Press Releases

The United States is trying to evade accountability for grave, ongoing human rights violations in the country, rights groups said today. On August 27, the U.S. State Department sent a letter to the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights stating that the Trump Administration will not participate in its upcoming Universal Periodic Review, a mandatory UN process through which countries review each other’s human rights records. A delegation of local, national and international sexual and reproductive health, rights and justice organizations, as well as other social justice groups, are currently in Geneva, Switzerland for advocacy and evidence briefings in anticipation of the U.S. review, which was scheduled to take place this November. The delegation in Geneva includes: Jane's Due Process, The Holy H.O.E. Institute, Reproductive Justice Action Collective (ReJAC), Birthmark, Global Justice Center, Ipas, Guttmacher Institute, Pregnancy Justice, Louisiana Abortion Fund (LAAF), and Physicians for Human Rights. The Universal Periodic Review offers a unique opportunity to hold countries accountable for human rights obligations on a global stage. Every UN member country participates and to date, only two other countries, Israel and Nicaragua, have attempted to evade review. This was scheduled to be the first UN review of the U.S. since the Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade and stripped federal constitutional protections for abortion. Since then, attacks on reproductive freedom and human rights have only escalated. Pregnant people are facing criminalization based on their pregnancy status or pregnancy outcomes, making people fear seeking care as clinicians are deputized to report these patients and driving up adverse maternal health outcomes, defying medical and human rights standards. Abortion restrictions also intersect with attacks on LGBTQIA+ people’s access to education and healthcare. The same lawmakers who obstruct access to reproductive healthcare are prohibiting young people’s access to gender-affirming care. The devastating health and human rights impact of retrogressive laws and policies around healthcare is compounded for multiply-marginalized individuals — as US states become increasingly carceral and militarized, thousands of people are unable to access healthcare, education and employment to sustain their families through restrictions on movement. Communities in the U.S., especially Black, Brown, immigrant, and young people, are already traveling thousands of miles just to access basic healthcare. But our movements are not silent. We came to the UN to deliver the recommendations our government refuses to face, because people’s lives cannot wait. This refusal is one more step in this administration’s intent to undermine human rights structures and silence those who are fighting to protect them — and that is the danger: a government that silences accountability while expanding repression. That is why we are here. Quotes from Delegation: Irma Garcia, Director of Reproductive Health and Education Services at Jane’s Due Process: “We came to the UN to confront our government, because people’s lives are literally on the line right now. The U.S. refusal to participate is about silencing the truth of communities who are dying under these policies. Black people, queer people, immigrants, young people are the ones who carry the weight of these policies. In Texas alone, we’ve served minors who’ve traveled more than 246,000 miles — equivalent to ten times around the Earth — to reach basic healthcare. No young person, anywhere in the world, should face this. We will not be quiet. This is how empire behaves when it is exposed, but we insist on another future rooted in reproductive justice, freedom, and collective liberation.” Qiana Lewis-Arnold of the Holy HOE Institute: “We are the very communities most harmed by U.S. repression. We live the same oppression and risks we are calling out. By bringing our truth to the world stage we put ourselves at greater risk, but we refuse to be silent. We came to Geneva because people’s lives cannot wait, and we want the world to know we are here and that we will be home soon.”  Dr. Victoria Williams, Birthmark: “Louisiana already has one of the deadliest maternal health crises in the country. Our communities, especially for communities of concerned families, are forced into parenthood, pushed deeper into poverty, and criminalized for their pregnancies. By refusing to participate in this review, the U.S. is not only denying its failures, it is denying us the right to live with dignity. We came to Geneva because the lives of our clients cannot wait.” Elise Keppler, Executive Director, Global Justice Center: “The US is repeatedly violating people’s human rights through abortion bans and restrictions, while shying away from a global review in which all countries participate. The US should face up to its status as a regressive global outlier on reproductive healthcare.” Kulsoom Ijaz, Senior Policy Counsel, Pregnancy Justice: “In the first year after losing Roe, we documented at least 210 cases of pregnancy-related prosecutions in the U.S., including after giving birth and suffering a pregnancy loss. At Pregnancy Justice, we defend pregnant people — many of them poor, stigmatized, and ostracized. As the walls continue to close in on them and their rights are trampled, the U.S. has cruelly shut its eyes, plugged its ears, and turned its back to this pain on the world stage on the eve of mine and other civil society members’ presentations on U.S. human rights violations. The Council must hold members accountable, and the U.S. is no exception.” Bethany Van Kampen Saravia, Senior Legal and Policy Advisor, Ipas US: “We traveled to the United Nations to shed a light on the egregious human rights violations occurring throughout the US and to sound the alarms that this administration is testing the rule of law as we know it in the US. If the US does not engage in this UPR process, it opens the floodgates for more human rights violations within its borders.” Pearl Ricks, Executive Director, Reproductive Justice Action Collective (ReJAC): “This is an attempt for the current US administration to shirk its responsibilities to its citizens and to its global counterparts. If the US does not participate in the UPR, our country will be cut off from a universal accountability body. This can’t be the start of a troubling trend or pattern. I adamantly urge UN member bodies and states to apply steadfast and earnest pressure. If the US doesn’t have a UPR in November, who knows what will happen behind its closed doors and taut borders, and the effects it will have on global justice.” For more details, see: Coalition UPR Submission: https://www.globaljusticecenter.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/USA-UPR-Submission.pdf

