Women and Justice: Keywords

The applicant was separated in her marriage and sought to regain custody of the child she had lost to her husband, the respondent. A lower court granted the respondent custody of the child on the grounds that he had paid lobola to marry the applicant and customary law therefore entitled him to the child. After delaying to comply with the court’s order and attempting to seek relief from another court, the applicant was found guilty of contempt for fighting to keep her child. She was sentenced to five working days in civil prison. The High Court of Malawi in reviewing the case held that the child must be returned to the custody of the applicant. The High Court explained that the lower court had erred by defaulting to customary law rather than hearing the arguments of both parties to determine the best interest of the child when determining custody. Moreover, that the lower court was unnecessarily harsh to sentence the applicant to civil prison without considering a fine as her punishment for an act as reasonable as fighting to keep her child.

The 33-year-old defendant pled guilty and was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment by a First Grade Magistrate for defilement after luring a nine-year old girl to his house and raping her. Subsequent medical examinations revealed that the defendant was HIV-positive, as well as injuries and other evidence of the crime on the victim, who did not contract HIV. The State appealed the sentence, arguing that it was insufficient due to the nature of the crime. The High Court agreed, citing 2013 precedent recommending that 14 years’ imprisonment should be the starting point for defilement sentences. However, the High Court noted the increase of defilement cases in Malawi – 2,155 convictions for defilement by July 2020 – indicated that 14 years was an insufficient deterrent. Instead, the High Court recommended that 20 years be the minimum sentence for defilement, noting the recent trend of High Court judges increasing such sentences similarly. In reviewing the defendant’s sentence, the Court considered numerous factors, including that: i) defilement cases against young girls had been on the rise in recent years in Malawi, which justified harsher sentences to protect young girls; ii) statutory rape of a girl under 16 is a serious offence; and iii) the defendant was HIV-positive and could have infected the victim. Ultimately, the High Court ordered that the defendant’s 10-year sentence be increased to 40 years’ imprisonment.

While intoxicated, the defendant committed lewd acts against a minor (under 14 years old) by forcing her to expose herself and photographing her naked. He also took the photographs, which were recognized as a pornographic product. According to the courts of the first and second instance, the illegal actions qualified as corruption of a minor (Article 156 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) and the production of child pornography for which he was sentenced to seven years of imprisonment. In his complaint to the Supreme Court, the prosecutor demanded a longer sentence, arguing that the sentence was disproportionate to the crime and emphasizing the defendant’s criminal history. The Supreme Court noted that the court of the first instance considered the severity of the crimes, the personal information about the offender, the defendant’s attitude towards the crimes, the defendant’s partial recognition of his guilt, and the aggravating circumstance of intoxication. Thus, by imposing a penalty of imprisonment near the maximum allowable sentence, the Supreme Court held that court of the first instance complied with the requirements of proportionality and fairness. In this case, the prosecutor's complaint was dismissed.

Чоловік в стані алкогольного сп’яніння вчинив відносно малолітньої (до 14 років) потерпілої розпусні дії (ст. 156 КК), які виразились у її примушуванні до оголення та фотографуванні в оголеному вигляді; він також створив фотознімки з таким зображенням потерпілої (було визнано продукцією порнографічного характеру). За результатами розгляду справи судом першої та другої інстанції протиправні дії було кваліфіковано як розбещення малолітньої особи та виготовлення дитячої порнографії та засуджено до 7 років позбавлення волі. Прокурор у своїй скарзі до Верховного Суду вимагає скасування рішення та призначення нового розгляду через невідповідність призначеного покарання скоєному злочину та неврахування особи винного, що неодноразово притягувався до адміністративної відповідальності. Верховний Суд зазначає, що суд першої інстанції, призначаючи покарання у виді позбавлення волі, врахував ступінь тяжкості вчинених злочинів, ставлення до вчиненого, часткове визнання своєї винуватості, наявність обставини, що обтяжує покарання - вчинення злочину в стані алкогольного сп'яніння, а також дані про його особу. Таким чином, суд першої інстанції, призначаючи покарання у виді позбавлення волі в розмірі, наближеному до максимального (передбаченого за інкриміновані правопорушення), дотримався вимоги співмірності та справедливості. Скарга прокурора не підлягає задоволенню.

With this decision, the Toulouse Court of Appeal held that a transgender woman had the right to be designated as the mother of her child when she had conceived the child before undergoing gender affirmation surgery. V., the claimant, and N.D. married and had two children. In 2009, V. successfully applied to change her civil status from male to female. She conceived the child that was the subject of these proceedings in 2014. She sought to be registered as the child’s mother, as opposed to as a surrogate, but the civil register refused. Until the decision of the Court of Appeal, only the claimant’s partner, their child’s biological mother, was listed on the child’s birth certificate. The claimant successfully argued, among other things, that it would be in the best interests of the child to have the claimant linked as the biological parent on the birth certificate. The decision was the first of its kind in France, and the result of eight years of proceedings. The Toulouse Court of Appeal referred in particular to the primacy of the child’s best interests, enshrined in the New York Convention, and to the right to respect for private and family life and the right to sexual self-determination, enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights (Articles 8 and 14). It found that those conventions require that a child born to a couple including a transgender person have the right to have both parents legally recognized, and that those conventions were not contrary to French national law.

Section 160B prohibits engaging in sexual activity with a child under the age of 18, an offence punishable by 21 years of imprisonment generally and life imprisonment where there are aggravating circumstances. Aggravating circumstances include: (i) being armed or presenting as armed; (ii) being in the company of other persons; (iii) endangering the victim; (iv) acting to substantially degrade the victim; and (v) being in a relationship of proximity and authority with the child, such as a step parent, foster parent, teacher, or guardian. However, it is a valid defence if the perpetrator is also a child no more than two years older than the younger child and the younger child consented. Section 160C prohibits procuring a child to commit gross indecency with them, or to commit gross indecency with another (of the opposite sex or same sex) in the presence of a child. The offence is punishable by 14 years of imprisonment. Showing, selling, or exposing offensive material to a child is an offence punishable by seven years (Section 160D). Permitting a child to engage in or simulate sexual acts while knowing or being expected to know that the child will be recorded is prohibited (Section 160E). It is further prohibited to record the child, to trade recordings of children, and to possess or view recordings of children engaging in or simulating sexual acts. These offences are all punishable by 14 years of imprisonment. Section 160G bars claiming lack of knowledge of the child’s age as a defence to the previously mentioned offences.

Per section 135, taking or detaining a woman of any age against her will for the purpose of marrying or engaging with her sexually (either for oneself or for another) is prohibited and punishable by seven years of imprisonment. Section 136 prohibits taking a child from the custody or protection of a parent or lawful caregiver against the will of such parent or caregiver and punishes the offence as a misdemeanor. Section 140 prohibits procuring or attempting to procure: (i) a girl or woman under 18 years of age for unlawful sexual relations in Malawi or elsewhere; (ii) any girl or woman to become a prostitute, in Malawi or elsewhere; (iii) any girl or woman to leave Malawi with intent that she should work at a brothel elsewhere; or (iv) any girl or woman to leave her current residence in Malawi with the intent that she should work at a brothel in Malawi or elsewhere. Such offences are punishable by life imprisonment. Section 141 criminalizes and punishes with 14 years of imprisonment the use of threats, intimidation, false pretenses and/or representations, or drugs to overpower a woman for the purposes of unlawful sexual activity in Malawi or elsewhere. However, convictions under the section cannot be sustained on the evidence of a single witness without corroboration. Section 143 criminalizes detaining a woman or girl without her consent with intent that she will engage sexually and unlawfully with any man, in general or in a brothel. It further criminalizes withholding clothing from a woman to prevent her from leaving where she is detained and provides legal protection for any woman who, in an effort to leave detention, appears unclothed in public. It is a misdemeanor for men (Section 145) and women (Section 146) to knowingly live off the earnings of sex workers. Further, men proven to be living with sex workers or controlling or influencing the movement of sex workers will be presumed to be knowingly earning from them (Section 145). Operating a brothel is punishable by seven years imprisonment (Section 147) and promoting prostitution is defined and punished in section 147A.

The Child Care, Protection, and Justice Act regulates the care and protection of children, including regulation of: the responsibilities and rights of parents; the role of local authorities; prohibiting harmful practices; procedures when children are accused of crimes; establishment of a child justice court system; and general child welfare. Under Section 78, no child can be taken without the consent of a parent of custodial figure. Punishment for such a crime is up to 10 years imprisonment. Under Section 79, child trafficking for any sort of exploitation is prohibited, and can be punished by up to lifetime imprisonment. Section 80 protects children from social and customary practices that are “harmful to the health or general development of the child,” but does not explicitly ban female genital mutilation or cutting. Under Section 82, no child can be sold as security, or engage in labor to provide income. Additionally, children cannot be forced into marriage or betrothal under Section 81. Violations of Sections 80-82 carry a 10-year prison sentence. Under any of these situations listed above (Sections 78-82), a social welfare officer can remove and place the child in a safe environment awaiting the decision of the child justice court. Sections 89-131 outline procedures for, and rights of, children suspected or accused of crimes. Sections 132-134 establish Child Justice Courts, which are magistrates courts subordinate to the High Court with jurisdiction over children’s matters.

The Law Against Femicide and Other Forms of Violence Against Women criminalizes violence against women, including when it occurs in the home by spouses and other chosen sexual partners. The proscribed violence under the Law can be physical, psychological, or emotional. The law establishes that the penalty is imprisonment for 5-12 years in cases of physical or sexual violence against women, and 5-8 years for psychological violence. Of note, the law also establishes courts specifically dedicated to adjudicating crimes against women.

La Ley contra el femicidio y otras formas de violencia contra la mujer tipifica como delito la violencia contra la mujer, incluso cuando ocurre en el hogar por los cónyuges y otras parejas sexuales elegidas. La violencia proscrita bajo la ley puede ser física, psicológica o emocional. La ley establece que la pena es de cinco a doce años de prisión en los casos de violencia física o sexual contra la mujer, y de cinco a ocho años en los casos de violencia psicológica. Cabe señalar que la ley también establece tribunales dedicados específicamente a juzgar delitos contra la mujer.

The Summary Offences Act includes provisions that protect the rights of children and women. Part 1 Section 5 states that assault or battery of a male child under 18 years of age, or of a woman, is an aggravated nature crime and can be punished by up to six months imprisonment rather than the three months proscribed for non-aggravated assault. Part 1 Section 45 states that the husband who refuses or neglects to provide support, by labor or other lawful means, to his wife or child may be deemed an idle and disorderly person and be liable for a fine and/or imprisonment of up to one month.

Articles 49, 50 of the Family Code of Ukraine refer the right to maternity and the right to parentage to the personal non-property rights of spouses. The term “maternity” means women’s legally guaranteed right to reproductive opportunity on (i.e., to give birth to children, raise them). The core of this personal non-property right is the wife's authority to decide whether or not to have a child. In addition, these articles establish that a woman's reluctance to have a child or her inability to conceive a child can be grounds for the dissolution of marriage. The same consequences entail if a man's refuses to, or his cannot, have a child. Such rules of the family legislation on the reason for the dissolution of marriage due to the wife's or husband's unwillingness or inability to have children restrict the freedom of behavior of women and men in marriage and violate the right to reproductive freedom. Article 123 establishes that if a married couple produce an embryo that is carried by a surrogate, then, the spouses are deemed the parents of the child. Similarly, the spouses are recognized as the parents when the wife gives birth to a child via implantation of an embryo that is not biologically hers. Article 136 of the Family Code of Ukraine allows a person legally registered as a child’s father to contest that registration, and thus his legal responsibilities as a parent to that child, if he believes or knows that he is not the child’s biological father. An analysis of court practice indicates that, as evidence of the lack of a parent-child relationship, the court accepts testimony of witnesses and results of forensic genetic examination.

Статтями 49, 50 Сімейного кодексу України право на материнство та право на батьківство віднесено до особистих немайнових прав подружжя. Термін "материнство" означає гарантоване законом право жінки на репродуктивну можливість (тобто народжувати дітей, виховувати їх). Ядром цього особистого немайнового права є правомочності дружини вирішувати питання про народження чи ненародження дитини. Крім цього, ці статті встановлюють, що підставою для розірвання шлюбу може бути небажання жінки мати дитину або її нездатність зачати дитину. Такі ж наслідки виникають, якщо чоловік відмовляється або не може мати дитину. Такі норми сімейного законодавства про підстави розірвання шлюбу через небажання чи нездатність дружини чи чоловіка мати дітей обмежують свободу поведінки жінки та чоловіка у шлюбі та порушують право на репродуктивну свободу. Статтею 123 встановлено, що, якщо у подружжя зароджується ембріон, виношуваний сурогатною матір'ю, то батьками дитини визнається подружжя. Так само, подружжя визнається батьками, коли дружина народжує дитину, шляхом перенесення в її організм ембріона, який їй біологічно не належить. Стаття 136 Сімейного кодексу України дозволяє особі, яка в установленому законом порядку записана батьком дитини, оскаржити таку реєстрацію, а отже, і свої обов’язки як батька щодо цієї дитини, якщо вона вважає або знає, що не є біологічним батьком дитини. Аналіз судової практики вказує на те, що як доказ відсутності зв’язку між батьком та дитиною суд приймає показання свідків та результати судово-генетичної експертизи.

The 2012 Act makes it an offence to withhold information, without reasonable excuse, about certain offences against children and vulnerable adults from the Garda Síochána (Sections 2 and 3). These ‘certain offences’ include, inter alia, murder, assault, false imprisonment, rape, sexual assault, and incest. Defences are set out in Section 4, including those which may be raised by “prescribed persons” employed or engaged by a prescribed organization (defined in Sections 5 and 6). Penalties for offenses under Sections 2 or 3 are set forth in Section 7. Upon summary conviction, a person is liable to a Class A fine (€5,000) and/or up to 12 months’ imprisonment; for conviction on indictment, the term of imprisonment changes relative to the term of imprisonment stipulated in the statute providing for the principal offence (Section 7).

The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017 gave effect to European Council Directive No. 2011/93/EU of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. It also amended certain other legislation, including the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 1993 (available here), the Criminal Law (Incest Proceedings) Act 1995, the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 (available here), the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008 (available here), and the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2006. The Act provides for offences relating to sexual acts with protected persons and relating to payment for sexual activity with sex workers, offensive conduct of a sexual nature and harassment of victims of sexual offences. The Act defines ‘sexual exploitation’ in relation to a child and specifies the elements that would constitute a sexual offence against a child, including performing sexual acts in front of a child and prostitution of a child. Generally, Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 broaden the scope of criminal acts in relation to children, such as the prohibition of causing a child to watch sexual activity (Section 6), meeting a child for the purposes of sexual exploitation (Section 7), and the use of information and communication technology to facilitate the sexual exploitation of a child (Section 8). The Act also criminalizes the purchase of sexual services and prohibits sexual activity with a protected person, as defined by the Act. The Act creates a distinction related to the commission of a sexual act with a child under 17 years of age and with a child under 15 years of age, with a conviction on indictment for the former offence resulting in a term of imprisonment of up to 7 years (unless the person is in authority, in which case they may be sentenced for up to 15 years) (Section 17), and with a conviction on indictment for the latter offence resulting in a term of imprisonment of life (Section 16). Importantly, Section 48 of the Act reforms the law in relation to consent to sexual acts. In particular, it states that a person does not consent to a sexual act if, inter alia, they permits the act to take place or submits to it because of the application, threat or fear of use of force against them, if they are asleep, if they are incapable of consenting because of intoxication, or if they are mistaken as to the nature and purpose of the act or the identity of the person involved. The Act also clarifies that consent can be withdrawn at any time and that lack of physical resistance does not, of itself, constitute consent (Section 48). Finally, Section 46 allows a court to issue a “Harassment order” against a person when imposing a sentence for a sexual offence or at any time before the convicted person is released from prison.

The 2008 Act, which amends the 1998 Child Trafficking and Pornography Act (available here) among other legislation, defines trafficking as when a person, in relation to another person, “(a) procures, recruits, transports or harbours the person, or (i) transfers the person to, (ii) places the person in the custody, care or charge, or under the control, of, or (iii) otherwise delivers the person to, another person, (b) causes a person to enter or leave the State or to travel within the State, (c) takes custody of a person or takes a person— (i) into one’s care or charge, or (ii) under one’s control, or (d) provides the person with accommodation or employment” (Section 1). Exploitation includes labour exploitation, sexual exploitation, or exploitation consisting of the removal of one or more of the organs of a person. Labour exploitation includes subjecting the person to forced labour, forcing him or her to render services to another, or enslavement or similar servitude. Sexual exploitation includes production of pornography depicting the person alone or with others, causing the person to engage in sexual activity for the purpose of the production of pornography, prostitution of the person, or otherwise causing the person to engage or participate in any sexual, indecent, or obscene act, etc. (Section 1). The Act contains specific provisions regarding trafficking of a child (a person under the age of 18), which were further amended by the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017 (available here). Trafficking a child for exploitation is an offense, as is selling or offering to sell a child, or purchasing or offering to purchase a child (Sections 2 and 3). There is an additional definition of “trafficks” in relation to a child, meaning that a person “(a) procures, recruits, transports or harbors the child, or— (i) transfers the child to, (ii) places the child in the custody, care or charge, or under the control, of, or (iii) otherwise delivers the child to, another person, (b) causes the child to enter or leave the State or to travel within the State, (c) takes custody of the child or takes the child— (i) into one’s care or charge, or (ii) under one’s control, or (d) provides the child with accommodation or employment” (Section 3). There is also separate definition of “sexual exploitation” in relation to a child, and includes inviting, inducing, or coercing a child to engage in prostitution or the production of child pornography, or inviting, inducing, or coercing the child to engage or participate in any sexual, indecent, or obscene act, etc. (Section 3). The offences of exploitation and sexual exploitation in relation to children are subject to penalties specified in sections 2 and 3; a court may sentence a person found guilty on indictment to a term of life imprisonment (or less) and a fine. Penalties for trafficking of persons other than children are specified in Section 4; the court may sentence a person found guilty on indictment to a term of life imprisonment (or less) and a fine. The Act also explicitly provides for penalties where an accused is found guilty of attempt, incitement, or conspiracy in relation to the offences under the Act. Soliciting or importuning for purposes of prostitution of trafficked persons, or benefiting from such activities, is also an offence subject to specified penalties (Section 5), as are offences committed by corporate bodies (Section 6). Jurisdiction includes extraterritorial jurisdiction (e.g., where a person commits an act in relation to an Irish citizen in a place other than the State that, if done in the State, would constitute one of certain enumerated offenses). The Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) (Amendment) Act 2013 (available here) further amends these provisions, in particular with expanded definitions of labour exploitation and aggravating factors.

Article 22 modified the French Civil Code, establishing a new civil law for eviction of a violent spouse from the matrimonial home. Specifically, the law amended the French Civil Code to provide that, where a violent spouse puts their spouse or children in danger, the judge may order separate residence, indicating which spouse may continue to live in the matrimonial home. Absent special circumstances, it is the violent spouse who should be ordered to leave the matrimonial home.

Article 22 modifie le Code Civil français, en établissant une nouvelle loi civile par rapport à l’expulsion d’un conjoint violent du logement conjugal. En particulier, la loi modifie le Code Civil Français, pour donner le droit à un juge de préciser que si un des conjoints est violent et met l’autre conjoint ou les enfants en danger, le juge peut avoir le pouvoir de déclarer que seul un des conjoints puisse continuer à vivre dans la maison conjugale. Absent des circonstances particulières, c’est toujours le conjoint violent qui devra être ordonné de partir du logement conjugal.

The legislation implements the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which the Lithuanian Parliament ratified in 1995. The Act sets out the rights of a child and defines neglect, physical, psychological, and sexual abuse. In 2019, the text was amended to include a clause on the prioritization of biological family, which means that the separation of children and parents against their will is only allowed in “extreme cases,” where it is “unavoidable and necessary to protect a child from real danger to his physical and psychological security, health, or life and when there is no other recourse to achieve such protection.”

Šiuo teisės aktu įgyvendinama Jungtinių Tautų Vaiko Teisių konvencija, kurią Lietuvos Seimas ratifikavo 1995 metais. Šis įstatymas nustato vaiko teises ir apibrėžia nepriežiūrą, fizinę, psichologinę ir seksualinę prievartą. Tekstas buvo iš dalies pakeistas 2019 m., įtraukiant nuostatą dėl biologinės šeimos prioriteto, kuri reiškia, kad vaikų ir tėvų atskyrimas prieš jų valią leidžiamas tik „kraštutiniais atvejais“, kai „neišvengiama ir būtina apsaugoti vaiką nuo realaus pavojaus jo fiziniam ir psichologiniam saugumui, sveikatai ar gyvybei ir kai nėra kitų priemonių tokiai apsaugai pasiekti“.

This regulation aims to ensure that pregnant women and their children have access to necessary basic medical care by tracking medical examinations received with a so-called mother-and-child-passport issued by the Federal Ministry of Health. Basic medical care includes, at least, five medical examinations of the pregnant woman and nine examinations of the child until the child reaches the age of 62 months. The regulation specifies contents, time intervals, and the information that should be included in the mother-and-child-passport. According to Sec. 8, a failure to abide to the time intervals has no consequences for state child allowance (Kinderbetreuungsgeld), as long as the mother is not responsible for the failure.

Diese Verordnung zielt auf die Sicherstellung des Zugangs von Schwangeren und deren Kindern zu notwendigen medizinischen Grundbetreuung, indem die empfangenen medizinischen Leistungen mit einem so-genannten Mutter-Kind-Pass verfolgt werden. Dieser wird von dem Bundesgesundheitsministerium ausgestellt. Grundbetreuung beinhaltet mindestens fünf medizinische Untersuchungen der schwangeren Frau und weitere neun Untersuchungen des Kindes, bis dieses das Alter von 62 Monaten erreicht. Diese Verordnung spezifiziert den Inhalt und die Zeitintervalle zwischen den Untersuchungen, sowie die Informationen, die in dem Mutter-Kind-Pass festgehalten werden sollen. Gemäß § 8 hat es keine Auswirkungen auf die Berechnung der Höhe des Kindergeldes, wenn die Frau den Untersuchungen nicht im vorgeschriebenen Zeitpunkt nachkommt, so lange sie das nicht zu vertreten hat.