Press Releases

MARCH 28, 2024 — The Global Justice Center, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Ipas — in partnership with Foley Hoag LLP — today filed an amicus brief in Idaho vs. United States, the United States Supreme Court case considering the enforcement of Idaho’s near-total abortion ban. The brief argues that Idaho’s abortion law violates the human rights of pregnant Idahoans. Citing human rights treaties that the US has ratified, including those covering civil and political rights, freedom from torture, and racial discrimination, it describes how Idaho's abortion law violates the United States' legal obligations to provide safe and legal abortion services. In particular, the brief cites human rights obligations during emergencies governed by the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. “Nothing less than the fundamental human rights of the people of Idaho are at stake in this case,” said Grant Shubin, Senior Legal Advisor at the Global Justice Center. “This abortion ban is a blatant violation of the rights to life, health, non-discrimination, freedom from torture, and privacy. And the violations are far from theoretical — day after day, pregnant people in Idaho are facing life-threatening cruelties while their doctors operate under fear of prosecution.” The brief also argues that Idaho’s abortion law will endanger the lives, health, and well-being of pregnant Idahoans — especially those from marginalized communities. It cites evidence from other US states and countries with similar abortion restrictions showing that such laws exacerbate preventable maternal mortality and morbidity, despite any narrow exception for life-saving care.  Risks to the health of pregnant people in Idaho in emergency situations have already been documented. In one case, a physician described having to send a pregnant patient home while experiencing a miscarriage because, without absolute certainty regarding the pregnancy outcome, the physician feared that Idaho’s abortion law prevented them from providing immediate care to manage the miscarriage in the emergency department. The Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments in Idaho vs. United States next month.

The Human Rights Committee today called on the United States to take all necessary measures — at the federal, state, and local levels — to “provide legal, effective, safe and confidential access to abortion” in line with its international human rights obligations. The committee further recommended the US harmonize its laws and policies with World Health Organization guidelines, which call for the full decriminalization of abortion and that it be made available on request, without grounds-based or gestational restrictions. The Committee is a body of independent experts that monitors compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which the US ratified in 1992. All countries party to the ICCPR are periodically reviewed by the Committee; the US was last reviewed in 2014. Today’s recommendations on abortion rights came as part of the Committee’s “concluding observations” following its October 17-18 review of US compliance with ICCPR. The Committee also issued recommendations on other issues where the committee observed that the US is falling short of its treaty obligations, including on mass incarceration, indigenous rights, Guantanamo Bay, gun violence, LGBTQ rights, and more. Tess Graham, legal advisor with the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement: “The United States is in the midst of an urgent human rights crisis, and the Human Rights Committee is just the latest international institution to recognize it. Since the Dobbs ruling last year, human rights experts from across the international system have raised the alarm. Millions are living without access to abortion or maternity care, and conditions worsen by the day. “The ICCPR protects some of our most fundamental human rights — the right to life, to non-discrimination, and to freedom from torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. The abortion rights crisis imperils all of these rights. Numerous women have nearly died after being denied abortions in the last year; doctors fear prosecution for providing essential care. And fundamentally, millions of people have been robbed of their bodily autonomy by the tightening web of abortion restrictions. In short, the US is manifestly failing to uphold its obligations under the ICCPR. “Many of today’s recommendations concern a post-Dobbs United States. But US abortion policy has never met human rights standards. Around the world, countries are bolstering abortion access while the US stands nearly alone in its regression. If the US wishes to end its pariah state status and become the leader on human rights it so often claims to be, abortion must be seen for what is: a fundamental human right.”

