Read on Twitter
Very important trans rights case in ECtHR today.
The case concerns the situation of two trans people who were refused recognition of their gender identities because they had not undergone gender reassignment surgery.
The Court held this to be a violation of the ECHR (Art 8).
The case concerns the situation of two trans people who were refused recognition of their gender identities because they had not undergone gender reassignment surgery.
The Court held this to be a violation of the ECHR (Art 8).
The Court observed that the two trans people had not wished to undergo the surgery in question before obtaining legal recognition of their gender reassignment, and that they relied in substance on their right to "self-determination".
The Court regarded the approach to the recognition of the two trans people's gender identity had placed them for an unreasonable and continuous length of time in a distressing position apt to give rise to "feelings of vulnerability, humiliation and anxiety".
Trans people, who did not wish to undergo gender reassignment surgery, were in an impossible
dilemma:
either they had to undergo the surgery against their better judgment, and thus forego full exercise of their right to respect for their physical integrity...
dilemma:
either they had to undergo the surgery against their better judgment, and thus forego full exercise of their right to respect for their physical integrity...
... or they had to forego recognition of their
gender identity, which also came within the scope of the right to respect for private life.
This upset the fair balance to be struck between the "general interest" and the individual interests of the persons concerned.
gender identity, which also came within the scope of the right to respect for private life.
This upset the fair balance to be struck between the "general interest" and the individual interests of the persons concerned.
The Court therefore held that the refusal to legally recognise the applicants’ gender reassignment in the absence of gender reassignment surgery amounted to
unjustified interference with their right to respect for their private life.
unjustified interference with their right to respect for their private life.
This is an important case, which makes absolutely clear that a state cannot demand that trans people undergo certain forms of surgery (that violate their physical integrity) in order to gain recognition of their gender identity.
The issue of "self-determination" is absolutely central to the judgment...
Summary here: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf/?library=ECHR&id=003-6910029-9279612&filename=Judgment%20X%20and%20Y%20v.%20Romania%20-%20refusal%20by%20authorities%20to%20record%20a%20change%20in%20sexual%20identity%20without%20surgery%20breached%20the%20Convention.pdf
Thanks @EuropeanCourts.
Summary here: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf/?library=ECHR&id=003-6910029-9279612&filename=Judgment%20X%20and%20Y%20v.%20Romania%20-%20refusal%20by%20authorities%20to%20record%20a%20change%20in%20sexual%20identity%20without%20surgery%20breached%20the%20Convention.pdf
Thanks @EuropeanCourts.
