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.
Rosario G. Algora,
Advancing Reproductive Justice in Latin America Through a Transitional Justice Lens,
Mich. J. Gender & L.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl/vol28/iss2/2