Tag Archive for: Sexual and Reproductive Rights

,

We participated in the XVI Regional Conference on Women in Latin America and the Caribbean

Fundeps took part in the XVI Regional Conference on Women in Latin America and the Caribbean, held from August 11 to 15 in Mexico City.

The Regional Conference on Women takes place every three years and is a key event to drive progress in gender equality across the region. It is a subsidiary body of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) and the main United Nations intergovernmental forum on women’s rights and gender equality in the region. Since 1977, it has convened regularly to analyze regional and subregional situations regarding women’s autonomy and rights, and to present recommendations on gender equality public policies, in compliance with regional and international agreements.

Romina Pezzelato, coordinator of the Gender and Diversity Area, represented Fundeps in the extensive agenda of “side events” officially supported by CEPAL. These gatherings brought together civil society representatives from across the region to deepen dialogue and debates around the human right to care, the central theme of this year’s Conference.

Throughout the week, one of the most significant highlights was the response of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to Argentina’s request for an advisory opinion, recognizing the right to care as an autonomous right—that is, not only as an aspect linked to other rights but as a right in itself—across three dimensions: the right to provide care, the right to receive care, and the right to self-care. Based on this position, the IACHR recommended that states in the region implement public policies that guarantee dignity, equality, and shared responsibility in the provision of care throughout the life cycle.

Care as a concept of struggle and community resistance
In a regressive regional context, where the rise of right-wing forces compels us to uphold networks and actions that protect hard-won rights, many of the debates centered on sustaining agendas that push for public policies guaranteeing the right to care. Defending care as an act of sovereignty for women situates us not within our homes ensuring the reproduction of life, but as protagonists in struggles such as the defense of land, the environment, food sovereignty, and sexual and reproductive rights, among others.

On Monday, August 11, the Feminist Forum took place as a precursor to the XVI Regional Conference on Women. Feminists from more than 150 civil society organizations across Latin America and the Caribbean came together to make their voices heard by governments. As a result of an intense day of debate, a document was drafted and read at the official Conference by a representative of the Otrans organization, addressing authorities present:
“Neither silence, nor setbacks, nor nostalgia, nor consolation. Thirty years after Beijing, we demand justice. We call on States to return to the basics: to place life, social, racial and ecological justice, as well as gender equality and the protection of human rights, at the center. We also invite you to be bold and creative in your responses. Feminists have been building collective, sustainable and radical strategies for decades, which must be recognized and incorporated into State debates.”

In another strong document outlining the many dimensions of the right to care in the current regional context, the Feminist Forum also stated:
“We demand clear commitments to the most humanizing agenda of all: one that promotes an economic, political, social, and cultural model that generates well-being, is sustainable, and places care at the center. An agenda that has defended the recognition of the right to decide over our own bodies and life projects. One that guarantees social justice with a restorative and reparative approach. The agenda of substantive equality supported by feminisms. From Palestine to Haiti, we demand peace, justice, and equality!”

The Commitment of Tlatelolco is the name of the official document resulting from the XVI Regional Conference on Women, in which regional governments pledged to develop public policies aimed at reducing inequality gaps that continue to weigh on the bodies of women and LGBTQI+ people.

At Fundeps, we reaffirm our ongoing commitment to advocacy actions that engage with each of these demands in defense of human rights.

Contact:

Romina Pezzelato, romina.pezzelato@fundeps.org

,

We held the second meeting “Networks of Commitment and Care”

More than 40 healthcare professionals from across the province took part in the meeting held on August 2. It was a space for training and exchange aimed at strengthening access to sexual and reproductive health with a diversity perspective and a rights-based approach.

With the participation of more than 40 healthcare professionals, we held the second meeting “Networks of Commitment and Care” on August 2 in the city of Córdoba. It was a space for training, active listening, and exchange, aimed at strengthening capacities, sharing experiences, and highlighting good practices in sexual and (non) reproductive health with a diversity perspective and a rights-based approach.

