Gender Identity Issues in the Asylum Claim

Table of Contents

Introduction
Application of this Instruction in Respect of Children and those with Children
Glossary
Gender Identity and Persecution
Discrimination
Non-state Agents of Persecution and the Failure of State Protection
Internal Relocation
Convention Grounds
Race
Religion
Nationality
Membership of a Particular Social Group (PSG)
Political Opinion
Interviewing and Assessment of Credibility
Deciding the Claim
Discretion
Persecution
Country of Origin Information
Sufficiency of Protection
Equality Act 2010 and Gender Reassignment

1
Introduction

The experiences of discrimination and persecution for transgender people are often
distinct, and in addition to those they may experience due to other characteristics. For
example, a transgender man may be perceived to be lesbian even after gender
reassignment if his ‘new’ gender is not acknowledged. A transgender woman may be
vulnerable as a woman and as a transgender person. This instruction should therefore be
read in conjunction with the Asylum Instructions (AIs) on Sexual orientation in the asylum
claim and Gender Issues in the asylum claim as well as Considering the Protection
(asylum) Claim and Assessing Credibility ; Considering Human Rights Claims, Conducting
the Asylum Interview, and Internal Relocation.

It should be noted that in addition to the UK’s obligations under the 1951 Refugee
Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and the minimum
standards for protection set by the EU Qualification Directive, the Equalities Act 2010
places a positive duty public bodies to eliminate discrimination.

As with anyone who lives by a name other than their birth name, a transgender applicant
should be given respect and referred to by their chosen name. If in any doubt, an applicant
should be asked which personal pronoun and salutation he or she would like used.

This instruction gives guidance on:

• How to approach consideration of asylum claims made on the basis of gender

identity.
• The additional considerations decision-makers should have in mind when
assessing claims for asylum that could include issues to do with gender identity.
• How to take gender identity issues into account when looking at the persecution
experienced and whether there has been a failure of state protection.
• How to objectively consider future fear within the legal, political and social context
of the country of origin.

Application of this Instruction in Respect of Children and those with Children

Section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 requires the UK Border
Agency to carry out its existing functions in a way that takes into account the need to
safeguard and promote the welfare of children in the UK. It does not impose any new
functions, or override existing functions.

Staff must not apply the actions set out in this instruction either to children with gender
identity issues or to transgender parents, guardians or carers with children without having
due regard to Section 55. The UK Border Agency instruction ‘Every Child Matters; Change
for Children’ sets out the key principles to take into account in all Agency activities.

Our statutory duty to children includes the need to demonstrate:

• Fair treatment which meets the same standard a British child would receive.
• The child’s interests being made a primary consideration. This means it is
considered first, although it is possible for other considerations to outweigh them.
2
 • No discrimination of any kind.
• Asylum applications are dealt with in a timely fashion.
• Identification of those that might be at risk from harm.

Back to contents

3
Glossary

Below is a brief glossary setting out some of the terms used in this instruction. It is
important to recognise the individual nature and perceptions of the transgender applicant,
and decision makers should not label or stereotype transgender persons. The term
transgender is a western one which does not have universal agreement and which may be
used variously. People in different cultures may use different terms to self-identify as
having socially adopted a gender different to that assigned at birth and some communities
may not emphasise a social identity or particular community affiliation based on variance in
gender identity.

Given the variety of terms that may be used, it will always be necessary for the
decision maker to establish how the applicant perceives him or her self and how his
or her behaviour or characteristics are perceived by the society which s/he is from.

Gender identity is understood to refer 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 and other expressions of gender, including dress,
speech and mannerisms.

A transgender (or trans) person is someone who lives, or desires to live, in the gender
opposite to the one assigned at birth. This Western term may include, but is not limited to,
transsexual, cross-dressing and gender variant people. Transgender people may identify
as men or women, as third gender or non-gendered persons.

A transsexual person, as defined by the Equalities Act, is a person who is proposing to

undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process to change their sex i.e. gender
reassignment. It is, however, important to note that for asylum purposes gender identity
issues may be broader which is why this document refers to transgender persons.

A transgender man is a person who is born female and transitions to become male
(FTM).

A transgender woman is a person who is born male and transitions to become female
(MTF).

Transition (or Gender reassignment) refers to the process of changing gender, that is,
what a person does to alter their gender or sex.

Transphobia consists of actions or expressions which injure, threaten, humiliate or

otherwise distress transgender persons in direct relation to their (real or perceived)
transgender status, where these actions are motivated by prejudice or fail to show due
diligence in regard to the safety and wellbeing of transgender people.

A 'refugee' is a refugee as defined in regulation 2 of The Refugee or Person in Need of

International Protection (Qualification) Regulation 2006.

The Convention is a reference to the 1951 Refugee Convention.

4
Gender Identity and Persecution

An applicant may claim asylum when he or she fears persecution on account of his or her
actual or perceived gender identity which does not, or is deemed not to, conform to
prevailing political, social or cultural norms in his or her country of origin.

Claims relating to gender identity are most likely to be considered under the Convention
ground of membership of a particular social group, but may also be linked to other grounds,
such as political opinion and religion, depending on the circumstances.

The European Council Directive (2004/83/EC) of 29 April 2004 on Minimum Standards for
the Qualification and Status of Third Country Nationals or Stateless Persons as Refugees
or as Persons who Otherwise Need International Protection and the Content of the
Protection Granted (the Qualification Directive) contains definitions of certain terms within
the Convention, including the forms persecution may take. The Directive was transposed
into UK law through the Refugee or Person in need of International Protection
(Qualification) Regulations 2006 and changes to the immigration rules, and has applied to
all protection based claims since 9 October 2006.

Transgender men and women may have distinct experiences of persecution. This may
relate to being perceived as challenging prevailing cultural conceptions of gender and
relationships. It may also relate to attempts to force ‘normative’ gender behaviour onto the
individual.

Claims made by people on the basis of their gender identity may reveal exposure to
physical and sexual violence and cumulative denial of human rights. Examples include:
• Threat of execution.
• Forced sterilization.
• Forced castration.
• ‘Corrective’ rape.
• Domestic violence.
• ‘Honour based violence’.
• Forced sex-working.

Other forms of physical and psychological harm that may constitute persecution include:
• Harassment.
• Threats of harm.
• Vilification.
• Intimidation.
• Psychological violence.

Back to contents

5
Discrimination

Hostility or the threat of violence towards transgender individuals need not necessarily be
the defining feature of persecution. A discriminatory measure, in itself or cumulatively with
others, may amount to persecution (see Considering the Protection (asylum) claim and
assessing credibility AI). For example, it may, depending on the facts of the case, amount
to persecution if the discrimination has sufficiently serious consequences for the person
concerned such as:

• Serious legal, cultural or social restrictions on rights to earn a livelihood.

• Serious legal, cultural or social restrictions on rights to private and family life.
• Serious legal, cultural, or social restrictions on rights to freedom of opinion,
expression, association or assembly.
• Restrictions on political enfranchisement.
• Restrictions on the choice to practise or not practise a religion.
• Restrictions on access to public places.
• Restrictions on access to normally available educational, legal, welfare and health
provision, including gender affirming treatment.

Transgender men, women and children may also be subject to discriminatory treatment
that is enforced through law or through the imposition of social or religious customs that
restrict their opportunities, rights and exploration of gender variance. This can include:

• Family and personal laws.

• Gendered dress codes.
• Discriminatory medical processes.
• Exclusion from education and employment.

Problems with accessing health care and/or an increased risk of exposure to harm may
occur especially where the gender identity of a transgender man or woman is not legally
recognised.

Child protection problems may arise in families where, for example, there is hostility to the
child’s expressed gender identity.

Back to contents

6
Non-state Agents of Persecution and the Failure of State
Protection

Persecution can be perpetrated by the state. However, acts of violence and serious
discrimination committed by the local populace, within a specific community, within the
family, or by individuals, are also persecutory if such acts are knowingly tolerated by the
authorities, or if the authorities refuse, or prove unable, to offer sufficient protection.

Protection is generally considered effective when the state takes reasonable steps to
prevent the persecution or suffering of serious harm, and the applicant has access to such
protection.

Decision makers should make a case specific research request to the Country of
Information (COI) Service, clearly identifying the subject matter as Transgender issues. In
addition decision makers should refer to objective country of origin information provided by
the COI Service, in particular any information on transgender issues given within the COI
Service country reports and the sections on LGBT, refer to Country Guidance cases
(principally found in the country Operational Guidance Notes), and take into account the
relevant sections on actors of persecution and the sufficiency of state protection in the AI
Considering the protection (asylum) claim and assessing credibility.

For reasons of gender identity men, women and children may be subject to abuse resulting
from social customs or conventions because there is no effective means of legal recourse
to prevent, investigate or punish such acts. Such failure of state protection may include, but
is not limited to:

• Lack of police response to pleas for assistance.

