SC issues notice to Centre on PIL seeking ban on female genital mutilation among Muslims – Tribune India

Judicial Review of Female Genital Mutilation in India: A Sustainable Development Goals Perspective

Legal Proceedings and Context

• The Supreme Court of India has issued notices to the Central Government and other relevant parties in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a comprehensive ban on the practice of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).
• The petition, filed by the Chetna Welfare Society, specifically highlights the prevalence of the practice within the Dawoodi Bohra community.
• This matter is anticipated to be referred to a five-judge Constitution Bench, consistent with a previous referral in 2018 concerning the validity of FGM.
• The issue is also part of a broader examination by a seven-judge Constitution Bench, initiated in 2019, to establish constitutional principles for addressing discriminatory practices across various religions.

Alignment with SDG 5: Gender Equality

• The legal challenge directly addresses Sustainable Development Goal 5, particularly Target 5.3, which calls for the elimination of all harmful practices, such as female genital mutilation.
• The petition argues that FGM is a form of gender-based violence and discrimination, not an essential religious practice, thereby violating the core principle of SDG Target 5.1 to end all forms of discrimination against women and girls.
• The initiative is supported by global consensus, including a 2012 United Nations General Assembly resolution urging the elimination of FGM.
• In India, the National Commission for Women has also formally supported a ban on the practice.

Implications for SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• The practice of FGM fundamentally contradicts the objectives of SDG 3, which aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all.
• The World Health Organisation (WHO) classifies FGM as a severe violation of the human rights of girls and women, with serious health consequences.
• The procedure, often conducted by midwives in unhygienic conditions, leads to numerous adverse health outcomes that undermine well-being, including:

1. Recurrent infections, cysts, and infertility.
2. Severe complications during childbirth, often requiring repeated surgeries.
3. Other lasting physical impairments.

Contribution to SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

• The PIL seeks to strengthen India’s legal framework, contributing to SDG 16’s goal of building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions.
• The petition asserts that FGM already constitutes multiple offenses under existing laws, thereby calling for stronger enforcement and justice. These include:

1. Violations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), specifically sections related to causing hurt.
2. Violations of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, which prohibits non-medical touching of a minor’s genitalia.

Analysis of the Article in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

   The article on the legal challenge against Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) in India connects to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that focus on health, gender equality, and justice.

   • SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article explicitly states that FGM is a “serious health concern as it can cause infections, problems relating to childbirth and other severe physical impairments.” It also references the World Health Organisation’s findings that FGM leads to “repeated infections, cysts, infertility, childbirth complications requiring repeated surgeries.” This directly links the practice to the goal of ensuring healthy lives and well-being.
   • SDG 5: Gender Equality: FGM is a practice that exclusively targets girls and women, making it a significant issue of gender inequality. The article highlights this by quoting the plea which states that the World Health Organisation has classified FGM as a “gross violation of the human rights of girls and women.” The practice is a form of gender-based violence and a harmful tradition that undermines the autonomy and physical integrity of females.
   • SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The core of the article is about a legal process—a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court—seeking to ban FGM. This relates to building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels. The plea argues that the practice “violates the rights of children” and falls under multiple offenses in the legal code, including the POCSO Act. The legal challenge itself is an attempt to strengthen institutions to protect vulnerable populations and ensure justice.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

   Based on the issues discussed, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

   • Target 5.3: This target aims to “Eliminate all harmful practices, such as child, early and forced marriage and female genital mutilation.” The article is entirely focused on the practice of FGM, which is explicitly named in this target. The legal petition seeks to ban the practice, directly aligning with the objective of its elimination.
   • Target 16.2: This target is to “End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children.” The article notes that FGM is “generally done at a young age” and the petitioner argues that it “violates the rights of children.” The reference to the POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) Act further reinforces the connection to protecting children from violence and abuse.
   • Target 3.7: This target aims to “ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services.” While not a direct mention, FGM is a harmful procedure that severely impacts the sexual and reproductive health of girls and women. The article details the negative health outcomes, such as “infertility, childbirth complications,” which are central to reproductive health concerns. Eliminating FGM is a crucial step toward ensuring reproductive health and rights.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

   The article implies several indicators that can be used to measure progress, even if it does not provide specific data.

   • Indicator for Target 5.3: The primary indicator is the prevalence of FGM. While the article doesn’t give numbers, the existence of the “practice of female genital mutilation (FGM) or female circumcision practised among Muslims, particularly in the Dawoodi Bohra community” is the baseline indicator. Progress would be measured by a reduction in the number and proportion of girls subjected to this practice.
   • Indicator for Target 16.2: The article points to legal and institutional actions as indicators. The filing of a PIL in the Supreme Court and the court’s decision to hear the case are indicators of an institutional response to protect children. The plea’s reference to existing laws like the POCSO Act and sections of the BNS suggests that the “existence and enforcement of a specific law banning FGM” would be a key indicator of progress in protecting children from this form of violence.
   • Indicator for Target 3.7: The health consequences mentioned in the article serve as negative health indicators. The “prevalence of infections, cysts, infertility, and childbirth complications” among women who have undergone FGM can be measured. A reduction in these specific health issues within the affected community would indicate progress towards better reproductive health and well-being.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Summary

Source: tribuneindia.com