On 15th April 2014 the Supreme Court of India gifted
India with the recognition of a new gender – Transgender. By allowing the
petition filed by National legal Services Authority, the Court held that
trans-genders have the right to equality under Article 14 and the right to live
with dignity under Article 21.
The Court defined
Transgender to mean a person whose gender identity, gender expression
or behavior does not conform to their biological sex.
Transgender are persons who do not identify with their sex assigned at birth,
which include Hijras/Eunuchs and they do not identify themselves as either male
or female. Hijras are not men by virtue of anatomy appearance and
psychologically, they are also not women, though they are like women with no female
reproduction organ and no menstruation. Since Hijras do not have reproduction
capacities as either men or women, they are neither men nor women and claim to
be an institutional “third gender”. Among Hijras, there are emasculated
(castrated, nirvana) men, non-emasculated men (not castrated/akva/akka) and
inter-sexed persons (hermaphrodites). Transgenders also include persons who
intend to undergo Sex Re-Assignment Surgery (SRS) or have undergone SRS to
align their biological sex with their gender identity in order to become male
or female. Further, there are persons who like to cross-dress in clothing of
opposite gender, i.e transvestites.
Gender Identity and
Sexual Orientation
The Court differentiated
between gender identity and sexual orientation. Gender identity refers to each
person’s deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or
may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth, including the personal sense
of the body which may involve a freely chosen, modification of bodily
appearance or functions by medical, surgical or other means and other
expressions of gender, including dress, speech and mannerisms. Gender identity,
therefore, refers to an individual’s self-identification as a man, woman,
transgender or other identified category. While sexual orientation refers to an
individual’s enduring physical, romantic and/or emotional attraction to another
person. It includes within its ambit transgender and gender-variant people with
heavy sexual orientation and their sexual orientation may or may not change
during or after gender transmission which also includes homosexuals etc.
By keeping in mind the
above difference and identifying the need to adhere to international
obligations under the UDHR, ICESCR, ICCPR and Yogakarta Principles the Supreme
Court of India recognized the need to protect the rights of transgenders.
Due to the absence of suitable legislation protecting the rights of the
members of the transgender community, they are facing discrimination in various
areas and hence the necessity to follow the International Conventions to which
India is a party and to give due respect to other non-binding International
Conventions and principles. Constitution makers could not have envisaged that
each and every human activity be guided, controlled, recognized or safeguarded
by laws made by the legislature the Court relied on the following points while
guaranteeing the much needed rights:
Article 14: Article 14 of the Constitution of India ensures equal
protection and therefore imposes a positive obligation on the states to ensure
the same. Article 14 does not restrict the word ‘person’ and its application
only to male or female. Hijras/transgender persons who are neither male/female
fall within the expression ‘person’ and, hence, entitled to legal protection of
laws in all spheres of State activity, including employment, healthcare,
education as well as equal civil and citizenship rights, as enjoyed by any
other citizen of this country.
Article 15 & 16: prohibit discrimination against any citizen on certain
enumerated grounds, including the ground of ‘sex’. In fact, both the Articles
prohibit all forms of gender bias and gender based discrimination. Both gender
and biological attributes constitute distinct components of sex. The
discrimination on the ground of ‘sex’ under Articles 15 and 16, therefore,
includes discrimination on the ground of gender identity. The expression ‘sex’
used in Articles 15 and 16 is not just limited to biological sex of male or
female, but intended to include people who consider themselves to be neither
male or female.
Article 19:
Provides that all persons have the freedom of speech and expression. Therefore
no restriction can be put on the basis of appearance, dressing, words or any
other form. However this is subject to Article 19(2). Gender identity lies at
the core of one’s personal identity, gender expression and presentation and,
therefore, it will have to be protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the
Constitution of India.
Article 21: Article 21 protects the dignity of human life, one’s
personal autonomy, one’s right to privacy, etc. Right to dignity has been
recognized to be an essential part of the right to life and accrues to all
persons on account of being humans. Recognition of gender forms the essence of
human dignity. Legal recognition of gender identity is, therefore, part of
right to dignity and freedom guaranteed under our Constitution.
Keeping in mind the
above points the Supreme Court held that Hijras, Eunuchs, be treated as “third
gender” for the purpose of safeguarding their rights under Part III of
Constitution of India. The Court directed the Central and State Governments to
recognize this new gender identity, treat them as socially and educationally
backward classes of citizens and extend all kinds of reservation in cases of
admission in educational institutions and for public appointments. Further
steps must be taken operate separate HIV Sero-survellance Centres since Hijras/
Transgenders face several sexual health issues and steps must be taken to
address the problems being faced by Hijras/Transgenders such as fear, shame,
gender dysphoria, social pressure, depression, suicidal tendencies, social
stigma, etc. and any insistence for SRS for declaring one’s gender is immoral
and illegal. Lastly, the Court insisted on proper steps should be taken
measures to provide medical care to Transgenders in the hospitals and also
provide them separate public toilets and other facilities.
In our opinion this is a
remarkable judgment and addresses the need of the hour – recognition of
alternate genders. This judgement, understandably contains a disclaimer stating
that the issue of constitutionality of Section 377 of IPC is finally settled in NAZ
foundation and therefore reserves its opinion on the same. It
is interesting to note that the Supreme Court in its judgement in NAZ relied
on a binary understanding of the term ‘gender’
while categorizing homosexual intercourse as “against the order of
nature”. This presumption of the existence of only two genders must affect
the understanding of the Court as to the true meaning of the “order of nature”.
No comments:
Post a Comment