FGM in Nigeria: From Cultural Tradition to Human Rights Violation—Why Action is Urgent

 

Human rights are fundamental to ensuring equality and dignity for all, serving as a benchmark for governance worldwide. While global attention has increasingly focused on the protection and implementation of these rights, grave violations persist—driven by war, socio-cultural practices, and systemic discrimination.

These violations span gender-based violence, discriminatory policies, misgovernance, and power imbalances. In response, global and regional institutions have strengthened efforts through treaties, conventions, and national laws. Advocacy and awareness campaigns remain vital in driving behavioural and policy changes to uphold human rights, especially for women and girls.

Amid global discussions on human rights, gender-based violence remains a critical concern. This pervasive issue includes various forms of violence driven by gender, sexual orientation, or societal expectations. Alarmingly, UN data shows that nearly one in three women worldwide has experienced physical or sexual violence at least once in their lifetime, often perpetrated by a current or former intimate partner.

While these statistics shows the urgent need for action, significant progress has been made. Across 193 countries, over 7,000 measures have been implemented to combat gender-based violence, including more than 1,583 legislative reforms specifically targeting violence against women[1]. This reflects a strong global commitment to eliminating gender-based violence and strengthening the rights and protection of women and girls.

In recent years, as discussions on violations of women’s and girls’ rights have gained momentum, there is a growing focus on the specific forms of gender-based violence across diverse cultural contexts. The statistics remain alarming, ranging from child marriage and restricted access to healthcare and education to intimate partner violence.

One of the most alarming forms of gender-based violence is Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). Global reports estimate that 230 million girls have undergone FGM, with 144 million cases occurring in sub-Saharan Africa. Additionally, 20 million girls remain at risk, highlighting the urgent need for stronger interventions and advocacy[2]. In response, the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) passed a resolution recognizing FGM as a form of violence against women and girls, urging countries to enact national legislation prohibiting the practice and to strengthen enforcement measures.

Since then, several international bodies have reinforced this commitment. CEDAW and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights have consistently reminded member states of their obligation to eliminate FGM and other harmful practices. In 2014, signatory states to CEDAW and the Convention on the Rights of the Child adopted a Joint General Recommendation on Harmful Practices, reaffirming their duty to ensure full compliance in eradicating these violations. In March 2018, during its session on Challenges and Opportunities in Achieving Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Rural Women and Girls, the UN Commission on the Status of Women reaffirmed the urgency of eliminating FGM, child marriage, and forced marriage. The Commission highlighted the disproportionate impact of these practices on rural women and girls and stressed the importance of community empowerment in challenging harmful social norms and driving lasting change.

These global commitments are echoed in regional and continental charters and conventions that explicitly prohibit FGM and other harmful practices: The Maputo Protocol (2003), a landmark legal instrument that, under Article 5, mandates states to implement legislative, social, and educational measures to eliminate FGM and other harmful practices. Similarly, the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (1990): Article 21 calls for the eradication of harmful social and cultural practices, including FGM, and requires states to protect children from such violations. The Abuja Declaration on FGM (2003): African leaders and civil society organisations reaffirmed their commitment to ending FGM, urging governments to strengthen national policies and legal frameworks. The African Union’s Agenda 2063, also a long-term development blueprint that prioritises gender equality, the eradication of harmful traditional practices like FGM, and the strengthening of legal mechanisms to protect women and girls. Finally, the ECOWAS Gender Policy (2005) Advocates for the elimination of FGM and other forms of gender-based violence, encouraging member states to adopt and enforce national legislation banning these practices.

These frameworks reinforce a strong regional and continental commitment to eradicating FGM and safeguarding the rights of women and girls across Africa.

Although Nigeria is a signatory to several international and regional conventions prohibiting Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), the 1999 Constitution (as amended) does not explicitly ban the practice. However, certain constitutional provisions can be interpreted as prohibiting FGM: Section 15(2), prohibits discrimination, reinforcing the principle of equal rights,while section 17(2): Affirms equality of rights for all citizens, which can be applied to protecting women and girls from harmful practices. Section 34(1): Prohibits torture, inhuman, or degrading treatment, aligning with arguments against FGM as a harmful and degrading practice. While these provisions offer a legal basis for challenging FGM, the absence of explicit constitutional prohibition highlighted the need for stronger legislative action to eradicate the practice.

Further reinforcing this stance, Section 11(b) of the Child’s Rights Act (2023) explicitly prohibits subjecting any child to torture, inhuman, or degrading treatment. This provision strengthens Nigeria’s legal commitment to protecting children from FGM and other harmful practices.

A major milestone in the fight against Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) was the passage of the Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act (VAPP) 2015. Section 6(1) of the Act explicitly criminalizes the circumcision or mutilation of the female genitalia of any woman or girl. Additionally, Sections 6(2)–(4) impose penalties on individuals who perform, aid, or attempt to carry out FGM. However, the Act does not mandate the reporting of FGM cases, leaving a gap in enforcement and accountability.

