Turkish Constitutional Court upholds court permit requirement for gender change

The Turkish Constitutional Court (AYM) has rejected a request to annul the provision of the Turkish Civil Code requiring court permission for gender change. A local court had argued that gender change legally eliminates biological sex differences and renders sex-based regulations in areas such as military service ineffective, claiming the rule was unconstitutional. The AYM, however, stated that the right to respect for private life includes the right to protect one's material and spiritual existence, but this right is not unlimited.

The High Court acknowledged that requiring court permission for gender change imposes a restriction on these rights. However, it emphasized that this restriction is regulated by law and subject to specific rules. The decision noted that the Turkish Civil Code regulates the gender change process in stages, with the first stage requiring a court assessment of whether the person is suitable for gender change. This condition aims to prevent unnecessary medical interventions and protect public order.

The AYM concluded that the court permit requirement is a restriction that is compatible with the requirements of a democratic society and proportionate. It also highlighted that court decisions regarding gender change requests are subject to judicial review. The High Court stated that the right to gender change is not an unlimited right granted to everyone; it is intended for individuals who meet the conditions specified in the law and for whom gender change is deemed medically necessary.

This decision means that the court permit requirement for gender change in Turkey will remain in place. The AYM's ruling reflects an approach that balances individual rights with public order. The decision requires individuals seeking gender change to undergo judicial scrutiny and assessment of medical necessity.

In conclusion, the AYM's decision confirms the constitutionality of the relevant provision of the Turkish Civil Code. The ruling establishes that the legal process for gender change will continue to require court permission. This constitutes an important legal reference point for both individual rights and social order.