More than 190 organizations and individuals, including health practitioners and human rights experts, today sent a letter to United Nations experts in response to the United States Supreme Court decision that repealed the constitutional right to abortion. The letter documents how abortion restrictions imposed in the wake of the court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization have deprived women, girls, and persons capable of pregnancy of their human rights to life, health, privacy, liberty, freedom from torture, and more. It goes on to argue that the Dobbs ruling puts the United States in breach of obligations under several legally-binding international treaties it has ratified, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the Convention against Torture. In addition to its call to action, the letter includes original research as well as testimony from physicians around the country. The full letter and list of signatories is here. Dr. Christine Ryan, Legal Director at the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement: “The protections of Roe had long eroded before the court’s ruling, but Dobbs put to rest any doubt of the United States’ failure to meet its human rights obligations. Decades of binding treaties have firmly established abortion as a human right. Now that the violation of this right is clear to all, the international community has a responsibility to act to hold the U.S. accountable.” Christina Hioureas, Partner at Foley Hoag and Chair of the firm’s United Nations Practice Group, the law firm acting for the coalition, issued the following statement: “Dobbs is the nail in the coffin on reproductive freedom in the United States. The consequences of Dobbs is that women, girls and persons capable of pregnancy across the United States are being deprived of critical access to health care and autonomy over their bodies and their lives. Simply put, women and girls will die as a result of this decision. The criminalization of access to reproductive health implicates the United States’ obligations under international law and is, thus, a matter of grave concern for the international community as a whole.” Payal Shah, Director of the Program on Sexual Violence in Conflict Zones at Physicians for Human Rights, issued the following statement: “The Dobbs decision has placed a target on the backs of pregnant patients and health care providers. The criminalization of abortion in many U.S. states has resulted in health care workers being mandated to act in complicity with violations of their patients’ rights, or to face imprisonment, professional sanction, fines, or harassment. As clinicians in this letter and around the country have shared, laws criminalizing abortion care will increase health disparities and impact the provision of health care across many specializations, from emergency medical care to family medicine to oncology and rheumatology. These harms will be most profoundly felt by Black, Indigenous, and low-income women. The international community, including UN Special Rapporteurs, must condemn this egregious rollback of human rights and affirm the U.S.’ obligation to ensure abortion rights.” Lauren Wranosky, Research and Program Associate at Pregnancy Justice, issued the following statement: “The Dobbs decision abandoned the constitutional right to abortion, violated U.S. legal obligations under treaties such as ICCPR, and exposed the fact that Roe was never enough. Many will continue to be jailed, convicted, and sentenced to prison for having abortions, experiencing pregnancy losses, or giving birth to healthy babies. This destroys families, inflicts trauma, and targets the most vulnerable by replacing healthcare with criminalization. We know this humanitarian crisis will only get worse, and we demand that the U.S. government join international peers as a leader in securing reproductive justice for all.” Annerieke Smaak Daniel, Women’s Rights Researcher at Human Rights Watch, issued the following statement: “Abortion is a form of health care needed more frequently by women of color, especially Black women, than white women in the US. Abortion restrictions compound economic, social, and geographic barriers to health care, including contraception, disproportionately impacting Black women’s ability to access the care we need. The US federal government is not meeting its human rights obligation to ensure access to abortion and to address and eliminate structural racism and discrimination in the US, and the impact on the health and rights of Black women is clear.”

NEW YORK — The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today called on the United States to take all necessary measures — at the federal and state level — to provide safe, legal, and effective access to abortion in line with its international human rights obligations. The recommendation came as part of the committee’s “concluding observations” following its review of US compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), which the US ratified in 1994. For more on US obligations on reproductive rights under ICERD, see this factsheet. The concluding observations specifically noted the recent Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, citing its “profound disparate impact on the sexual and reproductive health and rights of racial and ethnic minorities.” The committee questioned the US government in Geneva on August 11 and 12. During this session, it raised US abortion restrictions numerous times. The members were particularly concerned about disproportionate access to safe abortion for Black, brown, and indigenous women, as well as the prosecution of those seeking abortions post-Dobbs. Dr. Christine Ryan, legal director at the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement: “Make no mistake, the international community put the United States on notice today