Open Access Research Article
FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION IN INDIA: UNVEILING THE URGENT NEED FOR LEGISLATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION
Published Paper
Article Details
FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION IN INDIA:
UNVEILING THE URGENT NEED FOR LEGISLATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION
AUTHORED BY
- SHUBHAM VASHIST
Abstract-
Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) is a
harmful practice affecting millions of girls and women worldwide. This research
paper delves into the complex issue of FGM, primarily focusing on its existence
in India within the Dawoodi Bohra Muslim community. Through a comprehensive
analysis of historical, cultural, religious, and legal aspects, the paper
explores the origins, reasons behind its practice, and the prevailing global
and Indian context.
The research paper presents evidence
of the continued practice of FGM within India, challenging the government's
official stance of denial. It highlights the physical and psychological
consequences faced by victims and emphasizes that FGM infringes upon
fundamental human rights, including the right to privacy, bodily autonomy, and
equality. Furthermore, the paper discusses the legal framework in India,
showing how FGM can be prosecuted under existing laws such as those addressing
grievous hurt and child protection.
The paper evaluates international
precedents and emphasizes the global consensus against FGM, showcasing the need
for coordinated efforts to combat this practice. It underscores India's
obligation, as a signatory to the UN's Sustainable Development Goals, to
eliminate FGM by 2030.
In conclusion, this research paper
advocates for urgent legislative measures to criminalize FGM in India, aligning
with international standards. It argues that FGM violates the principles of
gender equality, bodily autonomy, and individual rights, and must be treated as
a severe violation of human rights. By analyzing legal, cultural, and human
rights perspectives, this paper contributes to the ongoing discourse
surrounding FGM, aiming to raise awareness and prompt action to eradicate this
harmful practice from Indian society.
Introduction-
Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) is
described by the WHO as "all procedures involving partial or total removal
of the external female genitalia or other injuries to the female genital organs
for non-medical reasons." A dictionary definition, however, falls short of
expressing the full gravity of this horrible practice. The practice has no
health benefits for girls and women and can cause severe bleeding, problems
urinating, and later cysts, infections, as well as complications in childbirth
and increased risk of newborn deaths.[1]
There are four distinct
classifications of female genital mutilation. Type I entails the partial or
complete removal of the clitoris or clitoral hood, while Type II involves the
inner and/or outer labia being partially or entirely excised, often accompanied
by pricking or piercing. Type III comprises the narrowing of the vaginal
opening through the creation of a seal, and Type IV encompasses all other
harmful non-medical procedures performed on the female genitalia. Typically
performed on girls on the cusp of puberty or sometimes even earlier, usually
aged 1 to 15, Female Genital Mutilation poses a serious threat.
Why is
Female Genital Mutilation practiced-
The origins of FGM are entrenched in
complex cultural, social, and historical contexts. It is often perpetuated by
deep-seated traditional beliefs, gender norms, misconceptions about religion, and a desire to control
female sexuality. While practitioners of FGM may view it as a rite of passage,
a cultural tradition, or a means of preserving family honor, the practice
inflicts enduring physical and psychological trauma on its victims. According
to a groundbreaking study titled ‘The Clitoral Hood A Contested Site’, some of
the common reasons cited for the practice of FGM include:
1.
Religious ritual:
Religious obligation was the most
often reported reason for FGM in the study. The justification for FGM as a
religious practice is hinged on notions of purity, and the control of women’s
sexual desire is viewed as a way to instill purity and piety in women. Most respondents were told about this
by elder women in the family, or through other community members, including
friends and/or members associated with the religious institution (Aamil/
Aamil’s wives). However, almost all respondents were unsure about the exact
religious citations that require Bohras to perform FGM.
2.
