9 June, 2014 Trans* Jersey

Open letter to Jersey’s politicians on equal marriage

Why civil partnerships do not make for equal marriage

For those who think that they were made some kind of promise by the gay community that civil partnerships would be enough to ensure equality, I can confirm that no such promise was made by the trans community who have always known that civil partnerships do not provide true equality. As Jersey law stands, a person in a marriage or civil partnership who undergoes gender reassignment whilst still in that union is severely discriminated against.

A key part of a transgender person’s journey is acquiring their gender recognition certificate (”GRC”) after two years of living as their true gender. It is a legal document that means for all purposes you are the gender you present. It enables a trans person to have all legal documents amended, including their birth certificate. It also provides a degree of privacy protection for the trans person because it is an offence under the Gender Recogntion (Jersey) Law to “out” someone in possession of a GRC, for example, when giving an employment reference.

Under current Jersey legislation, at the point at which a trans person in a marriage or civil partnership applies for their GRC, they are forced to dissolve their union. Having done so, they are then expected to re-make their union using the vehicle appropriate to their gender and the gender of their spouse. The choice for transgender individuals in this situation is clear: either, do not apply for your GRC and continue having your official documents “out” you; or, change your official documents at the cost of losing your legal ties to your family.

Anyone who has been through a divorce will know that not only are there costs involved, emotional and financial, but also that a divorce immediately stops the continuation of joint arrangements, such as pension provisions, insurance policies and wills, some of which cannot be re-started without severe penalty. And, if the union has produced children, the situation gets even more complicated. I think that all sides of the marriage argument would agree that nobody should be forced to go through a divorce.

In 2006, the International Commission of Jurists and the International Service for Human Rights developed a set of international legal principles on the application of international law to human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity. These were called the Yogyakarta Principles and, whilst not adopted as an international standard, are cited by UN bodies and national courts, and many governments have made them a guiding tool for defining their policies in the matter. The European Commissioner for Human Rights has endorsed the Yogyakarta Principles, in particular principle number 3, and considers them an important tool for identifying the obligations of states to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of all persons, regardless of their gender identity.

Yogyakarta Principle number 3 states that, “Each person’s self-defined sexual orientation and gender identity is integral to their personality and is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom… No status, such as marriage or parenthood, may be invoked as such to prevent the legal recognition of a person’s gender identity.”

Whilst legislation exists that gives opposite-sex couples a different piece of paper from same-sex couples, there will always be an inequality at the heart of the island’s laws. Jersey is proudly bringing in the first piece of anti-discrimination legislation later this year and, yet, enshrined within its laws is a nasty little “gotcha” that discriminates against a person in a marriage or civil partnership who transitions. If Jersey is serious about improving its human rights credentials on the world stage, it needs to adopt the Yogyakarta Principles as an internationally recognised model of best practice and address anomalies within its legislation such as this.

This is why Trans* Jersey is supporting Guernsey’s proposition for a Union Civile that requires all couples, regardless of gender, to wed in a civil ceremony that registers the union for legal purposes. Having done the legal part, couples who then wish to seek a church service aligned to their religious beliefs regarding marriage can do so. This solves the argument over the definition of marriage that exercises religious and secular groups, and it enables a transgender person to acquire their GRC and alter the gender on their Union Civile certificate without having to divorce. It is an elegantly simple solution to the problem and one that we hope Jersey will also propose, debate and pass.

15 May, 2014 Trans* Jersey

Legislative revisions

Equality Act 2010: Jersey is addressing the provisions of this law with its own anti-discrimination legislation. You can find out more about the public consultation process here.

Gender Recognition Act 2004: This Act directly affects trans islanders who wish to apply to the UK for their gender recognition certificate (GRC). Although Jersey has it own Gender Recognition (Jersey) Law 2010, it merely provides for a GRC from another jurisdiction to be registered in the Royal Court. You can find out more about this law here.

Trans* Jersey supports the calls to simplify the process of acquiring a GRC and to retain the protections afforded to trans individuals in possession of a GRC.

Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013: The Spousal Veto is the most pressing issue raised by the new legislation in England and Wales, and more information can be found about it here.

The Spousal Veto does not exist within Scotland’s legislation and Trans* Jersey are therefore advocating that, when Jersey brings in its own version of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act, it follows the example of Scottish law.

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973: Under Section 12(h) (non disclosure of gender history) of this Act, a marriage can be voided on the grounds that the respondent is a person whose gender at the time of the marriage had become their acquired gender under the Gender Recognition Act 2004. The Act, however, does not state whether a marriage could be voided on the grounds that the spouse is transgender but not in possession of a GRC. There is, therefore, a discrepancy between the way that the law treats trans individuals who hold a GRC and those who do not.

Jersey has followed the UK with the Matrimonial Causes (Jersey) Law 1949, which has similar provisions to the above in paragraphs 18(h) and 18(i). Trans* Jersey would like to see these clauses removed from Jersey law.

