Human rights organisations have condemned a new UK government Code of Practice that they say will exclude transgender people from public life and increase discrimination against gender-diverse communities.
On 21 May, the UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) published an updated Code of Practice outlining how the Equality Act applies to services, public functions and associations.
The revised Code reflects the controversial April 2025 UK Supreme Court ruling that excluded transgender women from the legal definition of “woman” under the Equality Act.
The ruling led to confusion on how to manage same-sex spaces and services in the UK, with several organisations, such as the Girl Guides, announcing the exclusion of transgender girls and women. The Code aims to bring clarity to the matter, but critics say it fails miserably at doing so.
Draft Code Restricts Access to Facilities
Under what critics have described as the Code’s “gender policing” framework, individuals would be expected to use single-sex facilities according to their sex registered at birth rather than their gender identity, even if they have legally changed their gender marker.
Service providers could offer separate alternatives specifically for transgender people. Activists argue, however, that this would effectively create a “third sex” category of services, leading to the stigmatisation and forced outing of trans individuals.
The UK Parliament has 40 days to consider the draft updated Code. If there are no objections, it will become law.
Human rights groups have responded with strong criticism, describing the Code as unworkable, discriminatory and harmful.
Rights Groups Warn of Exclusion and Stigma
In a statement, organisations including TGEU, ILGA-Europe, IGLYO, OII Europe, EL*C, Rainbow Cities Network, the European Pride Business Network and the European Forum of LGBTI+ Christian Groups said the UK government “has completely failed trans people.”
They warned that the Code “will result in service providers excluding trans people from using services according to their gender identity.”
The organisations argued that, while the Code does not explicitly permit the complete exclusion of transgender people from services, its practical effect would be exactly that.
Under the proposed guidance, trans people could be prevented from using bathrooms that align with their gender identity. At the same time, they could also face exclusion from facilities corresponding to their sex assigned at birth if their presence is deemed to cause “distress” to others.
Critics say this would place transgender women at a disproportionately high risk of harassment and violence by forcing them into men’s facilities. Likewise, transgender men could find themselves barred from both men’s and women’s facilities because their appearance may not conform to others’ expectations.
Privacy and Human Rights Concerns
The draft Code also states that providers of single-sex services could request evidence of a person’s biological sex when concerns arise based on their appearance or behaviour, raising significant privacy and data protection concerns.
“The Code will lead to cruel and inhumane assessments and outcomes,” said the organisations, “not only for trans people who may be outed without their consent but also for all gender non-conforming people, including gender non-conforming women who are likely to face scrutiny over their gender expression, or intersex people, who are at risk of facing scrutiny over having a variation of sex characteristics.”
The groups further argued that implementing the Code would result in the effective segregation of transgender and intersex people, as well as others whose sex characteristics do not conform to normative expectations.
They warned that restrictions could affect access to hospitals, changing rooms, bathrooms and support services for survivors of violence.
“It will result in the exclusion of these groups from public life, including through self-exclusion, and load the risks of inclusion/exclusion onto individuals and service providers, in addition to costing millions of pounds in compliance.”
Activists Warn of Shrinking Public Participation
Critics also challenged the rationale behind the proposed measures, arguing that they respond to a perceived threat fuelled by misinformation, fear and culture-war politics rather than evidence.
They noted that research does not support claims that transgender people pose a greater risk to others and instead consistently shows that trans people are instead more likely to experience harassment, discrimination and violence themselves.
Writing in The Guardian, trans equality activist Alexandra Parmar-Yee said: “Trans people will be left with a choice between researching toilet provision every time we go out or living our lives as we always have – only now without the protection of the law. In reality, our worlds will get smaller, and so many trans people who enrich our communities will self-exclude, leaving everyone worse off.”
She added: “Away from toilets and changing rooms, our access to services of all kinds will become harder. Trans people are anxious about leaving the house in a new world that makes us second-class citizens – told to accept being excluded, outed and put at risk.”
