The Legal Implications and Penalties Associated with FGM

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that three million girls undergo some form of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) procedure every year in Africa alone. More than 230 million girls and women alive today have undergone FGM in countries in Africa, the Middle East and Asia where FGM is practised. FGM is also found in other countries, including the UK amongst members of some migrant communities. FGM is mostly carried out on young girls between infancy and age 15 years, although it is occasionally performed on adult women. It is nearly always carried out by traditional practitioners on minors and is a violation of the rights of children. 

FGM is a severe violation of human rights with far-reaching health and psychological consequences. It reflects deep-rooted inequality between the sexes and constitutes an extreme form of discrimination against girls and women. 

Many countries have enacted laws to criminalise FGM and protect individuals from this practice. This article will explore the legal frameworks and penalties associated with FGM across different jurisdictions, examining how laws are enforced, the challenges faced, and the effectiveness of these legal measures in combating this practice.

Introduction to FGM and Its Legal Context

FGM has no health benefits, and it harms girls and women in many ways. It involves removing and damaging healthy and normal female genital tissue, and it interferes with the natural functions of girls’ and women’s bodies. Although all forms of FGM are associated with an increased risk of health complications, the risk is greater with more severe forms of FGM. Female genital mutilation is classified into four major types:

• Type 1: This is the partial or total removal of the clitoral glans (the external and visible part of the clitoris, which is a sensitive part of the female genitals), and/or the prepuce/clitoral hood (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoral glans).
• Type 2: This is the partial or total removal of the clitoral glans and the labia minora (the inner folds of the vulva), with or without removal of the labia majora (the outer folds of skin of the vulva).
• Type 3: Also known as infibulation, this is the narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the labia minora, or labia majora, sometimes through stitching, with or without removal of the clitoral prepuce/clitoral hood and glans.
• Type 4: This includes all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, for example pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterising the genital area.

Immediate complications of FGM can include:

• Severe pain
• Excessive bleeding (haemorrhage)
• Genital tissue swelling
• Fever
• Infections such as tetanus
• Urinary problems
• Wound healing problems
• Injury to surrounding genital tissue
• Shock
• Death

Long-term complications can include:

• Urinary problems such as painful urination, urinary tract infections
• Vaginal problems such as discharge, itching, bacterial vaginosis and other infections
• Menstrual problems such as painful menstruation, difficulty in passing menstrual blood, etc.
• Scar tissue and keloid – this is a raised scar left on the skin after a wound has healed
• Sexual problems such as pain during intercourse, decreased satisfaction, etc.
• Increased risk of childbirth complications such as difficult delivery, excessive bleeding, caesarean section, need to resuscitate the baby, etc. and likelihood of newborn deaths
• Need for later surgeries: for example, the sealing or narrowing of the vaginal opening (type 3) may lead to the practice of cutting open the sealed vagina later to allow for sexual intercourse and childbirth (de-infibulation). Sometimes genital tissue is stitched again several times, including after childbirth, hence the woman goes through repeated opening and closing procedures, further increasing both immediate and long-term risks
• Psychological problems such as depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), low self-esteem, etc.

The reasons why FGM is performed vary from one region to another, as well as over time, and include a mix of sociocultural factors within families and communities. FGM is often considered a necessary part of raising a girl, and a way to prepare her for adulthood and marriage. This can include controlling her sexuality to promote premarital virginity and marital fidelity. Some people believe that the practice has religious support, although no religious scripts prescribe the practice. Healthcare providers who perform FGM are themselves usually members of FGM-practising communities and are subject to the same social norms and there may also be a financial incentive for them to perform the practice.

FGM is currently documented in 92 countries around the world either through nationally representative data, indirect estimates (usually in countries where FGM is mainly practised by diaspora communities), small-scale studies, or anecdotal evidence and media reports. This highlights the global nature of this harmful practice and the need for a global and comprehensive response to eliminate it.

