Repoliticizing
Sexual and Reproductive
Health and Rights
Human Rights Approach
Wanda Nowicka
Objectives
 In my analysis I am reviewing the current
status of sexual and reproductive health and
rights (SRHR) globally.
 I am also trying to throw some ideas on
possible ways how to move SRHR agenda
forward by, among others, repoliticizing
these issues in political agenda.
Conceptual comments



Conceptual comments about my understanding of the term SRHR especially
sexual rights.
I understand sexual rights very broadly as embracing all rights related to
sexuality. Opposite to what contained in narrowly interpreted international
definitions, sexual rights are broader concept than reproductive rights as
reproduction is only one of many aspects of sexuality. Therefore, sexual rights
cover all issues related to sexuality. They encompass sexual orientation and
gender identity. Sexual rights enable individuals full and positive enjoyment of
their sexuality. They include all forms of prevention such as sexuality education
for adolescents, prevention of sexual violence and exploitation but also
reproductive choices of all despite their sexual orientation and gender identity.
However, in this paper I will almost not address sexual orientation and gender
identity due to the limited space and insufficient competencies on my part. My
focus will be rather on reproductive rights especially on the right to abortion.
In general, use the term SRHR as a full package of rights used a lot by
international community as addressing all rights related to sexuality and
reproduction without clearly defining and distinguishing them.
Not addressed
 I am NOT analyzing the problem which certainly deserves thorough
analysis – the phenomenon of vanishing SRHR, especially abortion
issue, from debates in which these issues should definitely be
addressed. I mean in particular the debates about maternal health,
maternal and infant mortality.
 It is particularly disappointing if non-governmental organizations which
should be in forefront of standard setting and have huge resources to
do so, choose to avoid SRHR in its entirety due to controversies such
issues might cause.
Major Successes
 National level
 abolishment of Indian “Sodomy” Law
 Strict anti-abortion law in Nepal has been liberalized in 2004
 In 2006 the Constitutional Court of Colombia overturned country
restrictive ban on abortion, allowing voluntary terminations in cases of
rape, fetal malformation, or when the life or health of the woman or
fetus is in danger.
 Abortion has been also liberalized in South Africa (1994), Ethiopia
(2005) and Mexico Federal District (2007). In Europe abortion was
liberalized in Switzerland (2002), Portugal (2007) and Spain (2010).
Major Successes con’t
At the UN
 Treaty Monitoring Bodies (TMBs)

The Human Rights Committee has adopted the groundbreaking General Comment on equal
right of men and women to the enjoyment of all civil and political rights in 2000 in which
reproductive health issues of women, incl. maternal mortality and unsafe abortions must be
reported by the governments.
The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) has adopted
among others GC on women’s health (1999) . In the introduction the Committee affirmed that
access to health care, including reproductive health is a basic right under the Convention on
the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.

Human right committees address strongly women’s rights including SRHR in the monitoring
processes of the states compliance with the conventions. They continue to issue powerful
concluding observations on these issues. A number of committees including CEDAW in its
recommendations on Ecuador in 2008 and CESCR on Poland in 2009 issued strong
recommendations on abortion.
The Committee against Torture (CAT) at its 42nd session (2009) in Geneva expressed its
profound concern about Nicaragua’s strict ban on abortion. The Committee described the
criminalization of abortion under any circumstances in Nicaragua as a violation of human
rights.


Conclusion. Progress has been possible at expert bodies not political bodies
Major Successes con’t
 Litigations
 KL against Peru (UN HRC)
 Alicja Tysiac against Poland (ECHR)
 Litigations have significant potential in
strengthening SRHR. However, the fact that the
cases need to be brought up to courts by
individuals poses major limitations to such legal
measures.

