Litigation Degree: Second
Case No: 107/2015
Issuing Court: Court of Appeals
Judgement: Unfavourable, the request for legal gender recognition was denied
Judgement Date: 08/01/2015

Summary:

The plaintiff, X, lodged a lawsuit before the Qatari Court of First Instance, seeking a modification of their official information in the birth and death registries to accurately reflect their gender transition from female to male, which was achieved through surgical procedures. However, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal, and subsequently, the Court of Appeal also rejected the appeal, citing Islamic sharia law and various assessments conducted by competent committees appointed by the Court of Appeal.

Facts:

Plaintiff X lodged a lawsuit with the Qatari Court of First Instance regarding the refusal of the Ministries of Interior and Health to amend his official information in the Births and Deaths Registries from female to male. This decision was based on his genetic intersex condition and his surgery to change his sex from female to male in the United Arab Emirates on June 7, 2009, and November 25, 2009. Before the surgeries took place, the plaintiff underwent evaluations by Austrian and Qatari medical committees at Hamad Hospital in Qatar. These committees produced conflicting reports, with the Qatari committee unable to confirm the plaintiff’s past deformity, while the Austrian committees recognized him as male. Despite this, the Court of First Instance dismissed the case, leading the plaintiff to appeal to the Administrative Court of Appeal in case No. 46/2012. As a result of the appeal, the State submitted the plaintiff’s situation to the relevant committees, which conducted chromosomal, genital, bone, and hormonal analyses. Ultimately, the committee determined that the plaintiff’s gender was female..

Judgement:

The court determined that the case was valid in form but lacked substance. As a result, the court affirmed the judgement of the Court of First Instance in accordance with Islamic Sharia law, as required by Qatari law in the absence of specific sentencing legislation, which is the case here. The decisions of the Qatari medical committees, including Hamad Hospital, concluded that there was no medical necessity for the plaintiff’s gender-affirming surgery. They also determined that the plaintiff experienced a discrepancy between their brain and physical body but did not have any conditions of intersexuality. Consequently, the official committees’ refusal to amend their official statements was legally sound, as the plaintiff’s gender reassignment surgeries were unlawful.