Tamil Nadu Government Publishes Glossary on How to Treat LGBTQ People

By: WE Staff | Wednesday, 24 August 2022

The Madras High Court recommended that the Tamil Nadu government create a glossary to explain how to refer to and characterise people who identify as the third gender.

The glossary was issued in the Tamil Nadu government gazette of the Social Welfare and Women Empowerment department on August 20 of this year, the Additional Advocate-General informed Justice N Ananth Venkatesh.

He also provided a copy to the judge and argued that once the glossary was published in the official gazette, the terminology stated in it would have legal standing, and any venue that addresses the LGBTQIA+ community must only refer to them using the terms that have been mentioned.

According to the AAG, this is an effort to treat members of the LGBTQIA+ community with greater respect and decency.

The judge took note of AAG's arguments and made it plain that everyone involved, including the visual and print media, must be aware of the notification and address members of the community only when necessary by using the informed phrases.

The judge was informed that the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Rules draught had been received from the Director of Social Welfare and needed to be reviewed and in accordance with the Central Act, 2019.

Before being distributed to the Chief Minister, it also needs to have the Law Department's clearance.

The judge was therefore asked to grant six more months for the rules to be completed and announced.

The Transgender Welfare Board secretary had been given orders to draught an exclusive policy for these people in consultation with all relevant parties, including staff members of the State Planning Commission, the judge was also informed. To create the final policy, six more months were requested.

The judge thought it was completely inappropriate to take another six months to complete the Transgender Policy and the rules that go with it.

 It demonstrates that this problem is not given priority. The judge questioned why six months of time was requested since this procedure has been ongoing for more than a year.

The government must keep in mind that members of the LGBTQIA+ community have been excluded from society's mainstream for far too long, and it is time for the policy and guidelines to be implemented with the utmost urgency.

The policies and regulations must be finalised as soon as possible if the government is sincere about helping members of the LGBTQIA+ community.

The judge stated that this court expects the government to respect the concern displayed by it and granted time until September 2, when the subject will be brought up again.