¹ Schubert, Karin & Moebius, Isabella, Zwangsheirat—Mehr als nur ein Straftatbestand: Neue Wege zum Schutz der Opfer [Forced Marriage—More Than Just a Criminal Norm: New Ways to Protect Victims], Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik 33, 33 (2006).Google Scholar

² See id. (contemplating the past lack of discourse on the issue); see also Klaus Letzgus, Der neue Straftatbestand der Zwangsheirat [The New Criminal Offense of Forced Marriage], Familie Partnerschaft Recht 452, 452 (2011); Deutscher Bundestag: Plenarprotokoll [BT] 17/96, at 10981 (During the passing of the 2011 legislation on forced marriages, the Federal Minister of the Interior at the time, Hans Peter Friedrich, pointed out that the new legislation aims to establish new integration policies that are based on the principles of promotion and encouragement (“Fördern und Fordern”).).Google Scholar

³ Strafgesetzbuch [StGB] [Penal Code], § 237; see also Wieck-Noodt, § 237, in Münchener Kommentar zum StGB para. 1 (Wolfgang Joecks & Klaus Miebach eds., 2nd ed. 2012).Google Scholar

⁴ See Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at para. 27.Google Scholar

⁵ Initiative für Münchener Mädchen e.V. [IMMA], Zwangsheirat verhindern [Stop Forced Marriage], Stadtrat der Landeshauptstadt München 4 (2012), http://www.ris-muenchen.de/RII/RII/DOK/SITZUNGSVORLAGE/2746374.pdf (last visited Nov. 6, 2014).Google Scholar

⁶ Schubert, & Moebius, , supra note 1, at 34; see also Mohamed Fadlalla, Zwangsheirat—die Änderungen des Personenstandsgesetzes und das neue Gesetz zur Bekämpfung der Zwangsheirat [Forced Marriage—the Change of the Law on Civil Status], Familie Partnerschaft Recht 449, 451 (2011) (discussing that while some cultural and ethnic groups refer to Islam to justify forced marriage, Islam does not promote forced marriages and sets out that women should not marry without consent).Google Scholar

⁷ Starting in the 1950s, shortly after the end of the Second World War, foreign workers from Turkey were invited by the German Government as so-called “guest workers” to support Germany's economy. Many second or third generation people of Turkish descent are now living in Germany. See Yurdakul, Gokce & Korteweg, Anna, Gender Equality and Immigrant Integration: Honor Killing and Forced Marriage Debates in the Netherlands, Germany, and Britain, 41 Women‘s Stud. Int‘l F. 204, 208 (2013).Google Scholar

⁸ Göbel-Zimmermann, Ralph & Born, Manuela, Zwangsverheiratung—Integratives Gesamtkonzept zum Schutz Betroffener [Forced Marriage—Integrative Holistic Concept to Protect Affected Persons], Zeitschrift für Ausländerrecht 54, 54 (2007); Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at para. 2; Monika Schröttle, Zwangsverheiratung, Gewalt und Paarbeziehungen von Frauen mit und ohne Migrationshintergrund in Deutschland—Differenzierung statt Polarisierung [Forced Marriage, Violence and Couple Relationships of Women with and Without a Migration Background in Germany—Differentiating Instead of Polarizing], Zwangsverheiratung in Deutschland 145, 149 (Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend eds., 2008); Jörg Eisele, § 237, in Strafgesetzbuch (Schoenke & Schroeder eds., 29th ed. 2014).Google Scholar

⁹ See Eisele, , supra note 8, at para. 3.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Schubert, & Moebius, , supra note 1, at 33. While boys and young men can also be affected by such practices, anecdotal evidence suggests that the risk of girls and women becoming victims is much greater. See Göbel-Zimmermann & Born, supra note 8, at 54. According to a study by the Federal Ministry for Family, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth, girls and young women are affected in ninety-three percent of all cases. See Thomas Mirbach, Torsten Schaak & Katrin Triebl, Zwangsverheiratung, IN Deutschland—Anzahl und Analyse von Beratungsfällen-Kurzfassung 22 (Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend eds., 2011).Google Scholar

¹¹ Estimate by the women's support organization Terre de femme in 2007. See Interview with Myria Böhmecke, Zwangsehen: Mütter drohen heiratsunwilligen Töchtern mit Selbstmord [Forced Marriage: Mothers Threaten Their Daughters Who Are Unwilling to Marry with Suicide], Spiegel Online (Aug. 10, 2007), http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/zwangsehen-muetter-drohen-heiratsunwilligen-toechtern-mit-selbstmord-a-499121.html (last visited Nov. 6, 2014).Google Scholar

¹² Mirbach, , Schaak, & Triebl, supra note 10, at 22. The research conducted by the Federal Ministry for Family, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth has been criticized in Germany as not being empirical and, therefore, as only being of suggestive nature. The study did not conduct research on victims of forced marriage itself but sent out questionnaires to support organizations in Germany to evaluate their experiences with victims of forced marriage. The study itself points out that the results of estimated victims have to be qualified as some victims may have sought help with different organization and may therefore be listed more than once. See Ulrike Schwarz, Zwangsheirat—Probleme in der Praxis [Forced Marriage—Problems in Practice], Nachrichtendienst des Deutschen Vereins für Öffentliche und Private Fürsorge 1, 2 (2013).Google Scholar

¹³ For an overview of older research studies on forced marriage in different German states, see Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at 16.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Göbel-Zimmermann & Born, , supra note 8, at 54. For analysis on newspaper coverage of so-called honor killings in Germany, see generally Anna Korteweg & Gökçe Yurdakul, Islam, Gender, and Immigrant Integration: Boundary Drawing in Discourses on Honour Killing in the Netherlands and Germany, 32 Ethnic & Racial Stud. 218 (2009).Google Scholar

¹⁵ For an overview and update on the case, see Hans, Barbara, Geschwistermord—Die verlorene Ehre der Familie Sürücü, Spiegel Online (June 27, 2011), http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/geschwistermord-die-verloreneehre-der-familie-sueruecue-a-777021.html. For media coverage of the case in English, see Derek Scally, Brother Gets Nine-Year Sentence for ‘Honour Killing’ of Sister, Irish Times (Apr. 14, 2006), http://www.irishtimes.com/news/brother-gets-nine-year-sentence-for-honour-killing-of-sister-1.1038216.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Yurdakul, & Korteweg, , supra note 7, at 208.Google Scholar

¹⁷ See, e.g., Deutscher Bundesrat: Drucksachen [BR] 767/04 (the initiative of the German state Baden-Württemberg); Deutscher Bundesrat: Drucksachen [BR] 436/05 (the initiative of Berlin); Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksachen [BT] 16/1035 (the initiative of the German Parliament); Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksachen [BT] 17/4401 (the 2010 initiative of the German government, which led to the amendment of the German Criminal Code). For a historic overview of the different legislative initiatives, see Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at para. 19.Google Scholar

¹⁸ On the legislative history, see Eisele, supra note 8, at para. 1.Google Scholar

¹⁹ See Eichenhofer, Johannes, Das Gesetz zur Bekämpfung der Zwangsheirat [The Law to Fight Forced Marriage], Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht 792, 794 (2011).Google Scholar

²⁰ Clark, Brigitte & Richards, Claudina, The Prevention of Forced Marriages—A Comparative Approach, 57 Int‘l & Comp. L. Q. 501, 501 (2008). See, e.g., Sundari Anitha & Aisha Gill, Coercion, Consent and the Forced Marriage Debate in the UK, 17 Feminist Legal Stud. 165 (2009) (analyzing forced marriages in the UK); see also Esther Efemini, Til Death Do Us Part: Forced Marriages in the UK, 79 Crim. Just. Matters 14 (2010). See, e.g., Alicia Lobeiras, The Right to Say “I Don't”: Forced Marriage as Persecution in the United Kingdom, Spain, and France, 52 Colum. J. Transnat‘l L. 896 (2014) (analyzing forced marriages in France in regards to asylum laws).Google Scholar

²¹ Gill, Aisha & Engeland, Anicee Van, Criminalization or ‘Multiculturalism Without Culture‘? Comparing British and French Approaches to Tackling Forced Marriage, 36 J. Soc. Welfare & Fam. L. 241, 247 (2014).Google Scholar

²² Forced Marriage Protection Orders are injunction orders prohibiting addressees to perform acts related to forcing someone into marriage. See id. at 244. For a discussion on whether forced marriage should be treated as a civil rather than a criminal matter and the UK government's past policy, see Kaye Quek, A Civil Rather than Criminal Offence? Force Marriage, Harm and the Politics of Multiculturalism in the UK, 15 Brit. J. Pol. & Int'l Rel. 626 (2013).Google Scholar

²³ According to § 121 of the Act:Google Scholar

(1) A person commits an offence in England and Wales if he or she— (a) uses violence, threats or any other form of coercion for the purpose of causing another person to enter into the marriage, and (b) believes, or ought to reasonably believe, that the conduct may cause the other person to enter into the marriage without free and full consent.Google Scholar

