Description
The repatriation of foreign terrorist fighters (FTFs) has proven politically and legally divisive, exposing differences between criminal justice systems across Europe, Asia, and North America- particularly with the prosecution and sentencing of women. Whilst countries including Germany, France, and the Netherlands have repatriated women to ensure they will face justice, the UK has been notably resistant to adopting this same approach. This goes beyond the repatriation of female FTFs. In England and Wales, women have not been prosecuted as often or sentenced equally to men who have committed the same terrorist offence since 2002. What are the reasons for this? And what are the implications of this? This talk offers an interpretation of doctoral research findings, which suggests there are factors - beyond the fact that fewer women engage in terrorism – which explain the differential treatment of male and female defendants. One potential answer may be that agency is articulated differently with respect to gender, which could impact legal decision-making processes. Secondly, it is possible that the widening scope of terrorism legislation- and its inclusion of non-violent and preparatory offences- has not yet been reconciled with the binary notion of female passivity and terroristic ‘violence’.
