Crime, Law and Social Change

, Volume 47, Issue 1, pp 1–31 | Cite as

An analysis of the implementation of laws with regard to female genital mutilation in Europe

  • Els LeyeEmail author
  • Jessika Deblonde
  • José García-Añón
  • Sara Johnsdotter
  • Adwoa Kwateng-Kluvitse
  • Linda Weil-Curiel
  • Marleen Temmerman


This paper presents results of a survey on legislation regarding female genital mutilation in 15 European member states, as well as the results of a comparative analysis of the implementation of these laws in Belgium, France, Spain, Sweden and the UK. The research showed that although both criminal laws and child protection laws are implemented a number of difficulties with the implementation of these laws remain. The article suggests that efforts should primarily focus on child protection measures, but also on developing implementation strategies for criminal laws, and concludes with suggestions to overcome the obstructing factors to implement laws applicable to FGM in Europe.


Male Circumcision Child Protection Female Genital Mutilation Penal Code Legal Provision 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors kindly acknowledge the Daphne Programme of the European Commission for funding the research and Prof Eva Brems of Ghent University for reading an earlier version of this paper and her valuable input in the research.


  1. 1.
    AIDOS (2006). The law on FGM/C in Italy approved. Unofficial translation of the Italian law by AIDOS. Retrieved January 25, 2006, from,4&idNat=102&tipo=1.
  2. 2.
    Allotey, P., Manderson, L., & Grover, S. (2001). The politics of female genital surgery in displaced communities. Critical Public Health, 11(3), 189–201.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Banda, F. (2003). Legal tools for the prevention of FGM : A perspective from Europe. In F. G. Stop (Ed.), Afro-Arab expert consultation on legal tools for the prevention of female genital mutilation. Cairo.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bartels, E., & Haaijer, I. (1995). Vrouwenbesnijdenis en Somalische vrouwen in Nederland. Utrecht: Pharos.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chalmers, B., & Hashi, K. O. (2000). 432 Somali women’s birth experiences in Canada after earlier female genital mutilation. Birth, 27, 227–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Comissió de seguiment dels protocols en casos de violència domèstica i maltractaments infantils de Girona (2003). Protocol de prevenció de la mutilació genital femenina a la demarcació de Girona, Departament de Justícia, Generalitat de Catalunya. Retrieved from
  7. 7.
    Comissió Interdisciplinaria d’Experts. Integrada per técnics dels Departaments de Sanitat, Interior, Justicia, Benestar Social, Ensenyament I de la Presidència (2002). Protocol d’actuacions per a prevenir la mutilació genital femenina, Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya, Secretaria per a la Immigració. Retrieved from
  8. 8.
    Commissie Bestrijding Vrouwelijke Genitale Verminking (2005). Bestrijding vrouwelijke genitale verminking. Beleidsadvies. Advies uitgebracht door de Commissie Bestrijding Vrouwelijke Genitale Verminking aan de minister van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport. Zoetermeer.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Bruyn, M. (2003). Discussion paper: socio-cultural aspects of female genital cutting. In Proceedings of the expert meeting on female genital mutilation. Ghent-Belgium, November 5–7, 1998 (pp. 68–82). Lokeren: De Consulterij.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Defence for Children International (2006). Persbericht 30 Januari 2006. Meisjesbesnijdenis vanuit Nederland ook strafbaar. Retrieved February 15, from
  11. 11.
    De Lucas, J., Añón, R. M. J., Bedoya, M. H., Fernández, I. M., Flores Giménez, F., Galiana, S. A., & García, A. J. (coordinator) et al. (2004) Evaluating the impact of existing legislation in Europe with regard to FGM. Spanish national report. Centre of Studies on Citizenship, Migration and Minorities/Grupo de Estudios sobre Ciudadanía, Inmigración y Minorías, València: Universitat of València.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    El Dareer, A. (1983) Complications of female circumcision in the Sudan. Tropical Doctor, 13, 131–133 (in [4]).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Elgaali, M., Strevens, H., & Mårdth, P. A. (2005). Female genital mutilation – An exported medical hazard. European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care, 10(2), 93–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Essén, B., & Johnsdotter, S. (2004). Female genital mutilation in the West: Traditional circumcision versus genital cosmetic surgery. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 83, 611–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hedley, R., & Dorkenoo, E. (1992). Child protection and female genital mutilation. Advice for health, education and social work professionals. London: Forward.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hopkins, S. (1999). A discussion of the legal aspects of female genital mutilation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 30(4), 926–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Izett, S., & Toubia, N. (1999). Learning about social change. A research and evaluation guidebook using female circumcision as a case study. New York: Rainbo.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Johnsdotter, S. (2004a). FGM in Sweden: Swedish legislation regarding “Female Genital Mutilation” and implementation of the law, Research report in Sociology 2004, vol. 1. Department of Sociology, Lund University.