REPROHEALTHLAW Updates – 2023-24

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS

[Argentina, preventable maternal death,”obstetric violence”] Britez Arce et. al. v. Argentina. (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, November 16, 2022). Decision in English. Decision in Spanish. Press Release Jan 18, 2023. Comment by CRR. [Earlier: Merits report by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (Report 236/19, Case 13.002. Report in English-download.)

[Bolivia, rape of a minor, revictimization] Losado v Bolivia (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, November 18, 2022) English press release Jan 19, 2023 Summary in Spanish. Decision in Spanish. The Court held Bolivia responsible for gender and child discrimination, and revictimization of an adolescent victim of sexual violence during the judicial process.

[Colombia, abortion decriminalized] Sentencia C-055-22.  Expediente D-13.956. Demanda de inconstitucionalidad contra el artículo 122 de la Ley 599 del 2000. (Constitutional Court of Colombia, February 21, 2022). Decision in Spanish (414 pages).  Backup decision in Spanish.  Unofficial English translation. 27-page Spanish press release.  English summary of Press Release.  1-page Spanish press release. [Abortion is decriminalized within 24 weeks of gestation, and thereafter permitted on specified grounds.] 

[El Salvador, abortion, anencephaly] Beatriz v. El Salvador, Case 13-378, Report No. 09/20, Inter-Am. C.H.R. (2020) (Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, January 5, 2022): Report in Spanish. Case Summary in Spanish.  Press release in English. [Woman with lupus and kidney failure denied abortion for fetus with anencephaly.] Inter-American Court of Human Rights held hearings in March 2023.

France made abortion a fundamental constitutional right. March 4, 2024. Parliamentarians voted to revise the country’s 1958 constitution to enshrine women’s “guaranteed freedom” to abort. News report in English.

[Mexico, Abortion decriminalized], Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación [Supreme Court], 2023..Review of Constitutional Protection. Amparo en revisión 267/2023. Sept. 6, 2023. Speaker: Justice Ana Margarita Ríos Farjat. Decided September 6, 2023. Official Press release in Spanish.   [Abortion is decriminalized throughout Mexico.]

[Northern Ireland, UN CEDAW] Report of the Inquiry concerning the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland under article 8 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, (2018) U.N. Doc. CEDAW/C/OP.8/GBR/1  Original CEDAW 2018 report.  Comments by Clare Pierson. [abortion, a crime in Northern Ireland following sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against Persons Act 1861, was legalized in 2020.]
—Follow-up report submitted by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, 16 January 2023, published March 14, 2023 as CEDAW/C/OP.*/GBR/3/Add.1.  Followup report in different formats, English, French and Spanish.  [Among other reforms, Northern Ireland established a Gender Equality Strategy Expert Advisory Panel whose Report of December 2020 is online here]. 

[Peru, UN Committee on the Rights of the Child] Camila v. Peru, Communication No. 136/2021.U.N. Doc CRC/C/93/D/136/2021 (June 13, 2023) Decision online in Spanish, Arabic and Russian.  Decision in English (May 25, 2023, *unofficial draft). Case note by Godfrey Kangaude.  [Child raped by her father. Ruling: Peru violated child rape victim’s rights by failing to guarantee access to abortion and criminally prosecuting her for self-abortion.]

[Peru, child marriage] Ley N.º 31945 to prohibit and eliminate any possibility of marriage with minors under the age of 18 was promulgated on 25 November 2023. Prior to the new legislation, Article 42 of Peru’s Civil Code permitted adolescents to marry from the age of 14 under certain conditions, with consent from at least one parent, despite the minimum legal age of marriage being 18 years for girls and boys. Context in English.

[Poland, ECtHR ruled against fetal abnormality abortion ban] M.L. v. POLAND (Application no. 40119/21) (European Court of Human Rights, December 14, 2023) [Woman forced to travel for abortion of malformed fetus. Court found violation of ECHR Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the ECHR, following a 2020 Constitutional Court ban on legal abortion in case of foetal abnormalities. Press release. Decision of 14 Dec 2023.

[Poland, fetal abnormality risk, inadmissible] A.M. and others v. Poland (application no. 4188/21, 4957/21, 5014/21,5523/21, 5876/21, 6114/21, 6217/21, 8857/21) (European Court of Human Rights, May 16, 2023) ruled these 8 cases inadmissible because each applicant could not claim to be a victim of a violation of the ECHR owing to risk of a future violation. Press Release. Decision of 16 May 2023.

[Spain, access to abortion information] Tribunal Supremo de España, Sala Tercera, de lo Contencioso-administrativo, Sección 4ª, S 1231/2022, 3 Oct. 2022 (Rec. 6147/2021)  Decision in Spanish.  Spanish backup copy.  Decision in English.  English backup copy. [The Government cannot block public access to a website containing information or opinions without judicial authorization.  This includes the site of Women on Web, which discusses access to abortion.

