Courts / Dublin / Report
Experts clash on whether historic case was actually FGM
Summary
In a Dublin Circuit Criminal Court appeal, two medical experts disputed whether a one‑year‑old girl's injuries were due to female genital mutilation (FGM). The parents, convicted of child cruelty, were found guilty of performing FGM on their daughter on 16 September 2016. Professor Birgitta Essen, a Swedish obstetrician‑gynecologist with 25 years of FGM research, argued that the absence of scarring and a visible clitoris meant FGM had not occurred, citing WHO criteria. Professor Sri Paran, a paediatric surgeon who cauterised the wound, contended that cautery could mask scars and that the child had not self‑injured. The father's counsel highlighted translation errors that he claimed compromised the trial's fairness. The appeal hearing remains ongoing.
Who, what, where, when and why
What: Report matter: Experts clash on whether historic case was actually FGM. Procedural stage: appeal
When:
- September 16, 2016 Hearing Or Sentence
- November 2019 Hearing Or Sentence
- 2021-10-07 Publication
Why: In her opinion, the girl at the centre of this case had not been a victim of FGM because her clitoris was still visible. CNI source report
Places mentioned
Topics
Related court reports
- Man charged with having 56k child abuse images and videos remanded on bail
- Ex-Dáil hopeful's allegations against former employer 'complete fantasy', WRC told
- Mater must pay €10k to worker who said he was wrongly accused of abusing patient
- 'I think we know I won't be getting bail' - Daniel Kinahan charged with directing criminal organisation
- Letting agent who claimed alleged domestic violence victim abandoned tenancy by fleeing to refuge must pay €14.7k
- 77-year-old with 470 convictions told Luas staff to 'f**k off'
If a fact, identity, locality or legal outcome needs review, email the newsroom with this report's details prefilled.
Email a correction request