Abstract
What is the difference between circumcision, nicking, mutilating or touching the genitals of a child? Does it matter if that child is a girl or a boy? Does it matter if the person performing the procedure is a man or a woman? A doctor or a midwife? A parent or a friend? These are the questions that underpin any consideration that the courts must undertake when they apply the laws against what is termed, in the laws of all western countries, 'Female Genital Mutilation'. The defining of an act as a 'mutilation' is not clear and it is loaded with politics and prejudice. These prejudices relate to the gender, the skin colour and the religion of the person. Judges and juries should not, of course, in Australia today employ such prejudices, but when it comes to the issue of what has been termed 'female genital mutilation' many of the considerations that usually make judges and juries hesitate before they pass sentence, might not apply. And this was the situation in Sydney in 2015, in the first case of its kind in a superior court in Australia.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
