Navigating the complexities of (trans) gender equality rights within the parameters of reasonable accommodation and security tensions in South African prisons: The judgement of September v Subramoney

Q1 Social Sciences
Marie Claire Van Hout
{"title":"Navigating the complexities of (trans) gender equality rights within the parameters of reasonable accommodation and security tensions in South African prisons: The judgement of September v Subramoney","authors":"Marie Claire Van Hout","doi":"10.1016/j.fsiml.2022.100077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Within the heterogenous global prison population of about 11.7 million, transgender prisoners have unique vulnerabilities and are exposed to substantial risks and harm. Their situation has been viewed as a <em>‘‘double punishment’’</em> by encompassing the system lack of gender recognition and exposure to traumatic experiences of detention often tantamount to torture. In Africa, sexual minority rights remain a contentious issue, and there is little documented about the situation of incarcerated transgender people.</p><p>South Africa is one of the most progressive African countries in terms of equality legislation and advancing the rights of sexual and gender minorities. A legal realist review was conducted of the 2019 South African Equality Court judgement of <em>September v Subramoney</em>, based on case decisions and by scrutinizing the international and regional human rights protections and rights assurance mechanisms which encompass the fundamental rights of detained transgender individuals. These are not limited to protection from custodial violence, prohibition of torture and discrimination but include conditions of accommodation, right to express their gender identity and access to gender affirming healthcare. The subsequent legal realist account critiques the impact of this judgement based on extant published literature (empirical, humanitarian, and UN Committee reporting) and jurisprudence in other jurisdictions cognisant of increasing strategic litigation in the field of transgender rights. The implications of this ground-breaking judgement are considered, with a particular lens focusing on the rights of trans-prisoners (particularly trans-women as most vulnerable) to equality, but also dignity, freedom of expression, dignified detention, and the prohibition of inhumane treatment or punishment. These rights are positioned within the boundaries of safe and reasonable accommodation, ability to gender express and prison system capacity to deal with security tensions in high risk <em>cis</em>-normative detention environments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":33816,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Science International Mind and Law","volume":"3 ","pages":"Article 100077"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666353822000078/pdfft?md5=28fff2224eb510ccbd31bc7f1ea04952&pid=1-s2.0-S2666353822000078-main.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Science International Mind and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666353822000078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Within the heterogenous global prison population of about 11.7 million, transgender prisoners have unique vulnerabilities and are exposed to substantial risks and harm. Their situation has been viewed as a ‘‘double punishment’’ by encompassing the system lack of gender recognition and exposure to traumatic experiences of detention often tantamount to torture. In Africa, sexual minority rights remain a contentious issue, and there is little documented about the situation of incarcerated transgender people.

South Africa is one of the most progressive African countries in terms of equality legislation and advancing the rights of sexual and gender minorities. A legal realist review was conducted of the 2019 South African Equality Court judgement of September v Subramoney, based on case decisions and by scrutinizing the international and regional human rights protections and rights assurance mechanisms which encompass the fundamental rights of detained transgender individuals. These are not limited to protection from custodial violence, prohibition of torture and discrimination but include conditions of accommodation, right to express their gender identity and access to gender affirming healthcare. The subsequent legal realist account critiques the impact of this judgement based on extant published literature (empirical, humanitarian, and UN Committee reporting) and jurisprudence in other jurisdictions cognisant of increasing strategic litigation in the field of transgender rights. The implications of this ground-breaking judgement are considered, with a particular lens focusing on the rights of trans-prisoners (particularly trans-women as most vulnerable) to equality, but also dignity, freedom of expression, dignified detention, and the prohibition of inhumane treatment or punishment. These rights are positioned within the boundaries of safe and reasonable accommodation, ability to gender express and prison system capacity to deal with security tensions in high risk cis-normative detention environments.

在南非监狱合理容纳和安全紧张的范围内处理(跨性别)性别平等权利的复杂性:九月诉苏布拉莫尼案的判决。
在全球约1170万异质监狱人口中,跨性别囚犯具有独特的脆弱性,面临着巨大的风险和伤害。她们的处境被视为一种“双重惩罚”,包括缺乏性别承认的制度和遭受往往等同于酷刑的拘留的痛苦经历。在非洲,性少数群体的权利仍然是一个有争议的问题,关于被监禁的变性人的情况几乎没有记录。在平等立法和促进性和性别少数群体权利方面,南非是最进步的非洲国家之一。根据案件判决,并通过审查涵盖被拘留跨性别者基本权利的国际和区域人权保护和权利保障机制,对2019年南非平等法院9月诉Subramoney一案的判决进行了法律现实主义审查。这些要求不仅限于保护其免受拘留暴力、禁止酷刑和歧视,还包括住宿条件、表达性别认同的权利和获得性别肯定保健的机会。随后的法律现实主义叙述基于现有的出版文献(经验主义、人道主义和联合国委员会报告)和其他司法管辖区的判例,对这一判决的影响进行了批评,这些司法管辖区认识到跨性别权利领域的战略诉讼越来越多。这一开创性判决的影响被考虑在内,特别关注变性囚犯(尤其是最脆弱的变性女性)的平等权利,以及尊严、言论自由、有尊严的拘留和禁止不人道待遇或处罚。这些权利的定位是在安全和合理的住宿、性别表达能力和监狱系统在高风险的顺规范拘留环境中处理安全紧张局势的能力范围内。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
153 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信