for the racist impacts of its recent regression on abortion rights. Even before the conservative majority on the Supreme Court overruled the constitutional right to abortion, they had dismantled abortion access for decades. Black, brown & indigenous women seeking abortion faced profound and disproportionate obstacles. After Dobbs, they’re facing nothing short of a gross and systemic human rights crisis. “Today’s recommendation on abortion is well within the committee’s mandate. ICERD prohibits racial discrimination in access to healthcare and requires the elimination of laws that perpetuate racial discrimination. Abortion restrictions in the US violate these measures at every turn. Forced travel for abortion is more difficult for women of color. Coerced pregnancy is more dangerous. And criminalization will target them at higher rates. “This is also a critical moment of international accountability for the United States. For too long, the US government has failed to fully implement the very human rights framework it helped create. The international community should take every opportunity to interrogate the state of human rights in the US and commit to reversing this damaging trend.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – April 3, 2019 [NEW YORK, NY] – Today, the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) challenged the United States’s restrictive abortion policies as potential violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in its list of issues prior to submission of the fifth periodic report of the United States. The Global Justice Center (GJC) commends the HRC for asking the US to provide information on the impact of the reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule on women's rights under the ICCPR, including to non-discrimination and equal protection under Article 2, 3 and 26, the right to life in Article 6 and the right to be free from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under Article 7. This January, GJC and the Center for Health and Gender Equity (CHANGE) submitted a report to the HRC arguing that these illegal abortion restrictions, including the Global Gag Rule, Helms Amendment, and Siljander Amendment, violate rights to free speech and association, life, and non-discrimination, that are laid out in the ICCPR. Although not explicitly outlined in the list of issues, it is important to note that illegal US abortion policies also violate Articles 19 and 22 of the ICCPR, which protect the freedoms of speech and association. US abortion restrictions on foreign aid limit the provision of abortion services around the world and prevent individuals, organizations, doctors, and human rights advocates from speaking about abortion rights to patients, governments, and the public. By censoring abortion-related speech, public debate, legislative reform, advocacy, and funding, the restrictions violate these most fundamental human rights. These restrictions on foreign aid have been a subject of concern for human rights bodies and experts in the past. During the 2015 Universal Periodic Review of the United States, six states challenged the imposition of the Helms Amendment without an exception for rape, with particular concern aimed at the impact of rape survivors in conflict zones. Similarly, the UN Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice expressed concern over the Helms Amendment following its mission to the United States and recommended its repeal. Over the past two years, the Trump administration has expanded the scope of the Global Gag Rule and the application of the Siljander Amendment. Just last week, the administration used the Siljander Amendment to cut its assistance to the Organization of American States (OAS) and attempt to shut down the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, based on purely ideological grounds. These illegal restrictions place US aid grantees in the often-untenable position of choosing between continuing to receive US funds—while eliminating essential sexual and reproductive health services—or losing US funding all together. The US must be held accountable to its obligations under the ICCPR, one of the few human-rights treaties that it has ratified. *** For more information contact: Liz Olson, Communications Manager at Global Justice Center, lolson@globaljusticecenter.net (212) 725-6530 ext. 217 The Global Justice Center (GJC) is an international human rights organization, with consultative status to the United Nations, dedicated to advancing gender equality through the rule of law. We combine advocacy with legal analysis, working to ensure equal protection of the law for women and girls.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – February 22, 2019 [NEW YORK, NY] – Today, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (“Committee”) will meet to discuss Myanmar’s Exceptional Report on the situation of Rohingya women and girls from northern Rakhine State. The Committee requested the Exceptional Report months after Myanmar’s Security Forces launched a massive attack on Rohingya civilians in August 2017, destroying almost 400 villages and forcing over 700,000 Rohingya to flee to Bangladesh. This was only the fourth time the Committee had requested an Exceptional Report since its founding in 1982. Myanmar’s report, submitted to the Committee earlier this month, demonstrates Myanmar’s unwillingness to acknowledge the international crimes committed against the Rohingya and its inability to ensure justice for these crimes. Myanmar’s authorities—civilian and military alike—have failed to demonstrate any intention to investigate or hold perpetrators accountable. In fact, Myanmar has variously denied any wrongdoing, ignored the problem, and failed to conduct genuine investigations or impose sanctions to ensure accountability on perpetrators of these crimes. For instance, Myanmar’s