(2) In relation to a victim who lacks capacity to consent to marriage, the offence under subsection (1) is capable of being committed by any conduct carried out for the purpose of causing the victim to enter into a marriage (whether or not the conduct amounts to violence, threats or any other form of coercion).Google Scholar

(3) A person commits an offence under the law of England and Wales if he or she— (a) practices any form of deception with the intention of causing another person to leave the United Kingdom, and (b) intends the other person to be subjected to conduct outside the United Kingdom that is an offence under subsection (1) or would be an offence under that subsection if the victim were in England and Wales.Google Scholar

The maximum penalty for forced marriage offenses is seven years.Google Scholar

²⁴ Gill, & Engeland, Van, supra note 21, at 246.Google Scholar

²⁵ Id. at 247.Google Scholar

²⁶ For analysis on human rights relating to forced marriage and Germany's obligations under international human rights law, see Hanna Beate Schoepp-Schilling, Zwangsverheiratung als Menschenrechtsverletzung, Die Bedeutung der internationalen Rechtsinstrumente [Forced Marriage as a Human Rights Violation, the Meaning of International Law], 1 Zwangsverheiratung in Deutschland 201, 205–11 (Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend eds., 2007); see also Letzgus, supra note 2, at 452.Google Scholar

²⁷ G.A. Res. 217 (III) A, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Dec. 10, 1948).Google Scholar

²⁸ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 23(3), Dec. 16, 1966, 999 UNTS 171 (entered into force for Germany Mar. 23, 1976); Gesetz zu dem Internationalen Pakt vom 19. Dezember 1966 über bürgerliche und politische Rechte, Nov. 15, 1973, BGBl. II at 1533.Google Scholar

²⁹ International Covenant on Economic and Social Rights, art. 10(1), Dec. 16, 1966, 933 UNTS 3 (entered into force for Germany Jan. 3, 1976); Gesetz zu dem Internationalen Pakt vom 19. Dezember 1966 über wirtschaftliche, soziale und kulturelle Rechte, Nov. 23, 1973, BGBl. II at 1569.Google Scholar

³⁰ Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, art. 16(1)(b), Dec. 18, 1979, 1249 UNTS 13 (entered into force for Germany July 10, 1985); Gesetz zu dem Übereinkommen vom 18. Dezember 1979 zur Beseitigung jeder Form von Diskriminierung der Frau, Apr. 25, 1985, BGBl. II at 647.Google Scholar

³¹ Referred to as monism. On monism, see generally Weissbrodt, David & de la Vega, Connie, International Human Rights Law: An Introduction 343 (2007); see also Peter Malanczuk, Akehurst's Modern Introduction to International Law 63 (7th ed. 1997); Donald Rothwell et al., International Law: Cases and Materials with Australian Perspectives (2010).Google Scholar

³² In other Member States, however, international instruments have no direct impact on national legislation until legislation is adopted by the Member State that “transports” these obligations into national law; this is referred to as dualism.Google Scholar

³³ Zartner, Dana, Courts, Codes, and Custom: Legal Tradition and State Policy Toward International Human Rights and Environmental Law 97–98 (2014) (classifying Germany as a monist state). Grundgesetz [GG] [Basic Law] art. 59(2) (stating that “treaties that regulate the political relations of the Federation or relate to subjects of federal legislation shall require the consent or participation, in the form of a federal law, of the bodies responsible in such a case for the enactment of federal law. In the case of executive agreements the provisions concerning the federal administration shall apply mutatis mutandis”).Google Scholar

³⁴ See also Young, Katharine, The Implementation of International Law in the Domestic Laws of Germany and Australia: Federal and Parliamentary Comparison, 21 Adelaide L. Rev. 177, 184 (1999). For further explanations on the situation in Germany, see Josef Isensee, Handbuch des Staatsrechts der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 167 (3rd ed. 2007); see also Ernst Benda, Werner Maihofer, & Hans-Jochen Vogel, Handbuch des Verfassungsrechts der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Studienausgabe 1466–67 (1995).Google Scholar

