The latest attack on a country’s protection
of preborn children from the violence of abortion comes from the 52nd
session of the United Nations Committee on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) during review of El Salvador’s
report. The treaty body is supposed to
monitor compliance of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights (ICESCR) which
recognizes that “the inherent dignity and of the equal
and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of
freedom, justice and peace in the world” and that “these rights derive from the
inherent dignity of the human person”, but instead the CESCR was critical and
judgmental of El Salvador’s protection of preborn children from the destruction
of abortion.
In
its observations following El Salvador’s report, the CESCR
urged El Salvador, the State party, to “review its legislation with regard to the total
prohibition of abortion to make it compatible with other fundamental rights
such as health and life of the woman, as well as with their dignity.”
Six of the eighteen committee members—described
on the CESCR website as “independent experts who are persons of high moral
character and recognized competence in the field of human rights”—were highly
critical of El Salvador’s ban on abortion and its 1999 constitutional amendment
“to defend the right to life from conception”. Committee experts revealed their pro-abortion bias
as reported in the official summary of the review.
It was noted that CESCR member Maria-Virginia
Bras Gomes of Portugal called El Salvador’s ban on abortion a form of “discrimination
against women, a violation of the right to health” and charged that it “constituted
failure on the part of the State to provide for those most in need”.
Expressing contempt for belief in the
dignity of life, Colombian Alvaro Tirado Mejia attacked El Salvador for the belief
that “life was still considered to begin at conception” and expressed his
regret at what he called “the apparent regression of government policy
regarding sexual and reproductive health”. He also asked “whether the
Government was making any efforts to change its policy, in step with several
other countries in the region” and if the State would comply with the
recommendations of the Committee and “other entities in that regard”.
The
disdain for El Salvador’s protection of the dignity of the human person from conception
hit a low for arrogance and intolerance when Waleed Sadi from Jordan demanded
to know if El Salvador’s abortion policy was “guided by religious or cultural
considerations”. Heisoo Shin from the
Republic of Korea claimed that the prohibition of abortion had “dire
consequences for women’s health, life and freedom” and urged the State “to do
everything in its power to change its policy” on abortion.
Responses from the official El Salvadoran
delegation included disappointing comments that agreed with the charge that the
1999 constitutional recognition that life begins at conception was
“regressive”. Delegation member Velásquez Centeno,
in official response for the government stated that “Salvadoran law had
regressed in respect of abortion” explaining that there are no legal exceptions
as in the past.
Comments from Delegation member Velásquez de Avilés included an explanation that abortion was “an issue
that generated huge passion, analysis and discussion in El Salvador which was a
very traditional and conservative country” while she called the present law on
abortion “repressive”. She spoke favorably of the work of NGOs and others in El
Salvador who since 1999 have “lobbied tirelessly for legal reform”. She
explained that with civil society support the Minister of Education was “spearheading
a campaign to raise awareness of sexual and reproductive rights”.
In the ongoing dialogue between El Salvador
and the Committee, CESCR member Sadi wanted to know “what forces had been at
work to cause the backtracking on the State party’s previous abortion policy.”
He viewed the low number of convictions for abortion as “inconsistent with the
strictness of the law” charging that it sent conflicting signals concerning the
State party’s commitment to the legislation.
CESCR expert Bras Gomes wanted to know why
the delegation had described El Salvador as a “traditional or conservative
society” and questioned if the delegation knew society’s current views on
abortion and if El Salvador had ever carried out a “dialogue on women’s right
to sexual and reproductive health” as recommended by the Human Rights Committee
in 2010.
PNCI
notes that some CESCR committee members simply could not remove their
pro-abortion lenses to see that El Salvador is in compliance with the CESCE
provision to provide “for the healthy development of the child” by preventing
the death of children through abortion. To urge El Salvador to legalize
abortion is to force it to act counter to the treaty, the task they are
supposed to fulfill. The treaty recognizes “the
inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the
human family” yet the CESCR views the lives of the youngest members of the
human family as expendable.
The
comments and official observations of the CESCE demonstrate profound disrespect
for the sovereign laws and cultural and religious beliefs of El Salvador. Such
statements distort the CESCR treaty and are emblematic of the growing and
disturbing intolerance by UN entities toward national laws and policies.
The
people of El Salvador are among the most pro-life in the world according to the Pew Research Center's 2013 Global Attitudes; 85% of El Salvadorans said having an abortion is
morally unacceptable. They deserve respect for believing in the inherent dignity of the human person, not disdain, from the CESCR.