Johanna Westeson - The ICHRP

As for child protection, local authorities have responsibilities when FGM has taken place
or may occur under the Children Act 1989. 615 These include general duties to safeguard
and promote the welfare of the child by providing a range of services (Section 17), but also
the duty to investigate when there is a suspicion that a child is suffering or is likely to
suffer harm (Section 47). In extreme cases, authorities may issue a non-authorization to
leave the country, withhold passports of parents or of the girl, suspend parental authority
or, as a last resort, remove the child from the family (‘Prohibited steps order’ (Section 8),
‘Supervision orders’ (Section 35), ‘Emergency protection order’ (Section 44), or Care and
supervision orders (Section 31)).
In France, by contrast, there is no specific legislation on FGM. According to articles 222-9
and 222-10 of the French Penal Code, 616 violence involving mutilation is an offence that
carries heavy penalties. Where the victim is a child under 15, the maximum penalty is 15
years’ imprisonment; if committed by the parents or grandparents, it is 20 years. 617 The
term ‘female genital mutilation’ does not appear in the legislation. However, according to a
Cassation Court judgment in 1983, removal of parts of the clitoris that results from wilful
violence constitutes mutilation in the meaning of then article 312-3 of the Penal Code (now
article 222-9). Since then, FGM cases have been understood to fall under this provision. 618
With regard to prevention of FGM in France, an official circular on the integration of
immigrant communities includes guidelines for action to be taken by the districts
(départements) where relevant communities live, in order to prevent FGM from being
performed. 619
Case law: damages for FGM and imprisonment for practitioner and parents
France is the country of Europe where most legal cases have been brought following
suspicion of FGM. Until 2009, at least 37 criminal cases had been brought in the highest
criminal court in the country (Assize Court of Paris). 620 In one of those, the case of Hawa
Gréou, decided on 17 February 1999, a young woman reported the excision-practitioner
who had performed FGM on her and her sisters in the 1980s. During the investigation the
address book of the excision-practitioner was seized, which allowed 48 other child victims
to be identified, and 25 parents to be put on trial. The practitioner was sentenced to eight
years of prison, and the mother of the girls to two years of prison; the other parents were
sentenced to suspended prison penalties. The 48 victims were granted 80.000 Francs each
in damages. 621
615 Enacted 16 November 1989.
616 In force since 1994, as amended. Unofficial translation available.
617 According to Council of Europe, Legislation in the Member States of the Council of Europe in the Field
of Violence Against Women, EG (2004)2, p 126.
618 Information from Anika Rahman and Nahid Toubia, Female genital mutilation: a guide to laws and
policies worldwide, 2000, p. 152.
619
Circular DPM 94/42 of 19 December 1994, according to Council of Europe, Legislation in the Member
States of the Council of Europe in the Field of Violence Against Women, EG (2004)2, p 127.
620 Information from International Centre for Reproductive Health, Responding to female genital mutilation
in Europe. Striking the right balance between prosecution and prevention (2009). Available at
http://www.icrh.org/files/ICRH_rapport%202009_def%20-%20high%20resolution.pdf. Last visited on 5
March 2010.
621 The author has been unable to locate the case but the facts have been confirmed through various sources.
See, e.g., Linda Weil-Curiel, “Female Genital Mutilation in France: a Crime Punishable by Law,” in Susan
Perry & Celeste Marguerite Schenk (eds), Eye to Eye: Women Practicing Development Across Cultures
(2001), pp. 193-195, and BBC News, “Woman jailed for 48 circumcisions,” 17 February 1999, at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/281026.stm. Last visited on 5 March 2010.
202