Summary:
Egypt can be considered as the most knowledgeable country in the region with regard to law, policy, religious opinions, and judicial case law pertaining to transgender individuals. These issues encompass gender-affirming healthcare, legal recognition of gender, right to education, and criminalization. However, this does not imply that Egypt is progressive in terms of transgender rights. On the contrary, transgender individuals face increased restrictions on their human rights in Egypt. The country employs laws associated with morality and anti-sex work to criminalize gender nonconformity. Islamic religious opinions influence both policies on gender-affirming healthcare and legal recognition of gender. Consequently, access to gender-affirming healthcare is severely limited due to a prohibition on doctors providing such services.
The process of legally recognizing one’s gender is arbitrary and can be achieved through an administrative procedure. Nevertheless, if the application is rejected, transgender individuals have no choice but to seek recourse in administrative courts, which have a mixed track record in handling transgender cases and predominantly reject requests for legal recognition of gender based on sharia law. Despite these challenges, Egypt is the only country in the region with case law that guarantees fundamental constitutional human rights for transgender individuals. This landmark ruling was issued by the Supreme Court in 2006 to a transwoman who successfully changed her documents and legally became a woman.
Criminalization:
De-facto: While Egypt does not have specific laws criminalizing social, medical, or surgical transition, gender nonconformity is effectively criminalized due to the enforcement of the following laws:
Punishment by imprisonment for a period ranging from three months to three years, as well as a fine ranging from 25 LE to 300 LE in the Egyptian administration, and from 250 Lira to 3000 Lira in the Syrian administration, is applicable in the following cases: (c) Individuals who engage in debauchery or prostitution on a habitual basis.
Article (25) Anyone who infringes a family principle or value of the Egyptian society, encroaches on privacy, sends many emails to a certain person without obtaining his/her consent, provides personal data to an e-system or website for promoting commodities or services without getting the approval thereof, or publishes, via the information network or by any means of information technology, information, news, images or the like, which infringes the privacy of any person involuntarily, whether the published information is true or false, shall be punishable by imprisonment for no less than six months and a fine of no less than fifty thousand Egyptian Pounds and no more than one hundred thousand Egyptian Pounds, or by one of these two penalties.
Article (27) In cases other than those stipulated herein, anyone who creates, manages, or uses a website or a private account on the information network for the purpose of committing or facilitating a punishable crime shall be punishable by imprisonment for no less than two years and a fine of no less than one hundred thousand Egyptian Pounds and no more than three hundred thousand Egyptian Pounds, or by one of these two penalties.
Enforcement:
Egypt actively utilizes the aforementioned legal provisions and other related statutes to condemn non-binary gender expression. Below are a few instances exemplifying the persecution of transgender individuals:
- In 2014, the Egyptian vice police arrested a transwoman who, according to their statement, had undergone hormonal replacement therapy and surgeries to augment the size of her breasts in order to engage in same-sex relations.
- In 2019, a transgender woman based in Giza was arrested while protesting against the government after a train derailment incident in Cairo. Due to inconsistencies between her gender expression and legal documentation, she was confined in a cell designated for solitary confinement. Regrettably, she was denied access to hormone replacement therapy prior to being relocated to a correctional facility for male individuals where she remained secluded until her eventual release in July. Throughout this period, she was subjected to involuntary anal examinations which were intended to inform the decision of whether to charge her with debauchery. She endured months of detention in deplorable conditions prior to her eventual release.
- In 2020, a foreign transgender woman was arrested and sentenced to three years of imprisonment. The authorities justified this action by alleging that she had been utilizing women’s attire as a means to allure men.
Legal Gender Recognition:
While administrative processes exist to rectify personal information in the civil registry, there is a lack of a comprehensive legal framework for the recognition of legal gender. This has resulted in a diverse and occasionally inconsistent body of case law on the subject.
Related Legal Articles:
- Article 46 Civil Status Law No. 143 of 1994: stipulates the establishment of a committee in each governorate specifically tasked with receiving and reviewing requests to amend or rectify entries in the civil register, such as name and sex.
However, it is worth noting that the legal gender recognition process for transgender individuals is not explicitly addressed in the aforementioned law. Consequently, this can result in significant arbitrariness and a lack of guarantee for successful outcomes for transgender individuals. In cases where the initial request is not successful, the applicant is required to undergo a judicial review process within the administrative courts.
Enforcement:
- Sally’s Case: Sally was a prominent case in the 1980s, serving as an example of a successful legal gender recognition through the administrative process, thereby obviating the necessity of undergoing a judicial review process.
- Judgment number 3867/66 JY: In 2011, a transwoman submitted an application for legal gender recognition to the civil registry committee. However, the committee denied the request, arguing that the applicant possesses the physical attributes typically associated with males, despite presenting with a female appearance. Consequently, the committee deemed it inappropriate to classify her as female. Subsequently, in 2013, the Alexandria Administrative Court rendered a verdict in favor of the civil registry, thereby declining to issue a judgment that would recognize the plaintiff as a woman.
- Judgment number 80419/68 JY: In 2016, the Administrative Court of Cairo rendered a verdict rejecting the legal recognition of gender for a transgender man. This decision was based on Sharia law, which defines the procedure he underwent as a sex change rather than a correction. This ruling was made despite the fact that the individual had undergone surgeries and therapy under the supervision of the official medical committee within the medical syndicate.