This initiative, promoted by the Gender and Diversity area of Fundeps in collaboration with Belén Carcedo from the Comprehensive Health Clinic and Sofía Menoyo, member of Socorristas en Red, brought together professionals from various localities: Agua de Oro, La Granja, Jesús María, Santa Rosa de Calamuchita, Villa Dolores, Huinca Renancó, La Paquita, Corral de Bustos, Bell Ville, Paso Viejo, Alta Gracia, and Villa Los Aromos.

On this occasion, the meeting focused, on the one hand, on the medical practice of Manual Vacuum Aspiration (MVA) as a safe, outpatient method of pregnancy termination recommended by the World Health Organization; and, on the other hand, on the challenges related to providing care with a rights-based approach for children, youth, and trans masculinities.

At a time when defunding of public health policies and stigmatization are affecting access to pregnancy termination, we updated and provided legal tools for healthcare teams that continue to guarantee the right to safe and free abortion in our province, under the terms of Law 27.610. Fundeps attorneys Mayca Balaguer and Luz Baretta offered an overview of the current legal framework on health from a human rights perspective. The emphasis was placed on the rights of children and adolescents, in light of key principles such as progressive autonomy and the best interests of the child, incorporated into the Civil and Commercial Code in 2015—principles that guide various health practices, including voluntary and legal termination of pregnancy.

In the afternoon, we began the work session coordinated by Santiago Merlo, a teacher and trans activist, member of the Trans Fatherhood Network, with whom we reflected on approaches within the health system from a diversity perspective. We reviewed the importance of dismantling our own prejudices and making room for trans experiences within the consultation space, using inquiry as a primary tool when faced with uncertainty: “There is no need for us to assume the sexual orientation or gender identity of those seeking care; asking them is a relief both for them and for health professionals. It is a fundamental resource,” Santiago stated.

Finally, we collectively reconstructed the milestones that enabled us to advance the implementation of AMEU practices in the province. We discussed the main challenges faced in each territory and the strategies that we can continue to strengthen through network-based work, which is one of our main commitments at Fundeps.

When asked what “accompanying” means, Camila Recalde, a family physician from the Cruz del Eje area, explained: “For me, it is about being able to put oneself in the place of the other, in that moment, and understanding that the people who come to consultations are subjects of rights, and that we are there to accompany decisions and processes with a respectful and compassionate perspective toward what that person is experiencing at that time.”

This was yet another opportunity to recharge our energies and continue working together to strengthen access to comprehensive sexual health care in Córdoba, with a diversity perspective and a rights-based approach.

Contact:

Romina Pezzelato – romina.pezzelato@fundeps.org

,

IACHR alert: Argentina must uphold its gender policies to protect human rights

In a historic hearing, the IACHR was informed of the regression of gender policies and access to sexual and reproductive health in Argentina and the State’s failure to comply with its obligations. The economic justification of the cuts by the Government was not accepted by the Commission. Its President and the commissioners present affirmed the existence of gender violence and stressed the need for specific measures to address it. “What is not named does not exist,” they said.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States (IACHR-OAS) summoned the Argentine State on Thursday, November 14, 2024, to its headquarters in Washington DC, to explain the serious regression in gender policies, in policies on sexual and reproductive rights and the lack of compliance with international commitments. Civil society organizations had requested the hearing in order to present evidence of this setback in the rights of women, girls, adolescents and LGBTIQ+ people in Argentina.

During the hearing, the commissioners asked the representatives of the Argentine Government present to provide answers regarding the coordination of public policies without a budget; to specify which programs are still in force and what measures they will take to strengthen the administration of justice in cases of gender violence. The Government did not respond to the Commission’s questions, nor did it mention how it will comply with its commitments. It only limited itself to recognizing the lack of budgetary attribution to these policies as an error and promised to make an addendum to the national budget.

Meanwhile, at the United Nations General Assembly, Argentina was the only country to vote against the prevention of violence against women and girls, with 170 votes in favour and 13 abstentions.

Civil society organizations urged the IACHR to recommend that the Argentine State adopt concrete policies that guarantee compliance with its international commitments and ensure the right of women, girls, adolescents, and LGBTIQ+ people to live free from violence and to guarantee access to sexual and reproductive health services. This hearing was an urgent call to action: our country must stop the dismantling of fundamental policies and resume its commitment to human rights, so that the basic rights of its citizens do not depend on regressive political decisions.

The voice of organizations

In their interventions before the Commission, Amnesty International, the Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS), the Latin American Team for Justice and Gender (ELA), the Mujeres x Mujeres Foundation and the Foundation for the Development of Sustainable Policies (Fundeps) presented information that shows the serious setback in public policies aimed at addressing and eradicating gender violence, and guaranteeing access to health services, especially sexual and reproductive health.

“Since taking office on December 10, 2023, the current Argentine government has systematically attacked the rights of women, girls, adolescents, and LGBTIQ+ people. It dismantled successful public policies; it discredited, without evidence, the institutions responsible for guaranteeing them; it arbitrarily cut budget allocations and reduced the staff that supported the implementation of public policies through mass layoffs. With these actions, the State is violating current international pacts and treaties,” said Natalia Gherardi, Executive Director of ELA.

The situation is alarming: in the first quarter of 2024 alone, of the 2,462 women who applied for the Acompañar Program, only 434 received help. This represents a 98% decline compared to 2023, leaving women at extreme risk unprotected. In addition, the budget executed for these programs in 2024 only reaches 15%, directly and critically affecting women and diversities facing situations of violence.

Regarding the dismantling of public policies for access to sexual and reproductive rights, Lucila Galkin, Gender Director of Amnesty International Argentina, stated that “the purchase and distribution of supplies has been the responsibility of the National State since the creation of the National Program for Sexual and Reproductive Health in 2002, and by constitutional mandate the Ministry of Health of the Nation has the authority to govern public policy to establish a minimum level of rights throughout the national territory. However, suddenly and for the first time since then, the State has left the provision of supplies to the provinces, without any type of transfer or transition in order to avoid putting women’s lives and health at risk, which results in a context of absolute inequality.”

Contrary to fundamental international principles

The dismantling of public policies contradicts fundamental international principles and treaties such as the Belém do Pará Convention and CEDAW, which oblige the State to actively intervene. “These measures not only put the lives of women, girls, adolescents and diversities at risk, but also perpetuate structural discrimination based on gender and violate the international commitments assumed by the Argentine State in this area,” said Mayca Balaguer of Fundeps.

What is happening in Argentina has an impact beyond its borders. The lack of protection for women and people of different backgrounds in the country creates a precedent that could legitimize setbacks in other Latin American states, putting at risk the advances in human rights that cost a lot of effort to achieve. “Using the excuse of considering human rights as ineffective and ideologically driven, Argentina is moving away from its historical leadership role in the promotion of women’s rights, initiatives against gender violence, and the promotion and protection of sexual and reproductive rights,” said Juliana Miranda of CELS. The IACHR has repeatedly warned that setbacks in one country affect the entire region, weakening joint efforts to prevent and eradicate gender violence.

The organizations requested that the Commission carry out a visit to the country to observe the situation and prepare a report, given the seriousness of the setback. “We appeal to the IACHR’s commitment to urge the protection of the human right to live a life free of violence and discrimination for all girls, adolescents, women and diversities in Argentina,” concluded Soledad Deza, president of the MxM Foundation.

  • Watch the full hearing here.

 

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

,

Good practices in the care of pregnancy termination

This report is the result of a survey carried out during the first months of 2024 among health personnel in the province of Córdoba who guarantee sexual and reproductive health practices in this territory. The objective is to circulate those strategies that have generated good results for access to services, such as the internal organization of the teams, the care and referral circuits, the use of guides and protocols, the interdisciplinary approach to cases, and other types of practices that are considered relevant for good care.

Descargar Documento / Download File
,

ESI because Yes, guaranteeing Comprehensive Sexual Education is expanding rights

This is the slogan of our campaign that seeks to debunk myths about CSE, promote open debates and provide essential knowledge that allows students to exercise their rights and lead a healthy and fulfilling life.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

On February 26, students from across the province of Córdoba will begin a new school year. Those who turn eighteen in 2024 will have the same number of years that will be counted in October from the enactment of Law 26,150, known as the Comprehensive Sexual Education Law (ESI). In this return to school, they hope that ESI will finally be implemented in their classes, so as not to continue being part of the 80% of students who consider that it is not applied adequately in their school, according to the data that emerges from a survey carried out by the Huésped Foundation.

