The Catholic Thing
HOME        ARCHIVES        IN THE NEWS        COMMENTARY        NOTABLE        DONATE
The San José Articles Print E-mail
By Austin Ruse   
Friday, 07 October 2011

High U.N. officials routinely tell countries around the world there is an international right to abortion that governments must protect. Only a few weeks ago, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Health issued a report to the Secretary General that such a right exists under the “right to health.” The Secretary General endorsed the report. A few days later the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said the same thing.

What they say is false. There is no such agreed upon right. No U.N. treaty mentions abortion. And the issue is so unsettled internationally that it could not have possibly achieved international legal status under common practice. Still, they maintain the falsehood.

Sadly, many governments have listened. A few years ago, the high court of Colombia struck down that country’s abortion laws based on the statements of a U.N. committee. Two judges of the Mexican high court also endorsed this view. And there will be others. What’s more, Catholic countries are particularly targeted – and so is undermining the authority of the bishops around the world. 

Enter the San José Articles.

Professor Robert George of Princeton and former U.S. Ambassador Grover Joseph Rees launched the San José Articles yesterday in the press briefing room at U.N. headquarters in New York. They are two of twenty-nine drafters and signers of this new document that some are calling the most important international pro-life document of our time.

In nine short Articles, the document establishes the scientific fact of the unborn child’s humanity; connects the unborn child to the human family; and, therefore, seeks to establish the unborn child’s protection in international law.

 
       Ambassador Grover Joseph Rees

The document goes on to say, “There exists no right to abortion under international law, either by way of treaty obligation or under customary international law. No United Nations treaty can accurately be cited as establishing or recognizing a right to abortion.”

The Articles point a finger at certain U.N. committees that make such assertions and makes clear: “Treaty monitoring bodies have no authority, either under treaties that created them or under general international law, to interpret these treaties in ways that create new state obligations or that alter the substance of the treaties. Accordingly, any such body that interprets a treaty to include a right to abortion acts beyond its authority and contrary to its mandate.”

Taking a more positive approach, the Articles assert that unborn children are already protected in international law and that governments should invoke existing treaties to protect them from abortion. Footnotes cite numerous treaties that could be invoked for such a purpose including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Political, Cultural and Social Rights.

What the Articles say is as important as who is saying it. Besides Robert George and Joseph Rees, signers include Professor John Finnis of Oxford, Professor John Haldane of St. Andrews, Professor Carter Snead of Notre Dame and UNESCO’s International Committee on Bioethics, Lord David Alton of the British House of Lords, Lord Nicholas Windsor (a member of the Royal Family of Great Britain), Professor Giuseppe Benagiano (former head of the International Association of OB-GYNs), Francisco Tatad (former majority leader of the Philippine Senate), Javier Borrego (former judge of the European Court of Human Rights), and Luca Volonté (member of the Council of Europe and president of the People’s Party/Christian Democrat group at the Council).


          Professor Robert George 

Professor George and Ambassador Rees along with Carter Snead of Notre Dame Law, and Susan Yoshihara of the International Organizations Research Group drafted the document initially. Twenty eventual signers negotiated the document in an intense two-day session in San José, Costa Rica last spring.

Besides the United Nations, over the next four weeks the document is being launched in the British House of Lords, the European Parliament in Strasbourg, the Italian Parliament, the World Pro-Life Congress in San José, the Canadian National Pro-Life Conference in Calgary, as well as at venues in Madrid, Santiago, Buenos Aires, and Washington D. C.

Ambassador Rees said, “When I was (U.S. Ambassador to) Timor I witnessed first-hand a sustained effort by some international civil servants and representatives of foreign NGOs to bully a small developing country into repealing its pro-life laws. The problem is that people on the ground, even government officials, have little with which to refute the extravagant claim that abortion is an internationally recognized human right. The San José Articles are intended to help them fight back.”

Professor George said, “The San José Articles were drafted by a large group of experts in law, medicine, and public policy. The Articles will support and assist those around the world who are coming under pressure from U.N. personnel and others who say falsely that governments are required by international law to repeal domestic laws protecting human beings in the embryonic and fetal stages of development against the violence of abortion.”

The document comes just in time. Right this second, somewhere in the world, a U.N. official or an American human-rights lawyer is telling a government official that his country is treaty bound to legalize abortion. Unless he is up on the day-to-day debate at the United Nations,  and, therefore, knows this is a false assertion, he will be defenseless to argue back. Signers of the San José Articles are counting on this person having the Articles in his desk so he can pull them out and say, “Not so fast. These experts disagree. So who are you to tell us what to do?”


Austin Ruse is the President of the New York and Washinton, D.C.-based Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), a research institute that focuses exclusively on international social policy. The opinions expressed here are Mr. Ruse’s alone and do not necessarily reflect the policies or positions of C-FAM.

©2011 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Rules for Commenting

The Catholic Thing welcomes comments, which should reflect a sense of brevity and a spirit of Christian civility, and which, as discretion indicates, we reserve the right to publish or not. And, please, do not include links to other websites; we simply haven't time to check them all.

Comments (6)Add Comment
0
...
written by M., October 06, 2011
How could these UN functionaries call themselves men, promoting the killing of babies?

Christian Knights! ... WIN!
0
...
written by Beth, October 07, 2011
The names of most of the members of this committee are not familiar to me, but Robert George's is. I am thankful for his intellect, his passion, and his relative youth and appreciate the sacrifices he must be making as he relentlessly advocates for the youngest among us. Prayers of gratitude and for continued good health of all the authors of the San Jose Articles.
0
...
written by Gary, October 07, 2011
The light expands! If neutrinos can travel faster than the speed of light, then men and women of goodwill, recognizing the natural law and cooperating with divine grace, can restore a Culture of Life. (Pace' RBH.) Praise be to God for this development and for the authors of the San Jose' Articles, and for Mr. Ruse's continuing good work at the UN.
0
...
written by michael, October 09, 2011
Religious superstition aside, a woman's body is her own, and abortion is a right.
The idea that a clump of cells is a person is an insult to reason. An acorn is not an oak tree.
0
...
written by Denverite, October 10, 2011
My comment in response to the article (and the Articles): - How wonderfully Providential it is that the Articles would be named after Saint Joseph! Redemptoris Custos, Guardian adn Protector of the Redeemer (in utero and in childhood), pray for us! My his prayers be invoked each time these Articles are mentioned!

My brief response to Michael: I am afraid your comment is an insult to reason, not also to mention religious persons, not to mention also to mothers, not to mention also to the very definition of a "right." If you are going to advocate for a position, then please do so; it is far more helpful than positing a non sequitur as the begining and end of your argument.
0
...
written by HV Observer, October 11, 2011
Is the text of the San José Articles posted somewhere? I don't see any links here or in other places.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 

Other Articles By This Author

CONTACT US FOR ADVERTISERS ABOUT US
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner