We, the undersigned representatives of civil society organizations in the United States, condemn the U.S. for its persistent non-cooperation with the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process, and urge you to take meaningful action within your mandate to prevent the attempted dismantling of the universality of a core pillar of the UN Human Rights Council.

Restrictions on abortion and laws that criminalize the provision of abortion related services, information, education, and support can violate a wide range of human rights, including the rights to life, health, privacy, nondiscrimination, freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. Abortion restrictions can also infringe on individuals’ right to freedom of religion, conscience, and belief (FRCB), yet such claims have been under developed in human rights circles. To the extent that FRCB claims have gained traction within national courts and human rights bodies, the analysis has predominantly focused on conscience-based refusals of abortion care that often lead to denials of reproductive healthcare. Less attention has been paid to the actions of seeking, providing and/or supporting abortion care when those actions are grounded in one’s religion, conscience, or belief.

We write as organizations committed to gender justice and women’s rights to share observations and recommendations regarding the draft ‘An Act Establishing a War and Economic Crimes Court for Liberia’ (Draft Statute), developed by the Office for the Establishment of War and Economic Crimes Court for Liberia (OWECC-L).

We recommend that the General Recommendation include more specificity in Section A and throughout (as described in detail below), on the role of reproductive capacity in shaping and entrenching gender stereotypes.

In 2022, Michigan’s citizens went to the polls to make their voices heard on an issue of systemic constitutional importance: the right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy. By a wide margin, Michigan’s citizens voted to enact the Reproductive Freedom for All Amendment (“RFFA”), an amendment to Michigan’s Constitution that eliminates outdated restrictions on reproductive healthcare and protects the fundamental right to reproductive freedom in Michigan, including the freedom for Michiganders to decide to end their pregnancies. The RFFA ensures that Michiganders have “the right to make and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to pregnancy,” including “abortion care,” without the State of Michigan “discriminat[ing] in the protection or enforcement of this fundamental right.”

As the United States ("US") approaches its rescheduled 4th Universal Periodic Review ("UPR"), individuals’ sexual and reproductive health and rights (“SRHR”) continue to deteriorate across the country. Since our previous submission, both restrictions on reproductive healthcare access, in particular abortion care, and targeted, state-sanctioned violence, intimidation, discrimination, and harassment of communities by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) and Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) have increased. This submission updates this coalition’s April 2025 submission. It includes quantitative research and qualitative data gathered from abortion funds, healthcare providers, doulas, and persons detained or deported by ICE agents. Testimony is from individuals who have been directly harmed by restrictive abortion laws and/or by the recent unlawful changes in and enforcement of immigration policies or from individuals whose clients or patients have suffered such harm.

Liberia’s support for key recommendations received during its fourth UPR cycle is a significant and welcome step toward at last delivering justice for serious international crimes during the country’s civil wars. These include recommendations aimed at the establishment and effective functioning of a war and economic crimes court and full implementation of the country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s recommendations.

In March 2026, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (the Court) issued a landmark judgment in Ramos Durand et al. v. Peru, holding Peru responsible for the forced sterilization and death of Celia Edith Ramos Durand. The case was brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights, DEMUS–Study for the Defense of Women’s Rights, and the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL). Global Justice Center submitted an amicus curiae brief in the case, with Debevoise & Plimpton acting as pro bono counsel, articulating the importance of specifically recognizing reproductive violence.