Women’s lobby says Malta must reconsider opposition on no-consent rape EU rule

Malta Women’s Lobby has called on the Maltese government to reconsider its stance on not supporting an EU-wide crime of no-consent rape in the proposed EU Directive on Violence Against Women.

Despite the well-documented vulnerability of women in society to gender-based and sexual violence, the Maltese government has chosen to support the removal of rape from Article 5 of the proposed EU Directive on violence against women and domestic violence.

On no-consent rape, Malta shies away from zealous EU definition

Article 5, which establishes a consent-based definition of rape across the EU, aligns with the principles of the Istanbul Convention, an international treaty aimed at combating violence against women.

The MWL said this consent-based definition is deemed vital, particularly given that 11 EU member states tates continue to predominantly define rape based on the use of force, threat, or coercion. “Such definitions have proven to be inadequate in providing comprehensive protection to victims and have often resulted in secondary victimisation,” the MWL said in a statement.

The MWL urged the government to heed the voices of women’s organisations, legal associations, survivors, and the hundreds of thousands of citizens who have signed petitions in favour of a robust Directive addressing violence against women.

“Such a reconsideration would represent a significant stride towards the eradication of violence against women and the assurance of justice for victims. Failure to do so would further highlight the fact that women’s rights are not high on the Maltese government’s agenda, not to mention the total disrespect towards and disregard for victims of rape,” the MWL said.

Justice minister Jonathan Attard says Maltese national law already ratifies in full the principles of the Istanbul Convention with the introduction in 2018 of no-consent rape.

“Our national law goes beyond the minimum standards proposed by the Commission regarding rape,” he says.

“Nationally our law is already in line with the proposed Directive. We do not think however that the EU should have this competence on aspects of national law by casting a wider obligation on other member states,” Attard concedes – predicting that Malta would not want to have its own hand forced by the Union, on other aspects of criminal law.

The 17 states opposing the directive’s proposals are also resting on the opinion issued by the Council Legal Service (CLS), which says that the Treaty of the European Union (TFEU) already has a list of “euro crimes”. Rape is not one of them. And attempts by the European Commission to argue that rape is a tool of sexual exploitation have been refused because the CLS says the notion of ‘sexual exploitation’ under the TFEU can only be used on a specific aspect of human trafficking.

“The notion of ‘sexual exploitation’ is generally not used to cover crimes like rape or engaging sexual activity with a person without his or her consent, of which the essential constitutive element is sexual violence directly affecting the physical integrity and sexual freedom, as opposed to sexual exploitation,” Jonathan Attard told MaltaToday.