SAN J OSE

ARTICLE 1. ARTICLE 2.

A RTICLES
As a matter of scientific fact a new human life begins at conception. Each human life is a continuum that begins at conception and advances in stages until death. Science gives different names to these stages, including zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus, infant, child, adolescent and adult. This does not change the scientific consensus that at all points of development each individual is a living member of the human species. From conception each unborn child is by nature a human being. All human beings, as members of the human family, are entitled to recognition of their inherent dignity and to protection of their inalienable human rights. This is recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and other international instruments. There exists no right to abortion under international law, either by way of treaty obligation or under customary international law. No United Nations treaty can accurately be cited as establishing or recognizing a right to abortion. The Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW Committee) and other treaty monitoring bodies have directed governments to change their laws on abortion. These bodies have explicitly or implicitly interpreted the treaties to which they are subject as including a right to abortion. Treaty monitoring bodies have no authority, either under the treaties that created them or under general international law, to interpret these treaties in ways that create new state obligations or that alter the substance of the treaties. Accordingly, any such body that interprets a treaty to include a right to abortion acts beyond its authority and contrary to its mandate. Such ultra vires acts do not create any legal obligations for states parties to the treaty, nor should states accept them as contributing to the formation of new customary international law

ARTICLE 3. ARTICLE 4.

ARTICLE 5. ARTICLE 6.

ARTICLE 7.

Assertions by international agencies or non-governmental actors that abortion is a human right are false and should be rejected. There is no international legal obligation to provide access to abortion based on any ground, including but not limited to health, privacy or sexual autonomy, or non-discrimination.

ARTICLE 8.

Under basic principles of treaty interpretation in international law, consistent with the obligations of good faith and pacta sunt servanda, and in the exercise of their responsibility to defend the lives of their people, states may and should invoke treaty provisions guaranteeing the right to life as encompassing a state responsibility to protect the unborn child from abortion. Governments and members of society should ensure that national laws and policies protect the human right to life from conception. They should also reject and condemn pressure to adopt laws that legalize or depenalize abortion. Treaty monitoring bodies, United Nations agencies and officers, regional and national courts, and others should desist from implicit or explicit assertions of a right to abortion based upon international law. When such false assertions are made, or pressures exerted, member states should demand accountability from the United Nations system. Providers of development aid should not promote or fund abortions. They should not make aid conditional on a recipients acceptance of abortion. International maternal and child health care funding and programs should ensure a healthy outcome of pregnancy for both mother and child and should help mothers welcome new life in all circumstances.

ARTICLE 9.

. We human rights lawyers and advocates, scholars, elected officials, diplomats, and medical and international policy experts hereby affirm these Articles. San Jose, Costa Rica March 25, 2011 * Institutions named for identifications purposes only. Signed, Lord David Alton, House of Lords, Great Britain Carl Anderson, Supreme Knight, Knights of Columbus 2 Guiseppe Benagiano, Professor of Gynecology, Perinatology and Childcare Universit la Sapienza, Rome, former Secretary General International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO)

Hon. Javier Borrego, former Judge, European Court of Human Rights Christine Boutin, former Cabinet Minister Government of France, current president Christian Democratic Party Benjamin Bull, Chief Counsel, Alliance Defense Fund Hon. Martha De Casco, Member of Parliament, Honduras Hon. Tom Coburn M.D., Member, United States Senate Jakob Cornides, human rights lawyer Professor John Finnis, Oxford University, University of Notre Dame Professor Robert George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Princeton University, former member of the Presidents Council on Bioethics Patrick Kelly, Vice President for Public Policy, Knights of Columbus Professor Elard Koch, Faculty of Medicine, University of Chile Professor Santiago Legarre, Professor of Law, Pontificia Universidad Catolica Argentina Leonard Leo, Former Delegate to the UN Human Rights Commission Yuri Mantilla, Director, International Government Affairs, Focus on the Family Cristobal Orrego, Professor of Jurisprudence, University of the Andes (Chile) Gregor Puppinck, Executive Director, European Center for Law and Justice

Ambassador Grover Joseph Rees, former US Ambassador to East Timor, Special US Representative to the UN on social issues Austin Ruse, President, C-FAM William Saunders, Human Right Lawyer, Senior Vice President, Americans United for Life, former delegate to the UN General Assembly Alan Sears, President, CEO and General Counsel, Alliance Defense Fund Marie Smith, President, Parliamentary Network for Critical Issues Professor Carter Snead, Member, International Bioethics Committee, UNESCO and former U.S. Permanent Observer to the Council of Europes Steering Committee on Bioethics, University of Notre Dame School of Law Douglas Sylva, Delegate to the UN General Assembly Hon. Francisco Tatad, former Majority Leader, Philippine Senate Hon. Luca Volonte, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, President of the European Peoples Party (PACE) Lord Nicholas Windsor, Member of the Royal Family of the United Kingdom Susan Yoshihara, Director, International Organizations Research Group Anna Zaborska, Member of the European Parliament, former Chair, Womens Committee of the European Parliament

Notes on the SAN J OSE ARTICLES

NOTES TO ARTICLE 1
Conception(fertilization)istheunionofanoocyteandspermcell(specifically,thefusion ofthemembranesofanoocyteandspermatozoonuponcontact)givingrisetoanewanddistinct livinghumanorganism,theembryo.Theembryoexistswhenthegametesnolongerexist,their geneticmaterialhavingcontributedtotheformationofthenewindividualgeneratedbytheir union.See,e.g.,Sadler,T.W.LangmansMedicalEmbryology,7thedition.Baltimore:Williams& Wilkins1995,p.3(notingthatthedevelopmentofahumanbeginswithfertilization,aprocess bywhichthespermatozoonfromthemaleandtheoocytefromthefemaleunitetogiverisetoa neworganism);Moore,KeithL.andPersaud,T.V.N.TheDevelopingHuman:ClinicallyOrientedEmbryology,7thedition.Philadelphia:Saunders2003,p.2(notingthattheunionofan oocyteandaspermduringfertilizationmarksthebeginningofthenewhumanbeing.). Inaddition,anyprocessthatresultsinthecreationofanewlivinghumanorganism shouldbeunderstoodasaformofconceptionforpurposesofthesearticles.Forexample,in rareinstancesatanearlypointinembryonicdevelopment,somecellsbecomedisaggregated fromtheembryoandthroughaprocessofinternalrestitutionandregulation,resolvethemselves intoaseparatenewlivinghumanorganismamonozygotic(identical)twinoftheoriginalembryo.Insuchcases,thelifeofthetwinbeginswiththisprocessratherthanbythefusionof spermatozoonandoocyte. Therearealsoscientifictechniques(includingbutnotlimitedtosomaticcellnuclear transfer,otherwiseknownascloning)thatbringintobeingadistinctnewhumanindividualat theembryonicstageofdevelopment.Allsuchtechniquesareformsofconceptionwithinthe meaningofthisarticle. Nomatterhowanindividualmemberofthespeciesbeginshisorherlife,heorsheis,at everystageofdevelopment,entitledtorecognitionofhisorherinherentdignityandtoprotectionofhisorherinalienablehumanrights,asnotedinArticle4,infra.

NOTES TO ARTICLE 2
Anembryoisdefinedastheseveralstagesofearlydevelopmentfromconceptiontothe ninthortenthweekoflife.Considine,Douglas,ed.,VanNostrandsScientificEncyclopedia, 10thedition.NewYork:VanNostrandReinholdCompany,2008,p.1291.Duringthefirstweek, theembryobecomesasolidmassofcellsandthenacquiresacavity,atwhichtimeitisknownas ablastocyst.RonanORahillyandFabiolaMullerHumanEmbryology&Teratology,3rdedition,NewYork:A.JohnWiley&Sons,2001,p.37. EventheEuropeanCourtofHumanRights,whichhasinrecentyearsbeenreluctantto affordfullprotectiontotheunbornchild,nonethelessstatedin2004:Itmayberegardedas 1

commongroundbetweenStatesthattheembryo/fetusbelongstothehumanrace.[Vov.France (53924/00,GC,8July2004,at84)]. Thefactofscientificconsensusdoesnotdeterminethetruthofthematterregardingthe biologicalstatusofthehumanembryo.Ifinthefuture,someinfluentialsegmentofthescientific communityweretoabandonthistruthforpoliticalreasons,itwouldnotalterthefactthatthe embryoisalivingmemberofthehumanspecies.

