rape cases

The UK Supreme Court has ruled that biological sex, not self-declared gender identity, must be recorded by police when logging criminal offences, bringing an end to the controversial practice of allowing male sex offenders to be officially registered as women.

The decision is expected to standardise how police forces in England and Wales record data on suspects, particularly those charged with rape and other sexual offences, by using birth sex rather than preferred gender identity. The ruling clarified that trans women are not the same as biological women under the Equality Act 2010, and as such, certain legal protections and definitions must remain sex-specific.

The outcome follows mounting criticism over instances where men who identify as women have been categorised as female in police records, despite the legal definition of rape requiring the use of a penis.

The issue drew national attention in the case of Adam Graham, who began identifying as Isla Bryson while awaiting trial for two counts of rape. Despite his convictions and male anatomy, he was initially remanded to a women’s prison in Scotland before being transferred to a male facility following widespread public concern. The case prompted Police Scotland to update its policy to prohibit self-identification for suspects in rape cases.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) has previously issued guidance advising forces to ask suspects whether they are “male”, “female”, or “intersex”, and explicitly cautioned against conflating gender with sex, noting that gender is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act. However, a review conducted last year found that at least 12 police forces continued to allow rape suspects to self-identify their gender in reports submitted as part of the Annual Data Requirement (ADR) to the Home Office.

The Supreme Court’s decision now places a legal obligation on forces to adhere to the statutory definition of sex. Police sources believe the ruling eliminates ambiguity over how transgender suspects, especially those accused of serious sexual crimes, should be categorised in official documentation.

The policy implications of the judgment have been welcomed by groups advocating for sex-based data integrity in policing. SEEN UK, a network of serving police officers with gender critical views, issued a statement urging full compliance across all forces. A spokesperson said: “The police service is bound by a duty to uphold the law impartially and without fear or favour. That duty must not be compromised by political or ideological pressures. The rights of women and girls, especially those enshrined in sex-based protections, are a matter of law, not preference.”

David Spencer, head of crime and justice at the think tank Policy Exchange, also supported the change, stating: “This week’s judgment by the UK Supreme Court shines a light on policies across the public sector. An independent review this year found police forces do not consistently record the natal sex of alleged sex offenders – meaning suspected rapists may not be accurately recorded in police records. This could have grave consequences for whether the police are able to effectively investigate sexual offences.”

Spencer added that the misrecording of offenders’ sex could undermine the public’s confidence in policing, and that the ruling marks a return to “a common-sense approach”.

Chief Constable Rachel Swann, who chairs the NPCC’s diversity, equality and inclusion committee, acknowledged the ruling and indicated that a full review of internal policies would now follow. “I welcome the clarity that the decision at the Supreme Court has provided, and we will be reviewing our policies and procedures in accordance with the outcome,” she said. “We will need time to consider the full implications of the court’s decision, as will many other public bodies.”

While the NPCC had already launched a review into data collection practices concerning sex and gender, prompted by the fallout from the Bryson case, it has not yet published its findings. The Supreme Court’s ruling now provides a clear legal foundation on which public bodies, including police forces, are expected to base their practices.

The clarification is anticipated to affect not only police records but also broader statistical reporting across the criminal justice system. It comes amid wider debates around the role of gender identity in legal, medical and educational contexts, particularly where definitions of sex carry statutory significance.

The Home Office has not yet issued an official statement in response to the judgment. However, legal observers note that the ruling places a renewed emphasis on the legal definitions embedded in the Equality Act 2010, requiring consistent application across all relevant institutions.