The couple was together for about 30 years before divorcing. She blamed his job for taking a toll on their marriage. However, in 2019, a French court ruled that she was only to blame for the breakup after she refused to have sex with him.
Europe's top human rights court on Thursday condemned the French court's decision, saying it violated a woman's right to autonomy and a private life, including her sex life. The decision was seen as a milestone by women's rights activists, who have long raised concerns about France's matrimonial laws.
A 2019 decision by the Versailles Court of Appeal said the woman, identified only as HW in court documents, was to blame for the divorce after she stopped having an “intimate relationship” with her husband. The court said being intimate with her husband had been a “serious and repeated breach” of her conjugal duties for years.
However, the European Court of Human Rights said that governments have an obligation to combat domestic and sexual violence, stating on Thursday that “the very existence of such a duty of engagement violates both sexual freedom and the right to control one's body.” ”, it was ruled.
“The court cannot accept, as the government suggests, that consent to marriage means consent to future sexual relations.”
It was a symbolic victory for women. The woman had argued that she should not be found guilty of divorce. Women's rights groups called it a fundamental step to address sexual violence and other forms of abuse against women in relationships.
“We hope that this decision marks a turning point in the fight for women's rights in France,” HW said in a statement through its lawyer Delphine Zoubi. “This victory is for all women, like me, who have faced extraordinary and unjust judicial decisions that call into question their bodily integrity and right to privacy.”
HW and JC determined that the husband, as named in the documents, lived together outside of Paris, married in 1984 and had four children together. The woman started divorce proceedings in 2012, claiming her husband's focus on his career had affected their family life and left him “irritable, violent, and hurtful.” did.
Her husband slandered him with her accusations, claiming in a French court that he was liable because he had breached his conjugal duties by denying her sexual intimacy.
The woman testified that she refused sex because of health problems, including a serious accident and a slipped disc. The French courts were in his favor.
The French government, defending in the European Court of Justice, argued that the question of whether marital obligations had been breached was a matter for domestic courts, and pointed out that French law punished sexual assault between spouses. Diego Colas, the official representing the French government in court, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
“Obviously we will go in the direction of history and adapt the law,” French Justice Minister Gerard Darman told reporters on Thursday. He said he would encourage lawmakers to discuss the issue.
The parties have three months to refer the case to the Chamber of Commerce of the European Court of Justice. Ultimately, the Court's Committee of Government Representatives from Member States will oversee its enforcement. Although the European court has no enforcement mechanism, its ruling could prompt countries to reconsider their laws.
Conversations about mutual consent, rape culture and sexual violence have swept France in recent months, driven by the tragic case in which 51 men were found guilty of sexually violating Gisèle Pelicot. Mrs. Perricotte's ex-husband, Dominic Perricotte, admitted to drugging and raping her for almost a decade, inviting dozens of strangers to join him.
Lilia Missen, another lawyer representing HW, said the ruling should stop French courts from interpreting the law in a way that forces women to have sex with their partners. She called it “a major development for women's right to control their bodies, including during marriage.”
The French women's rights group, the Women's Foundation, said the ruling brought France “face to face with its responsibilities.” It called on the government to review its judicial practices, adding that feminist groups had warned that the concept of “marriage obligation” was a form of domination and sexual violence.
“Marriage cannot and will never be equated with sexual slavery,” the group said.
