PRESS CONFERENCE BY UNITED NATIONS POPULATION FUND

Press Briefing

PRESS CONFERENCE BY UNITED NATIONS POPULATION FUND

Stopping the practice of female genital mutilation required profound social change, the Director of the International Programme at the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy, Anika Rahman, told correspondents at a Headquarters press conference this morning, sponsored by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) to introduce the book, Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Laws and Policies Worldwide.

While laws alone could not achieve that change, they were an important tool, said Ms. Rahman, who was joined by the book's co-editor, Dr. Nahid Toubia, Founder and President of the Research, Action and Information Network for Bodily Integrity of Women. The book, which provided a description of the legal status of laws on female circumcisions -- also known as female genital mutilation -- was unique in that it addressed the practice of female genital mutilation as a human rights issue. Ms. Rahman said 41 countries had addressed the issue of female genital mutilation in their laws and policies.

The book, which was the result of two years of collaboration between the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy and the Network, was one more tool to educate the public about female genital mutilation -- a practice which affected some 130 million girls and women worldwide, UNFPA Media Advisor Abubakar Dungus said. Female genital mutilation, the name given to a number of traditional practices that involved the partial or total excision of female genitals, was practiced in 28 African countries, as well as other regions of the world.

That female genital mutilation was reflective of the low status of women in society was the fundamental premise of the book, Ms. Rahman said. Female genital mutilation represented a blatant attempt to control women's sexuality and subordinate their status in society. It was also a violation of the human rights of girls and women.

Outlining the key findings of the book, cutting a child's or a woman's genitalia was both physically and psychologically damaging, Ms. Rahman said. The international community had recognized that female genital mutilation was a violation of women's human rights. Encouraging legislative and policy efforts could be found in countries around the world, in Africa as well as industrialized nations that had received African immigrants.

Female genital mutilation was prohibited by legal or administrative measures in at least 18 countries worldwide, Ms. Rahman continued. In Africa alone, nine out of 28 countries had enacted laws criminalizing female circumcision. That included a decree by the Egyptian Ministry of Health which declared female circumcisions unlawful. That decree had been later backed by a court decision. In most cases penalties for female genital mutilation ranged from six months to life in prison. The earliest example of a law against female genital mutilation was in 1965, when Guinea passed a law against that practice.

Seven industrialized nations had enacted laws criminalizing the practice of female genital mutilation, she said. One of those nations was Australia, where six out of its eight states had criminalized the practice. In the United States,

UNFPA Press Conference - 2 - 29 June 2000

15 of its states had criminal laws against female genital mutilation. There was also a federal law prohibiting the practice in the United States.

The book finds that there had been some success stories, she said. In several instances, women's groups along with human rights groups had successfully increased awareness of the practice of female genital mutilation. That awareness had resulted in legal change. In Senegal, for example, women's groups had lobbied to pass a criminal law on female genital mutilation. As a first step, the Government had provided women and families with education about the harmful nature of female genital mutilation. Also, in 1997, the Egyptian Government declared that Islam did not sanction female genital mutilation and that the practice was punishable under its penal code. The United Kingdom used an integrated legal approach to deal with the practice of female genital mutilation, which was considered a form of child abuse and could be used as the basis for State intervention to safeguard a child's welfare.

Laws against female genital mutilation were necessary, but not sufficient to stop the practice or to enhance women's rights, Ms. Rahman said. Legal change must be accompanied by public education and other campaigns and must be a part of an overall framework to promote women's rights. Female circumcision could be stopped within a generation. The long-term solution to the issue of female circumcision was empowering women. Governments must demonstrate the political will to promote women's rights.

Dr. Nahid Toubia, a medical doctor and women's rights advocate, said that although there was now discussion about legally banning female genital mutilation, some still did not acknowledge that the practice was wrong. Rather than fearing the loss of culture and the disintegration of tradition, society must consider the health of just one girl, who, while being held in place, would have a most sensitive part of her body cut without a say and without the possibility of ever reversing the damage done. The memories of female genital mutilation were never forgotten.

From a medical standpoint, cutting any healthy part of a body was never the right thing to do, she said. As a medical doctor she was sworn by oath to protect the body. While a cancer could be cut to save the life of a child, there was absolutely no reason to cut a perfectly healthy part of the body just because tradition said so. In addition to the psychological trauma, female genital mutilation had many other health implications, such as bleeding, infection, difficulty in childbirth and infertility. The practice also affected women's full sexual pleasure and relationships.

The right to health must be discussed, she said. "I think it is very important that as Africans we start thinking about the rights of our people as individuals and as human beings", she said. Whether a law would be productive or counter-productive was a controversial issue. Female circumcision was a complex issue about gender, belief and power. As a complex issue, it deserved complex approaches.

