Council of Europe votes to decriminalise abortion

[Hobo Sapiens]

There are plenty of thread to discuss the substantive issue if you want. No point turning this thread into another abortion discussion.

This thread is not about abortion?

[pro-choice]

baldur0300 please see my first post on this thread. I accept that it is non-binding. But going forward this vote will be referred to in the European Court of Human Rights and by the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Council of Europe.

Of course States can ignore these bodies as well. The Irish state ignored the European Court of Human Rights in the Norris case for years. However in doing that Ireland put itself out the consensus within Europe on gay rights. For oblivious reasons States do not like to be outside the consensus on human rights issues.

I know that you accept that CoE is non-binding, the point that I was making and something the NDS said as well is that PACE is a very limited body. Not only are its views non-binding but it does not have the competence to issue any such proclaimations or demands and if the body were to do so, other countries may threaten to leave on a point of principle.

Ireland has always been outside the Western European consensus as regards abortion. So what? The Supreme Court has in the past threatened to reject any attempt by the ECJ to interfere with our abortion laws, a court which far more powerful than the ECHR and far more relevant to our international interests. I have no doubt that any attempt by the ECtHR to interfere would be met with similar contempt.

The numbers of countries that criminalise abortion is reducing and Ireland is increasing being isolated on the issue.

Countries that enact laws which undermine Human Rights usually justify it by arguing that the international community is unfairly interfering in domestic issues. I would expect that the Irish State will respond initially at least in the same way.

It is my view that the weight of international pressure together with shifting opinions on the abortion issue in Ireland will lead to a change in the law. I accept that public opinion in Ireland will remain a key issue. Of course judgements of the ECHR and votes in the Council of Europe influence the opinions as well.

[pro-choice]

[quote=hiding behind a poster]

By having a very extreme law in Ireland (not legislating for X and forcing pregnant women with fatal feotal abnormalities into the courts) the Irish State is contributing to the situation.

"Pro-choice", you know full well that termination of pregnancy when a medical condition or abnormality threatens the life of the mother does NOT require any court intervention whatsoever. Medical ethics and procedures entitle the relevant medical professionals to terminate such a pregnancy, WITHOUT reference to the courts or the State.[/quote:24v8yht0]

No abortion is only allowed when there is a real and substantive risk to the life as oppose to the health of the woman.

RE: fatal feotal abnormalities I referring Miss D Vs the HSE last year and D Vs Ireland from the European Court of Human Rights in 2006.

[baldur0300]

There are plenty of thread to discuss the substantive issue if you want. No point turning this thread into another abortion discussion.

This thread is not about abortion?

Nope. It's about a report issued by the CoE which so happens to concern abortion.

[baldur0300]

The numbers of countries that criminalise abortion is reducing and Ireland is increasing being isolated on the issue.

The availability of abortion is being reduced, not increased in most EU states. The stage at which it is being allowed is being reduced all the time.

Countries that enact laws which undermine Human Rights usually justify it by arguing that the international community is unfairly interfering in domestic issues. I would expect that the Irish State will respond initially at least in the same way.

Ireland's primary position has been that the issue is completely about human rights, the balancing of the rights of the mother and the child. Many people would find the assertion that being against abortion is about undermining human rights offensive.

It is my view that the weight of international pressure together with shifting opinions on the abortion issue in Ireland will lead to a change in the law. I accept that public opinion in Ireland will remain a key issue. Of course judgements of the ECHR and votes in the Council of Europe influence the opinions as well.

And my view is that the practice will continue to be restricted in other European states until they come around to our position. Guess we'll see who's right in the future. Talk to you in 10 or 20 years.

[NotDevsSon]

baldur0300 please see my first post on this thread. I accept that it is non-binding. But going forward this vote will be referred to in the European Court of Human Rights and by the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Council of Europe.

Of course States can ignore these bodies as well. The Irish state ignored the European Court of Human Rights in the Norris case for years. However in doing that Ireland put itself out the consensus within Europe on gay rights. For oblivious reasons States do not like to be outside the consensus on human rights issues.

I know that you accept that CoE is non-binding, the point that I was making and something the NDS said as well is that PACE is a very limited body. Not only are its views non-binding but it does not have the competence to issue any such proclaimations or demands and if the body were to do so, other countries may threaten to leave on a point of principle.

Ireland has always been outside the Western European consensus as regards abortion. So what? The Supreme Court has in the past threatened to reject any attempt by the ECJ to interfere with our abortion laws, a court which is far more powerful than the ECtHR and far more relevant to our international interests. I have no doubt that any attempt by the ECtHR to interfere would be met with similar contempt.

Pro-choice still doesn't get it. Member states in both the EU and the CoE jealously guard control over certain policy areas. One of the main ones is abortion. Neither countries with liberal abortion laws, conservative abortion laws nor those with no abortion laws will accept any involvement with the CoE in the area of abortion. Liberals in Germany fear the CoE, if it gained control over the issue of abortion, would adopt a stance that while pro-choice would be more restrictive than they want, so they will not tolerate any CoE assumption of a role on the issue. Conservatives fear the CoE would adopt a stance more liberal than they want. Pro-choice and pro-life organisations in most countries actually are both agreed that they want the CoE to keep out of the issue because each fears that a CoE stance would not match fully what they want. In fact a number of states' governments have said in the past that if the CoE crosses a line and tries to set the agenda on that issue, from any angle, they will quit the organisation.

In addition, while the ECHR can issue rulings on issues it cannot overrule explicit constitutional prohibitions. The Irish constitution guarantees the "right to life of the unborn, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother". Therefore the ECHR is legally unable to overrule that. Those words cannot be changed except by constitutional referendum in Ireland. At most, the ECHR may offer an insight the Supreme Court may refer to in interpreting what that section means (taking in account rulings already on the X and C cases). But the ECHR cannot change the clear implication of that section of the Irish constitution, that there is no right to choose to have an abortion because that section makes clear that in Irish constitutional law a pregnancy involves two entities with human rights which should, where "practicable" (a word the article uses) be treated with equality.

So if pro-choice thinks the CoE motion, or even an ECHR ruling, could introduce abortion in Ireland they must have a very poor grasp of Irish constitutional law and ECHR law. The difference between the laws on homosexuality and the laws on abortion are simply that the latter was not mentioned explicitly in the constitution and only featured in a court judgment that could be overturned, and so was referrable, whereas the latter is mentioned explicitly in the constitution's text and so cannot be overturned, merely interpreted.

[NotDevsSon]

The numbers of countries that criminalise abortion is reducing

Incorrect. More and more restrictions on abortion have been imposed on former Soviet bloc countries, while proposals to reduce abortion have been made in recent years in France, Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries and the Nordic countries. It is also expected to be subject to re-examination by the US Supreme Court in the next couple of years.

and Ireland is increasing being isolated on the issue.

Incorrect. The number of countries copying Ireland in placing constitutional prohibitions on abortion is increasing, according to WHO stats.

Countries that enact laws which undermine Human Rights usually justify it by arguing that the international community is unfairly interfering in domestic issues. I would expect that the Irish State will respond initially at least in the same way.

You still completely miss the point of the debate and what Baldur and myself have pointed out.

It is my view that the weight of international pressure together with shifting opinions on the abortion issue in Ireland will lead to a change in the law.

International pressure cannot change Irish constitutional law. Only a constitutional amendment can do that.

I accept that public opinion in Ireland will remain a key issue.

The only issue, as only public opinion can change the constitution.

Of course judgements of the ECHR and votes in the Council of Europe influence the opinions as well.

If you think that you are seriously naive. Most voters don't know what the ECHR is, or what the Council of Europe is. That's the reality anyone who works in politics knows. In the real world, we are doing lucky if only 25% don't know who is the minister for something. 32% in one poll two weeks into a general election didn't know there was a general election on!!! And you think people know what the ECHR is, much less care what it says!!!

[rockofcashel]

The numbers of countries that criminalise abortion is reducing

Incorrect. More and more restrictions on abortion have been imposed on former Soviet bloc countries, while proposals to reduce abortion have been made in recent years in France, Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries and the Nordic countries. It is also expected to be subject to re-examination by the US Supreme Court in the next couple of years.

and Ireland is increasing being isolated on the issue.

Incorrect. The number of countries copying Ireland in placing constitutional prohibitions on abortion is increasing, according to WHO stats.

[quote:qi5j2mr8]Countries that enact laws which undermine Human Rights usually justify it by arguing that the international community is unfairly interfering in domestic issues. I would expect that the Irish State will respond initially at least in the same way.

You still completely miss the point of the debate and what Baldur and myself have pointed out.

It is my view that the weight of international pressure together with shifting opinions on the abortion issue in Ireland will lead to a change in the law.

International pressure cannot change Irish constitutional law. Only a constitutional amendment can do that.

I accept that public opinion in Ireland will remain a key issue.

The only issue, as only public opinion can change the constitution.

Of course judgements of the ECHR and votes in the Council of Europe influence the opinions as well.

If you think that you are seriously naive. Most voters don't know what the ECHR is, or what the Council of Europe is. That's the reality anyone who works in politics knows. In the real world, we are doing lucky if only 25% don't know who is the minister for something. 32% in one poll two weeks into a general election didn't know there was a general election on!!! And you think people know what the ECHR is, much less care what it says!!! [/quote:qi5j2mr8]


Exactly.. so when people produce a story about the Council of Europe approving the decriminalisation of abortion.. how many people will be able to understand whether or not the COE has anything to do with the EU....

They'll just see "Europe wants abortion"

Todays ruling was the worst one possible for the Yes side in Lisbon

[baldur0300]

Definitely it is something that the YES side should tackle. I know very educated people who don't know the difference between the two bodies. But then again most people realise the position of the two major parties is quite pro-life and would be unlikely to support a treaty that had the capacity to introduce abortion. If it comes up on the doors, it just has to be dealt with.

[NotDevsSon]

Definitely it is something that the YES side should tackle. I know very educated people who don't know the difference between the two bodies. But then again most people realise the position of the two major parties is quite pro-life and would be unlikely to support a treaty that had the capacity to introduce abortion. If it comes up on the doors, it just has to be dealt with.

It will have to be tackled. *sigh* Here we go again dealing with friggin' abortion. (Just when people have finally put to bed the nutty claim that the Lisbon treaty will introduce abortion, this arises! I would love to know who originally put this ridiculous idea on the agenda in the CoE and whether they have any links to the No side. I have suspicions as to what is going on with it. I notice how over the last month various No campaigners for no apparently reason have thrown in abortion as a word just to be mentioned in debates. One foreign visitor addressing the Forum 'just happened' to list general issues in the middle of a debate on the treaty to go alphabetically and decide to use for the letter A 'say, abortion'! It was such a blatantly obvious dirty trick it was spotted immediately and he was forced to admit that abortion had nothing to do with the debate, but wouldn't apologise for mentioning it!)