In the first ruling of its kind in Germany, a local court ruled yesterday that circumcision performed for religious reasons on young boys be banned as it could cause long-lasting, irreparable damage. It went on to say that the act should be made illegal due to the serious bodily harm that it could cause.

A court in Cologne, Germany made the ruling following the prosecution of a doctor who circumsised a four-year-old Muslim boy who consequently suffered from post-operative bleeding and had to be treated two days later. The doctor was later acquitted of the charges.

The new ruling bans “involuntary religious circumcision” and also recommends that it be made illegal. However, if boys consciously consented they would be allowed to go through with the procedure. Other details have not yet been made clear, but it is known that no age-restriction was given.

The ban caused widespread outcry almost instantly, particularly from major religious bodies in the country.

“Circumcision for young boys is a solid component of the Jewish religion and has been practiced worldwide for millennia. This religious right is respected in every country around the world,” President Dieter Graumann said in a statement.

“Freedom of religion is highly valued in our constitution and cannot be the play-thing of a one-dimensional case law which, furthermore, consolidates existing prejudices and stereotypes,” The Central Council of Muslims in Germany said a statement. It added that it was a “blatant and inadmissible interference” in the rights of parents.

The court defended its ruling by claiming that “the fundamental right of the child to bodily integrity outweighs the fundamental rights of the parents”. Even when children are too young to even begin comprehending such issues. It continued claiming that, “[t]he child’s body is permanently and irreparably changed by the circumcision. This change runs counter to the interests of the child, who can decide his religious affiliation himself later in life.”

The Central Council of Jews showed concern that the ruling could be replicated in other parts of the country and sought a firmer stance from parliament, urging it “to provide legal clarity in order to prevent attacks on religious freedom”.

The controversial ruling will no doubt spark further, heated debate as it pits thousands of years of religious rights against contemporary conventions.

[Source: Reuters]