https://StopIGM.org – Welcome to the new blog!

Thank you to everybody who helped making this new blog possible! (Photo: do_action Zurich)

STOP Intersex Genital Mutilation!Zwischengeschlecht.org on FacebookPlease update your bookmarks: After nearly a decade of intersex news, debate and action on our old blog at http://stop.genitalmutilation.org, now the entire content has been moved to this new blog in a more mobile-friendly format, https://StopIGM.org. Many thanks to the do_action Zurich team for setting it up!

Should you find something missing or not working, please drop us a line here. The old blog will no longer be updated, but will still remain online for a limited time – thereafter it will automatically redirect to the new blog. However, the entire old blog will remain archived at archive.org.

So watch this space for future updates – despite the ongoing Covid19 hiatus, recently there have been some exciting developments for intersex human rights at the UN in Geneva …

CCPR128 > Portugal Questioned About Intersex Genital Mutilation – Gov Answers on “Female Genital Mutilation” and “Health Care”


CCPR 128th Session @ Palais Wilson, Geneva 05.03.2020, 09:56h: Getting ready …
Right row, 2nd from left: Ms. Hélène Tigroudja who asked about IGM.

StopIGM.org on FacebookIGM = Torture, NOT 'Discrimination' or 'Gender Identity'This week, the UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) as the Treaty body monitoring the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) is examining the human rights record of Portugal during its 128th Session in Geneva, transmitted LIVE on webtv.un.org and now archived at webtv.un.org: Session 1 | Session 2

A thematic intersex NGO report (PDF, 609 kb) and an Oral NGO Statement (PDF) byStopIGM.org prove that IGM continues in Portugal with impunity – despite that Portugal claims a new Law No. 38/2018 “on gender identity” would prohibit and prevent involuntary, unnecessary surgery on intersex children, and despite a previous reprimand by CRC.

StopIGM.org ireported LIVE from Geneva, hoping the Committee will ask tough questions on IGM practices in Portugal!

Session 1, Thu 5 March 2020, 15-18h CET

CCPR128-Portugal-05-03-2020_Tigroudja-1_x15:55h (Video @ 0:54:57): YAY!! Committee expert Ms. Hélène Tigroudja raises “genital mutilation” of intersex children! Notes progress in establishing Law No. 38/2018, asks about shortcomings, namely lack of criminalisation and access to justice! :-) Unofficial Translation (from original French):

“Still on the issue of discrimination, I come to a category of people that has not yet been mentioned, namely LGBT and intersex people. So I very much appreciate the answer provided in the state report, which shows that the legislation has changed a great deal in 2018 and is rightly presented, it seems to me, as one of the most protective in the world and one of the best in the world in terms of the situation of people, particularly intersex people.

However, NGOs working on this issue and associations of intersex people continue to deplore certain shortcomings or deficiencies in the law, and in particular I will give you some of them on which I would like to have the delegation’s reaction, in particular the fact that the law does not criminalise genital mutilation, the law does not guarantee access for victims, and we have just mentioned access to courts, effective access to courts, but above all access to reparation, so what are your feelings on this reform that has been carried out, perhaps the improvements that could be made to this law of 2018?”

CCPR128-Portugal-05-03-2020_Marques-117:33 (Video @ 2:32:39): Delegation member Ms. Andreia Marques (Commission for Citizenship and Gender Equality) non-answers on IGM, claims no surgery “until gender identity is made manifest”, changes subject to “health care” and “trans and intersex health”:-( Unofficial Transcript (of UN simultaneous translation from original Portuguese):

“I’m basically going to be answering the questions from Madame Tigroudja. The first has to do with intersex people in Portugal and the implementation of this new law from 2018. In art. 5 of that law, art. 5 says, that apart from a risk for the individual, these surgical interventions, pharmacological and other interventions, which involve any changes to the body and the sexual characteristics of the intersex individual and also as a minor cannot be carried out until their gender identity is made manifest.

Portugal would like to say that the national health service some intersex interventions have deemed to be genital mutilation in 2019 and submitted in June last year we had the first health strategy for lesbian, gay, bisexual individuals, trans and intersex individuals drawn up by the director general for health with a great deal of corporation from 7 associations which in that support LGBTI persons and individuals, this strategy devoted its first volume to promote trans and intersex health. I don’t know if I’d answered your question.” 

CCPR128-Portugal-05-03-2020_Tiguodja-follow-up-117:58h (Video @ 2:57:37): YAY!! Committee expert Ms. Hélène Tigroudja follows-up on IGM, again asks about criminalisation of IGM. :-) Unofficial Translation (from original French):

“The second question relates to intersex health, so again, the legal framework has obviously evolved in a very positive direction, but my question is this: is there a criminalisation, for example, of genital mutilation that can be practised on intersex children?” 

Session 2, Fr 6 March 2020, 10-13h CET

CCPR128-Portugal-06-03-2020_Tainhas

10:05 (Video @ 0:03:14): Delegation member Mr. Fernando Tainhas (Ministry of Justice, Adviser to the Minister) answers on “female genital mutilation” on “intersex minors”, claims surgery is prohibited” unless there is a risk to the health of the individual”, but admits no criminalisation in “gender identity law”, refers to anti-FGM legislation Art. 144 2(b) of the Portuguese Criminal Code:-( Unofficial Transcript (of UN simultaneous translation from original Portuguese):

“Miss Tigroudja asked a very pertinent question whether or not Portuguese law foresees the criminalisation of female genital mutilation when it comes to intersex minors. There is not a specific rule on that subject but behaviour of that nature is considered as a serious attack on physical integrity, art. 144 2(b). The gender identity law was amended in 2018, it doesn’t specifically criminalise such behaviour … [translator interrupts to ask to speak directly into the microphone]. So, in 2018 the gender identity act was amended, but it did not specifically criminalise that kind of behaviour, but it did prohibit operations except in cases where there is a risk to the health of the individual. So, it’s criminalised under art. 144 2(b) of the Criminal Code.”

Let’s hope the Committee will issue strong binding recommendations, sternly reminding Portugal of its non-derogable obligations under CCPR to effectively prevent genital mutilation of intersex children!