Control of sexual behavior:
FGM is utilized as a method to
regulate the sexual conduct of females, including young girls. The practice is
rooted in the belief that modifying or eliminating the clitoral hood would
decrease the probability of women participating in sexual endeavors that occur
beyond the confines of marriage. By modifying the clitoral hood, it is
perceived that the experience of sexual gratification is diminished, thereby
serving as a deterrent against engaging in sexual relationships before or
outside of marriage. This practice is regarded as a mechanism for exerting
control over the community, safeguarding familial structure, and preserving
cultural and religious principles.
3.
Distinct identity:
Some respondents believed that FGM is
one of the ways Bohras maintain their distinct identity from other Muslim
groups in India. It is seen as a cultural and religious practice that sets them
apart and reinforces their sense of belonging within the community.
4.
Pressure from community members:
Several respondents noted the
influence exerted by family, acquaintances, and members of the religious
community to guarantee the performance of FGM on girls. This influence may stem
from the aspiration to adhere to community standards and anticipated behavior,
coupled with apprehensions about being marginalized or criticized within
society.
5.
Equating to Male circumcision and Hygiene:
Some respondents in the study equated
FGM/C to male circumcision and suggested that FGM/C is performed for reasons of
physical hygiene, similar to male circumcision.
Now with the reasons explored, let us take a
look at the pervasiveness of this practice.
Global
Prevalence of FGM and its existence in India-
The international day of zero
tolerance for female genital mutilation (FGM) is commemorated on February 6 and
although the precise number of girls and women who have had FGM is unknown,
based on data gathered from 30 nations, including Western, Eastern, and
North-Eastern Africa, as well as certain countries in the Middle East and Asia,
the practice has impacted over 200 million currently living girls and women.
Additionally, an annual estimate of more than 4 million girls is potentially
exposed to the risk of FGM according to The United Nations Population Fund[2].
The significance of this issue has grown to the point where UN
Secretary-General Antonio Guterres issued a call to action this year, urging
men and boys "everywhere to join me in speaking out and stepping forward
to end female genital mutilation, for the benefit of all."[3]
Hence, FGM emerges as a matter of worldwide significance.[4]
India is also no stranger to this
problem. Colloquially known as Khatna or Khafz, FGM has been a quiet practice
in the Dawoodi Bohra Muslim group, as well as other smaller Bohra sub-sects
including the Suleimani and Alavi Bohras[5].
The community in question traces its ancestry and ideological foundations back
to Egypt and Yemen in the 10th and 11th centuries. Even though it is a tiny
community, there are still more than 500,000 Indians within.
According to a survey and research
published by Sahiyo in February 2017 titled ‘Understanding Female Genital
Cutting in the Dawoodi Bohra Community’, eighty percent or 309 of the 385
survey participants responded that they had undergone FGC. Furthermore, 66% of
them were between the ages of 6 and 7.[6]
Similarly, according to a WeSpeakOut against FGM study, 75% of the 83 female
respondents had undergone some type of FGM, when they were young. A 2018
article by The Guardian relying on this study, claims that girls of the Bohra
sect of Shia Muslims frequently undergo Type I and Type IV FGM in India,
particularly in the states of Maharashtra, Kerala, Rajasthan, Gujarat, and
Madhya Pradesh.[7]
In the past five years, the
anti-FGM/C campaign in India, particularly WeSpeakOut and Sahiyo, have broken
the long-standing silence of Bohra women over Khafd, politicizing it and
removing it from the closely guarded domain of "privacy"; and while
the media has been very responsive to their demands, the government’s response
has been very lackluster to say the least.
Current
Situation in India-
Female genital mutilation has been
deemed a violation of human rights by the United Nations, however, its
persistence in India is evident. The practice endures, with young girls still
being taken to midwives and doctors in hospitals linked to the Bohra community.
In May 2017, union Women and Child Development (WCD) minister, Maneka Gandhi,
publicly announced “We will write to respective state governments and Syedna,
the Bohra high priest shortly to issue an edict to community members to give up
FGM voluntarily as it is a crime under Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Protection
of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act, 2012. If the Syedna does not
respond then we will bring in a law to ban the practice in India.”[8]
Despite this, no progress has been achieved subsequently, and there is no
political motivation to pass such a law. Adding to the predicament, in response
to a Supreme Court question in a Public Interest Litigation case regarding
FGM/C in India, the Ministry of Women and Child Development stated on December
29, 2017, "There is no official data or study which supports the existence
of FGM/C in India."
