A Long Awaited Reform: France’s Amended Rape Law

Image source: Damien Meyer/AFP

In September of 2024, Gisele Pelicot became a global figure and women’s rights icon during her trial against her now former husband Dominique Pelicot and 50 other men. For nearly a decade during their marriage, Dominique had drugged Gisele and invited numerous men to rape her while she was unconscious. Dominique was sentenced to 20 years for aggravated rape, with 46 men guilty of rape, 2 of attempted rape, and 2 of sexual assault. 

During this case, rape and sexual abuse in France was characterized as any form of sexual penetration using violence, coercion, threat or surprise. The lack of consent mentioned in the law was used as defense for Dominique and his co-defendants, as they were supposedly unaware that Gisele had not given her consent; therefore, the sexual acts could not constitute rape.

In response to this claim, France has now amended the law such that consent cannot be presumed from silence or no response. While seen as a triumph for many, this amendment also comes with many negative implications. Many fear that this could make it harder for victims to achieve justice because they would have to prove nonconsent, rather than focusing on the violence instigated by perpetrators. Nevertheless, this historic change is still touted as a step in the right direction to change a culture of taking advantage of women long steeped in French society. 

France has more than 230,000 sexual violence incidents per year, but only 8,000 result in convictions. The drastically low amount of convictions highlights the inability of France’s justice system to make meaningful progress towards gender-based sexual violence justice. One could even argue that the low amount of convictions fosters rape culture, as perpetrators are aware of the low probability that they will be convicted.

In 2017, the French Supreme Court ruled that a case involving 20 emergency service workers who had repeatedly had sex with a young girl when she was between 13 and 15 years old did not constitute rape. The court concluded that Julie, the pseudonym of the girl, had a flirtatious attitude, and there was no proof she was compelled to have sex. Despite the fact that Julie had not given consent and was underage, she was not protected to any extent by French law in this case, and only three of her rapists were charged with sexual abuse. The perpetuation of harmful gender stereotypes, misogyny, and the complete inability of France to protect its youth drew outcry for an age of consent to be enshrined into law.

In order for more victims to feel comfortable speaking out and for perpetrators to receive the sentences they deserve, it is vital that France to continues to reevaluate its laws and implement more policies eradicating sexual violence as a whole. This already overdue change is an important step in the right direction, but the fact that it required the MeToo Movement and a landmark rape case for France to come to this point is concerning for many French citizens and women.