Skip to content
Center for Reproductive Rights
Center for Reproductive Rights

Primary Menu

  • About
    • Overview
    • The Center’s Impact
    • Center Leadership & Staff
    • Annual Reports
    • Corporate Engagement
    • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
    • Careers
    • Contact Us
  • Work
    • Overview
    • Litigation
    • Legal Policy and Advocacy
    • Resources & Research
    • Recent Case Highlights
    • Landmark Cases
    • Cases Archive
    • World’s Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Issues
    • Overview
    • Abortion
    • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
    • Assisted Reproduction
    • Contraception
    • Humanitarian Settings
    • Maternal Health
    • COVID-19
  • Regions
    • Overview
    • Global Advocacy
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • United States
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Stories
    • Events
    • Center in the Spotlight
    • Press Releases
    • Statements
    • Press Room
    • Newsletters
  • Resources
    • Resources & Research
    • U.S. Abortion Rights: Resources
    • Maps
    • World Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
    • Repro Red Flags: Agency Watch
  • Act
    • Overview
    • Give
    • Act
    • Learn
  • Donate
    • Become a Monthly Donor
    • Make a Donor Advised Fund Gift
    • Leave a Legacy Gift
    • Donate Gifts of Stock
    • Give a Gift in Honor
    • Attend an Event
    • Employee Matching Gifts
    • Mail a Check
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Donate
icon-hamburger icon-magnifying-glass Donate
icon-magnifying-glass-teal

Amicus Work: Europe

Center for Reproductive Rights - Center for Reproductive Rights - search logo
search Close Close icon
Center for Reproductive Rights -
Menu Close Menu Close icon
Donate

Primary Menu

  • About
    • Overview
    • The Center’s Impact
    • Center Leadership & Staff
    • Annual Reports
    • Corporate Engagement
    • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
    • Careers
    • Contact Us
  • Work
    • Overview
    • Litigation
    • Legal Policy and Advocacy
    • Resources & Research
    • Recent Case Highlights
    • Landmark Cases
    • Cases Archive
    • World’s Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
  • Issues
    • Overview
    • Abortion
    • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights
    • Assisted Reproduction
    • Contraception
    • Humanitarian Settings
    • Maternal Health
    • COVID-19
  • Regions
    • Overview
    • Global Advocacy
    • Africa
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America and the Caribbean
    • United States
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Stories
    • Events
    • Center in the Spotlight
    • Press Releases
    • Statements
    • Press Room
    • Newsletters
  • Resources
    • Resources & Research
    • U.S. Abortion Rights: Resources
    • Maps
    • World Abortion Laws Map
    • After Roe Fell: Abortion Laws by State
    • Repro Red Flags: Agency Watch
  • Act
    • Overview
    • Give
    • Act
    • Learn
  • Donate
    • Become a Monthly Donor
    • Make a Donor Advised Fund Gift
    • Leave a Legacy Gift
    • Donate Gifts of Stock
    • Give a Gift in Honor
    • Attend an Event
    • Employee Matching Gifts
    • Mail a Check
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn

Related Content

Regions:

Europe

Type:

Case Document

Follow the Center

Donate Now

Join Now

07.09.2021

Europe Case Document

Amicus Work: Europe

Virginia Sobol
Highlights of amicus briefs and third-party interventions submitted by the Center on cases in Europe.

Share

  • facebook
  • Twitter
  • linkedin
  • Email id

Europe

Application by Sarah Jane Eware for Judicial Review (Reference No: 2018/60061/01)

High Court of Northern Ireland (2019)

Issue: Prohibition and criminalization of abortion.

Center’s position: The prohibition and criminalization of abortion in Northern Ireland violated the right to privacy under national and European human rights law.

Sarah Ewart claimed that her right to private life, as enshrined in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and national implementing legislation, was violated when she was prohibited from accessing abortion care in Northern Ireland following a diagnosis of fatal fetal impairment during her pregnancy. On 3 October 2019, the Northern Irish High Court upheld her claims and ruled that Northern Ireland’s highly restrictive abortion law contravened the European Convention and relevant national legislation.