This issue gained further prominence
at the 41st session of the United Nations Human Rights Council’s
Universal Periodic Review (UPR); for the first time, India received a
recommendation to regulate and make female genital mutilation (FGM) a criminal
offense. Costa Rica, a fellow United Nations member, called on India to create
a national strategy for addressing this issue. Their suggestion encompassed
adopting the World Health Organization's official definition of female genital
mutilation, imposing legal penalties for its practice, and implementing an
international plan to eliminate it. At the session, more than 25 member states
also made recommendations for India to implement greater measures for
safeguarding women, girls, and children from all types of violence, including
harmful customs and gender-based violence. It's interesting to note that India
itself advised Guinea and Mali against FGM during the UPR.[9]
However, when it came to the practice at home, the government has hitherto
failed to even acknowledge that FGM exists.
India is a signatory to the UN's
Sustainable Development Goals, which state that Female Genital Mutilation needs
to be eliminated by 2030. In light of this, let us now study the validity of
FGM.
International
precedents against FGM-
The global stance against Female
Genital Mutilation has gained significant momentum over the years as awareness
about its physical, psychological, and cultural implications has grown. Under
international law, international conventions are treaties or agreements between
countries. Their primary aim is to foster consensus among participating
countries, enabling them to collaborate towards shared objectives, like for
instance, eradication of racism from society.
In 2008, the World Health Assembly
passed resolution WHA61.16, advocating for collaborative efforts across sectors
like health, education, finance, justice, and women's affairs to eliminate FGM.[10]
The 2021 edition of the World Bank's "Compendium of International and
National Legal Frameworks on Female Genital Mutilation"[11]
indicates that 84 nations worldwide have domestic legislation that either
specifically forbids FGM or permits FGM to be punished through other laws, such
as the criminal or penal code, child protection laws, violence against women
laws, or domestic violence laws. In addition to this, the United Nations has
enacted various other conventions like the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
Against Women, 1979, aimed at protecting women from all forms of
discrimination.[12]
When considering the significance of
international treaties and conventions in combatting the practice of female
genital mutilation on a global scale, they effectively stimulate action within
individual nation states. These agreements prompt the development of
appropriate legal structures and frameworks to combat the issue. Following an
upsurge in the number of incidents being reported, Australia[13]
and South Sudan[14] recently
implemented laws criminalizing the practice in their nations.
Change takes time, and the battle is
only just beginning. Recent cases involving the Bohra community and FGM in
countries like Australia, India, and the United States have brought the issue
into public discourse. Recently, a nurse and a mother were convicted in
Australia, and are set to go to jail which has led to chatter within the
community and a decree from the Sydney Jamaat advising all Bohras against being
in contempt of the country’s law.[15]
The Netherlands provides an encouraging model, where collaboration among
various stakeholders like medical professionals, educators, law enforcement,
migrant organizations, and child abuse reporting centers, coupled with
decentralized efforts, have yielded positive outcomes.[16]
Similarly, in Burkina Faso, over 175,000 girls were safeguarded from FGM in
2019 through community child protection initiatives that identified at-risk
girls and organized them into adolescent groups.[17]
Now, let's delve into India's stance
and approach regarding this issue.
India’s
position on Female Genital Mutilation-
As we have discussed previously, the
official stance of the government regarding Female Genital Mutilation is that
“there is no official data or study which supports the existence of FGM in
India.”[18]
Contrary to this stance, however, studies have emerged that have shown the
opposite. Furthermore, with Costa Rica urging India to take proactive measures
to combat FGM, there is now international scrutiny on the issue within India's
borders.