NEW YORK — The United Nations Human Rights Council today passed a resolution on human rights concerns in Myanmar following the military coup. The resolution followed an emergency session requested by the United Kingdom and the European Union. The resolution, adopted by consensus, denounced the coup and the violations of civil and human rights that followed. It called on Myanmar’s military and security forces to refrain from violence and protect fundamental human rights. It also requested further UN monitoring of the situation and called for Myanmar’s cooperation. Grant Shubin, legal director of the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement: “The council took an important step today by passing a resolution against the coup and urging respect for democratic and human rights. The resolution rightly called on the Myanmar military to release those arbitrarily detained, including Aung San Suu Kyi. But, it failed to address the most necessary condition for change: accountability. “Structural impunity for crimes committed by the military is what emboldened the military to stage a coup. The international community has continually failed to combat this impunity cemented by Myanmar’s pseudo-democratic constitution. The council could have taken the opportunity today to confront this failure by acknowledging that there is no sustainable path forward for Myanmar without accountability for those responsible for human rights violations. “People across Myanmar are uniting more and more around the demand to bring the military under civilian control. They recognize that the military is the chief obstacle to democracy and human rights in the country. It’s time the international bodies like the UN Human Rights Council recognize this fact that the coup has made undeniable.”

The Global Justice Center applauds the Human Rights Council for acting where others have not in creating an International Impartial and Independent Mechanism (IIIM) for Myanmar. This is an important step towards addressing the total impunity for the decades of crimes committed by the military. While it is imperative to collect evidence, without a court where such evidence can be analyzed and prosecuted, justice and accountability for these crimes cannot be delivered. As such, the creation of the Mechanism without the establishment of an avenue for justice is insufficient. The Security Council should still refer the situation to the International Criminal Court so that the Court has jurisdiction over all crimes committed in the course of these attacks. Structural barriers to accountability in Burma, including those enshrined in the Constitution, must also be addressed. The Mechanism also must ensure that gender is at the center of the investigation, and that the Mechanism has sufficient gender expertise. “Burmese Security Forces have long used rape as a weapon of war against ethnic minorities,” says Global Justice Center President Akila Radhakrishnan. “The attacks on the Rohingya were gendered in their conception, commission, and consequences. Women were specifically targeted for crimes against humanity and genocide, and they must not be left behind in these accountability efforts.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - June 19, 2018 [New York] – Today’s decision to withdraw from the UN Human Rights Council is shortsighted and will further marginalize the United States in the international arena. The Council is an important venue to address the human rights records of all countries, including the United States. Just yesterday, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called the Trump Administration’s family separation policy “unconscionable” and demanded its immediate cessation. The UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights is scheduled to present a report to the Council this Thursday that criticizes US policies as “cruel and inhuman,” and driven by a “contempt for the poor.” As the Trump Administration continues its abhorrent racist, xenophobic and misogynist policies, withdrawal from the Human Rights Council will not shield the United States from being held accountable under the human rights framework.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - May 11, 2015 [GENEVA, CH] - Today, during the 2nd Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the United States, several UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) Member States directly challenged the abortion restrictions that the U.S. imposes on its foreign aid. “The list of countries calling on the United States to lift its abortion ban on foreign aid is growing,” said Global Justice Center (GJC) President Janet Benshoof. “The U.S. can no longer ignore or deflect its duty to change a decades-long policy that denies women and girls raped in war their rights under the Geneva Conventions.” The UN Human Rights Council monitors the human rights records of the 192 UN member states. Every four years, member states are required to sit for a Universal Periodic Review, during which each country receives recommendations on how to comply with their human rights obligations. In a September 2014 submission to the UNHRC GJC asserted that U.S. abortion restrictions on humanitarian aid are incompatible with U.S. obligations under the Geneva Conventions, the Convention against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. These restrictions, including the Helms Amendment, ban the use of any U.S. foreign aid funds by grantees to perform or even discuss abortion services. This includes humanitarian aid to war zones and results in the denial of abortion services to women and girls raped in armed conflict in violation of their rights. The need for such services is demonstrated daily in conflict zones, as was seen last week when it was discovered that one-third of those rescued from the clutches of Boko Haram – 214 women and children – were pregnant, according to a report from the United Nations Population Fund. The importance of access to safe abortion services as a matter of right for girls and women raped in war has been increasingly