Nicola Sturgeon’s government has argued in court that claims that the human race is determined at birth and cannot be legally changed are “false”.
On the second day of the judicial review, Ruth Crawford K.S. Ms., representing Scottish ministers, said it was “absolutely clear” that British legislation allows a man to legally become a female and urged Ms Haldane to reject a case brought by feminist activists.
The Campaign group for Scotland’s Women argued that the Government’s SNP guidance stating that transgender women with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) as females in quotas in public councils should be considered illegal, as under the Equality Act 2010, women Biologists and trans women are separate. groups.
However, Ms Crawford said that under the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which the Scottish National Party is currently seeking to amend in Scotland to make it easier to obtain a GRC, a male-born can become a woman in the eyes of the law and “share” their legal protections.
It dismissed allegations that the Equality Act had effectively repealed parts of the previous legislation, meaning PRCs had become “little more than a symbol.”
Ms Crawford also denied that her position meant that trans men with a CS would be stripped of their rights, for example if they became pregnant, a situation her opponent described as “completely incoherent”.
Ms Crawford told the court at the hearing: “I would like to stress that the petitioner is wrong when he argues … that sex is a fact, not a law, and that there is no category of legal sex separate from biological sex.”
“My answer is that the word building of the statute is a matter of legal truism rather than a matter of fact.”
She conceded that a person’s biological sex could not be changed by obtaining a certificate, but insisted that “as a matter of law” it could be changed.
The gender of the acquired person [if they hold a GRC] lead to acquired sex, for all purposes, and thus a person’s sex can be changed through a change of law.”
“There are no contradictions between the two statutes, they have different purposes and focus on different matters.”
Aidan O’Neill of “Four Women Scotland” has accused the Scottish government of “inventing” the concept of legal rather than biological sex.
The feminist group won an earlier case against the Scottish government, in which judges ruled that SNP ministers had exceeded their powers by redefining the legal meaning of women, as defined in the Equality Act, by seeking to include all trans women in this category.
For Scotland’s Women has launched a new judicial review after ministers changed their guidance to say trans women with a collegiate think tank would still be considered female, a position they say goes against the original ruling.
The new ruling will have implications far beyond Holyrood public councils legislation, passed in 2018, as it will help determine how the Equality Act and Gender Recognition Act interact, a contested area between gender equality activists and transgender rights activists.
Mr O’Neill, in response to Ms Crawford’s arguments, claimed that Scottish ministers had “fallen into inconsistency” by claiming that rights on some occasions are based on biological sex, for example if a transgender man becomes advanced, but not in other scenarios .
“It’s a recipe for chaos,” he said. “Our position is consistent and coherent – that there is only one definition of sex, and that is a biological one.
“What respondents are saying is that there is a choice-and-mix approach. Sometimes, if it suits them, it means biological women. Other times, if it suits them, it means biological women as well as well-rounded men.”
“How can anyone, without a coherent theory of legal interpretation behind this choice-and-mix approach, apply the law? Scottish ministers are everywhere.”
Ms Haldane said she would issue her ruling “in due course”.