At present, there is no legislation
in place that expressly forbids this practice within the nation. In fact, any
attempts to address it through legislation have been hampered by the
government's unwillingness to acknowledge its widespread prevalence. In 2017, a
human rights advocate named Sunita Tiwari initiated a writ petition[19]
challenging the constitutionality of this practice. A counter-affidavit was
filed contesting the rationale behind this position. Due to the complex and multifaceted
nature of the issue, particularly its significance within a religious context,
it was referred to a larger Constitution Bench consisting of five judges in
2018. While specific questions were not outlined, this Bench was tasked with
examining the matter comprehensively from all angles and determining the
constitutionality of khatna. Eventually, in November 2019, the Supreme Court
ruled that the issue of FGM should be referred to an even larger seven-judge
bench and be considered alongside other women's rights matters.[20]
However, as of now, a bench has not been convened in the apex court to hear
this matter.
As such let us examine the
constitutionality of Female Genital Mutilation in India within the current
legal system with respect to the rights guaranteed to the citizens-
1.
The Right to Privacy and Bodily Autonomy-
To begin, it is essential to examine
whether the practice of female genital mutilation, known as khatna, infringes
upon the right to privacy and bodily autonomy of the girls subjected to this
procedure. In the landmark case of Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh[21],
the Court emphasized that the right to life under Article 21 extends beyond
mere physical survival, setting the stage for the recognition of the right to
privacy. The definitive establishment of the right to privacy as a fundamental
right came with the K. S. Puttaswamy & Anr. vs. Union Of India &
Ors.[22] case.
The Supreme Court asserted that individuals possess the autonomy to make life
choices, emphasizing that the state's role is to protect this autonomy, not
dictate decisions. Justice Chandrachud, in his opinion, highlighted the
importance of decisional autonomy, which encompasses an individual's capacity
to make choices regarding their sexual and reproductive behavior.
Another relevant case in the context
of bodily and reproductive autonomy is Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh
Administration[23].
In this case, the High Court directed the termination of a pregnancy involving
a woman allegedly raped in a government welfare facility. The Court affirmed a
woman's right to make reproductive choices as part of her personal liberty
under Article 21, emphasizing the importance of respecting a woman's bodily
integrity and dignity.
In summary, the practice of khatna,
being non-consensual in nature, denies women their decisional autonomy over a
highly consequential procedure; and as previously discussed, this procedure can
lead to physical complications and psychological trauma and offers no positive
impacts on a female's well-being; instead, it unleashes a cascade of
detrimental consequences. Therefore, it can be argued that khatna violates the
right to privacy and bodily integrity enshrined in Article 21 of the
Constitution.
2.
Child's Right to Privacy-
Now an important question arises: Do children possess the same rights to
individual privacy and bodily autonomy as adults? This question must be
considered, given that parents or guardians often make decisions on behalf of
their children, such as the Hindu practice of mundan, or shaving a baby's first
hair.
However, the Indian Constitution does
not impose additional restrictions on Fundamental Rights based on age.
Furthermore, unlike mundan, female genital mutilation represents an
irreversible intervention with lasting physical and psychological consequences
for girls even into adulthood. It also violates their decisional autonomy,
which, as established, is a part of the rights guaranteed under Article 21.
3.
Right to Freedom of Religion-
Articles 25 and 26, found in Part III
of the Indian Constitution, ensure the freedom of religion for citizens. These
articles reflect the constitutional framers' commitment to fostering secularism
in the nation. However, it's pertinent to note that the concept of secularism in
India allows for State intervention. This intervention was designed to address
the divide between religious practices and societal norms, aiming to strike a
balance between the two. As such, the freedom of religion outlined in Articles
25 and 26 is subject to other fundamental rights in the Indian Constitution,
including Article 21, which Khatna endangers.
In the case of Indian Young
Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala[24],
the Supreme Court emphasized that when interpreting Articles 25 and 26, the
concept of "morality" should be understood as "constitutional
morality." It was further clarified that the assessment of "existing
structures of social discrimination" should be done through this lens.