“Comprehensive Sexual Education is an inalienable right of students throughout the country who attend both public and private educational establishments, as established by Law 26,150. Although this law has been in force since 2006, its effective compliance has not been achieved and, furthermore, today this right is threatened by strong disinformation campaigns that circulate both in public opinion and in institutional spaces,” explains Mayca Balaguer, executive director. from Fundeps.

Coinciding with the start of classes, at Fundeps we launch the ESI because Yes awareness campaign, with the aim of making adolescents and young people aware that Comprehensive Sexual Education is their right and that it must be guaranteed in all cases. With clear and precise information, the campaign aims to combat false news, myths and hate speech that circulate on social networks, generating confusion and false beliefs about the content and effective practices of the law in schools.

ESI because Yes, is intended mainly for secondary level students in the province, but also for teachers and educational authorities.

“The teaching role is fundamental: teaching sexual education is essential for the eradication of gender violence, the integration of sexual diversity, the prevention of sexual abuse, teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, among other issues. ESI is not a gender ideology, but rather a systematic and transversal space for teaching and learning, which ensures the transmission of precise, reliable and appropriate scientific knowledge at each evolutionary stage of the students. Teachers are guarantors of rights,” defines Mayca Balaguer.

In Córdoba, the Provincial Education Law (9870) reinforces adherence to national regulations, both in content and knowledge and in values. However, impediments to its application continue to exist in many institutions. That is why we also bet on networking, together with other organizations committed to the promotion of human rights.

“Guaranteeing ESI is expanding rights. It allows students to be formed who are free in thought and choice, with empathy and the ability to live a full sexuality with respectful bonds, since the very definition of Comprehensive Sexual Education stipulated by Law 26,150 contemplates the articulation of biological, psychological, social, emotional and ethical aspects “, confirms our executive director.

The ESI because Yes campaign will be available on the social networks of Fundeps and allied organizations.

 

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

,

Two OTP opinions and the Supreme Court’s responsibility to act according to law

Two opinions of the Attorney General’s Office of the Nation admit the legitimisation of two groups representing the ‘collective of unborn persons’, against the Constitution, national laws and Court rulings. However, they pave the way for the courts to attack the right to termination of pregnancy. Joint press release.

During the last week, Laura M. Monti, Deputy Attorney General of the Attorney General’s Office, signed two opinions in the same vein. In them, she recognises the legal standing of a group of citizens and a civil association to represent the so-called ‘unborn persons’ before the judiciary. This is an interpretation that is not supported by jurisprudence: no court has ever recognised in a final judgement the possibility of collective representation of ‘unborn persons’.

Monti issued these rulings in two cases: one led by Cristina Fiore Viñuales and the other by the organisation Portal de Belén, both initiated to question the constitutionality of the Law on the Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy. In both cases, although it claims to follow the law, it departs from the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation on collective representation. Also in both cases, the petitioners seek to turn what is in fact a general disagreement with the law into a ‘case’ (to be discussed in the courts).

Monti relied on art. 1 of Law 26.061 on the Integral Protection of Children to sustain standing. In this way, he distorted the meaning of the law and devised a sort of ‘popular action’ that would allow any citizen to bring an action outside of a specific case. Not only that, but it also equated ‘unborn persons’ with children and adolescents.

At the same time, in its rulings it decided not to take into account the requirements of article 116 of the National Constitution, the National Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure and the Court’s decisions and jurisprudence on collective proceedings, creating a situation of legal uncertainty. To name a precedent: in the Halabi case, cited by the Attorney General herself, it is established that the existence of a case must be proven in order to grant collective standing. In neither case, neither Fiore Viñuales nor Portal de Belén, is there a ‘case’; in other words, Monti should have denied standing outright.

Why this step by the public prosecutor is serious: because it allows a group of citizens to challenge a law voted for by all political forces through a lawsuit without proving that there is a right or concrete damage affected and, in the same action, to attribute to it a collective representation that does not exist in the Argentine legal system. The democratic debate has already taken place in Congress and has drawn a line for a basic social agreement on the right to health and life, through the decriminalisation and legalisation of abortion.

