Lemaitre Julieta, Sieder Rachel
Professor of law at Universidad de los Andes in Bogotá, Colombia, and PRIO Global Fellow.
Senior research professor at CIESAS in Mexico City and associated senior researcher at Christian Michelsen Institute, Bergen, Norway.
Health Hum Rights. 2017 Jun;19(1):149-160.
Feminists and religious conservatives across the globe have increasingly turned to courts in their battles over abortion. Yet while a significant literature analyzes legal mobilization on abortion issues, it tends to focus predominantly on domestic scenarios. In this article, we consider the effects of this contentious engagement of pro-choice and anti-abortion movements in international human rights fora, asking what happens to social movement claims when they reach international human rights courts. We answer the question through a detailed description of a single case, , decided by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in 2012 but with ongoing repercussions for abortion rights, given its authoritative interpretation of embryonic right to life. Through our analysis of , we show how legal mobilization before international human rights courts moderates social movement claims within the legal arena, as rivals respond to one another and argue within the frame of courts' norms and language.
全球各地的女权主义者和宗教保守派在堕胎问题的斗争中越来越多地诉诸法庭。然而，虽然有大量文献分析了围绕堕胎问题的法律动员，但这些文献主要集中在国内情况。在本文中，我们探讨支持堕胎权和反对堕胎运动在国际人权论坛上的这种争议性参与所产生的影响，追问当社会运动诉求提交到国际人权法庭时会发生什么。我们通过详细描述一个单一案例来回答这个问题，该案例由美洲人权法院于2012年裁决，但鉴于其对胚胎生命权的权威性解释，对堕胎权仍有持续影响。通过对该案例的分析，我们展示了在国际人权法庭之前的法律动员如何在法律领域内缓和社会运动诉求，因为对手们相互回应并在法庭规范和语言的框架内进行辩论。
