For the first time, a transgender person will give direct arguments at the Supreme Court concerning the constitutionality of a law that requires sterilization to change one’s gender on the family register.

The Grand Bench of the Supreme Court on June 27 set Sept. 27 as the date to hear oral arguments in the case.

Under the law that went into effect in 2004, people diagnosed with gender identity disorder (GID) can legally change their gender on the family register but only after undergoing surgical procedures to remove their reproductive organs.

Four years ago, a petty bench of the Supreme Court ruled the law was constitutional, but it added that future rulings may deem the practice unconstitutional in light of changes in society.

The plaintiff in the latest case is a transgender woman who has not undergone surgery to remove her testicles due to the high cost of the operation and concerns about after-effects.

She is arguing that the legal requirement for forced sterilization violates Article 13 of the Constitution, which guarantees respect for the individual and the right to the pursuit of happiness, as well as Article 14, which guarantees equality under the law.

Lawyers for the plaintiff said that synchronizing one’s gender identity with the gender on the family register is an important fundamental right, and that requiring the heavy burden of surgery to do so is unconstitutional.

This will apparently be the first time for the top court to hold public hearings in a family law case.

The World Health Organization in 2014 issued a statement calling for the abolition of required sterilization, saying it violates human rights. A number of nations no longer require such a procedure to legally change one’s gender.

PASSING THE BATON

“I look forward to the Supreme Court issuing a response that matches the current times,” said Takakito Usui, 49, the plaintiff in the case four years ago.

A transgender man, Usui was diagnosed with GID in 2013 and legally changed his name on the family register. But he did not go ahead with the surgical procedure.

He felt the heart of the issue was how he wanted to live rather than whether or not he underwent surgery.

In addition to the health risk from the operation, the surgery would not give him male reproductive functions.

In 2016, he sought to change his gender on the family register without the operation.

But the Supreme Court said such an action could cause confusion in society and ruled that “at the present time” the law requiring forced sterilization was constitutional.

Two of the four justices involved in the ruling issued supporting opinions that said the possibility of the law being unconstitutional had emerged.

Usui feels his views had reached the justices.

At a news conference after the 2019 ruling, he said: “I have done all I can. I want to pass on the baton to the next individual.”

Usui now lives with his female partner and her son, and is involved in farming in Shinjo, Okayama Prefecture.

But they face various inconveniences because they are not recognized as a legal family, such as being unable to accept an Individual Number Card on behalf of the applicant.

After the ruling, Usui heard from other transgender people who said his action had provided support to them.

Now that another individual has submitted a similar request to the Supreme Court, Usui said: “We have to continue to submit cards without fear. Such persistent action will one day lead to the wall crumbling down.”

HIGH HURDLES FOR SURGERY

Transgender YouTuber Kanata Kimoto, 31, who has about 245,000 registered subscribers to his channel, underwent the surgical procedure.

He became aware he did not want to continue living as a female when he turned 17. After entering an arts university, he told friends about his gender identity.

But Kimoto ran into a wall in his search for a job after graduation. He wanted to enter the movie industry but realized there was a clear difference in the jobs open to men and women in that field.

He decided to change his gender because it would have been difficult to work in the movie industry as a woman.

However, he then learned about the various conditions he needed to clear to legally change his gender.

“I realized how high the hurdle was,” Kimoto said. “To clear all conditions meant undergoing surgery.”

He had to give up on his dream of working in the movie industry. He held part-time jobs in restaurants, convenience stores and the moving industry to accumulate the 2 million yen ($13,900) needed for the surgery.

It took him two years.

Kimoto had plastic surgery in Japan to flatten his breasts but went to Thailand to have his uterus and ovaries removed.

Although some medical institutions in Japan can handle such procedures, there was a long waiting list.

“I do not regret the surgery,” Kimoto said. “But because I had no other options, my start to life was delayed. Things would have turned out differently if I was able to change my gender without the surgery.”

He knows of others who want to change their gender but are unwilling or unable to undergo the surgery.

“Forcing someone to take a surgical knife to a perfectly healthy body is a violation of human rights,” he said.

(This article was written by Kazufumi Kaneko, Satomi Sugihara and Takashi Endo.)