A regressive step for Scottish policing: Police Scotland Interim transgender search guidance
Image: Progress flag at Police Scotland headquarters (posted on X 6 June 2024)
1. Introduction
On 25 June 2025 Police Scotland published Interim guidance on Searching of transgender persons and searching by transgender police officers and police staff. Police Scotland developed the guidance in response to the UK Supreme Court judgment, which clarified that the terms ‘man’, ‘woman’, and ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010, refer to biological sex.
The default interim policy requires strip searches to be undertaken on the basis of biological sex. However, it also contains a self-ID provision, that allows detainees to request to be searched by an officer of the opposite sex, providing written consent is given by the searching officer, authorising officer and detainee.
The blog looks at the ‘consent’ principle, focusing principally on the implications for female officers. We note this has no clear basis in law and is not provided for in the statutory Scottish Code of Practice on Stop and Search, which also covers strip searches outwith custody.
Looking at the policy itself, we argue that the expectation that female officers may consent to interactions that the default policy recognises as potentially degrading and humiliating is incoherent.
Building on this, we argue that Police Scotland’s vigorous promotion of gender affirmation principles, within a hierarchical and male-dominated profession, undermines any possibility of meaningful consent. We conclude that the interim policy is profoundly sexist and a blow to the rights of women working as police officers for Police Scotland.
2. Interim transgender search policy: overview
The interim Police Scotland policy largely mirrors an interim policy published by the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) in May 2025, which covers England and Wales.
Whilst requiring that detainees are searched by an officer of the same biological sex, both policies include a self-ID loophole, which allows detainees to request to be searched by an officer of the opposite sex. The Police Scotland policy states:
when an individual, whose lived gender differs from their biological sex is subject to search and requests to be searched by an officer of their lived gender, efforts will be made to ensure an appropriate officer conducts the search, where this is operationally viable to do so.
Police Scotland Interim Guidance – Searching of transgender persons and searching by transgender police officers and police staff, June 2025
In these circumstances, written consent is required from the authorising officer (Inspector rank or above), the person to be searched, and the officer(s) conducting the search.’
Both policies also allow for detainees to ‘ask for a separate area search’, whereby ‘one half of their body will be searched by one biological sex Officer and the other half of their body will be searched by a different biological sex Officer’.
If a willing officer is not available, the policies revert to a search by an officer of the same sex.
The transgender detainee will be supervised until an Officer is identified who consents to carry out the search. Should this not occur within a reasonable time, or the risk be deemed too great, the search will be carried out by an Officer of the same biological sex as the transgender detainee.
Police Scotland Interim Guidance – Searching of transgender persons and searching by transgender police officers and police staff, June 2025
The self-ID loophole, which in Scotland refers to the ‘lived gender’ of the detainee, has no clear basis in law. Rather, as noted above, it rests on a ‘consent’ principle. The charity Sex Matters state that the NPCC policy is unlawful, and that officers cannot ‘consent’ to break the law.
3. Scottish Code of Practice on stop and search
On the day of publication, the Chief Constable met with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and advised her of Police Scotland’s intention to publish the Interim policy that afternoon.
A note of the meeting indicates that the Scottish Government asked that publication be delayed, to align with a forthcoming government consultation on the existing Code of Practice on Stop and Search in Scotland. The Chief Constable said that clarity was needed now and proceeded with publication that afternoon.
Police Scotland state the Interim policy will be revised and finalised following any revisions to the Code of Practice on Stop and Search, and publication of the revised EHRC Code of Practice on services, public functions and associations.
It is clear that the existing Code of Practice on Stop and Search is Scotland needs revising in light of the UK Supreme Court ruling. As it stands, it explicitly provides for searches based on ‘sex’ as conferred by a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), which is likely to be found unlawful if tested. It is badly drafted in places, incorporates wording recommended by Stonewall Scotland that departs from Equality Act definitions, and on one reading appears to provide for searches based on gender self-identification (although this is muddled at best).
Significantly, the Code does not make any provision for officers to ‘consent’ to searching opposite sex detainees. Indeed, the Code itself came about directly in response to widespread concern about uncodified stop and search based on nominal ‘consent’, that saw Police Scotland reported to the UN Human Rights Committee by the Scottish Human Rights Commission. We explain this background in Annex 1.
4. Policy incoherence
Police Scotland’s default interim position is that strip searches should be carried out on the basis of biological sex. The rationale for this is obvious. Strip searches engage with privacy and dignity principles. Such searches can be highly intrusive and involve the exposure of intimate parts. Male detainees may be required to lift their penis and testicles. A female detainee may be required to spread their legs and lift their breasts. Both sexes may be asked to bend over. Strip searching someone of the opposite sex is likely to be humiliating and degrading for the detainee and potentially for the officer also. Where a male detainee actively wishes to be searched by a woman, the potential for a degrading situation for that woman is increased. Opposite-sex strip searching is therefore prohibited in most circumstances.
