This is the firstdecision from an international human rights bodythat explicitly recognizes that the prohibition andcriminalization of abortion is a human rights vio-lation in and of itself.
Mellet v. ireland was a milestone where the UN Human Rights Committee declared that banning abortion violates international law. It marks a shift towards viewing abortion not as an exception, but as a core human right.
authorizing access to safe and legalabortion services only on certain grounds under-mines women’s autonomy and decision making byforcing them to carry to term pregnancies againsttheir will
This critiques the "limited grounds" approach, when abortion is allowed only in cases like rape or health risk. The authors argue that this still denies women full autonomy and treats reproductive freedom as conditional rather than inherent.
In 2006, the Colombian ConstitutionalCourt issued a groundbreaking decision over-turning the criminalization of abortion under allcircumstances and finding that, in order to protectwomen’s human rights, abortion must be permit-ted—at a minimum—when pregnancy poses a riskto the woman’s life or physical or mental health;when it results from rape, incest, or unwanted im-pregnation; or when the fetus has an impairmentincompatible with life. 2
This case is a turning point that shows how international human rights principles directly influenced national law. It connects global norms to real world policy, showing how human rights language can redefine legal frameworks
formal legal recognition of these rights isonly a first step toward enabling women to accessabortion care; the complex task of fully implement-ing such laws is essential for guaranteeing women’sand girls’ ability to exercise their reproductiverights.
I agree with this point. It's not enough to just pass a law saying abortion is legal if people still can't get it safely or afford it. I think this shows how human rights don't really mean much unless theyre actually put into action
Theseincreasingly progressive standards have played a critical role in transforming national-level abortionlaws by both influencing domestic high court decisions on abortion and serving as a critical resource inadvancing law and policy reform.
This shows how international human rights can actually change real laws in different countries. I thinks its interesting how global agreements can pressure local governments to update outdated laws. It makes me realize how connected the world is when it comes to human rights.