Criminal Enforcement in the Area of Female Genital Mutilation in France, England and the Netherlands: A Comparative Law Perspective

Abstract

The criminal justice system in Western countries is ever more frequently facing the question of how to deal with immigrants' cultural practices, such as honour killings, blood revenges and female circumcision, better known as 'Female Genital Mutilation', that are considered to be in violation of human rights. Especially practicing Female Genital Mutilation has been subjected to an intense debate in the last four decades. This debate culminated provisionally in the recently adopted resolution by the United Nations, which calls upon its member states to eliminate this practice. Despite such calls, the results of criminal enforcement in banning this practice diverge in many countries. This raise the question whether national views on citizenship and multiculturalism may offer an explanation for the divergent enforcement practices in the area of Female Genital Mutilation. This study pays in particular attention to the way France, England and the Netherlands have criminalised Female Genital Mutilation and whether the results of their legal approaches in banning this practice by using criminal law, can be declared from their particular notions of citizenship.

Female Genital Mutilation and Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery

“…The European Parliament said that by March 2009, nearly 500,000 women had had female genital mutilation in Europe [28]. France stands firmly against female genital mutilation while considering the importance of immigrants' assimilation to the French national identity and unity [29]. There are about 30,000 women in France who have undergone female genital mutilation.…”

“…All children born in France must receive a medical examination, including a genitals' inspection, before they are six years of age. If a doctor finds female genital mutilation, he is obliged to report [29]. In 1982, France appeared the first civil lawsuit against female genital mutilation, and in 1993 the first criminal procedure appeared [30].…”

“…In 1999, a woman was sentenced to eight years imprisonment for giving female genital mutilation to 48 girls [31]. As of 2014, more than 100 parents and two practitioners engaged in more than 40 criminal cases (Female Genital Mutilation) were prosecuted [29].…”

“…And the UK was the second European country to pass specialized legislation stopping female genital mutilation. Though the legislation was enacted more than 20 years, no concrete case has been prosecuted thus far [29].…”

European Models of Citizenship and the Fight against Female Genital Mutilation

“…The calls for a ban on FGM-based on the notion that it is a harmful and painful gendered practice to females-do not answer the more underlying question of why female circumcision cannot be considered a cultural exception in law, as is the case for some other (controversial) cultural (surgical) interventions such as male circumcision and cosmetic surgery (Kool and Wahedi, 2014;Wahedi, 2012). The question arises furthermore, whether Western legal systems are legitimized to qualify a non-Western cultural practice in terms of right or wrong and, if they are allowed to do so, is the only use of legal measures sufficient in this context to eliminate this practice (Gunning, 1992;Dustin, 2010).…”