Article 33. Legal gender recognition (2020-) | Háttér Society

Article 33. Legal gender recognition (2020-)

On May 29, 2020, the Act no. XXX of 2020 entered into force. Its Article 33 makes it impossible for a transgender person to have their gender legally recognized, that is, for a transgender person to request that their official documents contain their gender and name in accordance with their gender identity. We are challenging these provisions before domestic and international legal fora.

We provide up-to-date information on the status of these litigation efforts on this page. 

In addition to the procedures included in the table below, we are in contact with dozens of other trans people with whom we are negotiating in what form we can assist them the best. If your application for legal gender recognition has been rejected by the authorities, and you would like to take legal action, send an email to the address jogsegely@hatter.hu attaching the official decision!

 

Description of the case Legal forum Our role in the proceedings Status Expected developments
 

In 2016 a transgender man recognized as a refugee in Hungary requested the legal recognition of his gender. His request was rejected by the authorities on grounds that he has no Hungarian citizenship. Read more ...

European Court of Human Rights We provide legal representation.  

Case won. Appeal pending

 

 

 

In 2017 and 2019, 23 transgender people turned to the Strasbourg court because their application for legal gender recognition had not been processed by the Hungarian authorities. Transvanilla Transgender Association provides legal representation to the applicants. Read more ...

European Court of Human Rights  - Communicated  
 

In March 2020, the Administrative and Labor Court of Debrecen requested the constitutional review of the then existing regulation on legal gender recognition arguing that the legislation lacks sufficient clarity. Read more... 

Constitutional Court We filed an amicus curiae brief to the Court. Registered.   

Deadline for substantive decision: 8 June 2020 (in delay)

 

A transgender person whose application for legal gender recognition had not been processed until the entry into force of Article 33 petitioned the Constitutional Court. Transvanilla Transgender Association provides legal representation. Read more ...

Constitutional Court We plan to submit an amicus curiae brief to the court Motion passed.

 

 
 

A transgender person who has not yet applied for legal gender recognition turned to the Constitutional Court arguing that Article 33 stripped him of the right to legal gender recognition. Transvanilla Transgender Association provides legal representation. Read more ...

Constitutional Court  

We plan to submit an amicus curiae brief to the court.

Rejected.  
 

A transgender woman, whose application for legal gender recognition had already been accepted, turned to the Constitutional Court arguing that due to Article 33, her data in the birth registry might be perceived as wrong, as it contains her gender, not her sex at birth as it is supposed to be in line with the new legislation. This might result in the authorities deciding to correct the wrong data. Read more... 

Constitutional Court We plan to submit an amicus curiae brief to the court. Motion passed.  
Six transgender persons turned to the Constitutional Court who had submitted legal gender recognition requests, but those requests had not been processed before the entering into force of Article 33. Constitutional Court We plan to submit an amicus curiae brief to the court. Motion passed.  

In March 2019 a transgender man had applied for legal gender recognition, but his application was rejected by the local registrar in September 2019. The Budapest Administrative and Labor Court upheld the rejection, the plaintiff requested the review of the judgment from the Curia. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, which has only entered into force after the request had been submitted, or alternatively that the Curia shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. 

Curia We provide legal representation. Awaiting judgement  
In August 2019, a transgender man had applied for legal gender recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. Budapest Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Lawsuit in progress.  

In April 2019, a transgender man had applied for legal gender recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to  Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The court found the decision of the local registrar unlawful, as the evaluation of the request fell under the jurisdiction of the Budapest Government Office. In the repeated proceedings the  Budapest Government Office rejected the petition, therefore we challenged the decision in the Budapest Court of Appeal.

Budapest Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition and the statement(s) filed during the lawsuit.  Lawsuit in progress  

In March 2019, a transgender man applied for legal gender recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively that the Debrecen Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The Debrecen Court of Appeal annulled the order of the registrar and ordered a new proceeding. In the repeated proceedings, the Budapest Government Office rejected the request for gender and name change, therefore the decision was challenged at the Budapest Court of Appeal. The court initiates that the Constitutional Court declare that Act I of 2010 on Civil Procedure Procedure 11/2021. (IV. 7.)  unconstitutional and annulled by the decision of AB - it could be influenced between 29 May 2020 and 7 April 2021 - for the present proceedings of Section 101 / A (2), as well as for any proceedings in the same subject matter pending before a court ban on use.

Budapest Court of Appeal, Constitutional Court We provide legal representation. Lawsuit suspended.  
 