See also:
‘Only the Fear of the Judge Will Make IGM Perpetrators Change’
“Harmful Medical Practice”: UN, COE, ACHPR, IACHR condem IGM
49 UN Reprimands for IGM – and counting …
UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC): IGM = Harmful Practice + Violence
UN Committee against Torture (CAT): IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
UN Women’s Rights Committee (CEDAW): IGM = Harmful Practice
UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD): Violation of Integrity
UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) condemns IGM Practices

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Eliminating IGM practices by holding the perpetrators accountable via well-established applicable human rights frameworks, including Inhuman Treatment and Harmful Practices – Presentation @ UN expert meeting on Intersex Human Rights
>>> Download PDF (831kb)

Genital mutilation: German draft law fails intersex children

[ Deutsch ]


Photo: Intersex Protest vs. German medial societies + D$D guidelines , Leipzig 08.11.2014

IGM = CRIME, Not 'Health Care' or 'Therapy'!StopIGM.org on FacebookA Draft of a law for the protection of children from sex-modifying surgical interventions” (PDF, in german) published by the German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV) claims to protect intersex children from non-consensual and unnecessary genital surgery. However, the Draft law contains fatal shortcomings and loopholes due to unqualified and harmful legal misconceptions of applicable human rights standards, and in fact proposes to explicitly legalise most IGM practices:

Opinion by Zwischengeschlecht.org on the BMJV Draft Law

>>> Full opinion (in german): PDF | DOCX

Summary

The Intersex-NGO Zwischengeschlecht.org welcomes that the Federal Government, after many years of promises and expert meetings with no consequences, now finally wishes to effectively protect intersex children from unnecessary genital surgery, and that the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (BMJV), referring to the demands of persons concerned and their organisations, as well as to constitutional and human rights, is putting forward a draft bill for discussion. Unfortunately, however, the BMJV draft massively disregards and misinterprets the demands of the persons concerned and their constitutional and human rights, which is why it must be rejected in its present form for the purpose of rectification.

In particular, we criticise that the draft bill

  1. wants to protect intersex children only partially and to a limited extent from non-consensual, unnecessary and harmful interventions, and in turn wants to explicitly allow, among other things, the most frequent unnecessary interventions (p. 2-3)
  2. by making a pseudo-distinction between “sex-aligning” and “sex-altering” interventions, inadmissibly focuses on the perception of the fallible medical practitioners instead of on the consequences for the person concerned and their non-derogable constitutional and human rights (p. 4)
  3. only selectively and incompletely acknowledges relevant constitutional and human rights and UN recommendations, inter alia by focusing one-sidedly on an (unsubstantiated) “right of the child to sexual self-determination”, while completely disregarding the crucial non-derogable human rights to protection against inhuman treatment, harmful practices, etc. (p. 4-7)
  4. disregards minimum requirements for effective protection against serious violations of non-derogable human rights of intersex children, inter alia, ending impunity by criminalising or adequately sanctioning them, ensuring access to justice for victims, inter alia, by adapting the statutes of limitations, the right to compensation, reparation and rehabilitation (p. 7)
  5. one-sidedly focuses on degrading, stigmatising and pathologising medical views and expertise, while continuing to ignore psychosocial, human rights and experiential expertise and support (p. 8)

>>> Full opinion (in german): PDF | DOCX

See also:
‘Only the Fear of the Judge Will Make IGM Perpetrators Change’
“Harmful Medical Practice”: UN, COE, ACHPR, IACHR condem IGM
49 UN Reprimands for IGM – and counting …
UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC): IGM = Harmful Practice + Violence
UN Committee against Torture (CAT): IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
UN Women’s Rights Committee (CEDAW): IGM = Harmful Practice
UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD): Violation of Integrity
UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) condemns IGM Practices

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Eliminating IGM practices by holding the perpetrators accountable via well-established applicable human rights frameworks, including Inhuman Treatment and Harmful Practices – Presentation @ UN expert meeting on Intersex Human Rights
>>> Download PDF (831kb)

UN-CRC reprimands Austria for Intersex Genital Mutilation

[ Deutsch ]


Photo: Markus Bauer and Daniela Truffer (StopIGM.org) with the thematic intersex NGO reports on Austria
at the 83rd CRC Session, Palais Wilson, Geneva 31.01.2020

StopIGM.org on FacebookPress Release by StopIGM.org, 15.02.2020:

During its 83rd Session in Geneva, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) examined the human rights record of Austria. Based on NGO reports by StopIGM.org, the Committee specifically questioned Austria on “intersex genital mutilation”. Austria on the one hand denied the practice, but on the other defiantly insisted on continuing with IGM, i.e. when “until the end of the second year of life at the latest,” an unnecessary “surgical modification is carried out on the basis of an expert opinion” and “with the consent of the parents”.

As a result, CRC has now reprimanded Austria for IGM practices, specifically obliging Austria to “[p]rohibit the performance” of IGM and to collect data on IGM to better protect intersex children at risk, condemning IGM as a harmful practice (just like FGM) according to CRC art. 24(3) in conjunction with the CRC-CEDAW Joint General Comment No. 18/31 on harmful practices, and further referring to a previous UN reprimand to Austria by the UN Committee against Torture (CAT) in turn condemning IGM as a cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment falling under the absolute prohibition of torture, and additionally obliging Austria to “ensure” that IGM survivors “are adequately compensated.”

StopIGM.org welcomes this clear verdict, marking
• already the 2nd reprimand for IGM to Austria,
• the 22nd UN reprimand for IGM to a EU27 country,
• the 17th reprimand for IGM by CRC,
• now 49 UN reprimands condemning IGM as
a serious violation of non-derogable human rights!

Daniela Truffer (StopIGM.org):

«Austria has a serious problem with its outrageous abuse of intersex children. The fault lies not only with those who personally perform the mutilations, and those who directly finance and brazenly justify them like the Austrian government in Geneva, but also with all those who still trivialise and downgrade intersex genital mutilation to a “gender” or “health care” issue, thus enabling the former to continue with impunity.»

After the break: The full CRC Concluding Observations on intersex and IGM, the NGO reports that prompted CRC’s investigation, and videos and transcripts of Austria’s denials and excuses during the 83rd CRC Session.

