Introduction

Among the many things Prabina Bajracharya has learned over the course of her law career, this may be the simplest—and most important: “Don’t give up.” 

Prabina, a human rights lawyer, is from Kathmandu, Nepal, and she grew up under the country’s near-total abortion ban. Prior to 2002, its maternal mortality rate was among the highest in the world, with an estimated half of those deaths resulting from unsafe abortion. Up to one fifth of women in prison were there for abortion-related crimes. 

These were the kinds of rights violations that drove Prabina into human rights law, and eventually to the Center. “I see reproductive rights as being at the core of gender equality and human rights,” Prabina says, “and this really resonates with the Center’s mission of establishing reproductive rights as human rights.”  

Today, as Regional Director for the Asia Program, she lives in a different Nepal than the one where she was born—a country where abortion, maternal care, and other reproductive services are legally protected rights.  

What brought about this giant leap? Two decades’ worth of small steps forward.

A long journey

A long journey

In 2002, Nepal’s sky-high maternal mortality rate finally drove the country to legalize abortion up to 12 weeks of pregnancy and 18 in cases of rape or incest. Advocates had successfully championed the reform as a matter of public health.  

But abortion care remained out of reach for many. The country lacked the necessary health care facilities and providers, especially in rural areas. And though the government offered free maternal care services, abortion was intentionally excluded—and high fees often kept it inaccessible.  

Then came the landmark 2007 case Lakshmi v. Nepal, filed by a national Center partner. It focused on a rural woman who couldn’t afford abortion care and was forced to give birth to her sixth child. In a groundbreaking decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the government had to guarantee access to safe and affordable abortion services. 

The Center, which had supported the litigation, set out to ensure the government followed through. “We pioneered a network called Reproductive Health Rights Working Group (RHRWG), a wide and diverse network of organizations that conducted advocacy for safe abortion access and rights-based legal framework for many years,” Prabina says. Composed of researchers, service providers, grass-roots organizers, and diverse others, this coalition had its work cut out: Despite the Supreme Court ruling, less than half of the estimated 323,000 abortions performed in 2014 were safe.  

In 2018, RHRWG drove the passage of the Safe Motherhood and Reproductive Health Rights (SMRHR) Act. The act established abortion, antenatal care, maternity leave, and confidentiality around reproductive care as fundamental rights. Developed with technical guidance from the Center, it was a key milestone: “This was the first time abortion was defined as a right in a law.”  

But still the government wasn’t keeping its promises. “For almost one and a half years regulation under the law did not come through,” Prabina says. So the Center, led by Prabina, designed a lawsuit to spur the government into action. Brought by the Center’s partner FWLD, before the Supreme Court, the suit demanded budget allocation at all level of governments, new guidelines ensuring adolescents and people with disabilities could access services, and the formation of a Committee for monitoring sexual and reproductive health and rights.  

The Supreme Court issued an order that forced all the government ministries named in the suit to show proof they were implementing the act. In response, the government passed new regulations, and by the end of 2022 all the suit’s demands had been met. Reproductive health care—including abortion up to 28 weeks for certain grounds—was now free in all government health facilities, and new guidelines were in place to ensure expanded access. 

It was a victory not in the courts but beyond them. “The case proved that strategic litigation can be a powerful tool for exerting pressure on the government,” Prabina says. “The mere initiation of legal proceedings compelled the government to take action, underscoring the efficacy of litigation as a means to influence policy and address critical issues.”

Taking up the cause

Taking up the cause

Since 2000, Nepal’s maternal mortality rate has dropped by 71%. Its legal framework for reproductive rights is one of the most progressive in the region. But abortion remains under the criminal code, meaning that any procedures not expressly permitted by law can and may result in criminal charges. 

This, Prabina emphasizes, is all the more reason to get involved. Already she sees a new generation joining the ranks: “I feel so proud to see young and aspiring lawyers, especially women lawyers, taking human rights cases and demonstrating interest in reproductive rights cases.” 

“It might be a long and tiring journey towards success,” she says, “but if you persevere, success will surely be there, and you will be greatly contributing to the cause.”