³⁵ See Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery, arts. 6(1)–(2), 1(c)(i), Sept. 7, 1956, 266 UNTS 3 (entered into force for Germany Jan. 14, 1958); Gesetz ueber den Beitritt der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zum Zusatzübereinkommen vom 7 September 1956 ueber die Abschaffung der Sklaverei, des Sklavenhandels und sklavereiähnlicher Einrichtungen und Praktiken, July 4, 1958, BGBl. II at 203 (stating that an obligation exists to criminalize practices similar to slavery including servile marriage). Whether forced marriages are servile marriages will depend on whether the perpetrator exercises powers attached to ownership. See Simmons, Frances & Burns, Jennifer, Without Consent: Forced Marriage in Australia, 36 Melbourne U. L. Rev. 970, 984 (2012).Google Scholar

³⁶ In some UN Member States, no international instrument—including legally binding instruments, such as treaties or conventions—has direct force until the State adopts legislation that transports these obligations into national law—the distinction between monist and dualist states. See generally Starke, Joseph G., Monism and Dualism in the Theory of International Law, 17 Brit. Y.B. Int'l L. 6 (1936); Giuseppe Sperduti, Dualism and Monism, A Confrontation to Be Overcome, 3 It. Y.B. of Int'l L. 31 (1977); David Feldman, Monism, Dualism and Constitutional Legitimacy, 20 Austl. Y.B. of Int'l L. 105 (1999).Google Scholar

³⁷ Gesetzes zur Bekämpfung der Zwangsheirat und zum besseren Schutz der Opfer von Zwangsheirat sowie zur Änderung weiterer aufenthalts- und asylrechtlicher Vorschriften, June 30, 2011, BGBl. I at 1266–70. The explanatory memorandum to the legislation by the German government explicitly refers to human rights relating to forced marriage and concludes that more than preventative measures are required to protect victims, see Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksache [BT] 17/4401, at 8.Google Scholar

³⁸ StGB § 240(4)(2); see also Schubert and Mobius, supra note 1 (referring to the rule as an aggravation (Regelbeispiel)).Google Scholar

³⁹ StGB § 237.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Valerius, Brian, Gedanken zum Straftatbestand der Zwangsheirat (§ 237 StGB) [Thoughts on the Criminal Offence of Forced Marriage (§ 237 StGB)], Juristische Rundschau 430, 432 (2011); Eisele, supra note 8, at 1.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Valerius, , supra note 40, at 431.Google Scholar

⁴² StGB § 237(1).Google Scholar

⁴³ StGB § 237(2).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Kaiser, Dagmar, Zwangsheirat [Forced Marriage], Familienrechtszeitung 77, 77 (2013); Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksachen [BT] 16/1035, at 6. On the terminology, see also Bernd-Ruediger Sonnen, § 237, in Strafgesetzbuch at para. 1 (Kindhäuser et al. eds., 4th ed. 2013).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch [BGB] [Civil Code] § 1310.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Einfürhungsgesetzt zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuche [EGBGB] [Introductory Act to the German Civil Code], arts. 11, 13. See Bülte, Jens & Becker, Raymond, Der Begriff der Ehe [The Term Marriage], Zeitchrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik 61, 63 (2012).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Mirbach, Schaak, & Triebl, , supra note 10, at 38.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Letzgus, , supra note 2, at 455; Jörg Eisele & Christian Majer, Strafbarkeit der Zwangsheirat nach § 237 StGB im Lichte des Internationalen Straf-und Privatrechts [Criminal Responsibility According to § 237 StGB in Light of International Criminal and Private Law], Neue Strafrechtszeitung 546, 551 (2011).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Valerius, , supra note 40, at 432.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Kaiser, , supra note 44, at 86.Google Scholar

⁵¹ See Lackner, Karl, § 237, in StGB, at para. 3 (Lackner & Kuehl eds., 28th ed. 2014); see also Kaiser, supra note 44, at 86; Volker Haas, Der neue Straftatbestand der Zwangsheirat (§ 237 StGB)—eine kriminalpolitische Bewertung [The New Criminal Law of Forced Marriage (§ 237 StGB)—A Criminal Political Assessment], Juristen Zeitung 72, 78 (2013); Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at 24. But see Valerius, supra note 39, at 432; Eisele & Majer, supra note 45, at 550.Google Scholar

⁵² Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch [BGB] [Civil Code], tit. 2 Eingehung der Ehe [Concluding marriage]. See also Valerius, supra note 40, at 432; Sonnen, supra note 44, at 21; Bülte & Becker, supra note 46, at 63.Google Scholar

⁵³ Juristinnenbund, Deutscher, Stellungnahme zum Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung zur Bekämpfung der Zwangsheirat und zum besseren Schutz der Opfer von Zwangsheirat sowie zur Änderung weiterer aufenthalts- und asylrechtlicher Vorschriften, BT-Drs. 17/4401 (Mar. 10, 2011), http://www.djb.de/Kom/K5/st11-02/ (last visited Nov. 10, 2014).Google Scholar

