President Droupadi Murmu has given her assent to the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026, turning it into law. The decision comes after the bill was passed in Parliament, but it has already sparked strong reactions from opposition parties and rights groups over its provisions and implications.

The amended law introduces significant changes to the existing framework governing transgender rights in India. One of the key provisions is the creation of an authority that will determine whether a person qualifies as transgender. Critics argue that this move weakens the principle of self-identification, which had been central to earlier legal protections.

Opposition leaders have raised concerns that the law narrows the scope of protection by excluding certain groups. They have pointed out that gays and lesbians are not included within the ambit of the revised definition, which they say limits the broader understanding of gender and sexual minorities.

Another major concern revolves around the removal of the earlier provision that allowed individuals to identify themselves based on their self-perceived gender identity. The new framework replaces this with a more regulated process, where recognition depends on official verification. This shift has led to fears that individuals may now find it harder to assert their gender identity freely.

According to a notification issued by the law ministry on March 30, the Act will come into force on a date to be announced by the Central Government through an official gazette.

During parliamentary discussions, the government defended the bill, stating that its purpose is to strengthen protections for transgender persons and ensure better implementation of welfare measures. However, opposition members disagreed, arguing that the legislation undermines the right to self-determination of identity and reduces the autonomy of individuals. They had also demanded that the bill be referred to a standing committee for wider consultation before being passed.

The bill had earlier been cleared by both Houses of Parliament amid protests and disagreements. Opposition parties had expressed dissatisfaction with the way the legislation was passed and maintained that it lacked adequate consultation with stakeholders, especially members of the transgender community.

The new law has also created uncertainty regarding transgender identity certificates issued under the previous system. Around 32,000 such certificates were granted based on self-perceived identity, and questions are now being raised about their future validity under the revised framework.

Overall, while the government maintains that the amendment aims to improve the legal and administrative structure for transgender welfare, critics believe it marks a shift away from a rights-based approach. The debate highlights the ongoing tension between regulatory mechanisms and the fundamental right to identity, making the law a subject of continued political and social discussion.