Not so simple

OK. Its not that simple. First up is a call from the City of London Police to say that they do not intend to “crime” the matter. Why? Have they read the Act? Nope. Nor do they intend to.

Aha. I bridle. But over the call, I see the point. Sort of. Which is that what judges get up to in their court tends to be left to the Office of Judicial Complaints to sort out first of all – and only in the most egregious cases will that body pass matters back to the Police. Fine.

I hie me to the OJC and, in contrast to the lightning swift reaction of the Police get a rather slow call centre type who insists I write in with my complaint (apparently they don’t trust themselves to take the matter over the phone) and tells me it could take three months to investigate. Maybe more….


Meanwhile, Christine Burns comments on the original post to explain probs with this Act. In fact, it protects ONLY people making an application for a GRC under the Gender Recognition Act or who havea grc ALREADY – which far from providing broad protection for the trans community is a VERY small subset indeed. And its time limited to six months, which means complaints need to move fast.

Ah. Perhaps that is why the OJC promises three months or longer: sort of weeds out the smaller offences.

So I am off to file my complaint. In one sense, I think it might be helpful that the Police aren’t dealing with this, since the absence of a GRC (or application for one) means that Nina would be outside the strict letter of the law in respect of this Act. Whereas the Equality Act does lay down a broader requirement for public bodies to advance equality.

Will bang the complaint in this morning and see where it lands.


amended as per zoe comment


About janefae

On my way from here to there
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Not so simple

  1. Jane, can I correct you slightly there. I didn’t say that it only protects people making applications for GRC’s. Rather than try to sub down what I said, however, it might be best for you to quote the carefully worded explanation I tried to provide. Unfortunately these aren’t matters that can be reduced to a sentence or phrase. The devil is in the detail and I wouldn’t want anyone to think that s.22 does less than it can do. The point I made is that there are limits.

  2. I think you mean to say “It only protects people who have made an application under the GRA or have a Gender Recognition Certificate”.

  3. (Try again, this time with the right details)

    I think you mean to say “It only protects people who have made an application under the GRA or have a Gender Recognition Certificate”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s