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Johnsdotter, S., & Essén, B. (2004b). Analysis of the legislation concerning female genital surgery. Esthetic and sexual motifs are accepted-but not the traditional and religious ones. Lakartidningen, 101(37), 2810–2812.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kwateng-Kluvitse, A. (2004). UK’s legislation regarding female genital mutilation and the implementation of the law in the UK. London: Forward.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leye, E., & Deblonde, J. (2004). Belgian legislation regarding FGM and the implementation of the law in Belgium. ICRH publications no. 9. Ghent: International Centre for Reproductive Health.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Leye, E., De Bruyn, M., & Meuwese, S. (2004). Proceedings of the expert meeting on female genital mutilation. Ghent-Belgium November 5–7, 1998, International Centre for Reproductive Health, Ghent. ICRH Publications no. 2. Lokeren: The Consultory, Lokeren.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Leye E., Powell, R., Nienhuis, G., Claeys, P., & Temmerman, M. (2006). Health care in Europe for women with genital mutilation. Health Care for Women International, 27(4), 362–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    London Child Protection Committee (2003). London child protection procedures. JulyGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mohammad, R. (1999). Cultural and social dimensions of FGM. 1999 Feb 23. London: Forward.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Morellec, J., & Roussey, M. (2000). Les activités de protection maternelle et infantile. Retrieved October 24, 2005, from
  27. 27.
    Morisson, L., Dirir, A., Elmi, S., Warsame, J., & Dirir, S. (2004). How experiences and attitudes relating to female circumcision vary according to age on arrival in Britain: A study among young somalis in London. Ethnicity & Health, 9(1), 75–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ng, F. (2000). Female genital mutilation; its implications for reproductive health. An overview. The British Journal of Family Planning, 26, 47–51 (as cited in [31]).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nienhuis, G. (1998). Somali women tell: It’s like you have to do the delivery here by yourself, Tijdschrift voor Verloskundigen, 23(3), 160–166. Koninklijke Nederlandse Organisatie van Verloskundigen, Bilthoven Nederland.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nienhuis, G., & Haaijer, I. (1995). Ignorance of female circumcision may hamper adequate care. In Werkgroep Interculturele Verpleging (Ed.), Intercultureel Verplegen. Utrecht: De Tijdstroom.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Protection Maternelle et Infantile, Direction de l’Action Sociale de l’Enfance et de la Santé, Sous-Direction de la Petite Enfance, Département de Paris. Note à l’attention des médecins d’arrondissement de PMI, des sages-femmes, des puéricultrices-coordinatrices de crèches, des puéricultrices de secteur, des médecins vacataires, des directrices de consultations, « Conduite à tenir face à l’excision des petites filles ».Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Thierfelder, C., Tanner, M., Kessler, & Bodiang, C. M. (2005). Female genital mutilation in the context of migration: Experience of African women with the Swiss health care system. European Journal of Public Health, 15(1), 86–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    UNICEF (2005). Changing a harmful social convention : Female genital muilation/cutting. Innocenti Digest.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vangen, S. B., Johansen, R. E., Sundby, J. T., & Stray-Pedersen, B. (2004). Qualitative study of perinatal care experiences among Somali women and local health care professionals in Norway. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 112, 29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weil-Curiel, L. (2003). Weibliche Genitalverstümmelung aus Sicht einer französischen Rechtsanwälting und Aktivistin. In Terre des Femmes (Ed). Schnitt in die Seele. Weibliche Genital verstümmelung-eine fundamentale Menschenrechtsverletzung. Frankfurt am Main: Mabuse-Verlag.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Weil-Curiel, L. (2004). French legislation regarding FGM and the implementation of the law in France. Paris: CAMS.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weil-Curiel, L. (2004). In Leye, E., De Bruyn, M., & Meuwese, S. (Eds.), Proceedings of the expert meeting on female genital mutilation. Ghent-Belgium November 5–7, 1998, International Centre for Reproductive Health, Ghent. ICRH Publications no. 2. Lokeren: The Consultory.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Widmark, C., Tishelman, C., & Ahlberg, B. M. (2002). A study of Swedish midwives’ encounters with infibulated African women in Sweden. Midwifery, 18, 113–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    World Health Organisation (1997). Female genital mutilation. A joint WHO/UNICEF/UNFPA Statement. Geneva: World Health Organisation.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    World Health Organisation (2001). Female genital mutilation. A student manual. Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Els Leye
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jessika Deblonde
    • 1
  • José García-Añón
    • 2
  • Sara Johnsdotter
    • 3
  • Adwoa Kwateng-Kluvitse
    • 4
  • Linda Weil-Curiel
    • 5
  • Marleen Temmerman
    • 1
  1. 1.International Centre for Reproductive HealthGhent UniversityGhentBelgium
  2. 2.Human Rights Institute of the University of ValenciaValenciaSpain
  3. 3.Department of SociologyLund UniversityLundSweden
  4. 4.Foundation for Women’s Health, Research and Development (FORWARD)LondonUK
  5. 5.Commision pour l’Abolition des Mutilations Sexuelles (CAMS)ParisFrance

Personalised recommendations