The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026, was rushed through Parliament earlier this week. Why do I say “rushed”? Twenty years ago, six out of 10 bills were referred to parliamentary committees for scrutiny. In the last few years, that figure has fallen drastically. Only two out of 10 bills are now being sent for scrutiny.Here is another interesting factoid. In both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, the BJP only used two-thirds of the total time allotted to it for speaking. Unusual. Did it not have enough speakers on the Bill? Or did it choose not to put up speakers to hasten the process of passing the Bill? In sharp contrast, MPs from the Opposition utilised every minute allotted to them to make some powerful interventions.AdvertisementRenuka Chowdhury, INC: “When we become an MP, we have to identify our gender. We self-identify (our gender). Does any medical board endorse that?”.Tiruchi Siva, DMK: “Transgenders are being abused, decimated, and insulted at every place, and now the Union government is criminalising them and trying to put them behind bars.”Saket Gokhale, AITC: “A trans man is a man. A trans woman is a woman. Not a third gender. When this government does not comprehend even these basic fundamentals, what legislative competence are we talking about?”AdvertisementAnd here is what the opening speaker for the BJP, Medha Kulkarni, said in the Rajya Sabha: “They beg and collect money at traffic signals all day… when they reach home, they are seen counting money, consuming alcohol and cigarettes”. Sigh.Definition of transgender personsThe Bill passed in Parliament earlier this week makes sweeping changes to the 2019 Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act. The amendment is dangerous in intent and effect as it narrows the definition of “transgender person”, explicitly excluding any self‑perceived gender identities. For recognising a person’s identity, approval is needed from a medical board and a District Magistrate (DM). Self-identification will not do anymore. A tragedy. This raises constitutional issues because it shifts gender identity from a matter of personal autonomy to one of state approval. That shift creates unequal treatment (violation of Article 14) and restricts autonomy and dignity (violation of Article 21).Right to privacyThe new Bill, which will soon become an Act, mandates hospital reporting of gender‑affirming surgery to the DM and authority, intruding on medical confidentiality. The Supreme Court, in Justice K S Puttaswamy vs Union of India, made it clear that privacy includes bodily autonomy, decisional autonomy, and the right to control personal information. Decisions about one’s body, including gender-affirming care, fall squarely within the zone of personal liberty. In a society where transgender persons already face prejudice, forced disclosure risks outing individuals without their consent, exposing them to discrimination in families, workplaces, and public life. A law that claims to protect transgender persons cannot reinforce the very conditions that make protection necessary.Criminalising support systems and consentThe Bill greatly expands criminal penalties, which on paper aim to punish abuse, but use of vague terms like “allurement” and “undue influence” and the criminalisation of even consensual medical care tell a different story altogether. Fear of punishment will deter people from seeking gender-affirming care. Such vague framing of offences risks them becoming tools of harassment, penalising friends, families, and even medical professionals.you may likeThe Transgender Persons Act, 2019 and this Bill only recognise “sexual abuse” with a maximum punishment of two years. This is far less than the penalties prescribed for rape against cisgender women, which can extend to life imprisonment. This punishment is insufficient and discriminatory. The law on rape should be inclusive and extend its protection to transgender women.Distorted in popular cultureWhen voices are excluded while framing laws, they are also often distorted in popular culture. Let’s take a cursory look at the trajectory of transgender representation in Hindi films. Rishi Kapoor in Rafoo Chakkar (1975) or Amitabh Bachchan in Laawaris (1981) have been treated predominantly as sources of comic relief rather than lived realities. Years later, films like Laxmii (2020) reproduce a similar discomfort. Characters like Kukoo in Sacred Games (2018) or Shilpa in Super Deluxe (2019) suggest a slight shift with more layered portrayals, after the recognition of transgender rights by the Supreme Court in 2014. Even here, trans roles are largely performed by cisgender actors. At a moment when representation is inching forward, the Transgender Bill, rushed through Parliament earlier this week, appears to move in the opposite direction.The writer is MP and leader, All India Trinamool Congress Parliamentary Party. Research by Ayashman Dey, Chahat Mangtani