International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research
E-ISSN: 2582-2160
•
Impact Factor: 9.24
A Widely Indexed Open Access Peer Reviewed Multidisciplinary Bi-monthly Scholarly International Journal
Home
Research Paper
Submit Research Paper
Publication Guidelines
Publication Charges
Upload Documents
Track Status / Pay Fees / Download Publication Certi.
Editors & Reviewers
View All
Join as a Reviewer
Get Membership Certificate
Current Issue
Publication Archive
Conference
Publishing Conf. with IJFMR
Upcoming Conference(s) ↓
Conferences Published ↓
DePaul-2026
IC-AIRCM-T3-2026
NSSFIGTMA-2025
SPHERE-2025
AIMAR-2025
SVGASCA-2025
ICCE-2025
Chinai-2023
PIPRDA-2023
ICMRS'23
Contact Us
Plagiarism is checked by the leading plagiarism checker
Call for Paper
Volume 8 Issue 4
July-August 2026
Indexing Partners
A Comparative Analysis of Transgender Identity Laws in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Lessons for India
| Author(s) | Mr. Linto Antony, Dr. Basavaraja G |
|---|---|
| Country | India |
| Abstract | The global human rights paradigms are shifting towards demedicalizing transgender identity, and legal gender recognition frameworks continue to be very varied. In this study, we offer a comparative legal analysis of transgender identity laws in three Nordic jurisdictions (Denmark, Norway and Sweden) to examine the extent to which the ‘self-determination’ model outperforms traditional medical gatekeeping. Denmark (2014) and Norway (2016) are pioneering examples, having divorced legal gender recognition from medical, psychiatric and surgical requirements, and based it purely on self-identification. By contrast, Sweden, the first country to legislate in favour of gender recognition in 1972, and which recently implemented further legal revisions in 2025, still requires medical approval, showing the persistence of the difficulties of pathologisation. This study compares different Nordic approaches and provides important insights for the legal framework in India, and this contradiction is mirrored in the legal trajectory in India: the 2014 Supreme Court judgment of NALSA v. Union of India, which established self-identification as a fundamental constitutional right (National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) v. Union of India, , 2014). The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, regressed into a bureaucratic and medicalised model of gatekeeping and according to the 2019 Act, the issuance of a new legal gender certificate requires proof of gender-affirming surgery, and basic identity recognition requires approval from the District Magistrate. The paper contends that the existing Indian statutory framework structurally reflects the constraints of the Swedish model and so dilutes the constitutional protections of bodily autonomy and dignity. Drawing on the successful experiences of absolute self-determination in Denmark and Norway, the article further proposes concrete policy recommendations for India. It requires the abolition of the two-tiered system of magistrate certification, the elimination of all medical and surgical requirements and the establishment of a strictly rights-based administrative procedure that fully respects self-perceived gender identity in accordance with international human rights norms. |
| Keywords | Transgender, Rights, Identity, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, India, Policy, Act |
| Published In | Volume 8, Issue 4, July-August 2026 |
| Published On | 2026-07-24 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2026.v08i04.84375 |
Share this

E-ISSN 2582-2160
CrossRef DOI prefix of IJFMR is 10.36948/ijfmr
All research papers published on this website are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, and all rights belong to their respective authors/researchers.
Powered by Sky Research Publication and Journals