Ireland appeared before the Human Rights Committee (HRC) to present its fourth periodic report on compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and was pressured to expand access to abortion, despite silence of the treaty on the issue, and despite the fact that Ireland only legalized abortion for life of the mother and threat of suicide exceptions this year. 

The official HRC news account of the review reported that "easing restrictions for abortion" was one of the main discussion topics and stated that one unnamed Committee expert asked if the Irish people had ever been given the chance to vote on reducing restrictions on abortion.  This expert asserted that the HRC values the right to life and health of the mother first but failed to acknowledge that the Irish Constitution affirms the equal right to life of both. 

Another Committee member stated that it was "regrettable that Ireland did not show readiness to expand the list of criteria for abortion" while adding that the 2013 act to legalize abortion represented a "step forward regarding the life of the mother."  

In regards to Irish law on abortion, a member of the Irish delegation explained that it had "evolved over time and in the democratic process" with the attempt to "seek a careful balance between the provisions on the life of the unborn and protecting the life of the mother".  The delegation affirmed that "protecting life was a central tenet of Ireland's national and international obligations" and that there had been five separate referendums on abortion.       

Of the many NGOs present for the review, one pro-life organization, Family and Life, was able to make an oral presentation. It had also submitted a written statement in advance of the review, an effective and strategic action. All related documents can be found on the HRC website by Ireland's flag.  

Family and Life reported that the chairman described the pro-life submission as "breathtakingly arrogant", while "denying that the unborn child is an existent human being".  

Pro-Life Campaign in Ireland also attended the review and witnessed the participation of fully invested pro-abortion NGOs. Legal adviser Lorcan Price stated:  

"I sincerely hope the UN Human Rights Committee will defend the right to life and reject the international push from US based groups like the Center for Reproductive Rights who are determined to impose an abortion regime on Ireland.The UN knows that there is no international right to abortion in law. If the UN were to adopt a position explicitly endorsing abortion, it would do incalculable damage to its credibility as a protector of genuine human rights."

Read PNCI's extended report here.

PNCI encourages pro-life organizations globally to monitor their countries reporting schedule to UN treaty monitoring bodies for opportunities to submit written statements expressing their concerns.

The Peruvian health ministry issued regulations to permit access to abortion in some circumstances as allowed in a 1924 law. A so-called 'therapeutic abortions protocol' entitled the "National Technical Guide for the standardization of the comprehensive care procedure of pregnant women in the voluntary termination due to therapeutic indication of pregnancy less than 22 weeks with informed consent under the provisions of Article 119 of the Criminal Code" was enacted to allow abortion for the life or health of the mother. There is concern that the health exception will be loosely interpreted resulting in broad access to abortion. 

The regulatory change was announced as Peru was scheduled to appear before the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) which in 2011 under the optional protocol had recommended that Peru guarantee access to abortion for legal exceptions and in cases when a child was conceived in rape.

The regulation was defined by Health Minister Midori de Habich: "To be applicable, abortion should be the only way to save a mother's life or avoid serious and permanent damage to her health", explaining that abortion in such cases was never practiced because of a lack of a treatment protocol. The regulation does not include the rape exception.   

The Minister of Women and Vulnerable Populations, Carmen Omonte, was extremely supportive of the new abortion protocol stating that its enactment is "repaying an historic debt with the women of this country" and added, "The guide is part of the comprehensive public policy of respect for sexual and reproductive rights of women. It places Peru at the level of other countries that have taken important steps in promoting the rights of women to have access to healthcare."

In response, the Archbishop of Trujillo, H.E. Mgr. Miguel Cabrejos Vidarte, expressed his strong opposition to the abortion protocol in a letter to Peruvian President Humala that listed 16 points that demonstrate how the abortion provision is unconstitutional, legally wrong and creates confusion. Number 6 reads: "In our Penal Code, abortion is a crime, but this resolution wants to cover up this crime as simply a 'voluntary termination', which is confusing and leaves the door open to present abortion as something that could be decriminalized". Number 13 reads: "We all want progress and the well-being of Peru, but one cannot decide to move forward when its State is given a provision that eliminates the life of their children".

Former Health minister Dr. Luis Solari correctly raised concern that the government had acted under pressure from the United Nations, a pressure he said that he has witnessed escalate since 2006 when he was minister.  In regards to the abortion protocol, Dr. Solari explained that only four or five countries in Latin America have an abortion protocol, because "Everyone knows that these are situations that have been practically overcome by science and medicine."    

A statement by the Catholic bishops of Peru also asserted the need to protect the lives of both mother and child, "This ministerial regulation as well as being immoral is also unconstitutional and illegal. Both the pregnant mother and the unborn have the same right to life, both must be protected by the State."   

"The guidelines are part of the recommendations of a groundbreaking 2011 ruling from the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)... CEDAW recommended  that Perú amend its law to allow abortion in cases of rape; ensure the availability of those abortion services; and guarantee access to abortion services when a woman's life or health is in danger-circumstances under which abortion is already legal in the country." 

It important to note that the CEDAW treaty is silent on abortion but committee members continue to distort it to advance access to abortion, acting outside the treaty body's mandate.

The first International Pro-Life Conference in Nigeria was hosted by the Catholic Bishops Conference, in collaboration with the Culture of Life Africa and the Action Family Foundation; the two-day conference included a March for Life rally. Organizers explained that the conference was designed to help develop strategies that included defending the sanctity and dignity of human life. It brought together twelve Nigerian Catholic bishops and archbishops, fifteen speakers from Africa, Europe and the U.S.A., including Congressman Chris Smith and John Smeaton of SPUC UK, and over 1500 attendees. An EWTN TV crew filmed the event with former MEP Dana Scallon acting as host for the new series and documentary on global pro-life actions.

The conference was partly in response to Pope Francis' convocation of a special Synod dedicated to the family which is slated for October 2014 and partly in response to what was described as the "disturbing encroachment of the Culture of Death in Nigeria." The Pontifical Council for the Laity posted news of the event, including a communiqué that was released at the end of the conference and published in leading Nigerian secular newspapers.

The communiqué included the following declarations:

• Every conceived child is formed and perfected in the image and likeness of God. Human life therefore begins at the moment of conception, and must be protected until natural death. Nigerians love life, welcome children as precious gifts, celebrate motherhood and uphold marriage as a union between man and woman.

• To be Pro-Life is to be Pro-Christ for Jesus came to give life and life to the full (Cf. John, 10:10). It is imperative for the Catholic Church and all religious organizations in Nigeria to be more courageous and consistent in Pro-Life activities in favour of human life, marriage and the family as counter-cultural antidotes to anti-life ideologies and practices. This call is urgent as the battle against life, marriage and family in Nigeria has become more intense at both the federal and state legislative sectors.

• People in public service have a profound moral duty to protect the weakest and the most vulnerable from all threats. Professionals and practitioners of media have a special responsibility before God in this regard. The right to life - the most basic of all human rights - applies to all, regardless of race, colour, creed, sex, religion, state of physical health, age, stage of development or condition of dependency. Policies and programmes ought to reckon with this fact of our common humanity.

• The relentless promotion by some international organizations of "sexual and reproductive rights", a euphemism for abortion, is deceptive and unacceptable. Accordingly, we ask that all legislations for abortion, which is the intentional killing of innocent babies in the womb, be denounced and abrogated. We remain resolved in our efforts to ensure that abortion is never legalized in our country.

Reflecting on the conference, co-organizer Obianuju Ekeocha, founder of Culture of Life Africa, stated:

Archbishop Kaigama, president of the Nigerian Catholic Bishops' Conference, stated, "We cannot be terrorized into doing anything to diminish life and the family. We don't want an abortion industry in Africa. We want industries which produce food, which builds homes and roads, and other practical things which people need." 

The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the conscience rights of business owners in a landmark victory for religious freedom in the case Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. Under President Obama's healthcare plan, the Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate requires organizations to pay for twenty different birth control products for employees, including four which are abortifacients. Hobby Lobby, a Christian and family run company, refused to comply with the mandate in regards to the four abortifacients, charging doing so violated their religious beliefs and filed suit challenging the mandate.

In its decision, written by Justice Samuel Alito, the Court said the mandate "substantially burdens the exercise of religion", and that it violated the 1993 Religious Freedom and Restoration Act. "If the owners comply with the HHS mandate, they believe they will be facilitating abortions, and if they do not comply, they will pay a very heavy price - as much as $1.3 million per day, or about $475 million per year, in the case of one of the companies," the Court stated. "If these consequences do not amount to a substantial burden, it is hard to see what would." 

