AMNESTY International has announced they will intervene in a landmark case that will see the Supreme Court answer the question, “What is a woman?”.
The court will hear the case tomorrow and answer the question following legal action by Edinburgh-based campaign group For Women Scotland.
The legal action will decide if trans men can be defined as women under the 2010 equality act which mandates 50% representation for women on public boards.
For Women Scotland will challenge SNP ministers on whether someone with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) should be treated as a woman under the 2010 equality act.
For Women Scotland aim to overturn a decision made by Scottish courts in 2023 which found someone with a GRC can be lawfully treated as a woman under the 2010 Equality Act.
This decision means trans women can be appointed to public boards and contribute to the 50% female representation obligation of the public board.
The case will be heard on November 26 and 27 in the UK Supreme Court with Global human rights campaigners Amnesty International stepping in to defend SNP ministers.
Amnesty announced yesterday that they would be intervening in the case, stating that “the existing protections must not be eroded”.
They added: “For a few years, Amnesty International UK has been increasingly worried about the deterioration of rights and quality of life for trans people in the UK.
“Sections of the media and politicians across parties continue to spend an eye-watering amount of time berating trans people, who are only about 1% of the population.
“Where does this interest come from and why has it been prioritised over the many issues facing women in this country?
“We decided to intervene in this case because we believe it is critical to set out why legal gender recognition is a human rights issue and why existing protections are right and necessary.”
For Women Scotland director Trina Budge said: “Not tying the definition of sex to its ordinary meaning means that public boards could conceivably comprise of 50% men, and 50% men with certificates, yet still lawfully meet the targets for female representation.
“However, the ramifications of this case are much more far-reaching, and all sex-based rights protected by the Equality Act are at risk.”