The files had been awaiting an opinion for a year and a half, but they were issued two days after Dr. Rodolfo Barra was appointed National Treasury Attorney, even though he was still acting as a legal advisor in the ‘Fiore Viñuales’ case.

Dr. Barra, in his capacity as newly appointed Treasury Attorney, has a conflict of interest, according to the public ethics law, which makes him incompatible with the defence of Law 27.610. Therefore, he should be excused from intervening in the cases against the Law on the Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy and in all matters related to the right to abortion. In this regard, we filed a complaint with the National Treasury Attorney’s Office and informed the Anti-Corruption Office, as it is the authority responsible for applying the public ethics law.

Since 2021, of the total number of legal actions brought against the law, 34 have been rejected by courts in different jurisdictions across the country. Only 3 reached the Court, but not to decide on their constitutionality, but to determine whether those who brought these actions have standing to do so and to represent the collective of ‘unborn persons’.

The opinions of the Attorney General’s Office are not binding for the Court, which can define the applicable legal criteria without taking into account these recommendations. Therefore, the Court now has the responsibility to reposition class actions for the purposes for which they were created, to prevent them from being conceptually forced and to avoid violating due process guarantees. This is their chance to stop the unfounded litigation against an existing and key law for millions of women, girls and persons capable of bearing children.

  • Amnistía Internacional Argentina
  • Equipo Latinoamericano de Justicia y Género (ELA)
  • Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS)
  • Fundación para el Desarrollo de Políticas Sustentables (Fundeps)
  • Fundación Mujeres x Mujeres
,

Diploma in Feminist Strategic Litigation launched

Amnesty International, ELA – Latin American Team for Justice and Gender, Fundeps and the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law (Georgetown University) announce the launch of a new training course for lawyers in Argentina that brings together renowned faculty from throughout the region.

The proposal is aimed at legal professionals who wish to be trained in feminist strategic litigation strategies on sexual and reproductive rights in order to develop as leaders in their communities and environments. The Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS) and the MxM Foundation support the initiative.

The Diploma will be free of charge and will be developed virtually between March and October 2024 through synchronous meetings and will culminate with a practical and face-to-face litigation experience in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, for which scholarships will be granted.

In addition, those students who have obtained a certificate of approval will be able to apply for a legal internship in the organizations coordinating the Diploma, so that they can apply the knowledge, skills and tools they have acquired.

Registration in this form

Brochure – information about the schedule, modules and teachers.

For more information: diplomaturalitigiofeminista@gmail.com

,

Breaking the mold: advocacy from a feminist perspective

From Fundeps, together with IDEJUS and Católicas por el Derecho a Decidir, we present “Breaking schemes: a Conversation on Feminist Litigation” at the Faculty of Law of the National University of Córdoba. We spoke with an international panel of lawyers with outstanding experience in the defense of human rights.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

On Friday, September 15, within the framework of the optional subject “Feminist Litigation: Legal Strategies for Gender Equality” taught this semester at the Faculty of Law, the first discussion on feminist litigation took place. The subject addresses conceptual issues about strategic litigation and feminist criticism of law, with a practical part in which cases and experiences are studied. The teaching team is made up of lawyers from Fundeps, CDD and IDEJUS.

With the participation of Lucía de la Vega (CELS), Soledad Deza (Women x Women), Mariela Galeazzi (Amnesty International), Patricia Sotile (Latin American Justice and Gender Team) and Natalia Acevedo Guerrero (O’Neill Institute for Law and Global and National Health from Georgetown University), we talked about her experience in social organizations and in the development of strategic litigation, the obstacles to the practice of law with a feminist perspective and her response to all types of judicial controversies. They highlighted the importance of collective and interdisciplinary work for comprehensive approaches and the need for training in feminist and human rights perspectives in the legal field.

With a review of those causes in which they participated, the progress of the integration of perspectives for real access to justice and the importance of its promotion and dissemination was analyzed.

Through these instances, in line with what was discussed with the panel and with the institutional support of the Faculty of Law, we are committed to contributing to the training of legal professionals with a gender perspective.

