The Independent Commission for Human Rights Amended Penal Code, which abrogated the first paragraph of Article (295) of the original law. It was replaced with a new paragraph. The text of the more recent paragraph does not take account of the will of the female who is (15-18) years old if she agrees to sexual intercourse with her guardian or custodian. It imposes a penalty of not less than (10) years of hard labor on the perpetrator in such a case. If the law takes her will into account, the case would be classified as incest, so it is clear that Article No. (285) of the penal code is allocated for a female whose will and acceptance of sexual intercourse are taken into consideration, and this applies to a girl aged over (18) years and free from any mental or physical illness preventing full or partial consideration of her will. These two conditions should be available in the girl referred to under Article (285) of the penal code53. With regard to legislative reality in Palestine, Jordanian Penal Code No. (16) of 1960, which is in effect in the West Bank, followed suit with the Jordanian penal code which is in effect in Jordan. It distinguished between committing sexual intercourse with a female aged (15-18) years by a person of trust (her guardian or custodian) and the act of incest. With regard to the first criminal act, Article (295) of the penal code provided that such act would be substantiated if the female involved in sexual intercourse with one of her ascendants –legal or illegal-or with her stepfather or the husband of her grandmother on the paternal side or with a person of trust (guardian, custodian) is aged (15-18) years. This is stated in the seventh section covering crimes of misconduct and the first section regarding sexual crimes. It considered the man in such a case to be the “offender” and the girl the “victim” because of her immature will, which in turn would be due to being under age. As a result, the act is considered a criminal act punishable by temporary hard labor. With regard to the act of incest, which is stated under the second section which covers family crimes, the penal code has not identified a certain age for the female involved in sexual intercourse committed by one of the categories recalled in Article No. (185). It considers the man and the woman accomplices to that act, and so imposes a misdemeanor penalty of (2-3) years in prison on both parties equally, on the grounds that the woman has a free and appropriate will due to being (18) years of age. The Mandate Penal Code which is in effect in the Gaza Strip is different from the aforesaid laws with respect to criminalization of the act of incest. It does not consider the parties to the act of incest equal. It considers in such cases the man to be the “offender” and the female “victim” and does not consider the free will of a female aged (16-21) years to be in contradiction with the above mentioned age of reason; this is originally arrogated from French law. The Mandate Penal Code links the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, and free will as the basis of consent, with the marital status of the female determining the act of incest: the female should not be married at the time of the act. It seems that British law considers a married woman mature, with free will, and able to distinguish in regard to sexual issues; connected to this is that a legitimate sexual relationship nullifies the idea that her will to consent is immature. 53 36 Al-Saed, Crimes against ethics and family, p. 264.