12/29/2005 - Jan. 4th Teleconference for Reproductive Health Rights Groups
12/16/05 - FDA Court Date Rescheduled
12/13/05 - Center Study Exposes Government Neglect Of Women’s Health In East And Southeast Asia
12/8/05 -Launch of Women of the World East and Southeast Asia
11/29/05 - Statement on Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England
11/18/05 - Supreme Court Should Not Review Federal Abortion Ban Case, Center’s Brief Argues
11/17/05 - Victory for Reproductive Rights in Peru
11/14/05 - GAO's Report on FDA's Plan B Decision Process Confirms Center's Lawsuit
10/31/05 - Judge Alito’s Nomination is Deeply Troubling, Says Center for Reproductive Rights
10/12/05 - Center Files Friend-of-the-Court Brief
9/27/05 - Brief Against Supreme Court Review of Federal Abortion Ban Case
9/15/05 - Missouri Law Shuts Down Only Abortion Clinic in Southwest Missouri
9/15/05 - Federal Court Strikes Michigan Abortion Ban for Third Time
9/08/05 - Kansas
9/05/05 - Roberts' Nomination to Chief Justice
9/05/05 - Passing of Chief Justice Rehnquist
9/01/05 - 8 Questions Senators Must Ask Roberts
8/26/05 - Shame On the FDA: More Deception and Delay
8/9/05 - Leading Reproductive & Women’s Rights Organization Hold Press Conference
8/05/05 - Politics of Pataki Veto Highlight Need For FDA Action
7/19/05 - Center for Reproductive Rights Alarmed by Roberts Nomination
8/03/05 - When Voters Learn of Roberts’ Record, Support Plummets According to Focus Groups
7/14/05 - For First Time in NCLR’s History, Briefing on Reproductive Rights of Hispanic Women to be Held at Annual Conference
7/8/05 - Key Victory In Appeals Court Against 2003 Federal Abortion Ban
7/6/05 - To Protect Future Generations, Senate Must Require Full and Open Disclosure of Supreme Court Nominee’s Views, Constitutional Litigators Say
7/01/05 - Justice Sandra Day O’Connor Retires: Dramatic Change in Supreme Court Puts Reproductive Rights at Risk
6/23/05 - Law Endangering Young Women Challenged in Federal Court: Health Care Providers Say Law Imperils Health and Lives of Florida’s Young Women
6/23/05 - The Benefits of Roe v. Wade Are Clear: Center for Reproductive Rights’ Response to Senate Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing on Roe
6/20/05 - Civil Rights Chief from U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York Joins Center
6/14/05 - Groups Ask Court to Block Abortion Ban: Leading Reproductive Health and Rights Groups Say Michigan Law Would Prohibit Virtually All Abortions in the State
6/2/05 - Court Stops Virginia’s Third Attempt to 6/2/05 - Outlaw Safe Abortions
6/1/05 - Court Strikes Down Mississippi Abortion Law: Women in State Narrowly Escape Virtual Ban on Second Trimester Abortion
5/19/05 - Tulsa Clinic Challenges Teen Abortion Act as it Hits Governor’s Desk
5/12/05 - The FDA Under Evangelical Influence on Plan B Decision? No Surprise There
4/27/05 - Teen Endangerment Act: Putting Politics Before Teens’ Well-Being
4/13/05 - FDA Commissioner Crawford, No More Stalling!
4/12/05 - U.S. Government’s Appeal in Federal Abortion Ban Case Heads to Court for the First Time
4/10/05 - Alaska Supreme Court to Review Injunction on State’s Teen Abortion Law
3/23/05 - Yet Another Excuse from the FDA on Delaying Plan B Decision
3/15/05 - Statement on the Teen Endangerment Act
3/14/05 - Michigan Abortion Ban Put on Hold While Challenge Proceeds
3/10/05 - Responding to India Supreme Court Decision on Country’s Sterilization Practices
3/4/05 - As World Eases Restrictions on Abortion, U.S. Becomes More Restrictive, Study Finds
3/2/05 - What’s Missing from the Beijing Platform?
3/1/05 - Women’s Health Care Providers Challenge Michigan Law Banning Virtually All Abortions
2/14/05 - Center for Reproductive Rights Appoints New Director of International Legal Program
1/21/05 - Center Sues FDA for denying Women Over-the-Counter Access to Emergency Contraception
1/21/05 - Statement from the Center for Reproductive Rights on the 32nd Anniversary of Roe v. Wade
1/05/05 - Alberto Gonzales: Three Questions the Attorney General Nominee Must Address
print this page | email this page | join mailing list
UN Human Rights Committee Makes Landmark Decision Establishing Women's Right to Access to Legal Abortion


Woman Forced to Carry Fatally Impaired Fetus to Term Wins Case

More Info

New York, NY—Today, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) decided its first abortion case, KL v. Peru. The decision establishes that denying access to legal abortion violates women’s most basic human rights. This is the first time an international human rights body has held a government accountable for failing to ensure access to legal abortion services. The Human Rights Committee monitors countries’ compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

"We are thrilled that the UNHRC has ruled in favor of protecting women’s most essential human rights," says Luisa Cabal, Director of the International Legal Program at the Center for Reproductive Rights. "Every woman who lives in any of the 154 countries that are party to this treaty – including the U.S – now has a legal tool to use in defense of her rights. This ruling establishes that it is not enough to just grant a right on paper. Where abortion is legal it is governments’ duty to ensure that women have access to it."

The case was brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights in partnership with the Latin American and Caribbean Committee for the Defense of Women’s Rights (CLADEM) and the Counseling Center for the Defense of Women’s Rights (DEMUS) on behalf of a young Peruvian woman who was forced by state officials to carry a fatally impaired fetus to term. The pregnancy severely compromised her physical and psychological health.

In 2001, a 17-year-old Peruvian woman, was fourteen weeks pregnant when doctors at a public hospital in Lima diagnosed the fetus with anencephaly, a fatal anomaly in which the fetus lacks most or all of a forebrain. After much soul searching, the young woman decided to have an abortion. Abortion is legal in Peru for therapeutic reasons, however, because Peru failed to adopt clear regulations, women whose health is endangered by such pregnancies are left at the mercy of public officials. The petitioner in the case was denied access to the procedure by the hospital’s director, and was compelled to carry the fetus to term. She was forced to breast-feed for the four days the infant survived.

"Many women around the world face barriers to abortion even where it is legal," says Lilian Sepulveda, Legal Adviser for Latin America and the Caribbean at the Center for Reproductive Rights. "Providers refusing to provide services, restrictions on clinics, waiting periods, affordability issues, spousal and parental authorization, all represent barriers to legal abortion. Denying women access to basic reproductive health services – such as access to legal abortion – is a violation of their human rights, and finally there is a statement from international human rights law that holds governments accountable."

The ruling specifically establishes violations to the right to be free from cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment, privacy, special protection of the rights of a minor. It orders the Peruvian government to provide KL with reparations, and to adopt the necessary regulations to guarantee access to legal abortion.