In December 2010, the European Court of Human Rights settled the case of three Irish women who argued that their well-being had been jeopardized by their need to travel abroad to secure an abortion.

The Court ruling went against the Irish Republic only in the case of the third woman whose continuing pregnancy would have been likely to lead to a rare cancer’s return. As a consequence of the Court’s decision, the Irish law, which prohibited all forms of abortion, was amended this year providing for a woman’s right to an abortion only if her life was at risk, including from suicide.

A prominent UK liberal newspaper commented in its editorial at the time of the Court decision: “Ireland, however, is only one of several European nations to take a restrictive approach and even in Britain there is no absolute right to termination at every stage of pregnancy, with women having to persuade two doctors to agree to her wishes on the basis of restrictive criteria. Legal protections for European citizens are often traced back to the Declaration of the Rights of Man. If the rights of women had instead been declared with the same force throughout history, today’s abortion laws would surely look very different.”

The message in the newspaper’s editorial is quite clear: the human rights of women are being jeopardized where termination of pregnancy at any stage encounters restrictive legal criteria.

Earlier this month, the European Parliament had before it for discussion and decision the Estrela Report (named after the author, the extreme left-wing MEP Edite Estrela who also chaired the related parliamentary committee) which recommended that European Union member states declare abortion as a human right.

The warning signs about abortion as a ‘right’ are there for all to see

In the plenary session of the European Parliament, the decision was taken, by 351 to 319 votes with 18 abstentions, to refer the report back to the parliamentary committee from where it originated.

The Estrela Report is therefore not formally dead. It is most probable that the author, who is known for her strong commitment to the abortion cause, will come back with some form of new recommendations in the not-too-distant-future.

The majority against the recommendation included MEPs from the socialist, communist, Green and liberal parties who normally vote in favour of anything that is packaged to promote ‘women’s rights’. It is most probable that these MEPs were more concerned that the pro-abortion Bill would undermine the sovereignty of member states.

On the other hand, the matter ought to be of concern to the pro-life cause because the proposed legislation failed to pass by a mere 32 votes (or 4.6 per cent of all MEPs). It is now expected that the Estrela committee would carefully analyse the discussion that had taken place in the European Parliament and the vote outcome in order to come up with something less controversial.

The Estrela Report said that “20 member states permit abortion on demand (generally within a gestational limit). Of the seven remaining nations, three have very liberal restrictions regarding abortion while three nations will perform abortions only under more limited circumstances.” It continues: “There are cases reported from Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Poland, Ireland and Italy where nearly 70 per cent of all anaesthesiologists conscientiously object to providing abortion services.”

The report does not place any limits regarding gestational age, leaving open the possibility of abortion until the very day of birth. Doubly disturbing are the severe infringements on conscience protections of physicians, especially gynaecologists and anaesthesiologists.

The measures proposed in the Estrela Report claim to be human rights issues, yet, they fundamentally ignore two basic rights: the right to life of the baby at the centre of the whole issue and the right of the doctor to follow his conscience when s/he is being ordered by legal requirements to suppress a human life after spending years in training and practice to preserve it.

Indeed, in the case of doctors, the proposed legislation seeks to require member nations to “regulate and monitor the use of conscientious objection so as to ensure that reproductive healthcare is guaranteed as an individual’s right, while access to lawful services is ensured and appropriate and affordable referrals systems are in place”.

One should recall that the Council of Europe had passed a resolution on April 16, 2008 calling on all member states to make abortion “an unconditional right”. The resolution was passed with 102 votes in favour, 69 against and 14 abstentions. At the time, I wrote in Times of Malta warning that although the Council of Europe resolution was not binding on member states it was however a forewarning of what was yet to come.

I predicted that it was a matter of time and timing in the battle being waged by the pro-abortionists to have abortion legalised in an unrestricted manner throughout Europe under the guise of a ‘right’.

I will take no pride at all in proving myself correct in my analysis but the warning signs are there for all to see.