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.
Highlights
The question as to how to deal with non-Western customs, including Female Genital Mutilation, has confronted Western societies for some decades
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
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
Summary
The question as to how to deal with non-Western customs, including Female Genital Mutilation (hereafter: FGM), has confronted Western societies for some decades. (Note 3) The question arises whether Western countries are legitimised to qualify a non-Western cultural practice in terms of right or wrong, and if these countries are allowed to do so, is the only use of legal measure sufficient to eliminate this practice. (Note 4) In line with this the question arises why despite the consensus on the punishability of FGM, its enforcement diverges in Western Europe. The reason being, that national views on citizenship may influence the way, in which Western European societies deal with multiculturalism. This might offer a (partial) explanation for the divergent enforcement practices in the area of FGM
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
