“It is urgent to redefine rape as a criminal law, the definition of which, in France, presupposes implicit consent”. In an article published on Tuesday 12 December in the columns of Worlda collective calls for an urgent change to the criminal framework for rape and denounces the French position in the ongoing discussions in Brussels on the first European directive on violence against women.
“No one should be judged a priori as consenting »
At present, French law defines the crime of rape as sexual penetration or oral-genital act committed on a person with violence, coercion, threat or surprise, without the notion of lack of consent being explicitly mentioned.
“We must change our penal text. It is not the victims that our society must educate, but the aggressors, and no one should be judged a priori consenting.” we read in this article, co-signed in particular by the former minister of women’s rights, Najat Vallaud-Belkacem.
Negotiations underway in Brussels
As AFP contextualizes, this article is published on the eve of new discussions in Brussels on the European directive on violence against women. The text opposes countries that defend the definition of rape based on the absence of consent (Italy, Belgium, etc.) to countries, including France, that believe that rape does not fall within the competence of the EU. “There is no legal, moral or historical reason for this and we demand that this obstacle ends”supports the authors of the column.
While the National Assembly is currently also examining the issue of the criminal redefinition of rape, with an information mission launched on 5 December, the minister responsible for equality between women and men, Bérangère Couillard, for his part, believes that the current definition of rape gives “a clear picture”. A point of view defended in an interview for Publicationas he clarified to AFP: by integrating the notion of consent into the law, “ I fear that we will return to focusing on the victim, on his behavior, rather than on the perpetrator.” AND “We receive even fewer sanctions”.
An argument that doesn’t hold up, according to the signatories of the forum. “We are told that (…) taking consent into consideration differently in our Criminal Code would penalize the victims, on whom the burden of proof would then fall (i.e. to demonstrate that they did not consent) “. Gold, “It ignores that the current definition presupposes implicit consent to any sexual act and that it conveys stubborn stereotypes”. And to add: “This argument also ignores that to establish these material elements, justice essentially examines the behavior of the victims”.
Listen to Apéro des Daronnes, Madmoizelle’s show that aims to break down taboos on parenting.
Source: Madmoizelle
Mary Crossley is an author at “The Fashion Vibes”. She is a seasoned journalist who is dedicated to delivering the latest news to her readers. With a keen sense of what’s important, Mary covers a wide range of topics, from politics to lifestyle and everything in between.
