UK Human Rights Watchdog Faces Losing UN Seat Following Transgender Lobbying

File photo of a sign for unisex non-binary gender neutral toilet. (Victoria Jones/PA Wire)

The UK’s human rights watchdog may lose its seat at the U.N. Human Rights Council after it was put under review following lobbying by transgender activist groups.

Baroness Falkner of Margravine, chairwoman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said the watchdog experienced “targeted action” by campaign groups following its advice to the government in April, in which it backed the idea of defining “sex” as biological sex in the UK’s equality law.

In an article published on Monday in The Telegraph, the baroness said she’s “disappointed” that the EHRC now faces a special review by the U.N.’s Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI), which rates National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) on their compliance with the international standards called the Paris Principles.

If the EHRC loses its “A” accreditation status, it will lose independent participation rights at the U.N. Human Rights Council, its subsidiary bodies, and some U.N. General Assembly bodies and mechanisms, and the right to vote and hold governance positions at GANHRI.

The accreditation of an NHRI doesn’t reflect on a country’s own human rights record.

Baroness Falkner said campaign groups are using the accreditation process to “undermine” the EHRC’s statutory role.

Related Stories

Sunak Says UK Government Will Consider Defining Sex as Biological Sex in Equality Law

4/6/2023

UK Equality Watchdog Backs Plan to Define ‘Sex’ as Biological Sex

4/5/2023

“We were saddened to see that Stonewall and other campaigners chose to ‘go low’ with unsubstantiated claims about matters which have little to do with the daily lives of the people or groups who we are there to protect, instead of engaging with us to discuss our proposals to improve the balance of rights and protections,” she wrote.

In her letter to Minister for Women and Equalities Kemi Badenoch in April, the EHRC chair said the commission believes defining “sex” as biological sex the Equality Act 2010 (EqA) would provide clarification and reduce risks for employers, sports organisers, and other service users and providers.

There are nine “protected characteristics” under the EqA, including age, disability, race, religion or belief, marriage and civil partnership, sex, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, and pregnancy and maternity.

But under the Gender Recognition Act 2004, those who obtain a gender recognition certificate would have their acquired gender recognised as their legal sex, causing issues in many areas.

Baroness Falkner said the EHRC believes that defining “sex” as biological sex for the purposes of EqA would “bring greater legal clarity” in eight areas, such as data collection, single-sex spaces and sports, and helping “trans men” access female-specific supports and protections.

She also cited three areas where she said the change would be “more ambiguous or potentially disadvantageous” and transfer rights “from some trans women to some trans men.”

After the letter was published, Stonewall wrote to Katharina Rose, Geneva representative of GANHRI, on behalf of 30 LGBT activist groups, calling for a special review.

The group accused the EHRC of lacking political independence, being politicised and captured a the board level, opposing “the creation of a system of gender recognition based on legal declaration,” opposing “the legislative protection of trans people from conversion practices,” and issuing guidance on access to single sex spaces, which the campaign groups say “sought to enable greater exclusion of trans women,” who are born males.

According to the letter, the group had called for a special review in February last year, but was encouraged to instead submit evidence to the periodic review of the EHRC in September, which they did.

The EHRC was reaccredited with an “A” status in October last year.

Baroness Falkner said commissioners “absolutely refute” the assertion that they are “in cahoots” with the UK government, and their positions on sex and gender have “received support from parliamentarians across the party-political divides.”

Last week, the watchdog came under fire from the opposite direction after it recommended that the Office for National Statistics and governments in Westminster, Scotland, and Wales should “collect data on the experience of bullying in schools and education for children under 18, broken down by protected characteristics including sexual orientation and gender reassignment.

In a letter to Baroness Falkner, gender-critical group Sex Matters said it’s “very concerned” about the recommendation, which would require schools to ask children about “feelings of sexual attraction” and “whether they feel themselves to have a gender identity that is the same as or different from their body.

“These are adult concepts, and introducing them to children as identities they are expected to have and inviting them to declare them in response to adult questioning has clear child welfare implications,” the letter reads.

“It is also inappropriate framing of bullying, not based on understanding of child development or embedded in existing legal and policy frameworks about bullying in school. Bullying is not because of a feature of a child, but is a behaviour by the bully,” the group said.