NOTES TO ARTICLE3
Thefactthatfromconceptioneachunbornchildisbynatureahumanbeingistrueofall humanbeings,howeverbroughtintobeing,ateverystageofdevelopment.SeenotestoArticles1 and2,supra.

NOTES TO ARTICLE4
ThepreambleoftheUniversalDeclarationofHumanRights(UDHR)states:Whereas recognitionoftheinherentdignityandoftheequalandinalienablerightsofallmembersofthe humanfamilyisthefoundationoffreedom,justiceandpeaceintheworld,andUDHRArticle3 states,Everyonehastherighttolife,libertyandsecurityofperson. TheInternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights(ICCPR)Article6states:Every humanbeinghastheinherentrighttolife.Thisrightshallbeprotectedbylaw.Nooneshall bearbitrarilydeprivedofhislife.ThepreambletotheICPPRlikewisestates:Inaccordance withtheprinciplesproclaimedintheCharteroftheUnitedNations,recognitionoftheinherent dignityandoftheequalandinalienablerightsofallmembersofthehumanfamilyisthefoundationoffreedom,justiceandpeaceintheworld[.]TheICCPRpreamblealsorecognizesthat theserightsderivefromtheinherentdignityofthehumanperson.TheICCPRalsoimplicitly recognizesthehumanrightsofunbornchildrenbyprovidinginArticle6thatcapitalpunishment shallnotbecarriedoutonpregnantwomen. TheDeclarationoftheRightsoftheChildandthepreambletotheConventiononthe RightsoftheChildbothstatethatthechild,byreasonofhisphysicalandmentalimmaturity, needsspecialsafeguardsandcare,includingappropriatelegalprotection,beforeaswellasafter birth. Likewise,theAmericanConventiononHumanRightsstipulatesinArticle4.1:Everypersonhastherighttohavehisliferespected.Thisrightshallbeprotectedbylawand,ingeneral, fromthemomentofconception.Nooneshallbearbitrarilydeprivedofhislife. SeealsothepreambletotheInternationalCovenantonEconomic,Social,andCultural Rightswhichstates:[R]ecognitionoftheinherentdignityandoftheequalandinalienable rightsofallmembersofthehumanfamilyisthefoundationoffreedom,justiceandpeaceinthe world[.]

NOTES TO ARTICLES5
AbortionisnotmentionedinanybindingUNhumanrightstreaty.Onlyoneregionaltreaty,the ProtocoltotheAfricanCharteronHumanandPeoplesRightsontheRightsofWomeninAfrica (MaputoProtocol),containsreferencetoabortionasaright.Thattreatyishighlycontentious 2