Chief Justice Chandrachud, in his concurring opinion during the Sabrimala
judgment, emphasized the enduring value of constitutional morality,
highlighting that it should not be swayed by passing trends or societal norms.
He stated that once the foundational principles of human liberty, equality,
fraternity, and justice are acknowledged, it becomes imperative that freedom of
religion and the autonomy to administer religious matters must comply with and
be subservient to these fundamental tenets of constitutional morality.
Therefore, the right to freedom of
religion is not unqualified and is subject to limitations related to public
order, morality, and health, as such the practice of FGM cannot be permitted to
subsist.
4.
The Essential Religious Practices Test-
The Supreme Court established the
doctrine of Essential Religious Practices (ERP) to delineate the interplay
between religion and the Constitution. It was determined that any practice
considered 'essential' to a religion could not be subject to state regulation.
In the case of The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sri
Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt[25],
the Supreme Court outlined the ERP test. It was emphasized that the courts had
the responsibility to ascertain whether a practice possessed a 'religious'
character based on presented evidence and the tenets of the relevant religion.
Following this determination, the question arises as to whether the practice is
an 'essential' and 'integral' component of the religion. The Court affirmed
that freedom of religion encompassed both the freedom of religious belief and
practice. In evaluating the essentiality of any practice, the Court must take
into account the religion itself.
In this regard, the practice of
khatna does not meet the criteria of an essential religious practice as it
predates Islam and lacks endorsement from any Islamic source of law, a stance
supported by prominent United Nations organizations such as WHO, UNFPA, and
UNICEF, among others[26].
Previous WHO reports have also arrived at similar conclusions.[27]
To illustrate further, the Aga Khani
Ismailis, who adhere to the same jurisprudence as Dawoodi Bohras and share the
same religious text, Da’a’im al-Islam, trace their religious lineage back to
the Fatimid Caliphate when FGM was prevalent in the tenth to the twelfth
century. Despite their shared Islamic law, the Aga Khani Ismailis have
abandoned the practice of FGM.[28]Additionally,
even Bohra community members residing overseas have been prohibited from
practicing it, yet they remain within the religious community[29].
This demonstrates that the practice is not deemed essential to the religion.
5.
Right to Equality-
Often male circumcision, a
requirement in the Islamic faith, is cited to argue against a selective ban on
khatna, asserting it would violate the principles of equality under Articles 14
and 15. This argument falters due to its faulty reasoning. While a law banning
khatna could be seen as an unreasonable classification between the sexes, it is
essential to recognize the distinct physiological implications of circumcision
for men and women.
Thus, just like a law advocating for
women's representation in legislative bodies isn't rooted in stereotypical
views of separate gender roles but rather aims to enhance their active
engagement in politics and decision-making, a law prohibiting female
circumcision acknowledges the existence of a societal context rooted in gender
stereotypes and regressive beliefs regarding pre-marital chastity and would as
such be a valid legislation. Furthermore, Article 15(3) allows the state to
make special provisions for women and children.
Female Genital Mutilation constitutes
a manifestation of gender-based violence, seeking to exert authority over and
manage female sexuality. The aforementioned report[30]
substantiates this by revealing that women subjected to the procedure reported
diminished sexual satisfaction and heightened sensitivity in the clitoral
region. Consequently, it is perceived as a method not only to physically deter
what's considered "illegitimate" sexual activity but also to cleanse
the minds and desires of girls of perceived impurity. Consequently, this
practice, in its essence, violates the principles enshrined in Articles 14 and
15 of the Constitution, as it imposes unequal burdens on women solely due to
their gender and hence it should be struck down.
6.