 

Author

Luz Baretta

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

,

Abortion rights advocacy work is collective and international

During the last few months we have participated in international training, exchange and strengthening of the struggle for the right to access to abortion in the continent.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

Both the organization for advocacy and the difficulties involved are a common factor of the movements in the struggle for access to abortion throughout the region. With their differences and local particularities, a large group of people are part of international instances to share experiences and perspectives.

A tide that crosses borders

In February, following the new scenario that emerged with the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the famous “Roe v. Wade” ruling, the Green Wave Gathering was held in Washington, D.C. More than one hundred leaders and activists from the Americas participated under a fundamental premise of the feminist movement: joining forces. During three days, there were multiple tables of exchange and presentation of the problems of each country and the ways to address them, focusing on the construction of an intersectional and decolonial perspective of struggle. The meeting ended with a pañuelazo at Freedom Plaza, where the artwork created by the artist Paola Mendoza, representing the connection between the two continents for reproductive justice, was exhibited. In addition, the artwork pays tribute to the activists who have worked tirelessly to promote reproductive rights in both regions.

 

 

Persisting for change: abortion is our right

In June we also participated in the VII Regional Conference of CLACAI (Latin American Consortium Against Unsafe Abortion) which took place in Panama City, Panama. The Conference brought together health and legal professionals and journalists working for the defense of abortion rights from eighteen Latin American countries. There were multiple spaces for debate, training and collective construction for a comprehensive approach to the proposal. We would especially highlight the first face-to-face meeting of the recent Youth Network for the Right to Abortion in Latin America and the Caribbean, which is presented as a powerful space for the future of the movement.

The exchange of regional experiences and the strengthening of networks is one of the great signs that the struggle is collective.

 

 

Networked law

In line with the strengthening of networks and as part of the CLACAI Legal Network, we recently presented an Amicus Curiae before the Constitutional Court of Colombia. This action is framed in a case about a situation of multiple violence in the care of a young woman’s termination of pregnancy.

Through these instances we fight for the participation and collective and regional construction of the legal recognition of the right to access to safe abortions, the construction of public policies and standards respectful of the human and fundamental rights of pregnant women.

 

Author

Luz Baretta

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

,

Pañuelos en Lucha: a podcast on feminist action for the sanction and defense of the abortion law

We present “Pañuelos en lucha”, a series of four episodes that highlights the testimonies of different people who fought for the sanction of the Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy Law in Argentina and continue to raise their handkerchiefs to defend it.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

The project, carried out together with Parque Podcast and with the support of the Mujeres del Sur Fund, has as its protagonists the voices of women and gender dissidence members of the green tide, who had some type of participation in the process prior to the enactment of the law , and in its subsequent implementation and defense.

Based on the collection of testimonies and the sound archive that brings together experiences from different parts of the country, we tell the story of the enactment of the IVE law and what came after. The objective of this sound essay is to serve as a historical account that recovers and reconstructs various forms of organization and strategies of struggle of the movements in favor of reproductive autonomy.

We set out to reflect how, despite the actions and strategies implemented by conservative and religious fundamentalist groups, the sanction could be obtained and work continues for its full implementation.

Each episode poses a fight scenario. In the first, “The desire made law”, we develop how the conquest process was experienced in Congress, during the vigils, and what the collective achievement of a law means. In the second, “Not a step back”, we reflect on how this right is accessed in health systems. In the third, “Winning the courts”, we tell how the judicial scenario is constituted as a space for dispute. Finally, in the fourth, “Abortion after abortion”, we propose some reflections on the pending challenges and how we see the future.

The ideation process of each episode and the collection of testimonies was carried out by the staff and volunteers from Fundeps’ Gender and Sexual Diversity and Communication areas. The script was written by Florencia Flores Iborra. The recording was in charge of Leticia Riera. The mixing and sound design was in charge of Paula Manini and the locution was by Constanza Barbisan.

 

We invite you to listen to it!

 ACCESSED ALL EPISODES

 

And here we share the transcriptions of the scripts for each episode:

 

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

,

Provincial justice confirms that abortion is law in Córdoba

A new judicial rejection of those who seek to take away our rights

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

Today, the First Administrative Contentious Chamber of the Province of Córdoba has confirmed the constitutionality of abortion by rejecting the unfounded injunction filed against the application of Law 27610 in our province. This decision makes it clear that legal proceedings should not be used as a tool to obstruct the exercise of human rights for women and individuals with the capacity to become pregnant.

