This is a blog and webpage to keep interested readers informed about legal developments relating to sexual orientation, gender expression and identity and sex characteristics (SOGIESC). Hopefully, it will make it easier to find correct legal information about the developments in all regions of the world and, in particular international law. It is related to my academic work in the International Academic Forum on SOGIESC Law but meant to serve anyone who wants to contribute to improve the protection of human rights worldwide. If you prefer this information on Facebook or Instagram, you can still do so.


Switzerland: Army chief says transsexuals should be able to join Swiss military

Transgender people should be allowed in the Swiss army if they meet the conditions of service, says outgoing army chief Philippe Rebord. This comes after a man was turned down for being transgender.  Rebord, who steps down at the end of the year, said in an interview with 20 Minuten newspaper on Friday that he wants army guidelines on the issue revised. The army’s medical guidelines currently provide that being transgender is a reason to declare people unfit for service.    The debate has been sparked by the case of a 21-year-old transgender man who wants to do military service but was refused. He told the 24 Heures newspaper this was despite good medical and sports results. All able-bodied Swiss men are called up to do military service.  Asked about the case, army spokesperson Delphine Allemand told 24 Heures that under current criteria transgender people are considered unfit for military service because they generally “need medical and sometimes psychological support which …


Switzerland: UN Committee against Torture (CAT) – 8th report from Switzerland regarding Intersex Persons

UN Committee against Torture (CAT) – 8th report from Switzerland: According to the expert Mirjam Werlen of Inter-Action, Switzerland’s response to the report is very disappointing and contains unacceptable statements. According to the report, most of the recommendations of the National Ethics Commission in the field of human medicine would be met. That is not the case. The French version can be found on http://www.inter-action-suisse.ch


USA: The United States Constitution protect transgender students from being forced to use separate bathroom facilities


Ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia of 9 July 2019 in favor of transgender student Gavin Grimm (now a graduate of that school), reaffirming that both the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 protect transgender students from discrimination, including being forced to use separate bathroom facilities, and that the school’s refusal to give Gavin a diploma reflecting his name is discrimination as well.

“Every student should feel safe at school, regardless of gender identity. Transgender students are covered by Title IX and the United States Constitution and are entitled to the same rights and protections as every other student,” said Cathryn Oakley, State Legislative Director and Senior Counsel. “With the Trump-Pence administration’s barrage of attacks on LGBTQ people in this country, including against students, we are pleased that yet another federal court decision has reaffirmed legal rights and dignity of transgender people. Congratulations to Gavin Grimm and the American Civil Liberties Union on this milestone victory.”

In 2014, the Gloucester County School Board in Virginia voted 6-1 to institute a discriminatory bathroom policy that segregates transgender students from their peers after Gavin Grimm, with permission of school officials, began using the restroom that corresponded with his gender identity.

In 2017, the Supreme Court sent the Grimm case back to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals following the Trump Administration’s decision to rescind protective school guidance for transgender students. Because the Fourth Circuit’s original ruling was heavily based on the Obama Administration’s guidance, the Supreme Court asked the lower court to revisit the case and rule on the underlying statutory question regarding the scope of Title IX. Many federal courts, including the court today, have affirmed that Title IX and other federal nondiscrimination laws prohibit discrimination against transgender people, including with respect to restroom access.