November, 20 2015, 12:15pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
Abortion is Not a Crime, Doctors Warn Governments
Doctors and health professionals from every region of the world today added their voices to the growing pressure for the decriminalization of abortion, with 838 from 44 countries signing an open letter to governments published today by Amnesty International.
The letter calls on governments to stop interfering with health professionals' ability to provide care, warning that criminalizing abortion puts women and girls' health and lives at risk.
WORLDWIDE
Doctors and health professionals from every region of the world today added their voices to the growing pressure for the decriminalization of abortion, with 838 from 44 countries signing an open letter to governments published today by Amnesty International.
The letter calls on governments to stop interfering with health professionals' ability to provide care, warning that criminalizing abortion puts women and girls' health and lives at risk.
"The criminalization of abortion prevents healthcare providers from delivering timely, medically indicated care in accordance with their patients' wishes," the letter says.
"It impedes and disregards sound medical judgment and can undermine the professional duty of care and confidentiality that doctors bear towards their patients."
Globally, 40% of women of childbearing age live in countries where abortion is banned, highly restricted or otherwise inaccessible. Unsafe abortion accounts for 13% of maternal deaths, resulting in 47,000 women and girls dying each year.
"So many respected health professionals speaking out reaffirms what women have been saying for years; governments can no longer claim that criminalizing abortion has no impact on the health care that women and girls receive," said Sara MacNeice, Manager of Amnesty International's My Body My Rights campaign.
"Making criminals of women for abortion violates their human rights and can endanger their lives. In numerous countries around the world, Amnesty International has documented shocking cases of women forced to continue unviable pregnancies because of restrictive laws. We have seen women and girls pregnant as a result of rape forced to carry the foetus to term and give birth.
"International law is clear: at the very least women should have access to an abortion when the pregnancy poses a risk to the life or health of a pregnant woman or girl, in cases of severe or fatal foetal impairment, and in cases of rape or incest. International law is also says that under no circumstances should a woman be made a criminal for having an abortion."
Amnesty International's global My Body My Rights campaign aims to stop the control and criminalization of sexuality and reproduction by governments. It has highlighted the situation in El Salvador, Ireland and Chile, three countries where legal barriers to abortion severely limit doctors' ability to provide women the healthcare they need.
Doctors in Ireland, El Salvador and many other countries have spoken to Amnesty International of the restrictions abortion laws place on their ability to provide care to their patients.
El Salvador
Health professionals in El Salvador risk prosecution and imprisonment of six to 12 years for providing abortion services, under any circumstances. As a result, they are reduced to monitoring the woman's condition for sufficient deterioration before undertaking any procedure, which could harm the foetus, according to an Amnesty International report issued in September 2014.
A doctor working in a maternal health unit in a public hospital in El Salvador told Amnesty International how the law prevents doctors from acting if complications during pregnancy threaten a woman's health:
"We're not discussing a medical question, but a purely legal one. We all know what needs to be done, but we go back to the fact that we all have our hands tied by what is written in the law."
Ireland
Doctors and health care providers in the Republic of Ireland may face up to 14 years in jail if they provide, or assist in providing, an abortion other than when a woman or girl's life is at risk, even where they act to protect her health.
In a June 2015 report, doctors told Amnesty International that they face a choice of either breaking the law or providing potentially dangerous - and unethical - care to their patients.
Dr. Peter Boylan, an obstetrician, gynaecologist and former Master and Clinical Director of Ireland's National Maternity Hospital told Amnesty International about the legal and ethical tightrope medical staff are forced to walk:
"Under the [current law] we must wait until women become sick enough before we can intervene. How close to death do you have to be? There is no answer to that."
Chile
In Chile, under the Criminal Code health professionals risk prison for assisting or carrying out an abortion. Health professionals themselves often report abortions to the police.
