The couple had been together for about 30 years until they divorced. She blamed her work had a negative effect on their marriage. However, in 2019, the French court ruled that she was responsible for the catastrophe only after she refused to have sex with him.
On Thursday, the European Supreme Human Rights Court accused the French court's decision to infringe on private life, including sexual life, and women's rights to autonomy. This decision was regarded as a breakthrough event for women's rights activists who have long been concerned about the Marriage Law in France.
The 2019 Versailles Court's ruling stated that in court documents, women who were identified only with HW had a divorce negligence after the “intimate relationship” with their husband was cut off. The court stated that the years that she had been refused to be intimate with her husband was a “serious and repeated violation” of the couple's duty.
However, the European Human Rights Court is obliged to fight domestic violence and sexual violence on Thursday, saying, “The existence of such obligations itself is the right to control sexual freedom and your body. Both are contrary to both.
He added, “The court cannot accept the agreement to marriage, as suggested by the government,” he said.
This was a symbolic victory for a woman who claimed that divorce should not be recognized. Women's rights organizations argued that this decision was a fundamental step in dealing with sexual violence and other forms of abuse in women.
“I hope this decision will be a turning point for the fight for women in France,” said HW through lawyer Delfine Zebeviture. “This victory is for all women who are facing unusual and unfair judicial judgments, just like me, questioning the perfections of their body and the rights of privacy.”
According to the ruling, HW and JC described their husband's name in the document, lived together in the suburbs of Paris, married in 1984, and had four children. The woman filed a divorce lawsuit in 2012, and her husband concentrated on her career affected her family life, and her husband claimed that she was “frustrated, violent, and hurt.”
Her husband argued in court in France that she was responsible for her husband's duty by refusing sexual intimacy and slandering her husband in her accusation.
Women testified that they had refused sex due to health problems such as serious accidents and disk slips. The French court made a advantageous judgment for him.
The French government defended himself in a European court, arguing that violating the marriage obligation was a matter of the Domestic Court, and pointed out that the French law has punished sexual assault between spouse. A spokeswoman, Diego Coras, who served as a co -court agent in court, said in the short response of French Law Gerald Darmanan on Thursday.
“It's clear that we are going in the direction of history and adapt the law,” Darmanin told reporters. He said he would encourage the members to discuss this issue.
The two parties have a three -month suspension of the lawsuit to the European Court's Court of Court, and the Court may consider the lawsuit for the final judgment. In the final decision, the committee, which is a government representative of the court member, will supervise its execution. Although there is no executive organization in the European Court, the ruling may encourage countries to reconsider the law.
In the wake of the miserable incident that 51 men were convicted of sexual assault to Giselle Pelico, the debate over mutual consent, rape culture, and sexual violence has swept away in the last few months. Pelico's ex -husband, Dominik Pelico, acknowledged that he had administered drugs to Pelico for almost 10 years, raped, and invited dozens of strangers.
Another lawyer of HW, Lilia Missen, said that the ruling should stop the legal interpretation of a French court to force women to have sex with a partner. She called this “a major progress in the right to control her body, including her marriage.”
The French female Foundation, a French femininity organization, said that the ruling said that he had “faced his responsibilities.” The report has requested the government to review the judicial practice, warning that a feminist group has warned that the concept of “couple's duty” is a form of control and sexual violence.
The organization said, “We cannot identify marriage with sexual slavery and must never identify.”
