The parties are Almami Gibba, a politician and a National Assembly Member for Foni Kansala Constituency, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th plaintiffs are natives of Kuntaur in the Central River Region who were convicted by the Kuntaur/Kaur Magistrates' Court for engaging in the act of female circumcision, Concerned Citizens, Islamic Enlightenment Society, Women's Association for Islamic Solidarity and Gambian Women are Free to Choose.
The parties said the law banning female circumcision was inherently discriminatory against females particularly Muslim women, adding that the law contravenes several provisions of the 1997 Constitution.
They also referred to the ban on female circumcision as contravening several international human rights instruments.
According to the Women’s Act 2010, the parties concerned explained that a reference to a woman includes the girl child.
“It is our view that no parent will give birth to a child and subject that child to an unnecessary pain and suffering. Parents are presumed to act in the best interest of their child at all times”, they pointed out in their suit.
The parties also indicated that it was important that the circumcision of females or the girl child was not a matter of men against women or men trying to decide for women.
Rather, they said it was a private family matter concerning a particular family's religious, tribal, or cultural beliefs.
“Families have the right to take through their children what they believe to be in their best interest. The plaintiffs and many of the parents insisting on the practice have gone through the practice themselves and experienced it. They would not have insisted on keeping the practice if there was any harm as has been claimed by the anti-FGM campaigners,” they noted.
Based on the legal instruments the plaintiffs relied on, they said female children are being discriminated against by being denied the right to be circumcised as envisaged by both their culture and religion the exact form of which is availed to their male counterparts.
“This is discrimination based on sex or gender according to Section 33 (4) of the Constitution and Article 1 of the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).”
The plaintiffs said the lack of any medical or scientific evidence in the Health Committee's Final Report that substantiated claims by "survivors" of horrific morbidity and mortality due to female circumcision was absent in the Multi-index Cluster Survey (MICS) 2018, and the most recent UNICEF Report on FGM 2020.
They also indicated that the reports of "survivors" were not reliable and “the plaintiffs will show that many so-called FGM survivors are often recruited, coached and given financial and other forms of benefits by western NGOs to exaggerate or even make up their stories.”
Read Other Articles In Headlines
