A human rights approach to addressing FGM/C

Adopting a human rights approach to addressing FGM/C is crucial for several compelling reasons. First of all, FGM/C breaches fundamental human rights to bodily integrity, and a human rights approach recognises the right of every individual, irrespective of gender, to be free from any form of physical harm or mutilation. (For a discussion of terminology, and critiques of the term ‘mutilation’, see for example the Introduction, Chapter 2, and Afterword, this volume.) FGM/C is also often rooted in gender-based discrimination, reinforcing unequal power dynamics between men and women. A human rights perspective underscores the principle of gender equality, advocating for the elimination of practices that perpetuate discrimination against women and girls, while supporting the empowerment and autonomy of individuals and recognising their agency in determining their own lives and bodies.

When it comes to the right to health, FGM/C, particularly WHO Types 2 and 3, poses serious risks, whereas a human rights approach prioritises the broader well-being of individuals, emphasising the right of individuals to freedom from harmful practices and the right to achieve their potential, as well as having access to healthcare and education. Human rights approaches emphasise preventive measures, including community-based programmes, to address the root causes of FGM/C. They also prioritise support for survivors, recognising their rights, as appropriate, to support in order to minimise the physical and psychological harm caused by FGM/C. This may involve awareness raising within communities about its harmful effects, human rights, and the promotion of a cultural shift towards practices that respect individual rights.

In sum, adopting a human rights approach to FGM/C began to be seen as essential for protecting individual rights, promoting gender equality, ensuring health and well-being, and alignment with international commitments. It provides a comprehensive framework for addressing the cultural, social, and health dimensions of this practice. In addition, a human rights approach involves the enactment and enforcement of laws that reinforce the idea that individuals have the right to be protected from harmful practices. By recognising the importance of understanding and respecting diverse cultural contexts, a human rights approach involves engaging with communities in a respectful and empathetic manner to promote change from within, rather than imposing external values.

The emergence of a global agenda on the rights of women came about in the 1970s, when ‘FGM/C was denounced by indigenous doctors and women’s rights defenders, as well as Western feminists, who internationalised the debate’ (Falcão 2017:35). FGM/C has not always been considered a form of gender-based violence and a violation of human rights by the international community. It was initially addressed by the WHO and the Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices (IAC) as a women’s and children’s health issue. It took until the 1990s for FGM/C to appear on the human rights agenda, as part of the slow process of gender mainstreaming international law on human rights and defining violence against women as a violation of those rights (Rahman and Toubia 2000). As a result of these interrelated developments, the formal declaration that ‘women’s rights are human rights’ was finally made at the Vienna Conference on Human Rights in 1993 (Peters and Wolper 1995).

A few years earlier, in 1979, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which explicitly recognises that practices harmful to women are violations of human rights. Article 5 of CEDAW goes on to say:

Ten years later, in 1989, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), that includes provisions to protect children against ‘all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse’. However, the original version failed to specifically mention FGM/C.2 https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/crc.pdf. By 2011, a revised CRC specifically mentioned FGM in Article 19 (27, p. 11): https://archive.crin.org/docs/CRC.C.GC.13_en_AUV-1.pdf [Accessed 2 Sep­tember 2025].

In 1990, the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child was adopted by the Organisation of African Unity (now the African Union) and entered into force in 1999. It calls upon states to take appropriate measures to protect against harmful social and cultural practices in Article 21:

In that same year, the CEDAW General Recommendation No. 14 elaborated on specific provisions regarding FGM/C, which it referred to as female circumcision, saying that it was among ‘traditional practices harmful to the health of women’, practices which CEDAW claimed have ‘serious health and other consequences for women and children’. It recommended the eradication of ‘female circumcision’, and called upon states parties to take steps that included data gathering about ‘traditional practices’, encouraging women’s organisations, educationalists, politicians, professionals, religious and community leaders, the media, and the arts to cooperate in influencing public attitudes, and work towards the ultimate eradication of FGM/C.4 https://www.refworld.org/legal/general/cedaw/1990/en/27729 [Accessed 2 September 2025].

In 1992 the issue of violence against women became part of the global agenda after the CEDAW Committee acknowledged, in General Recommendation No. 19 on Violence Against Women, that such violence is a form of discrimination based on gender, thus establishing states’ obligations to prevent, prosecute, and protect.5 https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/f8d998/pdf/&ved=2ahUKEwi4r8KY2dX [Accessed 2 September 2025]. Soon afterwards, the UN General Assembly adopted the groundbreaking Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (1993), which provides the standard definition of ‘gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life’ (Article 1). It also called upon states ‘to condemn violence against women and […] not invoke any custom, tradition or religious consideration to avoid their obligations with respect to its elimination’ (Article 4).6 https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/eliminationvaw.pdf [Accessed 2 September 2025].

The 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), held in Cairo, marked a turning point (at least at the macro level). It influenced global thinking on population and development issues and established an agenda that places people’s dignity and rights at the centre of sustainable development. At this conference, 179 governments adopted a Programme of Action. It affirmed that inclusive sustainable development is not possible without prioritising human rights, including reproductive rights; empowering women and girls; and addressing inequalities as well as the needs, aspirations, and rights of individual women and men. It acknowledged FGM/C as a violation of human rights in Action 7.6, and called for the active discouragement of harmful practices.7 https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/event-pdf/PoA_en.pdf [Accessed 2 September 2025].

The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, adopted a year later, in 1995, included specific references to FGM/C as a harmful practice that violates the human rights of women and girls in Article 93. It urged governments to take measures to eliminate FGM/C and promote gender equality.8 https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/pdf/BDPfA%20E.pdf [Accessed 2 September 2025]. Progress continued to be made, with the WHO issuing a joint statement with other UN agencies in 1997 condemning the practice. The WHO emphasised that FGM/C violates the principles of equality and non-discrimination, and called for its abandonment.

Since FGM/C was reframed as a form of violence against women, many in the international community have intensified efforts for its eradication through education and prevention programmes, combined with a series of interventive texts calling for legislation against all forms of FGM/C. At a regional level, the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, commonly known as the Maputo Protocol (African Union 2003),9 https://au.int/sites/default/files/treaties/37077-treaty-charter_on_rights_of_women_in_africa.pdf [Accessed 2 September 2025]. and the Convention of the Council of Europe on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, or the Istanbul Convention (Council of Europe 2011),10 https://rm.coe.int/168008482e [Accessed 2 September 2025]. represent two binding reference documents for the harmonisation of national legal frameworks on FGM/C. In addition, the UN Commission on the Status of Women adopted resolutions on ending FGM/C in 2007, 2008, and 2010. And in 2008, an interagency statement on Eliminating Female Genital Mutilation was signed by ten UN agencies.11 For a list of the main regional and international documents to end FGM/C, see Kaplan and Gomez 2017:44–6. Table 4 (p. 46) lists the human rights anchored in international law that are breached by FGM/C.

The UN General Assembly has also adopted resolutions on FGM/C, urging member states to act to eliminate the practice. The UN Commission on Human Rights Resolution 1997/44 (1997) initially recognised FGM/C as a harmful traditional practice affecting the health and rights of women and girls, and urged states to take measures to eliminate FGM/C through legislation, education, and community engagement. It also called for international collaboration and information exchange on strategies to combat harmful traditional practices as a whole. Later on, the UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/67/146 (2012), which recognises FGM/C as a violation of human rights and a form of violence against women and girls, urged member states to implement and enforce laws criminalising FGM/C, and called for comprehensive and culturally sensitive strategies to end the practice.12 https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n12/487/36/pdf/n1248736.pdf [Accessed 2 September 2025]. It officially designated 6 February as the International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation. (See the textbox on zero tolerance, p. 204 of this book.) Governments, and international and national organisations including NGOs, use this day to highlight their commitment to ending FGM/C. Six years later, the UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/73/170 (2018) reaffirmed previous resolutions, emphasising the urgency of eliminating FGM/C, recognising the role of youth, community leaders, and civil society in advocacy and awareness efforts, and called for increased resources, cooperation, and data collection to accelerate progress.13 https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n18/449/34/pdf/n1844934.pdf [Accessed 2 September 2025].

Joint programmes aimed at accelerating the abandonment of FGM/C were also created in this period. The UNICEF-UNFPA Joint Programme, launched in 2008, aims to end the practice by 2030 in eighteen countries in Africa and Asia. It supports community-based initiatives, policy advocacy, research, and data collection, and promotes awareness and the mobilisation of resources to accelerate efforts against FGM/C.

Finally, in the UN’s Agenda for Sustainable Development, targets under Goal 514 https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/gender-equality/ [Accessed 2 September 2025]. include the elimination of all harmful practices. This specifically mentions child marriage and FGM/C, reflecting a commitment by member states to address the practice as part of broader development objectives. UN resolutions and declarations related to FGM/C collectively underscore the global consensus on the urgent need to eliminate the practice. They emphasise a human rights-based approach, combining legal measures with collaboration between international organisations, governments, NGOs, and community-based organisations. The narratives of women who have undergone FGM/C have played a significant role in humanising the issue and fostering empathy. It is also vital to acknowledge the role played by NGOs and civil society organisations (CSOs) working at grassroots level, without which high-level resolutions and protocols would be ineffective. Their messaging would simply never reach communities. While the acknowledgment of FGM/C as a human rights violation is now widely recognised, one of the challenges lies in translating this recognition into effective action on the ground, which is where NGOs and civil society groups, as well as media, come in.

Regional organisations, such as the African Union and the European Union, play a vital role in addressing FGM/C, as well as tailoring interventions to the specific cultural contexts and challenges within a particular region. These efforts involve collaborative approaches, awareness campaigns, policy changes, and community engagement to combat FGM/C and promote the well-being and rights of women and girls.

An example of this was the Multisectoral Academic Program to Prevent and Combat FGM/C (MAP-FGM), co-financed by the European Commission.15 For more information about the project: https://fgmc.cei.iscte-iul.pt/fighting-fgmc/ and https://mapfgm.eu/ [Both accessed 9 July 2025]. This innovative programme (2016–18) aimed to contribute to the defence of women’s human rights, including their sexual and reproductive rights, through raising awareness and preparing professionals in various fields who might, in future, be in contact with diasporic populations coming from countries where FGM/C is practised (Gómez and Kaplan 2017:26). It involved four European universities (in Portugal, Spain, Italy, and Belgium) and two NGOs (the Wassu-UAB Foundation and Fundazione Angello Celli). Project activities included holding training sessions for students and teachers, disseminating newsletters about the project, organising seminars, and holding international conferences that gathered academic experts, activists, and professionals in the field, from both the Global North and South.

So, can some of these international resolutions be considered merely symbolic? Is the use of vague and ambiguous terms in international protocols intended to accommodate different interpretations? For example, failing to define precisely what is meant by FGM/C could result in a wider range of people, organisations, and governments joining a campaign to end it, with their own interpretations. In addition, social practices and perceptions operate independently of the state, so there will always be room for appropriations, reconfigurations, and (re)interpretations of international conventions, the law, and justice.

To investigate if anti-FGM/C resolutions and conventions have de facto been effective in tackling this practice, it is necessary to gather data on the ground to find out whether international protocols are in fact being followed. One indicator would be the number of countries worldwide where FGM/C is practised that, following international recommendations, have introduced laws which criminalise FGM/C (for legislation in Africa see Kirigo Njenga, Chapter 11). However, research shows that some of these laws are ineffective for reasons that include a lack of resources for implementation and public awareness campaigns, weak institutional structures, and lack of capacity on the part of the security forces and judiciary. According to the NGO Equality Now (2020), of the ninety-two countries where FGM/C is practised, fifty-one have prohibited FGM/C under their national laws, either through a specific anti-FGM/C law or via provisions in other domestic laws such as the criminal or penal code, or child protection laws. Laws against FGM/C are most common on the African continent. Apart from Africa, 41 per cent of all laws against FGM/C are in countries where FGM/C is most commonly practised by diaspora communities, with sixteen European countries, the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand all having specific laws or legal provisions against FGM/C.16 In the Middle East, only Iraq (Kurdistan) and Oman have specific laws or legal provisions banning it. In Asia, not a single country has enacted a specific legal prohibition against FGM/C. Equality Now (2020). https://equalitynow.storage.googleapis.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/16151419/FGMC-A-Call-For-A-Global-Response-2020-compressed-1.pdf [Accessed 9 July 2025].

Implementing resolutions that address FGM/C in diverse cultural contexts presents a range of challenges. As already mentioned, cultural norms, traditions, and deeply ingrained practices often intersect with efforts to eradicate FGM/C, requiring a nuanced approach. FGM/C is deeply rooted in cultural practices, and communities may perceive external interventions as disrespectful or insensitive to their traditions. Resistance to change may be strong, making it challenging to introduce alternative practices or persuade communities to abandon this one. Migration across borders may also result in the continuation of FGM/C within diaspora communities (see Chapters 8, 9 and 10 of this volume). As such, sustainable programmes require sufficient resources to effectively address all those multifaceted aspects of FGM/C, coordinating efforts across borders (see textbox p. 241), and recognising the transnational nature of FGM/C practices.

Women and girls from families where girls have had some education are more likely to oppose FGM/C than those who have missed out on it (UNICEF 2022). This is likely to be due to their being more informed about its risks and consequences, and more confident in opposing or resisting social norms. Lack of access to education may also perpetuate gender-based inequalities that contribute to the maintenance of FGM/C. Hence, educational initiatives are crucial for creating awareness and empowering individuals to challenge and abandon the practice, and to reshape attitudes and beliefs over time.

Another obstacle in the way of implementing international resolutions and conventions lies in the societal expectations and community pressure which may discourage individuals from deviating from established practices. Engaging with community leaders and fostering community-driven initiatives is thus essential for changing social norms and promoting the abandonment of FGM/C. NGOs and other organisations working at grassroots level have been crucial in highlighting the negative consequences of FGM/C and empowering affected communities. Their advocacy has contributed to shaping global discourse and influencing policy makers.17 One example is the Foundation Wassu-UAB, a scientific organisation that works to prevent FGM/C through anthropological and medical research applied to knowledge transfer. See Carvalho et al. 2018:35–40.

Many regional initiatives, like the Maputo Protocol or Istanbul Convention, emphasise community-based and culturally sensitive approaches, which involve NGOs and community organisations collaborating to design and implement programmes that engage with local traditions, religious leaders, and community members to shift attitudes and promote the abandonment of FGM/C. Obtaining accurate data on the prevalence of FGM/C worldwide and the changes which are taking place is essential to inform future initiatives to end the practice, yet it is problematic. A UNICEF update report (2024) is based on DHS, MICS, and other national surveys. These large-scale surveys are useful in providing an overview of the status of FGM/C, although they lack the detail required to accurately assess the impact of international resolutions, national laws, awareness-raising campaigns worldwide, or the work of grassroots organisations. Nonetheless, according to these UNICEF statistics, 230 million women and girls around the world are still affected by FGM/C, a 15 per cent increase in the previous eight years, with thirty million more girls and women being subjected to FGM/C. This figure now includes data on FGM/C prevalence in Asia (eighty million), the Middle East (six million), and countries that have small practising communities and are destination countries for migration (one to two million). Figures like these remain far too high if we consider that the international community has been involved in research and advocacy for forty years to reduce the incidence of this practice worldwide.

Human rights-based interventions to end FGM/C at local levels would involve community engagement, education, legal measures, and collaboration with local leaders to ensure that initiatives are contextually appropriate and respectful of cultural traditions while also prioritising the rights and well-being of women and girls. Robust, consistent data is needed at local and national levels to assess the impact of such interventions. This process is often hindered by the lack of adequate resources for research and the challenges of researching such a sensitive topic. Research methodologies need to consider the possibility of secondary trauma from the re-telling of experiences, the stigma associated with FGM/C, and the impact this might have on an individual’s ability and willingness to accurately report their experiences (WHO 2021:2).

Globally, the challenge of a human rights approach lies in assessing the effects of international or transnational norms on local and national spheres – namely this practically indisputable imperative to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and other international documents, in opposition to the ‘cultural specificities of peoples’ (Jerónimo 2011:105). This highlights the tension between cultural or ethnic relativism and universal human rights, and embodies the dichotomy between the need to respect the integrity of cultures, which must be interpreted in the light of their own contexts, and the presumption of the universality of human rights (Donnelly 1984:400; Renteln 1990:9. See also ‘Axes of Difference’, in the Introduction to this volume).18 The importance of respecting and valuing cultural diversity finds its maximum expression in the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005).

Proponents of the presumption of the universality of human rights hold the belief that human rights apply regardless of culture, context, ideology, and value. On the other hand, the defenders of cultural relativism describe the universalism of human rights as a form of ethnocentrism because they are based on primarily Western values which have the pretension of ubiquity (Renteln 1990:13). One of Renteln’s proposals for overcoming this deadlock is to conceive of human rights not in philosophical terms but through empirical manifestations. This requires on-the-ground analyses to understand whether specific non-Western cultures have their own concepts of ‘human rights’, or equivalent concepts, which are based on their moral systems. According to Donnelly, practically all cultural traditions have the same moral aspirations: the right to life, social order, protection from arbitrary governments, a place in the life of the community, or access to means of subsistence (Donnelly 1984:414–15). Having analysed the context-specific moral code, a ‘universal’ human right can then be defined in terms appropriate to the local context (ibid.).

While international resolutions have contributed to positive developments, the effectiveness of efforts to eliminate FGM/C remains low, is context-dependent, and multifaceted. It is vital to reflect on the diverse contexts in which they will be implemented (if indeed they are). In addition, there is a need for sustained efforts, increased collaboration, and ongoing evaluation to ensure that the impact of international resolutions on FGM/C is maximised, because short-term funding cycles may limit the sustainability of data-collection efforts. Continuous, long-term data collection is essential for assessing the long-term impact of interventions, understanding evolving trends, and measuring changes in attitudes and behaviours over time.