Global arena – challenges to
implementation

 MDGs – opportunity or drawback?
 Not much has been achieved, especially in the context of another
global strategy – Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) adopted in
2000 which focusing on the basic needs of the least developed
countries such as poverty alleviation, basic healthcare, primary
education, AIDS pandemic, essentially lost human rights perspective in
a first place. The MDG framework forced many women’s groups to
engage for a number of years with this process in order to mainstream
into it SRHR issues to full possible extent with significant successes.
Certainly though in spite of some successful policies and programs
implemented under MDGs, the MDG framework had not had much
potential to progressive development of human rights.
Global arena – challenges to implementation
con’t
 UN Human Rights Council
 UPR
 Challenges to the universality of human rights
Two highly controversial resolutions “Combating Defamation
of Religions” (2007) and the resolution on traditional values
(Promoting human rights and fundamental freedoms
through better understanding of traditional values of
humankind) (2009)
Human rights of women in Europe
 European Union and Human Rights

Chilling effect to the advancement of human rights especially SRHR has been a
result to some degree of the Enlargement process of the EU in 2004, when Poland
and Malta joined the EU and together with “the old” EU member – Ireland –
increasingly and more assertively form a kind of “the unholy alliance” – coalition
which has been breaking the consensus regarding rights related to sexuality and
reproduction issues in numerous EU and UN meetings and other international
forums.

Currently, the major threat to reproductive rights in Europe we are facing now,
appeared as a result of the anti-discrimination directive (Council Directive on
implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of
religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation) which is now under
negotiations among EU governments and if adopted may lead to exclusion of
reproductive rights from new EU binding human rights law. The draft as it is now
explicitly states that the Directive “does not apply to laws on reproductive rights.”
Human rights of women in Europe con’t
Council of Europe
Resolution on safe and legal abortion in Europe (2008).
“The (Parliamentary) Assembly affirms the right of all human beings, in particular
women, to respect for their physical integrity and to freedom to control their own
bodies. In this context, the ultimate decision on whether or not to have an abortion
should be a matter for the woman concerned, who should have the means of
exercising this right in an effective way. (…) 7. The Assembly invites the member
states of the Council of Europe to: 7.1. decriminalize abortion within reasonable
gestational limits, if they have not already done so; 7.2. guarantee women’s
effective exercise of their right of access to a safe and legal abortion; 7.3. allow
women freedom of choice and offer the conditions for a free and enlightened
choice without specifically promoting abortion.”
Unfortunately, the resolutions of the CoE do not have a binding character,
however, it is certainly of moral significance that first international institution
agreed on the woman’s right to decide.
Moving forward
 The SRHR agenda has become gradually depoliticized,
especially since 21st century, when no serious efforts
have been made to push it forward. Due to extremely
unfavorable political environment NGOs working on
SRHR issues chose strategically not to propose
initiatives going beyond Cairo, Beijing and other
international agreements on the assumption that it
would be unrealistic to believe in progressive change.
Rather the opposite, many believed that the more
offensive approach the more backfire effect it could
have.
Moving forward con’t
 For a couple of years women’s movements proactively made efforts to
bring new actors to the table which included social movements – youth
movements, human rights movements, LGBTQI, HIV/AIDS, sex
workers – most of which equally or even more marginalized. This
outreach needs to be continued and strengthened by developing
partnerships with trade unions, professional organizations (health
providers, lawyers, media etc.), educational institutions etc. On the
other hand, women’s movements are still very weak and marginalized
while confronted with other movements. The attempts to mainstream
gender issues into other movements have rather moderate successes,
gender remains to be on the margins rather than being fully integrated.
World Social Forums could be only one example. Lessons need to be
learnt how to mutually support and more efficiently integrate our
agendas with other movements, especially the stronger ones.
Moving forward con’t



Paradoxically, the global economic crisis might create such a window of
opportunity. The crisis made many people highly unsatisfied, abandoned and
unsecured. Among many problems such as unemployment, shrinking social
security systems, access to health care is a big issue. In so many places public
health care is not functional and private health care is non-affordable.
The challenge remains, though, how to channel these feelings into positive energy
which would push progressive development, how within this framework promote
human rights including SRHR. We certainly should focus more on economic rights
as human rights and how they relate to SRHR. We know how economic situation
impacts and often limits people’s reproductive choices and influences decisions.
Therefore, in movement building and repoliticising its agenda, the global crisis
and its impact on SRHR has potential to generate significant mobilization.
I’ am truely grateful to Rhonda Copelon for all insightful comments and
suggestions which moved the paper into new direction.