Read moreUN-CRC reprimands Austria for Intersex Genital Mutilation

Intersex rights: ILGA-Europe 2020 Report mostly misses the mark

IGM = CRIME, Not 'Health Care' or 'Therapy'!Last week, ILGA-Europe published its “Annual Review 2020 of the Human Rights Situation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex People in Europe and Central Asia” (PDF), “covering events that occurred between January-December 2019”. Concerning intersex human rights, while the Review finally acknowledges the shortcomings of one country previously praised to the skies, in other instances crucial human rights developments were omitted, and actually harmful developments lauded as “progress” instead.

In particular, the Review 2020 has to be commended for finally acknowledging the shortcomings of the ILGA-sponsered Maltese intersex law, which has also been criticised by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in its 2019 State review of Malta, and for further acknowledging that intersex genital mutilation (IGM) continues in Malta despite the law (p. 74):

BODILY INTEGRITY
On 26 June, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child recommended Malta to protect intersex children from all non-consensual and unnecessary medical or surgical procedures, which continue to be practiced despite the ban. Civil society warned that sanctions for these harmful practices were only introduced in 2018, three years after the law was adopted, and that they are much lighter than in the case of female genital mutilation. The CRC also called for support for families and their intersex children and redress for victims.”

However, ILGA-Europe’s Review 2020 entirely missed the following UN Concluding Observations crucial for intersex rights and to effectively combat IGM practices, namely:

  • CRC Portugal: CRC/C/PRT/CO/5-6, para 28 (b), more info
  • CCPR Belgium: CCPR/C/BEL/CO/6, paras 21-22, more info
  • CAT UK: CAT/C/GBR/CO/6, paras 64-65, more info

In addition, regarding intersex and IGM practices, the ILGA-Europe Review 2020 once more repeatedly lacks the necessary distinction between actually helpful Concluding Observations recognising IGM as a serious violation of non-derogable human rights, namely harmful practices, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment falling under the absolute prohibition of torture, and non-consensual medical or scientific experimentation (e.g. CRC art. 24(3), CEDAW art. 5, CCPR art. 7, CAT art. 16) vs. actually harmful recommendations downgrading IGM to a “health care” issue, which in fact reassert medical authority and support IGM doctors in continuing with impunity, namely the 2019 CEDAW recommendations to Austria and the UK under CEDAW art. 10 “health” wrongly praised in the Review.

Such lack of distinction and failure to adequately recognise the minimal legal requirements for effective protections against IGM practices constituting serious violations of non-derogable human rights is also exactly why the laws in Malta, Portugal, Spain, Argentina, etc. ultimately fail intersex children and therefore are called out by UN Treaty bodies …

What’s worse, these omissions and failures are NOT a one-off, but were also evident in other recent reports authored by senior ILGA members, e.g. the October 2019 “UNFE Background Note on Human Rights Violations against Intersex People”.

ILGA-Europe has been approached for comments.

>>> Intersex human rights at the UN are under attack!!!

>>> Open Letter of Concern about Maltese and Portuguese laws

See also:
‘Only the Fear of the Judge Will Make IGM Perpetrators Change’
“Harmful Medical Practice”: UN, COE, ACHPR, IACHR condem IGM
48 UN Reprimands for IGM – and counting …
UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC): IGM = Harmful Practice + Violence
UN Committee against Torture (CAT): IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
UN Women’s Rights Committee (CEDAW): IGM = Harmful Practice
UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD): Violation of Integrity
UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) condemns IGM Practices

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Eliminating IGM practices by holding the perpetrators accountable via well-established applicable human rights frameworks, including Inhuman Treatment and Harmful Practices – Presentation @ UN expert meeting on Intersex Human Rights
>>> Download PDF (831kb)

PRESS RELEASE: UN Child Rights Committee: Austria insists on intersex genital mutilation!

StopIGM.org on FacebookPress Release by StopIGM.org, 02.02.2020:

Last week the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) reviewed Austria’s human rights record during its 83rd session in Geneva. >>> more info

Based on shadow reports of the intersex NGO StopIGM.org/Zwischengeschlecht.org, the Committee questioned Austria on intersex genital mutilation (IGM), considering it a harmful cultural practice (Art. 24(3) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which also includes FGM). Further, the Committee referred to the earlier UN reprimand to Austria by the Committee against Torture (CAT), considering IGM as a cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment falling under the absolute prohibition of torture.

The reply of the Austrian delegation on behalf of the Ministry of Health was two-faced:

On the one hand, it implied that IGM was allegedly no longer practised in the new intersex “care centres”.

On the other hand, Austria defiantly insisted on continuing with intersex genital mutilation, i.e. when “until the end of the second year of life at the latest,” an unnecessary “surgical modification is carried out on the basis of an expert opinion” and “with the consent of the parents”.

>>> Videolink + full transcript on the blog

Effective protection would look different! Hopefully the Committee will make clear, binding recommendations to Austria to effectively protect intersex children from genital mutilation and harmful practices in the future!

StopIGM.org demands the prohibition under criminal law of forced genital surgeries on children and adolescents with variations of reproductive anatomy and “Human Rights for Hermaphrodites too!”

Persons concerned shall later decide for themselves, if they want surgeries or not, and if yes, which ones. The statute of limitation must be adapted in such a way that adult IGM survivors can sue.

Kind regards

Daniela “Nella” Truffer, Markus Bauer
Founding members human rights NGO StopIGM.org / Zwischengeschlecht.org

CRC83 > Austria questioned about Intersex Genital Mutilation by UN – Gov admits to early IGM based on expert opinion and parental consent

[ Deutsch ]


CRC 83rd Session @ Palais Wilson, Geneva 31.01.2020, 09:58h: Getting ready …
Bottom right: CRC Vice Chairperson Mr Gehad Madi who raised IGM.

StopIGM.org on FacebookThis week, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is examining the human rights record of Austria during its 83rd Session in Geneva, transmitted live and now archived at webtv.un.org: Session 1 | Session 2 

A thematic intersex NGO report (PDF) plus an update for the Session (PDF) by StopIGM.org document how Austria continues to promote and facilitate IGM practices, despite a previous UN reprimand, and unsubstantiated assertions of progress by the Austrian Government.