"Ultimately, the law is a very important tool", she said. The law was an endorsement of public opinion. It was also a form of empowerment for those who were less powerful in society. There were many people, including women, children and men, who would rather not be circumcised. There were also families who would rather not circumcise their children, but social pressures dictated the practice. The law would give those people power they would not otherwise have.

The law was not just about punishment, she said. "There were cases in which people were well-educated and informed and still could not stand the idea that women could live with her sexual organs intact", she said. In that case, the law gave the power to intervene. The law was not meant to break up families or sever generational ties, but it did make provision for right and wrong behaviours.

She said that there was concern, however, about the possible abuse of the law, particularly in the case of already powerless refugee and minority populations living in host countries. Such laws should not fuel existing power struggles within a nation. There were countries in which only the minority practiced female genital mutilation. The best example of that was in Ghana, where female genital mutilation was only practiced by the Sahel people, who were poor, less educated and not in positions of power.

A correspondent asked if the United Nations had adopted any resolutions against female genital mutilation. Ms. Rahman said that the United Nations had taken positions repeatedly against female genital mutilation. The call to end the practice had been reiterated in the five-year review of the Fourth World Conference on Women, as well as the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women had also issued a recommendation calling for the steps necessary for governments to stop the practice.

Mr. Dungus said that the General Assembly, in its last session, adopted several resolutions on traditional practices that were considered harmful to women. It asked countries to take measures to discourage the practice. The Assembly had also thanked UNFPA for appointing a special ambassador for the elimination of female genital mutilations, as well as asking governments to contribute to a special fund set up to encourage UNFPA's work in discouraging the practice.

Asked to name countries in which female genital mutilation was still widely practiced, Dr. Toubia said there were 28 African countries that practiced female circumcision at different levels. In some countries, only very small tribes practiced it, whereas in other countries it was prevalent, with some 90 per cent of the population still carrying out female genital mutilation. The severity of the practice also differed. There had been no major change in the practice in the last 10 years in terms of actual numbers. It was a very complex, deep issue. In Africa, people had only started discussing the issue recently, within the last five years. That was not enough time to bring about social change.

Mr. Dungus said that Nigeria's national assembly was debating a bill to ban female genital mutilation throughout the country. That bill might be signed and passed into law this year. It was an ancient practice that would take time to end. The journey had begun, however. In Uganda, for example, the Sabiny Elders in the Kapchorwa district were awarded the Population Award in 1998. In that case, girls had been encouraged to say no to circumcision. In Kenya, a non- governmental organization called the "Maendaleo Ya Wanawake" was helping through alternative rite-of-passage ceremonies, which emphasized positive cultural and traditional rituals without incorporating female genital mutilation. Another example was in Guinea, where women were being persuaded to abandon the practice. While laws were helpful, society must be encouraged to take part in the movement away from the practice.

Asked to describe the effect of law on the practice of female genital mutilation, she said that in industrialized countries, there had not been many

cases of prosecutions, Ms. Rahman said. There had been a scattering of prosecutions in African countries. One of the best examples was a recent case in Senegal where a father stepped forward and said that his wife was trying to circumcise his daughter. The law was applied in that case. The law had also been applied in Ghana. In industrialized countries, there had been concern for using the female genital mutilation law against immigrants and minorities. While evidence had not been found of that, there remained the concern that the laws be applied in a non-discriminatory manner.

Were there any examples of positive or adverse social reactions to the laws? a correspondent asked. Dr. Toubia said that the cumulative positive effect was difficult to measure and would need time to be assessed. On the individual level, she was aware of two cases. There was a case of a well-educated, affluent immigrant family in the United States in which the mother did not want to circumcise the daughter. The father, however, was under great pressure by his business associates to circumcise his daughter. If he did not conform to the pressures of his business associates, his livelihood would have been threatened. The mother contacted a counseling service. When the father learned of the legal ramifications of female genital mutilation for his family and his community, the law gave him the power to resist the demands of his associates. Also in France, a woman who had undergone female genital mutilation was able to prevent her younger sister from undergoing the same procedure by revealing the situation to the French court system.

A negative reaction to the enactment of laws on female genital mutilation was in the Sahel region of Ghana, she said. In that region, the practice of female genital mutilation had gone underground. Although the practice had not stopped, no one would admit that the practice still occurred. Five years ago the practice would have been openly discussed. Now that a law was in place, no one discussed the practice.

Governments must express the political will to bring about change, Ms. Rahman said. Even when governments had enacted laws, they had not put programmes and resources in place to stop the practice and promote women's rights.

* *** *