The LGTBIQA+ Coordinator of the archipelago denounces an internal order that suppresses administrative recognition of non-binary identities
A new controversy shakes the Government of the Canary Islands. The Coordinator of LGTBIQA+ entities of the archipelago has expressed its deep concern after learning of an internal instruction that orders the elimination of the non-binary sex option in administrative forms. This measure, issued by the Territorial Directorate of Education in the province of Santa Cruz de Tenerife, contradicts—as they denounce—the commitments publicly assumed by the regional Executive.
The elimination is apparently justified by a resolution of the Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD), which warned the Canary Islands Government. However, this resolution is currently being appealed before the National Court by the Diversas Canarias Association, one of the entities integrated into the Coordinator. For the signatory groups, this administrative action violates the provisions of the Trans and Intersex Law of the Canary Islands, which explicitly recognizes the existence and right to recognition of non-binary people.
What does the Canarian Trans and Intersex Law say?
Approved to guarantee real equality and effective recognition of gender diversity, the Canarian Trans and Intersex Law obliges all regional government departments to respect the principle of gender self-determination. This includes the incorporation of a third option in official documents, beyond the traditional binary division of male and female sex.
As recalled by the Coordinator, the Executive had expressed its intention to maintain said box, aligning itself with the historical demands of the LGTBIQ+ community. However, this internal instruction denies, de facto, that institutional promise.
“An unacceptable setback”
The associations that signed the statement consider that this measure not only contradicts a previous political commitment, but also legally unprotects a part of the citizens. “It is unacceptable that non-binary people, who in many cases already live on the margins of social and legal recognition, now see themselves erased from administrative records,” they denounce. The decision, they add, sets a dangerous precedent that could spread to other areas of government.
They also point out what they consider a comparative grievance: while the Ministry of the Interior does consider this option for foreigners, the Canary Islands choose to eliminate it for its own resident population. A contradiction that is difficult to justify.
What implications could this decision have?
Beyond the symbolic impact, the suppression of non-binary mention has real effects. It prevents many people from seeing themselves reflected in official documentation, which can lead to situations of institutional discrimination, problems in access to public services or in administrative treatment. The Coordinator has requested an urgent meeting of the Advisory Committee that ensures the application of the Trans and Intersex Law, and they do not rule out taking legal action if this instruction is not reversed.
A critical view: is there room for interpretation?
Although the anger of the LGTBIQ+ movement is more than justified, it is still true that the AEPD resolution has generated legal doubts. To what extent is it legitimate for a regional administration to maintain sensitive personal data if there is a formal warning from the state data protection authority? Some voices suggest that perhaps the Canarian Government acted with legal caution, although at the cost of damaging acquired rights. This tension between data protection and recognition of diverse identities poses a dilemma that has no easy answers.
Now what?
At this point, it remains to be seen if the regional Executive will rectify. Social entities demand an immediate solution, but they also invite reflection: how do we guarantee that legal advances are not a dead letter in the face of contradictory administrative decisions?
Meanwhile, the LGTBIQ+ community of the Canary Islands continues to wait for a clear answer. Not only a legal explanation, but also an ethical commitment to the dignity of all people, without exception.
