Belfast Telegraph

The imposition of abortion on NI is an assault on democracy and an attack on the unborn ... the only way forward now is to repeal this iniquitous legislatio­n

But who will stand along with the DUP to limit the law to some very particular circumstan­ces, such as those in the heart-rending case of Sarah Ewart, asks Martin O’Brien

- Martin O’Brien is a journalist, communicat­ions consultant and award-winning former BBC producer

There must be something rotten in our body politic. There must be when, in a matter of a few months, from July to October, we suddenly moved from having one of the most restrictiv­e abortion regimes in the world to one of the most liberal.

All this happened with breakneck speed and without any public consultati­on and without a single one of our locally based lawmakers in Westminste­r — MPs or peers — voting for it.

And despite the objections of thousands of people, who made their voice heard in public protests and in petitions to Parliament and to elected representa­tives.

It’s still hard to take it in — but it ’s true.

We have moved from a situation where abortion was only permitted when the mother’s life was in danger, or where there was a risk of permanent and serious damage to her mental or physical health, to a new, deeply disturbing dispensati­on where there is no explicit legal protection for unborn babies up to 28 weeks.

And it gets worse.

As pointed out by Baroness Nuala O’Loan and others — including Both Lives Matter, an organisati­on supported by members of all faiths and none in Northern Ireland — there is no specific protection for unborn babies with disabiliti­es such as Down’s syndrome, and no prohibitio­n of abortion on grounds of the sex of a baby.

Nobody with a spark of human decency wishes to see anyone unreasonab­ly taken before the courts — especially a woman who has had to contend with the trauma of a crisis pregnancy.

However, there is something per verse when the decriminal­isation of abortion in Northern Ireland means the removal of “the current, ef fective protection against coercive abortion, including the practice of secretly slipping abortion pills into drinks”, as stated in the petition spearheade­d by Baroness O’Loan calling for the recall of the Assembly.

Abortion is, of course, arguably the most sensitive and diff icult of issues to address, but it is one on which good people can have honestly held and ver y var ying views.

So, wherever one stands, whether one regards abortion as always wrong, because it means the destructio­n of human life in the womb, or from the pro- choice standpoint (that, nonetheles­s, denies choice to the unborn human being), one must approach the issue with humility and with compassion.

And that should include showing understand­ing and empathy for legislator­s, who are called to exercise their conscience in such a contentiou­s area where constituen­ts hold deeply contrastin­g views.

The imposition of this

❝ Abortion is arguably the most sensitive and difficult of issues, but one of very varying views

abortion regime on Northern Ireland by Westminste­r is an assault on democracy in Northern Ireland, an attack on prolife values that transcend our traditiona­l divide and a grave violation of the principles of devolution and of subsidiari­ty.

The fact that the Good Friday Agreement institutio­ns are still down af ter nearly three years and that many British MPs have lost patience with Stormont for its failure to “reform” abortion law, as urged by cheerleade­rs for abortion such as Amnesty Internatio­nal ( how their founder must be turning in his grave), does not justif y this denial of democracy to the people of Northern Ireland.

Frankly, abortion law in Northern Ireland is not Westminste­r’s business under the devolution settlement. Abortion is a devolved matter and the place for the enactment of laws in relation to abortion is the Assembly in Stormont and nowhere else, with MLAs free to vote according to their conscience.

Of course, Westminste­r would not have taken this opportunis­tic and reckless initiative if our Assembly was f unctioning properly and the new abortion regime only kicked in on October 22, when Westminste­r’s ordained deadline for the restoratio­n of Stormont passed without an Executive being formed.

But we are where we are, so what is to be done about this egregious state of affairs?

The answer should lie in the Assembly — if only the DUP and Sinn Fein would show the statesmans­hip to get it back on

track. The Assembly did meet — exceptiona­lly — on October 21, at the instigatio­n of Baroness O’Loan ( lef t) and others, when the DUP, to their credit, in the person of Paul Givan MLA, tried to bring for ward a Private Member’s Bill to repeal Section 9, the part of the Executive Formation Act that deals with abortion. The proceeding­s were labelled a “political stunt” by most of the DUP’s political opponents. No party, including the DUP, isn’t up for stunts from time to time — just wait until the election campaign proper gets under way — but that is too harsh a judgment on this occasion.

The Catholic bishops spoke for many right across our divided land — including, let it be said, some supporters, or erstwhile supporters, of Sinn Fein and the SDLP — when they asserted it was “deeply offensive” to describe as “a stunt” the ef for ts of thousands of citizens from all sections of the community to make use of the democratic system “to address an issue of such f undamental importance”.

That issue could have been addressed in a meaningful way had Mr Givan’s Bill, designed to protect the unborn child, not been stopped in its tracks by the SDLP’s decision not to assent to the election of a Speaker. So much for the SDLP’s claim to be a pro-life party.

If they believed that the Assembly session was “a stunt”, as they claimed, and felt they could not join forces with a DUP pro-life initiative, then they should have stayed out of the Chamber like Alliance and Sinn Fein, rather than attempting to vir tue- signal pro-life voters by their attendance.

I am told by those close to the issue that the Assembly can act if and when it is restored to repeal, or significan­tly mitigate, this legislatio­n imposed on us without our democratic consent.

However, it ’s thought that if the Assembly voted to rescind the Westminste­r legislatio­n without offering alternativ­e regulation­s, this would prob

❝ The answer should lie in the Assembly — if only the DUP and Sinn Fein would get it back on track

ably be subjected to a legal challenge by pro-abortion campaigner­s.

A source opines that the courts would then have to determine if this part of the UK is complying with internatio­nal obligation­s such as human rights law.

It is considered questionab­le whether the UN Convention on the Eliminatio­n of all Forms of Discrimina­tion Against Women (CEDAW) report, on which the new abortion regime is based, places an obligation on the UK to comply.

It is expected that, when the Assembly is eventually restored, it will need to make new regulation­s on abortion, partly in response to the new law and partly in response to the High Court ruling in the Sarah Ewart case, I am told.

It will be interestin­g to see which parties will join the DUP — the only party apart from the TUV that appears to be actively and demonstrab­ly pro-life — in limiting the law on abortion to ver y particular circumstan­ces, such as those covered by that heart-rending Ewart case.

 ?? JONATHAN PORTER ?? Sarah Ewart, who had to travel to England for
an abortion six years ago due to a fatal foetal
abnormalit­y, outside the High Court with her mum Jane Christie after the judge ruled our strict
abortion regime was incompatib­le with human
rights legislatio­n
JONATHAN PORTER Sarah Ewart, who had to travel to England for an abortion six years ago due to a fatal foetal abnormalit­y, outside the High Court with her mum Jane Christie after the judge ruled our strict abortion regime was incompatib­le with human rights legislatio­n
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Ireland