Urgent Press Release: Lawyers, Feminists & concerned citizens urge President to exercise powers under Article 111 of the Constitution to send the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill 2026 back to Parliament for reconsideration

3 views
Skip to first unread message

napm india

unread,
Mar 26, 2026, 12:47:50 AM (8 days ago) Mar 26
to




Please see document below for full text of Letter to President of India

URGENT PRESS RELEASE:

Lawyers and Feminists from across India Urge President to Withhold Assent to Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026 and Send it Back to Parliament for Reconsideration under Article 111

26th March, 2026: Expressing alarm and distress at the undue and unjustifiable haste with which the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha passed the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026 over two consecutive days, despite resistance of lakhs of members of transgender, intersex, gender queer, non-binary communities across India and the vocal opposition within Parliament by many MPs, 140+ lawyers and feminists associated with NAJAR and ALIFA (NAPM) sent an urgent Appeal to the President of India today morning. 

The Appeal strongly urges the President to withhold her assent to the regressive Bill, by exercising her power under Article 111 of the Constitution of India and instead send it back to Parliament for reconsideration.

The signatories urged the the President to recommend to the Parliament that the Bill be referred to the relevant Standing Committee or a Select or Joint Parliament Committee for impartial and thorough scrutiny and extensive consultations with members of the transgender, intersex, non-binary and genderqueer communities, collectives and civil society, civil liberties groups on the operational and procedural aspects and limitations of the 2019 Act and the present Bill.

The letter also points out the multiple procedural infirmities in the manner of passage of the Bill, violating the Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy (2014) and Govt misleading the House that the transgender communities were consulted prior to amendments being introduced. 

The letter stated emphatically that there was no consultation even with the members of the National Council for Transgender Persons (NCTP) constituted under the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, before bringing in these deeply problematic amendments. At the last minute the NCTP members were invited to Delhi, on 22nd March, 2026; but the Minister, MoSJE didn't meet the Council. As on date, it is reported that multiple members of NCTP have resigned, owing to severe democratic deficit in the entire process and the far-reaching effects this regressive Bill would have on lakhs of transgender persons.

The Bill severely violates three major judgements of the Supreme Court in NALSA vs Union of India (2014), Puttuswamy vs Union of India (2018) and Jane Kaushik vs. Union of India (2025).

The right to self-determination / self-identification of one’s gender is a fundamental right protected under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution and the current Bill de-recognizes this right in an unconstitutional manner and ushers in unacceptable criminalization of individual right to gender identity and support to the same. 

The letter also pointed out that the Chairperson of the Advisory Committee appointed by the Supreme Court in the Jane Kaushik case, Justice (Retd.) Asha Menon wrote an urgent letter to the Union Government (Minister of MoSJE) on 25-3-2026 to withdraw the Bill, but the Government still went ahead and passed it in Parliament.

The signatories hoped that the President will exercise her constitutional powers in holding back assent and discharge her constitutional and moral responsibility in advancing the rights of some of the most marginalized communities of India. 

The Joint Appeal to the President was issued by All India Feminist Alliance (ALIFA) and National Alliance for Justice, Accountability and Rights (NAJAR) - pan indian platforms of the National Alliance of People's Movements (NAPM). ALIFA is a collective of feminist, grassroots organizations and individuals and NAJAR is a forum of progressive lawyers and legal professionals for democratic causes. Many of our members also identify as transgender, non-binary, genderqueer, intersex persons and others are in solidarity, together asserting constitutional and human rights.



---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: NAJAR Justice Forum NAPM <najarjus...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:43 AM
Subject: Lawyers, Feminists & concerned citizens urge you to exercise powers under Article 111 of the Constitution to send the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill 2026 back to Parliament for reconsideration
To: <presiden...@rb.nic.in>, <secy.pr...@rb.nic.in>, <osd...@rb.nic.in>


image.png

 

All-India Feminist Alliance (ALIFA)

 

National Alliance for Justice,

Accountability & Rights (NAJAR)

 

image.png

ALIFA

(associated with National Alliance of People’s Movements - NAPM)

NAJAR

 

                                                                                                                        Date: 26.03.2026

To,
Smt. Draupadi Murmu,
Hon’ble President of India,

Rashtrapati Bhavan,

New Delhi.

Sub: Lawyers, Feminists & concerned citizens urge you to exercise powers under Article 111 of the Constitution to send the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill 2026 back to Parliament for reconsideration

Respected Madam,

We, the undersigned lawyers, law students, feminists and social activists - members of the All-India Feminist Alliance (ALIFA) and National Alliance for Justice, Accountability and Rights (NAJAR) – pan India platforms associated with the National Alliance of People's Movements (NAPM) are extremely alarmed and distressed at the undue and unjustifiable haste with which the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha have passed the deeply problematic and regressive Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026 completely disregarding community concerns, opposition voices and in violation of established parliamentary procedures and multiple binding judgements of the Supreme Court.

