1

A “transsexual” woman has lodged a complaint against Bulgaria with the European Court of Human Rights because the state refuses to recognize her as a man.

2

The Ordo Iuris Institute is intervening in the case as amicus curiae. In its legal opinion, it argues that member states have the right to define sex according to biological criteria.

3

In its case law to date, the Court has held that states must afford so-called transsexual persons the possibility of changing their legal sex, but may make this conditional on the fulfillment of certain requirements.

A “transsexual” woman has lodged a complaint against Bulgaria with the European Court of Human Rights over the impossibility of being recorded in the civil status records as a man. The applicant claims that this violates her right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights) and her right to an effective remedy (Article 13 of the ECHR).

The Ordo Iuris Institute, with the consent of the President of the Third Section of the ECtHR, is taking part in the proceedings in this case as amicus curiae. In its legal opinion, the Institute stresses that persons who consider themselves “transsexual” should be treated with respect and as equals before the law, but that this does not mean they should be granted privileges connected with their personal notions of their own “gender identity.” Such privileges include adjusting official documents, including civil status records, to the wishes of such a person. There are strong legal, axiological, and social reasons in favor of defining sex according to a biological criterion, which means grounding the legal system on the premise that whoever is born a woman remains one until the end of her life and, likewise, whoever is born a man remains one until the end of his life. Excluding the possibility of changing one’s legal sex is supported by the so-called principle of the indivisibility of civil status, the principle of substantive truth, the principle of the certainty of legal transactions and—in the case of minors with gender identity disorders—also the principle of the best interests of the child. In the Ordo Iuris Institute’s assessment, member states should enjoy a wide margin of appreciation in deciding on the admissibility of, and the rules governing, changes of legal sex.

Although arrangements permitting a change of legal sex predominate in Europe, it is still ruled out in some states: in Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia, and Georgia. In most European states, a change of legal sex is allowed but conditional on meeting additional requirements—usually undergoing a psychiatric evaluation, hormone therapy, and sometimes also surgery to make the person physically resemble someone of the opposite sex.

The date on which judgment will be handed down in this case is not known. The Ordo Iuris Institute is monitoring the status of the proceedings and will report when a ruling is issued.

For more than 20 years, the case law of the ECtHR has recognized that states are obliged to enable “transsexual” persons to change their legal sex, but may make this possibility conditional on meeting specified requirements. What those requirements should be remains disputed. The LGBT movement is consistently pushing to strip such procedures of as many formalities as possible so that, ultimately, a change of legal sex would become available on the demand of the person concerned, without the need to meet any conditions whatsoever.

N.G. v. Bulgaria, application no. 21353/24.

See also:

Source of cover photo: iStock