Obstetrician Rene Castro highlighted the problems caused by having to wait until there is an imminent danger before being able to take action:
"Today there is a much greater consensus internationally when talking about quality of life. The issue is whether I wait until a woman is in intensive care because of a grave complication of a pre-existing condition before taking action, or whether I'm going to forestall this serious episode and accept it when a woman tells me "Doctor, I'd prefer to terminate the pregnancy before I get to that point" because "the focus should be on the woman's own decision"."
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
Federal Judge Halts Trump's 'Arbitrary and Capricious' Immigration Court Arrests
"This decision means I can finally focus on my asylum case, not on the ICE officers who might be waiting for me outside the courtroom door,” said the plaintiff in the class action suit.
Dec 26, 2025
A US judge on Wednesday temporarily blocked two federal agencies from arresting noncitizens at immigration courthouses in the San Francisco area, a ruling hailed by migrant justice advocates amid ongoing legal challenges to the Trump administration's policy.
US District Judge for the Northern District of California Casey Pitts granted a stay in Sequen v. Albarran blocking Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) from carrying out courthouse arrests within ICE’s San Francisco Area of Responsibility, pending the outcome of a broader legal challenge.
"Plaintiffs have established a likelihood that members of the courthouse-arrest class will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of a stay," Pitts, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, wrote in his 38-page ruling. "ICE has arrested large numbers of noncitizens at immigration courthouses in northern California pursuant to the challenged courthouse arrest policies, and it avows that it will continue doing so."
“This ruling is a critical step in ensuring that immigrants can safely pursue their immigration cases without fear of arrest."
For decades, federal immigration authorities eschewed arrests at "sensitive locations," including places of worship, hospitals, schools, and—during the Obama and Biden administrations—immigration courts. Trump began targeting courthouses during his first term.
"This circumstance presents noncitizens in removal proceedings with a Hobson’s choice between two irreparable harms," Pitts wrote in his decision. "First, they may appear in immigration court and face likely arrest and detention... And for many class members whom ICE arrests under the challenged policies... such an arrest would likely violate their rights under the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment."
"Alternatively, noncitizens may choose not to appear and instead to forego their opportunity to pursue their claims for asylum or other relief from removal," Pitts wrote. "As the declarations of immigration attorneys and former immigration judges establish, dozens of noncitizens are already taking this path and receiving in absentia removal orders as a result."
"Accordingly, if noncitizens wish to avoid the irreparable harm of arrest and detention, they must instead irrevocably give up their pursuit of potentially valid immigration claims and be ordered removed," he noted. "There can be little question that this permanent loss of noncitizen’s opportunity to have their claims heard, and their resulting removal, is an irreparable injury."
Pitts found that the class plaintiffs "are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims" that the Trump administration's ICE and EOIR courthouse arrest policy is "arbitrary and capricious."
Wednesday's decision follows a November 25 preliminary injunction in the same case requiring ICE to remedy unconstitutionally unsafe conditions in temporary holding cells at the agency's San Francisco field office.
Responding to Wednesday's ruling, class plaintiff Carmen Pablo Sequen said: "I fled persecution to seek safety, only to find myself arrested in the courthouse, the one place I was told to trust. The terror of that day has haunted me. This decision means I can finally focus on my asylum case, not on the ICE officers who might be waiting for me outside the courtroom door."
Plaintiffs' lawyer Jordan Wells, a senior staff attorney at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, said in a statement that "the administration’s reckless policy is an affront to justice, designed to sabotage the immigration court system and force people to abandon their lawful claims."
“This ruling is a critical step in ensuring that immigrants can safely pursue their immigration cases without fear of arrest," Wells added.
Laura Sanchez, legal director at the Central American Resource Center of Northern California, said, "For our clients, who are asylum seekers, survivors of violence, parents fighting to stay with their children, this ruling begins to lift a cloud of terror."
"They can now walk into court, not as targets, but as people lawfully pursuing their cases," Sanchez added. "This stay is a profound affirmation of their humanity and their right to be heard."
"This ruling begins to lift a cloud of terror."
