Legal clarity sought from Belfast High Court on Supreme Court gender ruling
Guidance will be sought from the High Court in Belfast over the effect a landmark Supreme Court ruling on gender will have in Northern Ireland.
The Equality Commission in Northern Ireland has said that there is 'significant' legal uncertainty in the wake of the ruling, including how it interacts with existing equality law and with Article 2 of the Windsor Framework.
Chief Commissioner of the Equality Commission Geraldine McGahey said they would consult with other parties on whether they wish to join the legal proceedings on the 'nuanced and complicated' issue.
Ms McGahey said through referring the issue to the courts, they hoped to avoid 'the toxicity which has sometimes characterised the debate'.
The Supreme Court in London declared in April that the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the 2010 Equality Act 'refer to a biological woman and biological sex'.
The ruling has been interpreted to mean that transgender women can be excluded from women-only spaces such as toilets and changing rooms.
However, the Equality Act 2010 does not cover Northern Ireland.
The Equality Commission was to prepare guidance on the ruling's potential implications on Stormont departments.
In a legal paper published by the Equality Commission on Friday, it said it would request legal clarity from the High Court.
The Commission said that once the High Court decides on the matter, and subject to any appeals, the Commission will then produce its draft guidance, which will be subject to further consultation.
Ms McGahey said: 'After much consideration and analysis, the Commission has concluded that the situation in Northern Ireland, in respect of this matter, is much more nuanced and complicated, and there is significant uncertainty due to our unique legal landscape.
'We have no interest in merely speculating as to how a court might determine these issues in the future. We will not answer these legal uncertainties by weighing the arguments 'for' and 'against'.
'It is important that the Commission shows leadership as people and their lives are at the heart of this issue.
'To achieve greater long-term certainty and clarity for all involved, the Commission will be seeking a declaration from the courts to address several questions regarding the significant legal uncertainties.
'Our equality laws do not sit in isolation; they interact with other laws and regulations for which the Commission does not have a remit.
'We believe other bodies and organisations will also require clarification on the legal position in relation to their own areas of work and may join the Commission in its legal proceedings.
'The Commission will issue Pre-Action Protocol letters to government departments and other public bodies with legal responsibilities potentially affected by the judgment and to other interested parties.
'The Commission will also commence a wider consultation process for all interested stakeholders.'
She said the Commission wants to give everyone the opportunity to engage and will welcome input from all stakeholders.
'We fully recognise the challenges faced by employers and service providers as they try to navigate these uncertainties,' she said.
'As this is an evolving area of law, we will keep our interim information for employers and service providers under review and offer advice on a case-by-case basis where the law is clear.
'Ultimately, maximising legal certainty and transparency is at the heart of our strategy.
'We aim to create a robust framework for offering guidance, rather than being subject to numerous legal uncertainties that may be contested in the courts over the coming years at potentially great cost to the public purse.
'By adopting this approach, we hope to avoid the toxicity which has sometimes characterised the debate around how to balance the rights of biological women and transgender women by creating a space for debate and adjudication by the courts.
'We believe our approach will be in the best interests of everyone in Northern Ireland.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
24 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘Unless you see it, you can't believe how bad it is': the peer demanding a minister for porn
When the Conservative peer Gabby Bertin arrived for a meeting with the the science and technology secretary, Peter Kyle, earlier this year she startled him by laying out an array of pornographic images across his desk. 'They were screengrabs showing little girls, their hair in bunches, and massive, grown men grabbing little girls' throats,' she says. She had selected images which appeared to depict child abuse, and yet were easily and legally available on a popular website. 'Unless you see it, you can't quite believe how bad it is.' The minister appeared shocked and upset by the images, she recalls, so she quickly tidied them away and later shredded them. Bertin has noticed that her desire to talk frequently and openly about extreme pornography is not shared by all her Westminster colleagues. 'I've definitely seen people swerve at lunch, not wanting to sit next to me for fear of what they're going to hear coming from my mouth,' she told fellow delegates at the launch meeting of her pornography taskforce this week, prompting a flutter of sympathetic laughter. Since being appointed by the former prime minister Rishi Sunak to lead an independent review into the regulation of online pornography in December 2023, Bertin has observed how a double taboo has made most politicians extremely reluctant to engage. Some simply find the subject hugely embarrassing; others stay silent because they do not wish to appear prudish by criticising the proliferation of extreme and often illegal pornographic material online. She is frustrated by this reticence. 