The Law and Marital Rape in Antigua & Barbuda

Content Warning: This episode contains mentions of rape, sexual assault and domestic violence

Back in April 2022, a national debate sparked in Antigua and Barbuda over a legal change to criminalise marital rape in the country. This national debate came weeks after the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) had ruled that a man can rape another man in Barbados. Still the debate raged on in Antigua and Barbuda as persons across society voiced their opinions on whether a married couple can rape each another. Thus, Tenement Yaad Media reached out to one of the young gender activists who is leading the charge in calling for the illegality of marital rape in the country - Attorney J. Zoe Teague. Through an oral interview, we spoke to Ms. Teague about the legal issue of marital rape in Antigua and Barbuda and the wider Caribbean. The transcription of this interview is below.

What exactly is marital rape?

Marital Rape, very generally, it's the act of sexual intercourse with one spouse without the consent of your spouse;  Whatever gender- whatever dynamic that gender, but whatever dynamic, you have two married people in that relationship and where one spouse has sex with the other without their consent. In the region and in some places across the world, we don't- we have Marital Rape provisions in our laws or no Marital Rape provision. In Antigua, we do not have a law that says a spouse can actually commit the act of rape with their spouse but there's a section in our legislation that is called 'Sexual assault by a husband in certain circumstances'. Those circumstances would be like: where there's an order of the court, where there's divorce, where there's a separation agreement between them in very specific circumstances, where the husband would engage in sex with his wife, and he  does it without her consent.  Another example, is Jamaica, where there is an offence in the legislation, the Sexual Offences Act that speaks to Marital Rape but it has similar provisions: there has to be an order of the court, they have to be separated etc. So regionally, most states in the region don't have Marital Rape in the broad sense where one spouse has sex- where there’s sexual intercourse between the spouses without consent, we don't have that.

What exactly spurred the conversation on marital rape, recently, in Antigua and Barbuda?

Based off what I've been following, there has been a lot of talk on marital rape again, because Antigua and Barbuda has its Universal Periodic Review and one of the recommendation was that marital rape be criminalized.  But one scenario I recall specifically, the Director of Gender Affairs went on a local radio station, and the topic of marital rape came up and I think after that, I've seen this snowballing. Still, I've seen this happen before, because we've had the marital rape discussion in the past. But that's what really spurred it. So, we've seen a lot of people, a lot of men actually, voiced their opinion on social media. I can remember at least three men, I didn't even know these men had the ability to write so much long, almost essays about how marital rape is not a real thing.  I remember one man said, "We’ll see more cheating if a man cannot have sex with his wife when he wants," and I remember that take because I was like, “What?"  Then there were feminists and people who support a change in the legislation who have been taking on social media, the radio etc. Recently, I was invited to speak on it with one of the executive directors of a local NGO, Alexandria Wong, and the acting director of the directory, on a morning show here in Antigua and Barbuda, because the intention around our discussion was to really move the conversation from this debate, to educating and to talking about why this change actually does need to happen. But I would say the recommendations from the Universal Periodic Review and the comments coming out of that, really spurred the conversation and it took on its own life at this point.

One of the oppositions is persons’ religious beliefs and one of the most popular means to oppose marital rape in the Caribbean, been a majority Christianity dominated region, is the interpretation of the biblical scripture: 1 Corinthians 7:3–5 “The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does”. Why is that a dangerous stance to have on the issue?

As it relates to me engaging with this question, I think it's dangerous; it's dangerous to take religion, and to thwart it into just disregarding somebody's autonomy. Additionally, we have to be so mindful of like the Bible, because of where the Bible comes from. We have to be so careful and I understand people have the right to choose whatever they want to choose in terms of what they believe. But if I tell you that a woman should be able to say, she doesn't want  to have sex with her husband, you're gonna come on and throw this in her face. People need to stop picking and choosing.  I know you all have to transcribe this and tweak what I say but bear with me because mi kinda vex. But back to the question. It flies in the face of personal autonomy.  It flies in the face of consent. It flies in the face of sexual sovereignty. And we cannot let the Bible and these beliefs get in the way of actually respecting people. So, we're not supposed to be able to say, “No, I don't want to do it”? You don't have no respect in a relationship? To me that’s foolish. Then for people to continue to bring up this as a point of opposition, it says a lot about how you don't respect your partner or you're trying to promote this ideology of disregard for people as an individual to choose. But we see that right? Don't we see that type of stance being used in different issues - in terms of LGBTI issues and in terms of abortion?  This is supporting harm if you're going to take this Bible verse and say, “Well, that means the wife should give her husband sex whenever he wants.” What you're saying is do harm. Do harm to another person. So this is a dangerous stance because you're supporting harm.

