By Gabriel Princewill-
The Council of Europe’s Human Rights Commissioner has outrightly complained about the UK’s treatment of trans people potentially amounting to a breach of the ECHR regulations.
Michael O’Flaherty(pictured) is the commissioner for the council which operates the ECHR, and has written two relatively impactful letters today which could stir emotions on both sides of the emotive topic.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
Michael O’Flaherty, the Council’s human rights commissioner, wrote that Britain’s stance “could lead to widespread exclusion of trans people from many public spaces” and “may severely infringe on their ability to participate fully and equally in society.”
His intervention comes against the backdrop of an April Supreme Court ruling which confirmed that “sex” and “woman” in law mean biological sex and not gender identity.
The ruling unambiguously clarified the current state of the law, facilitating new Government guidance across schools, prisons, and public services, confirming that women’s-only spaces can be reserved for biological females.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
Setting out the salient aspects of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights that should be taken into consideration in this process, the Commissioner stridently warned against measures that could exclude trans people from many areas of life.
He also cautions against tendencies to view the human rights of different groups as a zero-sum game, noting that this approach builds on prejudice against trans people.”
In his letter on trans people ,O’Flaherty assertively states that it would be unacceptable to ask people what their sex is in order to ascertain what loo they should be using, and “legal uncertainty or to dissonance between the lived experiences of trans people and their treatment in law should be avoided.
”It is also to be recalled that not all trans people wish to obtain legal gender recognition, and in reality simply live according to their gender identity,” he adds. The letter is addressed to chairmen of the Commons Joint Committee on Human Rights and the Women and Equalities Committee…
‘I am aware that ‘support’ for a proscribed group is an offence under the Terrorism Act 2000,’ he writes, adding that ‘domestic legislation designed to counter “terrorism” or “violent extremism” must not impose any limitations on fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, that are not strictly necessary for the protection of national security and the rights and freedoms of others.
In a separate letter addressed to the Chairs of the Joint Committee on Human Rights and the Women and Equalities Committee, the Commissioner highlighted human rights standards that must be upheld in further steps following the UK Supreme Court’s judgment in For Women Scotland which sparked controversy at the time the ruling was made.
The ruling unambiguously clarified the current state of the law, facilitating new Government guidance across schools, prisons, and public services, confirming that women’s-only spaces can be reserved for biological females.
Setting out the salient aspects of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights that should be taken into consideration in this process, the Commissioner stridently warned against measures that could exclude trans people from many areas of life.
He also cautions against tendencies to view the human rights of different groups as a zero-sum game, noting that this approach builds on prejudice against trans people.”
In his letter on trans people ,O’Flaherty assertively states that it would be unacceptable to ask people what their sex is in order to ascertain what loo they should be using, and “legal uncertainty or to dissonance between the lived experiences of trans people and their treatment in law should be avoided.
”It is also to be recalled that not all trans people wish to obtain legal gender recognition, and in reality simply live according to their gender identity.” The letter is addressed to chairmen of the Commons Joint Committee on Human Rights and the Women and Equalities Committee…
‘I am aware that ‘support’ for a proscribed group is an offence under the Terrorism Act 2000,’ he writes, adding that ‘domestic legislation designed to counter “terrorism” or “violent extremism” must not impose any limitations on fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, that are not strictly necessary for the protection of national security and the rights and freedoms of others.’
He also encourages the government to reconsider protest-related provisions in the Crime and Policing Bill currently before the House of Lords, in particular the proposed new offence of concealing one’s identity.
In a separate letter addressed to the chairs of the Joint Committee on Human Rights and the Women and Equalities Committee, O’Flaherty raises concerns about the implementation of this year’s Supreme Court judgment in For Women Scotland.
‘It should be ensured that steps taken towards implementing the Supreme Court judgment avoid a situation where a person’s legal gender recognition is voided of practical meaning, to the extent that it leaves trans people in an unacceptable “intermediate zone”,’ he states.
In the UK, he states: ‘I observe a tendency to see the human rights of different groups as a zero-sum game. This has contributed to narratives which build on prejudice against trans people and portray upholding their human rights as a de facto threat to the rights of others.
Such a zero-sum approach risks certain inferences being drawn from the UK Supreme Court judgment that could lead to widespread exclusion of trans people from many public spaces.’
The Council of Europe oversees the European Court of Human Rights, which interprets the Convention.Tory shadow minister Claire Countinho branded Mr O’Flaherty’s intervention as ‘a ludicrous political stunt by an extreme activist masquerading as a neutral human rights expert’.
She added: ‘This Commissioner has previously called for children to be allowed to change their gender, said gender has nothing to do with biology, and demanded all countries introduce self-ID.’
Policing Of Gaza Protests May Also Constitute Breach
On a separate issue, Mr O’Flaherty wrote to Ms Mahmood calling for the Government to ensure that policing of protests over Gaza, since proscribing Palestine Action as a terror group, does not restrict the right to peaceful assembly.
This separately veiled rebuke comes against the backdrop of multiple arrests for supporting the group at demonstrations since its ban this summer.
He said: ‘Domestic legislation designed to counter ‘terrorism’ or ‘violent extremism’ must not impose any limitations on fundamental rights and freedoms, including the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, that are not strictly necessary for the protection of national security and the rights and freedoms of others.
Mr O’Flaherty also raised concerns that the Government’s Crime and Policing Bill currently going through Parliament may not comply with human rights laws.
Referring to a new offence under the Bill which would ban protesters from wearing face coverings, he said it raises questions over ‘necessity and proportionality’ when police have powers for people to remove face coverings in specific cases.
His warning comes as Ms Mahmood has announced further plans to bolster policing powers to consider more restrictions on repeat protests following a wave of pro-Palestine demonstrations.
Today’s intervention will fuel intense debate in the weeks and months ahead on a very controversial topic.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar