Legislation should provide that consent of any person of any age or by a minor's parent is not a defense to a violation of legislation against harmful practices. The focus of legislation should be on the empowerment of women to reject harmful practices and enabling a shift in the social norms that support harmful practices and pressure women into undergoing them for themselves or others. The practice of FGM, for example, is so entrenched in social norms and expectations that, without a shift in those underlying norms and individual beliefs, true informed consent to undergo FGM for adult women, completely free from undue pressure, is difficult to ascertain.
Examples regarding Female Genital Mutilation:
- Sweden: Act (1982:316) on Prohibiting the Genital Mutilation (“Circumcision”) of Women, Sec. 1:
An operation may not be carried out on the outer female sexual organs with a view to mutilating them or of bringing about some other permanent change in them (‘circumcision’), regardless of whether consent has been given for the operation or not.
- Victoria, Australia: Crimes Act 1958, Sec. 34 - Consent not a defence to a charge under sections 32 or 33:
It is not a defence to a charge brought under section 32 [Offence to perform female genital mutilation] or 33 [Offence to take a person from the State with the intention of having prohibited female genital mutilation performed] to prove that the person on whom the act which is the subject of the charge was performed, or the parents or guardian of that person, consented to the performance of that act.
- New Zealand: Crimes Act 1961 No. 43, sec.204A (Female Genital Mutilation), Para6:
It is no defence to a charge under this section that the person on whom the act involving female genital mutilation was performed consented to that act, or that the person charged believed that such consent had been given.