Editor TLN
First modification: Last modification:
San Jose (AFP) – The Inter-American Court of Human Rights concluded this Thursday, March 23, the first hearing in its history related to abortion in the case “Beatriz vs. El Salvador”, after the woman was prohibited from interrupting her pregnancy despite the existence of a vital risk.
Now the case is pending deliberation by the Court, based in San José, to issue a sentence in approximately six months.
Beatriz, whose real name is unknown, was diagnosed in 2013 with the autoimmune disease systemic lupus erythematosus. She was later denied an abortion despite the risk she was running since the fetus presented anencephaly, the absence of brain development during pregnancy.
The authorities denied her an abortion despite the unviability of the fetus. 81 days later the doctors finally performed a C-section. The baby died after five hours.
Beatriz died in 2017 in a traffic accident. The Court began in 2022 the case “Beatriz vs. El Salvador”, the country with one of the most restrictive laws in the world on abortion, prohibited in all cases under prison terms of between two and eight years, according to the organization Human Rights Watch (HRW).
In addition, Salvadoran courts routinely classify abortion as aggravated homicide, which increases the sentence to between 30 and 50 years in prison.
In Latin America, abortion is legal in Argentina, Colombia, Cuba, Uruguay and in some states of Mexico. In Chile it is illegal with the exception of risk to the health of the mother, rape or malformations in the fetus.
In El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Haiti and the Dominican Republic it is absolutely prohibited.
decriminalize abortion
Lawyer Gisela de León, from the Center for Justice and International Law (Cejil) and representative of the family, explained at the hearing that El Salvador’s position “part of the absolute protection of the right to life of the unborn, making it invisible for complete women’s rights”.
For De León, the State considers abortion a “willful” conduct that “intends to eliminate the life of the unborn.”
“The State has to adopt measures among which are the decriminalization of abortion,” he asserted.
“What we really want is for other women not to suffer what my sister had to go through. In the future, this also opens the way (…) to have the opportunity for women to have a chance and not be like my sister, who was denied” an abortion, Beatriz’s brother, Humberto (not his real name), 30, told AFP.
State interference
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) participated in the trial as a prosecutor, after having investigated the case in the first instance and stating that “the State cannot arbitrarily interfere” in the decision of women regarding their reproduction.
The executive secretary of the Commission, Tania Reneaum, explained that El Salvador “incurred in responsibility for omission” since the law “did not guarantee access to the interruption of pregnancy.”
“The rights to life, personal integrity, health and private life that could be benefited during the interruption of the pregnancy were limited in view of the criminalization of abortion,” said Julissa Mantilla, IACHR rapporteur commissioner for El Salvador.
The doctor who treated Beatriz during her pregnancy, gynecologist Guillermo Ortiz, told AFP that the medical board determined that “yes, an abortion had to be done at that time (12 weeks pregnant) to prevent her from harming her health or I might even die.”
El Salvador appeals to the “right to life”
From the defense of the Salvadoran State, the lawyer Juana Acosta stressed that abortion implies “willful conduct” since “when the direct intention sought is to destroy the unborn or seek its death, that is where the criminal cause is specified.”
Next to her, the lawyer Ana María Hidalgo exposed, who argued that the American Convention on Human Rights determines that all people are considered “human beings without distinction.”
“This case involves two human beings, and therefore two holders of conventional rights, Beatriz and her daughter,” said Hidalgo to imply that the right to life is intrinsic to the human being and that Beatriz’s fetus , by the fact of being considered a human being, has the right to life.
And he asked the court that if the fetus “is considered non-human, what other species does it belong to?”