The Interim policy expects that some officers will freely consent to an interaction which the default policy understands to be potentially humiliating and degrading. In other words, it anticipates that some officers will freely consent to an interaction that is not in their interests. This is simply incoherent.
5. Under pressure?
For consent to be meaningful, a person must be fully informed, have the capacity to give consent, and lastly, be able to give consent voluntarily, without coercion or pressure, either implicit or explicit. The Interim policy engages most clearly with the latter.
Whether female officers will feel free and comfortable in refusing to search male detainees will be influenced by Police Scotland’s organisational culture, its values and beliefs, and leadership behaviours. It will also be influenced by the balance of power, both across the organisation and in any immediate situation. These factors are considered below.
6. Organisational values and leadership
Police Scotland has a strong track record of promoting gender affirmation in its policies, corporate messaging, and through close working partnerships with activist groups.
The single service invests heavily in general Equality Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) activity, covering all characteristics. In June 2025 the Spectator reported that the single service has 54 EDI posts at a cost of £2.8 million per year (including administrative support). Police Scotland has a dedicated LGBTQI+ portfolio, with four officers attached. In 2024 it recruited a LGBTQI citizen’s panel to advise on ‘building trust amongst LGBTQI+ people’. A Police Scotland Freedom of Information response states:
LGBTQI+ work has been ongoing since the inception of the national equality and diversity team and managed by Local Divisions prior to ‘Police Scotland’. There is currently one Inspector, one Sergeant and two Constables attached to the Police Scotland LGBTQI+ portfolio with Senior Leadership support.
Police Scotland, Freedom of Information response, 6 May 2025
The 2019 Police Scotland Transitioning at Work policy (currently under review) allows trans-identified men and male cross-dressers, in its own words, to use female facilities. This was supported by the previous Scottish Police Authority Chair, Martyn Evans.
Between 2019 and 2024 Police Scotland defended a policy that allowed rapists to be recorded as women. It repeatedly stated that this was ‘in line with its values’. It told a Scottish Parliament Committee that the policy promoted ‘a sense of belonging’.
In March 2024 it came to light that Police Scotland officers had devised training on hate crime legislation that included a scenario featuring a fictional gender-critical character called ‘Jo’, with a large social media following, who stated that trans people ‘belong in the gas chambers’. The Telegraph stated that Police Scotland refused multiple opportunities to deny that the character was based on the author J.K. Rowling.
Gender identity jargon
A recent promotion in a local police station displayed ‘gender alphabet’ posters, featuring affirmative gender identity jargon such as hir/zie’, ‘cisgender’, ‘demisexual’, and so on.
Allegiance to the flag
In 2022 and 2023, as part of Pride Month Police Scotland officers took part in initiatives to sign the Progress Flag, to demonstrate their allyship (here and here).
Images: Police Scotland update to Argyll and Bute Local Authority, 2023
In June 2024 Police Scotland raised the Progress Flag at the Headquarters in Tulliallan. In a report to the Scottish Police Authority (SPA), the Chief Constable said:
This month we are recognising PRIDE with a programme as part of this. I publicly apologised to the LGBTQI+ community which was published on 29 May. We are also flying of the Intersex-Inclusive Progress Pride Flag at Scottish Police Headquarters, Tulliallan for the first time and a range of events have been developed by our LGBTQI+ Community and their allies.
Chief Constable’s Report, 27 June 2024
In her apology for the role of policing in enforcing laws that it had no part in making. Ms Farrell stated:
We are empowering leaders to build inclusive teams; improving our education and training for all our officers and staff to ensure they understand and respect the issues facing the LGBTQI+ communities and on equality laws; focusing on our values and standards; and delivering a clear and consistent message that there is no place in Police Scotland for prejudice.
Police Scotland Chief Constable Jo Farrell, 29 May 2024
Staff representation
The Scottish LGBTI Police Staff Association has an active role in policymaking. It has regular meetings with the Police Scotland LGBTQI Portfolio team to ‘jointly work on projects’. The Association also enjoys support and funding from Scottish Government. Between 2020/1 and 2024/5 it received £30,246 per annum from government (note that Scottish Government also fund several other police staff networks).
Scottish Government funding to Police Scotland’s diversity staff associations
Note: SEMPER Scotland support and represent minority ethnic employees. SPMA is the Scottish Police Muslim Association. The SWDF is the Scottish Women’s Development Forum, although it does not advocate exclusively for women.
