Go to content

Legislation in each country and auto­nomous region

This section constitutes the main descriptive review of honour-based criminal legislation. Rather than following a strict country-by-country review in alphabetical order, it begins with the two countries that have the most comprehensive legislation: Sweden, which has defined specified honour crimes as a criminal offence, and Denmark, which has the most compre­hen­sive legislation in terms of the number of acts that can constitute a crime in an honour context. This is followed by an alphabetical country-by-country review. Since, as explained above, criminal legislation in the Faroe Islands and Åland replicates that in Denmark and Finland respectively, these cases are treated together under the same sections. Greenland is covered in a short section stating that, in practice, there is no honour-based criminal legislation corresponding to that found in the other countries and autonomous regions.

Swedish legislation

Swedish legislation contains both the oldest and most recently imple­mented legislation in the Nordic region, in the sense that a completely new legal provision and new criminal classifi­cation have been formulated. The oldest is Act SFS 1982:316 on female genital cutting, which entered into force on 1 January 1983. The most recent is the so-called ‘honour oppression clause’ (Chap. 4 § 4e of the Criminal Code), which entered into force on 1 July 2022.

Specified honour crimes

Since 2022, Sweden has had a specific law prohibiting repeated acts that constitute a crime against a person or their property in which “the motive is to preserve or restore the honour of a person or family, relatives or other similar group [...] if the acts form a part of an element in a repeated violation of that person’s integrity and suited to severely damage that person’s self-confidence,” a person can be convicted of specified honour crimes. The penalty is one to six years in prison (Chap. 4 § 4e of the Criminal Code).
4 § 4a of the Swedish Penal Code concerning gross violation of integrity and gross violation of a woman’s integrity and also carries the same range of punishment. As with the offence of a violation of integrity, the individual acts do not need to be of a particularly serious nature. Milder forms of violation, assault or similar acts fulfil the requirement, provided that they are repeated incidents.
While the offence of a violation of integrity explicitly focuses on violations committed against a close or former close relative, the section on specified honour crimes places greater emphasis on the perpet­rator’s motives. It is therefore not necessary to be a close relative of the victim to be convicted of a specified honour crime. The legislation appears to take into account the fact that many honour-based crimes are committed against boyfriends who are not accepted by a woman’s family. In such cases, the victim cannot be considered a close relative.
However, the concept of ‘motive’ is problematic. The clause on specified honour crimes is the only place in the entire Criminal Code in which ‘motive’ is a prerequisite, i.e. something that a prosecutor must prove has taken place. The question, however, is how motive can be proven, since it requires a court to be convinced that a person thought in a specific way in connection with specific acts, with an emphasis on the notion that they thought in such a way on repeated occasions. There is still no case law (ruling by the Court of Appeal or Supreme Court) pertaining to this section of the Criminal Code, although there is some guidance on assessing honour as a motive in relation to increased penalties, as explained in the following section.

Stricter penalties for honour-based crimes

An earlier Swedish law that entered into force on 1 June 2020 and pertains to harsher penalties is found in Chap. 29 § 2, para. 10 of the Swedish Criminal Code. The wording is largely the same as in the para­graph on specified honour crimes, as it stipulates that when determining a sentence, it shall be considered an aggravating circumstance “if the motive for the crime was to preserve or restore the honour of a person or family, relatives or other similar group”. The application of this provision in sentencing means that a person must first be convicted of a crime, i.e. that a criminal act has taken place and that there is no doubt that the defendant committed the act. Only when these two criteria are met can a sentence be imposed. At the prosecutor’s request, the court may then assess whether the crime was committed for reasons of honour, which may result in a harsher sentence. For example, an assault of the normal degree, an act which would typically carry a sentence of six months’ imprisonment, could instead result in a sentence of eight months’ imprisonment.

Female genital cutting

According to Act 1982:316 prohibiting female genital cutting, it is a crime to perform “an operation on the external female genitalia with the aim of mutilating them or causing other permanent changes to them [...] regardless of whether consent has been given to the operation or not”. The standard sentence is two to six years’ imprisonment or, in the case of a serious offence, five to ten years’ imprisonment. The range of punishment for a normal degree offence corresponds approximately to that for aggravated assault. In the case of a serious offence, it corresponds to the criminal classification of particularly aggravated assault. There is no classification for minor genital cutting – corresponding to assault of a normal degree. However, for genital cutting, there is the possibility of classification as a less serious crime, with a prescribed penalty of up to four years’ imprisonment. It is also possible to be convicted for attempted, conspired or planned crimes.