[Turkey, abortion for rape victim], [Case of] R.G. [GK], B. No: 2017/31619, 23/7/2020,.July 23, 2020. (Grand Chamber of the Turkish Constitutional Court)   27-page decision in Turkish. Backup copy. Official press release in English. Backup copy.  Comment  in English on IACL/AIDC Blog. Article in English from a Turkish Journal of Constitutional Law  [procrastination after rape victim applied for abortion violated the right to protect one’s corporeal and spiritual existence (provided under Article 17 of Turkish Constitution.

[UK – challenge to fetal abnormality ground for abortion] R (on the Application of Crowter and Ors) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care EWCA Civ 1559 Case No: CA-2021-000314 (UK Court of Appeal (Civil Division) London, 25 Nov., 2022, Judgment summary. Decision online.  [UK legislation allowing abortion for substantial risk of a born child’s serious handicap (such as Down syndrome) is not incompatible with disabled persons’ human rights to respect for their private and family life and to nondiscrimination.] This was an appeal of [2021] EWHC 2536 (Admin) Case No. CO/2066/2020 (High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, London) Sept 23, 2021.  Judgment and summary.    [fetus has no established rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), so UK abortion law allowing legal abortions in cases of severe fetal abnormalities is compatible with ECHR.]

[Venezuela, obstetric violence] Inter-American Court of Human Rights – Case of Rodríguez Pacheco et al. v. Venezuela. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 1, 2023. Series C No. 504. Press release in English. Official Summary in Spanish. 82-page judgment in Spanish. Download partial dissent by Judge Sierra Porto. Download: partial dissent by Judge Pérez Goldberg. The Court ruled that Venezuela is responsible for deficiencies in Judicial Proceedings on a Complaint of acts of obstetric violence and medical malpractice that took place in a private hospital.

SCHOLARSHIP

[comparative abortion law] Rebecca J. Cook and Bernard M. Dickens, “Abortion,” in Jan M. Smits, Jaakko Husa, Catherine Valcke and Madalena Narciso, eds., Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law, 3rd ed., (Cheltenham, UK: Elgar Publishing, 2023), 3-11. Abstract online here. Full text and PDF online

[abortion law, Colombia] “The new Colombian law on abortion,” by Isabel C Jaramillo Sierra, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 160.1 (January 2023): 345-350.  Abstract and Article. 

[abortion law and policy] “Self managed abortion: aligning law and policy with medical evidence,” by Patty Skuster, Heidi Moseson and Jamila Perritt, in International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 160.2 (February 2023): 720-725. Abstract and Article.  

[abortion law and policy, guideline] “The WHO Abortion Care Guideline: Law and Policy–Past, Present and Future,” by Joanna N. Erdman, in International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 162.3 (Sept 2023): 1119–1124. Abstract and Article.  WHO Abortion Care guideline, 2022.

[adolescents, Africa] “Integrating child rights standards in contraceptive and abortion care for minors in Africa,” by Godfrey Dalitso Kangaude, Catriona Macleod, Ernestina Coast and Tamara Fetters, International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 159.3 (December 2022): 998-1004.   Abstract and Article.

[Africa, Zimbabwe, rewrite abortion decision, gender equality] Charles Ngwena and Rebecca J. Cook, “Restoring Mai Mapingure’s Equal Citizenship,” In: Rebecca J. Cook, ed., Frontiers of Gender Equality: Transnational Legal Perspectives (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023). Abstract online.  Book available here. Introduction to the book (by Rebecca Cook).

[gender equality, health, CEDAW GR 24] “Gender Equality in Health Care: Reenvisioning CEDAW General Recommendation 24,” by Joanna N. Erdman and Mariana Prandini Assis, in Frontiers of Gender Equality: Transnational Legal Perspectives, ed. Rebecca J. Cook (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023). Abstract online in English. Portuguese translation of this chapter. Book available here. Introduction to the book (by Rebecca Cook).

[gender equality] Rebecca J. Cook, “Many Paths to Gender Equality,” Introduction to: Frontiers of Gender Equality: Transnational Legal Perspectives (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023). Introduction online.

[infertility] “”Human Rights Approaches to Reducing Infertility,” by Payal K. Shah and Jaime M. Gher, in International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics.162.1 (July 2023): 368–374.  Abstract and Article. 

US-focused news, resources, and legal developments are available  on Repro Rights Prof Blog. View or subscribe.

JOBS
Links to employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here.

______________
Contributed by: the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca.   See Program website for our Publications,  Research resources, and Reprohealthlaw Commentaries Series.  TO JOIN THE REPROHEALTHLAW BLOG: enter your email address in the upper right corner of our blog, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

Ugandan CC judgment: Maternal health is a constitutional right

Congratulations to the Center for Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) and three co-petitioners who, after nine years of dedication and perseverance, have received a favourable interpretation from the Constitutional Court of Uganda at Kampala.

The Center for Health Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) and 3 Others v Attorney General, Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2011 (Constitutional Court of Uganda at Kampala). Decision of August 19, 2020.

This is the first decision of an African constitutional court finding a violation of the rights to health, life, gender equality and freedom from inhuman and degrading treatment, for the preventable deaths in childbirth of two women, Sylvia Nalubowa and Jennifer Anguko, who died in hospital due to unavailability of basic maternal commodities.