The question on IGM was also mentioned in the UN Press Release (english), and additionally the non-answer in the UN Press Release (french).

StopIGM.org was reporting LIVE from Geneva, hoping the Committee will ask tough questions on IGM practices in Austria!  UPDATE: CRC reprimands Austria for IGM!

Session 1, Thu 30 January 2020, 15-18h CET

17:32h (Video @ 2:29:24): YAY!! CRC Vice Chairperson and country co-rapporteur for Austria, Mr Gehad Madi raises “intersex genital mutilation” under harmful practices! Asks about measures taken to implement the 2015 CAT Concluding observations on IGM, mentions the 2018 Constitutional Court sentence stating intersex is not a pathology, asks about informed consent.  :-) Unofficial Transcript:

«Turning to harmful practice: […] Issues of intersex genital mutilation: What measures the government is taking in response to CAT Committee against Torture recommendation in 2016 to take all measures necessary to protect intersex children from involuntary non-urgent surgery and other medical treatment? We also note that in 2018 the Constitutional Court recognised that intersex constitutes a variation and not a pathological development? Whether the consent of the children is taken, parents or guardian, is sufficient, and whether in some cases there is no absolute necessity to conduct such surgery at a certain age, small age of a child. Couldn’t you wait for the child to be able at certain point in time to give his or her consent to such operation, if necessary? If necessary means the operation is necessary.»

Session 2, Fri 31 January 2020, 10-13h CET

10:02h (Video @ 0:01:01): The Austrian Head of Delegation, Mr Helmut Tichy (Ambassador, Director General for Legal Affairs, Ministry for Europe, Integration and Foreign Affairs) reads out a non-answer on IGM prepared by the Ministry of Health, mentions the 2018 Health Ministry medical guidelines (discussed in our Session update PDF, p. 4-5), claims it’s a health issue taken care of in specialised “care centres“, claims no more IGM except “until the end of the 2nd year of life at the latest on the basis of expert opinionand with the “parents’ consent”, promises “close monitoring”, further mentions the 2017 “ethics opinion on intersex and trans identity” and the 2013 legal ban on cosmetic surgery on under 16s (which is not applied to intersex children). :-( Unofficial Translation (from original German):

«[Original English:] But before I give the floor to my colleagues I would like to read out something which we have received from our Ministry of Health. Because after the departure of our colleagues yesterday afternoon there were still some issues related to health and we have tried to get information from them, and if you permit me I will read this out, it is rather complicated, and I will read it out in German. So, please, bear with me, it’s about intersex persons:

[in German:] In 2018, the Constitutional Court recognised that intersex persons have a right to an entry in the register of births or in documents that corresponds to their sex. The first corresponding documents were issued in 2019. In 2017, the Austrian Bioethics Commission adopted a unanimous opinion on intersex and trans identity and recommendations on, among other things, the protection of intersex people from medical interventions, support for parents of affected children, protection from discrimination in society.

And further the following text: In urgent emergencies, which can also mean danger to life, especially if there is a so-called open bladder, surgery is performed immediately. This is now about surgeries for intersex persons. In other cases, until the end of the 2nd year of life at the latest, a surgical modification is carried out on the basis of an expert opinion from a specially established multi-professional board consisting of specialists from the fields of paediatrics, urology, paediatric psychiatry, endoctrinology and psychotherapy. To this end, the Health Department has drawn up a special recommendation on variations of sex development. These recommendations are listed here, in the appendix, OK.

A clear treatment path emerges from these recommendations, with the corresponding care centres already being set up throughout Austria and taking up their work at the beginning of this year. All decisions are made exclusively in close consultation with the parents of the children concerned, i.e. the parents’ consent must be obtained. In view of the fact that these centres have already been set up, close monitoring will also be carried out in parallel. Furthermore, it may be pointed out that on the basis of the Federal Act on the Performance of Aesthetic Treatment and Surgery in Austria, since 1 January 2013, cosmetic surgery or aesthetic treatment and surgery on persons who have not yet reached the age of 16 is not permitted, which is secured by corresponding penal provisions.

[Original English:] Thank you ladies and gentlemen, and I also thank the interpreters, because this is a very, very complicated text I believe.»

Let’s hope the Committee will not have the wool pulled over its eyes, and will issue strong recommendations, sternly reminding Austria of its obligations under CRC to effectively prevent harmful practices and genital mutilation of intersex children!

UPDATE: CRC reprimands Austria for IGM!

See also:
‘Only the Fear of the Judge Will Make IGM Perpetrators Change’
“Harmful Medical Practice”: UN, COE, ACHPR, IACHR condem IGM
48 UN Reprimands for IGM – and counting …
UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC): IGM = Harmful Practice + Violence
UN Committee against Torture (CAT): IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
UN Women’s Rights Committee (CEDAW): IGM = Harmful Practice
UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD): Violation of Integrity
UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) condemns IGM Practices

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Eliminating IGM practices by holding the perpetrators accountable via well-established applicable human rights frameworks, including Inhuman Treatment and Harmful Practices – Presentation @ UN expert meeting on Intersex Human Rights
>>> Download PDF (831kb)

Intersex genital mutilation: How Spain’s Law is failing intersex children

The following is a revised and expanded section from the new spanish edition of the 2019 CCPR Intersex NGO Report for Spain by StopIGM.org and Brújula Intersexual. It further examines the existing Laws and proposed legislative initiatives in Spain and their abysmal failure to effectively protect intersex children.

UPDATE! Based on our Report, CCPR has now put IGM on the “List of Issues prior to Reporting (LOIPR)” for Spain, asking the Government about “measures taken to prohibit” and “access to justice and redress” for IGM survivors. >>> Full Question & Timeline

The Rapporteurs thank Daniel J. García López for his important critical analysis of the Regional Laws leading to this new version.
This blog would further like to thank Amets Suess Schwend for alerting us to Regional Laws and the expiration of the National Initiative.  

In 2018, Spain has already been reprimanded for IGM by the UN Child Rights Committee (CRC). This year, CRC further denounced similarly failing Laws in Malta and Portugal, while CCPR denounced lack of “necessary measures” to “eliminate” IGM in Belgium and Mexico.

