Balancing Religious Rights And Health Risks - Analyzing Female Genital Mutilation In Modern Society
Author: LawSphereX
Category: General Law
Published:
Updated:
BALANCING RELIGIOUS RIGHTS AND HEALTH RISKS:
ANALYZING FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION IN
MODERN SOCIETY
Swati Baranwal, Advocate, HC of Delhi Bableen Kaur, L.L.M., SRMU, Lucknow Table of Abbreviations Full-Form Abbreviation “Female Genital Mutilation”
“FGM”
“Human Rights” “HRs” “Fundamental Rights” “FRs” “World Health Organization”
“WHO”
“United Nations Population Fund”
“UNFPA”
“Article” / “Articles” “Art” / “Arts” “Public Interest Litigation”
“PIL”
“Essential Religious Practices”
“EPR”
Chapter 1: Introduction Introduction Female Genital Mutilation (hereafter referred to as “FGM”), also known as “female genital cutting”, denotes all non-medical techniques involving partial or whole removal of the external female genitalia or other damages to the female genital organs. It is assessed that between 100 and 140 million females across the world have gone through such operations, with an additional
3 million girls at risk of receiving the procedures every yr.. FGM has been documented in many
areas of the world, although it is most common in Africa’s western, eastern, and north-eastern regions, several Asian and Middle Eastern nations, and some immigrant populations in North America and Europe. 1 There are no recognized health advantages to FGM. In contrast, it is widely acknowledged to be damaging to girls and women in several ways. It is, most importantly, painful and distressing. The removal or destruction of healthy, normal vaginal tissue interferes with the body’s natural functioning and has several immediate and long-term health effects. Kids born to mothers who have undergone FGM, for example, have a greater incidence of newborn mortality than babies born to women who have not experienced the operation. FGM is practiced by communities for several social and religious reasons.
From an HRs standpoint, the custom indicates innate gender inequality and is an extremist form of discrimination against women. FGM is almost always performed on minors, constituting a violation of the child’s rights. The process also breaches the person’s rights to health, security, and bodily integrity, as well as the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and the right to life when it results in death. The WHO defines FGM as - “any procedure that involves partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for cultural or nontherapeutic reasons”. The practice of FGM is divided into 4 major types:2
1 WHO, ‘Eliminating Female Genital Mutilation: An Interagency Statement - OHCHR, UNAIDS, UNDP,
UNECA, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNIFEM, WHO’ (2008) accessed 23 March 2022.
2 ibid.
1. Clitoridectomy: Partial or total removal of the clitoris and/or the prepuce;
2. Excision: Partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without
excision of the labia majora;
3. Infibulation: Narrowing of the vaginal orifice with the creation of a covering seal by cutting
and positioning the labia minora and/or the labia majora; and
4. Other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, like piercing,
incising, scraping, and cauterization. 3 Proponents of FGM argue that it preserves cultural identity, feminineness, female purity/ chastity, and family honor, maintain cleanliness and health, ensure women’s marriage potential. 4 FGM is said to make ladies clean and beautiful. 5 It is thought that by eliminating genital portions, “masculine” components such as the clitoris, or as in the case of infibulations, the “smoothness” attained is comparable to being attractive. Quite the reverse, organizations like the WHO have condemned FGM as a violation of HRs. It is a violation of a child’s rights because it is also performed on children, as well as a breach of a female’s right to the greatest achievable level of health and bodily integrity.
6 It is a display of gender inequality and discrimination, which is linked to historical oppression and subordination to which the females have been subjected to. Review of Literature
1. WHO - Eliminating Female Genital Mutilation: An Interagency Statement - OHCHR,
UNAIDS, UNDP, UNECA, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNIFEM, WHO7: The statement provides a complete background of what FGM is and its harmful consequences while discussing the Conventions which protect females from such acts of discrimination.
3 ibid.
4 AJ Gage, RR Van, ‘Attitudes Toward the Discontinuation of Female Genital Cutting Among Men and Women in Guinea’ (2006) 92(1) Int J Gynecol Obstet 92, 96.
5 WHO, ‘Eliminating Female Genital Mutilation: An Interagency Statement - OHCHR, UNAIDS, UNDP,
UNECA, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNIFEM, WHO’ (2008) accessed 23 March 2022.
6 ibid.
7 ibid.
2. Lakshmi Anantnarayan, Shabana Diler, and Natasha Menon – The Clitoral Hood: a
Contested Site – Khafd or Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) in India8 - The authors collected responses from 94 participants and gave an in-depth insight of what is FGM, how it is practiced and how prevalent it is in India.
3. UNFPA - 5 Ways Female Genital Mutilation Undermines the Health of Women and Girls9:
The article describes all the health issues a person who has undergone the process of FGM faces. It is important to understand all the health repercussions a person faces to understand the severity of the issue.
4. R Ghadially and A Manushi - All for Izzat: The Practice of Female Circumcision Among
Bohra Muslims10: The authors have penned down the distress faced by a woman of the Bohra community. The Bohra community in India still practices FGM in the name of religion. The woman who does not undergo the procedure of FGM faces peer pressure and social seclusion. Statement of Problem Under the disguise of religion, the right to make reproductive choices for a woman is infringed. The Courts have recognized the right to make reproductive choices but due to the absence of express provisions regarding the prohibition of FGM, the practice of FGM is still prevalent in India and people forcing a woman to undergo such a treatment go unpunished/ inadequately punished. Research Objective To examine the hypothesis in light of answers to the research questions. Hypothesis It seems that there exist no laws which prohibit FGM in India. The minor girls are forced to
8 Lakshmi Anantnarayan, Shabana Diler, Natasha Menon, The Clitoral Hood: A Contested Site – Khafd or
Gemale Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) in India (1st edn, WeSpeakOut 2018).
9 UNFPA, ‘5 Ways Female Genital Mutilation Undermines the Health of Women and Girls’ (20 May 2019)
accessed
23 March 2022
10 R Ghadially, A Manushi, ‘All for Izzat: The Practice of Female Circumcision Among Bohra Muslims’ (1991)
66 Journal About Women and Society 17.
undergo this procedure in the name of their religion’s requirements. Research Questions
1. What is Female Genital Mutilation
2. Whether the laws in India prohibit the practice of FGM
3. Whether FGM can pass the test of Essential Religious Practice as laid down by the apex
court of India Research Methodology For this research, the researcher undertakes qualitative legal research. It is analytical and descriptive by nature. The researcher shall use the 4th edition of OSCOLA as a uniform citation method for footnotes and bibliography. Limitations and Scope Due to the paucity of time, the researcher has dealt with only the Bohra community in India instead of discussing all the sects wherein FGM is practiced. Chapter 2: How FGM Undermines the Health of Women and Girl Child FGM as a deadly injury When females are cut, they are immediately in danger of bleeding, shock, major injury, an array of illnesses, and even demise if the hemorrhage or infection is severe. When un-sterile or rusted instruments are used to cut the flesh of females, infection and tetanus endanger their lives, with the risk being espl.
significant when the same tool is used to cut many females. 11 FGM may be executed by health care practitioners, community health workers, mid-wives, nurses, or even doctors in some settings. It may even be made available to new parents as part
11 UNFPA, ‘5 Ways Female Genital Mutilation Undermines the Health of Women and Girls’ (20 May 2019)
accessed
23 March 2022
of a routine package of care for newborn females. It may even be made available to new parents as part of a routine package of care for newborn females. According to UNFPA, one in every five girls exposed to FGM had their genital cut by a professional health care worker, and in other countries, it's more than three out of every four. Medicalized FGM is most frequent in Sudan, where mid-wives are the primary practitioners, and in Egypt, where doctors are generally involved. Furthermore, the medicalization of FGM is expanding in seven of the eight nations where more than 10% of girls exposed to FGM are cut by health care personnel. 12 Medicalized FGM may or may not be performed in a sterile setting or with the use of anesthesia. However, this doesn’t make it harmless or healthy for females.
It is still a barbaric wound with several major immediate and long-term health consequences and no medical explanation. Trained health professionals who perform FGM violate and undermine females' rights, in violation of fundamental principles of medical ethics. FGM has long-term health repercussions for girls and women, including bruising, cysts, abscesses, and other tissue damage, infertility, and increased vulnerability to infections. When they menstruate, pee, or engage in sexual activity, they may suffer discomfort and agony. Women who have had clitoridectomy, in which the labia are cut and sewed together to dramatically constrict the vaginal entrance, must have their labia cut open again for childbearing. Several nations with a higher number of the practice of FGM also have among the world's worst maternal death rates.
13 FGM can have a catastrophic and long-lasting psychological effect. Girls may feel severely deceived by their parents, who pushed on FGM. Loss of trust and confidence in young children can lead to behavioral issues in addition to psychological distress. FGM can also cause major psychological scars in the long run. It can cause anxiety, sadness, memory loss, sleep difficulties, and PTSD in girls and women. 14
12 ibid.
13 Els Leve, ‘Female Genital Mutilation: A Study of Health Services and Legislation in Some Countries of the European Union’ accessed 21 March 2022.
14 ibid.
Indian Perspective One of the most common misunderstandings regarding FGM is that it is permitted by Islam. However, because FGM predates it, there can be no connection between the two. In reality, Islam opposes it and says, “touch her not with injury, lest the penalty of a big day strike you”. 15 FGM, in any case, is a profoundly ingrained cultural practice. Culture is described as the collection of learned ideas, customs traditions, values, preferences, and behavioral rules that individuals of a certain community share. Cultural practices, like FGM, can sometimes gain Islamic validity over time. As a result of the lack of reference to FGM in these sources, it cannot be considered a religiously sanctioned practice and so, is not protected by Art 25 of the Constitution. 16 FGM is widely performed among India's Dawoodi Bohra group.
Dawoodi Bohras trace their ancestry back to Egypt’s Fatimi Imams, the Prophet Mohammed’s direct successors. They are a peaceful community committed to faith, love for their nation, belief in the importance of society, education, women’s empowerment, interaction with other faiths, physical health and well-being, and environmental conservation. 17 While members of the community can be found all over the world, India is home to the vast majority of them. They have their language, Lisan al-Da’wa, which is a combination of Arabic, Persian, Urdu, and Gujarati. They are followers of Fatimi Ismaili Tayyibi school of thought. 18 While the MWCD has no record of FGM in India, select members of the Bohra community have come out to share their stories and raise awareness about the continuance of FGM (known as "Khatna") in India, despite the lack of finding offered by UN-based research attempts.
Masooma Ranalvi was one such woman who, in 2015, created a blog about her ordeal. Her blog drew a lot of attention, prompting the creation of an organization called “SpeakOutonFGM”. This aroused the attention of the entire country to the practice of FGM in India. As a result, Sunita Tiwari, an HRs advocate, filed a PIL in the SC seeking a prohibition on the practice of “Khatna” as a gender-discriminatory practice aimed to limit female sexuality
15 The Quran, 26:156.
16 The Constitution of India 1950, Art 25.
17 About the Dawoodi Bohra, ‘The Dawoodi Bohras’ accessed 22 March 2022.
18 ibid.
and desires. The PIL was filed in connection with the Sabarimala case and was submitted to a 7-judge bench of the Supreme Court. The seriousness of the problem is highlighted in a report published in 2018 by WeSpeakOut. 19 According to the research, 75 percent of the participants' daughters (aged 7 and up) were subjected to FGM. It was also discovered that the majority of Bohras undergo type 1 FGM. Though supporters of Khatna in India claim that Bohras only engage in Type 1a (removal of the clitoris and/or clitoral hood) and type 4 FGM, survey respondents reported that both types 1a and 1b (partial or total removal of the clitoris and/or clitoral hood) are commonly practiced, with very few cases of type 4 FGM. 20 FGM has religious support among the Bohras from the book Da’a'im al-Islam, which is the binding sacred text for Dawoodi Bohras.
According to the tradition, written by Al-Qadi al-Nu’man, the Prophet is believed to have advised a simple cut of the women’s clitoral skin because it assigns purity to women and may make them more “beloved to their husbands”. Chapter 3: The Essential Religious Practice Test Even though Dawoodi Bohra is a religious group, it must pass the tests of public order, morality, and health. 21 As previously stated, FGM is customary practice in the Dawoodi Bohra community. While considering FGM in Islam, it is critical to include all Islamic schools of thought. FGM is mandatory for males and encouraged for women under the Sunni subsects of Hanafi and Maliki. It is mandatory for both men and women in the Sunni Shafi’i school. Within the Sunni Hanbali sect, some believe it is required for both men and women, while others believe it is obligatory for males but desirable for women.
22 While theological support for FGM cannot be attributed to a single Islamic school of thought, one must investigate the many grounds provided in Islamic law. 23 The ICPRHMW, held in Egypt in 1998, acknowledged that misinterpretation of Islamic teachings has resulted in the prevalence of harmful practices such as FGM. 19 Lakshmi Anantnarayan, Shabana Diler, Natasha Menon, The Clitoral Hood: A Contested Site – Khafd or Gemale Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) in India (1st edn, WeSpeakOut 2018).
20 ibid.
21 Sardar Dyedna Taher Saifuddin v State of Bombay, [1962] Suppl 2 SCR 496.
22 R Ghadially, A Manushi, ‘All for Izzat: The Practice of Female Circumcision Among Bohra Muslims’ (1991)
66 Journal About Women and Society 17.
23 ibid.
Religious freedom is guaranteed to the citizens under Arts 25 and 26, Part III of the Constitution. These provisions demonstrate the constitution’s framers’ goal to foster secularism in the country. However, in India, the concept of secularism is vulnerable to state intervention. The goal of such intervention was to bridge the gap between religious and social conduct. As a result, the SC developed the principle to explain the connection between religion and the Constitution. It was established that a practice deemed “essential” to any faith could not be controlled by the state. The SC stated the Essential Religious Practices (ERP) test in the case of The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt.
24 It was observed that the Courts were entrusted with determining whether an activity was “religious” in nature based on the facts presented and the teachings of the faith in question. On this basis, it is possible to challenge whether the activity is an “essential” and “integral” aspect of the concerned religion. The Court ruled that religious freedom included both religious belief and practice. When determining the need for any practice, the Court must consider the religion itself. 25 Following the Shirur Mutt decision, the SC attempted to investigate what defines “essentiality”. There were two potential options: the religious tenets could establish essentiality, or the Court could decide what comprised an “essential” religious activity. The question in Sri Venkataramana Devaru v.
the State of Mysore26 was whether the exclusion of Dalits from a temple constructed by Gowda Saraswat Brahmins was necessary to practice in the religious denomination. The Court held that a denomination’s religious rights to conduct its affairs under Art 26(b) were subject to the safeguards afforded by Art 25(2)(b). This established the precedent that courts could decide the essentiality of any religious practice without attributing a greater degree of determinacy to the opinions of the religious community. The SC placed a higher emphasis on religious texts as proof of essentiality. However, in the case of the Durgah Committee, Ajmer v. Syed Hussain Ali27, this viewpoint was modified.
The vires of the Dargah Khwaja Saheb Act, 1955, were challenged in this case, contending that the Act violated the FRs of Muslims belonging to the Soofi Chistia Order, who were the exclusive custodians and caretakers of the shrine at Ajmer. The Court rejected this argument, stating that religious activities based on superstition are not protected under Art 26 since they
24 AIR 1954 SCR 1005.
25 ibid.
26 AIR 1958 SCR 895.
27 AIR 1962 1 SCR 383.
are neither “essential” nor “integral” to the faith. As a result, the study of texts gave way to the study of customs, and the Court's opinion trumped that of the religious denomination. Similarly, in Tilkayat Shri Govindlalji Maharaj v. State of Rajasthan &Ors28, the SC had ruled that the question of essentiality will be decided by the Court itself, therefore eliminating the religion’s capacity to concur. The Court reasoned that reliance on communities to determine essentiality may be incorrect if competing claims about the same activity exist within the same group. The Tandava dance was determined not to be an ERP of the Ananda Marga sect in the Commissioner of Police & Ors. v. Acharya Jagadisharananda Avadhuta & Anr29, resulting in a significant development in the ERP test.
The Court stated in its majority ruling that the important aspect of religion includes the core ideas upon which the religion is established, as well as the activities that are crucial to the religion’s adherents. To assess if a particular activity is an important component of religion, the question must be whether the lack of the practice profoundly affects the religion. The conflicting views on the ERP Test have shrouded the concept in a veil of inconsistencies. This was vividly demonstrated in Shayara Bano v. Union of India30 when triple talaq was pronounced legally illegal by a narrow 3:2 margin. The continuity of custom, according to Justice Kurien Joseph, does not reflect essentiality. The elimination of triple talaq, according to Justice Nariman, does not alter the core character of Islam.
In their dissenting opinion, Justices Khehar and Nazeer argue that triple talaq was an ERP since Islam sanctioned it. This was a significant departure from earlier uses of the test, which required the religion to have legislated the activity under review rather than just sanctioning it. The ERP test was used to determine the necessity of prohibiting females between the ages of
10 and 50 from entering the Sabarimala shrine devoted to Lord Ayyappa, resulting in the Indian
Young Lawyers Association & Ors. v. The State of Kerala & Ors.31 To balance opposing rights and interests, Justice Chandrachud advocated that the ERP test have specific limits. Justice
28 AIR 1963 SC 1638.
29 (1983) 4 SCC 522.
30 (2017) 9 SCC 1.
31 (2019) 11 SCC 1.
Indu Malhotra, the sole dissenting judge, believed that essentiality should be assessed by the religious denomination itself. Violation of Right to Life According to Art 21 of the Constitution, “no individual shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty unless in accordance with the procedure established by law”. In the case of State of Punjab v Ram Lubhaya Bagga32, the SC observed that one person’s right correlates to a duty owed on another, whether an individual, employer, government, or authority. As a result, a citizen’s right to life under Art 21 imposes a responsibility on the state. The sanctity of human life is most likely the most basic of human social ideals. It is accepted by all civilized cultures, their legal systems, and internationally recognized HRs pronouncements. 33 The right to life includes the right to live with dignity.
34 Although there is no specific definition of dignity, it relates to the intrinsic and inseparable value of every individual, which should be acknowledged. It cannot be revoked. Every human being has dignity just by virtue of his or her being. 35 The State's obligation extends not only to safeguarding human dignity but also to facilitate it by taking constructive measures in that direction and ensuring the people's wellbeing. 36 The phrase “life” in Art 21 refers to more than just animal existence. 37 The clause forbids mutilation of the body by amputation of a limb or the removal of an eye, as well as the destruction of any other portion of the body through which the soul communicates with the outside world.
However, to constitute “deprivation of life”, there must be some “direct, overt, and tangible” act that threatens the lives of members of a community, as opposed to “vague or remote acts” that undermine people’s quality of life in general. In a landmark decision, the SC held that the “right to life” encompassed the “right to lead a healthy life to enjoy all the abilities of the human body in their prime conditions”. 38 According to the WHO’S preamble, health is “a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being,
32 AIR 1998 SC 1703.
33 R v DPP, (2022) 1 All ER 1.
34 Maneka Gandhi v UoI, AIR 1978 SC 597.
35 M Nagaraj v UoI, (2006) 8 SCC 212.
36 Paschim Banga Khetmazdoor Samiti v State of West Bnegal, (1996) 4 SCC 37.
37 Kharak Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1963 SC 1295.
38 Sunil Batra v Delhi Administration, AIR 1980 SC 1579.
not merely the absence of disease”. Chapter 4: International Conventions Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 The 1948 UDHR establishes a comprehensive framework for women’s protection from FGM.
1. Art 3: Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and personal security.
2. Art 5: No one should be tortured or subjected to cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment
or punishment.
3. Art 7: Everyone is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection under the law,
regardless of race or gender.
4. Art 8: Everyone has the right to an adequate recourse through competent national tribunals
for acts that violate the FRs guaranteed to him by the statutes.
5. Art 12: Protects the privacy of an individual.
6. Art 25: Addressed motherhood and childhood
7. Art 28: Everyone has the right to a social and international order in which the rights and
liberties enshrined UDHT can be fully realized. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 The ICCPR forbids discrimination based on gender and requires the state parties to guarantee that any person whose rights or freedoms, as defined in the ICCPR, are infringed has an appropriate remedy. Furthermore, the ICCPR protects persons from torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, as well as arbitrary or unlawful interference with their privacy. The ICCPR states that everyone has the “right to liberty and security of person” and that “every child shall have ... the right to such measures of protection as are required by his status as a minor, on the part of his family, society and the State”.
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1976 The ICESCR preamble emphasizes that human rights are derived from the intrinsic dignity of the human being. It asserts that state parties shall safeguard men and women’s equal rights to the enjoyment of the economic, social, and cultural rights enshrined in the ICESCR, as well as defend everyone’s right to the greatest achievable quality of physical and mental health. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 1979 and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 CEDAW and CRC both focus on the rights of women and girls and lay the groundwork for the abolition of FGM as an HRs violation.
CEDAW defines “discrimination against women” as – “any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field”. Although it is not officially stated, FGM falls under the criteria of discrimination against women as defined by CEDAW. It is an act geared solely against women and girls, with the effect of negating their enjoyment of their FRs.
Whatever the prevalent arguments for the practice of FGM, whether cultural or religious, FGM causes significant short-term and longterm physical and mental suffering to its victims and promotes the underlying discriminatory belief of women and girls’ subordination. Art 2 of CEDAW requires the states to eliminate such types of discrimination by undertaking certain actions such as - adopting necessary legislation and other measures, including suitable penalties, to prevent all forms of discrimination against women, to create legal protection for women’s rights on an equal footing with men’s rights, and to ensure effective protection for women against any act of discrimination through competent national tribunals and other public institutions, etc.
Furthermore, state parties to CEDAW are expected to change social and cultural patterns of behavior to eliminate prejudices and customs and all other practices based on the assumption of the inferiority or superiority of either sex or stereotypical roles for men and women. The CRC lays the ultimate duty for ensuring that children’s FRs are recognized and protected
by the government. Art 16 protects a child’s right to privacy, and Art 19 requires state parties to take all adequate legal, governmental, social, and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental abuse while being in the care of the child’s parent(s), legal guardian(s), or any other person who has the child’s care. It also necessitates states parties to develop social programs to offer required assistance to children and those who care for the child, as well as for other kinds of prevention and the identification, reporting, recommendation, investigation, treatment, and follow-up of instances of child maltreatment described heretofore, as well as for judicial intervention, as appropriate. Art 24 mandates state to adopt all necessary and appropriate measures to eliminate traditional practices that are harmful to children's health.
Chapter 5: Conclusion FGM is a cruel procedure that vilifies and restricts female sexual expression in the name of “purity” and “cleanliness”. Regardless of its religious or customary implications, FGM violates the HRs of girls and women who are minors at the time of the event and so cannot offer informed consent. FGM is a traumatic experience for its victims, and it can have long-term consequences on a person's mind and body. Subjecting women to this traumatic experience in the name of custom, religious or cultural tradition, societal pressure, or purely aesthetic reasons is an atrocious disregard for the lives and values of girls and women in society. While respect and appreciation of religious and cultural expression are certainly necessary, espl. in a heterogeneous country like India, one must consider if such an expression violates the FRs and HRs of a specific group.
Religious freedom is the foundation of secular democracy, but it must not undermine a person's right to life and equality. When such a divisive matter arises, the Courts must proceed with caution and render judgment without alienating the community or its practices. At the moment, no law in India recognizes FGM. This is in contrast to other countries that have banned the practice, including the USA, the UK, Australia, and about 27 African countries. Public bodies and local governments can assist the central government in the regional implementation of government policy on gender equality. Private and Governmental hospitals can help promote reproductive health in India and can treat victims of FGM. For any violation of the rule prohibiting FGM, both physicians and non-physicians should face criminal and civil
penalties. They should understand that female genital are not an illness and that surgical treatment is not required.