A transgender petitioner has moved to the High Court seeking legal recognition of her gender identity.
In oral submissions, the petitioner, who identified as Young Lourde, said a hunger strike outside the Attorney General’s office was a last resort to highlight what she described as the “degrading and torturous” impact of lacking a gender marker that reflects who she is.
Appearing before Justice Lawrence Mugambi on Thursday, the petitioner told the court she had engaged officials at the Attorney General’s office during her protest but was advised that the issue required legislative action through Parliament.
“We had a conversation with them, and they were like, we have to get to Parliament, and I was like, do we wait for Parliament first, and I’m suffering, and that’s why I went on a hunger strike,” she submitted.
She maintained that her suffering could not wait for a legislative process, prompting her to file the petition seeking orders compelling the State to change her gender marker in official records.
In her case, she has sued several state agencies, including the Ministry of Health and the Attorney General, arguing that the absence of legal recognition violates her constitutional rights.
She contends that the Constitution guarantees rights that do not depend on prior legislative action, insisting that recognition of her gender identity is immediate and fundamental.
“Having no gender marker that reflects who I am is degrading and torturous,” she told the court, adding that the rights she seeks to enforce are non-derogable and should not be delayed.
State counsel, Kaumba, appearing for the respondents, told the court that the petition as filed was not clear and required proper structuring.
He urged the petitioner to seek legal assistance from an advocate to ensure the documentation meets the required legal standards.
He also noted that the broader question of legal recognition of transgender persons is the subject of separate litigation pending determination.
“The issue of legal recognition of transgender persons, as opposed to intersex, is a subject of litigation pending determination on April 29, 2026, in Nairobi,” counsel stated.
Despite raising concerns over clarity, the State did not oppose the petitioner’s application for leave to amend her case.
Counsel argued that a properly drafted petition would enable the court to better understand and determine the issues in dispute.
In response, Lourde questioned the State’s position, noting that it had already filed a response outlining multiple grounds.
She wondered why the State would respond substantively if it did not understand her case.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi, in his directions, said the petition as filed lacked clarity compared to the petitioner’s oral submissions in court.
He emphasised that the court relies on pleadings in determining matters and advised the petitioner to seek assistance from a legal practitioner or civil society organisation to refine her case.
“I want your petition to be as clear as what you have stated in court today,” the judge said.
“I suggest you get an organisation like NGO or an advocate to help you put the documents well”
The court granted the petitioner leave to amend her petition and directed her to file and serve the revised documents.
The judge also noted that an earlier attempt to amend the petition could not be considered as the petitioner had not formally sought leave at the time.
The matter will be mentioned on April 14, 2026, for further directions.