In a separate case, Pitts earlier this week issued a 67-page order in Garro Pinchi v. Noem blocking the Trump administration’s rearrest and redetention policy targeting noncitizens who had previously been released and later taken into custody after attending immigration court hearings or check-ins.
Other courts have ruled against the arrest of noncitizens at immigration courthouses, including in a 2019 preliminary injunction granted by District Court Judge Indira Talwani—an appointee of former President Barack Obama—blocking ICE “from civilly arresting parties, witnesses, and others attending Massachusetts courthouses on official business while they are going to, attending, or leaving the courthouse.”
A federal appellate court reversed Talwani's preliminary injunction in the case, which did not result in any final judgment for or against ICE's courthouse arrest policy, as plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their lawsuit as moot after the Biden administration ended such apprehensions.
Earlier this month, US District Judge for the District of Columbia Beryl Howell—an Obama appointee—issued a ruling in Escobar Molina v. US Department of Homeland Security that preliminarily blocked warrantless civil immigration arrests by DHS officers in Washington, DC absent probable cause.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israeli Police Release Settler Filmed Running ATV Over Praying Palestinian in West Bank
A group of Israeli military veterans called his punishment "just a slap on the wrist" and "state-backed impunity for state-backed terror."
Dec 26, 2025
Israeli police have released a soldier from custody after he was filmed running his vehicle over a Palestinian man who was praying outside the city of Ramallah in the occupied West Bank.
A silent video of the incident, which both Israeli and Palestinian outlets reported on Thursday, shows an Israeli settler with a rifle slung over his back driving his all-terrain vehicle (ATV) toward a 23-year-old Palestinian man as he knelt in prayer on the roadside.
After barrelling over the man, the settler shouted something in his direction and backed up, then gestured for him to move.
The settler then turned his ATV around, got off, and shouted something at a Palestinian taxi driver. The injured Palestinian man then stood up, approaching the cab. The settler again shooed him off before hopping back on the ATV and speeding away.
Majdi Abu Mokho, the father of the Palestinian man, said his son now has pain in both legs after he was struck.
Mokho told Agence France-Presse: “The assailant is a known settler. He set up an outpost near the village, and with other settlers he comes to graze his livestock, blocks the road, and provokes the residents."
He also said the settler blinded him with pepper spray after hitting his son, though this is not shown in the video.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) identified the driver as an Israeli reserve soldier with one of its regional defense units. These battalions have dramatically expanded in recent years with backing from Israel's right-wing government, which contains many officials at the center of the settler movement.
Breaking the Silence, a group of Israeli military veterans critical of the occupation of Palestine, has referred to the regional defense units—which have been responsible for many other attacks on Palestinian civilians in the West Bank—as "no more than settler militias in uniform."
The IDF said the soldier's weapon has been confiscated and that he's been suspended due to the "severity of the incident," which the IDF said it was investigating. The IDF has not released the soldier's name.
An initial probe found that the same settler had opened fire in the village of Deir Jarir, north of Ramallah, earlier that same day, in an incident that resulted in a young Palestinian man being injured by gunfire.
During that altercation, which was also caught on film, a group of masked settlers was seen hurling rocks at the village's entrance. According to Palestinian sources who spoke with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the targets of the attack were villagers who were grazing their cattle near their homes.
In another video, a masked man—who the IDF identified as the same reservist responsible for the ATV attack—is seen firing his weapon in the direction of the camera. The IDF said that by opening fire inside the village while in civilian clothes, the soldier had committed a “serious breach of his authority.”
According to the Times of Israel, Israeli police released the settler reservist from custody on Friday. He has been placed under house arrest for five days and is banned from approaching Deir Jarir, where the incident occurred, or from contacting anyone else connected with the case.
The violent incident is the latest in a year that has seen a record number of attacks by Israeli settlers and soldiers against Palestinian villagers.
