By Qamar Naseem

In Pakistan’s socio-legal landscape, transgender persons have long existed at the margins excluded from public life, denied basic services, and rendered invisible within state systems. While the Constitution of Pakistan guarantees equality, dignity, and protection for all citizens against discrimination, the lived realities of transgender persons reveal a persistent gap between constitutional ideals and everyday practice. The passage of the Transgender Persons Protection of Rights Act in 2018 marked a historic moment in Pakistan’s legislative landscape.

At a time when transgender persons were largely invisible in law and policy and subject to neglect and marginalization, the Act was widely celebrated as a progressive and rights-affirming framework. It provided legal recognition to the transgender persons, and sought to protect them from discrimination, harassment, and exclusion, while affirming their right to dignity, inheritance, education, employment, healthcare, property and political participation.

Yet, seven years on, the promise of the 2018 Act remains contested. The trajectory of the law reflects the complex intersection of constitutional mandates, religious interpretation, institutional capacity, and deeply entrenched social attitudes. Rather than consolidating protection, the evolving discourse around the Act has uncovered structural weaknesses within Pakistan’s rights enforcement framework, raising questions about how progressive legislation is translated into lived realities.

While its intent was transformative, its scope, structure, and subsequent developments reveal significant legal loopholes and gaps that continue to limit its effective implementation and have, in some cases, triggered backlash and confusion.

One of the fundamental limitations of the Transgender Persons Protection of Rights Act, 2018 lies in its jurisdictional scope. Within the definition sections of the Act, the term government means federal government. Equally significant is the Act’s silence on transgender children and juveniles. Legal recognition and registration mechanisms envisaged under the Act, including registration with NADRA and other government departments, are limited to transgender persons who have attained the age of 18. T

his exclusion leaves transgender children without legal recognition during formative years when access to education, healthcare, family protection, and identity documents is most critical. Without birth registration aligned to their gender identity or pathways for later correction prior to adulthood, transgender children remain legally invisible. This invisibility compounds vulnerabilities within schools, healthcare facilities, and child protection systems, where identity documents are often prerequisites for access and inclusion. The absence of child-specific provisions fails to acknowledge the realities of early gender expression and exposes transgender children to heightened risks of abuse.

Another major shortcoming of the Act relates to the definitional framework. Section 2, particularly definition 2(1)(n), conflates intersex persons, eunuchs, and transgender persons within a single legal category. These are distinct sexual and gender identities, each with different lived realities, needs, and vulnerabilities.

By grouping them together under the umbrella term of transgender, the Act risks conceptual confusion, weakens targeted protection, and undermines the development of evidence-based policies and services tailored to specific groups. It also reinforces misinterpretations that have been exploited in public discourse, where biological variations and gender identity are deliberately conflated to question the legitimacy of transgender identities altogether.

Clear and precise definitions are not merely technical legal requirements; they shape how institutions interpret rights, design interventions, and deliver services. The definitional ambiguities within the Act have contributed to inconsistent implementation and widespread misunderstanding among state institutions, service providers, and the broader public.

While the Act recognizes a wide range of rights, it falls short in establishing an effective enforcement and accountability framework. The complaint redressal mechanisms referenced in the Act rely primarily on federal bodies such as the National Commission on the Status of Women (NCSW), the National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR), and the Federal Ombudsperson. These bodies are recommendatory in nature, and lack binding enforcement powers.

Moreover, the Act does not clearly prescribe punishments or penalties for violations of the rights it guarantees. In the absence of defined consequences for discrimination, harassment, or denial of services, rights remain aspirational rather than actionable. This gap places an unreasonable burden on transgender persons to navigate complex complaint mechanisms without the assurance of remedies, deterrence, or institutional accountability. This enforcement vacuum significantly weakens the Act’s deterrent effect and leaves transgender persons with limited recourse when their rights are violated.

Four years later after enactment, the Act faced strong opposition from right wing religious and political actors, and certain objections were raised, claiming that the Act promotes concepts contrary to Islamic teachings and the constitutional framework. Particular criticism was directed at sections 2(1)(f), 2(1)(n)(iii) providing definitions of gender identity and transgender person, section 3 providing a right to “self-perceived gender identity” and registration with NADRA and other government departments based on it and section 7 concerning inheritance rights based on self-identified gender.

This opposition culminated in petition before the Federal Shariat Court, which in 2023 declared the same provisions of the Act as repugnant to the injunctions of Islam. The judgment significantly altered the legal and political environment surrounding the Act, triggering wave of misinformation and hate campaigns against transgender community. However, an appeal against the judgment of the Federal Shariat Court had been filed before the Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court of Pakistan. As per Article 203D and 203F of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the decision of the Federal Shariat Court remains suspended upon the filing of such an appeal until the Shariat Appellate Bench finally adjudicates the matter.

Despite this clear constitutional position, a widespread misconception persists that the Transgender Persons Protection of Rights Act, 2018 has been struck down or rendered inoperative. This misunderstanding coupled with the Council of Islamic Ideology’s conservative and restrictive position on transgender identities, has had tangible consequences. It has generated significant institutional resistance and policy hesitancy at the provincial level, with government departments and service providers showing reluctance to engage with transgender persons. The pace of reform processes related to transgender inclusion once gaining momentum has also been slowed down.

In an effort to translate the national law into actionable measures, Provincial Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through the department of Social Welfare developed Protection and Welfare Policy on Transgender and Intersex Persons 2025 following a broad based extensive consultative process. Grounded in the principles of the Act, the policy provides a comprehensive roadmap to address systemic barriers and institutional discrimination.

It outlines measures to improve access to legal documentation, healthcare, education, social protection, justice, employment, security, and access to services and opportunities, with the aim of ensuring meaningful participation of transgender persons in public and social life. However, the policy’s progress has been impeded by objections raised by the Law, Parliamentary Affairs and Human Rights Department. The observations question the legal basis of recognizing gender identity beyond biological sex, express concerns regarding the compatibility of policy provisions with Islamic injunctions and state policy, and caution against extending rights or protections to the transgender community.

These objections, while framed as legal scrutiny, have stalled a policy instrument intended to guide provincial departments in the provision of the services in alignment with the rights outlined in the Transgender Persons Protection of Rights Act, 2018.

The evolving legislative and policy landscape surrounding transgender community underscores a broader challenge facing rights-based legislation in Pakistan: the gap between progressive legal intent and effective implementation. There is an urgent need to build the capacity of government institutions at federal, provincial, and local levels to understand, interpret, and implement the existing law. Parallelly, communities must be engaged through sustained mass media sensitization campaigns to counter misinformation, challenge stereotypes, and promote social acceptance of transgender persons.

Upholding the rights, social inclusion and civic participation of transgender persons is not a peripheral concern; it is a constitutional and moral imperative. Until implemented effectively, the rights, and protections outlined in the Transgender Persons Protection of Rights Act, 2018 will remain confined to paper, while exclusion and discrimination persist in practice. Bridging this gap requires political will, institutional accountability, and a clear commitment to counter personal bias and prejudice, safeguard dignity, and ensure equal citizenship of transgender persons in Pakistan.