The High Authority for Health (HAS) must reveal the names of the members of a commission dedicated to the care of transgender people, the courts decided on Tuesday, contacted by an association, a communication that the authority does not wish for confidentiality reasons.
The Montreuil administrative court had been contacted by Jurists for Children, an association close to the Manif pour Tous, which demanded to know the identity of the members of this commission.
“The High Health Authority is ordered to communicate to the Jurists for Children association the document establishing the composition of the “Transition pathway for transgender people” working group
,” the court decided.
Recurring context of controversies
This legal action is part of a recurring context of controversies surrounding the care of transgender people: some regret a lack of listening to the medical profession while others, conversely, fear a disappearance of safeguards gender transitions that could, according to them, prove premature.
Jurists for Children has regularly expressed its fear of seeing the HAS commission dominated by
“transactivist activists”
or by doctors specializing in gender transition and therefore, according to the association, exposed to conflicts of interest.
The HAS, a public authority but independent of the government, refuses, for its part, to communicate the composition of this commission, in particular to avoid possible pressure on its members.
She even filed a complaint against X a few months ago, after leaks in our columns.
Le Figaro
revealed in an article the identity of certain members of this commission.
But, according to the decision of the administrative court, the HAS would not unduly expose the members of the commission by giving their names and their responsibilities.
It has not been proven that one
“can legitimately fear that the communication of this information could lead to reprisals against these people”
, according to the decision.
The court therefore asked the HAS to communicate within a month the information requested by Jurists for Children.
In a press release, the HAS said it took note of this decision, specifying that it would examine the impact on
“the methodology of its work, to consider the follow-up to be given”
.