⁵⁴ See Bülte & Becker, , supra note 46, at 63.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ See Sonnen, , supra note 44, at para. 23; see also Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at para. 26 (contemplating whether forcing someone into a religious marriage could constitute an unsuccessful attempt of § 237).Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Kaiser, , supra note 44, at 86; see Bülte & Becker, supra note 46, at 66.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at para. 43.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ IMMA, supra note 5, at 4.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Schubert, & Moebius, , supra note 1, at 34.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Göbel-Zimmermann & Born, , supra note 8, at 54.Google Scholar

⁶¹ See IMMA, supra note 5, at 5; Eisele, supra note 8, at para. 6 (contemplating the difficulty of the assessment); Mirbach, Schaak, & Triebl, supra note 10, at 26. For critical scholarship on distinctions between forced and arranged marriages in the UK context, see Anitha & Gill, supra note 20.Google Scholar

⁶² Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at para. 43.Google Scholar

⁶³ Id. at para. 47.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Id. at para. 48; Lackner, supra note 51, at para. 3.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ In the U.S. context, see Fortheringham, J., expert in matrimonial law, cited in Julia Alanen, Shattering the Silence Surrounding Forced and Early Marriage in the United States, 32 Child Legal Rts. J. 1, 6 (2012).Google Scholar

⁶⁶ See generally Yerlikaya, Hayriye & Çakir-Ceylan, Esma, Zwangs-und Scheinehen im Fokus staatlicher Kontrolle; Eine Betrachtung des juengsten Gesetzesentwurfes zur Bekämpfung der Zwangsheirat unter Verhinderung von Scheinehen im Lichte des Opferschutzes [Forced Marriages and Marriages of Convenience in the Focus of State Control: Considering the Most Recent Draft Bill to Fight Forced Marriages and Prevention of Marriages of Convenience in Light of Victim Protection], Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik 205 (2011), http://www.zis-online.com/dat/artikel/2011_4_546.pdf.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Id. at 207.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Id. Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Kaiser, , supra note 44, at 79; Eisele, supra note 8, at 9; Haas, supra note 51, at 76. On the definition of “force” in the UK context, see Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007, c. 20, § 63A(6), pt. 4A. On emotional pressure and the “myth of free choice” in the UK context, see generally Anitha & Gill, supra note 20.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Yerlikaya, & Çakir-Ceylan, supra note 66, at 208; Lackner, supra note 51, at para. 3; Eisele, supra note 8, at 9.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Yerlikaya, & Çakir-Ceylan, supra note 66, at 208; Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at para. 50 (highlighting that the authoritative word of the patriarch does not necessarily constitute a threat with future harm).Google Scholar

⁷² Yerlikaya, & Çakir-Ceylan, supra note 66, at 208.Google Scholar

⁷³ Id. Google Scholar

⁷⁴ See Valerius, , supra note 40, at 433.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Sering, Christian, Das neue ‘Zwangsheirat-Bekämpfungsgesetz‘ [The New Law Against Forced Marriage], Neue Juristische Wochenschrift [NJW] 2161, 2163 (2011).Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Yerlikaya, & Çakir-Ceylan, supra note 66, at 208.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Sering, , supra note 75, at 2163.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at para. 55 (agreeing that it will be difficult to identify the different actors in practice). No criminal verdicts on forced marriage are recorded in the Juris database as of July 2015.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Deutscher Bundestag: Plenarprotokoll [BT] 17/84, at 9425.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Discussed in the UK context in Home Office, Forced Marriage—A Consultation—Summary of Responses 12 (June 2012), https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/157829/forced-marriage-response.pdf.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Bundeskriminalamt [BKA] [Federal Criminal Police Office], Police Crime Statistics 2013, http://www.bka.de/DE/Publikationen/PolizeilicheKriminalstatistik/pks__node.html (last accessed Nov. 6, 2014).Google Scholar

⁸² Bundeskriminalamt [BKA] [Federal Criminal Police Office], Police Crime Statistics 2014, http://www.bka.de/DE/Publikationen/PolizeilicheKriminalstatistik/pks__node.html?__nnn=true (last accessed July 28, 2015).Google Scholar

