The French parliament has ratified an amendment to add consent to the legal definition of sexual assault and rape law. Previously, rape or sexual abuse in France had been defined as 'any form of sexual penetration committed with the use of violence, coercion, threat, or surprise'. Now, the law will state that all sexual acts done to another without consent constitute rape.
The change is the result of a cross-party, years-long debate that gained renewed urgency after last year's Pelicot rape trial, where 50 men were found guilty of raping Gisèle Pelicot while she had been drugged unconscious by her husband Dominique.
The defense of many of the accused hinged on the fact they could not be guilty of rape because they were unaware Ms Pelicot was not in a position to give her consent. Some defense lawyers had argued that there could be no crime without the intention to commit it.
The new bill will make this argument more tenuous, as it states that consent must be 'free and informed, specific, prior, and revocable.' The law now clarifies that consent will have to be evaluated according to the circumstances, stressing that it cannot be inferred from 'silence or lack of reaction.' The amendment further stipulates: 'There is no consent if the sexual act is committed through violence, coercion, threat, or surprise, whatever their nature.'
MPs who drafted the amendment hailed it as a 'historic victory' for the fight against sexual violence. However, critics have expressed concerns that the law may lead to victims needing to prove their lack of consent. Nonetheless, France's highest administrative court supports the amendment, asserting it will protect personal and sexual freedoms.
Initially adopted by the National Assembly in April, the progression of the law was delayed by political turmoil. It has now seen final approval, positioning France alongside several other European nations that have implemented consent-based rape laws.
The change is the result of a cross-party, years-long debate that gained renewed urgency after last year's Pelicot rape trial, where 50 men were found guilty of raping Gisèle Pelicot while she had been drugged unconscious by her husband Dominique.
The defense of many of the accused hinged on the fact they could not be guilty of rape because they were unaware Ms Pelicot was not in a position to give her consent. Some defense lawyers had argued that there could be no crime without the intention to commit it.
The new bill will make this argument more tenuous, as it states that consent must be 'free and informed, specific, prior, and revocable.' The law now clarifies that consent will have to be evaluated according to the circumstances, stressing that it cannot be inferred from 'silence or lack of reaction.' The amendment further stipulates: 'There is no consent if the sexual act is committed through violence, coercion, threat, or surprise, whatever their nature.'
MPs who drafted the amendment hailed it as a 'historic victory' for the fight against sexual violence. However, critics have expressed concerns that the law may lead to victims needing to prove their lack of consent. Nonetheless, France's highest administrative court supports the amendment, asserting it will protect personal and sexual freedoms.
Initially adopted by the National Assembly in April, the progression of the law was delayed by political turmoil. It has now seen final approval, positioning France alongside several other European nations that have implemented consent-based rape laws.
