Interview – During his divorce, Mrs. H. received exceptional mistakes on the grounds that she gave her sex her husband. The Human Rights Court has finally agreed and condemned France to process the file. Lighting with lawyer Sofi Tubiran.
At the beginning of last week, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) made a decision to manage Mrs. H. About condemning France. How did we get there? The story begins since 2012, when the woman and her husband and her husband and four children have been married since 1984. Returns and explains that his wife refuses to have sex since 2004. The enterprise that he explains his health problems and with his husband’s hand.
It was held in the endless trials, he sees his rejected approaches. In 2018, the judge of the first family business proves him wrong and suggests that his illness does not justify his / her disease. He adds. At the end of 2019, the Court of Appeals was divided into its unique mistakes, for the same reason. Abstaining for justice is a serious and new violation of the responsibilities and responsibilities of marriage, making it intolerable to maintain common life. ” And in 2020, the Court of Cassation also confirmed this decision.
Mrs. H., including women’s associations, including women’s foundation, Decision as described as a member of “strict symbolic” Sofi Subiran, lawyer and women’s foundation, interview MEDIME FIGAROA number
“Data-cript =” https://static.lefigaro.fr/widget-ttl/vide/index.js “>
Article 212
Madame Figaro: Why did you decide to bring this job to ECHR?
Sophie Subira.- It is the DNA of the Women’s Foundation that is legal assistance next to other feminist associations, such as the feminist team against rape (CFCV). This case attaches importance to the central problem. The need to remove the “Family Duty” Concept in Civil Legislation. It is Archaper to keep in mind that marriage implies the alleged liability for sexual relations. This applies to the principles of agreement and gender equality that we have been protecting for a long time.
What does the law say to this exact subject?
The concept of “cognal obligation” does not appear in the Civil Code anywhere, but it is based on the persistence of judges. Article 212 provokes “the responsibility of compliance” stipulates that “husbands should respect, loyalty, help and help.” However, some judges believe that this includes sex. The condemnation of France by the ECtHR defines the revision of this approach.
Is there no ambiguity between the idea of the idea of ”marital duty” and the recognition of marital rape?
Absolutely Conal Rape in 1990 is the Criminal Code, while the marital duty refers to civilian. This creates a mismatch. You can’t force your wife to have sex, but rejection can be considered a civil sin. It’s absurd. Moreover, since the recognition of marital rape is only thirty years old (it is very recently), it is clear that it has no deeply penetrated society yet. Look at Mazan’s rape trial, many defendants explained that they think that Gizit Pelikot had an agreement because her husband was on her body.
Turning point for women’s rights
What are the effects of divorce responsible for people, like Mrs. H.
An announcement of guilt can lead to significant financial sanctions. This may include the impossibility of entering the former woman of moral prejudice and compensation, which is particularly punishing women, but they are mainly paid less than their husbands.
Legally, what are the “sins” in cases of convicted divorce? The Civil Code speaks of loyalty …
The question arises. If marriage definitely means having sex, we can still impose loyalty. The fact that judges can bring morals about the couple are problematic and cause discussions within their analysis.
Which factors are this incident to reach the ECHR?
Mrs. H. The decision to support between lawyers and feminist associations was very important. A case has provoked significant financial and financial resources in front of the ECHR. If this decision does not change its personal situation, it is a great preliminary for women’s rights.
Basketfully, what can we expect from all of this?
This decision obliges French judges to review the interpretation of the texts. It also opens a significant discussion. No one, marriage or elsewhere can have to have sex. The agreement must be a non-name principle. This decision is a major step for gender equality and respect for individual rights.
Source: Le Figaro