andinnowayenjoysuniversalacceptance.Onlyabouthalfofthe54AfricannationshaveaccededtotheMaputoProtocol,andthereasonmostoftencitedfornon-accessionistheabortion provision. ThelongtimeformerexecutivedirectoroftheU.N.PopulationFundrecentlyobserved: We,UNFPA,aremandatedtoconsiderabortionwithinthecontextofpublichealth,butneveras aright,assomeNGOsdo....Abortionisanationalissuetobedecidedbynationallawsandlegislations.InterviewwithThorayaObaid,HuffingtonPost,January15,2011.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/katherine-marshall/courageous-in-navigating-_b_806313.html.DespiteUNFPAs officialposition,theagencynonethelesspromotesabortionrights.SeenotesonArticle7,supra. Evenabortionadvocacyorganizationsconfirmeduntilquiterecentlythatthereisnorightto abortionininternationaltreaties.Forinstance,in2003theCenterforReproductiveRights acknowledgedthatinternationaltreatiesdonotrecognizearighttoabortion:Wehavebeen leadersinbringingargumentsforawomansrighttochooseabortionwithintherubricofinternationalhumanrights.However,thereisnobindinghardnormthatrecognizeswomensright toterminateapregnancy.ThestatementwasmadeintheCenterforReproductiveRights2003 internalmemorandum,InternationalLegalProgramSummaryofStrategicPlanning,andwas introducedintotheU.S.CongressionalRecord.[TheCenterforReproductiveRights,internal memorandum,enteredintotheU.S.CongressionalRecord:108Cong.,1stsess.,Congressional Record149,no.175(December8,2003)E2534-E2547,http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?position=all&page=E2534&dbname=2003_record] In2009,however,theCenterforReproductiveRightsargued:Womensrighttocomprehensivereproductivehealthservices,includingabortion,isrootedininternationalhumanrights standardsguaranteeingtherightstolife,health,privacy,andnon-discrimination.Theserights areviolatedwhengovernmentsmakeabortionservicesinaccessibletothewomenwhoneed them.Underinternationallaw,governmentscanbeheldaccountableforhighlyrestrictiveabortionlawsandforfailuretoensureaccesstoabortionwhenitislegal.CenterforReproductive Rightsreport,BringingRightstoBear:AbortionandHumanRights,January14,2009,p.1. http://reproductiverights.org/en/document/bringing-rights-to-bear-abortion-and-human-rights] ThedisparitybetweenwhatwassaidbytheCenterforReproductiveRightsin2003andthenin 2009isthatin2003theywerespeakinginaprivatemeetingoftheirstaff,boardandstake-holders,whilein2009theywerespeakinginpublic.Nothinghadchangedintheinterveningyears, eitherincustomarylaworintreatylaw,tomakethe2003statementnolongertrue. Internationalhumanrightsadvocacyorganizationshavealsotraditionallyrecognizedthat [t]hereisnogenerallyacceptedrighttoabortionininternationalhumanrightslaw.[Amnesty International,Women,ViolenceandHealth,18February2005.] Someoftheseorganizationshaverecentlychangedtheirposition,oftenusinglanguage nearlyidenticaltothatintheCenterforReproductiveRightsdocuments.Forinstance,Amnesty Internationalarguedin2008,thatrepealingthelegalreformsoftheFederalDistrictPenal Code[liberalizingaccesstoabortion]will,infact,resultinviolationsofMexicosinternational humanrightsobligations.AmnestyInternational,BriefsubmittedtotheSupremeCourtof Mexico,March2008. TheAmnestyInternationalbriefintheMexicocasewasfiledafewmonthsafteranabortionrightsconferenceatwhichAmnestyInternationalhadannounceditwouldadvocatefora 3

humanrighttoabortion.Thegroupssexualandreproductiverightsdirectorannouncedthat AmnestyInternationalwouldjointheCenterforReproductiveRightsinternationallitigation strategyforabortionrightsbyhelpingtobringlawsuitsinnationalcourtstochallengerestrictiveabortionlaws.WhentheAmnestyInternationalrepresentativestatedthatherorganization onlypromotedabortionrightsinsomeandnotallcircumstances,hercounterpartfromHuman RightsWatchcounteredthatthedistinctionwasinsignificant,andthenwelcomedAmnesty Internationalintothefoldofinternationalabortionrightsadvocates.Atthesameconference, AmnestyInternationalsexecutivedeputysecretarygeneralannouncedthatthegroupwouldalso jointheCenterforReproductiveRightsinanewlegalinitiativetopromotearighttomaternal healthwhichincludedabortion.[RemarksattheWomenDeliverconference,London,October 2007.SeeSixProblemswithWomenDeliver,InternationalOrganizationsResearchGroup BriefingPaperNo.2(November5,2007),http://www.c-fam.org/docLib/20080611_Women_Deliver_final.pdf]. Foradiscussiononreproductivehealthanditsrelationshiptoabortionseenotesonarticle7,infra.