Judicial Review of the Law on Termination of Pregnancy in Northern Ireland (UKSC 2017/0131)

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (2017)

Issue: Prohibition and criminalization of abortion.

Center’s position: The prohibition and criminalization of abortion in Northern Ireland violated the right to privacy under national and European human rights law.

The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission initiated legal proceedings seeking a declaration that the law on abortion in force at the time in Northern Ireland was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. On 7 June 2018, a majority of the UK Supreme Court recognized that, by prohibiting abortion in situations of rape, incest and fatal fetal impairment, Northern Irish law contravenes the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the Court also held that the Commission did not have legal standing to bring the relevant claims and for this the Court considered itself unable to issue a declaration of incompatibility. The Court underlined that the restrictive nature of Northern Ireland’s abortion law is untenable and called on lawmakers to undertake swift and radical reform as soon as possible.

In the Matter of the Constitutionality of Article 7(1)(e) of Law 87/2020  

Constitutional Court of Romania (2020)

Issue: Constitutionality of legal provisions regarding education on gender and gender identity.

Center’s position: The Center joined ILGA-Europe and four other European NGOs in arguing that Romania is obliged under international human rights law to protect and respect the rights of trans and gender diverse people and prevent discrimination on the grounds of gender identity in the field of education.

Romania’s Constitutional Court was called upon by the country’s President to determine the constitutionality of a new law which would have prohibited educational institutions from teaching about sexual orientation and gender identity in accordance with international human rights law. On 16 December 2020, the Constitutional Court found the provision unconstitutional.

Review of the Constitutionality of the Act on Health Measures for the Realization of the Right to Freely Decide on the Childbirth (U-I-60/1991 i dr.)

Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia (2017)

Issue: Constitutionality of Croatia’s law on abortion.

Center’s position: International human rights law, comparative European law and international public health and clinical standards support women’s right to access abortion care, including the legality of abortion on request

The Croatian Constitutional Court was called on to review the constitutionality of the Act on Health Measures for the Realization of the Right to Freely Decide on the Childbirth (Act Official Gazette No. 18/78). On 20 March 2017, the Constitutional Court ruled that by allowing access to abortion, including on request in early stages of pregnancy, the law gave effect to women’s constitutional rights.

Review of the Constitutionality of the Act No. 73/1986 Coll. on Induced Abortion  (PL ÚS/12.01)

Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic (2007)

Issue: Constitutionality of Slovakia’s abortion law.

Center’s position: The Center and the International Women’s Human Rights Law Clinic at the City University of New York School of Law, in cooperation with Pro Choice Slovakia and the Slovak Family Planning Association, explained that international and European human rights law do not recognize the right to life before birth. 

On 4 December 2007, the Constitutional Court confirmed that the Slovak Abortion Act, which allows abortion on request during first 12 weeks of pregnancy, is in compliance with the Slovak Constitution.

B.B. v. Poland (App. No. 67171/17)

European Court of Human Rights (2020)

Issue: Human rights violations as a result of denial of access to legal abortion care in Poland.

Center’s position: Denial of access to abortion can give rise to inhuman and degrading treatment in breach of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and can violate the right to respect for private life enshrined in Article 8 of the Convention

The applicant in the case was prevented from accessing abortion care after receiving a diagnosis of a fatal fetal impairment. She claims a breach of her rights under Articles 3, 8, 13 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The case is pending.

Charron and Merle-Montet v. France (App. No. 22612/15)

European Court of Human Rights (2017)

Issue: Access to in vitro fertilization without discrimination based on sex, marital status and sexual orientation.

Center’s position: International and comparative human rights standards and jurisprudence related to women’s access to assisted reproductive technologies recognize that restrictions on access to IVF based on marital or relationship status engage women’s rights to private and family life and have a disproportionate impact on women in general, and on single women and lesbian couples, in contravention of the international prohibition of discrimination against women on grounds of sex, marital status and sexual orientation.

The case concerned French legal rules which do not allow single women or lesbian couples to access medically assisted reproduction. On 8 February 2018, the European Court of Human Rights found the application inadmissible for failure to exhaust domestic remedies.

