India's Transgender Rights Amendment Bill 2026 Draws UN Censure — Rajasthan HC Flags Constitutional Concerns; Activists Vow Legal Challenge
The United Nations Human Rights office has sharply criticised India's newly passed Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill 2026, warning it risks "setting back hard-won rights." The Rajasthan High Court has also flagged potential conflicts with constitutional guarantees, raising questions about the bill's legal sustainability. Activists have announced they will file a Supreme Court challenge.
Representative image. Photo: Nationalism News / PTI
The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill 2026, which was passed by voice vote in both houses of Parliament on March 25 and received Presidential assent shortly thereafter, has triggered a sharp international and domestic backlash. The United Nations Human Rights office issued a statement on April 2 stating that the bill "risks setting back hard-won rights" of transgender persons in India.
The central controversy of the amendment is its replacement of self-identification — the cornerstone of the original 2019 Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act as interpreted by the Supreme Court — with mandatory medical verification. Under the new framework, a transgender person seeking legal recognition of their gender identity must undergo a series of medical examinations and official verifications before receiving a certificate from a district magistrate.
UN Human Rights spokesperson Liz Throssell, in Geneva, said: "We are deeply concerned that requiring medical verification to obtain legal gender recognition is incompatible with international human rights standards and violates the right to privacy, dignity and self-determination." Amnesty International India called the bill "a massive step backward" and said it directly contradicts the Supreme Court's 2014 NALSA judgment, which had recognised the right of transgender persons to self-identify.
In India, the Rajasthan High Court, in an order relating to a state-level case on transgender welfare scheme eligibility, cautioned that "legislative changes cannot dilute constitutional guarantees, particularly those recognised in prior Supreme Court rulings." Legal experts say this signals that the constitutional validity of the amendment is ripe for challenge at the apex court.
A coalition of transgender rights organisations, led by Humsafar Trust, LABIA and Transgender Welfare Association, has announced it will file a writ petition in the Supreme Court of India seeking the bill's stay. "We will fight this in court. Our rights are guaranteed by the Constitution of India, not subject to the whims of any legislature," said Gazal Dhaliwal, a prominent transgender rights advocate.
The government, through the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, has defended the amendment as necessary to prevent "misuse" of the self-identification framework and to ensure that genuine transgender persons receive welfare benefits. It has rejected international criticism as "interference in India's internal legislative processes."
Meanwhile, several Indian states — including Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra — have indicated they may not implement the amendment's verification requirements, arguing it conflicts with state-level welfare policies and court orders. India's federal structure means states have some discretion in implementation, potentially creating a patchwork of different frameworks across the country.