Forced marriage and child marriage offences

In Sweden, forced marriage and child marriage are regulated in Chap. 4 § 4c of the Criminal Code. In addition, misleading someone into travel for the purpose of marriage is punishable under Chap. 4 § 4d of the Penal Code. The crime of forced marriage entered into force in 2014 and the crime of child marriage came into force in 2020. Since 2022, preparing, attempting and/or conspiring to commit the above offences have also been criminalised under Chap. 4 § 10 of the Criminal Code.
In short, the elements of forced marriage include “through unlawful coercion or exploitation of a vulnerable situation, causing a person to enter into a marriage”. The second paragraph of the section equates a ‘marriage-like relationship’ with marriage, which means that even in cases where there is no formally documented marriage certificate, it may be sufficient for the marriage to be considered to exist through the customs of a group and – as a central part of the requirement – that the dissolution of the relationship is in some way conditional.
The description of the offence of child marriage (Chap. 4 § 4c, para. 3 of the Criminal Code) is similar to that of forced marriage, except that it specifies that the person given in marriage (the plaintiff) is under the age of eighteen. The legislation also takes into account that persons under the age of eighteen have limited legal capacity, which means that even those who allow a child to be married off (implicitly a guardian) can be convicted of the offence.
The penalty is the same regardless of whether it concerns forced marriage or child marriage offences, i.e. im­prison­ment for a maximum of four years.
The offence of “misleading a person into travel for the purposes of marriage” is also introduced via § 4d. This means that anyone who “through deception persuades a person to travel to a country other than the one in which he or she lives, with the aim of exposing that person to [a marriage crime]” is guilty of what can be described as a form of aiding and abetting or preparation for a marriage crime or child marriage crime. In this case, the penalty is slightly lower: imprison­ment for a maximum of two years.
According to Chap, 5 § 5 of the Marriage Code, a person who has been subjected to forced marriage has the right to request a divorce without a cooling-off period (a cooling-off period is otherwise a normal condition for divorce). The third paragraph of the same section gives prosecutors the mandate to pursue a divorce case, and a social welfare board that becomes aware of a child marriage is obliged to provide information relevant to such a case to the prosecutor.

Compulsory veiling and conversion attempts

There is no Swedish legislation that makes it a criminal offence to force someone else to wear or not wear certain clothing. In recent years, a number of municipalities have introduced local rules mainly prohibiting girls in primary and lower secondary school from wearing a veil during school hours. Compliance with these local regulations has been varied but, judging by media reports, limited overall, mainly because head teachers have not compelled (or been able to compel) teachers or other school staff to enforce the bans.
Conversion attempts, i.e. actions aimed at persuading individuals to embrace a heterosexual lifestyle and thus distance themselves from other possible sexual orientations, have been the subject of relatively little debate in Sweden compared to, for example, Norway. Recently, the issue has also been included in steering documents concerning honour-based issues (see the policy analysis in the previous section of this publication), but at the legislative level there has still been no discussion of defining conversion attempts as a specific crime. On a theoretical level, as there is still no court practice to confirm this, repeated conversion attempts with proven reference to family honour could be tried under the aforementioned clause on speci­fied honour crimes. Similarly, a proven single violation of an individual’s sexual orien­tation could result in a more severe punishment if the court considers that the act has an underlying honour motive.

Double criminality

Chap. 2 § 5, para. 2 of the Swedish Criminal Code stipulates that even though the main rule in the first paragraph of the same section is that crimes committed by or against persons with a connection to Sweden (in practice, citizenship or residence permit) can only be tried if the suspected crime is also a crime in the country where it was committed, certain crimes included in Chap. 4 of the Penal Code may be tried even if they are not criminal offences in the country where they were committed. These include forced marriage, child marriage and specified honour crimes. Female genital cutting is also included among the offences for which a person can be convicted even if the offence was committed in a country where such acts do not constitute a crime.

Danish and Faroese legislation

In Denmark, virtually all existing criminal legal provisions were introduced during the 2000s. In 2003, female genital cutting was made a criminal offence. In 2012, forced marriage was made a criminal offence. In 2019, § 243 of the Criminal Code was introduced, making psychological violence against close family members a criminal offence. Such psychological violence is assumed to be included under the definition of so-called negative social control.
The Faroe Islands have been part of the Danish Kingdom since 1380 and followed Danish legislation between 1816 and 1948, when the territory became self-governing. Since 1948, the area has gradually moved away from Danish legislation in favour of its own, with Løgting as the legislative assembly (Nyborg Lauritsen, 2019). Since 2010, the Faroe Islands have had their own criminal legislation (Revsilógin), which is essentially a Faroese translation of the Danish Criminal Code. All existing Danish laws relating to honour are also included in the Revsilógin. The term ‘negative social control’ found in the Danish Criminal Code has its counterpart in the Faroese neiligt sosialt eftirlit.