We strongly urge you not to grant assent to the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026 and instead send it back to Parliament for reconsideration by exercising your power under Article 111 of the Constitution of India.

We provide the following grounds for you to withhold your assent:

Procedural infirmities in the manner in which the Bill was passed by Parliament

1.      Dr. Virendra Kumar, Minister of Social Justice and Empowerment (MoSJE), introduced the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill (hereinafter ‘the Bill’), 2026 in Lok Sabha on 13 March 2026. The Bill was suddenly added to the agenda of the House through a supplementary list of business without affording MPs sufficient opportunity to read the Bill before its introduction.


2.      Violating the mandate of the Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy, 2014, the Government did not undertake any prior public and stakeholder consultation on the Bill before introducing it in Parliament.


3.      The Bill was subsequently taken up by Lok Sabha and passed on 24 March 2026 despite severe opposition. Going against settled parliamentary conventions, the reply by Finance Minister to the debate on Finance Bill was postponed to suddenly take up the Bill.


4.      In the Business Advisory Committee as well as on the floor of the House, several MPs requested the Government to send the Bill to a Standing or Select Committee for proper scrutiny, analysis and stakeholder consultation. However, the Government refused to send the Bill to a Committee without providing any cogent reason for the same.


5.      The Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, Kiren Rijiju also misled the House by claiming on the floor of Lok Sabha that extensive debate had happened on the Bill, when in fact, Government had not undertaken any consultation on the Bill.


6.      The Bill was immediately taken up by Rajya Sabha the next day, i.e. on 25 March 2026. Again, several MPs moved motion to refer the Bill to a Select Committee and demanded this during debate on the Bill as well, but the Government again refused to do so.


7.      At no point of time has the Government explained the reason for the extraordinary rush with which the Bill was pushed through Parliament without proper scrutiny and stakeholder consultation when widespread protests have been ongoing against the Bill.


8.      There was also no consultation even with the members of the National Council for Transgender Persons (NCTP) constituted under the 2019 Act, before bringing in these amendments. At the last minute the NCTP members were invited to Delhi, on 22nd March, 2026; but the Minister, MoSJE didn't meet the Council. As on date, it is reported that multiple members of NCTP have resigned, owing to severe democratic deficit in the entire process and the far-reaching effects this regressive Bill would have on transgender persons.

Constitutional violations through the provisions of the Bill

1.      In National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014) 5 SCC 438 [“NALSA Judgement”], the Supreme Court held that the right to self-determination / self-identification of one’s gender is a fundamental right protected under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. The Bill omits Section 4(2) of the Principal Act, which guaranteed every person the right to self-perceived gender identity, thereby violating constitutional rights of citizens of India.


2.      The Bill introduces a new “authority,” defined as a medical board, whose recommendation the District Magistrate is required to ‘examine’ before issuing a certificate of identity. The Supreme Court in NALSA judgment expressly rejected the requirement of medical evaluation as a pre-condition for recognizing gender identity. This also violates the right to bodily integrity and privacy protected under Article 21 (Puttaswamy v. Union of India).


3.      While the Bill is presented as making implementation ‘more effective’ by reaching those who are “in actual need of protection” the amendments will in fact exclude a vast majority of the most marginalized - economically, culturally and socially - transgender people from accessing protections and rights, they are entitled to under law.


4.      The new penal provisions under the substituted Section 18 criminalize compelling any person to “outwardly present a transgender identity.” Read alongside the substantially narrowed definition of “transgender person,” these provisions effectively treat self-determined transgender identity as an outcome of ‘coercion’ or ‘deception’ rather than as a legitimate expression of personhood. They further risk being deployed against transgender communities and their support networks that have long functioned as informal safety nets, in the face of social and economic vulnerability and absence of state protection.


5.      The Bill also severely violates the recent Judgement of the Supreme Court in Jane Kaushik vs. Union of India (2025 INSC 1248) - Judgement dated 17 Oct, 2025. The Chairperson of the Advisory Committee appointed by the Supreme Court in this case, Justice (Retd.) Asha Menon wrote an urgent letter to the Union Government (MoSJE) on 25-3-2026 to withdraw the Bill, but the Government still passed it in Parliament.

Therefore, in light of the above-mentioned concerns and constitutional violations, we the undersigned concerned citizens of India, urge you, as the guardian of the fundamental rights of citizens and custodian of constitutional values and morality, to:

1.      Withhold your assent to the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026 as passed by both Houses of Parliament.


2.      Instead, by invoking your powers under Article 111 of the Constitution of India, refer the Bill back to the Parliament of India with the recommendation that the Bill be referred to the relevant Standing Committee or a Select or Joint Parliament Committee for impartial and thorough scrutiny and extensive consultations with members of the transgender, intersex, non-binary and genderqueer communities, collectives and civil society, civil liberties groups on the operational and procedural aspects and limitations of the 2019 Act and the present Bill.

We are hopeful that you will stand with the citizens of India and exercise your constitutional powers and discharge your constitutional responsibility in advancing the rights of one of the most marginalized communities of India.

Your sincerely,

ALIFA Members

NAJAR Members

  1. Meena Saraswathi Seshu, Sangram, Sangli, Maharashtra
  2. Suneetha A, Feminist Researcher, ALIFA, Hyderabad.
  3. Ravali P, Social Worker, Hyderabad, Telangana
  4. Saakshi Samant, Law Student, Mumbai, Maharashtra
  5. J Devika, Feminist Historian, Kerala.
  6. Ponnu Ima, Trans-Queer Person, Sahayatrika, Kerala
  7. Madhu Bhushan, Feminist Activist, Karnataka
  8. Ammu Abraham, Activist, Mumbai
  9. Adv Dr Shalu Nigam, Delhi NCR
  10. Neharika Mahajan, New Delhi.
  11. Laxmi Murthy, Bangalore
  12. K. Sajaya, Women and Transgender Org Joint Action Committee, Telangana
  13. V. Sandhya, WTJAC, Hyderabad
  14. Bhanu Kalluri, Feminist Activist, Hyderabad
  15. Jayasree Subramanian, Academic, Hyderabad
  16. Sharanya, Koraput, Odisha
  17. Shivani Taneja, Social Activist, Bhopal
  18. Svati Shah, Academic, Mumbai
  19. Kalpana Karunakaran, Academic, Chennai
  20. Mamata Dash, New Delhi
  21. Moumita Alam, North Bengal
  22. Arundhati Dhuru, Lucknow, NAPM
  23. Prof. Rosemary Dzuvichu, Nagaland
  24. Shilpa Parthan, Researcher, Kerala
  25. Arundhati Ghosh, Bangalore
  26. Grace Banu, Trans Rights Now Collective, Tamil Nadu
  27. Nisha Gulur, Human rights activist, Bengaluru
  28. Ritu, Queers for Constitution Collective- New Delhi
  29. Nikita, Researcher, Delhi/Haryana
  30. Smita Gupta, Economist and Activist, New Delhi
  31. Dr. Sanju, ALIFA Rajasthan
  32. Nidhi, ALIFA
  33. Biraja Nandan Mishra, Odisha
  34. Ayan A, Queer Art and Action, Goa/Kolkata
  35. Kamal, Social activist, Vadodara, Gujarat
  36. Seema Azad, Social Activist, UP
  37. Ananya Iyer, Researcher, UP/Rajasthan
  38. Radhika Desai, Independent Researcher and Consultant, Gender and Livelihoods, Goa
  39. Aditi Maddali, Researcher, Mumbai
  40. Arti Zodpe, MJSS, Parbhani
  41. Sagrika Rajora, Lawyer and Researcher, New Delhi.
  42. Yashna, Trans person, New Delhi
  43. Akanksha Mehta, researcher and educator
  44. Sagari Ramdas, Food Sovereignty Alliance
  45. P E Usha, Activist, Althia Women Collective, Kerala
  46. Chayanika Shah, Educator, Mumbai
  47. Geeta Seshu, Journalist, Mumbai
  48. Meera Sanghamitra, ALIFA Telangana 
  49. Gabriele Dietrich, NAPM Tamil Nadu
  50. Bittu K R, scientist, Haryana
  51. Ritash, gender-fluid writer, Karnataka
  52. Nandini Rao Akkaraju, Social activist, New Delhi
  53. Don Hasar, Social Activist, Himachal
  54. N. Indira Rani, Independent Researcher & MH Practitioner, Telangana
  55. Neha Saigal, Bangalore
  56. Renuka Kad, Researcher, Maharashtra
  57. Albertina Almeida, Advocate, Goa.
  58. Nikita Naidu, Climate Change and Regenerative Justice, Telangana
  59. Gouthami, Feminist, North Goa
  60. Rahee SG, PhD Student, New Delhi & ALIYSA, ALIFA, NAPM
  61. Shiva, Feminist Researcher, New Delhi
  62. Tarini Manchanda, Independent Filmmaker, New Delhi
  63. Peehu Pardeshi, Academic, Mumbai
