French Woman's Divorce Case Triumphs, Shaping Future of Marital Consent

In a landmark ruling, a French woman won a pivotal appeal that challenges the traditional view of marital obligations regarding consent, impacting women's rights in France.

A 69-year-old French woman, known as Ms. H.W., has achieved a landmark victory in a significant case concerning marital consent, following a ruling from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The ECHR unanimously determined that her refusal to engage in sexual relations with her husband should not have been considered a fault in their divorce proceedings. This ruling, issued on Thursday, asserted that French authorities had infringed upon H.W.'s right to respect for private and family life as stipulated in European human rights law.

The long-standing legal battle, which has been ongoing for nearly a decade, ended in H.W. celebrating the court’s decision as a vital step toward dismantling pervasive "rape culture" and enhancing awareness of consent within spousal relationships. The case has ignited robust discussions surrounding the concepts of marital consent and the broader implications for women's rights across France.

Lilia Mhissen, H.W.'s attorney, emphasized that the court's ruling dismantled the outdated notion of "marital duty," encouraging French judiciary systems to evolve in alignment with contemporary understandings of consent and gender equality. Advocates from various women's rights organizations highlighted that the current judicial approach continues to perpetuate detrimental, archaic interpretations of marriage.

H.W. has lived in Le Chesnay, a suburb of Paris, and married her husband, JC, in 1984, with whom she has four children—one of whom has a disability requiring extensive care. Over the years, their relationship deteriorated post the birth of their first child. By 1992, H.W. began to face increasing health issues, culminating in instances of physical and verbal abuse from her husband in 2002.

In 2004, following her request for divorce in 2012, H.W. faced opposition concerning the established grounds for their separation. An appellate court in Versailles ruled against her complaints, siding with her husband, a decision that was later upheld by France's Court of Cassation without a detailed explanation. Unwilling to accept this outcome, H.W. took her case to the ECHR in 2021.

The ECHR concluded that state intervention regarding sexual conduct should only occur under the most grave circumstances. The court stressed that the French legal concept of "marital duties" fails to recognize the fundamental importance of consent in sexual relationships. The ruling clarifies that entering into marriage does not equate to automatically consenting to sexual activity indefinitely, stating that to imply otherwise undermines acknowledgment of marital rape as a serious crime.

This ruling is especially timely given heightened scrutiny of consent issues in France, catalyzed by notorious legal cases such as that of Dominique Pélicot, who drugged his wife and orchestrated her rape by numerous men. Following their convictions, critics have voiced concerns regarding the treatment of consent within the realm of French law.

Feminist organizations assert that the ECHR's ruling underscores the urgent need for reforming French legal frameworks and societal attitudes towards consent. A recent report by French lawmakers has recommended the legal definition of rape be amended to explicitly include non-consent, reinforcing that consent must be voluntary and can be revoked at any point.