"We are faced with a policy that is co-responsible for the persistence of a cultural construct that legitimises a predatory type of male sexuality." declares Cristina Carelli, president D.i.Re – Donne in Rete contro la violenza. "Women's sexual availability is taken for granted unless the rapist clearly understands a no. We know well that consent does not always mean the absence of a no: either the amendment to Article 609bis of the Criminal Code moves in the direction of consent, or there must be no consent.” continues Carelli. “Only in this way can we continue the difficult journey of addressing sexual violence and overcoming a culture that limits women's freedom through constant threats to their bodies and lives.” concludes the president.
In recent months, the topic of consent and its expression in the context of sexual violence crimes has been the subject of news, reflections, and academic debates, both in legislative and social contexts. Requests for compliance with international directives, such as those of GREVIO, have been raised.[1], have pushed Parliament and the institutions to consider changes to the 1996 law. This law, strongly supported by the women's and feminist movement over a decade of mediation, compromise, and in-depth evaluation, rests on a delicate balance between protecting the right to sexual self-determination, the risk of secondary victimization, and the right to defense of the accused.
The proposal put forward by President Bongiorno on 22 January 2026 and approved today by two votes (12 – 10) introduces worrying changes, which – once again – undermine the dignity of women.
The word "consent" has even been eliminated. Its inclusion, required for the proper application of the Istanbul Convention, was the very reason for the proposed amendment to the existing law. Clearly, the objective has changed, and it's certainly not enough to have increased penalties after having inexplicably lowered them.
"The proposal presented and voted on is far worse, not only compared to the one unanimously approved by the Chamber which introduced the consent in article 609 bis, but it is also worse compared to the existing one." declares Elena Biaggioni, criminal lawyer of the D Lawyers Network.i.King. “Indeed – continues Biaggioni – The Court of Cassation already interprets sexual violence in light of the provisions of the Istanbul Convention and in line with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. The new proposal introduces an assessment of the situation and context—rather than context alone, a dual definition. ambiguous: either it makes no sense or it aims to broaden the possibilities for justifying violence” concludes the lawyer.
There is clearly a serious problem with the way we interpret violence against women: this proposal is an attempt to convince the public that sexual violence is a matter of misunderstanding, of misreading the signs. However, it is now well known that violence is an exercise of power, a form of oppression and control, a way to silence women.
A law that shifts the focus onto the victim rather than the perpetrator and the violent act is another way of hindering women's access to justice.
[1] In the GREVIO report on Italy published on 5 December 2025: 134. Regarding trials for sexual violence and rape, GREVIO notes with satisfaction that the Supreme Court of Cassation has clearly aligned itself with the requirements of the Istanbul Convention, applying a consent-based understanding of this crime in its decisions. GREVIO regrets, however, that lower courts often fail to comply with this interpretation, requiring the use of force or reflecting stereotypes and prejudices that are not in line with the Convention. A legislative amendment aligning the Italian Criminal Code with the Istanbul Convention's requirement to adopt a consent-based definition of sexual violence and rape, accompanied by a broad public awareness campaign and a debate on the nature of consent, would therefore be vital.