Scottish officials call the gender change legislation block ‘irrational’.
The Scottish government has published its legal arguments in an effort to overturn a block on gender reform legislation by the British government. The 22-page petition to the Court of Session asserts that Scottish Secretary Alister Jack’s concerns are “irrational” and unsupported by evidence.
MSPs passed the gender reform bill in December to simplify the process for transgender individuals to change their legally recognised sex. It would reduce the age requirement from 18 to 16, eliminate the requirement for a medical diagnosis, and reduce the amount of time applicants must have resided as their acquired gender.
Critics argued that permitting anyone to “self-identify” as a woman could have a negative impact on women’s rights and access to single-sex spaces such as refuges and changing rooms. In response, Mr. Jack utilised a Section 35 order to prevent the law’s enactment, arguing that it could result in “more fraudulent or bad faith applications.”
Attorneys for the Scottish government have challenged the Section 35 order on four grounds: that Mr Jack committed a “material error of law,” that his concerns about the safeguards in the Bill were “irrelevant” to the making of the order, and that his justifications were “inadequate,” rendering the order “illegal.” Additionally, they stated that they had not satisfied the three requirements for such an order.
Shirley-Anne Sommerville, secretary of social justice, informed members of the Scottish Parliament that the government had “no choice” but to challenge the order in an effort to safeguard democracy. A government spokeswoman responded that the government would “vigorously defend” its decision and maintain that the Bill would have a negative impact on reserved matters.
The Scottish government has submitted a 22-page petition to overturn a restriction imposed by the UK government in the ongoing legal dispute between the Scottish and British governments regarding gender reform legislation. Reforms in the Gender Recognition Bill are intended to make it easier for trans people to change their legally-recognized sex; however, this has prompted concern among those who argue that it could have repercussions for women’s rights and access to single-sex spaces.
The Scottish government has accused the UK government of committing a “substantial legal error,” as well as claiming that their concerns regarding the Bill’s safeguards are “irrelevant” and that their justifications are “inadequate.” Shirley-Anne Sommerville, secretary of social justice, stated that the government had “no choice” but to challenge the order and that it was an effort to safeguard democracy. In response, the government of the United Kingdom stated that it would “vigorously defend” its decision and maintain that the Bill would have a negative impact on reserved matters.
The Court of Session will now review the petition submitted by the Scottish government, with a decision anticipated in due course.
