Advancing Reproductive Justice in Latin America Through a Transitional Justice Lens

R. Algora
{"title":"Advancing Reproductive Justice in Latin America Through a Transitional Justice Lens","authors":"R. Algora","doi":"10.36641/mjgl.28.2.advancing","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reproductive autonomy is a pivotal part of women’s access to equal citizenship, yet it has not been included in any international nor regional human rights treaty. In the past decades, the U.N. Committees, notably the CEDAW Committee, and regional human rights bodies, particularly the Inter-American System for the Protection of Human Rights, have timidly advanced reproductive justice through their jurisprudence, including through the use of reparations. Drawing from the standards of reparations developed in the field of transitional justice, human rights bodies increasingly rely on reparations to enhance the transformative effects of their decisions. These reparations intend to include a gender-perspective in their design and aim to ensure the non-repetition of human rights violation, not only to the victim, but to society. Constitutional courts in Latin America are increasingly relying on the standards of reparations in their own decisions, including in those on reproductive justice. In this Article, I analyze two recent rulings from Latin American constitutional courts–one from Colombia and one from Ecuador–to understand how courts can use reparations to advance reproductive justice. I analyze these particular rulings for two reasons: (1) Both rulings have the potential to develop reproductive jurisprudence in the region where high courts have traditionally imported international and comparative law to resolve legal debates over reproductive rights; and (2) Both rulings challenge the traditional concept of reparations and offer an opportunity to rethink how the remedy can be deployed in a human rights context.","PeriodicalId":303089,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of Gender & Law","volume":"23 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Journal of Gender & Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36641/mjgl.28.2.advancing","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reproductive autonomy is a pivotal part of women’s access to equal citizenship, yet it has not been included in any international nor regional human rights treaty. In the past decades, the U.N. Committees, notably the CEDAW Committee, and regional human rights bodies, particularly the Inter-American System for the Protection of Human Rights, have timidly advanced reproductive justice through their jurisprudence, including through the use of reparations. Drawing from the standards of reparations developed in the field of transitional justice, human rights bodies increasingly rely on reparations to enhance the transformative effects of their decisions. These reparations intend to include a gender-perspective in their design and aim to ensure the non-repetition of human rights violation, not only to the victim, but to society. Constitutional courts in Latin America are increasingly relying on the standards of reparations in their own decisions, including in those on reproductive justice. In this Article, I analyze two recent rulings from Latin American constitutional courts–one from Colombia and one from Ecuador–to understand how courts can use reparations to advance reproductive justice. I analyze these particular rulings for two reasons: (1) Both rulings have the potential to develop reproductive jurisprudence in the region where high courts have traditionally imported international and comparative law to resolve legal debates over reproductive rights; and (2) Both rulings challenge the traditional concept of reparations and offer an opportunity to rethink how the remedy can be deployed in a human rights context.
从过渡司法的角度推进拉丁美洲的生殖正义
生殖自主是妇女获得平等公民权的关键部分,但尚未列入任何国际或区域人权条约。在过去的几十年里,联合国委员会,特别是消除对妇女歧视委员会,以及区域人权机构,特别是美洲保护人权系统,通过其判例,包括通过使用赔偿,胆怯地推进了生殖正义。根据过渡时期司法领域制定的赔偿标准,人权机构越来越依赖赔偿来加强其决定的变革效果。这些赔偿打算在其设计中纳入性别观点,目的是确保不仅对受害者而且对社会不再发生侵犯人权的行为。拉丁美洲的宪法法院在其自己的决定中,包括在有关生殖司法的决定中,越来越依赖于赔偿标准。在本文中,我分析了拉丁美洲宪法法院最近的两项裁决——一项来自哥伦比亚,另一项来自厄瓜多尔——以了解法院如何利用赔偿来促进生殖正义。我分析这些特殊的裁决有两个原因:(1)这两项裁决都有可能在高等法院传统上引入国际法和比较法来解决有关生殖权利的法律辩论的地区发展生殖法学;(2)这两项裁决都挑战了传统的赔偿概念,并提供了重新思考如何在人权背景下部署补救措施的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信