• Reluctance, refusal or failure to investigate, prosecute or punish individuals.
• Encouragement or toleration of particular social, religious or customary laws,
practices and behavioural norms or an unwillingness or inability to take action
against them. For instance, a state may not allow gender reassignment but
nevertheless condone or tolerate societal or familial violence against
transgender people.

It is not always reasonable or possible for a transgender claimant to alert the authorities to
his or her need for protection. This may be because protection may not be forthcoming or,
where there are criminal sanctions for transgender practices, because the claimant is
regarded as an offender rather than a victim. Transgender persons may be hesitant to
come forward with complaints due to a distrust of authorities and/or previous abuse by
authorites.

The ways in which particular laws, social policies or practices (including traditions and
cultural practices) are implemented may constitute or involve a failure of protection. Thus,
for example,

• A law, policy or practice may have a "legitimate" goal, e.g. the maintenance
of law and order out of respect for genuine religious or social sensitivities, but
be administered through persecutory means.

7
 • The penalty for non-compliance with the law or policy may be
disproportionately severe against certain persons/groups.

• A law, policy or practice may not be enforced in practice and therefore fail to
deter or prevent the banned behaviour.

Back to contents

8
Internal Relocation

In accordance with Paragraph 339O of the Immigration Rules, if there is a part of the
country of origin to which the applicant can relocate where they would not have a well-
founded fear of persecution or real risk of suffering serious harm, and where it is
reasonable to expect them to stay, then the application for asylum should be rejected.

The Supreme Court in HJ (Iran) made the point that internal relocation is not the answer if
it depends on the person concealing their sexual orientation in the proposed new location:

“There is no place, in countries such as Iran and Cameroon, to which a gay applicant could
safely relocate without making fundamental changes to his behaviour which he cannot
make simply because he is gay.” (para 21)

Likewise, it is not reasonable to expect a transgender man or woman to conceal his or her
gender identity in order to survive in a place of relocation.

In the event that internal relocation may be a possibility then the question to be asked is
whether the applicant would face a well-founded fear of persecution in the place of
relocation; whether there is a reasonable level of protection by the authorities, and if so,
whether it is reasonable, i.e. not unduly harsh, to expect the individual to travel to and stay
in that place. The practicalities for the individual concerned of moving to and settling in a
different part of a country must be assessed in the light of the available information about
the country concerned, such as the means of travel and communication, cultural traditions,
religious beliefs and customs, ethnic or linguistic differences, health facilities, employment
opportunities, supporting family or other ties, and the presence and ability of civil society
(e.g. non-governmental organizations) to provide practical support.

In certain countries, financial, logistical, social, cultural and other factors may mean that a
transgender person may face particular difficulties. This may be particularly the case for an
individual perceived as being a transgender lesbian, especially in countries which place a
high moral value on the biological sex and sexual orientation of the individual. Transgender
men and women may also face a particular form of discrimination in the place of relocation
and thus be unable to work or safely access healthcare, to the extent that they cannot
survive in the place of relocation.

Decision makers should consider whether the applicant, if unaccompanied, would be able
to safely access the proposed relocation area.

Decision makers should make a case specific research request to the COI Service, clearly
identifying the subject matter as Transgender issues. In addition, decision makers should
refer to objective country of origin information provided by the COI Service, in particular
any information on transgender issues given within the COI Service country reports and the
sections on LGBT, and refer to the Asylum Instruction on Internal Relocation . But even
where country information and guidance may suggest that relocation is possible, the
personal circumstances of the individual should be explored at interview for a sound
decision to be reached on the reasonableness of internal relocation. The onus is on the
decision maker to demonstrate that internal relocation is not unduly harsh, having regard to
the individual circumstances and country of origin information.

Back to contents
9
Convention Grounds

Issues about gender identity may inform an assessment of whether one of the five
Convention grounds applies. Decision-makers are reminded that an application does not
have to be on one Convention ground only and that while the claimant is required to
establish that she or he has a well-founded fear, she or he is not required to identify
accurately the Convention reason for it. As with all other applications, someone who may
not qualify for international protection under the Convention could nevertheless qualify for
Humanitarian Protection (subsidiary protection) (see the AI on Humanitarian Protection).