recognized, including by the UN Security Council, the UN Secretary-General and other countries. International concern over the role of the U.S. in the denial of essential medical care to girls and women raped in war has resulted in countries including the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Belgium, Norway and France recommending during today's UPR that the United States government take steps to limit the impact of these restrictions and ensure access to safe abortions for rape victims in conflict zones. In addition to these oral recommendations during the review, Norway, the UK, Netherlands and Switzerland all submitted written questions in advance, asking the US to examine its abortion-related restrictions on foreign aid, if the US was considering removing these restriction and if not, for what justification. It is now up to the Obama Administration to act. The Administration has three months to formally respond to these recommendations. “President Obama has not only the ability, but also the duty, to act to rectify these violations of U.S. obligations under international law,” said Benshoof. For more information contact: Akila Radhakrishnan, Legal Director, akila@globaljusticecenter.net, 212.725.6530, ext. 203 or Sarah Vaughan, Director of External Relations, svaughan@globaljusticecenter.net, 212.725.6530 ext. 204. Download PDF

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - November 11, 2010 [NORWAY] - Norway became the first country to challenge the legality of the anti-abortion conditions that the United States imposes on all of its foreign aid, in a question posed at the Universal Periodic Review of the United States before the Human Rights Council in Geneva. Citing a Global Justice Center shadow report identifying the alarming effects of these restrictions, Norway asked the United States if it has, “[A]ny plans to remove its blanket abortion restrictions on humanitarian aid covering the medical care given women and girls who are raped and impregnated in situations of armed conflict?” During the interactive dialogue, Norway went on to recommend that these restrictions be removed on humanitarian aid for medical care to rape victims in conflict. This recommendation is included in the draft report of the Council. The Global Justice Center applauds Norway’s question as a breakthrough for the rights of girls and women. Says Global Justice Center President Janet Benshoof, “By questioning the global effect of the US abortion restrictions on humanitarian aid to women and girls raped in armed conflict, Norway is breaking the silence about a practice of denying abortions for rape victims that is deadly, cruel and illegal.” The UN Human Rights Council is the UN body tasked with monitoring the human rights records of the 192 members of the United Nations. Every four years, member states are required to sit for a Universal Periodic Review in front of the, during which each country receives recommendations on how to comply with their human rights obligations. The US State Department has said it will now “conduct a considered, interagency examination” of all recommendations and give their “formal response at the March 2011 Council session”, when the final report of the Council will be adopted. Women who have been raped and impregnated in armed conflict in countries such as the Congo and Sudan have the legal right to non-discriminatory medical care under the Geneva Conventions. This includes the right to abortions wherever victims of rape request them. However, U.S. abortion restrictions effectively deny all girls and women raped during armed conflict this essential component of complete medical care, in violation of their obligations under international humanitarian law. The United States is the largest provider of humanitarian aid in the world. The abortion restrictions placed on U.S. foreign aid originated in the 1973 Helms Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act. These restrictions have since expanded to include bans on all abortions and all abortion related speech in U.S. foreign aid. This policy often undermines the aid programs of the UN and other governments. When a grantee that receives humanitarian aid from a government also receives funding from the United States, the grantee is subject to US abortion speech restrictions. President Obama, by issuing an executive order removing the application of these restrictions to humanitarian aid, can unilaterally reduce the scope of the Helms Amendment so that the United States complies with its Geneva Conventions obligations, as recommended by Norway. Download PDF

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE—November 2010 [NEW YORK, NY] - Thousands of girls and women, impregnated by rape in armed conflict are routinely and illegally denied lifesaving abortions in places like the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Burma and Sudan. The right to non-discriminatory medical care for these victims, which includes the option of abortion, is enshrined in common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. A major reason for the near global “no abortion policy” for these victims can be traced to US abortion restrictions placed on all humanitarian aid. By imposing these restrictions on foreign aid, the US is forcing foreign governments and humanitarian aid providers to exclude the option of abortions from the medical services made available to victims of war rape. Further, when these funds are comingled with funds from other donor governments, these restrictions, in effect, apply to the entire pot of funding. This impedes other states’ ability to comply with their fundamental obligations under the Geneva Conventions, its Additional Protocols and customary international law. As part of the upcoming Universal Periodic Review of the United States on November 5, 2010, the Global Justice Center urges all member states of the Human Rights Council to question the US about these abortion restrictions. Norway has already submitted the following question to the US: “The Global Justice Center (GJC) filed a shadow report for the universal periodic review of the US expressing concern with regard to US blanket abortion restriction on humanitarian aid and abortion speech restrictions on US rule of law and democracy programs. Does the US have any plans to remove its blanket abortion restrictions on humanitarian aid covering the medical care given women and girls who are raped and impregnated in situations of armed conflict? Does the US government apply abortion speech restrictions on its rule of law and democracy programs?” We urge all countries to join Norway and question the US on this policy which has deadly consequences for victims who are raped and impregnated in armed conflict. Background information on the rights of girls and women impregnated by rape in armed conflict Rape used as a tactic of war: the scale of the problem The sheer number of girls and women targeted by sexual violence is shocking. Between 250,000 and 500,000 girls and women were raped during the Rwandan genocide in 100 days and approximately 20,000 children were born as a result of these rapes. In Liberia, one government survey showed that 92% of the women interviewed had experienced some form of sexual violence. The targeted use of rape in war is not new. In 1971 the West Pakistani army raped hundreds of thousands of Bangladeshi women resulting in approximately 25,000 children being born of rape due to limited access to abortions. Local health centers in South Kivu, DRC estimate that approximately 40 women are raped in the region every day, and the International Rescue Committee (IRC) estimates that for every rape reported in the DRC, 30 rapes go unreported. Today, the major providers of humanitarian aid to girl and women victims of war rape routinely exclude abortion services. Although a few courageous doctors and agencies, such as MSF, provide abortion services episodically, this provision is a discretionary humanitarian act, not a recognition of a woman’s non-derogable legal right. The non-provision of abortions is euphemistically referred to as the “unavailability of abortions” and this situation is viewed as an unfortunate but accepted reality in many UN and INGO reports on sexual violence against women in armed conflict. The right to non-discriminatory medical care necessarily includes abortions Under common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and its Additional Protocols require that during armed conflict States provide non-discriminatory medical care to the “sick and wounded” including girls and women impregnated by war rape. The Additional Protocols make clear that medical care must be given “without distinction” which we argue includes the option of abortions. This principle is now recognized as customary international law and binds all states. Additionally, since this right is enshrined in the Geneva Conventions, it supersedes any local criminal abortions laws during times of armed conflict. The only class of victims who are not granted their entitlement to complete medical care are those that are impregnated from rape. Boys and men who are raped, or girls and women who are raped but not impregnated, are theoretically given the full range of medical care that is necessitated by their injuries. The provision of EC is helpful only for the small percentage of victims who are able to obtain medical care within 72 hours. For example, of the 303 recent victims of sexual violence in Walikale in the DRC, only two presented for treatment within this 72 hour window. The US abortion restrictions on humanitarian aid have a global effect The United States is the largest provider of humanitarian aid in the world. It imposes, as a condition of foreign aid, abortion restrictions on all its grantees (including foreign governments and NGO’s). This has shaped the discrimination towards victims of war rape. By applying abortion restrictions to humanitarian aid the US is effectively inhibiting other states from complying with their obligations under international humanitarian law. For example, when the US provides humanitarian aid to Sudan, it prevents Sudan from using those funds to offer the option of abortion in state funded medical care to girls and women raped during the conflict, which it is required to do under the Geneva Conventions. Download PDF

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - May 26, 2010 [NEW YORK, NY] - The Global Justice Center, in a submission to the UN Human Rights Council, challenges the censorship of abortion related speech imposed on all U.S. foreign aid. The Global Justice Center identifies the alarming effects of this censorship, including denying impregnated rape victims in conflict access to information about abortion services. “For the United States to prevent women and girls who have been gang raped and impregnated by the military in places like the Congo, Sudan, or Burma from their full range of medical treatment options, including abortion, is cruel, inhumane, and violates fundamental international laws such as the Geneva Conventions,” says Global Justice Center President Janet Benshoof. “It is not what America stands for.” The Global Justice Center also singles out the censorship in overseas rule of law and democracy projects. For example, U.S. and foreign NGOs must exclude any discussion on criminal abortion law reform when advising governments and conducting trainings on the domestic integration of international human rights laws. This violates the guarantees of free expression in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This censorship, originating in the 1973 Helms Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act, has expanded over the last 37 years to cover all foreign appropriations, including U.S. State Department and USAID funds; censoring over $49 billion in U.S. foreign aid in 2010. The Global Justice Center filing to the Human Rights Council does not address the problematic restrictions on funding abortion services or on U.S. funded population and family planning projects. The Global Justice Center urges the Human Rights Council to find the U.S. in violation of international human rights and humanitarian law. Given the ongoing humanitarian law violations, the Global Justice Center is also seeking an Executive Order by President Obama that would immediately lift the censorship on all humanitarian aid and halt the discriminatory treatment now provided to women and girls in conflict areas. “The Obama Administration has taken laudable steps, including lifting the Global Gag Rule in January 2009, to establish the United States as a partner in the human rights community,” states Benshoof. “But these efforts ring hollow as long as the Helms Amendment and related restrictions remain in place, censoring initiatives like the $17 million for sexual violence victims in the Congo allocated by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.” Download PDF