< Back to other cases

NATIONAL LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY (NALSA) VS. UNION OF INDIA

Read the full judgement here
citation:

AIR 2014 SC 1863

court:

Supreme Court of India

judges:

K S Radhakrishnan & A K Sikri

KEY FACTS: 

This case was filed by the National Legal Services Authority of India (NALSA) to legally recognize persons who fall outside the male/female gender binary, including persons who identify as “third gender”.

ISSUES & DECISION: 

The Court had to decide whether persons who fall outside the male/female gender binary can be legally recognised as “third gender” persons. It deliberated on whether disregarding non-binary gender identities is a breach of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. It referred to an “Expert Committee on Issues Relating to Transgender” constituted under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment to develop its judgement.

This was a landmark decision where the apex court legally recognised “third gender”/transgender persons for the first time and discussed “gender identity” at length. The Court recognised that third gender persons were entitled to fundamental rights under the Constitution and under International law. Further, it directed state governments to develop mechanisms to realise the rights of “third gender”/transgender persons.

Defining “Third Gender”

The Court upheld the right of all persons to self-identify their gender. Further, it declared that hijras and eunuchs can legally identify as “third gender”.

The Court clarified that gender identity did not refer to biological characteristics but rather referred to it as “an innate perception of one’s gender”. Thus, it held that no third gender persons should be subjected to any medical examination or biological test which would invade their right to privacy.

Fundamental Rights

The Court interpreted ‘dignity’ under Article 21 of the Constitution to include diversity in self-expression, which allowed a person to lead a dignified life. It placed one’s gender identity within the framework of the fundamental right to dignity under Article 21.

Further, it noted that the right to equality (Article 14 of the Constitution) and freedom of expression (Article 19(1)(a)) was framed in gender-neutral terms (“all persons”). Consequently, the right to equality and freedom of expression would extend to transgender persons.

It drew attention to the fact that transgender persons were subject to “extreme discrimination in all spheres of society” which was a violation of their right to equality. Further, it included the right to express one’s gender “through dress, words, action, or behaviour” under the ambit of freedom of expression.

Under Articles 15 and 16, discrimination on the ground of “sex” is explicitly prohibited. The Court held that “sex” here does not only refer to biological attributes (such as chromosomes, genitalia and secondary sexual characteristics) but also includes “gender” (based on one’s self-perception). Thus, the Court held that discrimination on the ground of “sex” included discrimination on the basis of gender identity.

Thus, the Court held that transgender persons were entitled to fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 16, 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution. Further, the Court also referred to core international human rights treaties and the Yogyakarta Principles to recognise transgender persons’ human rights.

Further Directions

The Court held that public awareness programs were required to tackle stigma against the transgender community. It also directed the Central and State Governments to take several steps for the advancement of the transgender community, including:

  1. Making provisions for legal recognition of “third gender” in all documents
  2. Recognising third gender persons as a “socially and educationally backward class of citizens”, entitled to reservations in educational institutions and public employment.
  3. Taking steps to frame social welfare schemes for the community

SIGNIFICANCE: 

This is a landmark decision because it is the first to legally recognise non-binary gender identities and uphold the fundamental rights of transgender persons in India. The judgement also directed Central and State governments to take proactive action in securing transgender persons’ rights.