Race

Whilst actual or attributed racial identity is not specific to transgender cases, gender
identity may affect the form that persecution takes in race-related cases. For instance, a
particular racial group may target transgender persons not conforming with moral codes
within their group in order to assert the group’s racial superiority or ‘purity’ i.e. by ‘purging’
the group of perceived ‘impure’ elements.

Religion

Religion may be relevant to gender identity asylum claims where, for example, the attitude
of religious authorities towards transgender people is hostile, or where being transgender is
seen as an affront to religious beliefs in a given society.

Nationality

Regulation 6(1)(c) of the Qualification Regulations states that:

“The concept of nationality shall not be confined to citizenship but shall include, for
example, membership of a group determined by its cultural, ethnic or linguistic
identity, common geographical or political origins, or its relationship with the
population of another state.”

As a result the term ‘nationality’ may occasionally overlap with the term ‘race’. Whilst actual
or attributed national identity is not specific to transgender persons, it may operate in
tandem with gender identity to explain why an individual fears persecution. For instance a
transgender individual from a particular ethnic group may have a fear of persecution that
does not exist for other transgender individuals in the country of origin.

Membership of a Particular Social Group (PSG)

Claims relating to gender identity are likely to fall under ‘Particular Social Group’. A
definition of what constitutes a particular social group is provided in Regulation 6 (i) (d) of
the Refugee or Persons in Need of International Protection (Qualification) Regulations
2006.

A group shall be considered to form a particular social group where, in particular:

10
 i) Members of that group share an innate characteristic, or a common background that
cannot be changed, or share a characteristic or belief that is so fundamental to
identity or conscience that a person should not be forced to renounce it, and

ii) That group has a distinct identity in the relevant country, because it is perceived as
being different by the surrounding society.

The Regulation sets out an approach to identifying the existence of a social group which is
similar to the one taken by the UK courts, most significantly in the House of Lords
judgement in the case of Shah and Islam [1999] UKHL 20 where it was found that women
in Pakistan constituted a particular social group.

An absence of information on transgender issues in an OGN or COI should not be taken to

mean that there are no issues for the transgender people in that country. If decision-
makers are in doubt as to whether a person may be part of a PSG they should refer to the
section on membership of a particular social group in the Considering the protection
(asylum) claim and assessing credibility AI and/or discuss the case with a Senior
Caseworker (SCW). If it is considered that the person is not within a PSG, the decision
maker will explain why not.

Political Opinion

Regulation 6(1)(f) of the Qualification Regulations 2006 states that:

“The concept of political opinion shall include the holding of an opinion, thought or
belief on a matter related to the potential actors of persecution and to their policies
or methods, whether or not that opinion, thought or belief has been acted upon [by
the applicant]”.

Holding political opinions different from those of the government is not in itself a ground for
refugee status. However, in countries where transgender practices are viewed as contrary
to the country’s policy, an applicant may apply for asylum based on a fear of persecution
for acting in opposition to the political opinion. For full details see section on political
opinion in the Considering the protection (asylum) claim and assessing credibility AI

Back to contents

11
Interviewing and Assessment of Credibility

Each applicant will have been asked at screening to indicate a preference for a male or
female interviewer, and it should normally be possible to comply with a request for a male
or female interviewer or interpreter made in advance of an interview. Requests made on
the day of an interview should be met as far as is operationally possible.

When interviewing an applicant, before assessing the credibility of an account and before
deciding whether there is a need for protection, decision-makers should have an
awareness of the status and treatment of transgender individuals in the applicant’s country
of origin. This should be by making reference to the information provided by the COI
Service, and other approved objective sources of information, on transgender people in
particular and on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in general - it may be the
case that if gay men are found to face persecution, then transgender persons may also be
at risk, as a corresponding group which does not conform to an established gender role.
This awareness should include, but not be limited to the hostility that such non-conformist
groups might experience in the applicant’s country of origin.

Generally speaking, self-identification will be the usual starting point as an indication of a

person’s gender identity and their expression of this. However applicants may not have felt
able to disclose this at the screening interview and it will need to be explored in greater
depth at interview.

A transgender applicant may have kept aspects and sometimes large parts of their lives
secret, perhaps in response to societal pressure, explicit or implicit hostility and
discrimination, criminal sanctions and/or feelings of shame, stigma and difference. For
these reasons, as well as available terminology, a transgender asylum seeker may struggle
to talk openly about his or her gender identity. An open, non-judgmental and reassuring
environment will help to establish trust between the interviewer and the claimant, and
should help the full disclosure of sensitive and personal information.