Stricter penalties

Danish/​Faroese legislation also applies tougher penalties for honour-based crimes. Unlike Swedish legislation, however, these tougher penalties are sometimes specified in individual sections of the law, in addition to crimes in certain contexts being grouped together in a section on sentencing (§ 81a-d of the Criminal Code). Stricter penalties in Danish/​Faroese legislation will therefore be dealt with both for individual crimes and within the framework of the section on stricter penalties.

Negative social control

The Danish Criminal Code stipulates that anyone who, through neglect or degrading treat­ment, violates a partner, child or minor under their care, or other relative or in-law who is a direct ascendent or descendent, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for up to two years (§ 213). This provision, which is found in Chap. 23 on crimes in family relationships, is somewhat dated and could be applied to honour-based acts. However, since 2019, § 243 of the Criminal Code contains a provision under the offence of ‘psychological violence’. The key elements of § 243 are that gross violations are acts carried out repeatedly over a period of time against someone in a household to whom one has a connection with the aim of “unduly controlling the person through negative social control”. While the length of the period is not specified, the central requirement is that the acts are repeated, which is comparable to the Swedish honour oppression clause. The period is then limited to taking place between the first and last proven act.
The fact that the offence is described as taking place in a household context rather than a family context means that the collective interest extends beyond clear family ties. This can be compared to the aforementioned § 213, where applicable kinship is clearly defined. The term ‘household’ may imply family ties but can also be interpreted as persons with interests in a collective in which kinship is not a strict prerequisite. This broadening of the concept means that persons with more distant kinship ties can be implicated in such a crime and that persons who are not related but otherwise have interests in a family or clan sphere can be considered accomplices. This was the case, for example, in a high-profile honour killing in Denmark in 2005 (see Wikan, 2010) and in an honour killing in Sweden in 2016 (Court of Appeal for Southern Norrland, Case B 821-17; see also Rosquist, 2020).
The term ‘negative social control’, which in Denmark (and Norway and, to some extent, Finland) is a collective term for the collectively imposed system of sanctions that constitutes specified honour crimes, is explicitly used in § 243. Negative social control is exercised with the aim of “punishing those who violate the norms and behaviour that the family or community considers to be decent” (see part 1 in this publication). What is highlighted here is that negative social control is accepted and sanctioned within the community (or household) whose honour is considered to be threatened by a specific individual’s breach of norms. The mention of negative social control reflects the Swedish legal provision, which instead focuses on the motive of maintaining or restoring the honour of a family or similar group.

Physical violence and grounds for increased penalties

The following sections of the Criminal Code (§§ 244-246) deal with violent crimes (crimes against the ‘body’) of gradually increasing severity, from assault of a nor­mal degree to gross negligence resulting in the death of another person. Here, the legislation emphasises that such offences are considered more serious if they have been committed against someone who is or has been a member of the perpetra­tor’s household. See, for example, § 244, which stipulates that the maximum penalty for assault of a normal degree is doubled from three to six years’ im­prison­ment in cases in which the act is committed against a close relative. It should be noted, however, that the concept of a close relative is applicable to all forms of violence in family relationships and not exclusively to honour-based family violence.

Female genital cutting (kvindelig omskæring)

Denmark and the Faroe Islands are the only Nordic countries to use the term ‘female circumcision’ rather than female genital cutting or genital mutilation in legislation. The legal provision concerning female circumcision is included in the Criminal Code (§ 245a) through Act 2003-05-28 nr 386, an amendment to the Danish Act on Aliens. In practice, this is an addition to the existing § 245 on criminal liability for causing bodily harm through medical intervention, which carries a maximum penalty of six years’ imprisonment. Alongside this, female circumcision is included in § 246, which concerns grievous bodily harm or death, which carries a maximum penalty of ten years’ imprisonment. In addition, sentences for offences included in §§ 245, 245a or 246 can be increased by a further fifty per cent of the stated maximum penalty in the event of repeated offences (Criminal Code § 247).