NOTES TO ARTICLE6
Whiletheauthoritiesgiventothesebodiesvaryaccordingtothetermsofthetreaties thatcreatedthem,theseinstrumentsspeakofthetreatybodiesrolesintermsofmonitoring andmakingrecommendations,notmakingdecisions.Forinstance,CEDAWArticle21provides thattheCEDAWCommitteemaymakesuggestionsandgeneralrecommendationsbasedonthe examinationofreportsandinformationreceivedfromtheStatesParties.Similarly,theConventionontheRightsoftheChildArticle45providesthattheCommitteeontheRightsoftheChild maymakesuggestionsandgeneralrecommendationsbasedoninformationreceivedpursuantto articles44and45ofthepresentConvention,andtheInternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights(ICCPR)Article40(4)providesthattheHumanRightsCommitteeshalltransmit itsreports,andsuchgeneralcommentsasitmayconsiderappropriate,totheStatesParties. NoUnitedNationstreatyauthorizesatreatybodytoissueinterpretationsofthetreatythatare bindingonStatesParties.AlthoughsubsequentOptionalProtocolstosometreatiesallowtreaty bodiestoadjudicatecasesarisingfromindividualcomplaints,theseadjudicationscantakeplace onlywithrespecttostatesthathaveratifiedtheOptionalProtocolinquestionandarebinding onlyonthepartiestotheparticulardispute. StatesPartieshavemadenumerousstatementsmakingclearthattheydonotregard commentsbytreatybodiesaslegallybindingandthatsuchcommentswerenotcontemplatedto belegallybindingwhenthetreatieswerenegotiated.AccordingtoArticle31(3)(b)oftheVienna ConventionontheLawofTreaties,thissubsequentpracticeshouldbetakenintoaccountin interpretingthetreaty.Seee.g.,ReportoftheHumanRightsCommittee,50thSess.,Supp.No. 40,AnnexVI,ObservationsofStatesPartiesUnderArticle40,Paragraph5,oftheCovenant,at 135,U.N.Doc.A/50/40(Oct.5,1995)(TheUnitedKingdomisofcourseawarethattheGeneral Commentsadoptedbythe[HumanRights]Committeearenotlegallybinding.).Seealsothe U.S.statementsthattheICCPRdoesnotimposeonStatesPartiesanobligationtogiveeffectto the[HumanRights]CommitteesinterpretationsorconferontheCommitteethepowertorender definitiveorbindinginterpretationsoftheICCPR.Idat131,TheCommitteelackstheauthoritytorenderbindinginterpretationsorjudgments,andthedraftersoftheCovenantcouldhave giventheCommitteethisrolebutdeliberatelychosenottodoso.Id. 4

 EvenlegalcommentatorswhohaveadvocatedforbroadtreatybodypowershaverecognizedthattreatybodyinterpretationsarenotbindingonStatesParties.See,e.g.,Manfred Nowak,TheNeedforaWorldCourtofHumanRights,HumanRightsLawReview7:1,252 (2007)(notingthattreatybodiesissuenon-bindingdecisionsonindividualcomplaintsaswell asconcludingobservationsandrecommendationsrelatingtotheStatereportingandinquiry procedures.);MichaelOFlahertyandJohnFisher,SexualOrientation,GenderIdentityand InternationalHumanRightsLaw:ContextualisingtheYogyakartaPrinciples,HumanRights LawReview8:2,215(2008)(ConcludingObservationshaveanon-bindingandflexiblenature.); ChristinaZampas&JaimeM.Gher,AbortionasaHumanRightInternationalandRegional Standards,HumanRightsLawReview8:2,253(2008)(notingthattreatybodiesarenotjudicialbodiesandtheirConcludingObservationsarenotlegallybinding). Despitethisconsensusandthefactthatthetreatyitmonitorsdoesnotmentionabortion, theCommitteeontheEliminationofAllFormsofDiscriminationAgainstWomen(CEDAW)has readarighttoabortionintothetreatyandhaspressedmorethan90countriestoliberalizetheir abortionlaws.[HumanRightsWatch,InternationalHumanRightsLawandAbortioninLatin America,July2005,p.5]ThecommitteestatedinitsGeneralCommentNo.24that,when possible,legislationcriminalizingabortionshouldbeamended,inordertowithdrawpunitive measuresimposedonwomenwhoundergoabortion.CEDAWGeneralCommentNo.24further assertsthatnationsmustalsoputinplaceasystemthatensureseffectivejudicialaction.Failuretodosowillconstituteaviolationofarticle12.Whennationsnegotiatedthetreaty,there wasnounderstandingthatthisarticleincludedabortionrights,nordidanynationreserveits positiononthisarticleinordertoprotectitslawscriminalizingabortion.Onenationalcourt, however,hasacceptedthecommentsoftheCEDAWcommitteeasauthoritativeinthisregard. ThehighcourtofColombiadirectedaliberalizationofthenationalabortionlawin2006andthe courtsmajorityreferredtothecommentsofthetreatybodiesregardingabortion.[Constitutional CourtofColumbiaDecisionC-355/06,10May2006]. TheHumanRightsCommitteehasadmonishedmorethanadozencountriestoliberalize theirabortionlaws.TheCommitteeonEconomicandSocialRightshaspressedmorethanten countriestoliberalizetheirabortionlaws.TheCommitteeontheRightsoftheChildandthe CommitteeAgainstTorturehavealsourgedcountriestoliberalizetheirabortionlaws.

NOTES TO ARTICLE7
TheWorldHealthOrganizationhasassertedthat[a]ccesstosafe,legalabortionisafundamentalrightofwomen,irrespectiveofwheretheylive.[See,e.g.,WorldHealthOrganization, Unsafeabortion:thePreventablePandemic(2006),www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/general/lancet_4.pdf.] TheUNPopulationFund(UNFPA)isprohibitedfrompromotingabortionasaformof familyplanningbyitsmandateinthe1994InternationalConferenceonPopulationandDevelopment(ICPD)ProgramofAction,clause8.25.Yetitnonethelesspromotesabortionbyfunding abortionprovidersandadvocateswhopromoteabortionasahumanrightandbymakingthese providersandadvocatesitspartnersandagentsincountriesthroughouttheworld.Forexample, UNFPAfundstheabortion-rightslawfirmCenterforReproductiveRights(CRR)[SeeCRRannualreports,e.g.itslatestreportfrom2009athttp://reproductiverights.org/sites/crr.civicactions. net/files/documents/crr_annual_09.pdf.]UNFPAhasalsocollaboratedwithCRRonbriefingsfor 5

