On February 2nd, Madagascar passed a law allowing for the chemical and, in some cases, surgical castration of those found guilty of the rape of a minor. The law must now be ratified by the High Constitutional Court and signed by President Andry Rajoelina, who first raised the issue in December. Nevertheless, it has prompted criticism from international rights groups, who find it an inappropriate deterrent to rape culture.

Justice Minister Landy Mbolatiana Randriamanantenasoa claims, “Madagascar is a sovereign country which has the right to modify its laws about circumstances and in the general interest of the people.” However, the Minister views the current code as “[inadequate] to curb the perpetrators of these offenses.” According to AP News, the United Nations Children’s Fund has highlighted Madagascar as holding the one of the world’s highest rates of sexual abuse against children. Amnesty International also recognizes that Madagascar is in severe need of addressing and protecting the victims of abuse, whilst also referring to the new law as “inhuman and degrading treatment.”

The question arises as to whether the law effectively fulfills its role in safeguarding children. Randriamanantenasoa claims that “[Madagascar] wanted to protect children much more. The younger the children, the greater the punishment.” As reported by U.S. News and World Report, chemical castration is “the use of drugs to block hormones and decrease sexual desire.” While chemical castration is generally reversible by stopping the drugs, surgical castration is a permanent procedure. The use of both is highly contentious. For example, surgical castration would be problematic if anyone who underwent the process was later exonerated of a crime on appeal.

Several countries and some U.S. states, including California and Florida, allow for chemical castration for some sex offenders. Surgical castration as a punishment is much rarer. For instance, California law mandates chemical castration for the following group of offenders: repeat sex offenders, offenders who molest children under 13 years, and parolees. Although California was the first state to adopt chemical castration to protect society from repeat offenders, the law has undergone extreme criticism. Some organizations that criticize castration argue that the process does not consider the right to equal protection under the law and the offender’s right to privacy.

In summary, Jessica Lolonirina Nivoseheno of the Women Break the Silence group, which campaigns against rape and supports victims, voices that “The new law is progress because it is a deterrent punishment… This move could prevent potential attackers from taking action.” However, she cautions policymakers and citizens by adding that the law will be effective only if “we are aware of the existence and importance of this new penalty.”