As lawyer Moses Mulumba of CEHURD gratefully informed supporters: “The Constitutional Court agreed with our submissions and all judges accepted all the grounds of the petition. Through this judgement, the right to maternal health care (and the right to health broadly) has been granted a place in Uganda’s Constitution. The judgment recognises basic maternal health care services and emergency obstetric care. [ . . . ]

“Moving forward, we can work together to ensure that this judgement brings lasting change to [the] health system in Uganda, within the African region and globally.”

RELEVANT RESOURCES:

• Twelve key Declarations by the Constitutional Court of Uganda, circulated by CEHURD, are listed in the expanded version of this Reprohealthlaw Commentary, online here.
• Constitutional Court decisions:
  The Center for Health Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) and 3 Others v Attorney General, Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2011 (Constitutional Court of Uganda at Kampala). [Maternal health] Decision 2012 online. Decision 2012 attached in PDF. Case summary of 2012 decision. NEW DECISION of AUGUST 19, 2020.
• Supreme Court decision:
  The Center for Health, Human Rights and Development and 3 Others v Attorney General [2015], Constitutional Appeal No. 01 of 2013 (Supreme Court of Uganda at Kampala), Judgments by Kisaakye, JSC and Katureebe, CJ. [Uganda Supreme Court orders Constitutional Court to hear petition on maternal health rights violations.]  Decision PDF. Case summary in Legal Grounds III .

_____________
Compiled by: the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca.   See Program website for our Publications,  Information resources, and Reprohealthlaw Commentaries Series.  TO JOIN THE REPROHEALTHLAW BLOG: enter your email address in the upper right corner of our blog, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

“Abortion and Public Health Ethics” by Dr. Mahmoud Fathalla

Congratulations and thanks to Dr. Mahmoud F. Fathalla of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at Assiut University in Egypt, whose article in the forthcoming Oxford Handbook of  Public Health Ethics can now be previewed online.

Mahmoud F. Fathalla, “Abortion and Public Health Ethics,” The Oxford Handbook of Public Health Ethics, ed. Anna C. Mastroianni, Jeffrey P. Kahn, and Nancy E. Kass, Oxford Handbooks Online,  February 2019,  Article online.

Abstract:
There is an ethical imperative to take public health action to eliminate the global problem of unsafe abortion. The moral obligation is dictated by the magnitude of the problem, the health inequities and social injustices that result from lack of access to safe abortion, the voices of women calling for action, and an international consensus recognizing unsafe abortion as a global health problem. The availability of public health interventions and the cost savings associated with fewer abortion complications reinforce the obligation to address unsafe abortion. Public health actions include reducing the need for abortion through family planning, providing safe abortion to the full extent of the law, managing abortion complications, and providing post-abortion care. These actions intersect with morality, religion, law, justice, and human rights. The public health community has a collective social and ethical responsibility to stand beside and behind women as they claim their human right to health.

Keywords:
public health ethics, abortion, unsafe abortion, public health, global health, justice, family planning, human rights

The full text of this article is online here.

RELATED RESOURCE:
“Reproductive health and public health ethics” by B.M. Dickens and R.J. Cook (2007) 99 International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 75-79.
__________________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

Kenyan High Court upholds human and constitutional rights to maternal dignity and reproductive healthcare

Many thanks to Naitore Nyamu, an LL.M. student in the graduate program in Sexual and Reproductive Rights in Africa at the University of Pretoria’s Centre for Human Rights, for contributing a detailed abstract of this progressive Kenyan ruling for Legal Grounds III: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in Sub-Saharan African Courts, online edition.

J O O (also known as J M) v Attorney General & 6 others [2018] Petition No 5 of 2014, (High Court of Kenya at Bungoma), March 22, 2018.  Case summary by Naitore Nyamu.   Court decision.

The case summary by Naitore Nyamu explains how, on 5 August, 2013, a low-income pregnant woman sought healthcare for delayed labour and suffered neglect, privations and expenses from an ill-funded county hospital, and humiliating personal abuse from its nurses.  She later filed a constitutional petition alleging various violations of her rights as stipulated in the Constitution of Kenya 2010 and she also made reference to rights recognized in international human rights treaties to which Kenya is a party.

The Court held that the Petitioner’s right to maternal health care had been infringed and that the abusive actions of the nurses and the Hospital denied, derogated and demeaned the Petitioner’s worth.  Hence, the Court found a violation of her right to dignity contrary to the provisions of Article 28 and a violation of her freedom and security, including the right not to be treated in a cruel, inhuman and degrading manner, contrary to Article 29 (j) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010. Additionally, the Court held that the national and county governments had failed to devote adequate resources to healthcare services and had not established effective measures to implement, monitor and provide minimum acceptable standards of health care. This is a violation of the Constitution and the international instruments that Kenya has ratified.

As Naitore Nyamu comments in her case summary, the Kenyan Constitution of 2010 has an expansive Bill of Rights, including the right to sexual and reproductive health, but women in Kenya cannot access maternal care in a dignified manner. One of the tenets of devolving the health services was to increase accessibility of better health care services to all citizenry. The treatment the Petitioner received at the Hospital leaves a lot of questions on whether the County Governments want to make the right to health and sexual and reproductive health rights a reality.  This case highlights how deep-rooted and systemic the violations of the rights to maternal health care are in Kenya. It also illustrates the many obstacles and humiliations that women seeking maternal health care can face in public health institutions.

This High Court judgment in J.O.O. reinforces the decision in Millicent Awuor Omuya alias Maimuna Awuor & Another v. The Attorney General & 4 Others (2015), (Petition No. 562 of 2012), where it was held that the National and County Governments do not require resources to accord respect to women seeking services in public institutions such as hospitals.  The Court’s reliance on provisions of international legal instruments ensured that the Court interpreted this issue from a wide spectrum of human rights provisions, hence this is a very progressive ruling that sets high standards. The Court found that the actions and omissions of the respondents were in violation of numerous rights as provided in the international treaties that Kenya has ratified. This signifies that it is not enough to just ratify conventions; states must equally ensure realization of the rights in these conventions. It was also an indication that Kenya cannot ratify conventions and fail to effect what these provisions stipulate.

For details, see Naitore Nyamu’s full case summary, online here, or  the High Court’s decision of March 22, 2018 online here.

An earlier Kenyan case of maternal abuse is abstracted in Legal Grounds III: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in Sub-Saharan African Courts:

• Millicent Awuor Omuya alias Maimuna Awuor & Another v The Attorney General & 4 Others [2015], Petition No. 562 of 2012, (High Court of Kenya at Nairobi (Constitutional and Human Rights Division)). [Detaining women for failing to pay for maternal health services is a violation of their constitutional rights]  Decision online

Other decisions from this chapter are summarized in Legal Grounds III.

• The Center for Health Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) and 3 Others v Attorney General [2012], Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2011 (Constitutional Court of Uganda at Kampala). Preventable maternal deaths dismissed as a “political question”.  However, see subsequent Supreme Court decision of 2015] Decision online.

• The Center for Health, Human Rights and Development and 3 Others v Attorney General [2015], Constitutional Appeal No. 01 of 2013 (Supreme Court of Uganda at Kampala), Judgments by Kisaakye, JSC and Katureebe, CJ. [Ugandan Supreme Court orders Constitutional Court to hear a petition on maternal health rights violations.]  Decision online.

• The Center for Health, Human Rights and Development & 4 Others  v Nakaseke District Local Administration [2015], Civil Suit No. 111 of 2012 (High Court of Uganda at Kampala). [Ugandan High Court finds human rights violations where a pregnant woman died of a ruptured uterus and blood loss while in labour.] Decision online.

• Ntsele v Mec for Health, Gauteng Provincial Government [2012] ZAGPJHC 208 (South Gauteng High Court, South Africa) [medical negligence during labour]  Decision online.

Maternal Health Care and Services  – thematic highlight by Tinyade Kachika

Legal Grounds III: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in Sub-Saharan African Courts (Pretoria: Pretoria University Law Press, 2017)   54 court decisions from 2008-2016   Online edition with updates.   Entire book, 228-pages 

Legal Grounds I and II  are online at the Center for Reproductive Rights.
__________________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

Chile: Constitutional Tribunal upholds constitutionality of new abortion law

Many thanks to Carlos Herrera Vacaflor, LL.M., for providing the following overview of this historic decision in Chile.

Tribunal Constitucional Chile, STC Rol N° 3729(3751)-17 CPT,  Requerimientos de inconstitucionalidad presentados por un grupo de Senadores y Diputados, respecto de normas del proyecto de ley que regula la despenalización de la interrupción voluntaria del embarazo en tres causales, correspondiente al boletín N° 9895-11.  Decision in Spanish: 295 pages.  Accompanying documents.  Other Submissions
New: English Decision: 149 pages includes a Table of Contents for both English and Spanish editions.

On August 21, 2017, the Constitutional Tribunal of Chile, in a 6 to 4 ruling, upheld the constitutionality of a Bill (now enacted into law) that decriminalizes abortion in three cases: rape, fatal fetal impairment and when a woman’s life is in danger.

The Tribunal based its ruling on the following guiding principles, among others. On the basis of international human rights treaties ratified by Chile and national legal developments on maternity, the Tribunal recognized that pregnancy affects the physical and psychological integrity of a woman, since a fetus occupying a woman’s body causes physical and physiological transformations.  Furthermore, the Tribunal stated that criminal law on abortion imposes severe restrictions on rights, and leads to social and legal condemnation of individuals. The Tribunal, given such punitive power, recognized that criminal law should only be considered as an instrument of last resort, in order to limit the restrictive effect the law has on rights.

