|
|
|
|
| Last Updated: Sep 3, 2008 - 9:22:44 AM |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
ERITREA: Gov’t declares Female Circumcision illegal
6 Apr 6, 2007 - 7:13:34 PM
|
By Berhane M. Tekeste
On Wednesday, 4 April 6, 2007, the government in Eritrea issued a
proclamation
arbitrarily banning female
circumcision because "female circumcision is a procedure that seriously
endangers the health of women, cause them considerable pain and suffering
besides threatening their lives". Indeed, the method female circumcision
was being performed for many centuries is barbaric and should have been
arrested long ago.
That said, if that is all the reason for issuing this proclamation, here is
good news: In this day and age, female circumcision can and is being performed
safely, pain-free, aseptic, without suffering or threatening life in any health
center, and Eritrea has enough of them. But if the purpose of the proclamation
were to abolish female circumcision as a cultural heritage, regardless of how
it is performed, then the proclamation is totally off the mark. The government
has no right whatsoever to ban a cultural heritage.
In Eritrea, Female circumcision is a deeply rooted cultural heritage that is
not amenable to legislation but to the absolute will and consents of each and
every family. As the smallest unit of society, the family has the last word
over female or for that matter also male circumcision and all other cultural
heritages. No law can force people to abandon their cultural heritage because
they have the inalienable right to develop and preserve their cultural heritage
such as language, religion, music, dance, art etc, and pass it on to future
generation. For all purposes and intent, people are essentially what their
cultural heritage is.
As it is written, the proclamation appears to be directed towards abolishing
the procedure not the cultural heritage itself. The government or any group of medical
professional has every right to ban any barbaric/cruel method used to preserve
cultural heritage. But why would the government of Eritrea want to abolish a
cultural heritage that is practiced by, practically, the entirety of its
population?
Eritrea is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious society. Yet, female circumcision is
a cultural heritage practiced by all Eritreans. There is and never have been
any recorded and/or documented incident of an uproar, uprising, or opposition
against this particular cultural heritage in Eritrea? So why try to do away
with it?
The cultural heritage of any given society is characteristic of that society.
It doesn't have to be accepted or conform to the cultural heritage of other
society. Nor do others have any right to impose their cultural heritage upon
others?
Female circumcision as a cultural heritage is a matter for each and every
family to decide. Given access to safe, sanitary and pain-free methods, the
family should have the option to do it or not. No one but the family and only
the family has the right to preserve or to abandon its own cultural heritage.
If people are forced not to preserve their cultural heritage even under
sanitary conditions in their own homeland, then they will be forced to take
care of that somewhere else. And there are plenty of options for that.
Proclamation 158/2007 can ban only the method of female circumcision but has
neither reason nor standing to abolish female circumcision as a cultural
heritage.
Author can be contacted at
bmtekeste@yahoo.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
