio 4 appearance.
In a piece for The House, Falkner wrote: "Naturally parliamentarians will highlight constituents’ concerns. They will articulate whether they believe the law strikes the right balance between different rights. But it is unacceptable to question the integrity of the judiciary, or indeed the regulator, as some have done."
Some MPs have complained that the ruling has given rise to confusion, raising more questions than it answers.
Sarah Owen, the Labour chair of the Women and Equalities Select Committee, said in the Chamber: “Far from this ruling providing clarity, trans intersex and non-binary people are instead anxious and unsure about where this ruling leaves them, legally and practically, as they go about their lives.”
Meg Hillier, Labour chair of the Treasury Committee, asked the government whether a constituent of hers who transitioned in the 1970s would now have to start using different toilets after decades of using the women's facilities.
The EHRC chair urged "every legislator to read the judgment in full", adding: "I regret any uncertainty among duty bearers and the public that has been fuelled by misunderstanding and distortion, particularly across social media. The judgment is a model of clarity."
PoliticsHome understands that there has been some frustration from within the EHRC that people appear to be waiting for guidance from the watchdog before acting on the Supreme Court ruling. The EHRC does not make the law but simply sets out the implications for affected bodies, so has made clear that employers and others should comply with the judgment immediately.
Falkner also wrote that the independent equality and human rights regulator intends to submit an updated statutory Code of Practice for services for ministerial approval by the end of June, and to launch a public consultation on understanding the implications of the court's judgment in May.
Victoria McCloud, Britain’s first transgender judge, has announced plans to apply to the European Court of Human Rights to bring action against the UK over the Supreme Court's ruling.