The Tribunal interpreted “threat to the life of the woman” as a risk to her life (riesgo vital). Only the physician who provides the abortion is needed to diagnose the risk to the woman’s life; no further examinations are required, lest the provision of care be delayed. Abortion is also decriminalized when the fetus carries a fatal congenital or genetic impairment impeding its survival outside the womb. The Tribunal maintained that since the Bill requires that two specialist physicians diagnose the disease of the fetus, these professionals must avoid decisional paralysis that could put a woman in greater danger. In cases of rape, the Tribunal considered constitutional the limits on access to abortion: for girls under the age of 14, abortion must be performed before 14 weeks of gestation; if the victim is older than 14, before 12 weeks of gestation.

The Tribunal also recognized, by an 8 to 2 vote, the constitutionality of institutional conscientious objection. The Tribunal found institutional conscientious objection also constitutional. Given the lack of uniformity on whether artificial legal “persons” (such as hospitals or clinics) have a right to conscience and religion in the Inter-American System of Human Rights, the Tribunal decided to elaborate its own position. The Tribunal considered it arbitrary to limit the scope of conscientious objection only to professionals intervening in abortion care. It argued that freedom of conscience and religion is protected for all persons in the Constitution and that, under comparative case law, educational institutions and private associations have been recognized as conscientious objectors in the context of education.

Full texts of Decision and Submissions:  Decision in Spanish -295 pages.  Accompanying documents.  Other Submissions     New: English Decision: 149 pages includes a Table of Contents for both English and Spanish editions. 

Chilean law professors who addressed the Court included:
Prof. Veronica Undurraga  presentation  in Spanish.
Prof. Lidia Casas Becerra   presentation in Spanish, at minute 42.

Amicus curiae brief re: International consensus on abortion law with respect to decriminalization, by Joanna Erdman and Rebecca Cook:
Spanish and English briefs in one PDF.

Amicus curiae brief re conscience and conscientious objection by Prof. Bernard M. Dickens:  English PDF    Spanish PDF.

“Chile Celebrates its First Steps Towards Fulfilling Abortion Rights,” by Lidia Casas and Lieta Vivaldi, on Health and Human Rights Journal website.   Blogpost in English

Symposium — 5 scholars comment on Constitutional Court abortion ruling:   Symposium   The Introduction to the symposium is Introduction,   Part I,   Part II,  Part III, Part IV, and   Part V.

Press Release from Center for Reproductive Rights.  Online in English.

Newspaper report in English.

——————————

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates monthly by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

“‘Protection of Life during Pregnancy Act 2013’: Suicide, Dignity and the Irish Discourse on Abortion” by Claire Murray

Congratulations and thanks to Dr. Claire Murray of the School of Law, University College Cork in Ireland, for her useful article, published in a special issue of Social & Legal Studies,  guest-edited by Siobhan Mullally, on “Regulating Abortion: Dissensus and the Politics of Rights.”  We are pleased to circulate this abstract and links to the full text:

Claire Murray, “The Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013: Suicide, Dignity and the Irish Discourse on Abortion”, Social and Legal Studies 25.6 (Dec 2016): 667-698   PDF online.  Accepted version.

Abortion is an issue that exposes deep divisions in Irish society and this was apparent during the debates on the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013.  This introduced a framework regulating abortion into Irish law for the first time, but maintained the existing position where abortion is only available where the life of the woman is at risk. This article focuses on the centrality of suicide within the Irish discourse on abortion and the impact this had on the shape of the legislation ultimately introduced, in particular the inclusion of a more onerous process with which a woman must engage before she can obtain an abortion where the risk to her life is from suicide.  It highlights the practical consequences of this for the small number of very vulnerable women in Ireland who will be required to engage with the new statutory process which is deeply damaging.  The 2013 Act reinforces the two-tier approach to healthcare that exists in Ireland in the specific context of reproductive healthcare, as those with sufficient resources will be able to bypass the difficult and undignified statutory procedure and those who lack the socioeconomic capital will be compelled to remain.
PDF online.  Accepted version.

Keywords:  Abortion, dignity, Ireland, regulation, risk to life, suicide.

See also:
Attorney General v. X, [1992] I.E.S.C. 1, (Supreme Court of Ireland) had decided that an attempt to prevent a 14-year old girl who was pregnant as a result of being raped, from traveling from Ireland to England in order to access abortion care was not justified.  She was at real risk of committing suicide. Decision online.

Re-imagined judgment of Attorney General v. X  by Ruth Fletcher, with Commentary by Sheelagh McGuiness, in: Northern/Irish Feminist Judgments: Judges’ Troubles and the Gendered Politics of Identity, edited by Máiréad Enright, Julie McCandless and Aoife O’Donoghue (Oxford: Hart, 2017)  This book re-imagines, re-writes and comments on 26 court decisions from feminist perspectives.  Table of Contents and details
Reprohealthlaw blog comments, and links to full text

A referendum on Irish abortion law has been promised before June 2018. Irish Times.

 

 

 

 

 

REPROHEALTHLAW Updates, June 2016

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates monthly by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS

“Ireland’s abortion laws subjected a woman to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, according to a  landmark decision from the United Nations Human Rights Committee.”
Center for Reproductive Rights, CRR press release.   UN Press Release, June 9, 2016.  Newsmedia reports.  Decision CCPR/C/116/D/2324/2013 online.

EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY IN AFRICA – SCHOLARSHIPS

Master’s degree (LLM/MPhil) in Sexual and Reproductive Rights in Africa,  University of Pretoria, South Africa, Two-year program starts in Jan. 2017.   Blended learning course with online interaction and residential block-weeks in Pretoria, South Africa. Two contact sessions will be scheduled every year (four contact sessions over the two year period).   Apply by 31 Oct 2016. Up to 15 full scholarships available for African citizens.  African LLM/MPhil details.

RESOURCES

[abortion, U.K. and U.S.] “With advances in embryo research, it’s time to bring abortion law out of the Victorian age,” by Sally Sheldon. Kent Law School, Kent University, Canterbury, BioNews 853 (May 31, 2016)  Article online.

[conscientious objection – institutions] Contracting Religion, by Elizabeth Sepper,  in:  Law, Religion, and Health in the United States, ed. Holly Fernandez Lynch, I. Glenn Cohen, & Elizabeth Sepper (Forthcoming: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017). (Draft chapter online).

[fetal abnormality, microcephaly, Brazil]  Special issue of Cadernos de Saúde Pública 32.5 (2016) Rio de Janeiro includes a special thematic section:
“Zika and Pregnancy”  Table of Contents with links to translations.
— “Zika virus and women,” by Debora Diniz (English and Portuguese)
— “The debate on abortion and Zika: lessons from the AIDS epidemic,” by Thais Medina Coeli Rochel de Camargo, (English and Portuguese)
— “Women’s reproductive rights and the Zika virus epidemic,” by Jacqueline Pitanguy (English and Portuguese)
— “Comment on the paper by Pitanguy,” by Florencia Luna (English and Spanish)
— “Ensuring a rights-based health sector response to women affected by Zika” by Paige Baum, Anna Fiastro, Shane Kunselman, Camila Vega, Christine Ricardo, Beatriz Galli, and Marcos Nascimeno (English and Portuguese).
— “Comment on the article by Baum et al.,” by Ana Cristina González-Velez
(English and Spanish)
— “Zika and reproductive justice,” by Alexandra Minna Stern (English)

[fetal abnormality, microcephaly] “Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in the Time of Zika in Latin America and the Caribbean,” by Ana Langer, Jacquelyn M. Caglia andClara Menéndez, Studies in Family Planning 47.2 (June 2016): 179-181.  Online version.

Law and Policy updates are issued monthly by International Campaign for Women’s Right to Safe Abortion.  To receive the electronic newsletter, click “Join the Campaign”

[maternal deaths, Uganda]: “Why the Constitutional Court should rule on the right to health,” by Michael Addaney in AfricLaw blog,  June 3, 2016  AfricLaw blogpost,

[stereotyping] “Emerging from the Shadows: Substantive Equality and Article 14 of
the European Convention on Human Rights,” by Sandra Fredman, Human Rights Law Review 16 (2016): 273–301   Advance access.

US-focused news, resources, and legal developments are available on Repro Rights Prof Blog.  View or subscribe.

NEWS

[El Salvador]  Sentenced to 40 Years After a Miscarriage, Maria Teresa Rivera was freed May 20,2016 News report in English.   News report in Spanish

JOBS

Links to other employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here

______________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

 

Preventable maternal deaths: Ugandan court decisions

Many thanks to Godfrey Kangaude, LL.M. (UFS), LL.M. (UCLA), an LL.D. candidate with the University of Pretoria and Executive Director of Nyale Institute for Sexual and Reproductive Health Governance in Malawi, for composing or editing dozens of analytical summaries of African court decisions for our forthcoming volume, Legal Grounds III: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in Sub-Saharan African Courts.  Previous volumes in the series, published in 2005 and 2010 by the Center for Reproductive Rights, are freely available in print or electronic form.  Legal Grounds online.

Several of the cases involve preventable maternal deaths. Traditionally, families and communities suffer these losses silently, unless a legal advocacy organization brings the case forward.  In Uganda, for instance, the Center for Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) and others brought two maternal death cases to the Constitutional Court of Uganda as human rights violations, but the petition was dismissed without consideration in 2012 as a “political” matter.[1]  In November 2015, however, Uganda’s Supreme Court ordered Constitutional Court to hear the petition on maternal health rights violations.[2]  We still await the Constitutional Court’s  ruling on the merits of CEHURD’s petition.

Just six months earlier, a Ugandan High Court  found human rights violations and awarded damages to the family of a woman who died in obstructed labour at Nakaseke District Hospital; the only doctor who could handle this complication was on duty but could not be found.[3]  As Godfrey Kangaude  comments, “the judgment is an important signal that preventable death of women during pregnancy, labour, and childbirth is a human rights issue.”

