Human rights watchdog accuses trans activists of misinformation over single-sex space guidance

The code, which came into force in August, confirmed a service must be used on the basis of biological sex in order for it to be classed as single-sex under the Equality Act, as per the April 2025 Supreme Court ruling.

Now, Dr Stephenson suggested criticism of the code had made the "real alarm" felt by trans people worse by wrongly suggesting they had lost protections or would face routine sex checks.

Writing in The Times, Dr Stephenson said: "You could be forgiven for thinking that the guidance strips trans people of their rights, bans them from public spaces and requires sex checks at public toilets.

"Were that the case, claims that it’s 'unworkable' and 'discriminatory' would be justified. But none of that is true.

"Last year’s Supreme Court judgment means these must be provided on the basis of biological sex.

"But that doesn’t mean every service must now be single-sex. Nor does it mean trans people have lost their protection from discrimination, harassment and victimisation under the protected characteristic of gender reassignment."

The proposals were met with criticism from LGBT+ groups, who said the revised code "leaves trans people in the UK today with less rights" than before the Supreme Court judgment.

Transgender rights group TransActual described the guidance as a “bathroom ban” and a “huge rollback for human rights”.

The Good Law Project accused the EHRC of producing "discriminatory" and "unworkable" guidance, adding that service providers which followed it would be "causing immense harm, and helping to strip trans people of their rights".

Speaking at the Green Party's annual conference in Brighton, Zack Polanski said trans people were being "legislated and discriminated against”, adding they were being “harassed out of toilets, policed in public places, scared to go about their daily lives”.

Councillors in the south London borough of Lambeth passed a motion, agreeing to "proceed with non-implementation" of the guidance, "should officers advise that this is a lawful option".

Its leader, Martin Abrams, and deputy leader, Natalie Kane, signed an open letter to Ms Phillipson on the day the code took effect.

Joined by the leaders from five other London borough councils, Hackney, Haringey, Lewisham, Southwark and Waltham Forest, they wrote that “trans women are women, trans men are men and non-binary identities are fundamentally valid”.

They added: "It is simply unacceptable that the Code of Practice is harmful to the rights of trans people and will make their exclusion from public life more likely, not less."

Transgender activists have warned against the guidance

PA

Reacting to this, Ms Stephenson said she recognised how "uncertainty about their rights has caused real alarm for many trans people" but added, "some of the commentary surrounding the code has worsened that distress."

She said: "We must also recognise the distress of women unable to access single-sex facilities.

"Women who believe that their right to privacy, dignity or safety have not been properly protected deserve to have those concerns taken seriously too.

"Recognising women’s need for access to single-sex services doesn’t require us to dismiss the rights of trans people and recognising the vulnerability of trans people doesn’t require us to dismiss women’s concerns."