Therefore, the court determinedthat all women and girls who become pregnant asa result of rape can access legal abortion services.Furthermore, the court clarified that these womenand girls are not required to provide evidence of therape or to receive judicial authorization before pro-curing an abortion. To this end, the court invokedUN treaty body standards reprimanding Argentinafor failing to guarantee timely access to legal abor-tion services and for the judiciary’s “interference”with such access

They have condemned absolutebans on abortion as being incompatible with inter-national human rights norms and have urged statesto eliminate punitive measures for women and girlswho undergo abortions and for health care provid-ers who deliver abortion services. 10 Moreover, theyhave called on states to decriminalize abortion, ata minimum, when the pregnancy poses a risk tothe woman’s life or health, when the pregnancyresults from rape or incest, and in cases of severefetal abnormality. 11 Furthermore, in the landmarkcase of L.C. v. Peru, the Committee on the Elimi-nation of Discrimination against Women (CEDAWCommittee) explicitly instructed a state party todecriminalize abortion in cases of rape, markingthe first instance in which a human rights body hasexplicitly directed a state to liberalize its abortionlaw as a result of an individual communication

International and regional human rights normshave also been a key tool in lobbying and influencinglegislatures to liberalize abortion laws and establishpolicies to ensure access to safe and legal abortionservices. For example, in 2010, Spain enacted asexual and reproductive health law authorizingabortion without restriction as to reason. The lawitself indicates that it seeks to bring Spain in linewith the “international consensus” on reproductiverights. It explicitly looks to CEDAW’s recognitionof the unique impact of pregnancy and childbear-ing on women and considers the Convention on theRights of Persons with Disabilities’ reproductiverights protections.53