In July 2019 a transgender man applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Debrecen Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The Debrecen Court of Appeal annulled the decision of the registrar and ordered a new procedure. In the repeated proceedings, the Budapest Government Office rejected the application, so we turned to the Debrecen Court of Appeal to change the decision of the Government Office, or to annul it and order the authority to initiate a new procedure. The court annulled the infringing decision of the Budapest Government Office and ordered a new proceeding. In the repeated procedure, the Budapest Government Office rejected the application, therefore we filed a lawsuit, on the basis of which the Budapest Government Office revoked its infringing decision, and then in the repeated procedure it rejected the application. The rejection decision was challenged in the Debrecen General Court.

Debrecen Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Petition filed  
 

In May 2019 a transgender man applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The Court found the decision of the registrar unlawful, as it would have been within the jurisdiction of the Budapest Government Office to decide. 

Budapest Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition. Repeated procedure in progress  
 

In February 2020 a transgender man applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to not having received a notification of  the change of gender from the Budapest Government Office. We request in the case that the court follows existing case law and orders the appropriate authority to accept the medical opinions provided. The Budapest Court of Appeal dismissed the action, after which we appealed to the Curia. The review procedure was suspended by the Curia on the basis of an ongoing constitutional court proceeding.

Curia We assisted in compiling the petition. Review procedure suspended  
 

In December 2019 a transgender man applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33, and not having received supportive medical opinion or a notification of the change of gender from the Budapest Government Office. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The court found that the decision of the registrar was unlawful, as it was within the Budapest Government Office's jurisdiction to decide on the matter. In the repeated proceedings, the Budapest Government Office rejected the request for gender and name change, therefore the decision was challenged at the Budapest Court of Appeal.

Budapest Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition. Lawsuit in progress  
 

In July 2019 a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33, and not having received supportive medical opinion or a notification of the change of gender from the Budapest Government Office. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The Budapest Court of Appeal annulled the decision of the registrar and ordered a new proceeding. The repeated proceeding is in progress. In the repeated proceeding, the Budapest Government Office rejected the application, so we so we went to court to change the decision of the Government Office or to annul it and instruct the authority for a new procedure. The court annulled the infringing decision of the Government Office of the Capital City of Budapest and ordered a new proceeding. In the repeated procedure, the Budapest Government Office rejected the application, therefore we filed a lawsuit, on the basis of which the Budapest Government Office revoked its infringing decision, and then in the repeated procedure it rejected the application. The rejection decision was challenged in the Budapest Court of Appeal.

Budapest Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Application filed.  
 

In January 2020 a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33, and not having received supportive medical opinion or a notification of the change of gender from the Budapest Government Office. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The Budapest Court of Appeal annulled the decision of the registrar and ordered a new proceeding. The repeated proceeding is in progress. In the repeated proceedings the Budapest Government Office rejected the application, so we applied to the Budapest Court of Appeal to change the decision of the Government Office or to annul it and order the authority to initiate a new procedure.

Budapest Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Petition filed.  
 

In January 2020 a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Miskolc Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The court, in agreement with the plaintiff, appealed to the Constitutional Court to judge the application of the new rules to ongoing proceedings unconstitutional. The Constitutional Court agreed with the applicant and the Miskolc Court of Appeal and annulled the provision that requires the application of the new rule to ongoing proceedings. Details: http://public.mkab.hu/dev/dontesek.nsf/0/CB4CA4E8F72D33DFC125863A0060497...

Pursuant to the decision of the Constitutional Court, the General Court of Miskolc annulled the decision of the registrar and ordered a new procedure, stating that the application must be transferred to the competent Government Office of the Capital City of Budapest. 

Miskolc Court of Appeal, Constitutional Court We provide legal representation. Repeated proceeding in progress  
 

In July 2019 a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Győr Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The court found that the decision of the registrar was unlawful, as the Budapest Government Office would have had the right to decide on the matter. Referring to the ongoing proceedings of the Constitutional Court, the court suspended the lawsuit. In the repeated procedure, the Budapest Government Office rejected the application, so we went to court to change the decision of the Government Office or to annul it and instruct the authority for a new procedure. The court annulled the infringing decision of the Budapest Government Office and ordered a new proceeding. In the repeated procedure, the Budapest Government Office rejected the application, therefore we file a lawsuit.

Győr Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition and the statement(s) filed during the lawsuit.  Application is pending  

In July 2019 a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33, and not having received supportive medical opinion or a notification of the change of gender from the Budapest Government Office. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The court suspended the lawsuit, referring to it being an ongoing constitutional court proceeding.

