The extent of Stonewall’s influence on judicial training in England and Wales could become clearer, following a case brought by Maya Forstater (see photo), the tax specialist who won an appeal against an employment tribunal after she posted gender-critical beliefs online.
There has been mounting concern that Stonewall is exerting far-reaching influence on the training of judges. A number of recent rulings have revealed a growing boldness to issue rulings reflecting a judicial view that people who hold gender-critical beliefs do not deserve protection under equality law.
The Judicial College, which trains judges, produces the Equal Treatment Bench Book (ETBB), a guidance document that was last revised in February 2021. The ETBB refers to people with gender being ‘assigned at birth’ or ‘birth gender’; to transgender people being ‘authentic man or woman’; and criticises the language of the Equality Act 2010 as ‘out-of-date and stigmatising’.
However, writing in The Critic, Forstater has written that her attempts through Freedom of Information requests to find out how the ETBB guidance was written and put together have been refused on the basis that the Judicial College is exempt from disclosure to preserve judicial independence.
The Information Commissioner agreed with this, leading to a new case, in which a ruling from the Information Tribunal is now awaited. Counsel for Forstater argued that judges should decide cases based on the evidence, not on the views of pressure groups.
It has already been publicly acknowledged that trans individuals, for the lobby group Gendered Intelligence, have delivered training to employment tribunal judges and judges in the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal.
Simon Calvert of the Christian Institute said: ‘There is widespread concern that public sector bodies like the judiciary have been paying Stonewall activists to come and lobby them. And we now know that some of what these activists have been saying as part of this lobbying is legally nonsensical; it’s a widely inaccurate portrayal of the law.’
He said Stonewall has been misrepresenting what equality law says and does. ‘So if the judiciary has been sitting under this legally inaccurate training from these activities’, added Calvert, ‘that is very serious. I think we’re entitled to know about that. More to the point, we need to know what the judicial service is going to do to correct the misinformation that Stonewall has been giving to it.’
Forstater has called for a public inquiry into Stonewall’s influence over public institutions.