Before the enactment of the VAPP Act, the HIV and AIDS (Anti-Discrimination) Act of 2014, under Section 3(3), prohibited any culture, practice, or tradition that exposes individuals to HIV/AIDS. This provision is particularly relevant, as FGM has been linked to a higher risk of HIV transmission due to unhygienic cutting practices and other related health complications affecting girls and young women.

While traditional forms of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) are prohibited, a concerning trend has emerged—the medicalisation of FGM, where healthcare professionals perform the procedure in medical settings. However, FGM has no medical justification, regardless of where or by whom it is carried out, and remains a violation of human rights with serious health consequences.

The Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act (VAPP) 2015 does not explicitly address the issue of medicalized FGM. However, Section 48(1) of the National Health Act (2004) prohibits the removal or cutting of tissue from another person’s body without lawful justification. This provision can be interpreted to mean that medical practitioners should not perform FGM, as it constitutes an unjustified and harmful practice with no medical benefit.

espite legal prohibitions against FGM—whether traditional, cultural, or medicalized—the practice persists across Nigeria. As of 2022, an estimated 19.9 million women and girls had undergone FGM. Encouragingly, prevalence among women aged 15–49 has declined from 25% in 2013 to a lower rate in recent years. However, alarming trends show an increase in FGM among young girls aged 0–14, rising from 16.9% to 19.2% over the same period, highlighting the need for stronger enforcement and community-driven interventions[3].

Alarmingly, 1 in 4 FGM survivors underwent the procedure at the hands of a medical professional. This growing trend of medicalised FGM weakens global efforts to end the practice, as it creates a false perception of safety while continuing to inflict harm and violate human rights[4].

FGM remains deeply entrenched in Nigerian society, driven by cultural traditions that hinder the development and well-being of girls. Beyond its immediate physical and psychological impact, the practice exposes survivors to severe health risks, social stigma, and economic disadvantages, limiting their potential and restricting their ability to fully participate in and contribute to society.

Despite laws and policies prohibiting FGM, its continued prevalence reveals significant gaps in enforcement and institutional capacity. Weak implementation, limited resources, and inadequate coordination among relevant agencies undermine efforts to eliminate the practice, allowing it to persist despite legal prohibitions.

Furthermore, the absence of comprehensive data and structured support systems for FGM survivors hinders effective intervention and recovery efforts. The lack of access to psychosocial care, medical support, and reintegration services leaves many survivors without the assistance needed to heal and rebuild their lives. Addressing these gaps through research and targeted programs is essential for meaningful change.

Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) is widely recognized as a grave violation of the rights of girls and women, reaffirming the fundamental principle that women’s rights are human rights. While the global community acknowledges the human rights abuses inherent in FGM, it is equally crucial to recognise  its far-reaching social, economic, and health consequences.

The impact of FGM extends far beyond the individual, affecting social, cultural, economic, and health outcomes on a broader scale. While research has attempted to quantify these costs, the true burden of FGM is societal, weakening overall progress. Its long-term consequences hinder economic development, gender equality, and public health, making its elimination not only a moral imperative but also a critical necessity for sustainable societal growth. FGM hinder economic development, gender equality, and public health, making its elimination not just a moral imperative but a critical necessity for sustainable societal growth.

Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) has far-reaching and multifaceted consequences, affecting survivors physically, emotionally, socially, and economically. These impacts can be immediate or long-term, significantly shaping the lives of girls and women in profound and lasting ways.

Conclusion

Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) remains a grave human rights violation, deeply embedded in cultural and social norms that compromise the dignity, health, and opportunities of girls and women in Nigeria. While legal frameworks, advocacy efforts, and growing awareness have contributed to progress, the persistence of this harmful practice demands urgent action beyond policy commitments.

To achieve the global goal of eliminating FGM by 2030, stakeholders must transition from declarations to concrete interventions. This includes strengthening enforcement mechanisms, investing in community-led initiatives, and prioritizing survivor-centered support systems. The rise of medicalised FGM presents an additional challenge, requiring stricter regulations and ethical accountability within the healthcare sector. Furthermore, enhancing institutional capacity, increasing funding for grassroots initiatives, and ensuring psychosocial and economic support for survivors must be central to these efforts.

Ending FGM is not just a legal or health imperative—it is a fundamental issue of gender equality and human rights. Governments, civil society, community leaders, and young people must work collaboratively to dismantle harmful traditions, empower survivors, and foster a future where every girl can live free from violence and discrimination. The time for promises has passed—now is the moment for bold, sustained action to protect the next generation and accelerate the end of FGM.

 By 

Jonathan Abakpa

Human Rights and Democracy Specialist

 

 

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is it Democracy or a Demography Contest?

Beyond June 12: Youth, Democracy, and the Burden of Exclusion in Nigeria