Forced marriage, compulsory veiling and child marriage

Since 2012, Danish/​Faroese legislation has included a criminal law provision (Criminal Code § 260, para. 2) that equates forced marriage with unlawful coercion. It was introduced by Act 2013-05-01 No. 434, an amendment to the Criminal Code and the Act on Aliens. Forced marriage in this context includes forcing someone to enter into marriage or partake in a religious ceremony or similar marriage-like relationship, or to force someone to remain in such a relationship. Under this provision, refusal to accept a divorce could also constitute forced marriage, but this needs to be seen in the light of the fact that divorce is a relatively common occurrence in Denmark and that it is not unusual for one party to oppose divorce. For coercion of an individual to remain in a marriage to constitute forced marriage, it must be assumed that there are perpetrators outside of one of the two married parties from within the extended family circle. In this respect, the involvement of a clan or family constitutes an honour-based case.
Criminal Code § 260 is a portal provision in Chap. 26 concerning “crimes against personal freedom”, corresponding to “crimes against freedom and peace” in Chap. 4 of the Swedish Criminal Code. While unlawful coercion of a ‘normal degree’ (§ 260, para. 1) carries a penalty ranging from a fine to imprisonment for up to two years, coercion into marriage under the second subparagraph is punishable by imprisonment for up to four years. Similarly, the third part, introduced in August 2018, stipulates that anyone who forces someone to wear clothing designed to conceal their face (‘compulsory veiling’) also risks imprisonment for up to four years. In terms of sentencing, forced marriage and compulsory veiling are therefore considered particularly serious crimes against personal freedom. It is also noteworthy that forced marriage and compulsory veiling are dealt with in such close connection to each other in the text of the law and that they are given special signifi­cance from a sentencing perspective. This indicates that Danish legislation attaches particular importance to codifying the prosecution of honour practices.
Child marriage is regulated in § 260a of the Criminal Code. According to the first sub­paragraph, a marriage officiant who marries a child under the age of eighteen can be fined or sentenced to imprisonment for up to two years. The same penalty is imposed on anyone who allows their child to be married (implicitly a guardian), as per subparagraph two. It is note­worthy that child marriage is in practice subject to a lower penalty than forced marriage. However, it can be assumed that the issue of forced marriage would be investigated in parallel and, where appropriate, prosecuted separately by the public prosecutor.
It should also be noted that, under Danish/​Faroese law, a marriage officiant who marries a minor can be prosecuted for child marriage offences. There is no equi­va­lent to this in the criminal legislation of other Nordic countries. In the other Nordic countries, the focus is entirely on coercive family members and other relatives. In all the Nordic countries and autonomous regions, marriage ceremonies are invalid in the case of forced and/​or child marriage, but it is only in Denmark that conducting a marriage ceremony is in itself a punishable offence for the person conducting the ceremony.

Re-education trips

Criminal Code § 215a stipulates up to four years’ imprisonment for anyone who is responsible for a minor travelling abroad to participate in activities that harm the child’s health or development (re-education trips). This provision is consistent with the fact that Danish authorities have a special mandate to combat re-education trips and that such trips are related to so-called honour-based conflicts and negative social control (see part 1 in this publication), as well as UIBM 2016).

Double criminality

The prohibition and enforcement of laws on female circumcision are further clarified and strengthened through the inclusion of criminal liability for offences committed abroad through the additions of Act 2006-06-08 No. 540 amending the Criminal Code and Act 2008-06-17 No. 490 amending the Criminal Code and various other laws. In practice, this means extended criminal jurisdiction, as Danish citizens or persons with strong ties to Denmark (e.g. through residence permits) can be convicted of crimes in Denmark even if they do not constitute crimes in the country where they are committed. The same applies if the act is committed against a Danish citizen or a person with strong ties to Denmark. This provision applies only to a few crimes; in addition to female circumcision, it applies to the sexual exploitation of children, human trafficking and terrorism (Criminal Code § 7). Female circumcision is also one circumstance in which a person can be prosecuted abroad but still be prosecuted in Denmark at a later date, known as double criminality.

Finnish and Ålandic legislation

The Finnish Criminal Code contains few specific references to crimes that can be assumed to be honour-based. As described in the policy analysis of this publication, work to strengthen legislation has recently begun; see, for example, the Finnish Government (2023:209). A review of pending bills from 18 July 2025 does not indicate, however, that such legislation is imminent.

Sentencing

No honour-based acts are specified as grounds for sentencing under Chap. 6 §§ 4-8 of the Finnish Criminal Code. Instead, sentences are imposed according to general principles that apply to all criminal acts.

