| HRS - Forsiden | Om rights.no | Om HRS | Kontakt HRS | Bli HRS - venn i dag ! | In English | Lenker | Anbefalt litteratur | Nettstedskart |
Her er du: HRS - Forsiden > In English > Human Visas > Afterword

VIKTIGE SØKEOPPLYSNINGER!
Søk i rights.no

“Dialogue with the female imams”

Yet though these policy changes are highly positive, the Norwegian government has chosen to respond to them by depicting Denmark as, essentially, a racist country. Misleading, and in some cases utterly incorrect, claims have been made about both the content and the consequences of the Danish initiatives. Recently Norway’s first (and so far its only) member of Parliament with an immigrant background told the Norwegian media that one result of the Danish 24-year rule is that girls are moving to and being married off in their families’ homelands, the plan being for them to live there until they are 24, at which time they may return to Denmark with their spouses. Anyone familiar with the specifics of the Danish policy knows that such a scenario is inconsistent with the connection requirement.

One of Norway’s most talented cabinet ministers has made an equally inaccurate claim: namely, that the connection requirement has compelled immigrants in Denmark to marry spouses younger than themselves. In our view, such misinformation – and disinformation – is merely further evidence that the facts about immigration and integration are not being communicated very well, either domestically or internationally.

Linda Weil-Curiel Foto: HRSThe issue of female genital mutilation demonstrates just how haphazard and irresponsible European immigration policy is. There can hardly be a more serious and destructive crime than female genital mutilation, which is, moreover, generally carried out on defenseless children. That such operations are performed in Europe today has been known for at least 20 years. Yet not a single European country has implemented a complete, coordinated policy to protect the victims of this practice. This failure seems more than accidental. Perhaps the most sensational fact is that in all of Europe , it is only in France that cases of genital mutilation are prosecuted. Several other European countries have sizable minorities from regions where mutilation is traditionally practiced; but none of them prosecute offenders. There is no good reason why this should be the case. It is significant, we think, that it is not France ’s political leaders who have taken on the problem of genital mutilation but rather a couple of motivated individuals: the doctor Emanulle Piet and the lawyer Linda Weil-Curiel. Thanks to these two women, little girls’ risk of being genitally mutilated – in at least one part of France , anyway – has been drastically reduced. The recipe for this prevention is simple, obvious, and effective: medical exams of children and trials for adults who are discovered to have mutilated them. We cannot see why such a policy should not be introduced throughout Europe . The continent is not what it once was: everyone now knows that genital mutilation is a fact. Yet health authorities, ignoring the reality not only of mutilation but of child sexual abuse, still cling to outdated medical models centered on vaccination.

The basic question is this: why are countries refusing to introduce those routines that are necessary to ensure Emanuelle Piet Foto: HRSchildren’s right to health – and their protection from brutal traditions? Again, we believe the answer is an anxious reluctance to address such matters. Political leaders are more concerned about being accused – unfairly – of discrimination or racism than they are about protecting their citizens’ rights. This refusal to take action doubtless also reflects the still-discriminatory attitudes in the West toward women’s sexual organs and sexuality. The extent of genital mutilation continues to be debated: politicians, bureaucrats, and immigrant leaders deny that it is widespread, but instead of presenting facts they offer sentences beginning “it is believed” or “it is felt.” Our answer is: How will we ever be able to get an overview of how many are affected as long as the matter is not investigated? We have had several conversations about this problem with Norwegian politicians from various parties who support the idea of nationwide medical exams of the kind we have described. It is to be hoped that Norway will become the first country in the world to introduce such exams. We know mutilation still goes on; it can be stopped if all European countries follow the same path.

The Norwegian government demonstrated an impressive ability to take meaningful action when it changed the marriage laws in the early summer of 2003 to ensure that Muslim women in Norway could obtain Muslin divorces. This was a problem with which many people had been familiar for years, but to which no one could find a solution. Our proposal was simple and effective, though it has also, inevitably, drawn flak. The criticism has come mostly from the Catholic Church, which refuses to accept the idea of both spouses in a marriage having the right to divorce. We cannot take this objection very seriously, since Catholic Norwegians, after all, must live under Norwegian law, which gives all persons the right to divorce. Our most recent conversation with Bertel Haarder , the Danish integration minister, strengthened our confidence that Denmark will follow in Norway ’s footsteps in this regard. We have noted, however, that the political leaders of other countries seem more or less unaware of this issue – another sign that information-sharing across national borders has been poor (and, when it has taken place, has been random or accidental). Yet the reactions to the first edition of this book have indicated that both the Finnish and Dutch governments are now aware of the divorce problem and are studying proposals for solutions.

© Human Rights Service

Human Rights Service (HRS) Møllergata 9, 0179 Oslo - Norge Tlf: (047) 22 33 80 00 [email protected] © HRS 2002 - 2005