ECHR as the next battleground for the rights of women and children

[Ingenieur]

I have started this thread to avoid derailing a previous one.

Original thread:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4852476-tougher-transgender-guidance-for-schools-is-unlawful-sunak-told?page=1

It was suggested there that the ECHR would be an impediment to rescinding or fundamentally changing the GRA or the gender reassignment parts of the Equality Act. This is on the basis that membership of the European Convention on Human Rights would not permit the unwinding of existing rights, even if it does not force member nations to comply.

I know most of us do not practise law, and even fewer are international or constitutional lawyers, but I'd like to understand more of the nuance surrounding this aspect of our fight.

As a starter for 10, is this even true? Is leaving the ECHR the only solition to unwinding these laws?

Also, looking at the ECHR summary of the Goodwin case, it states the following:

Since there [we]re no significant factors of public interest to weigh against the interest of this individual applicant in obtaining legal recognition of her gender re-assignment, the Court reache[d] the conclusion that the notion of fair balance inherent in the Convention now tilt[ed] decisively in favour of the applicant.

It is astonishing that a case which overturned a number of previous ECHR Article 8 and Article 12 cases was judged on the basis of public interest, and that no public interest was noted.

Seems like a bit of a mess.

All four home nations need to vote majority to leave ECHR. Would make trying to win Brexit look like child's play.

Ain't happening.

So if we repeal the GRA what happens?

Maybe a bit of Judith Butler wilful inpenetrability thrown in for good measure.

Even without the GFA any course of action that required us to leave the ECHR would be bad. The GFA issue makes it abhorrent to even contemplate in my view.

I don’t think that’s correct.

Ultimately leaving the ECHR just requires an Act of Parliament. Consent of individual nations within the UK is not required.

Ok I’ll reword

Without GFA or ECHR issues are you for women having single sex spaces?

Women as defined by sex

Yes.

@PlanetJanette

Thanks for responding to the thread.

Ministers and civil servants can’t break the law.

It's clear from previous examples on this thread that ministers and civil servants are able to pass laws which are counter to the ECHR, retroactive application of laws being one that is identified, so this is already happening and therefore is within the capacity of the government to do.

I stand corrected.

It says on my preferred pronouns badge
"Gender/Critical".

But I believe leaving the ECHR is bad on so many levels.

What if we did, and a Trump like party took office, looking to ban all abortions, the lack of ECHR would massively help.

In other words, be careful what you wish for.

What's needed is an revolutionised Tory party under the leadership of a Badenoch or Cates, and industrial grade effort to absolutely push reframing of the GRA and taking up of EHRC advice, rather than let this Trojan Horse that Whittle and associates engineered to their own ends continue unamended.

Unfortunately the only way this happens is if Sunak loses in 2024, Starmer pushes on with GRA reform/trans conversion ban/ground laid for 2028 second Labour term Self ID legislation, and the people of this country (effectively the women with male assistance) see the writing on the wall, civil unrest happens, maybe even along the lines of JSO tactics.

And Labour falls after one term.

Of course, if it's not Badenoch or Cates who takes over the Tory reins while Starmer does his thing, but Keegan or Mordaunt...

It almost makes you think the Tories had fourteen years to do the right thing, but couldn't get off their pampered arses to even try.

Ok. One last one, for the mo anyway, do you think this is possible whilst remaining in the ECHR?

I don’t know. I do know repealing the GRA would not be possible. It’s not clear to me whether single sex carve outs such as in the Equality Act would be contrary to the ECHR - I suspect it wouldn’t be because of its fairly high threshold requiring proportionality.

But I don’t have enough knowledge of the courts jurisprudence on broader equality law.

What avenues does the UK have to influence the ECHR?

I’m not ignoring this but it requires a more detailed reply than I have time for at the moment.

I think section 19(b) of the Human Rights Act has been misunderstood on this thread and it does not as some think provide cover for ministers and civil servants to act unlawfully.

Ok I appreciate the answer.

I’m thinking about a situation where women have single sex spaces, we can state our GC belief, we are not compelled to use particular pronouns and children are not impacted by gender ideology

And we could be part of the ECHR

I think that could be palatable to me. Although I’m getting up to speed on this so may have missed something which causes a re-think

I also think it might be possible with this gov, but not necessarily the next.

What do you mean by 'sex'?

A PP said sex was the same as gender identity. Do you agree with them?

Whether or not you think repeal of the GRA would be possible while remaining in the ECHR, do you think it's desirable?

Would anything bad happen to people with trans identities if it was repealed?

Of course, what was I thinking saying women need to bring cases?

Just repeal and let them spend their money for a change. I'm sure jolyolyolyon would take it on.

Yes, I think it’s a bad thing. I think people ought to have a right to live their lives with legal recognition of their gender identity, and have the dignity of knowing that will be recorded on, for example, their death certificate.

‘Just repeal’ ignores the constraints on ministers and civil servants to take forward unlawful policies.

Oh maybe I should have asked for definition

The thing is, while this is Mumsnet, we are not actually the world's mum.

Women's human rights are not contingent on the GFA or any other peace treaty between warring tribes of men.

It's not our job to sort out lasting peace in NI before we are allowed to advocate and litigate in our own interests, just like it's not our job to sort out where everyone has a piss or gets changed for swimming before we are allowed to assert our right to female only spaces.

What about those of us who don't believe in gender identities?

Doesn't sound like PlanetJanette and I have similar goals so fair play, we part ways.

As it happens I do think we should look critically at both the ECHR and GFA as I don't think they're fit for purpose in today's world, but I agree, we shouldn't make repealing the GRA dependent on doing these things because they're both exceptionally hard problems to solve.

But if repealing/exiting both is required to achieve the right of people to not be forced to lie about other humans' sex - I'm up for it.

@PencilsInSpace Women's human rights are not contingent on the GFA or any other peace treaty between warring tribes of men. well said

You think the Troubles in Northern Ireland only affected men? Women were the most impacted in many respects - and would be again if the were to resume.

A cavalier attitude to peace in Northern Ireland - and the implication that it has no relevance to the rights and welfare of women - suggests you are either deeply naive or really callous.

Don’t apply for a gender recognition certificate then?