Application of EU law to pension claimants: GIRES explains this issue as follows:

Trans women who have undergone gender reassignment surgery qualify for a Category A retirement pension under the direct effect of European Union Directive 79/7. Well established European Court of Justice (ECJ) case law indicates that once direct effect is established, it cannot be removed by a national law that introduces more burdensome conditions than in the Directive. The direct effect of Directive 79/7 has been set aside by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), which will only award a pension at the female pension age if the applicant holds a GRC.

Alas, for married applicants, they must currently divorce before they can receive GRC. This makes the award of a pension dependent on marital status and this is forbidden (on any grounds whatsoever) under Article 4 of the aforementioned Directive. Tribunals are unaware of their legal duty to enforce EU law and have little understanding of how EU law interacts with national law in matters of shared competence. It has not been appreciated that direct effect is by default, a part of national law and must be enforced.

Trans people are not being treated according to the law. Also, DWP is using procedural “initiatives” to delay Tribunal cases to deny justice. One such case had an appeal initiated over three years ago, has been postponed 6 times and “stayed” twice, was heard at the First-tier Tribunal nearly two years ago and has still not delivered a judgment.

Existing law should be enforced. The law firm dealing with such claims will be prepared to brief EHRC on the specific case law that has been set aside. A Judicial Review is being planned to address confidentiality issues related to trans service users of the DWP. A further case is being planned to address the use of domestic law to limit the rights to pensions awarded under EU law. The principle must be established that the law applies to trans people.

Trans* Jersey is currently undertaking research into how trans islanders are being treated with regard to pension provisions.

Trans* Jersey would also add into the legislative areas of concern for trans* people the following:

Sexual Offences Act 2003: Under Section 76 of this Act, a trans* individual can be prosecuted for obtaining sexual intimacy by fraud if they do not first declare their trans* history before intimacy occurs. The case of Chris Wilson is one such example and is explained in more detail here. It should be noted that there is no requirement for murderers, people with a history of domestic violence, soldiers with genitals that have been mutilated in the line of duty, bankrupts, etc to disclose their history before intimacy.

This is a nasty little “gotcha” that Jersey trans* people need to be aware of when dating in the UK. There is no equivalent law in Jersey.

19 April, 201413 May, 2014 Trans* Jersey

Jersey trans* law

Currently, there is only one piece of legislation in Jersey that is directly concerned with protecting transgender islanders: Gender Recognition (Jersey) Law 2010

This law deals with the process of issuing a gender recognition certificate (“GRC”), the legal effect of a GRC on existing marriages and civil partnerships, the general consequences of issuing a GRC, the prohibition on disclosure of information relating to a holder of a GRC, the requirement (or not) to alter public registers and clarification of those agencies exempt from the prohibition on the disclosure of information.

Jersey recognises that it does not have the required healthcare professionals who can make decisions based on appropriate evidence to grant an inidividual a GRC. The island, therefore, looks to bigger jurisdictions to undertake this process for its trans* citizens. Having obtained a GRC from a jurisdiction approved by Jersey, a GRC will then be granted by the Royal Court. Most islanders will, therefore, apply to the UK for a GRC, which can then be presented in Jersey’s Royal Court.

The UK’s Gender Recogntion Act 2004 covers the issuance of GRCs. The granting of a GRC is decided by The Gender Recognition Panel, a branch of HM Courts & Tribunal Service. It is formed from an administrative team and a judicial panel, made up of legal and medical members. The panel needs to be satisfied that the applicant has lived in their correct gender throughout the period of 2 years prior to the date of the application and intends to continue doing so until death. It is a matter for the panel to decide whether the medical evidence satisfies that test. The charity GIRES provides guidelines for applying for a GRC here.

It is to be noted that the LGBT Consortium in the UK have recently published a consultation paper stating that the Gender Recognition Act is no longer fit for purpose and requires reviewing.

Advantages of obtaining a GRC:

All legal documents, including your birth certificate, can be changed to your correct gender. Note: the States of Jersey will issue driving licences and passports in your correct gender without the requirement of a GRC.
A GRC prohibits those privileged with the information that a person is trans* from disclosing it to others. There are, however, quite a number of exceptions to this prohibition.

Disadvantages of obtaining a GRC:

If you are married or in a civil partnership, you will need to dissolve or annul the union before a full GRC can be obtained from the Royal Court. Note: this is not a requirement for marriages in the UK since the passing of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013.

New sex discrimination law

The States of Jersey launched a consultation on the next phase of discrimination legislation due to become law in September 2015. It includes gender reassignment discrimination.

This will be the second piece of legislation to directly concern trans* islanders. We therefore want hear your views in order to formulate a response to the consultation.

Please our consultation page to find out more about how you can get involved before 30 May 2014.