thecommitteesresponsibleformonitoringcompliancewiththeConventionAgainstTortureand theInternationalCovenantonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights.AccordingtoCRR,these briefingsfocusedonreproductiverightsviolationssuchasdenialofreproductivehealthcare services,includingabortionandpost-abortioncare.[http://reproductiverights.org/en/press-room/ center-briefs-un-committees-on-emerging-reproductive-rights-issues] TheProgramofActionadoptedattheInternationalConferenceonPopulationandDevelopmentisoftencitedtosubstantiateclaimsthatthereisaninternationalrighttoabortion derivedfromtheinternationallyrecognisedrighttothehighestattainablestandardofhealth care[SeeICPDProgramofAction,Cairo513September1994].Whileitisnotlegallybinding, theProgramofActionremainstheonlydocumentofsomeinternationalstandingcontaininga definitionthetermreproductivehealthandrights,whichsomeinterpretasincludingarightto abortion. Infact,however,thatdefinition(foundinparagraph7.2oftheProgramofAction)doesnot includeanyreferencetoabortionatall.Onthecontrary,ratherthanimposingonanyStatean obligationtolegalizeorde-penalizeabortion,theICPDProgramofActionexplicitlyrecognizes thesovereigntyofstatestolegislateonthatmatter.Specifically,paragraph8.25states,Any measuresorchangesrelatedtoabortionwithinthehealthsystemcanonlybedeterminedatthe nationalorlocallevelaccordingtothenationallegislativeprocess. BecauseICPDandtheoutcomedocumentfromtheFourthWorldConferenceonWomen inBeijingdidnotincludeabortionrights,advocatesturnedtotheUNhumanrightstreatymonitoringsystemtofindarighttoabortion.In1996,stafffromtheofficeoftheUNOfficeofthe HighCommissioneronHumanRights,UNPopulationFund,UNDivisionfortheAdvancement ofWomenandnon-governmentalabortionadvocatesproducedareportoutliningthemeansto doso.Thestrategy,whichhasbeenimplementedinsubsequentyears,saidthatUnitedNationsagenciescouldanalyzeeachtreatyandtheworkofeachtreatymonitoringbodytopromote theagenda,whichentailedredefiningthevariousrightstoattempttofashionarighttoabortion.Accordingtothereport,Therighttolifecouldbeextendedtotheissueoflifeexpectancy, includingdistinctionsbetweenwomenandmen,particularlyinrespectofissuesofwomens reproductiveandsexualhealthwhichadverselyaffectwomenslifeexpectancy,suchasstrict abortionlawswhichleadwomentoseekunsafeabortion.[RoundtableofHumanRightsTreaty BodiesonHumanRightsApproachestoWomensHealth,withaFocusonSexualandReproductiveHealthRights,GlenCoveReport,(December9-11,1996),22-23.TheCEDAWcommittee welcomedtheRoundtablereportatits53rdsessionin1998,(A/53/38/Rev.1),http://www.un.org/ womenwatch/daw/cedaw/reports/18report.pdf]. TheCenterforReproductiveRightssimilarlyfindsarighttoabortionbyreinterpreting treaties:Weandothershavegroundedreproductiverightsinanumberofrecognizedhuman rights,includingtherighttolife,liberty,andsecurity;therighttohealth,reproductivehealth, andfamilyplanning;therighttodecidethenumberandspacingofchildren;therighttoconsent tomarriageandtoequalityinmarriage;therighttoprivacy[SeeCenterforReproductive Rightsinternalmemorandum,andpositionofAmnestyInternationalonabortionrights,Notes onArticle5,infra]

NOTES TO ARTICLE8
ItisgenerallyacknowledgedthattherighttolifewithinthemeaningoftheInternational CovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights(ICCPR)andotherhumanrightsinstrumentsentailsan obligationofStatesPartiesnotonlytorefrainfromunlawfulkillingbutalsototakeaffirmative stepstopreventsuchkilling.See,e.g.,L.C.B.v.theUnitedKingdom(EuropeanCourtofHuman RightsJudgmentof9June1998,ReportsofJudgmentsandDecisions1998-III,p.1403,36): therighttoliferequirestheStatenotonlytorefrainfromtheintentionaltakingoflife,butalso totakeappropriatestepstosafeguardthelivesofthosewithinitsjurisdiction. TheViennaConventionontheLawofTreaties(VCLT)Article26(pactasuntservanda) providesthat[e]verytreatyinforceisbindinguponthepartiestoitandmustbeperformed bythemingoodfaith.Article31(1)oftheVCLTprovidesthat[a]treatyshallbeinterpreted ingoodfaithinaccordancewiththeordinarymeaningtobegiventothetermsofthetreatyin theircontextandinthelightofitsobjectandpurposeandthesucceedingsectionsofArticle31 specifyfactorsthatshouldbetakenintoaccountininterpretingtreaties,suchasagreements amongstatesrelatingtothetreatyand/oritsinterpretation,statepracticethatestablishessuch anagreement,andanyapplicableandrelevantrulesofinternationallaw. BecauseneitheranyoftheinterpretivefactorssetforthinArticle31oftheVCLTnorany otherauthoritativesourceindicatesthatstateresponsibilitytoprotecthumanlifedoesnotextendtoallhumanbeings,StatesarefreeundertheVCLTtointerprettheirobligationsunder treatiesguaranteeingtherighttolifeasincludinganobligationtoprotectthelivesofallhuman beingsfromthemomentofconception.

