[Version française]

CIRCUMCISION INFORMATION RESOURCE CENTRE

News Release

Group challenges constitutionality of Criminal Code

Lawsuit could force ban on infant circumcision

TORONTO (Monday, February 12, 2001) — The Association for Genital Integrity, a newly-formed Canadian group opposed to routine circumcision of male infants, has applied for funding from the Court Challenges Program of Canada to contest the constitutionality of section 268 of the Criminal Code. The Association contends that this section of the Criminal Code, which bans female genital mutilation (FGM), is discriminatory because it does not protect males and females equally.

The Court Challenges Program of Canada is a federally funded national non-profit organization set up to provide financial assistance for important court cases that advance equality rights guaranteed under Canada’s Constitution.

Spokespersons for the group say their goal is not to deny protection to females, but to extend equal protection to males.

The Association for Genital Integrity also views the practice of infant male circumcision as a violation of the right to bodily integrity guaranteed under section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

“It will be refreshing to see the issue of circumcision transferred from the medical arena to the domain of human rights, ethics and justice -- where it rightly belongs,” says Dr. Arif Bhimji, one of the spokespersons for the group.

John Antonopoulos, head of the Circumcision Information Resource Centre, a Montreal educational organization, agrees. “If routine infant circumcision is to continue, it should at least be put through a careful review of the various legal, ethical and human rights issues it raises. To proceed otherwise would be substandard.”

Lawrence Barichello, Executive Director of Intact, a human rights organization dedicated to ending routine circumcision as a medical practice, says: "It is clear that informed Canadians already oppose infant circumcision, given that only 25% of baby boys are being subjected to it. But uninformed parents can still make this terrible mistake, and clearly there needs to be a law that says 'you cannot do this,'" says Barichello. "That a baby can have sexual tissue cut off just because he's male and not female is a disgrace," he added.

The application further alleges that Canadian institutions responsible for regulating circumcision are practising systemic discrimination against male infants. To support this allegation, the application includes copies of several hundred pieces of correspondence with federal and provincial ministries of health, ministries of justice, colleges of physicians and surgeons, human rights commissions, and child welfare agencies.

Vancouver spokesperson Dennis Harrison says it’s clearly a matter of equality. “If the purpose of the present law against female circumcision is to protect females from operations that are not medically justified, then males deserve the same protection,” he says. “I don’t know of any national medical organization in the world that thinks infant male circumcision is medically justified,” adds Harrison.

Dr. Bhimji, author of Infant Male Circumcision: A Violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the application’s main supporting document, points to a lack of leadership. The group is clearly frustrated with non-legal channels.

“When there is a lack of leadership on the part of our institutions, citizens have nowhere to turn but the courts,” says Dr. Bhimji. “This is an issue of equality under the law and clearly there has been a failure to act on the part of officials in a number of our societal institutions,” he says.

Spokespersons for the Association state that a substantial amount of evidence has already been gathered, but more work remains to be done. The funding would be used to complete research, secure expert legal advice and proceed to court.

The practice of infant male circumcision has come under increasing attack in recent years. The Canadian Paediatric Society advises that circumcision of newborns “should not be routinely performed.”

Dr. Margaret Somerville, Founding Director of the McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law in Montreal, has been a commentator on the ethical and legal issues surrounding circumcision for over a decade. In her recent book, The Ethical Canary, Dr. Somerville devotes a chapter to these issues. Her analysis shows that the time is ripe for these important considerations to be addressed in court.

The Association has launched a comprehensive website (http://www.courtchallenge.com) to support the application and provide information to the general public about the court challenge.

“The Association’s goal is to direct attention to the ethical, legal, and human rights issues raised when a healthy body part is removed from a non-consenting person who has no medical need for surgery,” says Dr. Bhimji. “This is first and foremost an issue of equality and human rights,” he adds.

CONTACTS:

ASSOCIATION FOR GENITAL INTEGRITY SPOKESPERSONS:

Dr. Arif Bhimji (for Eastern Canada):

Dennis Harrison (for Western Canada):

OTHER CONTACTS:

John Antonopoulos,
President, Circumcision Information Resource Centre

Lawrence Barichello,
Executive Director, Intact

J. Steven Svoboda, J.D.,
Executive Director, Attorneys for the Rights of the Child