Gambia's rejection of FGM Bill highlights ongoing struggle against harmful practices
Gambian activists Rohey Cham (left) and Sainabou Sey, celebrate, in Banjul, Gambia on July 15, 2024, after the country's parliament rejected a bill to end a ban on FGM .
What you need to know:
- On July 15, the Gambian parliament rejected a bill aimed at lifting the ban on FGM, citing cultural and religious objections.
- This setback underscores the ongoing challenges in combating harmful practices and highlights the need for continued advocacy and public pressure to protect women’s and girls’ rights.
News that the Gambian parliament, on July 15, rejected a bill seeking to end a ban on female genital mutilation (FGM) was definitely a watershed in the fight on harmful traditional practices against women and girls. The quest, seeking to amend the Women’s Bill enacted in 2015, rode on a campaign by some conservative Islamic scholars propagating the notion that the law violated the cultural and religious rights of Gambians.
Global estimates show that about 130 million girls and women have been exposed to FGM. African countries in which the prevalence of FGM is highest (80 per cent and above) are Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Egypt, Mali, Sierra Leone and Sudan.
Perpetrators
The next (50 -79 per cent) are Gambia, Ethiopia, Mauritania, Liberia and Guinea Bissau. The third group (25-49 per cent) has Chad, Nigeria and Senegal. The last (below 24 per cent) contains Central African Republic, Tanzania, Benin, Ghana, Togo, Niger, Cameroon, Uganda and Kenya.
The 2022 Kenya Demographic and Health Survey shows that the has reduced to 15 per cent from 32 per cent in 2003 and 38 per cent in 1998. This could be attributed to initiatives by civil society and the government, including enactment of the Prohibition of Genital Mutilation Act 2011 under which a few cases have been litigated and perpetrators held accountable.
There are four types of FGM. Type 1 (clitoridectomy) involves the partial or total removal of the external and visible part of the clitoris and/or the skin around it. Type 2 (excision), refers to partial or total removal of the clitoris and inner folds of the vulva, with or without removal of the outer folds. Type 3 (infibulation) involves excision of part or whole of the external genitalia and narrowing of the vaginal opening by creating a covering seal on it or introduction of corrosive substances into the aperture. Type 4 is an omnibus category that covers all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia, such as elongation, pricking, piercing, incising, scraping, and cauterization of the organ.
Bodily integrity
Various arguments are used to justify FGM, including that it is part of culture. Eradicating it is, therefore, seen as an affront on people’s heritage, notwithstanding the repugnance of the practice.
Second is that FGM is obligated by Islam. Some religious organisations categorically dismiss this argument and argue that FGM contradicts Islamic values and principles on the sanctity of life, bodily integrity, equal value for all human beings, protection of children and freedom from harm.
Third is social pressure. Many parents who subject their daughters to FGM cite that they fear stigma, ostracization and physical assault. It is under this factor that girls who have not undergone the rite are given derogatory nicknames and lured or forcefully taken for the procedure.
Fourth is the argument that FGM qualifies girls for marriage. Consequently, a girl who has not gone through the procedure is treated as ineligible for the nuptial market. This rejection exerts pressure on them to acquiesce by even demanding the procedure. The argument is informed by a notion that marriage is the ultimate destination for any respectable girl. This stream is maintained by male appetite for such girls. In which case, FGM may only be eradicated if concerned men discard this appetite.
Blackmail
Fifth is that FGM is a source of income for women who perform it. Some organisations have tried to tackle this by engaging the circumcisers in income generating activities to divert them. However, this strategy can be counterproductive because it encourages other women to become circumcisers so as to benefit from the projects. Circumcisers can also exercise blackmail by threatening to resume the practice if not compensated.
Sixth is the fact that mothers who underwent the practice insist on their daughters going through it. They argue that since they didn’t die from FGM, there is no reason for their daughters to do so. They are also convinced that FGM promotes chastity because it reduces sexual libido, hence promiscuity. The libido part is true given that FGM removes the sensitive parts of female genitalia. But the promiscuity part is neither here nor there as this can be driven by factors other than physiology.
When the Bill in Gambia was initially tabled in parliament, it was supported by 46 legislators out of the 54. In the final vote, 48 voted against it. This change is attributed to public outrage, opposition by human rights groups and pressure by the United Nations.
The experience shows three things. One, even people who are charged with protecting women and girls from violence, use the religion-culture argument to perpetrate the same. Two, the crusade on eradication of harmful traditional practices is alive. Three, public pressure is an important strategy to resist retrogressive thinking and actions that compromise women’s and girls’ rights.
The writer is a lecturer in Gender and Development Studies at South Eastern Kenya University ([email protected]).
