Regulating female genital mutilation : Comparing criminal law of two European States, Finland and France.

Sammanfattning: BackgroundThis research paper examines the criminal legal regulations applied to Female Genital Mutilation in France and Finland. Female genital mutilation is a form of violence against women, and a violation of the Human Rights. The procedure has life-long negative consequences to the victims and their communities. Female genital mutilation is a tradition of certain cultures and ethnicities. Through immigration from Female Genital Mutilation practicing regions, Female Genital Mutilation has become prevalent in European Union area. The practice is a criminal act in all European member states but treated under each member state’s national law. Methods France’s and Finland’s criminal regulations treating Female Genital Mutilation, are examinedusing legal text and secondary source documents from trusted sources. The findings will be analyzed through intersectional theory. Furthermore, the determinants for the countries differences in regulations are examined through demographics and gender equality.ResultsNeither, France nor Finland has a separate regulation treating female genital mutilation, nor a specific notion to Female Genital Mutilation in their criminal laws. The cases of Female Genital Mutilation are dealt under the general criminal law. France has a notion to “mutilation” in two of its regulations which do not solely refer to Female Genital Mutilation. France also emphasizes victim’s minor age as a base for more severe punishment and wider extraterritorial prosecution coverage. Finland applies different degrees of Assault-charges to FGM cases, covering all age groups. ConclusionFrom intersectional theory’s point of view, females encounter discrimination and oppression in both Finland’s and France’s legal regulations applied to Female Genital Mutilation cases. From those legal regulations, the study identified social identity factors predisposing the victim to discrimination and oppression: gender, class, age and ethnicity. Explaining the differences between France’s and Finland’s regulations the study concludes that demographics show causal correlation with female benefitting law formation. France has a historically longer time spam and greater volume of immigrants arriving from Female Genital Mutilation practicing countries. This has enabled France to adjust its criminal legislation to, if not explicitly but in part, to refer to incidents related to Female Genital Mutilation. Another determinant, gender-equality cannot be linked to causal correlation with female benefitting law formation. This is due to short time spam of high female representation in parliamentary and as ministers in both France and Finland.