The United Kingdom ratified the Istanbul Convention on 21 July 2022, committing to ensure protection from violence and discrimination for all women, without distinction, including on the grounds of gender identity. In view of the upcoming evaluation by GREVIO in 2027, ASSEDEL has assessed recent legal developments in the UK. This analysis finds that judicial and administrative changes risk placing the UK in breach of Articles 4(3) (non-discrimination) and 40 (sexual harassment) of the Convention.
The Redefinition of “Sex” in UK Law
In For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers, the UK Supreme Court ruled that the term “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 refers to biological sex. While transgender individuals remain protected under the characteristic of gender reassignment, they are not included in the legal category of “women” for the purposes of this Act—even when holding a Gender Recognition Certificate.
This interpretation allows service providers to restrict access to women-only spaces, including shelters, hospitals, and changing facilities, based on biological sex. Although framed as a matter of legal coherence, the ruling creates a separation between legal recognition and practical access to protections.
Administrative Guidance and Its Effects
Following the judgment, the Equality and Human Rights Commission issued guidance reflecting this interpretation, confirming that biological sex may be used to determine access to single-sex services.
In practice, this has increased the likelihood that transgender women will be excluded from spaces designed to ensure safety and privacy. Civil society organizations have warned that such exclusion may expose individuals to harassment, humiliation, and violence, particularly when they are required to use spaces that do not align with their gender identity.
Judicial Confirmation by the High Court
In R (Good Law Project) v Equality and Human Rights Commission, the High Court upheld the lawfulness of the EHRC’s guidance. The Court confirmed that public authorities may rely on the Supreme Court’s interpretation and apply a biological understanding of sex.
Importantly, the Court minimized concerns regarding involuntary disclosure of gender identity, describing it as a burden that individuals may be expected to bear. This reasoning has been criticized for overlooking the specific risks faced by transgender individuals, including discrimination and exposure to violence.
Implications Under the Istanbul Convention
These developments raise serious concerns under the Istanbul Convention. Article 4(3) requires that protections be guaranteed without discrimination, including on the basis of gender identity, while Article 40 obliges States to prevent and address conduct that creates degrading or hostile environments.
By enabling the exclusion of transgender women from protection services and increasing the risk of involuntary outing, the current UK framework may undermine both provisions. As emphasized by GREVIO, States must ensure that vulnerable groups—including transgender persons—have effective access to protection in practice, not only in law.
Conclusion and Recommendations
ASSEDEL concludes that the UK’s current approach risks creating barriers to protection for transgender women and may be incompatible with its international obligations. To address these concerns, the United Kingdom should:
- Align the interpretation of the Equality Act 2010 with the requirements of the Istanbul Convention
- Ensure non-discriminatory access to services and protection mechanisms
- Prevent involuntary disclosure of gender identity in service provision
- Assess the impact of single-sex policies on vulnerable groups
Final Remarks
Ensuring compliance with the Istanbul Convention requires that legal frameworks do not create gaps in protection for those most at risk. The recent developments in the United Kingdom highlight the need to reconcile domestic law with international human rights standards, in order to safeguard the dignity, safety, and equality of all women, including transgender women.