report dismissed accusations of rape and sexual violence committed by its Security Forces as “wild claims” despite extensive documentation by the United Nations’ Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar, the United States Department of State,and many international human rights organizations. The Global Justice Center, European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, and Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice have submitted a joint letter to the Committee outlining the report’s particularly concerning sections and highlighting the risk that Myanmar will attempt to derail accountability efforts. Myanmar’s blanket denials that such crimes occurred underscore the reality that accountability can only be achieved through international mechanisms. “Myanmar's recent report fits within a well-worn pattern of denial. The military has committed atrocities against all of the country’s ethnic minorities for decades and is protected by guarantees of impunity enshrined in Myanmar's constitution,” says Global Justice Center President Akila Radhakrishnan. “Until these provisions are changed, justice and accountability at the national level are impossible.” *** The Global Justice Center (GJC) is an international human rights organization, with consultative status to the United Nations, dedicated to advancing gender equality through the rule of law. We combine advocacy with legal analysis, working to ensure equal protection of the law for women and girls. GJC has worked on issues related to justice and accountability in Burma, particularly for sexual violence against ethnic women, since 2005. The European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) is an independent, non-profit legal and educational organization dedicated to enforcing civil and human rights worldwide. Together with affected persons and partners worldwide, we use legal means to end impunity of those responsible for torture, massacre, sexualized violence, corporate exploitation and fortressed borders. In June 2018, ECCHR together with the Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice and Bangladeshi partners submitted a report on sexualized violence against Rohingya women to the International Criminal Court. Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice is an international NGO working for a gender just world in which there is accountability for sexual and gender-based crimes by the International Criminal Court and other mechanisms, both internationally and nationally, and in which there is equality in and through the law. For more information contact: Liz Olson (GJC, New York), lolson@globaljusticecenter.net +1 212 725 6530 ext. 217. Alexandra Lily Kather (ECCHR, Berlin), kather@ecchr.eu, +44 7478 621725. Maria Mingo (Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice, The Hague), maria.mingo@iccwomen.org.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE—November 14, 2016 [NEW YORK and GEVENA (OMCT-GJC)] — Tomorrow, the Committee Against Torture (CAT), during its 59th session, will examine Sri Lanka’s fifth State party report. In October, the Global Justice Center (GJC) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) jointly submitted an alternative report focused on how Sri Lankan law violates the Convention Against Torture by banning abortion in most circumstances, and by authorizing rape in certain instances and child marriage. The joint report highlights how Sri Lanka’s penal code, dating back to 1883 and still enforced today, criminalizes abortion in all cases except when the mother’s life is at risk – even in cases of rape or fetal unviability. As a result, Sri Lankan women are forced to seek clandestine abortion services from unqualified persons in non-sterile places. Sri Lanka’s rape law is also outmoded, as it narrowly defines rape as non-consensual sex, leaving the burden of proof on the victim, contrary to international standards. In 2014, Sri Lanka’s Minister of Child Development and Women’s Affairs proposed a new law that forces rapists to marry their victims. Moreover, the child marriage law that bars marriage below the age of 18 years does not apply to marriages within Sri Lanka’s Muslim community, resulting in a significant number of legal child marriages each year. A recent study showed that some 12 per cent of Sri Lankan women are married before they become adults. “This means women still cannot decide what to do with their lives and bodies in Sri Lanka – a form of gender-based discrimination leading to acts which amount to ill-treatment,” said Nicole Bürli, OMCT Human Rights Adviser. The CAT has established that restrictions to abortion access, especially in cases of rape, incest, fetal unviability and where the health of the woman is at risk, can amount to cruel and inhuman treatment. The CAT has routinely expressed concern about the absence of marital rape provisions and repeatedly found that a widespread and high rate of sexual violence in a country violates the Convention. The CAT has also found child marriage is a form of ill-treatment. “There are significant legislative obstacles to ensuring women and all girls are free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in Sri Lanka,” says Akila Radhakrishnan, Legal Director for GJC. “These obstacles have a huge impact on lives of women and girls in Sri Lanka and must be addressed immediately.” GJC and OMCT in their shadow report, urge the CAT to ask the Sri Lankan Government to repeal the anti-abortion law in the penal code, criminalize all acts of rape, including marital and child rape in all circumstances and absolutely prohibit the marriage of children under 18 years of age. For more information contact: Stephanie Olszewski (GJC, New York), solszewski@globaljusticecenter.net +1 212 725 6530 ext. 211 Nicole Bürli (OMCT, Geneva), nb@omct.org +41 22 809 49 26 Banner photo courtesy of Michael Theis

