A legal challenge to introduce gender-neutral passports in the UK has been rejected by the High Court.
Christie Elan-Cane claimed that the process for UK passports was “inherently discriminatory” and breached article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
But this argument was dismissed by High Court judge Mr Justice Jeremy Baker.
Lawful
The judge said he was “not satisfied” that “the current policy of HM Passport Office is unlawful”.
However, he went on to say that Government departments should consider whether “the recording of an individual’s sex and/or gender in official and other documentation is justified”.
Elan-Cane’s legal challenge was supported by Human Rights Watch.
Costly
Elan-Cane, who has been referred to as “they” in the media, had wanted an “X” option to be placed on passports.
But lawyers representing the Home Office argued that any change in policy would bring “significant administrative and financial costs” to HM Passport Office and have a far-reaching impact.
Elan-Cane is considering whether or not to appeal.
Relevance
Gender-neutral passports and Government documents were introduced last year in Canada.
In 2016, the Women and Equalities Committee called for the UK Government to move towards the “non-gendering” of official records and to only record the sex of an applicant when it is a “relevant piece of information”.