Despite the futile attacks and the displeasure of groups seeking to roll back the acquired rights over our bodies, abortion is protected by law and enjoys broad legal and social consensus.

Key points from the court ruling:

The Chamber has decided to reject the injunction with the votes of two judges, Ángel Antonio Gutiez and Gabriela Cáceres. Judge Leonardo Massimino issued a dissenting opinion.

Judge Gutiez states that the action should be rejected outright because it is merely an expression of dissatisfaction with Law 27610, rather than a challenge to local legislation or public policy that would justify the injunction. However, due to the significance of the underlying issue and its various impacts on society, he addresses the plaintiff’s arguments.

Firstly, he affirms that Law 27610 is the result of balancing fundamental rights by the legislators of the National Congress in the legitimate exercise of their powers and as representatives of the whole society. These rights encompass those of the hypothetical human being in the womb and those of women and individuals with other gender identities who have the capacity to become pregnant.

Regarding the protection of the right to life, the ruling states that, contrary to the plaintiff’s claim of absolute protection of life from conception, “in our legal system, human life, since its beginning at conception, receives varying degrees of protection that increase as the fetus grows. If born alive, that ‘child’ obtains the full range of rights that protect an individual who can live independently outside the body that hosted them throughout their life until its end.” This gradual and incremental protection of the right to life arises from the American Convention on Human Rights and the interpretation made by the Inter-American Commission on Article 4 in the “Baby Boy” case. Therefore, legislation that allows exceptional cases that restrict the broad concept of the right to life, such as Law 27610, is respectful of this treaty.

Regarding the purpose of Law 27610, the judge asks why there was a need for a law on access to voluntary termination of pregnancy. The ruling states that the reasons why a woman wishes to have an abortion can be manifold, but they are all intimately personal, and it is her sole responsibility to assess them. The ruling emphasizes that it is the woman who will have to carry the result of conception in her body for nine months, with all the risks involved, and who will have to give birth, with all the pain and risks that entails, even with the advances in modern medicine. The ruling states that in a reality where abortions occur, whether legal or illegal, Law 27610 should only be seen as a measure of healthcare; nothing more than that. The law’s sole purpose is to ensure that women who decide to have an abortion, guided solely by their conscience, can do so under appropriate healthcare conditions, allowing them to terminate the pregnancy without the risk of death or permanent sterility, among other equally undesirable outcomes.

The ruling unequivocally affirms that “the law does not encourage the killing of children; the law does not promote abortions. The only thing the law does is to permit women who decide to have an abortion to do so in an environment where their health is protected. […] What a woman seeks through abortion is to free herself from the pregnancy itself and from the care of a child that may be born. Which of these reasons or others leads her to make that momentous decision belongs to her innermost sphere, and the State cannot, in order to protect a potential person, so severely restrict a woman’s will.”

Regarding the provincial and national competencies in health matters, the plaintiff argued that the national government exceeded its powers by enacting the law, and therefore, the province should not have applied it within its territory. However, the Chamber understands that the powers over health policy are concurrent between the Nation and the province of Córdoba, and it states that “issues related to health law and public health can be regulated by federal or national laws. Asserting the opposite would be tantamount to postulating the unconstitutionality of laws on organ transplants (24,193), sexual health (25,673), patient rights (26,529), mental health (26,657), vaccination (27,491), comprehensive health care during pregnancy and early childhood (27,611), among others.”

Regarding the lack of a specific case to trigger the constitutional review, the injunction requested the declaration of unconstitutionality of the law in the province. However, the Chamber understands that there is no concrete case on which to apply constitutional review. In this regard, it states that “the Argentine system of judicial control over norms with respect to the Constitution is diffuse, meaning that any court can exercise it in the case presented for its resolution. What cannot be done, not even by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, even if it issues a hundred identical judgments, is to universally repeal the application of a law enacted by the National Congress.”