In Africa, 33 countries generate FGM data from nationally representative data. These are:

• Benin
• Burkina Faso
• Cameroon
• Central African Republic
• Chad
• Côte d’Ivoire
• Democratic Republic of Congo
• Djibouti
• Egypt
• Eritrea
• Ethiopia
• Gambia
• Ghana
• Guinea
• Guinea-Bissau
• Kenya
• Liberia
• Malawi
• Mali
• Mauritania
• Niger
• Nigeria
• Senegal
• Sierra Leone
• Somalia
• South Africa
• South Sudan
• Sudan
• Tanzania
• Togo
• Uganda
• Zambia
• Zimbabwe

In the Middle East, the practice occurs in countries including:

• Iraq
• Iran
• Jordan 
• Oman
• The State of Palestine 
• The United Arab Emirates
• Yemen

Asian countries with FGM practice include: 

• Afghanistan 
• Bangladesh 
• Brunei 
• Cambodia 
• India
• Indonesia
• Laos 
• Malaysia
• Pakistan
• Singapore
• Sri Lanka
• Thailand
• The Maldives
• The Philippines
• Vietnam 

FGM is also reported in the United States, Canada, New Zealand and Australia, and in Colombia, Ecuador, Panama and Peru in South America. 

In Europe, FGM is practised in Georgia, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom. Official EU-wide data on the prevalence of FGM in Europe are lacking. Four studies to map FGM, conducted by the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) between 2012 and 2020, found that there are victims (or potential victims) in at least 16 EU countries: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Sweden.

The European End FGM network estimates that over 600,000 FGM survivors live in Europe, and 180,000 girls are at risk in 13 countries alone. Around 20,000 women and girls from FGM-practising countries seek asylum in the EU every year, with an estimated 1,000 asylum claims relating directly to FGM. This number has grown steadily since 2008.

Of the 92 countries (many of these mentioned above) where FGM is practised in some form, 51 countries have specifically prohibited FGM under their national laws, either through a specific anti-female genital mutilation law or by prohibiting female genital mutilation under a criminal provision in other domestic laws such as the criminal or penal code, child protection laws, violence against women laws or domestic violence laws.

Laws against FGM are most common in the African continent with 55% of total laws globally coming from the 28 countries in Africa that have enacted specific laws or specific legal provisions against FGM. In contrast, in the Middle East, only Iraq (Kurdistan) and Oman have specific laws or legal provisions banning FGM. In Asia, not a single country has enacted a specific legal prohibition against FGM; there are also no specific laws or legal provisions against FGM in Latin America.

In 2012 and in 2018, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolutions (FGM/C) (A/RES/67/1461 and A/RES/73/5822), urging the international community to intensify global efforts to eliminate female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). It also called upon “States, the United Nations system, civil society and all stakeholders to continue to observe 6 February as the International Day of Zero Tolerance for FGM/C and to use the day to enhance awareness-raising campaigns and to take concrete actions against female genital mutilations”.

International Legal Framework

At an international level, United Nations (UN), African Union and Council of Europe standards are benchmarks for work to combat FGM. Key treaties, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Geneva Convention, all cover FGM indirectly, with specific guidance on protection and asylum for victims. 

In Africa, the 15 parties to the Maputo Protocol have committed to eliminate FGM (Article V). The Council of Europe’s Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention) is the first treaty to recognise that FGM exists in Europe (Article 38), and sets out specific obligations on preventing and combating the practice and providing support for victims and those at risk.

The EU currently has no binding instrument designed to protect women from violence, but certain aspects come within the scope of existing EU law. The EU has regulated three crimes related to gender-based violence against women – sexual harassment, trafficking and child sexual exploitation and abuse. The Equal Treatment Directives (Directive 2006/54/EC; Directive 2010/41/EU and Directive 2004/113/EC) prohibit harassment on the grounds of sex and sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination in the context of employment and the offer or supply of goods or services.

At national level, every EU Member State has taken steps to combat Gender-based Violence Against Women (GBVAW). Nevertheless, comparative assessments conclude that the uneven transposition and implementation of the existing EU legislation, and the diversity of legislative and policy approaches, are resulting in unequal levels of criminalisation, protection and support for victims, and prevention, and that current approaches fall short of the standards set in the Istanbul Convention in many instances.

FGM is illegal in the UK. In England, Wales and Northern Ireland criminal and civil legislation on FGM is contained in the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003. In Scotland, FGM legislation is contained in the Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation (Scotland) Act 2005.

The United Nations (UN) SDG target 5.3 aims to eliminate FGM by 2030; however, this target is unlikely to be met as progress would need to be at least 10 times faster than it has been over the past 15 years. The COVID-19 global pandemic in 2020 appears to have increased girls’ risk of undergoing FGM. School closures potentially placed many girls in harm’s way for longer periods. Meanwhile, law enforcement and frontline service providers were being redeployed to respond to the COVID-19 crisis, weakening formal protection systems.

Analysis from UNICEF showed that as many as 86 million more children would be living in poverty by the end of 2020. COVID-19 containment measures pushed more households into monetary poverty, and families increasingly adopted negative coping strategies to reduce economic burdens, such as having girls undergo FGM as a precursor to child marriage.

Working in 22 countries across Africa and the Middle East, UNICEF supports ending FGM by ensuring girls are educated, empowered, healthy, and free from violence and discrimination. The organisation’s multi-sectoral and holistic approach supports the elimination of FGM by addressing the intersecting factors that are attributable to the continuance of the practice, such as discrimination, weak infrastructure, poverty, barriers to meaningful participation, and vulnerability to shocks and fragility in crises. In addition to contributing to meeting SDG target 5.3, ending FGM advances the UNICEF Strategic Plan, 2018–2021, specifically Goal Area 3: ‘Every child is protected from violence and exploitation’.

The UNFPA and UNICEF Joint Programme on the Elimination of Female Genital Mutilation is funded by the European Union and the governments of Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. It works to tackle FGM through interventions in 17 countries: 

• Burkina Faso
• Djibouti
• Egypt
• Eritrea
• Ethiopia
• Gambia
• Guinea
• Guinea-Bissau
• Kenya
• Mali
• Mauritania
• Nigeria
• Senegal
• Sudan
• Somalia
• Uganda
• Yemen

Fourteen of the 17 countries supported by the UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme have legal and policy frameworks banning FGM. To date, there have been more than 3,200 cases of legal enforcement and arrests. Public statements at all levels of government have announced that FGM is a human rights issue and must be stopped. Such statements provide the political backing required to strengthen community-wide efforts and initiatives to eliminate FGM.

The European Commission is strongly committed to ending all forms of gender-based violence in line with the Union’s equality policies. This commitment is outlined within the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024, the EU Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025, the EU Gender Action Plan III, and the EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child, which aims to end violence against children, including FGM, both inside and outside the EU. In line with these policies and their commitment to end FGM in Europe and globally, the EU supports and cooperates with survivors, affected families and communities, experts and policymakers.

National Legislation and Penalties

According to the 2021 edition of the World Bank’s “Compendium of International and National Legal Frameworks on Female Genital Mutilation”, 84 countries in the world have domestic legislation that either specifically prohibits the practice of FGM or allows it to be prosecuted through other laws, such as the criminal or penal code, child protections laws, violence against women laws or domestic violence laws.

In Africa, the following counties have enacted FGM laws; the year(s) of enactment is in brackets: Algeria (2015); Benin (2003); Burkina Faso (1996); Cameroon (2016); Central African Republic (1996, 2006); Chad (2002); Comoros (1982); Congo Republic (2002); Côte d’Ivoire (1998); Djibouti (1994, 2009); Democratic Republic of the Congo (2006); Egypt (2008); Eritrea (2007, 2015); Ethiopia (2004); The Gambia (2015); Ghana (1994, 2007); Guinea (1965, 2000, 2016); Guinea-Bissau (2011); Liberia (2018, by one-year executive order); Kenya (2001, 2011); Malawi (2000); Mauritania (2005); Mozambique (2014); Niger (2003); Nigeria (2015); Senegal (1999); Sierra Leone (2007); Somalia (2001)*; South Africa (2005); Sudan (2020); South Sudan (2008); Tanzania (1998); Togo (1998); Uganda (2010); Zambia (2005, 2011); Zimbabwe (2006). *Somalia’s Constitution expressly states that the “circumcision of girls is prohibited”. However, there is no national legislation that expressly implements this Constitutional provision, and there are no known instances where FGM offences have been prosecuted under general criminal provisions. The FGM Bill has been stuck in the legislative process for several years.

In Australia, six out of eight states enacted FGM laws between 1994 and 2006. FGM is now illegal in all of Australia’s eight states, which includes legislation that makes it illegal to perform the procedure on an Australian overseas. Penalties differ largely among states, for example, under Section 33A of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (South Australia), FGM is a crime. It is not a defence that the person who has been mutilated consented to the procedure. Nor is it a defence that the person’s parent or guardian consented to the procedure. Maximum penalty: 7 years imprisonment.

Under Section 33B of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA), a person must not take a child from the State, or arrange for a child to be taken from the State, with the intention of having her subjected to genital mutilation. It will be presumed (in the absence of proof to the contrary) that the offence of taking a child out of the State for the purpose of subjecting her to genital mutilation has been committed if the child was taken out of the State and while out of the State was subjected to genital mutilation. Maximum penalty: 7 years imprisonment.

In the United States the U.S. government opposes FGM/C, no matter the type, degree, or severity, or the motivation for performing it, whether for cultural, religious or other reasons. The U.S. government considers FGM/C to be a human rights abuse, and a form of gender-based violence and child abuse. It is against U.S. law to perform, attempt to perform, or conspire to perform FGM/C on a girl under the age of 18, or to send her outside the United States for the purpose of FGM/C. It is also against the law for a parent, guardian or caretaker to facilitate or to consent to FGM/C.

Violation of the law is punishable by up to 10 years in prison, fines or both. There is no exception for performing FGM/C because of religion, custom, ritual, tradition or standard practice. Additionally, 41 states have laws criminalising FGM/C, and FGM/C constitutes a form of child abuse, which is prohibited in every state. Violating the laws against FGM/C, even without a criminal conviction, may have significant immigration consequences, including making a person inadmissible to or removable from the United States, as well as ineligible for some immigration benefits. 

Since 1997, Canada has banned FGM as aggravated assault under Section 268 of the Canadian Criminal Code. In adopting this law, the Canadian Parliament framed FGM as a grave form of violence against women and children. Section 268 establishes that aggravated assault covers acts that wound, maim, disfigure, or endanger a person’s life fall and specifies that excision, infibulation or mutilation, in whole or in part, of the labia majora, labia minora or clitoris of a person constitute ‘wounding’ or ‘maiming’. However, as of 2023, Canada has not prosecuted a single case under its anti-FGM laws. 

In Europe, FGM is a crime in all EU Member States. In many EU countries it is also possible to prosecute for conducting FGM abroad, following the principle of extra-territoriality. This prevents families from taking their daughters to their country of origin to have them mutilated there. The criminalisation of FGM is also required under the Istanbul Convention, and its victims therefore also fall under the scope of the Convention’s prevention, support and protection measures, in those Member States that have ratified the Convention (the criminalisation of FGM is a Member State competence).

In the UK, FGM is a criminal offence. The government’s commitment to ending FGM is embedded in the cross-Government Ending Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG) Strategy: 2016 to 2020 and has been carried forward to the most recent publication Tackling Violence Against Women & Girls published July 2021. The strategy is underpinned by effective partnership working at both a local and national level. The UK government has signed and ratified the United Nations call to all states to prevent and respond to violence against women: The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).

The Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 was amended by Sections 70-75, Serious Crime Act 2015, which extended the FGM Act 2003 protection to include:

• UK habitual residents
• Mandatory reporting (for teachers, social workers and health professionals)
• Introduction of FGM Protection Orders and lifelong anonymity for survivor

Penalties include:

• Maximum penalty: 14 years in prison
• Failure to protect a girl: (parental responsibility) 7 years in prison
• Breach of FGM Protection Order: 5 years in prison

According to UNICEF, girls are one-third less likely to be subjected to FGM today than 30 years ago. However, rapid population growth in some of the world’s poorest countries, where FGM persists, threatens to roll back progress. At the system level, legislation accompanied by political will, in combination with additional interventions such as sensitisation and locally appropriate enforcement mechanisms, are promising practices for reducing FGM. However, law and legal enforcement take a long time to produce results. 

In the UK, hospital and GP attendances about FGM in England have risen by 15%, according to NHS figures, prompting a call for greater protection for girls. There were 14,355 attendances about FGM in the 2023–2024 financial year, according to NHS Digital statistics, compared with 12,475 the previous year. This may indicate that the current penalties are not acting as a deterrent, as there are few successful prosecutions. In 2023, a woman was found guilty of handing over a three-year-old British girl for FGM during a trip to Kenya, in the first conviction of its kind. Campaigners said the verdict showed that the introduction in 2015 of mandatory reporting of suspected FGM was working.

Challenges in Legal Enforcement

There are serious challenges to the implementation and enforcement of FGM laws throughout the world. Some of these challenges are systemic; for example, there are often few police or other government officials in remote rural areas in countries where FGM is most prevalent, and those who are in these areas may have limited knowledge or understanding of the law. There are also cultural challenges and conflicts of interest where police and local political and community leaders continue to support the practice, for reasons of ‘tradition’, status and/or financial gain.

Ultimately, while governments are the decision-makers and can lead the way by introducing appropriate policies and legislation, they must be backed up by detailed and appropriate strategies that ensure full implementation and enforcement of the law. It is also critical that legislative frameworks are implemented alongside programming that addresses social norms. Where legal norms are in strong contradiction of social norms, this can drive the practice of FGM/C underground, with cutting occurring at younger ages and in secret.

When legal norms are aligned with social norms, or at least with a readiness to change social norms, they can support reductions in the practice. For the law to be effective, it has to be implemented by the government, be respected by the citizens, and applied by the judicial bodies.

Just recently (March 2024), in Gambia’s National Assembly, the male-dominated Assembly, where women have only 8.6 per cent of seats, overwhelmingly voted to repeal a ban on FGM. The pushback against women’s rights diverts badly needed attention, resources and services, including healthcare, reconstructive surgeries and psychological care, away from survivors. The concern is that other male-dominated administrations may also follow suit, making the eradication of the practice much more difficult to achieve.

In many countries in conflict the prevalence of FGM often intensifies, exacerbated by factors such as displacement, poverty and breakdown of social systems. Recently, the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs in Ethiopia backed medicalised FGM, where a healthcare professional carries out the cutting, contradicting national laws.

The United Nations (UN) has played an important role in establishing and disseminating global norms condemning FGM as a fundamental violation of human rights. However, where FGM is a social convention (social norm), the social pressure to conform to what others do and have been doing, as well as the need to be accepted socially and the fear of being rejected by the community, are strong motivations to perpetuate the practice. Ending the practice will take intensive and sustained collaboration from all parts of society, including families and communities, religious and other leaders, the media, governments and the international community.

Case Studies and Examples

The British government has generally adopted a tough pro-prosecution stance on FGM, but has prosecuted a relatively small number of cases. Those prosecutions that have occurred have targeted non-Western genital modification practices. 

The first prosecution under UK law was brought in 2015 against a physician who, while attending the labour and delivery of a woman who had previously been subjected to FGM in her home country of Somalia, sutured a vaginal incision that had been made to enable the women to deliver vaginally. The Crown Prosecution Service characterised this suturing as a form of re-infibulation prohibited by law. The case ended in acquittal. 

In 2019, the first successful prosecution under British anti-FGM laws occurred when a 37-year-old woman from Uganda was convicted for an alleged FGM procedure performed on her 3-year-old daughter. The woman and her Ghanaian partner claimed the child had fallen and cut her genitals on the edge of a kitchen cupboard. The woman was found guilty and sentenced to the maximum penalty of 14 years. 

In 2024, a former PhD student was found guilty of conspiring to commit FGM in what has been described as a ‘landmark case’. Emad Kaky arranged for a young girl to travel from the UK to Iraq, where she would have been subjected to FGM and also forced into marriage. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said the FGM conviction was the first of its kind in England and Wales. Kaky, who lived in Nottingham at the time of the offences, was found guilty at Nottingham Crown Court and sentenced to four and a half years’ imprisonment. 

The above are a small number of examples of prosecutions for FGM in the UK. Some of the issues of being able to bring successful prosecutions include:

• There are few complaints despite an estimated 65,000 girls aged 13 and under at risk of mutilation. Survivors are disempowered girls, with little or no voice, knowledge or social resources to make official complaints. Mutilated when young, these are often the children of those who organise the ceremony. They may be related to accomplices and be fearful of cutters who have status, authority or mystique in their communities. These children are confused, have conflicting loyalties and are scared of losing their parents. Children are unlikely to give evidence against parents or relatives for fear of losing their family or social group.
• Few or no witnesses are prepared to come forward. Typically these witnesses are family members who believe stopping the practice can damage a family’s economic and social prospects. Mutilations either happen overseas or, if in the UK, in private homes. Those relatives who might disapprove and report can face social ostracism and physical threats.
• Despite clear guidelines, many frontline professionals, including GPs, midwives, teachers, healthcare visitors and social workers, are not trained, do not understand the law or may harbour beliefs that FGM is someone else’s problem. They are uncertain about the significance of cultural or traditional values and concerned about accusations of racism. Some worry about patient confidentiality and their role in supporting socially isolated clients. Despite a legal duty to do so, hospitals report a mere 5-10% of FGM cases to the police or local authorities.