The LGBTI Association met with the Scottish government on eleven occasions between 2022/23 and March 2025 (government also met with the other groups noted above). Minutes are available for only four of the meetings with the LGBTI Association (we do not know if minutes are available for meetings with other groups).
The Association developed the Police Scotland LGBT Allies Toolkit which strongly promotes gender affirmation. This is marked ‘Official’ and integrated into Police Scotland EDI ‘mainstreaming’ work (see page 27).
The Toolkit urges officers to “Speak up as an advocate and evangelise your allyship among others”, put pronouns on email signatures, and “wear your Scottish LGBTI Police Association lanyard with pride”.
An ‘Allies pledge’ asks officers and staff to “be comfortable with the uncomfortable”, create “psychologically safe environments for colleagues to be themselves”, and use “diversity of thought to check their own and others’ behaviour”.
Former SPA Chair Martyn Evans described the Toolkit as a ‘stepping stone’ towards ‘promoting understanding between people who share a protected characteristic and others.
What about representation for women?
There is no equivalent representation for female officers or those who believe that sex matters. The Policing SEEN network is not recognised by Scotland, whilst the Scottish Women’s Development Forum is open to men, women, serving and retired officers, and those from partner organisations.
The Police Scotland ‘Inclusion calendar (see page 3) celebrates just one day for women (International Women’s Day), compared to two months for LGBTI causes (LGBTI History Month, Pride Month). The Allies Toolkit ‘Cultural Calendar’ further recommends that colleagues commemorate Asexuality Day, Pansexual Visibility Day, International Drag Day, International Pronouns Day, and others.
Partnerships with activist groups
Police Scotland works closely with activist groups that promote gender affirmation principles.
In 2015 Police Scotland made its first application to the Stonewall Workplace Equality Index (WEI). The following year, it ranked 83 in the Stonewall’s Top 100 UK employers and was awarded ‘Most Improved Employer’. In 2017, Police Scotland was ranked 20th in the UK. In 2021 Police Scotland was unable to provide copies of its correspondence with Stonewall, due to the size of the task. Police Scotland left the WEI in 2023 but continues to partner with activist groups.
Both Scottish Trans and Stonewall Scotland advised Police Scotland on its Stop and Search Standard Operating Procedure, recommending an approach based on gender affirmation. The Care and Welfare of Persons in Police Custody policy was written in consultation with Scottish Trans. This advised that detainees ‘should be searched according to the gender they present and live their lives as’.
Police Scotland has partnered with controversial charity LGBT Youth Scotland for over eight years. In September 2024 the City of Edinburgh Council and BBC’s Children in Need cut their funding to the charity. The following month Police Scotland confirmed that a “commitment to the [LGBT Youth Scotland] charter is being piloted by Edinburgh & C3 divisions”. In January 2025 Police Scotland described LGBTYS as a ‘key partner’.
Impartial policing?
Of particular relevance here is the recent ruling in Lindsey Smith v The Chief Constable of Northumbria Police. Applying an impartiality test, the judge found the Force’s participation in a Pride march gave the impression of “institutional support for gender ideology and transgender rights” and should not have been authorised by Chief Constable Vanessa Jardine (Ms Jardine is also the NPCC lead for its LGBTQI+ portfolio with joint responsibility for its Interim transgender search policy). It is understood that following the ruling, Northumbria Police will no longer take part in Pride, or other activities that promote gender ideology. Police Scotland also pulled its own officers from the Glasgow Pride march, and stated that it is looking at the implications of the ruling.
7. (Im)balance of power
Policing is a ranked profession, with a hierarchy of authority. Junior officers are expected to obey instructions from line managers, so ‘requests’ feel like commands. Reliance on rank is greater in high-risk or pressured situations, when things need to be done quickly. As an example, custody environments are often busy and fast-paced, with pressure to process detainees and free-up response officers.
Refusing to carry out a search creates delays and puts the onus on other officers. Officers may feel pressured to ‘take one for the team’. They may worry about professional consequences. Some line managers may be sympathetic to an officer that refuses, others less so, for example, towards the end of a shift. Whilst the interim policy states that refusing to search will not impact on an officer’s career, this cannot be guaranteed.
Male-dominated profession
In Scotland, the proportion of male to female officers is almost double, with only incremental increases over the last decade, as shown in the chart below. This disparity is greater within the higher ranks (with the exception of the Chief and Deputy Chief Constables).