Fédération des Associations Familiales Catholiques en Europe (FAFCE) v. Sweden (Complaint No. 99/2013)

European Committee of Social Rights (2013)

Issue: Regulation of refusals of care by medical professionals to provide reproductive health care.

Center’s position: The Center and the Swedish Association for Sexuality Education (RFSU) argued that international human rights law and standards do not require that medical professionals be allowed to refuse to provide reproductive health care, including abortion care.

The Federation of Catholic Families in Europe (FAFCE) submitted a collective complaint under the European Social Charter claiming that Sweden’s failure to establish a legal and policy framework governing refusals of care by medical practitioners for personal or religious reasons violated medical providers and medical students rights to protection of health and freedom from discrimination. On 17 March 2015, the Committee ruled against FAFCE and held that the Charter does not grant a right to refuse to provide reproductive health care, including abortion care, and that Swedish law did not violate the Charter.

Gauer and Others v. France (App. No. 61521/08)

European Court of Human Rights (2011)

Issue: Forced sterilization of women with disabilities.

Center’s position: The Center, together with the European Disability Forum, the International Centre for the Legal Protection of Human Rights (INTERIGHTS), the International Disability Alliance and the Mental Disability Advocacy Center, argued that the sterilization of women with disabilities without their free and informed consent is a violation of international human rights law.

The case was brought by and on behalf of women with disabilities in France who were forcibly sterilized and who claimed that this violated their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. The European Court of Human Rights found the application inadmissible for failure to submit the application within the prescribed deadline.

A, B and C v. Ireland (App. No. 25579/05)

European Court of Human Rights (2008)

Issue: Prohibition on abortion and failure to establish an effective procedure for access to legal abortion.

Center’s position: The Center, together with the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Programme, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, argued that Ireland’s law on abortion was inconsistent with international human rights and European comparative law as it did not permit abortion to safeguard a woman’s physical and mental health.

Three women who had to travel outside of Ireland to obtain safe and legal abortion care challenged Ireland’s prohibition on abortion and the absence of effective procedures by which women could access legal abortion care when their lives were at risk. On 16 December 2010, the European Court of Human Rights held that Ireland’s failure to adopt legislation and establish an effective and accessible procedure for women whose lives were at risk to access lawful abortions violated the right to respect for private life under the European Convention on Human Rights.

Tysiąc v. Poland (App. No. 5410/03)

European Court of Human Rights (2005)

Issue: Denial of access to legal abortion violates human rights standards.

Center’s position: When national law provides for an entitlement to abortion care, the state is obliged under human rights law to ensure that women can exercise this right and access care in practice.

A visually impaired Polish woman was denied a legal abortion even though medical diagnoses confirmed that continuing her pregnancy could severely impact her vision, thereby constituting a risk to her health. On 20 March 2007, the European Court of Human Rights held that Poland had violated Article 8 on the right to respect for private life as a result of its failure to establish an effective procedure through which the applicant could have enforced her entitlements under national law to a legal abortion.

J.D. et al. v. the Czech Republic (Communication No. 102/2016)

Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (2017)

Issue: Obligation to provide effective remedies and reparations to Roma women survivors of forced and coercive sterilization

Center’s position: Discriminatory and systematic practices of forced and coercive sterilization contravene the international prohibition of gender-based violence and torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and constitute a gross violation of international human rights law. States have obligations under CEDAW and general international human rights law to provide effective remedies and redress to Roma women who have survived forced and coercive sterilization.

Six Roma women complained that they had been forcibly sterilized without their informed consent and that this resulted in ongoing breaches of their human rights and that they had been denied access to an effective remedy. On 16 July 2019, the CEDAW Committee found the communication inadmissible for failure to exhaust domestic remedies.

A.S. v. Hungary (Communication No. 4/2004)

Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (2005)

Issue: Forced sterilization of Roma women.

Center’s position: International human rights law and medical standards on informed consent and the right to information are critical components of any sterilization procedure and it is a violation of international human rights when sterilization is performed without full and informed consent.

