Vandalising the law

Across the animal kingdom, males have evolved elaborate ways of marking territory. Cardiff offered a vivid demonstration this weekend. While drag queens, human pups and bondage enthusiasts paraded down the high street for Pride, trans activists elsewhere in the city sprayed slogans across the offices of the Companies House, where the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is based.

The militant direct-action group Trans Bash Back claimed that “independent actionists representing BASH BACK” were responsible for the vandalism. “The EHRC cannot run away from the consequences of their bigoted ‘guidance’,” it boasted on social media, adding ominously: “The fight continues.”

Trans Bash Back has been linked to a series of disturbing events. Last July, activists smashed the windows of Health Secretary Wes Streeting’s constituency office and daubed “child killer” across the building. Months later, they targeted the FiLiA feminist conference before attacking the London headquarters of the EHRC, which was subsequently forced to relocate. In January, the group turned to doxxing, publishing the names and details of Free Speech Union donors.

Trans Bash Back is not exactly subtle in its mission to target “organisations that promote transphobic rhetoric”. A direct-action manual urges supporters to “ensure your target can be hit repeatedly until they desist from their activities”, adding: “All of our targets have blood on their hands. We refuse to let them wash it off in peace.”

Ceri Rosser, deputy co-ordinator for WRN Wales, says that the targeting of the EHRC was predictable, pointing out that Plaid Cymru itself has pledged to “uphold trans people’s right to continue to access services and facilities in accordance with their gender identity.” 

“No wonder these angry men feel empowered to smash up the offices of the EHRC in their latest attempt at intimidation. They know they have the establishment in Wales either firmly on their side or cowering in fear on the sidelines,” she adds.

It’s true that otherwise respectable Senedd members are in ideological lockstep with the vandals. Earlier this week, Plaid Cymru’s Sarah Rees tabled a motion expressing “solidarity with trans people” and claiming that “there are shortcomings in the practical application of the Supreme Court’s judgment”. A rival motion, tabled by Conservative Natasha Asghar, followed two days later.

The division seems unlikely to be healed by the usual democratic processes, such as sitting in the chamber together and engaging in debate. On Thursday, Reform UK’s Cristiana Emsley MS rose to speak about the EHRC guidance and the obligation of public bodies to comply with the law as clarified by the Supreme Court. This was hardly a revolutionary proposition — the law is the law, whether politicians happen to like it or not.

Yet some Plaid Cymru members apparently found even listening to this argument intolerable. Rather than challenge Emsley’s claims, question her reasoning or rebut her interpretation, they chose simply to turn and walk out before she had opened her mouth.

It is hard not to see a parallel between the contempt of trans activists for the law and that displayed by some politicians within the Senedd itself. In a healthy democracy, people are robust enough to listen to, or at least tolerate opinions they dislike. They campaign to change laws they think are unfair through persuasion and reasoned argument. A refusal to hear opposing views often betrays a lack of confidence in one’s own. 

The Supreme Court’s ruling that sex in law means “female” and “male” may have disappointed activists. The EHRC’s guidance on the judgment may have disappointed Plaid politicians. But facts cannot simply be wished away, and walking out of the room does not alter the law any more than spraying paint on a wall does. Whether wearing a lanyard in the Senedd or a balaclava in the street, too many activists appear to regard institutions and laws as legitimate only when they produce the desired result. 

When democratic institutions cease to command respect from those who govern them, the vandals have already won

Democracy requires what political scientists call the consent of the loser. Governments function because people who lose arguments, elections and court cases nevertheless accept the legitimacy of the institutions that produced those outcomes. Mature political movements accept defeats and set about persuading the public. Immature activists reach for spray paint, denunciations and walkouts.

The graffiti on the EHRC’s offices will eventually be scrubbed away. The more serious problem is a culture where lawmakers seem to have limited respect for the law. When democratic institutions cease to command respect from those who govern them, the vandals have already won, pissing over what has taken millennia to build.