IF you were holding out any hope that this administration will do anything with regard to legislation to stop marital rape, Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis gave little encouragement yesterday.

Shortly after his Attorney General, Ryan Pinder, signalled that the Davis administration does not expect to introduce any such legislation before the end of its term, activists went as far as calling the prime minister spineless.

Attorney Marion Bethel said she was incensed by Mr Pinder’s comments, saying it reflected a broader disregard for the safety and rights of women. Equality Bahamas director Alicia Wallace accused the government of siding with rapists over survivors, calling the government “incompetent” and saying it “does not deserve anyone’s votes”.

When asked to speak on the issue yesterday, how did Mr Davis respond? By saying he wants “consensus” on the issue and wants to understand what a cross-section of Bahamians want on the issue, “not just one group”.

He said: “This is a very divisive matter. You have arguments on both sides.”

Perhaps that is true, but only one of those sides is being raped.

Mr Davis went on: “I will touch it once I get a full understanding of what Bahamians as a whole want and not just one group, one group on either side of the divide. I want to have some consensus as to what has to happen before we move forward.”

Mr Davis has been in office long enough now to have gained that understanding – not to have done so shows a lack of willingness to tackle the issue.

And let us be clear – lack of action remains a form of action. By not siding with the group that seeks to criminalise the behaviour when someone is raped by a spouse, it is siding with the group that does not want that behaviour criminalised. It is a deliberate choice.

It is also a choice not to abide by the international agreements The Bahamas has made when it comes to ensuring equality for women.

It is also a choice not to abide by the promises in his own Blueprint for Change offering pledges to voters ahead of the election that brought him to office. That document pledges that a hallmark of his administration would be “equality for all Bahamians”. Not if you’re married, apparently. It also promised to provide “gender equality and empowerment for women and girls”. Little empowerment on show in this debate.

That comment in the blueprint referred to a promise to be committed to the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals, one of which (Goal 5) includes eliminating all forms of violence against all women and girls. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) had identified the Sexual Offences Act as an area of discrimination – specifically the section that defines rape, with its clause of “who is not their spouse”.

The debate over marital rape is not new. It has been covered extensively and exhaustively both at home and internationally. In the international arena, The Bahamas has acknowledge and promised to tackle the issues.

How then is the prime minister still seeking other views? Meanwhile, the FNM leader, Michael Pintard, yesterday restated his view that there should be legal consequences for those who commit rape in a marriage. He said: “While the Progressive Liberal Party cowers in fear of losing votes, the FNM is not afraid to address this issue with the seriousness victims deserve.” Whichever side of the debate you might fall in, it appears that there is a clear choice between the parties on this issue.

As the clock ticks toward election, the FNM is saying there should be legal consequences, while the PLP vacillates and talks of finding a consensus that will never be reached.

Meanwhile, others note that in industries where money was on the table, gaming and cannabis, there was no need to find any such consensus.

Mr Davis has made clear his lack of will to tackle the issue – despite his party’s own previous promises. That is an election gamble – but in the meantime, those who are actual victims will continue to lack legal protection. The electoral cost is as nothing to the real cost of those suffering without justice.