Man convicted of domestic violence against transgender minor. Court upholds gender identity-based prejudice

Man convicted of domestic violence against transgender minor. Court upholds gender identity-based prejudice

The Criuleni Court has convicted a man for domestic violence committed against a transgender minor. The court determined that the aggressor acted out of prejudice based on the victim’s gender identity and imposed a sentence of 200 hours of unpaid community service.

The Criuleni Court, Central Headquarters, found the man guilty of committing the crime of domestic violence, knowingly committed against a minor, under art. 201¹ para. (2) let. a¹) of the Criminal Code.

The sentence was pronounced on April 17, 2026. According to the decision, the man was sentenced to 200 hours of unpaid community service. The court also ordered him to pay 7,462 lei as legal costs.

The case concerns acts committed in March 2024, at the family home. According to the sentence, the defendant lived with the victim’s mother and the minor, having a relationship with him similar to that between a parent and a child.

The court found that the man knew that the victim was a minor and identified as a transgender person. According to the sentence, he acted out of prejudice based on gender identity, in order to impose his will and control over the victim.

According to the sentence, the defendant tried to determine the minor to abandon the hormonal transition process, forbade him from taking hormonal treatment and using a mobile phone, threatened him with the dissemination of personal images and with the incorporation into the military service of the unconstitutional forces in the Transnistrian region.

The court also noted that the man addressed him with offensive words, threatened him with physical violence, shoved him, slapped him in the face and forced him to cut his hair.

According to the forensic report cited in the sentence, the minor showed fear of the aggressor, tension, anxiety and insecurity, symptoms considered indicators of domestic violence. The court noted that the victim’s statements regarding the incident had a high degree of credibility.

An important aspect of the decision is that the court rejected the possibility of terminating the criminal proceedings by reconciling the parties. Although the injured party subsequently filed a request stating that he had reconciled with the defendant and had no claims against him, the court emphasized that, in cases involving domestic violence, reconciliation does not remove criminal liability.

“A child’s gender identity cannot be used as a reason for humiliation, control, threats or violence. The family is not a space outside the law, and LGBTQ+ children and adolescents have the right to protection, safety and dignity,” states the GENDERDOC-M Information Center.

The GDM Center draws attention to the fact that LGBTQ+ adolescents may face specific forms of violence in the family, including control over the body and physical appearance, confiscation of the phone, isolation from support people, threats of forced disclosure of identity or pressure to give up their own identity.

The organization recalls that every child has the right to protection against physical and psychological violence, and the authorities have the obligation to intervene in cases where a minor is exposed to risk in the family.