There are also concerns that this will spur on false reporting. Can you address that?

Most definitely. I don't support that notion. For gender based violence in terms of physical abuse, sexual abuse, financial and economic abuse - there is a lot of underreporting. We know the global statistics say one in three women will experience sexual violence in her lifetime but that, again, is only based off of people who actually report the statistics and the data that we have. We also have another issue that is  just like we talked about the existence of these religious beliefs, you have issues where people have a hard time reconciling their beliefs of their faith and things that have happened to them. So, they are not also willing to report then. You also have issues of where people have a fear of reporting because of what society will say when you report. So this notion that this is going to spur on false reporting and it’s going to be spiteful women, I'm not for that. I would love anybody who reads this, to really move away from that because just like we talk about rape, there are people who falsely accuse people, but those numbers are so small in comparison to those who are accusing people who have actually perpetrated violence against them. When we bring up this idea of false reporting, and we're saying this is the big major concern, it's also saying that you don't believe women, you don't believe people, or you don't believe victims generally, when they come to you. Even now, in these type of conversations, we see people willingly jumping up to discredit something that we don't even have statistics on, something that doesn't exist in our law.  What does that tell you? You don't believe victims. So I want us to really move away from that. I want to because I don't support the notion of false reporting being a major issue. Still, I really want for when people jump with the false report idea, they also address the fact that there's under reporting and this is a notable fact in Antigua and Barbuda and throughout the world. 

How exactly do you want the country’s Sexual Offences Act to reflect against marital rape?

So firstly, I need the removal of gendered language surrounding this, right? So it's not husband and a wife, or like a husband to a wife, I don't want it to be that. Granted, I know that, as I said, women are the ones who suffer more often than not in this- in this context but there are instances where men are raped too so I want the removal of that gendered language. Additionally, the Sexual Offences Act would need to recognize same sex relationships to make space for the fact that queer persons in queer relationships would have dynamics where personal autonomy, sexual sovereignty, and the lack of consent have been disregarded. So I'd want our legislation to also address those types of things. I also would want the removal of certain conditions. So right now, in Antigua, when the law makes reference to sexual intercourse they're talking about penetration. I wanted to go beyond penetration of a penis, because you can penetrate somebody with another object and that should still count as rape. Additionally, if we really need to have a broader type of definition of rape but if we are refusing to go broader, because of whatever reason, I need the legislation to remove sexual assault by husband in certain circumstances and call it rape - just rape. Call it marital rape, because that's what it is.

Another look at your advocacy, what are other legislations against gender-based violence that you want the legislation of Antigua and Barbuda to reflect?

Decriminalisation of the act of buggery. It is archaic, oppressive and it infringes on the rights of LGBTI persons in the society.  I would want the legislation to allow persons of different sexual identities, gender identities, to be able to  address whatever circumstances they find themselves in. Thus, we then open up Antigua and Barbuda to really being a safer, more inclusive space.  I was looking at Spain and they have this law - rather than just criminalising things and removing gendered language, they also make space for provision of services. So for example, I think for persons who have experience violence, domestic violence, gender based violence - that they can work less hours, but still be compensated kind of accordingly and equitably, because they understand the impact. So, it's one thing for legislation to criminalise or decriminalise something, but legislation also can be a very powerful tool for social change, for really changing the way that things happen and the way that people approach it. So it would be great if our legislation can also make provisions that if you have suffered this type of violence, you are entitled to be able to take time off work. I think that also provides people with a space to realise that this is a traumatic experience. It would signal to people, that this has a powerful impact on members of our society and we have to put social tools in place for these persons. So I don't only want our legislation to come down or free up the thing as somebody would say, but I also want our legislation to create structures that benefit people outside of throwing them in jail, outside of protection orders, but help them. We don't have any shelters in Antigua so after we create a shelter, legislation can mandate certain things for the shelters, right? The legislature can mandate that there must be police at the shelters. Another thing is the Domestic Violence Act. It has this police intake form of how the police are supposed to deal with domestic violence reports , but I want our legislation to go further to actually say that we must have gender based violence unit. I want our legislation to be real about these things -  that these things exist in our society.

This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.