                T A B L E   O F   C O N T E N T S :
                IGM in Spain: State-sponsored and pervasive, Gov fails to act
                2. Existing Laws and Legislative Initiatives against IGM
                    a) Overview
                    b) Regional Laws and Initiatives
                           Madrid (2016): No sanctions at all
                           Murcia (2016): No sanctions at all
                           Extremadura, Navarra, Balearic Islands (2015-17): No sanctions at all
                           Andalusia (2018): No sanctions at all
                           Valencia (2018): Some sanctions – but not for IGM
                           Canary Islands (2019): No sanctions so far
                    c) National Initiative (Expired)
                           Original Draft (2018): No sanctions at all
                           Revised Commission Draft (2018): No protections, no sanctions at all
                    d) Contrast: Existing Spanish Laws against FGM
                    Footnotes

IGM in Spain: State-sponsored and pervasive, Gov fails to act

2.  Existing Laws and Legislative Initiatives against IGM

a) Overview

Out of the 17 autonomous Communities in Spain, so far 7 have enacted laws claiming to formally prohibiting or at least restricting IGM practices (Madrid, Murcia, Extremadura, Navarra, Balearic Islands, Andalusia, Valencia), however, only 1 of these laws contains any (minor) sanctions concerning intersex people at all (Valencia), and none of them contain any sanctions for IGM practices, or address obstacles to access to justice, namely the statutes of limitations, or contain extraterritorial protections. In fact, concerning IGM none of them are enforced.

Currently, also the autonomous Community of the Canary Islands is considering a Law proposal, but again without any sanctions.

On the national level, last year a Draft Law was filed in the Spanish Lower House gaining Commission support, however, the Original Draft and the watered-down Commission Draft both didn’t contain any sanctions, or adress obstacles to justice, or extraterritirial protections, and due to the change of the legislative period the proposal expired, .

In contrast, existing Spanish legislation against FGM includes prohibition under Criminal Law, comparatively strong sanctions, preventive measures, extraterritorial protections and mandatory notification by professionals.

b) Regional Laws and Initiatives

Madrid (2016): No sanctions at all

The Community of Madrid has to be commended for being the first to have enacted legislation aimed at preventing IGM practices. Law 2/2016 of the Community of Madrid [13] states in art. 4 (3), “[…] genital surgeries of intersex persons without the informed consent of the person concerned or the need to ensure biological functionality for health reasons, are prohibited in the health services of the Community of Madrid.” Art. 15 titled “Health care for intersex people” further affirms, 1. The public health system in Madrid will ensure the eradication of genital modification practices in newborn babies […] with the exception of medical criteria based on the protection of the newborn’s health and with legal authorisation.”

However, while Madrid’s Law 2/2016 art. 51 “Infractions”, art. 52 “Repeat Offences” and art. 53 “Penalties” have to be lauded for at least including some sanctions for infractions against LGBT persons of up to 45,000 Euros plus possible temporary suspension, they contain no sanctions for IGM (or any other violations against intersex people) at all, as intersex (or “sex characteristics”) is not included in arts. 51-53. Concerning IGM, in practice the Law 2/2016 isn’t enforced (nor its implementation monitored), as also in the Community of Madrid both public and private children’s hospitals openly flaunt the law by continuing to publicly advertise, perform and promote IGM practices (see below p. 12-14) – just the same as in the other autonomous Communities without such a law.

Murcia (2016): No sanctions at all

Similarly, the Community of Murcia has to be commended for being the second to have enacted legislation aimed at preventing IGM practices. Law 8/2016 of the Community of Murcia [14] states in art. 8 (3), It is forbidden in the sanitary services of the Autonomous Community of the Region of Murcia […] the genital surgeries of intersex people that do not obey the decision of the affected person or the need to ensure biological functionality for health reasons.” Art. 16 (2) further affirms, “The public health system of the Region of Murcia will ensure the eradication of the practices of sex assignment in newborn babies attending only to surgical criteria and at a time when the real identity of the newborn intersex person is unknown. All this with the exception of medical criteria based on the protection of the health of the newborn person.”

However, while also Murcia’s Law 8/2016 art. 50 “Infractions”, art. 51 “Repeat Offences” and art. 52 “Penalties” have to be lauded for at least including some sanctions for infractions against LGBT persons of up to 45,000 Euros plus possible temporary suspension, it contains no sanctions for IGM (or any other violations against intersex people) at all, as intersex (or “sex characteristics”) is not included in arts. 50-52. Concerning IGM, in practice the Law 8/2016 isn’t enforced (nor its implementation monitored), as also in the Community of Murcia children’s hospitals openly flaunt the law by continuing to publicly advertise, perform and promote IGM practices (see below p. 12, 13, 15) – just like in the other Communities without such a law.

Extremadura, Navarra, Balearic Islands (2015-17): No sanctions at all

Also the autonomous Communities of Extremadura, [16] Navarra [17] and the Balearic Islands [18] enacted laws containing sections that stipulate to “ensure the eradication of the practices” of involuntary, non-urgent genital surgeries and other procedures on intersex children. Further, these laws stipulate to establish health-care guidelines, including to provide intersex persons and their families with “adequate psychological care”. [19] However, all these laws don’t include any sanctions for IGM (or any other violations against intersex people) at all, and further fail to address obstacles to access to justice, such as the limitation period, as well as extraterritorial protections, as intersex (or “sex characteristics”) is not included in the relevant articles on infractions, repeat offences and sanctions. Concerning intersex people and IGM, these Laws are again not enforced, as all typical forms of IGM practices continue to be practiced in public hospitals with impunity (see below p. 15) – just the same as in the other autonomous Communities without such a law.

Andalusia (2018): No sanctions at all

Further, the autonomous Community of Andalusia [20] enacted a vaguely formulated Law to ensure that the practices of genital modification in newborn babies do not attend only to surgical criteria”, with “exception[s]” only allowed in the case of urgent medical necessity. However, also this Law fails to include any sanctions for IGM (or any other specific violations against intersex people) at all, as intersex (or “sex characteristics”) is not included in the articles on infractions (arts. 60-62), repeat offences (art. 63) and sanctions (art. 64), and further fails to address obstacles to access to justice, such as the limitation period, as well as extraterritorial protections. The only areas where intersex is included is under inciting violence against LGBTI persons and their families” (arts. 60(a), 61(a)+(f), 62(f)), and “LGBTI discrimination (arts. 61(f), 62(d)+(f)). However, concerning intersex people, the Law is not enforced, as IGM practices continue to be incited and practiced with impunity (see below p. 15).