Female genital cutting

The provisions on female genital cutting were introduced as recently as 2024 and are regulated in Chap. 21 of the Criminal Code, which deals with crimes against life and health. They have been introduced as sub-paragraphs to Chap. 21 § 6, which regulates aggravated assault and preparations for such assaults. Female genital cutting is described as the total or partial removal or other damage to the external genitalia of a woman or girl (Chap. 21 § 6b). The penalty is imprisonment for one to ten years. Chap. 21 § 6c regulates preparation for female genital cutting, which may include possessing “a tool that is designed specifically for the purpose” of performing the act (Criminal Code, Chap. 21 § 6a, cl. 1), taking a woman or girl abroad for the purpose of performing the procedure (Criminal Code, Chap. 21 § 6c, cl. 2) or persuading a woman or girl to undergo the procedure (Criminal Code, Chap. 21 § 6c, cl. 3). Preparing to perform female genital cutting carries a sentence of four months to five years’ imprisonment.
The range of punishment for female genital cutting is the same as for aggravated assault, which implicitly means that the crime is not considered to be of a normal degree. It is also stipulated in § 6b that attempts at female genital cutting are punishable within the frame­work of the range of punishment. In the case of preparation for female genital cutting, the range of punishment is slightly higher than for preparation for other forms of aggravated assault, mainly because it carries a minimum penalty of imprisonment. Preparation for other forms of aggravated assault can result in a sentence of up to four years in prison but do not require a prison sentence.
The focus of § 6a is on the act of female genital cutting in itself, i.e. the person who performs the procedure. In cases in which family members or other persons are involved in planning and carrying out female genital cutting, these circumstances are considered preparation for the crime under § 6b.

Forced marriage and child marriage

The Criminal Code does not contain any specific provisions on forced marriage; instead, this offence is dealt with under the provisions on human trafficking (Chap. 25 § 3, cl. 4) or aggra­va­ted human trafficking (Chap. 25 § 3a). If the forced marriage is carried out against a child, aggravated human trafficking is automatically applicable (Chap. 25 § 3a, cl. 3). Human trafficking of a normal degree carries a sentence of imprisonment for at least four months and up to six years while aggravated human trafficking carries a sentence of imprisonment for at least two and up to ten years. The provisions on unlawful coercion under § 8 of the same chapter may also be applicable (RP 172/2021).
According §§ 27a and 27b of the Marriage Act, a marriage entered into under duress shall be annulled with the same legal effect as in the case of divorce under § 27 1, i.e. without the requirement for a cooling period as would apply in the case of an ordinary divorce. The legal process for applying for the annulment of a marriage is regulated under §§ 30b-32. Provi­sions for the annulment of marriage were introduced in 2023 on the basis of Govern­ment Bill 172/2021. On the same basis, § 115a was introduced, according to which a marriage contracted abroad shall not be recognised in Finland if at least one of the parties was under eighteen years of age and at least one of the parties was resident in Finland when the marriage was contracted.

Double criminality

Finnish law applies to crimes committed outside Finland against Finnish citizens (§ 5 Crimi­nal Code) and by Finnish citizens (§ 6 Criminal Code). This only applies to crimes with a maxi­mum penalty of more than six months’ imprisonment. This means that all of the above-mentioned crimes could be subject to trial in a Finnish court, as their maximum penalties all exceed six months’ imprisonment.
The starting point for double criminality is that acts that are not crimes in the country where they were committed cannot be tried in any other country. However, it follows from Chap. 1 § 11, cl. 8 of the Criminal Code that female genital cutting can still be tried by a Finnish court. Similarly, unlawful coercion (Chap. 25 § 8) can be tried if the coercion constitutes an act of forced or child marriage in violation of Article 37 of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence.

Greenlandic legislation

Greenland has traditionally exercised considerably greater independence from Denmark in the legal sphere than the Faroe Islands has. This is evident, for example, in the fact that Greenland has its own independently drafted criminal code (Kriminallov for Grönland), although it has been translated into Danish. The Greenlandic Criminal Code is clearly influenced by the specific social problems that arise from the vulnerability and isolation caused by Greenland’s geography and nature (Nyborg Lauritsen, 2019). The Criminal Code stipulates, among other things, that it is expressly punishable not to help persons in distress (§ 89 of the Criminal Code). A corresponding provision, consistent with one of the most important assessment criteria of honour practices, “to help one’s neighbour”, also appears in the General Penal Code of Iceland. There are no corresponding explicit provisions in the criminal codes of the other Nordic countries or autonomous regions.
Greenlandic legislation has been examined through searches on www.nalunaarutit.gl, which is the official source of Greenlandic legal information. The site contains legislation and other legal material in both Greenlandic and Danish. Based on the Danish search terms listed in the methodology section, searches were conducted in the Greenlandic Criminal Code and in specific legislation on marital relations, genital cutting and negative social control. Despite extensive searches, no legislation or other legal documents have been found that can be attributed to forced marriage, child marriage, female genital cutting, conversion attempts or other honour-based acts.

