Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police
This unique conviction is the first-of-its-kind in the UK after she was found guilty of facilitating an act of female genital mutilation (FGM) overseas.
This is the first time in the Met’s history where officers have secured a conviction for FGM occurring abroad.
Amina Noor, 39 (1.1.84) of London was found guilty of assisting a non-UK person to mutilate the genitals of a UK female citizen overseas, contrary to Section 3 of the Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) Act 2003, on Thursday 26 October at the Old Bailey following a two-week trial.
The conviction was secured after a long, complex and sensitive investigation by detectives due to the historical nature of the offence which was reported to police in November 2018.
During the trial, the court heard how the investigation commenced after the victim informed a teacher that she had been abused years before.
Detectives established Noor had travelled with the child to Kenya in 2006, where she was subjected to the abuse.
Noor denied having knowledge the child had suffered severe mutilation of her genitals, claiming she believed she was pricked or injected, a procedure she referred to as being called “Sunnah” and “Gudniin”. Detectives established these were Arabic words meaning “the practice of Prophet Mohamed” and “circumcision” respectively.
This version of events was later discredited by medical professionals who assessed the girl’s injuries and determined she had not been injected, but instead she suffered severe mutilation of her genitals. This is likely to have caused significant bleeding and extreme pain.
Detective Superintendent Andy Furphy, the Met’s Modern Slavery and Child Exploitation lead, said: “Female genital mutilation is a barbaric and violent crime inflicted on young and vulnerable girls, often with lifelong consequences, and it has no place in today’s society.
“I hope this landmark case sends out a strong message that we will not tolerate this type of offending and will do everything in our power to bring those responsible to justice.
“We will continue to work closely with partners across social care and the health service to identify and safeguard those at risk of this heinous abuse.”
In a statement read outside court today, Detective Superintendent Andy Furphy encouraged anyone who has suffered, to come forward and get the justice they so rightly deserve. He also reiterated that anonymity commences as soon as an allegation of FGM is made to police, which ensures victims and survivors are protected whatever the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.
If you know someone who you believe to be at immediate risk of FGM, call 999 immediately.
If you have concerns about the welfare of any young person, or you have information about FGM-related offending, you can call police or the NSPCC FGM Helpline on 0800 028 3550.
Background
An image of Noor and her address will not be released due to the risk of jigsaw identification, where the Serious Crime Act 2015 applies to the lifelong anonymity for the victim.
One of the reasons why victims of FGM may be reluctant to come forward and report the crime is because of the risk of being identified as a victim of such a personal and sensitive crime. Giving victims the protection that lifelong anonymity affords is intended to encourage more victims to come forward to report this crime. Anonymity commences as soon as an allegation of FGM is made by the victim. This ensures that the victim is protected whatever the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.
For more information go to: Section 4A and Schedule 1 of the FGM Act 2003 to see provisions for the anonymity of victims of FGM. The effect is to prohibit the publication of any matter that would be likely to lead members of the public to identify a person as the alleged victim of any offence under the FGM Act 2003. The prohibition lasts for the lifetime of the alleged victim. The prohibition covers not just immediate identifying information such as the name and address or a photograph of the alleged victim, but any other information which, whether on its own or pieced together with other information, would be likely to lead members of the public to identify the alleged victim.
A restriction on the reporting of the defendants’ identities may be appropriate where it is proposed that it is to be reported that they are the parents of the victim and other information, such as the location of the incident or people who have subsequently become responsible for the care of the victim, may also be subject to reporting restrictions. “Publication” is given a broad meaning and would include traditional print media, broadcasting and social media such as X or Facebook.