A committee of MPs has agreed to recommend the lowering of the age of sexual consent to 16 years, from the current 18.
A joint meeting of Parliament’s standing committees on health, social affairs and family affairs last night concluded a series of seven meetings on the subject.
Eight entities and eight individual experts, representatives from the legal, medical and youth studies fields, put forward their views.
The National Institute for Childhood within the President’s Foundation for the Wellbeing of Society also submitted its contribution to the discussion. The institute felt that the idea that better access to health services required the decriminalisation of sexual activity between consenting 16- to 18-year-olds was a limited conceptualisation of the issues at stake.
It recommended the search for a delicate balance between considering minors as rights holders with capacity and autonomy and as a “subordinate group defined by their dependency and need for protection”.
Twenty-five recommendations were debated, most of which were approved.
The Medical Council proposed that the difference in age between persons engaged in sexual activity, where one of the partners is aged between 16 and 18, should be no more than three years.
This recommendation was rejected.
The majority considered that one cannot allow a person to engage in sexual activity and then limit the consent by the partner’s age. However, Deo Debattista (PL) said that, considering his professional experience and the Medical Council’s views, he was in favour of this age banding.
The lowering of the age of consent would lead to a legal amendment allowing 16-year-olds to seek medical services without their parents’ consent. A proposal allowing those younger than 16 to seek medical advice and treatment without parental consent, according to their maturity, was rejected.
Education services were another debated topic. It was agreed to recommend the compulsory sexual education of minors. Some proposed a compulsory “secular” sexual education “not tainted by religion”.
The recommendation of installing condom dispensers at post-secondary educational institutions was approved. Anthony Agius Decelis (PL) suggested the inclusion of a recommendation that these condoms should be available at affordable prices. Deo Debattista (PL) stated that the price was not a determining factor in the decision about condom use decision about condom use, while Deborah Schembri (PL) spoke against price fixing mechanisms. The suggestion was not approved.