UK: no to gender-neutral passports
Christie Elan-Cane, who defines herself as non-binary, lost her appeal to the Supreme Court in which she asked to be transcribed in documents as gender the interest in the definition of sex in public documents is paramount

Share this article

The ruling of the English Supreme Court, which denies gender neutral registration in the passport, is particularly interesting because makes the public interest prevail over that of the person asking to be transcribed as non-binary. In fact, he says that if in one's personal relationships one can ask to be treated and named as one believes - with the agreement of the interlocutors - in public life the certainty of sex is relevant and therefore pre-eminent.

An activist has lost his Supreme Court case challenging the government's refusal to issue gender-neutral passports.

Christie Elan-Cane (pictured) said the refusal violates human rights laws by not allowing option “X.” But the court said that the sex of the applicants is “a biographical detail that can be used to confirm their identity”.

Christie Elan-Cane said the case will now go to the European Court of Human Rights.

The activist, who has been calling for legal recognition of neutral identity for decades, said on Twitter that “The UK government and justice system are on the wrong side of history." and “this is not the end”.

Gender-neutral passports are already issued by Argentina, Australia, the United States, Canada, Denmark, India, Malta, Nepal, the Netherlands -actually in the Netherlands you cannot indicate gender X, but you can request to omit the sex from the documents, ndt– New Zealand and Pakistan, while Germany has introduced the intersex category –very rare genetic condition that has nothing to do with transgender, ed.-.

The Supreme Court unanimously rejected Christie Elan-Cane's appeal, which came after the Home Office won an earlier Court of Appeal ruling.

Lord Reed, Chief Justice, said in the ruling that gender could be checked against birth, adoption or gender recognition certificates as part of confirming the applicant's identity.

“It is the gender recognized for legal purposes and recorded in those documents that is relevant,” he said.

He also said that Christie Elan-Cane's interest in having an “X” passport is outweighed by other considerations, including “maintaining a consistent approach across the administration.”

“There is no legislation in the UK that recognizes a genderless category of individuals,” he explained.

He also said the legislation assumes that all people can be classified into two sexes or genders – “terms that have been used interchangeably”.

At a hearing in July, Kate Gallafent QC, representing Christie Elan-Cane, told the court that genderless and non-binary people are forced to make a false declaration to obtain a passport, fact that “compromises the standards of honesty and integrity expected from such official procedures”.

But Lord Reed said that while the neutral identity may be central to Christie Elan-Cane's private life, the designation of an identity in a passport is not “a particularly important aspect of the applicant's existence or identity”.

Sir James Eadie QC, representing Her Majesty's Passport Office - which is part of the Home Office - said it was "obviously problematic and highly undesirable" for only part of the Government to recognize non-binary or gender identities.

He explained that this could result in a person being treated as one sex or gender by the Passport Office and a different one by other parts of the administration.

original article here, translation by Laura De Barbieri

You can give us your contribution by CLICKING HERE

or by sending to

BLU BRAMANTE CULTURAL ASSOCIATION

MANDATORY REASON: FEMINIST POST

IBAN: IT80C0200812914000104838541


Share this article
Scroll to Top