State moves to amend anti-FGM law after shocking shift in prosecutions

A version of this article appeared on Nation.Africa.

The government has initiated steps to review the legislative framework governing the fight against female genital mutilation.

This decision follows growing criticism from civil society organizations regarding how law enforcement agencies handle these sensitive gender-based cases.

Human rights groups accuse Kenyan authorities of criminalising girls and women subjected to harmful practices.

Instead of focusing judicial resources on arresting the cutters and organizers, the legal machinery has frequently penalised the survivors.

Data shows that the individuals who undergo the cut face aggressive arrest tactics, while perpetrators manage to evade accountability.

Legal experts argue that the current application of the law creates double trauma for women.

They suffer the physical violence of the practice, and then they face the indignity of state-led criminal proceedings.

Activists note that police officers often round up everyone present at a suspected cutting ceremony.

This dragnet approach routinely catches young girls, who are then held in custody as suspects.

The Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act (PFGM) was enacted in 2011 to eliminate the practice.

However, its implementation has inadvertently turned the legal system against the exact populace it aimed to safeguard.

Charges like failure to report the procedure are frequently used against family members and victims.

Human rights lawyers have pointed out that forced medical examinations are sometimes used to gather evidence against these girls.

This practice has drawn severe condemnation from regional and international human rights watchdogs.

They emphasize that survivors require psychosocial support, not cell blocks and court dates.

The proposed amendments will seek to realign the justice system toward a victim-centered approach.

The legislative changes aim to clarify clauses that state prosecutors have used to justify punishing survivors.

Parliamentary committees are reviewing the statutory loopholes to ensure absolute immunity for victims who speak out.

The state wants to encourage more open reporting by removing the fear of legal retribution from vulnerable communities.

Without these critical changes, the law will continue to drive the practice further underground.

Medicalization of the cut is also rising as families look for discreet ways to bypass the existing statutory bans.

Amending the text remains a high priority for the ministry responsible for gender and social protection affairs.

By restructuring the penal provisions, the state intends to direct full punitive measures toward the criminal syndicates and traditional practitioners.

The push for reform highlights the delicate balance between penal deterrence and human rights protection in judicial enforcement.