The case was brought by a Roma woman who was forcibly sterilized without her informed consent. On 29 August 2006, the CEDAW Committee found that Hungary had failed to protect her rights under the CEDAW Convention and that its failure to provide reproductive health information and to ensure that women’s full and informed consent was obtained prior to sterilization violated the Convention.

 

Related Posts

Decision: Amanda Mellet v. Ireland

Abortion, Legal Restrictions,Europe, Ireland,In the Courts, At the United Nations

Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic Consideration: Amicus brief (Slovak)

Úvod1. Tieto písomné pripomienky predkladá Centrum pre reprodukčné práva v New York City a Právna klinika medzinárodných ženských ľudských práv...

Europe, Slovakia,In the Courts

Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic Consideration: Amicus brief (English)

Introduction1. These written comments are submitted by the Center for Reproductive Rights and the International Women’s Human Rights Law Clinic...

Europe, Slovakia,In the Courts

Sign up for email updates.

The most up-to-date news on reproductive rights, delivered straight to you.

Footer Menu

  • Careers
  • Privacy Policy
  • Gift Acceptance Policy
  • Contact Us

Center for Reproductive Rights
© (1992-2024)

Use of this site signifies agreement with our disclaimer and privacy policy.

Better Business Bureau Charity Watch Top Rated Center for Reproductive Rights
This site uses necessary, analytics and social media cookies to improve your experience and deliver targeted advertising. Click "Options" or click here to learn more and customize your cookie settings, otherwise please click "Accept" to proceed.
OPTIONSACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
CookieDurationDescription
_ga2 yearsThis cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to calculate visitor, session, campaign data and keep track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookies store information anonymously and assign a randomly generated number to identify unique visitors.
_gat_UA-6619340-11 minuteNo description
_gid1 dayThis cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the wbsite is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages viisted in an anonymous form.
_parsely_session30 minutesThis cookie is used to track the behavior of a user within the current session.
HotJar: _hjAbsoluteSessionInProgress30 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjFirstSeen30 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjid1 yearThis cookie is set by Hotjar. This cookie is set when the customer first lands on a page with the Hotjar script. It is used to persist the random user ID, unique to that site on the browser. This ensures that behavior in subsequent visits to the same site will be attributed to the same user ID.
HotJar: _hjIncludedInPageviewSample2 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjIncludedInSessionSample2 minutesNo description
HotJar: _hjTLDTestsessionNo description
SSCVER1 year 24 daysThe domain of this cookie is owned by Nielsen. The cookie is used for online advertising by creating user profile based on their preferences.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
CookieDurationDescription
_fbp3 monthsThis cookie is set by Facebook to deliver advertisement when they are on Facebook or a digital platform powered by Facebook advertising after visiting this website.
fr3 monthsThe cookie is set by Facebook to show relevant advertisments to the users and measure and improve the advertisements. The cookie also tracks the behavior of the user across the web on sites that have Facebook pixel or Facebook social plugin.
IDE1 year 24 daysUsed by Google DoubleClick and stores information about how the user uses the website and any other advertisement before visiting the website. This is used to present users with ads that are relevant to them according to the user profile.
IMRID1 year 24 daysThe domain of this cookie is owned by Nielsen. The cookie is used for storing the start and end of the user session for nielsen statistics. It helps in consumer profiling for online advertising.
personalization_id2 yearsThis cookie is set by twitter.com. It is used integrate the sharing features of this social media. It also stores information about how the user uses the website for tracking and targeting.
TDID1 yearThe cookie is set by CloudFare service to store a unique ID to identify a returning users device which then is used for targeted advertising.
test_cookie15 minutesThis cookie is set by doubleclick.net. The purpose of the cookie is to determine if the user's browser supports cookies.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
CookieDurationDescription
adEdition1 dayNo description
akaas_MSNBC10 daysNo description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional1 yearThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others1 yearNo description
geoEdition1 dayNo description
next-i18next1 yearNo description
SAVE & ACCEPT
Powered by CookieYes Logo
Scroll Up