Barbara Green, co-founder of Hobby Lobby, said of the ruling: "Our family is overjoyed by the Supreme Court's decision. Today the nation's highest court has re-affirmed the vital importance of religious liberty as one of our country's founding principles. The Court's decision is a victory, not just for our family business, but for all who seek to live out their faith. We are grateful to God and to those who have supported us on this difficult journey."

In a historic victory for pro-life Americans, the United States Supreme Court unanimously struck down a Massachusetts law banning pro-life sidewalk counseling outside abortion clinics. The justices ruled in McCullen v. Coakle that the law was unconstitutional, affirming pro-lifers' First Amendment rights.

The suit challenging the law was brought forth by 77 year-old grandmother Eleanor McCullen and other pro-life advocates who offer sidewalk counseling to women entering abortion clinics and was represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom. Massachusetts' 2007 law on abortion clinic protest had created 35 feet "no pro-life speech zones", so-called "buffer zones" around abortion clinics, which extended onto public sidewalks. The policy targeted any form of protest to abortion, verbally or silently. Pro-life advocates wearing a pro-life t-shirt, holding a sign, or distributing pamphlets while in the "no pro-life speech zone" outside an abortion clinic could be arrested and convicted of criminal charges. The law both censored and discriminated against anyone expressing pro-life views while clinic employees could say whatever they wanted within the restricted zone.

The Court ruled unanimously that the Massachusetts law violates the First Amendment, noting, "By its very terms, the Act restricts access to 'public way[s]' and 'sidewalk[s],' places that have traditionally been open for speech activities and that the Court has accordingly labeled 'traditional public fora.'" However, Justices split on the reason why. The majority opinion, backed by Justices Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, found the law unconstitutional because its limits on speech were too broad. Meanwhile, the minority opinion, supported by Justices Alito, Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas, said the law unfairly restricted pro-life speech but allowed abortion clinic employees to speak freely.

Justice Alito, concurring in judgment, called the Massachusetts law "blatant viewpoint discrimination".

PNCI's full report can be found here.

Mexico City's legislature has passed legislation to provide the "morning after" pill free to adolescents as young as 12. The bill will make contraceptives, including emergency contraception, available for free at all Mexico City's health centers, including Marie Stopes clinics. The legislation now awaits the signature of Chief of Government Miguel Mancera, whom pro-life and pro-family groups are lobbying to veto the bill. Dr. Jorge Sepulveda, a gynecologist and member of the Medical Association of Monclova, warned of the already high use of the "morning after" pill as a contraceptive: "There are patients that take it two or three times a month and have severe issues." He also noted that the rate of young women with unintended pregnancies has significantly risen with the availability of emergency contraception.

The Israeli Knesset is debating new legislation to permit assisted suicide. The controversial bill was approved by the Ministerial Committee for Legislative Affairs in a vote of 8-2 and has strong support among Knesset members. Religious leaders oppose it, saying a doctor's responsibility is to heal. In the Jerusalem Post, Rabbi Shimshon Hakohen Nadel wrote, "The State of Israel is the Jewish state, and religious affiliations aside, Judaism values life above all. In Judaism, life has sanctity. A law legalizing physician-assisted suicide threatens to undermine the Jewish character of the Jewish state." The bill now awaits further action by the Knesset.

Faruqi and pro-abortion activists are attempting to legalize abortion before final approval of Zoe's Law which they fear "will create human rights for a foetus and so it will become very difficult for a judge to rule that abortion is legal". 

According to Faruqi, "Foetal personhood would change the way NSW law conceptualises pregnant women and the foetuses they carry. Judges would have to factor in parliament's new definition of a foetus as a person when considering whose rights take precedence."

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk recently told Polish doctors they should perform abortions, even if they are morally opposed. "Regardless of what his conscience is telling him", Tusk said a doctor "must carry out the law." His comments were made in reference to a Roman Catholic physician, Bogdan Chazan, who refused to perform an abortion on a disabled unborn baby because of his moral opposition. Chazan is among 3,000 Polish doctors who have signed a declaration expressing their opposition to abortion and euthanasia.

A Czech government adviser was forced to resign for promoting euthanasia for disabled children. Miroslav Mitloehner, who was director of the Institute of Social Work at Hradec Kralove University and served on the Labor Ministry's scientific council, said babies with disabilities are "freaks" and should be terminated without parents' consent. "It makes no sense to prolong the life of a baby born as a monster," he stated. Mitloehner's comments supporting eugenics reflect the dangerously slippery slope of euthanasia, which is already permitted in Belgium and the Netherlands for children.