Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T17:14:31.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - Constitutional Incorporation of International and Comparative Human Rights Law: The Colombian Constitutional Court Decision C-355/2006

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

Susan H. Williams
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

In 2006, the Constitutional Court of Colombia declared unconstitutional a statute criminalizing abortion under all circumstances. The Court ruled that abortion should be legally permitted when:

  1. the continuation of pregnancy presents a risk to the life or physical or mental health of the woman;

  2. there are serious malformations that make the fetus nonviable; or

  3. the pregnancy is the result of a criminal act of rape, incest, unwanted artificial insemination or unwanted implantation of a fertilized ovum.

The Court held that banning abortion to protect fetal interests in these cases would violate women's fundamental rights, because criminalization under such circumstances places a disproportionate burden on women's exercise of human rights protected by the 1991 Colombian Constitution and by international human rights law.

This paper analyzes how the Court protected the rights of pregnant women in the abortion context by incorporating regional and international human rights law within its judicial review of the abortion legislation, giving constitutional status to human rights treaties ratified by Colombia. It also describes the reasoning of the Court regarding the status of the unborn under Colombian and international law, the way the Court balanced the constitutionally required protection of the unborn with the rights of women, and the borrowings the Court made of comparative law and jurisprudence. It explains how the Court enriched the meaning of the dignity of women by interpreting constitutional provisions in light of international human rights sources with a feminist perspective, and laid a foundation for protecting the reproductive rights of women in countries that are parties to the treaties on which the Court relies.

Type
Chapter
Information
Constituting Equality
Gender Equality and Comparative Constitutional Law
, pp. 215 - 247
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Safe Abortion: Technical and Policy Guidance for Health Systems, (Geneva: WHO, 2003)
Ramelli, Alejandro, Sistema de Fuentes del Derecho Internacional Público y Bloque de Constitucionalidad en Colombia, 11 Cuestiones Constitucionales157–175
Knop, Karen, Here and There: International Law in Domestic Courts, 32 N.Y.U. J. Int'l L.& Policy 503 (2000)Google Scholar
Siegel, Reva, Reasoning from the Body: A Historical Perspective on Abortion Regulation and Questions of Equal Protection, 44 Stan. L. Rev. 261 (1992)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siegel, Reva, Sex Equality Arguments for Reproductive Rights: Their Critical Basis and Evolving Constitutional Expression, 56 Emory Law Journal815–842 (2007)Google Scholar
Cook, Rebecca & Howard, Susannah, Accommodating Women's Differences under the Women's Anti-Discrimination Convention, 56 Emory Law Journal1039–1091 (2007)Google Scholar
MacKinnon, Catherine, Reflections on Sex Equality Under Law, 100 Yale Law Journal1281 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crane, Barbara et al., Abortion, Social Inequity and Women's Health, 94 Int'l J. of Gyn. and Obstet. 310–316 (2006)Google Scholar
Sedgh, Gilda et al., Induced Abortion: estimated rates and trends worldwide, 370 Lancet1338–1345 (2007)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marston, C. and Cleland, J., Relationships Between Contraception and Abortion: A Review of the Evidence, 29(1) Int'l Family Planning Perspectives6–13 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fineman, Martha L., Contexts and Comparisons (Book Review), 55 U. Chi. L. Rev1431 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Jane Maslow, Comparison-Shopping in the Marketplace of Rights (Book Review), 98 Yale L.J. 1235 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nedelsky, Jennifer, Communities of Judgment and Human Rights, 1(2) Theoretical Inquiries in Law32 (2000)Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×