Insights
A Beacon Shines in the Storm: European Court of Justice Advances the Human Rights of Trans People
Region(s)
TOPIC(s)
Type
Legal Analysis
Author(s)
Publish Date
March 21, 2025
Share
At this time of political adversity, when the rights of trans people are being questioned and attacked worldwide, a judicial decision illuminates one path toward justice and dignity. On March 13, 2025, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a historic ruling in case C-247/23, setting a key precedent in protecting trans people’s rights across Europe.
In a case involving Hungary, the Court determined that conditioning gender identity recognition on surgical procedures constitutes an unjustifiable restriction on fundamental rights, reinforcing the principle that legal recognition must not come at the expense of bodily autonomy or human dignity.
The CJEU, based in Luxembourg, interprets European Union law and ensures its uniform application across all European Union member states. Its decisions are legally binding for these states, meaning national courts and authorities must comply or risk facing infringement proceedings from the European Commission, potentially leading to financial penalties. This role differs from that of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), based in Strasbourg, which oversees compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights, a separate treaty from the EU legal framework.
At the heart of this ruling is the interpretation of Article 16 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which applies to all EU Member States and guarantees individuals the right to rectify inaccurate personal data. This legal provision is crucial for ensuring that official records reflect a person’s correct and lived identity rather than outdated or incorrect information that may expose them to discrimination or legal obstacles.
This principle was put to the test in the case of VP, a transgender refugee in Hungary who faced significant challenges due to the misrepresentation of their gender in official asylum records. Despite submitting medical documentation affirming their gender identity, VP’s request for correction was denied by the Hungarian immigration authority, which insisted on proof of gender reassignment surgery as a condition for legal recognition. This rigid requirement placed VP in a state of legal uncertainty, leaving them without accurate identification documents—an essential prerequisite for accessing fundamental rights such as health care, employment, and social services. As a result, VP faced increased exposure to discrimination and exclusion.
The Hungarian legal context played a crucial role in the obstacles VP faced. In 2018, Hungary’s Constitutional Court ruled that denying legal gender recognition to non-citizens residing in the country was unconstitutional, but no legislative action was taken to address this gap. In 2020, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in Rana v. Hungary that the country violated the European Convention on Human Rights by failing to provide a procedure for legal gender recognition for refugees. However, Hungary did not implement legislative or administrative changes to comply with the ruling, maintaining the legal void. That same year, Hungary eliminated the possibility of legal gender recognition for its citizens, effectively preventing transgender people from updating their gender markers in official documents. Since then, the legal war against lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex, and queer (LGBTIQ) people has intensified, with the government implementing increasingly restrictive measures—the latest being the approval of a law banning Pride events.
The CJEU’s ruling, centered on the interpretation of Article 16 of the GDPR, affirms that individuals have the right to rectify incorrect personal data without undue burdens, including surgery.
Key Findings of the Ruling
The Court firmly ruled against imposing disproportionate requirements for gender identity recognition. Key aspects of the ruling include:
- The right to rectify personal data: The CJEU reaffirmed that Article 16 of the GDPR obliges national authorities to maintain public registers to correct personal data related to gender identity when they are inaccurate, in line with Article 5(1)(d) of the GDPR. The Court emphasized that data on gender identity should reflect the person's lived identity rather than their assigned sex at birth.
- Proportionality in evidence collection: While Article 16 of the GDPR does not specify the evidence required for rectification, the ruling clarifies that any proof requested must be "relevant and sufficient" and should not impose an excessive burden on the applicant. The Court ruled that the person seeking rectification must provide reasonable evidence that their recorded gender identity is incorrect.
- Protection of fundamental rights: The ruling establishes that requiring gender reassignment surgery as a prerequisite for gender identity recognition violates fundamental rights, including the right to private life (Article 7 of the Charter) and bodily integrity (Article 3 of the Charter). The Court also referenced the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law, affirming that gender recognition cannot be made conditional on surgery.
International Importance of the Ruling Amid Attacks on Trans Rights
The CJEU’s ruling has wide-reaching legal implications for all 27 EU Member States, as it establishes that the right to rectify personal data under the GDPR applies directly to gender identity recognition. This means that:
- Any national procedures requiring medical, judicial, or other bureaucratic hurdles for gender recognition that contradict this decision are now legally indefensible.
- Trans people across the EU can invoke the GDPR to demand sex or gender marker changes in official documents without invasive or excessive requirements.
- Member States that fail to comply with this ruling could face legal challenges, including direct legal action at the national and European levels.
In addition, the CJEU's decision comes at a critical moment when trans people’s rights are under attack in various parts of the world. In Europe, the Americas, and Asia, restrictive legislation is being promoted that would limit trans people’s access to legal identity, health care, and security. Like VP in Hungary, trans people everywhere face a heightened risk of discrimination, social and economic exclusion, and violence when they lack official documents that reflect their gender identity. When governments establish complex and unnecessary bureaucratic procedures for legal gender recognition, they delay access to accurate identification documents and sometimes inflict direct harm to trans people’s dignity and bodily autonomy.
Outright’s research has found that around twenty countries have adopted gender identity laws based strictly on self-determination, eliminating all undue obstacles such as sterilization, other medical interventions, divorce, psychiatric evaluation, or lengthy waiting periods. These countries offer good practices that Hungary and other EU countries could draw upon in enacting rights-respecting gender identity laws. Outright recommends, at a minimum, the abolition of the medical model of gender identity recognition. No one should have to undergo surgical procedures that they do not want or cannot afford in order to meet the gender standards of government gatekeepers.
The CJEU ruling underscores the urgent need to remove these bureaucratic hurdles and establish procedures that respect the dignity and rights of trans individuals. Recognizing gender identity without unnecessary medical or judicial conditions is not only a matter of efficiency; it aligns with international human rights standards and fosters a more inclusive and equitable society.
This ruling also holds significant relevance in the context of International Women's Month and the 69th session of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW). The inclusion of trans women in gender equality policies is essential to ensuring that no group is left behind in human rights advancements. Women, in all their diversity, continue to face systemic barriers that limit their access to fundamental rights, and trans women are particularly vulnerable to exclusion from legal protections and policy discussions. The CSW, as a key forum for promoting global gender equality, must take a comprehensive approach that recognizes and addresses the unique challenges faced by trans women, ensuring that their voices are not only heard but actively shape the policies that impact them.
The CJEU ruling serves as a critical reminder that states should not arbitrarily police gender identity and that international institutions play a crucial role in dismantling discriminatory legal barriers. In politically adverse human rights contexts, courts and legal bodies should shine as unwavering lights, illuminating the path toward justice and dignity for all trans people.
Take Action
When you support our research, you support a growing global movement and celebrate LGBTIQ lives everywhere.
Donate Now