Dominique Pélicot was convicted by a French criminal court for having repeatedly drugged and sexually abused his then wife Gisèle Pélicot for almost a decade.
“The trial shed light on misconceptions in France about the nature of sexual violence and exposed the harsh realities of victimisation in private spaces,” Dr Chifflet says.
She adds that while there has been much commentary about Gisèle Pélicot’s ordeal, and her courageous choice to hold the trial publicly, there has been less attention on the broader legal context of the trial.
“My research examines two distinctive features of the French substantive and procedural framework. The first relates to inadequacies in the definition of rape. In particular, the French Criminal Code's definition of rape requires that the conduct is committed with ‘violence, coercion, threat or surprise’ and is yet to grapple with the absence of consent as a stand-alone consideration,” she says.
“The second concerns the procedural peculiarities of the case, namely that the trial was held before a panel of judges, but the upcoming appeal will be heard before a jury. This is a unique feature of the French system where appeals in such cases are reheard in full,” she says.
Dr Chifflet adds that the conversation in France strongly resonates with the Australian experience over the past 30 years, raising similar arguments for and against reform.
