In Malaysia, there have been different court decisions about legal gender
recognition applications, with inconsistent results. In addition, fatwas
(religious edicts or opinions) on transgender persons issued by the Fatwa
Council carry weight in public opinion and government policies,
influencing the outcomes of these cases.
The most progressive case on the matter was JG v Pengarah Jabatan
Pendaftaran Negara (High Court of Kuala Lumpur) “JG”. The court
followed the Australian case of Re Kevin and rejected the Corbett view of
sex as immutably fixed at birth. In the absence of legislative guidance,
the court held that medical experts should determine gender, and with
both physical and psychological aspects examined by doctors, the court
found that the applicant was female and allowed to change the last
number on her Identity Card (marking her as female).
However, the reasoning in Re JG is not always found instructive in other
courts hearing legal gender recognition cases. The court did so on the ground that there was no medical evidence from
Malaysian experts on whether gender affirming surgery “changes a
person’s gender”.
In 2016, another High Court level case allowed a transgender man legal
gender recognition after evidence of surgeries, finding the court’s
standard of proof in Re Kristie Chan, which insisted on chromosomal
requirements, to be “impossible” and “unjust”.

A 2014 HRW report found that while there is no law in Malaysia that prohibits explicitly legal gender recognition most people find it virtually impossible.

Before 1983, it was possible for trans people to change their legal gender after receiving surgery.

If medical opinion states that the individual is their
desired gender, courts should comply and legally recognise
the desired gender. (High Court in Re JG)