Causing Grievous Hurt & POCSO-
In India, when it comes to addressing
different forms of violence, we turn to the Indian Penal Code of 1860. While
the Penal code does not explicitly mention Female Genital Mutilation, it
indirectly implies that it falls under Section 320, which deals with grievous
hurt. Even R.K. Raghavan, the former director of the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI), has emphasized that while FGM/C is not expressly
prohibited by the IPC, the police are required to file a case under Section 326
of the IPC in response to a complaint.[31]
Under Section 320, any hurt that
risks life or causes the victim to endure severe bodily pain for more than
twenty days is considered an offense. Additionally, Section 326 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860, states that voluntarily causing grievous hurt using any
weapon or instrument that can potentially cause death is also an offense.
Since the immediate
complication of FGM can include excessive bleeding (hemorrhage), genital tissue
swelling, wound healing problems, injury to surrounding genital tissue, shock
and death, those involved in practicing FGM could face legal action under
Sections 319 to 326 of the Indian Penal Code.
Furthermore, Section 3 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) addresses
penetrative sexual assault involving any person and a child. It notably defines
this act to include the insertion of any object into a girl's vagina. It is
recognized precedency that penetration in sexual offenses does not require full
penetration. In fact, Explanation 1 of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code
explicitly states that the term "vagina" includes the labia majora.
Thus, Female Genital Mutilation,
which involves inserting a sharp object into a child's vagina, would fall under
the purview of Section 3 of the POCSO Act and in conjunction with Explanation 1
of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code it should be banned and punished
appropriately.
Conclusion-
Female Genital
Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) is a cruel practice that, under the guise of
"purity" and "cleanliness," seeks to suppress and control
female sexual expression. Despite its religious and traditional associations,
this act violates the human rights of girls and women, particularly since it
often occurs when they are minors and cannot provide informed consent. FGM/C
inflicts profound physical and psychological trauma on its victims. Subjecting
women to such a distressing experience in the name of custom, religion,
culture, social pressure, or mere aesthetics demonstrates a blatant disregard
for the dignity and worth of girls and women in society. These practices
tarnish the image of modern India, a nation committed to empowering its female
population, and as such, they should be treated as serious crimes against the
female body, governed by stringent laws.
Although we've discussed
provisions in Indian law that address various forms of harm, there is no
specific mention of FGM/C in our legal framework, allowing this practice to
largely go unnoticed. Consequently, it is clear that a distinct law addressing
FGM/C is urgently required to bring this issue to light and treat it as a
harmful criminal practice, rather than accepting it as a religious custom. The
Indian government must formulate comprehensive legislation and a strategy to
eradicate this practice. This effort should involve engagement with practicing
communities and all stakeholders, drawing from global best practices in
combatting FGM/C. The strategy should encompass prevention, protection,
prosecution, service provision, and collaboration.
[1] World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation, (last visited Sept. 16, 2023)
[2] UNICEF, https://www.unicef.org/stories/what-you-need-know-about-female-genital-mutilation, (last visited Sept. 16, 2023)
[3] United Nations, https://www.un.org/en/observances/female-genital-mutilation-day/message, (last visited Sept. 16, 2023)
[4] United Nations, https://www.un.org/en/observances/female-genital-mutilation-day, (last visited Sept. 16, 2023)
[5] Laksmi Anantnarayan, Shabana
Diler, Natasha Menon, The Clitoral Hood A Contested Site: Khafd or Female
Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C), WESPEAKOUT (Sept. 16, 2023, 3:17 pm), https://narisamatamanch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Khafd-or-Female-Genital-MutilationCutting-FGMC-in-India_A-Report.pdf
[6] Mariya Taher, Understanding Female
Genital Cutting in the Dawoodi Bohra Community: An Exploratory Survey, Sahiyo
(Sept. 16, 2023, 3:20 pm), https://sahiyo.org/images/resource-pdf/sahiyo_report_final-5.21.19.pdf
[7] Kirti Bhargava, Does India Need A
Law To Curb Female Genital Mutilation? What Has FGM To Do With Religion?,
Outlook India, (Nov. 17, 2022, 5:08 pm), https://www.outlookindia.com/national/does-india-need-a-law-to-curb-female-genital-mutilation-what-has-fgm-to-do-with-religion--news-238125
[8] Moushumi Das Gupta, Govt will end
female genital mutilation if Bohras don’t: Maneka Gandhi, Hindustan Times, (May
29, 2017, 09:17 am), https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/practise-of-female-genital-mutilation-should-be-banned-in-india-maneka-gandhi/story-kQhNA4rIYOLQTurkN5zAAM.html
[9] Masooma Ranalvi, Modi govt in
denial about female genital mutilation in India. Collect data, let states ban
it, ThePrint, (Nov. 23, 2022, 10:41 am), https://theprint.in/opinion/modi-govt-in-denial-about-female-genital-mutilation-in-india-collect-data-let-states-ban-it/1230724/
[10] World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation, (last visited Sept. 16, 2023)
[11] World Bank, Compendium of
international and national legal frameworks on female genital mutilation (5th
ed. 2021).