Icelandic legislation

Almenn hegningarlög, or the General Penal Code of Iceland, was originally enacted in 1940, from which point many additions and amendments have been made. The General Penal Code largely does not contain criminal classifications but consists of descriptions of crimes. The section headings below correspond to the criminal classifications used in Swedish legislation.
A number of the criminal definitions mentioned below are relatively new and were introduced in 2016 in connection with the ratification of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. The ratification mainly meant that female genital cutting and forced marriage were included in the General Penal Code. The changes are specified in Act No. 23 from 30 March 2016.

Recent treatment of the concept of honour in Icelandic legislation

Icelandic criminal law takes a slightly different approach to the concept of honour than other Nordic countries and autonomous regions, as, until recently, the concept has been legally applicable. Under Articles 84 and 85 of the General Penal Code, a person convicted of a minor offence (punishable by up to one year in prison) could, two years after serving their sentence, apply to the court to have their honour restored (uppreist æru). The possibility of having one’s honour restored had far-reaching consequences, among other things because the crime for which an individual had been punished could not be invoked in defamation cases under the former Article 238, nor could it be held against them with respect to various forms of public employment. In this way, the Icelandic concept of honour reflects research that places honour practices in a political, legal, economic and social context (Rosquist, 2020; Baianstovu, 2017).
Articles 84 and 85 were removed from the General Penal Code in 2018, which entailed changes to a large number of related legal provisions. The preparatory work and debates that preceded the removal of the principle of restoring honour are not covered by this study. However, it is important to mention that until recently Iceland had legislation that allowed for the restoration of honour, which contrasts with the legislation that this study focuses on, i.e. the prohibition of maintaining or restoring honour in the Nordic countries and autonomous regions.

Stricter penalties

There is no specific Icelandic provision for stricter penalties that directly refers to honour. However, stricter penalties are stipulated for certain specific offences. These are described under the respective subheadings.
Article 70, which regulates sentencing in general, states in the third paragraph that if an act is directed against a man, woman or child with whom the perpetrator has a close relation­ship, and the relationship is considered to be relevant to the seriousness of the crime, a more severe penalty shall be imposed. Therefore, if a crime takes place in a family or clan context, and this context was significant for the planning and execution of the crime, it can be considered an aggravating circumstance (þyngingar refsingunni) under Icelandic criminal law.
Item 7 from the first paragraph of the same article states that the perpetrator’s motive must be considered. However, it does not specify whether the motive should be considered a mitigating or aggravating circumstance, which means that both circumstances may be relevant. This can be compared to the Swedish so-called stricter penalty clause (Chap. 29 § 2, itm. 10 of the Swedish Criminal Code), in which honour motives are interpreted as an exclusively aggravating circumstance when determining sentencing.

Female genital cutting

Article 218a, which is an addition to Article 218 on general assault, stipulates a sentence of up to six years in prison for offences of a normal degree, those which cause injury by partially or completely removing the sexual organs of a girl or woman. In the case of a serious offence, a sentence of up to sixteen years’ imprisonment may be imposed. No fines are included in the range of punishment, with imprisonment being the minimum sentence. When assessing the severity of an offence, consideration is given to whether the act caused serious injury or death, led to long-term health problems and/or was conducted in a particularly reckless manner (author’s translation).
Article 218c states that if a person previously convicted of female genital cutting is convicted of a new offence (implicitly against another woman or girl), this constitutes grounds for a stricter penalty. The penalty may then be increased by an addition fifty per cent of the prison term of the first sentence.