Regarding the relevance of the Supreme Court precedent in the FAL case, the plaintiff requested the declaration of unconstitutionality of several articles of Law 27610, particularly focusing on Article 16. This article amends Article 86 of the Penal Code, which previously regulated abortions in exceptional cases. The Chamber notes that the Supreme Court already ruled on this issue in the FAL case in 2012, a discussion that the plaintiff seeks to reopen, and states that “all the tortuous imagination displayed by the plaintiff in imagining extreme and barbaric scenarios to try to validate his position has a response in the very Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation” which ruled on this matter in the FAL case.

Regarding the rights of women and individuals with the capacity to become pregnant, Judge Gutiez points out that the plaintiff completely disregards the rights granted to women and pregnant individuals by International Treaties, as well as the National and Provincial Constitutions. He notes that the plaintiff diminishes women as holders of their own rights, “treating them more as mere receptacles for unborn individuals.”

Finally, in concluding the ruling, the judge states that: “The era we live in our country has meant and means progress in recognizing the rights of women as such, demolishing barriers, preconceptions, stigmas, and prejudices; recognizing their unique and singular entity and identity. Among these essential rights is the simple right to choose; the right to choose whom to relate to and how; the right to choose to have or not to have children; the right to choose how far she wants to advance in her career, work, or profession, breaking any glass ceiling; the right to independently decide what to do with her body. Law No. 27,610 allows women to exercise one of these choices without interference from any other person, religious organization, or the State.”

With this ruling, the judiciary reaffirms that abortion is a right that all women and individuals with the capacity to become pregnant in the province of Córdoba can enjoy within frameworks of respect and dignity.

Therefore, today and always, we will continue raising our flags: throughout the country, abortion is legal.

Access the full ruling for more information.

 

Contact 

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

,

We presented amicus curiae before the Inter-American Court in the case “Beatriz vs. The Savior”

On April 4, we appeared as amicus curiae before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in the case “Beatriz vs. El Salvador”, in which the violations of the rights of Beatriz and her family are denounced due to the absolute prohibition of voluntary interruption of pregnancy in that country.

“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.

Beatriz was 22 years old in 2013, when she demanded access to a therapeutic abortion before the courts of El Salvador, since her life was at risk due to having an anencephalic pregnancy (without a brain), with no chance of survival, added to a series of previous illnesses. The abortion request was finally denied by the Salvadoran courts.

Given this refusal from the Constitutional Chamber of that country, the organizations that accompanied the young woman took the case to the Inter-American Human Rights System, and both the Commission and the Court respectively granted precautionary and provisional measures. On June 3, Beatriz began labor, so she had to undergo a cesarean section. The anencephalic fetus died five hours later. The event had wide international repercussions due to the tragedy and violation of rights it meant.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) determined that El Salvador was responsible for the violation of Beatriz’s rights and recommended that the State adopt measures to guarantee real access to abortion in situations where the fetus is not viable with extrauterine life. and risk to the health and life of the mother. In January 2022, the case was elevated to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

One of the axes of our work is the promotion of the human rights of women and other identities, such as the right to health. In addition, we have actively participated through communication campaigns and political advocacy activities in the process of legislative discussion and subsequent sanction of the national Law 27,610 on Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy in Argentina.

Through our amicus, in addition to maintaining that there has been an impact on the human right to health in light of international law, we seek to contribute our experience as an organization that works on the issue in Argentina, maintaining that the criminalization of abortion is a form of violence against women, and that the criminalization of abortion is a deficient response by States. Therefore, there is a need to review the restrictive legislation that still exists in other countries in the region.

In this sense, it has been shown that laws that prohibit abortion do not reduce the number of abortions that are performed. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), nearly 6.5 million abortions are performed annually in Latin America and the Caribbean, despite the fact that in most countries in the region abortion is illegal or strongly restricted. . The criminalization of abortion only makes the procedures clandestine and unsafe, which puts women’s health and lives at risk.

The Inter-American Court has the opportunity to establish an important precedent in this case, confirming that the absolute criminalization of abortion is a violation of human rights and that States have the obligation to guarantee access to safe and legal abortion in certain circumstances. We hope that the Court gives rise to what was proposed by the Commission and sends a clear message to the States of the region about the need to protect the human rights of women and other identities with the capacity to bear children.

Access the complete Amicus

 

Author

Vanina Piccardo

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org