Budapest Court of Appeal We provide legal support. Lawsuit suspended  

In November 2019 a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33, and not having received supportive medical opinion or a notification of the change of gender from the Budapest Government Office. We argued in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The court annulled the registrar's decision and ordered a new proceeding. The repeated procedure is in progress. In the repeated proceedings, the Budapest Government Office rejected the application, therefore the decision was challenged in the Budapest District Court.

Budapest District Court We assisted in compiling the petition and the statement(s) filed during the lawsuit.  Application filed  

In April 2019 a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33, and not having received supportive medical opinion or a notification of the change of gender from the Budapest Government Office. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. 

Budapest Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Lawsuit in action.  

In December 2019 a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in July 2020 with reference to Article 33, and not having received supportive medical opinion or a notification of the change of gender from the Budapest Government Office. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Szeged Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. 

Szeged Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Lawsuit in action.  

In November 2019 a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The court found that the decision of the registrar was illegal, as the Budapest Government Office would have had the right to decide on the matter.

Budapest Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Repeated proceeding in progress  

In January 2020 a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in July 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Győr Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The court found that the decision of the registrar was unlawful, as the Budapest Government Office  would have had the right to decide on the matter. In the repeated proceedings, the Budapest Government Office rejected the request for gender and name change, therefore the decision was challenged. The court annulled the infringing decision of the Budapest Government Office and ordered a new proceeding. In the repeated procedure, the Budapest Government Office rejected the application, therefore we file a lawsuit.

Győr Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition and the statement(s) filed during the lawsuit.  Application pending  

In March 2020 a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in July 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Budapest Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The court suspended the lawsuit, referring to it being an ongoing constitutional court proceeding.

Budapest Court of Office We provide legal representation. Lawsuit suspended  

In April 2019 a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Szeged Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. 

Miskolc Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition and the statement(s) filed during the lawsuit.  Lawsuit in action  

In February 2020 a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Szeged Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. 

Budapest Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition. Lawsuit in action.  

In March 2019 a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Debrecen Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. 

Budapest Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition and the statement(s) filed during the lawsuit.  Lawsuit in action.  

In May 2020 a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in July 2020 with reference to Article 33, and not having received supportive medical opinion or a notification of the change of gender from the Budapest Government Office. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Veszprém Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. Referring to it being an ongoing proceeding, the Constitutional Court suspended the lawsuit.

Veszprém Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition and the statement(s) filed during the lawsuit.  Lawsuit suspended.  

In February 2019 a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Győr Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. The court found that the decision of the registrar was unlawful, as the Budapest Government Office would have had the right to decide on the matter. In the repeated proceedings, the Budapest Government Office rejected the request for gender and name change, therefore the decision was challenged at the Budapest Court of Appeal.

Budapest Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Lawsuit in action.  

In November 2019 a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition, which was rejected by the local registrar in July 2020 with reference to Article 33. We argue in the case that legal gender recognition should be granted notwithstanding the entry into force of Article 33, or alternatively, that the Miskolc Court of Appeal shall suspend the case and request the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 33. Referring to it being an ongoing proceeding, the Constitutional Court suspended the lawsuit.

Miskolc Court of Appeal We provide legal representation Lawsuit in action.  

In April 2019 a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, which was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the local registrar, who refuses to evaluate the request, claiming that they have no jurisdiction in the matter. In the proceedings we petition that they local registar shall evaluate the request or initiate the resolution of the jurisdiction debate via court. In February 2021, a negative decision was made by the Budapest Government Office, against which we filed an action.