  64. Kavita Srivastava, President, PUCL India (Rajasthan)
  65. Faizan Khan, Independent Filmmaker, New Delhi
  66. Mukta Srivastava, Right to Food Campaign, Maharashtra
  67. Nikita Chatterjee, Feminist Activist, Bhopal
  68. Dr. Vandana Prasad, Public Health Activist, New Delhi
  69. Laxmi Murthy, Independent Journalist, Bengaluru
  70. Shewli, Academician, Mumbai
  1. Gayatri Singh, Sr Advocate, Bombay High Court
  2. Muskan Tibrewala, Lawyer, Chennai
  3. Gatha, Thiruvananthapuram, Lawyer and Researcher, Keralam
  4. Pratik, Lawyer, Delhi NCR
  5. Avanti Deshpande, Lawyer, New Delhi
  6. Ishika Hazra, Law Student, West Bengal
  7. Auronisha Roy, Law Student, Kolkata
  8. Harsh Kinger, Advocate, Gujarat
  9. Ameya Deb, Law student, Bangalore
  10. Nikita Chavan, Law Student, Mumbai
  11. Khalil ur Rehaman, Advocate, Bombay High Court
  12. Shreya Panda, Law Student, Hyderabad
  13. Shafiujjma Ashraf, Law student, Punjab
  14. Diya Elizabeth Prakash, Law Student, Delhi
  15. Samaa, Law Student, Kanker, Chhattisgarh
  16. Shanthala Ramesh, Law student, Gurgaon, Haryana
  17. Ameya Bokil, Legal Researcher, Bangalore
  18. Iswarya, Advocate, Chennai
  19. Parvathi Nair, Lawyer, Bangalore
  20. Dewangi, Legal Researcher, Delhi
  21. Winona D’Souza, Lawyer, Ahmedabad
  22. Madhura, Lawyer, Chennai
  23. Lekshmi, Lawyer, Trivandrum
  24. Rishav, Lawyer, Dehradun
  25. Ananya Aerra, Law student, Hyderabad
  26. Vishwas Tanwar, Lawyer, Delhi
  27. Disha D, Lawyer, Surat, Gujarat
  28. Siddhi Shinde, Law Student, Mumbai
  29. Anushka Ojha, Advocate, New Delhi
  30. Shraddha Halapnavar, Advocate, Karnataka
  31. Katyayani Chandola, Advocate, New Delhi
  32. Raksha Awasya, Advocate, New Delhi
  33. Sachin PS, Lawyer, Bangalore
  34. Bhagyesha Kurane, Advocate, Bombay High Court
  35. Tanishqua Dhar, Advocate, Delhi
  36. Geet, Advocate, New Delhi
  37. Maansi V, Lawyer, Delhi
  38. Hozefa Ujjaini, Advocate, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
  39. Purbayan Chakraborty, Advocate Calcutta High Court, West Bengal
  40. Sirishree Hotanahalli, Advocate, High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench
  41. Ritesh Dhar Dubey, Lawyer, Delhi
  42. Varishtha Singh, Advocate, Delhi
  43. Ramani VM, Advocate, Madras High Court, Chennai
  44. Ranjit Vaghela, Lawyer, Ahmedabad Gujarat
  45. Vertika Mani, Advocate and Secretary PUCL Delhi
  46. Naveed Bukhtiyar, Advocate, J&K High Court.
  47. Daniel Jose, Lawyer, Ernakulam, Kerala
  48. Shafaqat Badiger, Law student Dharwad, Karnataka
  49. Maharathi Madhu Kiran, Law student, Hubballi, Karnataka
  50. Bhargav Oza, Lawyer & Labour researcher, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
  51. Farha Qureshi, Lawyer, Delhi
  52. Gowtham, Law Student, Tiruchirapalli, Tamil Nadu
  53. Anju Rao G. Lawyer, Hyderabad
  54. Bijoya Chanda, Advocate, West Bengal
  55. Sanjana Srikumar, Advocate, New Delhi
  56. Sabika, Lawyer, Lucknow
  57. Nisha Biswas, Law Researcher, Kolkata
  58. Somaya, Advocate, New Delhi
  59. Edgar Kaiser, Advocate, Tamil Nadu
  60. Akram, Advocate, Jammu
  61. Venkatraman, Advocate, Madurai, Tamil Nadu
  62. Shubham Kaushal, Law Researcher, Ahmedabad
  63. Sudha Bharadwaj, Advocate, Mumbai and Chhattisgarh
  64. Cassandra Nazareth, Lawyer, Goa
  65. Akhil Surya, Law Researcher, Hyderabad
  66. T Mohan, Advocate, Chennai, TN
  67. Ninni Susan Thomas, Advocate, New Delhi
  68. GK Anser, Advocate, Karnataka
  69. Kavin Castro, Advocate, Chennai
  70. Nishita Sharma, Law Student, Hyderabad.
  71. Carina Singh, Lawyer, Delhi

 

 


Letter to President on Transgender Amendment Bill.docx
Letter to President on Transgender Amendment Bill.pdf
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages