In a landmark effort to combat violence against women, the European Union (EU) finds itself embroiled in a heated debate over the definition of rape. Negotiators from member states and lawmakers are currently engaged in intense discussions to finalize the first bloc-wide law aimed at protecting women from gender-based violence, forced marriages, female genital mutilation, and online harassment.
The crux of the disagreement lies in how to define rape within the legislation. The draft text proposes a definition based on the absence of explicit consent, a position supported by the European Parliament and several countries, including Belgium, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Sweden. However, a significant number of countries, including France, Germany, and Hungary, vehemently oppose incorporating a rape definition into the text, arguing that the EU lacks the competence to legislate on this matter.
International rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have criticized the opposing stance, emphasizing the benefits of consent-based definitions in ensuring greater protection and access to justice for victims of rape. They argue that such definitions have proven to increase reporting and prosecution rates, providing a stronger framework for combating rape across the EU.
The EU states opposing a common definition of rape argue that it lacks the necessary cross-border dimension to be considered a crime with common penalties across the bloc. However, the European Parliament and the European Commission strongly dispute this position, asserting that rape can fall under the category of “sexual exploitation of women,” for which there are already unified penalties.
The disagreement has led to finger-pointing among negotiators. Evin Incir, a Swedish parliament negotiator, squarely blamed French President Emmanuel Macron, German Justice Minister Marco Buschmann, and Hungarian Premier Viktor Orban for obstructing the inclusion of a consent-based definition. French lawmaker Nathalie Colin-Oesterle expressed disappointment, stating that the legislation had been reduced to “half a law”.
Berlin and Paris have expressed concerns that including a definition of rape in the legislation could lead to its potential overturning by an EU court following a legal challenge. This fear has further complicated the negotiations, as both countries believe that a more cautious approach is necessary to ensure the law’s effectiveness.
Despite the impasse, some officials view the legislation as a step forward, albeit not meeting the expectations of progressive groups. While the debate over the definition of rape continues, the law aims to address other forms of gender-based violence, forced marriages, female genital mutilation, and online harassment.
