Tragedy As A Catalyst For Law Reform

Gisele Pelicot's public fight against her decade-long drugged assault reveals gaps in French rape laws, sparking calls to redefine rape to include explicit consent, aiming for stronger legal protections.

Tragedy As A Catalyst For Law Reform

Daily, thousands of rape cases are reported against women around the globe. Unfortunately, the number of unreported cases is also high. The French mass rape case is one of them, but the crime is unusual in nature, as the police first approached the victim with evidence about the offense committed against her. Gisele Pelicot, who was subjected to rape for a whole decade of which she was unaware, brought the case to light when she courageously requested the Court of Justice to let her case be heard publicly and waived her right to anonymity. She emerged as a symbol of courage and resilience. She says, "I want all women who have been raped to say: Madam Pelicot did it, I can too. I don't want them to be ashamed any longer."

The case states that a 71-year-old French woman, Gisele Pelicot, was raped by her ex-husband, Dominique Pelicot. He used to drug her through her meals or sweets; as soon as she passed out, Dominique would let other men rape her, whom he called through an online connection. Currently, 51 defendants are on trial in the Vaucluse criminal court in Avignon, France. It is a sorrowful reality that criminals often encounter fewer challenges than victims in their quest for justice. Legal technicalities should not obstruct the rights of citizens; rather, the law should be accessible and straightforward for the common person. In the interpretation and scope of law, definitions play a vital role. The clearer the law is, the fewer complexities arise, making the pursuit of justice more transparent.

It has been observed in the past that countries do not amend their laws until a “heinous” crime is committed and surfaces enough to cause havoc in society. There are several examples of such incidents where legislative assemblies amended their laws only after the commission of crimes of a heinous nature

The Istanbul Convention 2011 defines rape as “all forms of sexual acts which are performed on another person without her or his freely given consent and which are carried out intentionally.” Including the European Union, the convention was signed and ratified by more than 70 countries. But still, in many countries, the definition is vague, which prevents many cases from being prosecuted. French criminal law defines rape as “any act of sexual penetration, of any nature whatsoever, committed against another person by violence, constraint, threat, or surprise rape.” The proposal to add the word ‘consent’ in the rape definition of French Criminal Law has been debated a few times, including in the upper house of parliament last November and the lower house in February.

It has been observed in the past that countries do not amend their laws until a “heinous” crime is committed and surfaces enough to cause havoc in society. There are several examples of such incidents where legislative assemblies amended their laws only after the commission of crimes of a heinous nature. Many amendments happened after strong public reactions, reflecting society’s urgent demand for justice and accountability. This reactive stance often undermines the legal system’s credibility and effectiveness. However, to eliminate crime, a preventive approach must be equally emphasised.

For instance, in Pakistan, several rape cases of a similar nature had been reported previously, but the Zainab rape and murder case surfaced as particularly heinous in the eyes of the public and lawmakers, leading to the creation of the “Zainab Alert, Response, and Recovery Act (2020).” Likewise, the murder of Adam Walsh in the United States led to the “Missing Children’s Assistance Act (1984).” In the United Kingdom, the tragedy of Dunblane Primary School in Scotland led to the “Firearms (Amendment) Acts (1997).”

Pelicot's husband specifically confessed that he committed the crime of rape. However, more than 30 are claiming and arguing in court that they ‘presumed’ Pelicot had consented to the ‘alleged rape’ by her husband. They claim they were unaware and were tricked by her husband. Following public outrage and protests, the French Minister of Justice, Didier Migaud, has voiced the need to amend rape laws of France and add the term ‘consent,’ otherwise, this could give perpetrators a gateway to evade punishment for which they are liable.

The offense against Gisele Pelicot is one of the most tragic sexual offenses committed against a woman in the history of crimes, which, despite being condemned to the fullest, would always remain insufficient. If the nooses of the law could have been tightened earlier, such tragedies could have been prevented. Lawmakers should not wait for crimes to be committed to amend the laws. Initiating preventive measures within legal language may curb such crimes more effectively than solely increasing punishments. This will lead perpetrators to think that the law will hold them accountable and will not provide an easy way out.