Valencia (2018): Some sanctions – but not for IGM

Also, the Community of Valencia enacted a Law containing a section “People with intersex variations or differences of sex development (DSD)” (arts. 46-50). [15] However, the Law 23/2018 exclusively frames IGM as a “health care” issue (art. 48) under the authority of “reference hospital departments”, i.e. the current perpetrators (art. 49).

Nonetheless, the Valencia Law has to be commended for being the first and only Spanish Law to contain any sanctions for any infractions against intersex people at all, namely

  • a fine of up to 6,000 Euros for “using or issuing abusive speech on the grounds of […] sex development” (art. 60(2a) “Minor Infractions” and 62(1) “Sanctions for Minor Infractions”)
  • a fine of up to 60,000 Euros e.g. for inciting violence against LGBTI persons”, failure to immediately retract […] expressions inciting violence for reasons of [sex development]”, discrimination [in court] on the grounds of […] sex development”, “isolating, rejecting or publicly and notoriously disparaging people because of their […] sex development or their family group”, “in education, portraying persons as inferior or superior on the grounds of […] sex development” (arts. 60(3) “Severe Infractions” and 62(2) “Sanctions for Severe Infractions”)
  • a fine up to 120,000 Euros, e.g. for aggressive or harassing behavior based on a person’s […] sex development”, and refusal of assistance to victims by a person officially obliged to do so (arts. 60(4) “Very Severe Infractions” and 62(3) “Sanctions for Very Severe Infractions”)

However, also the Valencia Law 23/2018 contains no sanctions for IGM at all, and further fails to address obstacles to access to justice, such as the limitation period, as well as extraterritorial protections. What’s more, concerning intersex people and IGM, also Law 23/2018 is not enforced, as IGM continues with impunity.

Canary Islands (2019): No sanctions so far

In May 2019, a Draft Law aimed at preventing IGM practices was presented by the Councillor for Employment, Social Policies and Housing of the autonomous Community of the Canary Islands. [21] Unfortunately, the Draft Law again fails to include any sanctions for IGM (or any other violations against intersex people), and fails to address obstacles to access to justice, such as the limitation period, as well as extraterritorial protections.

c) National Initiative (Expired): Watered down, no sanctions

Original Draft (2018): No sanctions at all

In October 2018, a Draft Law 162/000841 [22] was filed in the Spanish Lower House (Congreso de los Diputados) proposing, in line with the recent CRC recommendations to Spain, to

  • explicitly prohibit unnecessary medical or surgical treatment during childhood to ensure bodily integrity, autonomy and self-determination for affected children”
  • “provide families with intersex children with appropriate counselling and support
  • provide redress to victims of such treatment, including adequate compensation and the fullest possible rehabilitation, and conduct an investigation of incidents of surgical and other medical treatment on intersex children without informed consent”

Notably, the Law Draft failed to include any sanctions, and to address obstacles to access to justice, such as the limitation period, as well as extraterritorial protections.

Revised Commission Draft (2018): No protections, no sanctions at all

In December 2018, the Commission on the Rights of Children and Adolescents of the Spanish Lower House (Comisión de Derechos de la Infancia y Adolescencia del Congreso de los Diputados) approved the modified Draft Law 162/003870 [23] [24] for parliamentary discussion.

Unfortunately, the Commission modifications watered down the original Draft Law, making it no longer in line with the CRC recommendations:

  • First, the Commission discarded all sections concerning access to justice and redress, i.e. the Commission Draft no longer proposed to the Government to adopt a law to “[e]ncourage the adoption of the necessary legislative measures to provide redress to victims of such treatment, including adequate compensation and the fullest possible rehabilitation, and conduct an investigation of incidents”, but now merely proposes tostudy the adoption of the necessary legislative measures to provide reparation and support to the victims of such treatment and to carry out an investigation of incidents”.
  • Second, the Commission Draft added two sections promoting medical self-regulation as a solution (e.g. “adopt protocols to ensure, to the extent possible, the participation of minors in the decision-making process”).

Again, the Commission Draft failed to include any sanctions, to address obstacles to access to justice, such as the limitation period, as well as extraterritorial protections.

Due to a change of the legislative period, in 2019 the law proposal has expired without further parliamentary discussion. [25]

d) Contrast: Existing Spanish Laws against FGM

In contrast, FGM is explicitly forbidden in the Spanish Criminal Code, with sanctions including “imprisonment from six to twelve years” (Organic Act 11/2003, modified article 149.2). Also, extraterritorial protections are established (Organic Act 6/1985, article 23.4, modified by Organic Act 1/2014). Further, Article 158 of the Civil Code, modified by Organic Act 9/2000, allows judges to adopt preventive measures in the case of an imminent risk of genital mutilation. As FGM is considered a crime, professionals aware of an actual or impending incident are therefore subject to mandatory notification (article 450 of the Criminal Code; articles 262 + 355 of the Civil Procedure Act; Organic Act 1/1996). [26]

Footnotes:

[13]    Comunidad de Madrid: Ley 2/2016, 29.03.2016, art. 4, para 3 (prohibition); art. 51 (infractions), art. 52 (repeat offences), art. 53 (sanctions), https://www.boe.es/eli/es-md/l/2016/03/29/2/con

[14]    Comunidad Autónoma de la Región de Murcia: Ley 8/2016, 27.05.2016, art. 8, para 3 (prohibition); art. 50 (infractions), art. 51 (repeat offences), art. 52 (sanctions), https://www.boe.es/eli/es-mc/l/2016/05/27/8/con

[15]    Comunitat Valenciana: Ley 23/2018, 29.11.2018, arts. 46-50, https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2019-281

[16]    Comunidad Autónoma de Extremadura: Ley 12/2015, 08.04.2015, art. 11, para 2,
https://www.boe.es/eli/es-ex/l/2015/04/08/12/con

[17]    Comunidad Foral de Navarra: Ley Foral 8/201, 19.06.2017, art. 17, para 1,
https://www.boe.es/eli/es-nc/lf/2017/06/19/8/con

[18]    Comunidad Autónoma de las Illes Balears: Ley 8/2016, 30.05.2016, art. 23, para 2,
https://www.boe.es/eli/es-ib/l/2016/05/30/8/con

[19]    Extremadura law: art. 11, paras 1; Balearic Islands law: art. 23, para 1. The Navarra law: art. 53, instead contains stipulations for guidelines on the “preservations of the gonads” (para 2), to avoid “experimental” and other unnecessary “hormonal treatments” (para 3), “limitation of genital explorations” (para 4), and “respect for privacy” (para 5).