⁸³ Göbel-Zimmermann & Born, , supra note 8, at 60.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Kaiser, , supra note 44, at 89.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Schubert, & Moebius, , supra note 1, at 33.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Deutscher Bundestag: Plenarprotokoll [BT] 17/84, at 9425 (comment by Monika Lazar).Google Scholar

⁸⁷ See Yerlikaya and Çakir-Ceylan, supra note 66, at 213.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Home Office, supra note 80, at 9 (discussing the issue in the UK context).Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Juliane Kokott, The Burden of Proof in Comparative and International Human Rights Law 203 (1998).Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Strafprozessordnung [StPO] [Code of Criminal Procedure] §§ 52, 55.Google Scholar

⁹¹ See Kalthegener, R., Strafrechtliche Ahndung der Zwangsverheiratung: Rechtslage-Praxiserfahrung-Reformdiskussion [Criminalization of Forced Marriage, Law, Practice, Reform Discussion], in Zwangsverheiratung in Deutschland, Forschungsreihe 221 (Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend eds., 2007); Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at 78.Google Scholar

⁹² In relation to the likelihood of victims not testifying out of fear, see Letzgus, supra note 2, at 456.Google Scholar

⁹³ Home Office, supra note 80, at 12.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Letzgus, , supra note 2, at 456.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ No criminal court verdicts are recorded in the Juris database as of June 2015.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Haas, , supra note 51, at 76.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksachen [BT] 17/4401, at 1.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Id. at 9.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ See Yerlikaya, & Çakir-Ceylan, supra note 66, at 213.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ Valerius, , supra note 40, at 431.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ Haas, , supra note 51, at 76.Google Scholar

¹⁰² Gill, & Engeland, Van, supra note 21, at 246; see Wieck-Noodt, supra note 3, at 4 (concurring that forced marriage in Germany is mostly based on tribal customs and patriarchal family structure).Google Scholar

¹⁰³ Haas, , supra note 51, at 76.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ See Letzgus, , supra note 2, at 453.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Schubert, & Moebius, , supra note 1, at 35.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ See Wilson, Amrit, The Forced Marriage Debate and the British State, 25 Race & Class 25, 36 (2007); Quek, supra note 22, at 636–37 (discussing statements by proponents of the criminalization of forced marriage in the UK); see also Home Office, supra note 80, at 14 (discussing responses to criminalization of forced marriage in the UK and the perception that cultural outsiders do not understand the culture and criticism on their involvement).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ See Yerlikaya and Çakir-Ceylan, supra note 66, at 213.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Sonnen, , supra note 44, at para. 5.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksachen [BT] 16/1035, at 6.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ Clark, & Richards, , supra note 20, at 503 (citing Mission d'information sur la famille et les droits des enfants for the argument that the practice is intolerable).Google Scholar

¹¹¹ Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksachen [BT] 17/2491, request 7. The Green party requested a Parliamentary inquiry into the effectiveness on the criminal law of coercion governing forced marriage. This request was unsuccessful.Google Scholar

¹¹² See Eisele, , supra note 8, at 3; Eisele & Majer, supra note 48, at 547; Haas, supra note 51, at 74–75.Google Scholar

¹¹³ See Valerius, , supra note 40, at 431.Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ See Shariff, Fauzia, Towards a Transformative Paradigm in the UK Response to Forced Marriage: Excavating Community Engagement and Subjectivising Agency, 21 Soc. & Legal Stud. 549, 549 (2012).Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ Response of the Federal Republic of Germany in preparation of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights' report Strengthening Efforts to Prevent and Eliminate Child, Early and Forced Marriage in Light of UN Human Rights Council Resolution A/HRC/24/23, http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Women/WRGS/ForcedMarriage/Germany.pdf (Dec. 13, 2013) (last visited Nov. 7, 2014).Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ The brochure can be downloaded on the German Federal Government website, http://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/Publikation/IB/leitfaden-fuer-schulen-zum-umgang-mit-zwangsverheiratungen.pdf (last visited Nov. 6, 2014).Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Response of the Federal Republic of Germany, supra note 115, at 2.Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Schwarz, , supra note 12, at 2 (suggesting that a support service structure is missing particularly in rural areas in Germany).Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ IMMA, supra note 5, at 14.Google Scholar

¹²⁰ See id. Google Scholar

¹²¹ See id. at 15.Google Scholar

¹²² See id. Google Scholar

¹²³ More information on the work of the Forced Marriage Unit, available at www.gov.uk/forced-marriage (last accessed Nov. 6 2014). The Unit was first launched in 2000 under the title Community Liaison Unit. See Shariff, supra note 114, at 552.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ Id. Google Scholar