Pécs Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition and the statement(s) filed during the lawsuit.  Lawsuit in action.  
In the second half of 2020, a transgender man had planned to submit a request to the Budapest Government Office to legally change his gender and name, but due to § 33 he no longer has the opportunity to do so, so we initiated a constitutional complaint procedure with the Constitutional Court. Constitutional Court We provide legal representation.  Motion passed.  
In March 2020, a transgender man had applied for legal recognition. His application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the local registrar, who did not adjudicate it within the procedural deadline. In a letter, we called on the registrar to make a substantive decision or to initiate a court dispute resolution of jurisdiction. The Registrar closed the proceedings with reference to § 33. Our client did not challenge the decision in an administrative lawsuit. Wowever, since rejection decision was not made by the competent body (Budapest Government Office), we initiated that the notary annul it and transfer the procedure to the Budapest Government Office. On the basis of the request, the notary did not annul his previous decision and did not transfer the procedure to the competent body, so we turned to the competent supervisory body to have the decision annulled. In the meantime, the notary revoked his infringing decision, and in the repeated proceedings the Budapest Government Office rejected the application, therefore the decision was challenged in the Miskolc Court. Miskolc Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition and the statement(s) filed during the lawsuit.  Application filed.   
In 2020, a transgender woman had planned to submit a request to the Budapest Government Office to legally change her gender and name, but due to § 33 she no longer has the opportunity to do so, so we turned to the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights to initiate an investigation into § 33's compliance with the Basic Law. Commissioner for Fundamental Rights We provide legal representation. Complaint filed.  
In March 2019, a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition after her gender and first name was already legally changed in 2017 at her place of residence abroad. Her application was rejected by the Budapest Government Office on the grounds of a missing expert opinion, therefore we filed an action with the Budapest Court of Appeal to annul the decision of the Budapest Government Office and to order a new proceeding. The court suspended the lawsuit on the basis of an ongoing constitutional court proceeding. Budapest Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Lawsuit suspended.  
In 2018, an intersex person had submitted a request for legal recognition to the Budapest Government Office, however, her request was rejected in November 2020, citing § 33. We filed a lawsuit with the Budapest Court of Appeal requesting that the court grant legal recognition despite § 33, or apply to the Constitutional Court for the unconstitutionality of § 33. Debrecen Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Lawsuit in action.  
In June 2018, a transgender man had applied for legal recognition. His application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of his birth, who refused to examine it due to a lack of competence. The dispute over jurisdiction was settled by the Curia, and the Budapest Government Office was appointed to conduct the proceedings. The government office had rejected the application in November 2020, so we filed an action with the Metropolitan Court asking the court to grant its non-legal recognition despite § 33, or to apply to the Constitutional Court for the unconstitutionality of § 33. Pécs Court of Appeal We provide legal representation. Lawsuit in action.  
Due to the changed legal environment in May 2020, he is unable to submit a request to change his gender and name, so we turned to the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights to declare Section 33 unconstitutional and to request the Constitutional Court to review its compliance with the Constitution. Commissioner for Fundamental Rights We provide legal representation. Application filed.  
In April 2019, a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition, but her application was rejected by the Budapest Government Office in July 2020, citing § 33, and she filed an action to the Budapest Court of Appeal to overturn the decision of the Budapest Government Office. Budapest Court of Appeal We assisted in compiling the petition and the statement(s) filed during the lawsuit.  Application filed.  
In January 2020, a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition. Her application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of her birth, and was rejected by the local registrar in July 2020 with reference to § 33. After the application was submitted, the registrar revoked the infringing decision, a repeated procedure is in progress.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the registrar. Repeated proceeding in progress.  
In November 2019, a transgender man had applied for legal recognition. His application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of  his birth, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to § 33.  After the application was submitted, the registrar revoked the infringing decision, a repeated procedure is in progress.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the registrar. Repeated proceeding in progress.  
In December 2019, a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition of her gender and name. Her application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of her birth, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to § 33. We appealed to the registrar to annul the rejection based on the decision of the Constitutional Court and to forward the application to the Budapest Government Office, which would be competent in conducting the proceedings.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the registrar. Application filed.  
In January 2019, a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition. Her application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of her birth, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to § 33.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the registrar.    
In March 2020, a transgender man had applied for legal recognition. His application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of birth, which was rejected by the local registrar in July 2020 with reference to § 33.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the registrar. Application filed.  
In June 2018, a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition, however, no decision has been made on the application to date.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the Budapest Government Office.    
In November 2019, a transgender man had applied for legal recognition. His application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of birth, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to § 33.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the registrar.    
In March 2020, a transgender man had applied for legal recognition. His application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of birth, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to § 33.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the registrar. Application filed.   
Due to the changed legal environment in May 2020, he is unable to submit a request to change his gender and name, so we turned to the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights to declare Section 33 unconstitutional and to request the Constitutional Court to review its compliance with the Constitution. Commissioner for Fundamental Rights We provide assistance in compiling the application for the registrar.    
In March 2019, a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition. Her application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of birth, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to § 33.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the registrar.    
In July 2019, a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition. Her application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of birth, which was rejected by the local registrar in June 2020 with reference to § 33.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the registrar. Application filed.  
In December 2018, a transgender woman had applied for legal recognition. Her application was forwarded by the Budapest Government Office to the registrar of the place of birth, which was rejected by the local registrar in October 2020 with reference to § 33.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the registrar.    
In October 2018, a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, however, no decision has been made on the application to date.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the Budapest Government Office.    
In October 2018, a transgender man had applied for legal recognition, however, no decision has been made on the application to date.   We provided assistance in compiling the application for the Budapest Government Office.    

 

Tag Cloud