Publications

We the undersigned are writing to you to raise concern regarding the decision by several European governments to suspend or review their funding to several Palestinian and Israeli civil society organizations. We are deeply concerned by these developments and call on your government to reverse any decision to halt such crucial funding. A reduction in funds to these groups and organizations erodes human rights protections across Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) and call into question your ability to credibly promote and protect universal human rights values across the Middle East and North Africa. Several European states, namely Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland, as well as the European Commission have taken measures to suspend or review their funding to Palestinian and Israeli civil society organizations due to unfounded allegations of diversion of funding to terrorist organizations. These measures have intensified following the attacks by Hamas and other armed groups on 7 October 2023, where members of Hamas and other armed groups committed summary killings, hostage-taking of civilians, and launching indiscriminate rocket attacks into Israel.

Dear Vice-President Mogherini and Commissioner Stylianides, In September 2015, the European Commission laudably took a historic step in making clear that women and girls raped in armed conflict deserve equal medical protection under international humanitarian law (IHL). In response to Members of the European Parliament, you stated: “In cases where the pregnancy threatens a woman’s or a girl’s life or causes unbearable suffering, international humanitarian law and/or international human rights law may justify offering a safe abortion rather than perpetuating what amounts to inhumane treatment. Women and girls who are pregnant as a result of rape should first receive appropriate and comprehensive information and be provided access to the full range of sexual and reproductive health services.” Previously, the European Union’s position was that national abortion laws in conflict countries – not IHL – govern the scope of available care for women and girls in conflict settings. In 2015, the EU joined a growing chorus of human rights advocates, legal experts, United Nations bodies and national governments to acknowledge the primacy of IHL in conflict, including when it comes to safe abortion. The European Commission’s latest position also received wide cross-party support in a number of parliamentary resolutions and several Member States have voiced their support for this policy for its compliance with IHL. Unfortunately, since 2015, no steps have been taken to implement this policy. Download PDF

In recent years, right-wing populism has been spreading across Europe and the United States. The US, France, Germany, Greece and the Netherlands have seen a surge in public support for right-wing parties. Ranging from fascist groups like Golden Dawn in Greece to parties attempting to soften their image to gain more followers like the Front National in France, rightist ideologies have squeezed their way into mainstream politics. What does this represent for women’s rights and reproductive rights? A challenge. Typically, right-wing parties are politically conservative, support traditional women’s roles and family structures. Most do not speak out for gay rights or women’s rights and do not favor a progressive feminist agenda, which includes equal pay and supporting family planning organizations. Furthermore, right-wing leaders have also spoken out against access to abortion and reproductive rights. Sound familiar? When it comes to human rights and women’s rights, the US, Canada and many European countries are leading the conversation and promoting activism. With the Trump Administration and prominent right-wing groups gaining more power and influence in Europe, this conversation may become severely limited. Many family planning organizations and health clinics rely on federal funding to remain open and provide health services. Organizations that also provide women with abortions are often targeted and threatened with the withdrawal of funding. Such actions and restrictions do not result in a decreased number of abortions, but result in harming women who need abortions and can only get them outside of a doctor’s office, often in a non-sterile environment with limited access to proper medical tools. Two of the leading right-wing parties in Europe, both of which are led by women, are the Front National and Alternative for Germany. Both leaders, Marine Le Pen and Frauke Petry, during their campaigns and interviews have spoken out against access to abortion and gay rights. They have also promoted the return to traditional family values, where a nuclear family is the ideal. The Front National in France does not support abortion or progressive women’s rights. Alternative for Germany promotes similar ideas, as well as a strong anti-immigrant sentiment. Similar ideas have found support in President Trump’s administration and across the United States. What is it exactly that these political party and leaders support? While Trump’s administration and President Trump himself claim to be great supporters of women and say they are supporters of paid maternity leave and maternity benefits, people argue that his claims are not reflected in the laws he passes and the bills he signs. Furthermore, Trump introduced the expanded Global Gag Rule that will cut funding to foreign family planning organizations that rely on US money. This includes many organizations in developing countries, where such organizations are the sole source of birth control and safe abortions. Although social activism is bright and promising, with many joining women’s rights and human rights movements across the globe, it is important to make sure that these political shifts and the resulting sentiments do not become normalized in our societies. Whether it is through more organized protest, the work of human and women’s rights organizations or liberals running for office, unity and perseverance are more important than ever.

Daesh, also known as ISIS/ISIL, is committing genocide against religious and ethnic minorities, targeting women and girls in particular. The time is now for the EU to fulfil its international legal obligations to prevent and prosecute genocide. This means the EU must recognize this ongoing genocide, take steps to prevent and suppress it, and call for and facilitate its prosecution. 1. Daesh is perpetrating genocide Reports and verified information obtained from UN agencies, human rights organizations, local communities and media clearly demonstrate that Daesh (also known as Islamic State, IS, ISIS, or ISIL) is perpetrating all of the five explicit crimes of genocide listed in the Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: (1) killing; (2) causing serious bodily or mental harm; (3) deliberately inflicting conditions to destroy a group; (4) preventing births within a group; and (5) transferring children from one group to another group. While reports indicate that Daesh targets various ethnic and religious minorities, no group has been subjected to the destruction that the Yazidi have suffered. What’s more, within the Yazidi community, women and girls have been methodically targeted by specific, ongoing crimes. Download PDF

EU Humanitarian Aid Must Uphold the Rights of Girls and Women Under International Law SUMMARY A recent change in policy, but not in practice. In September 2015, the European Commission acknowledged that under international humanitarian law (IHL) and like all persons wounded in war, girls and women impregnated by rape in armed conflict have the right to necessary medical care, including abortions. The EU’s 2016 budget also newly specifies that EU humanitarian aid must be provided in line with the non-discrimination rules of the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, and not be subject to any restrictions imposed by other donors. This means that the EU’s humanitarian aid partners must ensure women suffer no “adverse distinction” in their medical treatment options, and must separate their EU funds from US funds in order to avoid the US ban on abortion currently restricting EU funds. The European Commission has yet to make these changes effective. Download PDF