[12] UN General Assembly, Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 18 December 1979,
United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1249, p. 13, http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/cedaw.htm.
[13] Crimes Act, 1900, § 45 (NSW)
[14] The Penal Code Act, 2008, § 259
[15] Bridie Jabour, Australia's first
female genital mutilation trial: how a bright young girl convinced a jury, The
Guardian, (Nov. 13, 2015, 6:28 am), https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/nov/13/female-genital-mutilation-trial-young-girl-convinced-jury-australia
[16] Pec?iu?riene?, J. (2013) Good
practices in Combating female genital mutilation. Luxembourg: Publications
Office.
[17] UNICEF, https://www.unicef.org/media/88751/file/FGM-Factsheet-2020.pdf, (last visited Sept. 16, 2023)
[18] Shalini Nair, No official data on
existence of Female Genital Mutilation in India, Centre tells SC, The Indian
Express, (Dec. 28, 2017, 07:16 am), https://indianexpress.com/article/india/no-official-data-on-existence-of-female-genital-mutilation-in-india-centre-tells-sc-5001780/
[19] [WP (C) No. 286/2017]
[20] HT Correspondent, Female genital
mutilation petition pending before Supreme Court, Hindustan Times, (Nov 15,
2019, 01:53 am), https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/female-genital-mutilation-petition-pending-before-supreme-court/story-rsHGOLu0z5eEg3aZjHYEIL.html
[21] AIR 1963 SC 1295
[22] AIR 2017 SC 4161
[23] (2009) 9 SCC 1
[24] (2019) 11 SCC 1
[25] AIR 1954 SC 282
[26]Eliminating female genital
mutilation: An interagency statement OHCHR, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNECA, UNESCO, UNFPA,
UNHCHR, UNICEF, UNIFEM, WHO (2008). Geneva: World Health Organization.
[27] Al-Sabbagh, M.L. (1998) Islamic
ruling on male and female circumcision. Alexandria: World Health Organization,
Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean.
[28] Kassamali N. Genital cutting.
[ed.] Suad Joseph. Encyclopedia of Women & Islamic Cultures. Brill-Leiden,
2006, Vol. III, p 129–134.
[29] Sahiyo, https://sahiyo.com/2016/03/08/notices-by-sydney-melbourne-and-londons-anjuman-e-burhani-trusts-on-khafd-khatna-or-female-genital-cutting/, (last visited Sept. 16, 2023)
[30] Laksmi Anantnarayan, Shabana
Diler, Natasha Menon, The Clitoral Hood A Contested Site: Khafd or Female
Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C), WESPEAKOUT (Sept. 16, 2023, 3:17 pm), https://narisamatamanch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Khafd-or-Female-Genital-MutilationCutting-FGMC-in-India_A-Report.pdf
[31] Rasheeda Bhagat, India: Ban this
barbarous practice!, Stop FGM Middle East, (July 29, 2014), http://www.stopfgmmideast.org/india-ban-this-barbarous-practice/
Article Information
FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION IN INDIA: UNVEILING THE URGENT NEED FOR LEGISLATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION
Authors: SHUBHAM VASHIST
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/09/22
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.