Best Practices and Recommendations

The enforcement of FGM legislation both in the UK and also worldwide, takes time. It requires general legal awareness-raising as well as the operationalisation of legal processes. Several challenges can occur during enforcement, such as legal loopholes, limited institutional capacity for enforcement, difficulties in reporting close family members, weak or absent social support systems if parents are incarcerated, a lack of community readiness to comply with the law as well as the practice performed secretly over fears of prosecution.

In Africa, Burkina Faso and Kenya have ‘mobile courts’ for public hearings that bring the legal process closer to communities and make court appearances easier. Burkina Faso’s implementation model is exemplary, linking 13 ministries, women’s rights and other non-governmental organisations, religious and community leaders, law enforcement officials and the judiciary.

UNFPA and UNICEF regional offices in South-East Asia have begun developing a regional initiative on FGM, “Breaking the Silence: Increasing Accountability on Addressing Female Genital Mutilation in South-East Asia”, that will be funded by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Government of Australia.

In the UK, one of the reasons why victims of FGM may be reluctant to come forward and report the crime is because of the risk of being identified as a victim of such a personal and sensitive crime. Giving victims the protection that lifelong anonymity affords is intended to encourage more victims to come forward to report this crime. Anonymity commences as soon as an allegation of FGM is made by the victim. This ensures that the victim is protected whatever the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.

In a case where victims and witnesses can also provide evidence of being subjected to FGM, it is important to ensure that they receive support. Police and prosecutors should recognise that these cases will often involve vulnerable victims who may have had little or no dealings with the criminal justice process. Victims of FGM can often retain a loyalty to their family/community and this may make them reluctant to support a prosecution.

Given that FGM is often carried out by a family who believes it is beneficial and in a girl or woman’s best interests, the victim may require support both during the prosecution and after the case has concluded. Victims of FGM are entitled to support under the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime (Victim’s Code). Police and prosecutors will comply with their responsibilities as set out in the Victim’s Code.

Conclusion

Female genital mutilation is still a very real issue in the world today, affecting the health and well-being of women and girls. As we have seen in this article, although numerous countries have enacted legislation to combat the practice, much of this legislation is ineffectual, resulting in very few prosecutions that can act as a deterrent to others. 

Activists say that to stamp out the practice, which is often rooted in cultural and religious beliefs, advocacy needs to be customised to each region where it is prevalent. The I-Rep Foundation is one such organisation educating women and girls in West Pokot County, Kenya. Founded by Domtila Chesang, who put aside her career as a teacher to champion the end of FGM in her community, the I-Rep Foundation works to educate girls about the harmful implications of FGM. Awareness-raising via the combined efforts of families, communities and governments, together with the promotion of health education programmes in demonstrating the complications derived from this practice, play a vital part in helping to eradicate FGM.

The UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme across 17 countries has been making significant progress towards the ending of FGM. 

Here in the UK, the government pledged £50 million in 2018 to end FGM by 2030. The money has been distributed to community programmes and grassroots campaigners in affected countries across Africa to support those working in women’s organisations and schools to end the harmful practice in their communities. In 2022, the UK government renewed its funding of support to the Africa-Led Movement (ALM) to end FGM/C. This five-year initiative aims to support and build the capacity of the ALM to end FGM by working in partnership with UN agencies, civil society organisations and women’s and girls’ movements.

For anyone who wants to know more about FGM, and would like to add their support to its eradication both in the UK and abroad, the following organisations can provide further information, advice and guidance:

• Daughters of Eve
• Action Aid
• The National FGM Centre
• NSPCC FGM Helpline
• The FGM/C Research Initiative
• The Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO) 
• Forward
• NHS Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) Clinic

If you suspect a person of carrying out FGM, or think someone you know has been a victim, or may be soon, there are various ways you can report it. 

Is someone in immediate danger? Is a crime taking place or has one just happened? If so, call 999 now and ask for the police.

If you’d like to report online, you can use the online crime reporting service which is secure and confidential. All reports made using this service are reviewed by the 24/7 contact centre within a few hours and someone will get back to you in a maximum of two days (although usually quicker).

If you’d prefer to speak to someone else before reporting it to the police, you can contact:

• The national FGM helpline on 0800 028 3550
• The NSPCC to speak to a professional practitioner
• The children’s social care team at your local council
• Crimestoppers confidentially and anonymously