[20]    Junta de Andalucía: Ley 8/2017, 28.12.2018, art. 29, https://www.boe.es/eli/es-an/l/2017/12/28/8/con

[21]    https://www3.gobiernodecanarias.org/noticias/el-gobierno-elabora-en-tiempo-record-el-anteproyecto-de-ley-de-no-discriminacion-por-razon-de-identidad-de-genero/

[22]    See p. 19-20, http://www.congreso.es/public_oficiales/L12/CONG/BOCG/D/BOCG-12-D-445.PDF

[23]    See p. 38-39, http://www.congreso.es/public_oficiales/L12/CONG/BOCG/D/BOCG-12-D-468.PDF

[24]    https://www.europapress.es/epsocial/igualdad/noticia-congreso-pide-gobierno-prohibicion-expresa-mutilacion-genital-menores-intersexuales-20181121193656.html

[25]    http://www.congreso.es/public_oficiales/L12/CONG/BOCG/D/BOCG-12-D-519.PDF

[26]    https://uefgm.org/index.php/legislative-framework-es/

>>> Intersex human rights at the UN are under attack!!!

See also:
‘Only the Fear of the Judge Will Make IGM Perpetrators Change’
“Harmful Medical Practice”: UN, COE, ACHPR, IACHR condem IGM
48 UN Reprimands for IGM – and counting …
UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC): IGM = Harmful Practice + Violence
UN Committee against Torture (CAT): IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
UN Women’s Rights Committee (CEDAW): IGM = Harmful Practice
UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD): Violation of Integrity
UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) condemns IGM Practices

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Eliminating IGM practices by holding the perpetrators accountable via well-established applicable human rights frameworks, including Inhuman Treatment and Harmful Practices – Presentation @ UN expert meeting on Intersex Human Rights
>>> Download PDF (831kb)

Mutilations génitales intersexes : l’ONU réprimande la Belgique et le Mexique

[ English ]


Photo: CCPR 127, en occasion de la réunion du Comité avec les ONG, Palais Wilson, Genéve 15.10.2019

Zwischengeschlecht.org on FacebookIGM = Torture, NOT 'Discrimination' or 'Gender Identity'Lors de sa 127ème session à Genève, le Comité des droits de l’homme des Nations Unies (HRCttee), en tant qu’organe chargé de surveiller l’application du Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques (CCPR), a examiné la situation des droits humains en Belgique et au Mexique en questionnant les deux États spécifiquement sur les ” mutilations génitales intersexes “. Les deux États parties ont nié avec véhémence l’évidence et ont tenté de changer de sujet, passant des MGI à ” discrimination “, ” soins de santé trans et inter spécifiques “ ou ” conditions de genre, identité sexuelle, orientation sexuelle ” et ” maladies de la différenciation sexuelle “.

Les défenseurs de droits des personnes intersexes se félicitent que le Comité ait désormais condamné sans équivoque les pratiques de MGI en Belgique et au Mexique comme une violation grave des droits humains non dérogeables, notamment en faisant explicitement référence à l’article 7 du CCPR non dérogeable qui couvre les traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants relevant de l’interdiction absolue de la torture, ainsi que les expérimentations médicales ou scientifiques non consenties, et oblige les deux Etats à prendre toutes ” mesures nécessaires “ pour ” éliminer “ les pratiques de MGI.

Ces dernières condamnations des pratiques de MGI par un organe de traité de l’ONU marquent
• déjà la 2e réprimande pour MGI pour la Belgique et le Mexique,
• les 3e et 4e réprimandes pour MGI par le CCPR,
• maintenant 48 réprimandes de l’ONU condamnant les MGI comme une violation grave des droits de l’homme non dérogeables.

Les ONG intersexes StopIGM.org, Intersex Belgium, Brújula Intersexual et Vivir y Ser Intersex ont soumis des preuves substantielles des pratiques actuelles des deux pays, ce qui a amené le CCPR à se saisir de cette affaire.

Vous trouverez ci-dessous la version intégrale des recommandations exécutoires concernant les droits humains des personnes intersexes pour la Belgique et le Mexique, ainsi que des liens vers les preuves soumises au Comité et vers les démentis et excuses choquants des deux États lorsque le Comité les a questionnés à Genève :

Belgique

2019 CCPR Belgium NGO Intersex IGMIGM in Belgium: 2019 CCPR Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
IGM in Belgium • Complicity of the State • Inhuman Treatment
>>> Download as PDF (581 kb)

>>> CCPR127 Belgium: Full Session Report, Transcripts, Videos
>>> CCPR Timeline Belgium 2019

Belgique: Recommandations exécutoires intersexes CCPR127
>>> Télécharger les observations finales complètes:
CCPR/C/BEL/CO/6, paras 21-22

[Version provisoire non éditée]

[…] intersexualité

21. Le Comité note avec préoccupation que des enfants présentant des variations intersexuelles à la naissance subissent parfois des actes médicaux invasifs et irréversibles visant à leur attribuer un sexe, que ces actes se fondent souvent sur une vision stéréotypée des rôles dévolus à chaque sexe et qu’ils sont pratiqués avant que les intéressés soient en âge de donner leur consentement librement et en toute connaissance de cause (art. 3, 7, 9, 17, 24 et 26).

22. L’État partie devrait prendre des mesures nécessaires pour mettre fin aux actes médicaux irréversibles, en particulier aux opérations chirurgicales, pratiqués sur des enfants intersexués, qui ne sont pas encore capables de donner leur consentement librement et en toute connaissance de cause, sauf lorsque de telles interventions sont absolument nécessaires du point de vue médical.

