Background on FGM/C in Alaska 

In 2013, the Population Reference Bureau estimated that 20 women and girls had undergone or were at risk of FGM/C in the state of Alaska. While this number may seem relatively low, it is important to emphasize the urgent need for updated and comprehensive data in this area. The above statistic was based solely on prevalence rates in diaspora communities and thus is not reflective of the true scope of the issue.

Currently, FGM/C is not a crime under Alaska state law despite previous legislative attempts. In 2017, HB 245 was introduced and subsequently referred to the Health & Social Services, Judiciary, and Finance Committees. However, the bill never progressed any further, and was not considered in subsequent legislative sessions.

A New Bill Targeting FGM/C was Introduced to the Alaska Legislature in January 2024 

In 2024, Representative Eastman introduced a new bill, HB 214, into the Alaska legislature. On January 16, it was referred to the Health & Social Services, Judiciary, and Finance Committees. 

The new bill defines the felony of FGM/C as “circumcising, excising, or infibulating, in whole or in part, the labia majora, labia minora, clitoris, or clitoral prepuce of a female; surgically altering, pricking, scraping, or cauterizing normal, healthy, and functioning genital tissue of a female; or other procedures that are harmful to the external genital tissue of a female.” Anyone who knowingly performs FGM/C, transports a person to perform FGM/C, or any parent, guardian, or person in custodial authority who consents to FGM/C is punishable under the bill. If found guilty, the bill imposes a sentence of between five and 99 years. 

In addition to its core provisions, the proposed bill contains progressive and inclusive elements, including that it: 

• Calls for the revocation of a practitioner of FGM/C’s license, certificate, or permit;
• Includes a provision on vacation cutting, such that travel for the purpose of performing FGM/C is punishable;
• States that consent of the survivor or their parent is not a defense;
• States that religion, culture, custom, or practice are not a defense;
• Creates an exception, wherein general evidence laws granting spousal confidentiality do not apply.

Despite the positive provisions listed above, there are areas where the language and content of the bill could be improved. These include: 

• The bill states that educational, preventative, and outreach activities established and implemented under the bill should focus on “immigrant populations that traditionally practice” FGM/C. 

→ This makes the assumption that FGM/C is primarily an issue in immigrant populations.

• The bill specifies in its definition of FGM/C that it refers “normal, healthy, and functioning genital issue.” 

→ This is unnecessary because there is already a medical exception listed in affirmative defenses, and this phrase could potentially be misused to target intersex persons.

Equality Now calls for the swift passage of this bill into Alaska state law, while urging legislators to revise the potentially damaging language that leaves loopholes in the law and could hinder its effectiveness.