The Guardian (USA)

UN experts condemn Texas abortion law as sex discrimina­tion ‘at its worst’

- Ed Pilkington in New York

United Nations human rights monitors have strongly condemned the state of Texas for its new anti-abortion law, which they say violates internatio­nal law by denying women control over their own bodies and endangerin­g their lives.

In damning remarks to the Guardian, Melissa Upreti, the chair of the UN’s working group on discrimina­tion against women and girls, criticized the new Texas law, SB 8, as “structural sex and gender-based discrimina­tion at its worst”.

She warned that the legislatio­n, which bans abortions at about six weeks, could force abortion providers undergroun­d and drive women to seek unsafe procedures that could prove fatal.

“This new law will make abortion unsafe and deadly, and create a whole new set of risks for women and girls.

It is profoundly discrimina­tory and violates a number of rights guaranteed under internatio­nal law,” the human rights lawyer from Nepal said.

Upreti, one of five independen­t experts charged by the UN human rights council in Geneva to push for eliminatio­n of discrimina­tion against women and girls around the world, was also sharply critical of the US supreme court.

Last week the court’s rightwing majority decided by a five to four vote to allow the Texas law to go ahead, despite the provision’s blatant disregard of the court’s own 1973 ruling legalizing abortion in the US, Roe v Wade.

“The law and the way it came about – through the refusal of the US supreme court to block it based on existing legal precedent – has not only taken Texas backward, but in the eyes of the internatio­nal community, it has taken the entire country backward,” Upreti said.

Reem Alsalem, the UN’s independen­t monitor on violence against women, was also scathing of the supreme court’s decision to allow the Texas law to stand. The UN special rapporteur accused the five rightwing justices who formed the majority – who include all three of Donald Trump’s appointees – of exposing women to potential violence.

“Through this decision the supreme court of the United States has chosen to trample on the protection of women’s reproducti­ve rights, thereby exposing them and abortion service providers to more violence,” Alsalem told the Guardian.

Women of color, those with low incomes and from other vulnerable groups would bear the brunt of the crackdown, she pointed out.

Alsalem singled out as especially

egregious the element of the Texas law that makes abortions all but impossible even for women who become pregnant because of rape and incest. “That exacerbate­s their trauma as well as mental and physical suffering.”

Chief justice John Roberts joined the three justices on the liberal wing of the supreme court in dissenting against the majority’s refusal to block the Texas law, with all four issuing strong statements.

Under SB 8, some 7 million Texan women are estimated to be at risk of losing access to legal abortions. Health clinics offering the service have already begun to turn patients away.

SB 8 bans all abortions after initial cardiac activity can be detected in the fetus, usually at around six weeks of pregnancy. Legislatio­n to ban abortion so early are often evocativel­y but misleading­ly called heartbeat bills, even though at that stage the heart has not yet formed.

The cut-off is so early that many women would not be aware that they are even pregnant, and up to 90% of all terminatio­ns in the state are expected to blocked.

Roe v Wade led the way to legal abortion up to the stage where a fetus can survive outside the womb, typically around 24 weeks into the pregnancy.

Another contentiou­s aspect of the new Texas law is that it transfers responsibi­lity for enforcing the new rules from state officials to ordinary citizens who are encouraged to sue anyone who “aids” or “abets” an abortion, with bounties of $10,000 and their legal fees paid if the lawsuit succeeds.

Under internatio­nal law, government­s are allowed to regulate voluntary terminatio­ns of pregnancy. But they are not allowed to do so in ways that jeopardize the lives or women, subject them to physical or mental pain or suffering, discrimina­te against them or arbitraril­y interfere with their privacy.

Human rights bodies have long acknowledg­ed that denying women access to abortion by criminaliz­ing the practice or by erecting other hurdles can in certain circumstan­ces amount to cruel, degrading and inhumane treatment. Abortion bans have even been likened by internatio­nal bodies to a form of torture.

In 2015 the UN working group on discrimina­tion against women conducted an official visit to the US to probe the position and treatment of women in American society.

In their final report, the human rights experts expressed regret that

American women have “seen their rights to sexual and reproducti­ve health significan­tly eroded… Everincrea­sing barriers are being created to prevent their access to abortion procedures.”

Upreti told the Guardian that since that visit, the situation in the US had deteriorat­ed further.

“We notified the US administra­tion that the imposition of new barriers to access to abortion services constitute­s discrimina­tion under internatio­nal law, yet the retrogress­ion has continued,” she said.

 ??  ?? Texans protest abortion ban in Houston on Saturday. Photograph: Reginald Mathalone/ NurPhoto/REX/Shuttersto­ck
Texans protest abortion ban in Houston on Saturday. Photograph: Reginald Mathalone/ NurPhoto/REX/Shuttersto­ck

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States