The lives of girls and women are routinely endangered by mass rape every day in nearly every war zone. Impregnated rape survivors are again endangered by being routinely denied abortions in EU-funded medical facilities. This is because the European Commission’s policy is that that national abortion laws, not the Geneva Conventions, provide the appropriate standard of medical care for women, civilians and servicewomen alike, impregnated by war rape. They are the only category of persons “wounded and sick” in armed conflict being deliberately denied a critical medical treatment in humanitarian medical settings. This policy legitimizes forced childbearing as an appropriate medical outcome for war rape survivors, and is hugely influential given that the European Union (EU), through the European Commission, is the world’s second largest donor of humanitarian aid. Download PDF

Briefing by Janet Benshoof, President of Global Justice Center. Thank you. It is an honor to address this body. The EU, unquestionably, is the global leader in advancing international law and women’s equality. As we sit here today, over 200 Christian Chibok schoolgirls are waking up to their 548th day of dehumanizing sexual degradation by their Boko Haram slave masters. So too, ISIS continues expanding its genocidal hell; enslaving Yazidi and Christian girls and women in Iraq and Syria for a lifetime of “religiously” justified rape, even of prepubescent young girls, of forced impregnation, forced marriage, and forced conversion. What happened to 1325? Where is the Responsibility to Protect? Where is the Genocide Convention? The Security Council has passed 1325 and seven additional resolutions to stop the rampant rape of women and girls in armed conflicts and to rectify peacekeeping and post conflict inequality. The very fact that the UN Security Council regularly examines the impact of today’s armed conflict on women is a sea change for women’s rights. Progress has been made on 1325 goals but not on its central goal: mass rape of women and girls continues as the weapon of choice in a third of today’s armed conflicts. This does not mean 1325 is at fault. The reasons states and the UN working together, have failed to stop rape in war lie elsewhere. The Security Council’s competency to pass 1325 is based in its mandate to stop gross violations of international humanitarian law, or the Geneva Conventions for shorthand, as threats to international peace and security. The Secretary-General’s first report to the Council on 1325 in 2002 was unequivocal: to stop rape in war, the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols, must be enforced by all states without discrimination against women. Download PDF

A recent controversial death in Ireland has sparked worldwide debate regarding abortion. Savita Halappanavar, a young woman suffering from a potentially life-threatening miscarriage, was denied a life-saving abortion due to Ireland’s restrictive abortion laws. According to reports by Mr. Halappanavar, Savita was told told that an abortion could not be performed because “Ireland is a Catholic country”. The couple had also been informed that the fetus had no chance of survival, but that an abortion could not take place until the fetal heartbeat had disappeared. Oddly, Ireland’s constitution itself states that abortion is legal, even if there is a fetal heartbeat, if there is a “real and substantial risk” to the life of the woman. This condition was clearly present in this case, as Ms. Halappanavar was pronounced dead only a week later. The fetus was eventually removed, but by then it was too late, causing Ms. Halappanavar to die from sepsis (infection of the blood). The problematic wording of the constitution’s requirement of “real and substantial risk” to the mother’s life clearly allows a great deal of subjectivity and discretionary action on the part of the physician.

On March 7, 2013, the European Parliament issued an open letter to President Obama, urging him to lift US abortion restrictions on aid to war rape victims. The Global Justice Center’s August 12th Campaign challenges the denial of life-saving abortions to girls and women who are raped and impregnated in armed conflict, as a violation of the Geneva Conventions. This letter highlights the fact that the US “no abortion” clause negatively affects how aid from foreign governments can be administered because it is often pooled together. As a result, humanitarian aid organizations on the ground are often unable to provide medically-necessary abortions to girls and women who have endured the horrors of war rape. Click here to read the letter from the MEPs to President Obama.   Here is the press release issued by the MEPs: D66 Press Release Brussels, 7 March 2013 MEPs urge Obama to rescind US abortion ban for women raped in armed conflict In an open letter to United States President Barack Obama, Members of the European Parliament Working Group on Reproductive Health, HIV/AIDS and Development (EPWG) urge the head of state to immediately lift US abortion restrictions on humanitarian aid for girls and women raped and impregnated in armed conflict. “Withholding war raped women the right to safe abortion as a result of US development aid policy is a form of violence against women and girls, priority theme at the UN Commission on the Status of Women in New York”, says Chair of the EPWG, Dutch Liberal Democrat Sophie in ‘t Veld. In ‘t Veld and colleagues have been campaigning for the EU and its Member States to no longer accept the US imposed ban. “Europe must speak up for those women, and urge our American friends and allies to immediately abolish the ban.” The US imposes a “no abortion” clause on its foreign aid, which in practice means that humanitarian organizations that receive US funding neither talk about nor provide safe abortions to victims of war rape. In ‘t Veld comments: “Rape is being used as a weapon of war, destroying lives, families and communities. Women victims are already punished enough and should not be denied the right to a safe termination of the resulting unwanted pregnancy.” Every year, tens of thousands of girls and women are raped during armed conflicts. More than two-thirds of conflict-related rape in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) are gang rapes, one third of the victims are girls under the age of 18. Given that many girls and women in the DRC are raped in the context of sexual slavery, they incur the greatest risk of pregnancy. In ‘t Veld: “The fact that United States is the world’s largest provider of humanitarian aid has enabled it to impose its policy on abortion on neutral organizations, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross. The US should make a distinction between abortion as a means of family planning and termination of pregnancy as a medical necessity.”