Moreover, as Kangaude explains, “Uganda is a party to the International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). One of the important decisions on the subject matter under CEDAW is Alyne da Silva Pimentel Teixeira v Brazil (Communication No. 17/2008 CEDAW/C/49/D/17/2008). The Committee on CEDAW (CEDAW Committee) considered the case of a woman who had died of complications of pregnancy as a result of delays in being provided with appropriate care by the health system.[4] The CEDAW Committee found violation of state obligations under Article 12 on the equal right to health, and under Article 2(c) in relation to access to justice, amongst others. It made several recommendations to address the systemic factors, which would apply to the Uganda context . . .” [5]

The CEDAW Committee recommended that the state:

“(a) Ensure women’s right to safe motherhood and affordable access for all women to adequate emergency obstetric care, in accordance with General Recommendation No. 24 (1999) on women and health;

(b) Provide adequate professional training for health workers, especially on women’s reproductive health rights, including quality medical treatment during pregnancy and delivery, as well as timely emergency obstetric care;

(c) Ensure access to effective remedies in cases where women’s reproductive health rights have been violated and provide training for the judiciary and for law enforcement personnel;

(d) Ensure that private health-care facilities comply with relevant national and international standards on reproductive health care; [and]

(e) Ensure that adequate sanctions are imposed on health professionals who violate women’s reproductive health rights.”[6]
_____________________

REFERENCES:

[1] Center for Health Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) and 3 Others v Attorney General [2012], Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2011 (Constitutional Court of Uganda at Kampala). Decision online. Preventable maternal deaths were dismissed as a “political” matter.  Case Summary and Analysis by Nthabiseng Lelisa and Godfrey Kangaude, with special thanks to Nthabiseng Lelisa, an LL.M. candidate in Sexual and Reproductive Rights in the Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, South Africa.

[2]  Center for Health, Human Rights and Development & 3 Others  v Attorney General.  [2015], Constitutional Appeal No. 01 of 2013 (Supreme Court of Uganda at Kampala) [Uganda Supreme Court orders Constitutional Court to hear a petition on maternal health rights violations.]  Decision online.  Case summary and analysis by Godfrey Kangaude. 

[3] Center for Health, Human Rights and Development & 4 Others  v Nakaseke District Local Administration [2015], Civil Suit No. 111 of 2012 (High Court of Uganda at Kampala). [Ugandan High Court finds human rights violations where a pregnant woman died of a ruptured uterus and blood loss while in labour.] Decision online. Case summary and Analysis by Godfrey Kangaude 

[4] See also: Rebecca J. Cook “Human Rights and Maternal Health: Exploring the Effectiveness of the Alyne Decision”  41.1 (Spring 2013) Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 103-123,  Original publication in English.  Republished in Spanish.  Translation to Portuguese.  Republication in Portuguese journal.

[5] CEHURD v Nakaseke (note 3 above), Case summary and Analysis by Godfrey Kangaude , page 3.

[6] Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women,  Alyne da Silva Pimentel Teixeira (deceased) v Brazil, Communication No.17/2008, CEDAW/C/49/D/17/2008), Recommendations, 8.2.  CEDAW decision Sept 27, 2011

---

Legal Grounds: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in African Commonwealth Courts   (up to 2008) Volumes I and II can be downloaded here.  Our update will be published early in 2017.  Decisions already identified for Volume III  are online here.  New case summaries are added every month.   If you can suggest other cases, please do!   How You Can Help.

REPROHEALTHLAW Updates

SUBSCRIBE TO REPROHEALTHLAW: To receive these updates monthly by email, enter your address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

DEVELOPMENTS

GENDER JUSTICE UNCOVERED AWARDS – Vote on the Best and Worst judgments of 2015, gathered by Women’s Link Worldwide.  Decisions are attached!  Vote by May 30, 2016.  To review this year’s nominees, click on “Cases”.

PERU: re the historic case of  K.L. v. Peru: As a teenager in 2001, K.L.was denied abortion of an anencephalic fetus who died soon after birth. The UN CEDAW Committee stated that her human rights had been violated.   In 2016, she has received financial compensation.   News report.

RWANDA – access to legal abortion for raped 13-year-old denied by first court, then allowed on appeal.    Judgment of October 30 2015, official English translation, redacted to preserve privacy. Rwandan juvenile abortion decision.

UGANDA – Preventable Maternal Deaths – 3 decisions Overview on Reprohealthlaw Blog.

Center for Health Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) and 3 Others v Attorney General [2012], Constitutional Petition No. 16 of 2011 (Constitutional Court of Uganda at Kampala). Preventable maternal deaths were dismissed as a “political” matter.  Decision online.  Case Summary and Analysis by Nthabiseng Lelisa and Godfrey Kangaude.

Center for Health, Human Rights and Development & 3 Others  v Attorney General.  [2015], Constitutional Appeal No. 01 of 2013 (Supreme Court of Uganda at Kampala) [Uganda Supreme Court orders Constitutional Court to hear a petition on maternal health rights violations.]  Decision online.  Case summary and analysis by Godfrey Kangaude. 