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE—July 1, 2016 [GENEVA] – On July 7th, Myanmar’s implementation of its obligations to ensure gender equality will be reviewed by the UN’s Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW Committee). Myanmar ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in 1997, but this will be the first international women’s rights review of the country since the elections that brought Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) to power. “While there have been limited reforms in Myanmar since the transition to a quasi-civilian government in 2011, women have in large part not been the beneficiaries of these reforms and serious obstacles remain to achieving gender equality,” says May Sabe Phyu, Gender Equality Network’s (GEN) Director. In Myanmar, women fight against a deep history of patriarchy, negative gender stereotypes and decades of an oppressive military dictatorship, face multiple forms of discrimination throughout the country, and remain marginalized in politics and the peace process. “Provisions in Myanmar’s Constitution and laws explicitly and in effect discriminate against women and limit their opportunities. Violence against women remains a pervasive problem and the country lacks a comprehensive law to prevent and protect women,” says Akila Radhakrishnan, Global Justice Center’s (GJC) Legal Director, “and, despite Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s leadership, women remain woefully underrepresented at all levels of government and have been largely excluded from processes to bring an end to conflict.” Together, GJC and GEN submitted a shadow report in advance of the CEDAW review detailing these and other concerns which prevent Myanmar from complying with its obligations under CEDAW. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD’s newly-formed government, which took office at the end of March 2016, have an opportunity to refocus attention on the achievement of equal rights for women in Myanmar. The upcoming review and Myanmar’s implementation of the Committee’s recommendations will be a test of this new Government’s commitment towards ensuring that democratic reforms meaningfully address the needs and rights of women and girls across the country. “With the democratic election of a new government, there has never been a better time for Myanmar to undertake the wide-ranging reforms necessary to ensure equal rights for women,” concluded May Sabe Phyu. For more information contact: Stephanie Olszewski (New York), solszewski@globaljusticecenter.net, +1.212.725.6530 ext. 211 Phyu Phyu Sann (Geneva), psann@globaljusticecenter.net, +1.347.880.1674 May Sabe Phyu (Myanmar), gen.phyuphyu@gmail.com, +959788798053

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – October 21, 2014 [NEW YORK, NY & GENEVA] - Today marks the 20th anniversary of U.S. ratification of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). Yet to this day, the U.S. repeatedly fails to meet its commitments under the treaty with its abortion restrictions on foreign assistance to girls and women raped in armed conflict. In advance of the 53rd session of the Committee against Torture convening on November 3 in Geneva, the Global Justice Center (GJC) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) submitted a report highlighting the inhuman treatment of impregnated war rape victims by the U.S. as a result of its “no abortion” policy placed on all U.S. foreign aid, including the Helms Amendment. The report details the horrific effects of the denial of safe abortion services on impregnated war rape victims, from increased risk of maternal mortality to extended and intensified physical and psychological suffering. “OMCT is very concerned about the effect of the U.S. foreign aid policy on women’s rights to be free from torture and ill-treatment, said Carin Benninger-Budel, Human Rights Advisor on the Violence against Women’s Program at OMCT. “We, together with numerous other NGOs, already asked President Obama in 2012 to change the policy, the U.S. government, however, remained inactive.” Over the past decade, international human rights bodies have repeatedly found that the denial of abortion, in particular to rape victims, can constitute torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. The Committee against Torture has repeatedly called on states that have ratified CAT to reassess and change policies and laws that impede access to safe abortion services. “By ratifying this treaty 20 years ago, the U.S. Government committed to ending the use of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment," said Akila Radhakrishnan, GJC’s Legal Director, “However U.S. abortion restrictions on foreign assistance strongly contradict the object and purpose of CAT – this policy not only makes the struggle against torture less effective, but actively contributes to the suffering of rape victims and thus perpetuates ill-treatment.” Due largely to GJC efforts, there is growing international recognition around the legal and moral imperative to provide all necessary medical care, including safe abortion services, to war rape survivors. GJC has successfully advocated for governments to segregate their foreign aid so as not to be compromised by the U.S. policy, as well as spearheaded a letter writing campaign representing over 3,500 groups to urge President Obama to issue an executive order lifting the abortion restrictions. Now, the Committee against Torture must urge the US Government to reverse this terrible policy so that the U.S. may live up to the standards it committed to twenty years ago when ratifying CAT. For more information contact Akila Radhakrishnan, Legal Director, GJC, akila@globaljusticecenter.net, 212.725.6530, ext. 203 or Nicole Buerli, Legal Expert, OMCT, nb@omct.org, +41 22 809 49 26. Download PDF