'You can't leave the pitch on this stuff just because you're worried about being accused of being too strait-laced,' she says. The government needs urgently to appoint a minister for porn, she recommends, to ensure that the issue gets the attention it deserves, rather than being passed reluctantly between the Home Office and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. A former adviser to David Cameron, Bertin has gathered cross-party support for her work and says she emails Keir Starmer so regularly about the issue that she has 'practically become his pen pal' (if you can have a pen pal who delegates to officials the responsibility of replying). 'We're really British about it so we don't want to have a graphic conversation about sex and porn,' she says, in an interview in the Westminster office she shares with several other peers. 'But you've got to shout about it as loudly as possible. The reason why we've got into this mess is because nobody has really wanted to talk about it.' By mess she means a situation whereby online pornography (which is viewed by an estimated 13.8 million UK adults every month) is not regulated to the same degree as pornography watched in cinemas or videos, despite the fact that videos have been redundant for decades and vanishingly few people now visit cinemas to watch porn. The absence of scrutiny has created an environment where much of the content created is, she says, 'violent, degrading, abusive, and misogynistic'. She also means a situation where a member of her own party had to resign after twice watching porn (perplexingly tractor-themed) on his phone, as he whiled away time on the green benches in the House of Commons. 'People have slightly lost the plot on porn. Would someone 20 years ago have just taken Playboy into the Commons, and had it lying on their lap? It just shows what an extraordinary place we've got to,' she says. 'You can do what you like in your private life – I don't have a problem with that – but you can't watch porn in the House of Commons, and you shouldn't be watching porn at your desk. There's a place for these things and it's not in the office.' Her review, published in February, made 32 recommendations. Last week the first of these became government policy, when officials announced that pornography depicting strangulation would be made illegal. Her new taskforce of 17 people, bringing together representatives from the police, the advertising industry, anti-trafficking organisations and violence against women charities, will focus on how to ensure harmful online content is better regulated, trying to bring parity between the scrutiny of offline and online content. She pays tribute to the 'hugely innovative side' of the porn industry, which has long driven technological advances in webcams and internet speeds, fuelled by the sector's enormous capacity to turn profit, but she has not invited any representatives on to the taskforce, wary of anything that might let the industry 'mark their own homework'. This week Ofcom announced that major online providers, including the UK's most popular pornography site, Pornhub, had agreed to implement stronger age-verification measures in compliance with the Online Safety Act, to prevent under-18s from accessing adult material. Those platforms that do not comply with the measures face being fined 10% of global turnover or being blocked in the UK. Ofcom is also responsible for monitoring whether sites distributing user-generated pornography are protecting UK viewers from encountering illegal material involving child sexual abuse and extreme content (showing rape, bestiality and necrophilia, for example). However, other forms of harmful pornography that are regulated in physical formats are not subject to similar restrictions online. It is this grey, unscrutinised area that Bertin's panel will focus on, as well as calling for better processes to respond to stolen content, working out how people depicted in pornographic videos can request that the clips be removed from sites, and how to build safety mechanisms into AI tools that create sexually explicit content. Officials at the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) guided her through short clips of extreme material to help her understand the nature of easily available harmful content. She remains disturbed by the material she saw – content designed to appear to be child sexual abuse, set in children's bedrooms – roles played by young girls, who may be over 18 but are acting as children. 'The titles are very problematic, things like: 'Daddy's going to come home and give his daughter a good seeing to' or 'Oops I've gone too far and now she's dead' or 'Kidnap and kill a hooker.'' This content would be prohibited by the BBFC in the offline world, but is unregulated online. During research for her review, she met representatives from global tech companies, and told them how when Volvo invented the three-point safety belt they gifted the patent to the rest of the industry because staff realised the innovation was so vital to raising safety standards. 'My pitch was that they have a duty and responsibility to double down on trying to get technology that can clean up these situations, and they should share that technology,' she says. 'Taylor Swift can whip a song off a website as soon as anyone tries to pirate it. There's no reason why the firms can't come up with technology to sort this out.' Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Posing for photographs, she edges away from a watercolour of Margaret Thatcher hung on the wall by one of her colleagues. 'Let's do it without Thatcher in the background. That's not my doing by the way – I share the office,' she says semi-apologetically, before rapidly adding: 'I mean I love Thatcher, obviously.' But she may be making an important distinction. In a 1970 Woman's Hour interview, Thatcher said the rise of pornography was a 'frightening' manifestation of a newly permissive society that she believed was undermining family life. Bertin describes herself as a liberal conservative and wants to be clear she is neither anti-porn nor running a moral crusade. 'Consenting adults should be able to do what they want; I have no desire to stop any kind of sexual freedom. But restricting people from seeing a woman being choked, called a whore, and having several men stamp on her – for example – is not ending someone's sexual freedom. This is the kind of content we want to end.'
Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
I was a Question Time panellist on an episode that left viewers LIVID - Fiona Bruce showed her true colours when the cameras stopped rolling
YouTuber TommyInnit's mum has revealed what it was really like starring on Question Time - including her experience with BBC host Fiona Bruce. The internet star, who goes by the real name of Thomas Michael Simons, 21, had his mum Sarah Simons in the audience when he took part in the show - and she went on to appear on the panel backstage during a recent episode of the BBC programme. Last Thursday's episode (19 June) saw the YouTuber, 21, Katharine Birbalsingh, 52, Adolescence writer Jack Thorne, 46, the secretary of state for science and technology Peter Kyle, 54, and MP Lord Willetts, 69, discuss on challenges growing up in the 21st century. Sarah took to her X account to share how much of a good time she had while appearing on the show. Sharing some pictures of her and her son in the studio, alongside a selfie with host Fiona, 61, she wrote: 'It was a surreal and wonderful experience to watch my lad be brilliant on BBC Question Time tonight. So proud of him.' She added: 'Obvs we did a few daft pics too. LOVE Fiona Bruce, she was glorious, and the BBC team was so kind and welcoming.' Many rushed to reply to the tweet to share the love. 'Absolutely LOVE this!! QT already my favourite Thursday tradition so this is a crossover…' 'Totally impressive performance by Tom last night. Measured and charming, a great combination. Distinct lack of young uns. Blaming the tools rather than their application.' 'That's amazing! Well done to both of you.' While watching the installment last week, some viewers shared how odd they thought it was that only one person on the panel was under the age of 45. Many took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to share their thoughts. 'I thought the Youth focused #bbcqt was a great and overdue idea. Until I saw the panel had an average age older than me.' 'Next generation you say?' 'Why is there only 1 actual youngish person on this panel? Comedy.' 'The average age of the panellists debating what it's like being young in Britain today? 48. Farcical.' At the start of the episode, Fiona said: 'For tonight's question time, we're asking a specially convened panel and audience about the challenges of growing up in the 21st century and what it means for all of us. 'Roughly half our audience is from what very generation - under 30 or mostly Gen Z and the rest are just a little bit older, but like every other week, they reflect the range of political views across the country. 'Welcome to Question Time - the next generation - from Greenford in West London on BBC, iPlayer and Sounds.' Despite their ages, the guests do all have their own opinions from their fields about the matter. Katharine Birbalsingh is a headteacher at the Michaela Community School. Many took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to share their thoughts She is known to be the 'UK's strictest headmistress'. Meanwhile Jack's latest Netflix hit Adolescence hit headlines earlier this year. Back in April it was revealed that 114 million people had watched the drama - which follows the story of a boy called Jamie Miller (Owen Cooper), who murdered his female classmate. It brought misogyny among young boys to light and the resulting potential for violence against women. TommyInnit - real name Thomas Michael Simons - has 15.1M subscribers on YouTube. Meanwhile Peter Kyle and Lord Willetts are figures in the political sphere.
Sky News
42 minutes ago
- Sky News
Son of 1994 Chinook helicopter crash victim 'furious' as documents 'sealed for 100 years'
The son of a victim of the 1994 Chinook helicopter crash has called for "truth and transparency" after the Ministry of Defence dismissed demands for a judge-led public inquiry. Families of the 29 people who died in the disaster have vowed to press on with seeking a judicial review in the High Court over the MoD's decision. RAF Chinook ZD576 crashed on the Mull of Kintyre en-route from RAF Aldergrove in Northern Ireland to a conference at Fort George in Scotland, killing all those on board, including 25 British intelligence personnel and four crew. A finding of gross negligence against the Chinook's pilots, Flight Lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper, was overturned by the UK government 17 years later following a campaign by the families. The families launched legal action in a "letter before action" to the UK government, sent on 2 June - the 31st anniversary of the crash. They said they will now pursue a judicial review after the MoD rejected their demands for a public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the incident. Andy Tobias, who was eight when his father Lt Col John Tobias died in the crash, told Sky News he and other relatives of the victims were "absolutely furious" to learn files have been sealed for 100 years. "All it's done is create a huge vacuum of suspicion regarding what's in those documents, and what does it mean about our fathers and our brothers who died in that crash," he said. "It feels very deceitful, it feels very unfair, and you don't lock stuff away unless there's something you really don't want people to know." Mr Tobias said he wants to know why his father boarded an aircraft that was not airworthy, adding: "All we're after is truth and transparency about the circumstances of that crash." He added: "My childhood was stolen from me because someone decided my dad and his colleagues should be put on a helicopter that was not fit for purpose. "The MoD had a duty of care to those on board, and they failed that catastrophically by making them fly in an unairworthy aircraft with well known and documented issues and by doing so they stole their right to life. "My mum, my brother, I and all the families deserve the truth and the MoD must repay the honour and integrity that those on board had shown in their years of service to their country." The families, who have formed the Chinook Justice Campaign, claim failing to order a public inquiry is a breach of the government's human rights obligations. Nicola Rawcliffe, whose brother Major Christopher Dockerty was killed in the crash, said she was "furious and disgusted" with the MoD's decision. "The MoD is continuing to deceive our families and disrespect our loved one's memories by claiming that the many previous inquiries investigated all the facts, but we now know the aircraft was not airworthy." She added: "My brother was only 33 years old. He gave his life in service of his country and all we have had in return is dishonesty, deception and disdain from the Ministry of Defence." An MoD spokesperson said the Mull of Kintyre crash was "a tragic accident" and "we understand that the lack of certainty about the cause of the crash has added to the distress of the families". "We provided a detailed and considered response to the pre-action protocol letter stating the reasons why we cannot accept the demand for establishing a new public inquiry," the spokesperson added. "It's unlikely that a public inquiry would identify any new evidence or reach new conclusions on the basis of existing evidence. "The accident has already been the subject of six inquiries and investigations, including an independent judge-led review."
