In an interview with Agence Europe following the presentation of her own-initiative report at a joint meeting of the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) and Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM) on Monday 14 July (see other news), Swedish MEP Evin Incir (S&D) called for European legislation on rape to be based on the absence of consent. She revisited the political deadlocks of the previous mandate and supported a cultural change within the European Union. (Interview by Nithya Paquiry)
Agence Europe: Why did you choose to present this report now, more than a year after the directive on gender-based and domestic violence entered into force (see EUROPE 13431/33)?
Evin Incir: It’s a way of showing that we in the European Parliament are rolling up our sleeves. During the last mandate, some Member States blocked the inclusion of a consent-based definition of rape in the directive. I’m still furious that we missed this historic opportunity because of political obstacles. This report aims to fill that gap, the shortcomings in the legislation are very clear. Only 0.5% of rapes in the European Union lead to conviction (https://aeur.eu/f/hw1 ). That’s impunity we’re talking about. In no other area would that be considered acceptable.
AE: You base your proposal on Article 83 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. Why is this legal point so important?
Because some Member States, such as France, Germany or Hungary, claimed that the EU had no competence. But that’s a false pretext. The legal service of the European Parliament was very clear: this is a serious form of violence present in all 27 Member States. That fulfils the conditions for listing it as a “European crime” under the category of sexual exploitation of women and children. This is not a technical or legislative issue, it’s a matter of political will.
AE: Do you think the new Commission could go further? And what else can Parliament do?
The situation has changed in some Member States, including France. That gives us the momentum to restart the work and make sure there is no longer a blocking minority, as there was during the last mandate. If the ‘von der Leyen II’ Commission wants to act, the moment is right. There is also the Gisèle Pélicot case, and the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (https://aeur.eu/f/hvz ), which clearly states that consent is required, even in marriage. These developments have raised broader awareness. The European Parliament must therefore remain united and continue to demand this legislation.
AE: Your report also highlights sexual and reproductive rights, sexuality education, and professional training. Why are these major elements?
Some, even here in Parliament, question sexuality education or the right to abortion. But if a woman becomes pregnant after a rape, she must be able to decide. Questioning that is denying that she is a victim. Also, violence starts early. When a boy hits a girl at school, we say “he’s in love”. If we teach from early childhood that touching without consent is not a sign of affection, we can prevent future violent behaviour. And in police stations or courtrooms, we still hear, “if you weren't so opinionated” or “were you wearing a short dress?” (...) We must stop asking women, “did you say no?” and start asking men, “did you ask?”.