Center for Health, Human Rights and Development & 4 Others  v Nakaseke District Local Administration [2015], Civil Suit No. 111 of 2012 (High Court of Uganda at Kampala). [Ugandan High Court finds human rights violations where a pregnant woman died of a ruptured uterus and blood loss while in labour.] Decision online. Case summary and Analysis by Godfrey Kangaude 

EDUCATIONAL FUNDING

Comparative Program on Health and Society at the University of Toronto, Canada, invites applications for 2016-2017.  Complete applications due May 30, 2016.    Doctoral fellowships on “Health and human rights” and “Social determinants of health”: Doctoral fellowships.   Research Associate fellowship

O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, DC.   – Associate position for law graduates, to work on domestic and global health law and policy projects. Apply by May 31, 2016  Associate position for law graduates

RESOURCES

[abortion – anti-choice strategy, United Kingdom]”A guerrilla strategy for a pro-life England,” by Sheelagh Mcguinness, 7.2 Law, Innovation and Technology 283-314. [how anti-abortion “guerrilla” strategies undermine reproductive rights]  Abstract and article.

[abortion and police]  Practical Guide for Partnering with Police on Abortion. The guide is for trainers and advocates, by Ipas, 2016.  Ipas Guide.

[abortion, zika virus – Brazil]  “Threats of retrocession in sexual and reproductive health policies in Brazil during the Zika epidemic,” [Ameaças de retrocesso nas políticas de saúde
sexual e reprodutiva no Brasil em tempos de epidemia de Zika] by Beatriz Galli and Suely Deslandes,   32.4 (2016) Cad. Saúde Pública (Rio de Janeiro)  Epub 19-Abr-2016  Portuguese original.  English translation.

[abortion, zika] “Using a Human Rights Accountability Framework to Respond to Zika,” by Beatriz Galli.  Health and Human Rights Journal blog, May 2, 2016.  Blog online.

[Conscientious objection by hospitals – new report] “Health Care Denied: Patients and Physicians Speak Out about Catholic Hospitals and the Threat to Women’s Health and Lives,” American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU and Merger Watch, 2016)  40-page report.   Faith-based restrictions at 550 US hospitals go far beyond abortion: news article.

[Conscientious objection by hospitals prohibited] “Healthcare responsibilities and Conscientious Objection”  by R. J. Cook, M. Arango Olaya and B.M. Dickens,  International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 104 (2009): 249-252.  English abstract and article. Spanish translation.

[Conscientious objection] “The Right to Conscience,” by Bernard M. Dickens in Abortion Law in Transnational Perspective: Cases and Controversies, ed. Rebecca J. Cook, Joanna N. Erdman and Bernard M. Dickens (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014), 210-238. Book in English.  Spanish translation.

Conscientious Objection: articles and projects related to the Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Programme of the University of Toronto  Updated List.

[forced treatment during pregnancy, e.g. caesarean births] New book: Autonomy and pregnancy: A comparative analysis of compelled obstetric intervention (2016), Samantha Halliday. Table of contents and excerpts at Googlebooks

US-focused news, resources, and legal developments are available on Repro Rights Prof Blog.  View or subscribe.

JOBS

Program Manager, Women’s Health and Equality in Latin America, Wyss Foundation, Washington DC,  Apply by May 31, 2016.  Job details.

Links to other employers in the field of Reproductive and Sexual Health Law are online here

______________
Compiled by the Coordinator of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, reprohealth*law at utoronto.ca For Program publications and resources, see our website, online here. TO JOIN THIS BLOG: enter your email address in upper right corner of this webpage, then check your email to confirm the subscription.

Kenya High Court upholds criminalisation of adolescent consensual sex, ignores gender bias in the law

Many thanks to Godfrey Kangaude, LL.M. (UFS), LL.M. (UCLA), Executive Director of the Malawi Law Society and Co-Director of Nyale Institute for Sexual and Reproductive Health Governance, and Mobby Rusere, an LL.M. candidate in Sexual and Reproductive Rights in the Centre for Human Rights,  Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, for collaborating on this case summary and analysis for Legal Grounds III: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in Sub-Saharan African Courts, forthcoming in 2016.

CKW v. Attorney General & Director of Public Prosecution, Petition No. 6 of 2013 (High Court of Kenya)  Decision online.  Summary and analysis online.    Facts:  The petitioner, who was 16 years old at the material time, was facing a charge before the magistrate’s court for the offence of  defilement, for having had penetrative penile-vaginal sex with a girl of 16, which was contrary to Sections 8(1) and 8(4) of the Sexual Offences Act, 2006 (Sexual Offences Act). This was an application before the High Court of Kenya lodged on behalf of a minor petitioning the court to declare Sections 8 (1) and 11 (1) of the Sexual Offences Act invalid to the extent that they criminalise sexual relationships between consenting adolescents.

Legal Grounds I and II, online here, contain summaries and analyses of 107 decisions from African Commonwealth Courts.  Both were published by the Center for Reproductive Rights in 2005 and 2010.
Newer case summaries drafted for “Legal Grounds III” are online here.   These also include a 2012 decision holding Kenyan police accountable for failure to investigate child sexual assaults and a 2011 Ugandan decision on maternal mortality and the constitutional right to health.