As with anyone who lives by a name other than their birth name, a transgender applicant
should be given respect and referred to by their chosen name and gender identity. If in any
doubt, an applicant should be asked at interview which personal pronoun he or she would
like used.

The interview should explore what the applicant is claiming to be their current gender
identity and establish the range of behaviour and activities of life that inform or affect the
individual’s gender identity, or how they are perceived. It will be important to establish the
applicant’s own terms of reference and description of their gender identity and how they
have expressed it. Care must be taken to sensitively, but thoroughly, investigate relevant
elements of the individual’s history of gender variance. Despite the need to focus on
establishing the individual’s gender identity, decision makers are reminded that the asylum
claim needs to be considered in the round and that all other material facts and merits of the
case will also need to be addressed.

Establishing the material facts and assessing the credibility of the claim are essential and it
is therefore important that an effective interview is conducted and relevant issues clarified
with the applicant. (For further guidance see the Considering the protection (asylum) claim
and assessing credibility and Conducting the asylum interview AIs).

12
The credibility of an individual’s claim and the degree of risk on return should primarily be
tested by a sensitive enquiry into the applicant’s realisation and experience of gender
identity. Altering one’s birth sex is not a one-step process, but a complex process that
occurs over a period of time. Transition may include some or all of the following personal,
legal and medical adjustments: telling family, friends and colleagues; changing one’s name
and/ or sex on legal documents; dressing, behaving and/or living as a different sex;
hormone therapy; and possibly surgery. Interviewing officers should ask open questions
that allow applicants to describe the development of their identity and how this has affected
their experiences both in their own country and in the UK.

Staff should be careful to avoid subjective judgements. Although an individual’s

appearance or demeanour may have a bearing on the persecution suffered in the country
of origin, stereotypical ideas of gender, such as the presence or absence of a feminine
voice, should not influence the assessment of credibility.

The fact that an applicant has, or has had, a conventional life and relationships (including
marriage and/or parenthood) in the country of origin or in the country of asylum does not
necessarily mean that s/he is not transgender - it may be that the individual was fearful of
the implications of acting on his or her gender identity, and wary of doing so in the UK. The
fact that a transgender applicant has not taken steps to physically demonstrate their
change of gender should not be seen as evidence of a lack of credibility. Decision makers
should encourage individuals to explain their previous actions in order to ensure that all
evidence can be considered appropriately.

Correspondence should normally be prepared using the applicant’s preferred salutation of

the applicant. Officers should be aware of the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998
which, even where a transgender person does not hold a Gender Recognition Certificate,
prevent the disclosure and processing of sensitive personal information other than in the
limited circumstances set out in that Act. Further information is contained in the IDI on
Disclosure of Information relating to asylum claims . The Gender Recognition Act 2004
further restricts the disclosure of information relating to a person’s gender history, where
they hold a Gender Recognition Certificate. Further information is contained in the
instruction on Gender recognition.

Back to contents

13
Deciding the Claim

Having established the facts of the claim and come to a conclusion on which aspects are
accepted, rejected or where it is appropriate to apply the benefit of the doubt, in
accordance with paragraph 339L of the Rules, decision makers will then need to consider if
there is a future risk of persecution, and if the criteria for Refugee Status, Humanitarian
Protection or Discretionary Leave apply. (See Considering the protection (asylum) claim
and assessing credibility AI for detailed guidance). Where an applicant is found not to be a
transgender person he or she should be processed (for asylum support and enforcement
purposes) in the sex they have been found to be.

The decision-maker needs to assess objectively whether there are reasonable grounds for
believing that the applicant, in his or her particular circumstances, would face persecution if
returned to the country from which they seek refuge. It is important to consider fully any
other relevant material such as medical or psychological reports as well as objective
country information provided by the Country of Origin Information Service. The absence
of objective information to corroborate a claimant’s account should not necessarily be
taken to mean that the claimed fact did not occur. Each case must be decided on its own
merits.

There may be very little evidence on the ill-treatment of transgender men and women in the
country of origin. Decision makers may wish to explore the following areas more fully with
COI Service:
• The social and cultural norms of the country, including access to healthcare and
employment, and how these might affect transgender people.
• The level of ‘visibility’ of transgender communities, including the presence of
dedicated social, campaigning or support groups.
• The efficacy of protection against violence available to all citizens of the country of
origin, including transgender people.
• The legal status of transgender men, women, children, third gender or on-gendered
persons (as applicable), including the recognition of an altered gender;
discriminatory measures; protection from discrimination and any anti-discriminatory
measures.