Mexique

2018 CRC Italy NGO (for PSWG) Intersex IGMIGM in Mecico: 2019 CCPR Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Repr. Anatomy
IGM in Mexico • Complicity of the State • Inhuman Treatment
>>> Download as PDF (636 kb) | Español (670 kb) 

>>> CCPR127 Mexico: Full Session Report, Transcripts, Videos
>>> CCPR Timeline Mexico 2019

Mexique: Recommandations exécutoires intersexes CCPR127
>>> Télécharger les observations finales complètes:
CCPR/C/MEX/CO/6, paras 12-13

[Traduction non officielle de l’espagnol original]

12. […] Malgré les explications fournies par la délégation de l’État partie, le Comité est préoccupé par les informations faisant état d’interventions médicales irréversibles et invasives sur des enfants intersexués (art. 2, 6, 7, 17 et 26).

13. L’État partie devrait intensifier ses efforts pour lutter contre les stéréotypes et les préjugés à l’égard des personnes […] intersexuées et pour faire en sorte que les actes de discrimination et de violence à leur égard soient évités. Il devrait également s’orienter vers l’élimination du traitement médical irréversible, en particulier le traitement chirurgical des enfants intersexués, qui ne sont pas encore en mesure de donner leur consentement libre et pleinement informé, à moins que ces procédures ne soient absolument médicalement nécessaires.

>>> StopIGM.org > Pages françaises

Intersex Genital Mutilation: UN-CCPR reprimands Belgium, Mexico

[ Français ]


Photo: Nonviolent Intersex Protest @ UNHRC UPR #14, Geneva 20.10.2012

Zwischengeschlecht.org on FacebookIGM = Torture, NOT 'Discrimination' or 'Gender Identity'During its 127th Session in Geneva, the UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) as the Treaty body monitoring the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) examined the human rights record of Belgium and Mexico, questioning both States specifically on “intersex genital mutilation”. Both State parties vehemently denied the obvious, and tried to change the subject from IGM to “discrimination”, “trans and inter-specific health care” or “conditions of gender, sexual identity, sexual orientation” and “diseases of sexual differentiation”.

Intersex advocates welcome that the Committee now unmistakably condemned IGM practices in both Belgium and Mexico as a serious violation of non-derogable human rights, including by explicitly referring to the non-derogable CCPR art. 7 covering cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment falling under the absolute prohibition of torture, as well as non-consensual medical or scientific experimentation, and obliging both States to take all “necessary measures” to “eliminate” IGM practices.

These latest reprimands for IGM practices by a UN treaty body mark
• already the 2nd reprimand for IGM for both Belgium and Mexico,
• the 3rd and 4th reprimand for IGM by CCPR,
• now 48 UN reprimands condemning IGM as a serious violation of non-derogable human rights.

Intersex NGOs StopIGM.org, Brújula Intersexual, Vivir y Ser Intersex and Intersex Belgium have been submitting substantial evidence of ongoing IGM practices in both countries, resulting in CCPR taking up the issue.

Please find below the full binding intersex recommendations for both Belgium and Mexico, as well as links to the evidence submitted to the Committee and to the shocking denials and excuses of both States when questioned by the Committee in Geneva:

Belgium

2019 CCPR Belgium NGO Intersex IGMIGM in Belgium: 2019 CCPR Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
IGM in Belgium • Complicity of the State • Inhuman Treatment
>>> Download as PDF (581 kb)

>>> CCPR127 Belgium: Full Session Report, Transcripts, Videos
>>> CCPR Timeline Belgium 2019

Belgium: Full Binding CCPR127 Intersex Recommendations
>>> Download Full Concl Obs:
CCPR/C/BEL/CO/6, paras 21-22

[Unofficial translation from original French]

[…] intersex

21. The Committee notes with concern that children with intersex variations at birth may undergo invasive and irreversible medical procedures aimed at assigning them to a sex, that these procedures are often based on a stereotypical view of the roles of the sexes and that they are performed before they are of age to give their free and informed consent (arts. 3, 7, 9, 9, 17, 24 and 26).

22. The State party should take the necessary measures to put an end to irreversible medical procedures, in particular surgical procedures, performed on intersex children who are not yet able to give their free and informed consent, except where such procedures are absolutely medically necessary.

Mexico

2018 CRC Italy NGO (for PSWG) Intersex IGMIGM in Mecico: 2019 CCPR Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Repr. Anatomy
IGM in Mexico • Complicity of the State • Inhuman Treatment
>>> Download as PDF (636 kb) | Español (670 kb) 

>>> CCPR127 Mexico: Full Session Report, Transcripts, Videos
>>> CCPR Timeline Mexico 2019

Mexico: Full Binding CCPR127 Intersex Recommendations
>>> Download Full Concl Obs:
CCPR/C/MEX/CO/6, paras 12-13

[Unofficial translation from original Spanish]

12. […] Despite the explanation provided by the State party’s delegation, the Committee is concerned about reports of irreversible and invasive medical interventions on intersex children (arts. 2, 6, 7, 17 and 26).

13. […] The State party should increase its efforts to combat stereotypes and prejudices against […] intersex persons and to ensure that acts of discrimination and violence against them are prevented. It should also move towards the elimination of irreversible medical treatment, in particular surgical treatment of intersex children, who are not yet in a position to give fully informed and free consent, unless such procedures are absolutely medically necessary.

>>> Intersex human rights at the UN are under attack!!!

See also:
‘Only the Fear of the Judge Will Make IGM Perpetrators Change’
“Harmful Medical Practice”: UN, COE, ACHPR, IACHR condem IGM
48 UN Reprimands for IGM – and counting …
UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC): IGM = Harmful Practice + Violence
UN Committee against Torture (CAT): IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
UN Women’s Rights Committee (CEDAW): IGM = Harmful Practice
UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD): Violation of Integrity
UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) condemns IGM Practices

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Eliminating IGM practices by holding the perpetrators accountable via well-established applicable human rights frameworks, including Inhuman Treatment and Harmful Practices – Presentation @ UN expert meeting on Intersex Human Rights
>>> Download PDF (831kb)