It is indefensible that courts have lesser powers to protect girls at risk of FGM than those at risk of forced marriage, writes barrister David Maddison

In response to Dr Brenda Kelly’s letter (13 February) regarding her experience of courts making an interim supervision order, this could only be made if a local authority was already involved with the litigation. This misses the point of the bill that Sir Christopher Chope objected to.

I proposed this bill to Lord Berkeley because of an occasion in court where the police sought a female genital mutilation protection order. The local authority were not involved but the judge wanted to engage their protective powers for the girl.

Continue reading...

Powered by WPeMatico

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.