Police Scotland female officers, 2013 to 2024 (%)
Source: Police Scotland Equality & Diversity Employment Monitoring Report 2023/2024
‘Culture of Sexism’
Added to this imbalance, Police Scotland has a dismal record on its treatment of female officers (see here, here and here). An internal survey carried out in 2022 found ‘examples of inappropriate behaviour, language, discrimination and unfair treatment, where colleagues felt unsupported and unable to raise issues’. Female respondents reported being treated differently to male colleagues, and their experience being discounted. It found instances of discrimination ignored or dismissed as ‘banter’, with those speaking out accused of not being able to take a joke.
An Independent Review Group report published in 2024 found ‘pervasive attitudes of misogyny and sexism across all areas and divisions of Police Scotland’, which contributed to ‘a hostile environment for women who may choose to leave their careers early or to change career path’.
8. Conclusion: A regressive step for Scottish policing
For the best part of a decade Police Scotland has promoted a belief in gender affirmation in the name of ‘inclusion’. Taking the lead from activist groups, it has written gender affirmation into its policies and insisted this is in line with its values. It has actively promoted resources urging officers and staff to use pronouns, display symbols, and ‘evangelise’ their allyship. Officers have signed the Progress flag to show their allegiance. The Force has also raised the Progress flag at its Headquarters. Police Scotland has worked extensively with activist groups that have characterised people arguing that sex is relevant as ‘anti-trans lobbyists’.
The single service has now introduced a policy that, firstly, anticipates some officers will freely consent to an interaction that the policy itself clearly recognises as degrading and is obviously not in the officer’s interests. It anticipates that some other officers who do not wish to give their consent will feel free to defy the organisational “values” that Police Scotland has so vigorously promoted. It also anticipates that women officers will feel free to say ‘no’ to their predominantly male managers, in a hierarchical and male-dominated profession.
This feels like either naivety or wilful blindness. It fails to recognise that any semblance of consent will be unstable, situational, and dependent on the individuals involved. It reflects particularly badly on the Police Scotland legal team and on the human rights advisor engaged by the force who is credited with extensively advising on the policy’s development.
As noted in the introduction, the Scottish Government intends to revise its statutory Code of Practice on Stop and Search following the Supreme Court judgment. This may well put the government on a collision course with the Police Scotland. A decade ago the Scottish Human Rights Commission argued that ‘consensual’ stop and search was unlawful and reported Police Scotland to the United Nations Human Rights Committee. On the recommendation of an Advisory Group established by the Scottish Government and chaired by a human rights lawyer, in December 2015 the Scottish Parliament voted to put all searches on a statutory basis.
For Police Scotland to now anticipate that some female officers will willingly strip search men based on the same sort of uncodified and untenable consent principle, makes a mockery of the successive commitments made by senior officers to improve Police Scotland’s treatment of women. It is a seriously regressive step for Scottish policing.
Annex 1. Abolishing ‘consensual’ stop and search
The Stop and Search Code of Practice is provided for in a series of amendments to the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2016, which radically reformed the regulation of stop and search in Scotland. Most significantly, the Act abolished the use of non-statutory stop and search, that is, searching without any basis in law.
The provisions in the 2016 Act came about on the recommendation of an Advisory Group established by the Scottish Government and chaired by then Solicitor Advocate John Scott QC. This followed a drawn-out controversy over the use of stop and search in Scotland during which Police Scotland fiercely defended non-statutory search, which it dubbed ‘consensual’, with the implication that people were freely agreeing to be searched.
The Independent Advisory Group report countered this interpretation. It described the tactic as lacking a legal framework, and ‘of questionable lawfulness and legitimacy’. It also questioned ‘how genuine and informed any “consent” has been, in view of the age and vulnerabilities of some of the individuals being asked to consent, especially given the perceived imbalance in power between the police and public’. The Scottish Government accepted the Group’s recommendations in full.
In December 2015, at Stage 3 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill, the then Justice Minister Michael Matheson at the Stage 3 debate explained:
The bill will introduce a new code of practice after a period of consultation. When that code of practice comes into effect, the current practice of non-statutory, or consensual, stop and search will end. From that point on, searches by the police of people not in police custody will be carried out only where there is a statutory authority or a warrant to do so.
The Code came into effect via secondary legislation in January 2017, bringing Scotland in line with England and Wales, which had prohibited non-statutory stop and search in relation to juveniles and persons incapable of giving consent since 1990, and across the board since 2003.
At Section 3.3 the Code states that searches must be in accordance with the law and that a person cannot be searched, even if they submit voluntarily [i.e. consent]. The only exception to this is “protect life”.
Constables must not search a person, even if they are prepared to submit to a search voluntarily, where no statutory power to search is applicable, and they have no warrant to do so.
