Letter to The International Executive Committee
|
15 May 2007
The International Executive Committee (IEC)
Amnesty International
International Secretariat
Peter Benenson House
1 Easton Street
LondonWCIX 0DW
United Kingdom
Dear Members of the IEC:
We read, with deep dismay and trepidation, your memo-circular of 5 April 2007 regarding your recommended policy statement on selected aspects of abortion (as amended at the Chairs Forum, 10th March 2007), and we take this venue to strongly protest its adoption and promotion.
|
Stripped of its euphemisms, your policy statement, in effect, urges all members of the global human community, in their individual capacity as sovereign states, through legislation, 1) to present abortion as an option in cases of unwanted/unplanned pregnancy; 2) to legalize the killing of unborn children, though conceding to certain “reasonable restrictions” by the state, like gestational limits; 3) to allow abortion without restrictions for “specific cases” like rape and incest; 4) to give mothers of aborted children access to medical services when complications arise. All these in the name of protecting women’s right to choice.
We are deeply disturbed with your policy statement because it contradicts and defeats the fundamental purpose for which Amnesty International had precisely been created, clearly reflected in your organization’s vision of “a world in which every person enjoys all of the human rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights standards.” Even more seriously, we are fearful of its adoption because, coming from a highly-regarded international institution like Amnesty International, your policy statement will surely have grave repercussions on our common global fight against fundamental human rights violations.
Allow us to explain our position on this issue.
Firstly, it cannot be argued that, by all ethical and moral standards, the most fundamental of all human rights is the right to life. Thus, the inviolability of the right to life is of prime importance. Without it, measures at protecting any other human rights are rendered meaningless. Under this premise, every human community, and the political community itself are founded.
In recognition of this, the United Nations, 3 years after its creation, adopted, in 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which declared unequivocally that, firstly, “everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person.” The order of the stated rights is significant – LIFE above all other rights.
To strengthen this declaration, it was followed by , among others, the Declaration of the Rights of the Child in 1959, and reaffirmed by the Convention of the Rights of the Child in 1989. It should be noted that both documents lay the premise that: “the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth …” By stating thus, the life, as well as the personhood, of the unborn child, are recognized.
In this light, your policy statement urging all states to decriminalize abortion violates the unborn child’s right to life, not only as a living organism but also, and more importantly, as a person and a human being. Although your policy statement sets concessions for “specific cases” and “reasonable restrictions”, these do not, in any way, mitigate the violation. If anything, these concessions only subject the unborn child to further discrimination.
Secondly, with respect to the human rights of women, we are all well-aware of the many international instruments that aim to specifically protect women’s rights. Two of the more significant ones are the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women. Yet, on this matter, your recommended policy statement fails on at least two (2) counts:
1) Reports have it that even to this day, gender-selected forced abortion continues to be practiced in some parts of the world. For instance, the China Aid Association has recently reported that in the 2nd week of April 2007, at least 61 women were forced to abort their unborn female children at the Guangxi Province. Yet, your recommended policy statement fails to give amnesty to these women and their like who are obviously victims of discrimination and violence.
2) It has been well-documented, and now medically recognized, that women who undergo abortion experience various physical, emotional, psychological, and spiritual turmoil. The after-effects, collectively known medically as Post Abortion Syndrome, include adverse medical conditions (e.g. sterility, premature births in subsequent pregnancies, early hysterectomies, and cervical and breast cancers), deep sadness, regret and remorse, guilt feelings, depression, and anxiety disorders. For this reason, Women For Life International, whose membership represents women who have undergone legal abortion, has attested that abortion, legal or otherwise, is degrading, cruel, and a violent act against women, exploiting their vulnerabilities at a very stressful period in their lives. Yet again, your recommended policy statement on abortion fails to recognize the full range of the harmful after-effects of abortion on women, and offers no protection against them.
When an organization like Amnesty International, whose mission it is to defend and promote human rights, urges state authorities to willfully violate the fundamental right to life of persons in their initial stages of childhood, who and what will stop any one from subjecting all others to the same violence, at any time, in any place? Then again, when Amnesty International is indifferent to acts of discrimination and violence against mothers of unborn children, who and what will stop any one from subjecting other women to other forms of discrimination and violence, at any time, in any place? We shudder at the thought!
We appeal to each and every member of your committee to rescind your recommended policy statement on selected aspects of abortion, as we echo John Paul II’s appeal to all: “respect, protect, love, and serve life, every human life! Only in this direction will the world find justice, development, true freedom, peace, and happiness!”
For Human Life and Dignity,
Sr. Mary Pilar Verzosa, RGS
Chair, Pro-Life Philippines Foundation, Inc.
|
|
