The recent arrest of two individuals in connection with the death of a three-week-old baby girl, reportedly following the practice of female genital mutilation (FGM), has once again brought attention to a persistent and troubling issue. Despite the enactment of legislation banning FGM, cases continue to surface, raising questions about enforcement, public awareness, and the balance between law and tradition.
FGM remains outlawed because of the clear medical risks it poses, including severe pain, long-term health complications, and in extreme cases, death. The law was introduced to safeguard the health and rights of girls and women, and it reflects international standards as well as commitments to protecting vulnerable groups. The recent incident underscores the stakes involved when these protections are disregarded.
The controversy surrounding FGM largely stems from its cultural and, in some circles, perceived religious significance. While the practice is defended by some as a rite of passage or a requirement of faith, leading medical and religious authorities alike have clarified that it has no health benefits and no binding religious basis. However, the persistence of such beliefs demonstrates the gap between legal frameworks and social attitudes.
This gap is where the challenge lies. Legislation is only as effective as its enforcement and acceptance. While arrests and prosecutions are important for upholding the law, they alone cannot eliminate practices that are deeply rooted in tradition. Effective change requires a multifaceted approach: consistent law enforcement, sustained public education, and meaningful engagement with communities where the practice is most entrenched.
Religious leaders and community elders, in particular, have an important role to play in shaping perceptions. Their voices carry weight and can dispel misconceptions that often hinder progress. Likewise, public health campaigns should be expanded to clearly explain the dangers of FGM, not only for the individual but for families and communities at large.
The death of this infant is a reminder that progress on this issue remains fragile. It highlights the importance of moving beyond symbolic bans and toward comprehensive strategies that combine law, education, and dialogue. Protecting children and ensuring compliance with national law requires both firm enforcement and persistent efforts to shift attitudes.
FGM is illegal, harmful, and unnecessary. The task before policymakers, campaigners, and community leaders is to ensure that the law is not just written but lived—so that such tragedies do not continue to occur.
The time has come for there to be a renewed effort to sensitize the people about the outlawed practice.
