A campaigner has lost a Court of Appeal challenge over gender-neutral passports.
Senior judges ruled against Christie Elan-Cane, who brought a challenge relating to “X” (for unspecified) passports.
In a statement after the judgment was handed down, Elan-Cane said the decision was “devastating”.
“It is bad news for everyone who cannot obtain a passport without the requirement imposed by the UK Government that they should collude in their own social invisibility,” the campaigner said.
Elan-Cane has fought for legal and social recognition for non-gendered identity for more than 25 years, and believes the UK’s passport application process, which requires individuals to indicate whether they are male or female, is “inherently discriminatory”.
'X' PASSPORTS
I regret to inform that the Appeal Court has ruled in the UK government's favour in a judgment handed down this morning.
We intend to seek permission for the case to be heard at the Supreme Court.
— Christie Elan-Cane (@ChristieElanCan) March 10, 2020
During a hearing in December, lawyers representing Elan-Cane argued that the Government’s current policy on gender-neutral passports is “unlawful” and breaches human rights laws.
But, in a ruling on Tuesday, three senior judges dismissed the appeal.
The case, which was contested by the Home Office, was taken to the Court of Appeal after a judicial review action was dismissed by the High Court in June 2018.
The appeal centred on the lawfulness of the current policy administered by Her Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO), which is part of the Home Office.
It was argued that the policy breaches the right to respect for private life, and the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of gender or sex, under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel