The ruling by the European Court of Human Rights is a significant victory for a French woman who had stopped engaging in sexual relations with her abusive husband, declaring such a refusal should not be grounds for divorce fault.
French Court Ruling Shifts Paradigm on Marital Consent and Women's Rights
French Court Ruling Shifts Paradigm on Marital Consent and Women's Rights
A landmark ECHR decision focuses on the importance of consent in marriage, challenging outdated legal concepts.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) recently ruled in favor of a French woman, referred to as Ms. H.W., asserting that her refusal to engage in sexual relations should not be viewed as a fault leading to divorce. The 69-year-old woman celebrated this decision as a significant step towards abolishing "rape culture" and fostering a culture of consent within marriage. This ruling, made on Thursday, found that France had violated her rights under European human rights law, concluding a legal battle that has persisted for nearly a decade.
H.W. pointed to the ruling as a necessary move to dissolve the outdated concept of "marital duties," which implies a mandatory sexual relationship within a marriage. Her lawyer, Lilia Mhissen, urged French courts to modernize their perspectives on consent and equality, echoing concerns from women's rights advocates who argue that French judges often perpetuate an antiquated view of marriage that undermines women's autonomy.
H.W., residing in Le Chesnay near Paris, was married to her husband, JC, since 1984, and together they had four children, one of whom required constant care due to a disability. After the birth of their first child, their relationship began to deteriorate, further exacerbated by physical and verbal abuse from her husband starting in 2002. By 2012, after an increasing decline in their relationship and H.W.'s health, she petitioned for divorce, disagreeing only with the fault grounds cited by the courts.
Initially, an appeals court in Versailles upheld her husband's claims. The French Court of Cassation later dismissed her appeal without elaboration, prompting her to bring the case to the ECHR in 2021. In a unanimous decision, the ECHR stated that states should only intrude on matters of sexuality for compelling reasons and clarified that marriage does not imply consent to sexual relations. This ruling emphasizes the seriousness of marital rape as a crime and highlighted the necessity for consent to be an ongoing agreement within marriage.
This decision emerged during a national discourse on consent, intensified by the high-profile trial of Dominique Pélicot, convicted last month for drugging and enabling the rape of his wife. Feminist activists are leveraging this critical moment to advocate for the reassessment of legal definitions surrounding consent in France, proposing that non-consent be explicitly included in laws against rape and highlighting that consent must always be freely granted and reversible.
H.W. pointed to the ruling as a necessary move to dissolve the outdated concept of "marital duties," which implies a mandatory sexual relationship within a marriage. Her lawyer, Lilia Mhissen, urged French courts to modernize their perspectives on consent and equality, echoing concerns from women's rights advocates who argue that French judges often perpetuate an antiquated view of marriage that undermines women's autonomy.
H.W., residing in Le Chesnay near Paris, was married to her husband, JC, since 1984, and together they had four children, one of whom required constant care due to a disability. After the birth of their first child, their relationship began to deteriorate, further exacerbated by physical and verbal abuse from her husband starting in 2002. By 2012, after an increasing decline in their relationship and H.W.'s health, she petitioned for divorce, disagreeing only with the fault grounds cited by the courts.
Initially, an appeals court in Versailles upheld her husband's claims. The French Court of Cassation later dismissed her appeal without elaboration, prompting her to bring the case to the ECHR in 2021. In a unanimous decision, the ECHR stated that states should only intrude on matters of sexuality for compelling reasons and clarified that marriage does not imply consent to sexual relations. This ruling emphasizes the seriousness of marital rape as a crime and highlighted the necessity for consent to be an ongoing agreement within marriage.
This decision emerged during a national discourse on consent, intensified by the high-profile trial of Dominique Pélicot, convicted last month for drugging and enabling the rape of his wife. Feminist activists are leveraging this critical moment to advocate for the reassessment of legal definitions surrounding consent in France, proposing that non-consent be explicitly included in laws against rape and highlighting that consent must always be freely granted and reversible.