Forced marriage and child marriage

Article 225(2) of the General Penal Code stipulates that anyone who forces a person to marry (ganga í hjúskap) or undergo a marriage-like ceremony may be sentenced to imprisonment for up to four years. Fines are not included in the range of punishment, and the prison sen­tence is twice as high as for crimes of general unlawful coercion, as described in the first paragraph of the same article.
As mentioned earlier, Icelandic legislation makes relatively little use of explicit criminal classifications, and this is also the case here, but Article 227a states that forced marriage (nauðungarhjónaband) may also constitute human trafficking (mansal), which can result in up to twelve years’ imprisonment. Article 227a also specifies that if the target of an act of human trafficking is under the age of 18, this shall be considered an aggravating circum­stance or grounds for a stricter penalty. The crime of child marriage is thus implicitly criminalised but without an explicit criminal classification.
In Icelandic marriage law, the validity of a marriage is mainly regulated by Article 25a. This article, which was added to the Marriage Act as recently as 2022, concerns the recognition of marriages contracted abroad. The basic rule is that marriages contracted abroad shall be recognised in Iceland as long they have been conducted in accordance with the laws and regulations applicable in the country where the marriage took place. However, the second paragraph emphasises the requirement that both spouses must have been over the age of eighteen when the marriage took place. In exceptional cases and “taking into account the unambiguous interests of a person under the age of eighteen”, a marriage may be recognised for persons who were sixteen years of age at the time of the marriage. Thus, there is some regulation of the recognition of child marriages and marriages involving young people.
The third paragraph of Article 25a states that if a marriage “is contrary to the fundamental rules of the Icelandic legal system or public policy”, it cannot be recognised in Iceland. In this way, forced marriages or child marriages established in accordance with the above-mentioned Article 225(2) or Article 227a of the General Penal Code could not be recognised under the Marriage Act.

Conversion attempts

Since 1 January 2024, a new article (227b) has been added to the General Penal Code. According to this, anyone who “through coercion, deception or threats persuades a person to undergo unconfirmed treatment (ógagnreynda meðferð) with the aim of suppressing or changing their sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression (breyta kynhneigð, kynvitund eða kyntjáningu)” shall be sentenced to a fine or imprisonment for up to two years. The term ógagnreynda specifies that the treatment lacks medical or similar evidence, meaning that the provision does not apply to gender-affirming treatment performed within the framework of public healthcare.
An offence committed against a person under the age of 18 carries a sentence of imprison­ment for up to four years, as is the case for anyone who abducts a child for the purposes of subjecting them to conversion attempts. The legislation is thus clear that such an offence against a minor is particularly serious.
The third subparagraph of the same article also stipulates that encouraging or inciting conversion attempts, as well as accepting money to participate in such a crime, is also punishable. There is thus an implicit assumption that conversion attempts are carried out in a collective context against individuals.

Double criminality

Article 5 of the General Penal Code specifies that persons who are citizens or residents of Iceland may be convicted under Icelandic law for offences under Article 218a and Article 225 sub-paragraph 2 even if the offence was committed abroad and even if the act is not a criminal offence in the country where it was committed. This corresponds to the other Nordic countries’ specific focus on double criminality for honour-based crimes. Additional crimes included in this specification relate to child pornography offences and certain sexual offences. Double criminality was introduced through a number of amendments to the General Penal Code between 2012 and 2023. The amendments aim in various ways to promote the health and safety of children and women and involve the ratifications of UN conventions on children and women and a number of EU directives.

Norwegian legislation

In Norway, there is no specific legislation for crimes believed to be committed for reasons of honour. The terms ‘honour-based’ and ‘negative social control’ are not used in the Norwegian Penal Code. To the extent that honour-based acts are punished, they must instead be derived from more general legislation.

Stricter penalties

Point f of Chap. 14 § 77 of the General Penal Code, which concerns increased penalties, states that crimes committed by several persons acting in concert (fellesskab) constitute grounds for increased penalties. This finds its parallel in the aforementioned § 81 sub-paragraph 2 of the Danish Criminal Code, which specifies acts committed by “several persons acting in concert”. However, it does not specify what this association or group might consist of, unlike Chap. 29, § 2, sub-paragraph 10 of the Swedish Criminal Code, which specifies “the honour of a family, clan or similar group”. Whether this point has been used in honour-based cases in Norwegian case law may be the subject of further research.

Forced marriage and child marriage

The Norwegian General Penal Code § 253 regulates the crime of forced marriage, which means forcing someone to enter into a marriage or marriage-like relationship through violence, deprivation of liberty, other unwarranted or criminal acts, or undue pressure. The second paragraph of the same section stipulates that taking a person abroad for the pur­pose of forcing them into marriage constitutes attempted forced marriage. The maxi­mum penalty for the offence is six years’ imprisonment.
Child marriage is regulated in § 262 sub-paragraph 2 of the General Penal Code. There is no criminal classification for child marriage corresponding to forced marriage, but anyone who enters into marriage with a person under the age of sixteen may be sentenced to up to three years’ imprisonment, even if they are unaware of the other party’s age. If both parties are of equal age or development, immunity from punishment may be applicable.
If the child marriage was entered into under duress, the above-mentioned § 253 applies, which can incur an increased penalty of up to six years’ imprisonment.
The Marriage Act § 23 regulates the right to obtain a divorce in cases of forced marriage. This is supported by § 16 of the same act, which allows for the marriage to be annulled, providing a stronger legal action than divorce. Child marriage is mainly regulated by § 1a of the Marriage Act, which states that persons under the age of 18 cannot enter into marriage. Child marriages contracted abroad cannot be recognised in Norway if one or both parties were under the age of 18 at the time of the marriage. This applies regardless of whether one or both parties had a connection to Norway at the time of the marriage (§ 18b of the Marriage Act) or neither party had a connection to Norway at the time of the marriage (§ 18c). However, § 18c of the Marriage Act allows for marriages to be approved upon special application if either or both parties were over sixteen years of age and neither party had a connection to Norway at the time of the marriage, provided that the parties are over eighteen years of age at the time of the application. Such an application for approval may also be granted if there are exceptional reasons for doing so.