Discretion

Great care should be taken in assessing the risk to an individual and the issue of
‘discretion’. As noted by the UNHCR in its Guidance Note Relating to Refugee Claims
Relating to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (21 November 2008):

“A person cannot be expected or required by the State to change or conceal his

or her identity in order to avoid persecution. As affirmed by numerous
jurisdictions, persecution does not cease to be persecution because those
persecuted can eliminate the harm by taking avoiding action. Just as a claim
based on political opinion or nationality would not be dismissed on grounds that
the applicant could avoid the anticipated harm by changing or concealing his or
her beliefs or identity, applications based on sexual orientation and gender
identity should not be rejected merely on such grounds.”

14
This is to be understood in the following terms: people cannot be required to behave
discreetly. However, how they will behave on return is a question of fact to be investigated
at the interview. Applications should therefore not be approached from the assumption that
individuals could exercise discretion in order to avoid persecution.

The test established by the Supreme Court in the case of HJ and HT should be applied
when assessing a claim based on fear of persecution because of the applicant’s gender
identity. If a transgender individual chooses to live discreetly because s/he wants to avoid
embarrassment or distress to his or her family and friends s/he will not be deemed to have
a well founded fear of persecution and will not qualify for asylum. This is because s/he has
adopted a lifestyle to cope with social pressures and not because s/he fears persecution
due to his or her gender identity. Conversely, an individual who chooses to live discreetly
because s/he fears persecution if s/he were to live openly as a transgender man or woman
may be granted asylum if that fear is considered to be well founded fear.

Each case must be determined in the light of its own facts and country of origin
information. It is the task of the decision-maker to assess objectively whether there
are reasonable grounds for believing that there would be a real risk of serious harm
to the applicant, in his or her particular circumstances, if returned to the country from
which s/he is seeking refuge.

Persecution

General hostility and transphobia may not amount to persecution but general discriminatory
measures and the cumulative effects of harassment, threats and restrictions can constitute
persecution. The interview should establish if it was a single event or a number of incidents
that led to the applicant’s fear of persecution.

It is reasonable to expect the individual to give a detailed account of any incidents of

persecution and/or ill treatment they or others they know have experienced even if they are
not aware of the exact legal or social position of transgender persons in their country of
origin.

It is neither reasonable nor logical to argue that an awareness of the illegality of their
actions should prevent the applicant from engaging in those actions. However, it is
reasonable to expect the applicant to explain what they did in response to any ill treatment,
persecution or discrimination.

Country of Origin Information

A climate of hostility to transgender persons can still exist in a particular country even
where those acts are not specifically laid down as criminal in a penal code or legal statutes,
or where laws do exist but are not enforced, or even where there is provision for gender
reassignment surgery. A society which is intolerant of non-conformist behaviour in relation
to gender and/or sexual activity is likely to be intolerant of transgender people. The
absence of specific legislation on transgender men and women in particular may be an
extension of their general marginalisation. The interview should establish if the threats
came from state agents enforcing legislation or whether the persecution is a result of
societal discrimination and general transphobia.

15
Sufficiency of Protection

This must be considered within the context of available objective country information. It
may not always be possible to access protection from the state because of the general
hostility that exists toward people who are transgender.

This area must be explored and due consideration given to the reasons as to why an
applicant’s fear of the authorities might prevent them approaching those authorities for
protection. General transphobia within a society may contribute to the lack of state
protection regardless of whether their gender expression and/or relationships are
criminalised. It is reasonable to ask whether redress was sought and/or to explore any
reason for not seeking protection.

Back to contents

16
The Equality Act 2010 and Gender Reassignment

The Equality Act makes it unlawful to discriminate against or harass a person because of
gender reassignment; and places a duty on public bodies to have due regard to the need to
eliminate discrimination and harassment because of gender reassignment, to advance
equality of opportunity between transsexual and non-transsexual people, and to foster
good relations between transsexual and non-transsexual people. The Equalities Act also
prohibits direct discrimination and harassment where someone is wrongly perceived to be
a transsexual person, and where someone is associated with a transsexual person.

17
Document Control

Change Record
Version Authors Date Change Reference

1.0 Sandra Wray 08/6/11 New document

Review
Reviewed By Name Date Position

Issue Control
Approved for Publication by Date Role
Name

Emma Churchill 13/06/11 Regional Director LSE and National

Protection Lead

18