Gender-affirming healthcare:
Restricted, explicit criminalization: The provision of gender affirming care is explicitly restricted by the medical code of ethics of 2003. This code established a sex correction committee with the purpose of reviewing cases of individuals seeking to change their gender. The committee comprises medical experts and a representative of Egypt’s Islamic authorities (Dar Alifta or Al-Azhar) in order to ensure that only cases conforming to the Islamic understanding of these treatments, i.e., only intersex individuals and not transgender individuals, are approved. Over the years, the medical members of the committee advocated for the inclusion of gender identity disorder (GID) as a valid reason for approving cases, but their religious counterpart opposed this. Although a few cases were accepted based on GID in 2013, the committee currently only accepts intersex cases.
Related legal articles:
Doctors who offer gender-affirming healthcare to transgender individuals may face professional disciplinary measures and potential criminal prosecution.
Doctors are unequivocally prohibited from performing sex reassignment surgeries. Gender correction procedures are exclusively permissible upon obtaining approval from the review committee within the Syndicate. Surgical interventions will solely be carried out subsequent to a comprehensive assessment, which includes a two-year psychiatric evaluation and hormonal treatment, as well as a thorough examination of the applicant’s hormones and chromosomal map.
Whoever causes, by mistake, the occurrence of a wound or harm to a person as a result of neglect, imprudence, carelessness, or nonobservance of the laws, decrees, regulations, and systems, shall be punished with detention for a period not exceeding one year and a fine not exceeding two hundred pounds, or either penalty. The penalty shall be detention for a period not exceeding two years and a fine not exceeding three hundred pounds, or either penalty, if the injury results in a permanent disability or if the crime occurs as a result of the felon’s gross breach of duties imposed by the norms of his position, profession, or trade, or as a consequence of using liquors or narcotics when preparing the error that resulted in the accident, or by refraining from helping the victim of the crime or the person who asked for his assistance, although he was able to extend help. The penalty shall be detention if the crime results in injuring more than three persons. If another condition of those prescribed in the previous clause is established to exist, the penalty shall be detention for a period of not less than one year and not more than five.
Enforcement:
- Post 2003: In 2010, a hospital was shut down for having provided gender-affirming healthcare to a transgender patient without obtaining approval from the board. Consequently, the hospital’s physicians were subsequently referred for legal prosecution, as prescribed by the aforementioned article.
- Prior to 2003 (Criminal Investigation Petition 21/1988): In 1988, Al-Azhar submitted a petition to the public prosecution office, urging an investigation into the involvement of medical professionals in the controversial case of Sally Mursi’s transition. The prosecution office sought expert opinions from Cairo University, and upon careful consideration of these opinions, ultimately dismissed the petition due to the experts’ consensus that no medical malpractice had taken place.
- Prior to 2003 (Judgment Number 34/1988): In 1989, the Cairo Court of Appeal rendered a judgment on a petition submitted by Sally’s doctor, who had faced disciplinary action from the medical syndicate due to the surgeries performed. The Court ruled in favor of the doctors, determining that no medical misconduct had occurred and subsequently nullifying the disciplinary penalty imposed.
Fatwas:
Egyptian Islamic authorities have issued numerous Fatwas (religious edicts) pertaining to matters concerning transgender individuals, commencing in 1981. These Fatwas exhibit a consistent line of reasoning, stipulating that surgical interventions should only be permissible for individuals who are intersex, as such individuals possess a biological imperative for such procedures. Conversely, transgender individuals are deemed to be afflicted with a psychological disorder, thus necessitating therapy rather than surgical intervention as a course of treatment. The following examples serve as illustrative instances of these Fatwas:
- Fatwa Number 1288/1988: Issued by former Egypt’s Grand Imam Gad Al-Haq and is the first Fatwa to look into the issue of gender-affirming healthcare for transgender and intersex people.
- Fatwa Sheikh Tantawi: Issued on 08/06/1988 by Egypt’s former Grand Imam Mohamed Al- Sayed Tantawi. It is the most famous Fatwa as its subject was Sally Mursi.
- Fatwa 953/1997: Issued by Atya Saqar, Al-Azhar Scholar
- Fatwa Ali Gomaa: Issued on 07/11/2016 by Egypt’s former Grand Imam Ali Gomaa. The Fatwa is important as it is the first to use more modern terminology such as GID to talk about transgender people.
Other:
Right to Education for Transgender People:
Sally Mursi, a former medical student at Al-Azhar Medical School, faced significant obstacles upon her transition. Al-Azhar, perceiving her transition as a transgression, declined her readmission. Moreover, Al-Azhar’s gender segregation policy inherently precluded Sally’s recognition as a woman, a stance zealously upheld by the university officials. Consequently, Sally was left with no recourse but to initiate an arduous legal battle in order to secure her right to education. This protracted legal struggle spanned a duration of 18 years, encompassing four principal phases of litigation.
Ultimately, the Supreme Administrative Court of Egypt rendered a verdict compelling Al-Azhar to reinstate Sally. The court based its decision on the grounds that Sally, having legally obtained female status, merited the same constitutional rights as any other female citizen. Among these rights was the fundamental entitlement to education, a prerogative that could not be impeded by any entity within the country.
- Judgment Number 5432/42 JY, Egyptian Administrative Court, 2 July 1991.
- Judgment Number 4019/50 JY, Egyptian Administrative Court, 28 September 1999.
- Judgment Number 1487/54 JY. The Egyptian Administrative Court. 20 June 2000.
- Judgment Number 9907/48 JY. The Supreme Egyptian Administrative Court, 15 June 2006.
Military Conscription:
Egypt implements compulsory military service for individuals registered as male on their official identification documents and who are over the age of 18. However, transgender individuals are exempted from this service due to their classification as “people with severe personality disorder,” which entitles them to a medical exemption based on their condition.