Female genital cutting

The General Penal Code §§ 284 and 285 describe the crime of female genital cutting as an intervention that causes damage to or permanently alters a woman’s sexual organs. Resto­ra­tive procedures are also criminal and fall under the same section of the law. The sentence for female genital cutting of a normal degree (§ 284) is imprisonment for up to six years. For aggravated female genital cutting (§ 285), the sentence is imprisonment for up to fifteen years. When assessing whether the crime is aggravated, consideration must be given to whether the procedure has led to illness or incapacity to work, permanent or incurable (irreversible) changes in appearance, serious bodily injury or death. Only one of these con­sequences needs to be proven for the more serious classi­fication of the crime to apply. It is also emphasised in § 284 that the consent of the victim does not exempt the perpetrator from liability. The provision in the General Penal Code replaces the previous law prohibiting female genital cutting, which was in force from 1995 to 2015.
It should be noted that while the classification of the crime is gender neutral, the crime itself is only applicable if the procedure is performed on a woman. Female genital cutting is there­fore a crime that can only be committed against women (or girls), which distinguishes it from the medically proven procedure on men or boys, which is referred to as circumcision (om­skjæring).
It should also be noted that the requirement of permanent change, combined with the fact that consent does not exempt from liability, means that the threshold for a crime of normal severity to be committed is very low. It also means that procedures requested by a woman for cosmetic rather than ritual or religious reasons are also punishable.

Conversion attempts

The General Penal Code §§ 270 and 270a classify conversion attempts as an offence in both the normal and serious degrees. A conversion attempt is defined as a violation that involves influencing a person to change, deny or suppress their sexual orientation or gender identity in a systematic way. ‘Systematic’ refers to the use of psychotherapeutic, medical, alternative medical, religious or similar methods. For offences of a normal degree, the range of punish­ment spans fines to prison sentences of up to three years (§ 270). For serious offences, a sentence of up to six years in prison can be imposed. General Penal Code § 270 sub-para­graph 2 emphasises that the offence is also applicable when the methods are used against children under the age of 18 and that it does not matter whether the suspected perpetrator knew that the child was a minor. However, the description of the offence and the range of punishment are the same as for acts committed against adults.
When assessing the severity of an offence, particular consideration shall be given to whether the acts cause significant damage to the body or health, whether the ‘conversion attempt’ continues over a long time and whether the acts are committed by several perpetrators.
The fact that the forms of retribution listed are described as systematic means that the acts may fall under what Norwegian policy refers to as ‘negative social control’, which is one of the concepts used to specify that acts are honour related (Friberg & Bjørnset, 2019). It also means that it is implicitly required that the acts be repeated to be considered ‘systematic’. One of the requirements for a serious offence is also that several perpetrators are part of the systematic conversion attempt. Since honour is practised collectively for the good of a family or clan, and since the ‘shame’ of one member becomes a collective concern, conversion attempts carried out in an honour context in principle always constitute a serious offence.

Double criminality

According to the General Penal Code § 5, a Norwegian citizen, a person residing in Norway or a person working on behalf of a Norwegian-registered company may be convicted for, among other things, child marriage, forced marriage and/or female genital cutting, even if the crime was committed abroad. Conversion attempts performed abroad are also punishable under Norwegian law. Similarly, Norwegian criminal law may apply to persons who, regardless of Norwegian or other national ties, commit the aforementioned crimes against a Norwegian citizen or person residing in Norway, provided that the crime is subject to a minimum sen­tence of six years in prison (§ 5 sub-paragraph 5 of the General Penal Code). In other words, the legislation takes into account that crimes associated with honour-based practices can be committed both by and against persons with strong ties to Norway. However, the normal degree of punishment for some of the crimes discussed above is waived as a result of the limitation on the penalty value.