R v A2

The High Court of Australia considered appeals from the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal concerning charges under s 45(1)(a) of the *Crimes Act 1900* (NSW). The respondents were charged with mutilating the clitoris of complainants, with one respondent also charged with assisting in these offences. The defence argued that the procedures performed were merely ritualistic. The central dispute revolved around the interpretation of the terms "mutilates" and "clitoris" within the context of female genital mutilation, and whether the trial judge had misdirected the jury on these points.

The legal issues before the High Court included whether the phrase "otherwise mutilates" in s 45(1)(a) should be interpreted according to its ordinary meaning or in light of the specific context of female genital mutilation. The Court also had to determine whether the definition of "clitoris" as directed by the trial judge, which included the clitoral hood or prepuce, was correct. Furthermore, the Court considered whether the trial judge's directions on the meaning of "mutilate" and "clitoris" constituted a misdirection.

The High Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the orders of the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal. The matter was remitted to the Court of Criminal Appeal for redetermination of a specific ground of appeal relating to whether the verdicts were unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence. This indicated that while the appeals were allowed, the ultimate outcome for the respondents would depend on the further consideration of this ground by the lower appellate court.