NOTES TO ARTICLE9
AlthoughthisArticlespecificallymentionsabortion,governmentsshouldalsoguard againstotherthreatstothelivesofunbornhumanbeings.Thesethreatsincludebutarenot limitedtoresearchinvolvingtheuseanddestructionoflivinghumanembryos. Statesmay,andindeedshould,interpretinternationalobligationsunderUNhuman rightstreatiesasincludingadutytolegallyprotecthumanlifefromitsverybeginning,thatis, fromconceptionasdiscussedinthepreviousnotetoArticle1.Anumberofnationalconstitutions alreadyprotectthelivesofhumanbeingsfromconception,includingthoseofChile,theDominicanRepublic,ElSalvador,Guatemala,Honduras,Ireland,Madagascar,Paraguay,Peru,Philippines,andHungary. Indeed,abouttwo-thirdsoftheworldscountriescontinuetoprohibitabortionbylawin alloralmostallcircumstances.AccordingtothemostrecentcompilationbytheabortionadvocacygroupCenterforReproductiveRights,68countrieseitherprohibitabortionorpermititonly wherenecessarytosavethemotherslife,andanother59countriespermitabortiononlywhen necessarytopreservethemotherslifeorhealth.Aboutathirdofthesecountriesalsohaveexceptionsforrape,andafewalsohaveexceptionsforincestand/orfetalimpairment.[Centerfor ReproductiveRights,FactSheet:TheWorldsAbortionLaws,September2009.]Whilenotallof these127lawsaffordunbornchildrenthefullscopeofappropriatelegalprotection,theyclearly reflectacontinuingrecognitionbytheoverwhelmingmajorityoftheworldsnationsthatunborn childrendeserveprotectionandthatthereisnohumanrighttoabortion.Incontrast,only56 7

countriespermitabortionforanyreason,andonly22ofthesearewithoutrestrictionsuchas gestationalperiod.Another14countriesprohibitabortionbutprovideexceptionsforsocioeconomicreasons.[FactSheet,supra.] Examplesofpressurebroughttobearondevelopingnationsbydevelopednationsinclude theexperienceofNicaraguain2006inresponsetoitslegislaturesdecisiontobantherapeutic abortion.Thetermtherapeuticismentionedherebecauseitistheonecommonlyused,althoughwedonotagreethatanabortioncanbeconsidered,perse,atreatmentforanydisease. TheambassadorstoNicaraguafromSweden,Finland,Denmark,NorwayandtheNetherlands, aswellastheRepresentativesoftheUnitedKingdomandCanadiangovernments,theEuropeanCommission,andUNagencies(theWorldHealthOrganization(WHO),theUNChildrens fund(UNICEF),theUNPopulationFund(UNFPA),theUNDevelopmentProgram(UNDP)and theFoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations(FAO)),signedajointlettertothe PresidentoftheNationalAssembly,EduardoGomezLopez,onOctober20,2006,inwhichthey urgedapostponementofthevoteonthegroundthatthenewabortionlawwouldaffectthe lives,thehealth,andthelegalsecurityofNicaraguanwomen.Theleadsignatoryontheletter,SwedishambassadortoNicaraguaEvaZetterberg,announcedatadonorsconferenceafew monthslaterthatdonorswishtoensureaplanwithmechanismsthatguaranteeabetterlinkagebetweenassistanceandgovernmentpoliciesandthatabortionissuper-importantforus. [EmpiezaMesaGlobalentreelgobiernoylospaisesdonantes,LaVoz,July3,2007;Breves Nicaragua,RevistaEnvio,July2007.]ShortlythereafterSwedenannouncedaphasedwithdrawalofallassistancetoNicaragua.ThewithdrawalwaswidelyviewedwithinNicaraguaas retributionforthenewabortionlawbanningtherapeuticabortion.[Diputadosacusanala EmbajadoraSuecia,ElNuevoDiario,August29,2007.]