Opinion | Banning Female Genital Mutilation (original) (raw)

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/opinion/global/banning-female-genital-mutilation.html

You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.

Op-Ed Contributor

Dec. 19, 2012

The fight to eliminate the scourge of female genital mutilation is breaking new ground. The United Nations General Assembly is poised to adopt a resolution on Thursday calling on all states to enact legislation banning this egregious human rights violation.

This remarkable development has come about thanks to a coalition of non-governmental organizations that have worked closely over the past 10 years and those U.N. member states — notably Italy and Burkina Faso — that have been most dedicated to combating the practice at home and internationally.

The U.N. resolution will be adopted by consensus, demonstrating the international community’s unified stance. The consensus is strengthened by the fact that two thirds of U.N. member states are co-sponsoring the resolution, with 67 states joining the 54 nations of the African Group, which initially introduced the text.

The next step will be for all states to implement the recommendations of this breakthrough document, starting, in the words of the resolution, by taking “all necessary measures, including enacting and enforcing legislation to prohibit female genital mutilations and to protect women and girls from this form of violence, and to end impunity.”

Female genital mutilation, defined as any procedure to remove or injure external female genitalia, is practiced in many countries in Africa, and also throughout the Middle East, South Asia and South America as well as in immigrant communities in Europe, North America and Oceania. The World Health Organization estimates that there are between 100 million and 140 million girls and women worldwide who have been mutilated, and that, in Africa alone, three million girls are at risk every year.

Over the years, a specious debate has pitted advocates for community-level grassroots activists against proponents of strong legislative frameworks, creating a false rivalry between the bottom-up and top-down approaches to eradicating the practice.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT