The UK’s highest court has rejected an appeal by a prominent campaigner to allow gender neutral passports in the country.
The decision follows a 25 year battle by Christie Elan-Cane to achieve legal and social recognition for non-gendered identity.
Elan-Cane, who themself identifies as gender neutral, had argued that Elan-Cane, who themself identifies as gender neutral, had argued that it was a breach of the UK’s existing human rights protections to force people to identify as either male or female on the official travel documents.
Instead, they campaigned for gender neutral people to have the option of entering ‘X’. However, the UK courts have now ultimately rejected this.
Christie Elan-Cane argued that the application process requiring individuals to indicate their gender is unlawful.
The President of the Supreme Court, Lord Reed, found that Elan-Cane’s interest in being issued with an ‘X’ passport was “outweighed” by other considerations – including “maintaining a coherent approach across government” as to what genders are recognised.
Lord Reed said in the ruling: “The form is concerned with the applicants’ gender as a biographical detail which can be used to confirm their identity by checking it against the birth, adoption or gender recognition certificates provided and other official records [and] it is therefore the gender recognised for legal purposes and recorded in those documents which is relevant.”
He continued: “There is no legislation in the United Kingdom which recognises a non-gendered category of individuals.
“On the contrary, legislation across the statute book assumes that all individuals can be categorised as belonging to one of two sexes or genders, terms which have been used interchangeably.”
Back in March 2020, appeal court judges ruled the right for a gender neutral passport was “beyond argument” – but said government did not breach the law.
Read more:
Following today’s ruling, Elan-Cane tweeted: “The UK government and judicial system are on the wrong side of history.
“This is not the end – we are going to Strasbourg.”
The French city of Strasbourg, as referred to by Elan-Cane, is home to the European Court of Human Rights – which Britain is still a member of – and if this action goes ahead, it is said that it would allow “more scope” on how to interpret rulings and legislation.
Featured Image – Unsplash (Ethan Wilkinson)