According to official figures, Israeli forces and illegal settlers have killed at least 1,130 Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, injured nearly 11,000, and detained around 21,000, since October 2023, when Israel launched its two-year genocide in Gaza following Hamas' attack.
On the same day as the ATV attack, Israeli police announced that they had arrested five Israeli settlers over their alleged involvement in an ambush against a Palestinian home, which resulted in “moderate injuries to the face and head” of an eight-month-old Palestinian girl, according to the Palestinian news agency WAFA.
While the IDF says it is investigating the ATV attack along with local police, attacks by Israeli settlers are often treated with leniency.
In January 2025, the Israeli watchdog group Yesh Din reported that across more than 1,700 reports of religious or politically motivated hate crimes committed by Israelis against Palestinians in the West Bank over the past two decades, nearly 94% of them were closed without any indictment being filed, and only 3% resulted in a conviction.
Although there has been a documented rise in killings by Israeli settlers since October 2023, not a single one of those cases has resulted in an indictment, and only about a quarter have resulted in investigations by Israeli authorities.
Critics found the punishment of the reservist to be similarly lackluster and the latest example of settlers' immunity from justice.
"Israeli reserve soldier intentionally runs over Palestinian praying on the side of the road," said Rabbi David Mivasair, an activist with the Canadian group Independent Jewish Voices. "His punishment: his weapon was taken away, and he was suspended from the reserves... nothing more."
Breaking the Silence called the punishment "just a slap on the wrist" and "state-backed impunity for state-backed terror."
Others noted that nearly 8,000 Palestinians are currently being held in Israeli prisons indefinitely without trial, including in Israel's "administrative detention" system, which allows them to be confined based on secret evidence that they and their lawyers cannot see.
Israel has justified it as a measure to prevent terrorism. However, in January, the government banned Israeli settlers from being held under those same administrative detention orders, with Defense Minister Israel Katz saying the goal was “to convey a clear message of strengthening and encouraging the settlements."
Ihab Hassan, a Palestinian human rights activist, said of the ATV attack: "Had the victim been Israeli and the attacker Palestinian, the sentence would be life in prison. That is why it is called apartheid."
Following the attack, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) reiterated its calls for the US Congress to stop sending military aid to the Israeli government.
"This shocking and dehumanizing act is yet another example of the unchecked violence and abuse Palestinians face daily under Israel’s illegal occupation," the group said. "Brazenly running over a man while he prays is enabled by a system that grants near-total impunity to illegal settlers. The Trump administration must end its silence and take concrete steps to hold the Israeli government accountable for these ongoing human rights abuses.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump’s Lax Approach to Antitrust Helps Spur Banner Year for Corporate Mergers
"Trump’s new antitrust enforcers have demonstrated a willingness to facilitate dealmaking through an uptick in early terminations and settlements," said the American Economic Liberties Project.
Dec 26, 2025
Global corporate mergers surged to near-record highs in 2025, driven in part by US President Donald Trump's lax approach to antitrust enforcement.
The Financial Times reported on Friday that global dealmaking in 2025 topped $4 trillion, including 68 mergers worth $10 billion or more, highlighted by Netflix's $72 billion bid to buy Warner Bros. Discovery and a proposed $85 billion mega-merger between railway giants Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern.
The US alone accounted for $2.3 trillion worth of mergers and acquisitions, which the Financial Times said highlighted the Trump administration's role in green-lighting corporate consolidation.
"Top dealmakers said that the Trump administration’s push to loosen regulation had encouraged companies to explore tie-ups that they might otherwise have been hesitant to pursue," the Financial Times explained.
Andrew Nussbaum, co-chair of the executive committee at law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, told the Financial Times that corporate leaders "see a willingness of the regulators to engage in constructive dialogue" under the second Trump administration, which has given them "a willingness to take on regulatory risk for transactions that are strategic."
The American Economic Liberties Project has also taken note of the Trump administration's role in shepherding through big mergers, and created a Trump Merger Boom tracker earlier this year to document the massive wave of corporate consolidation.
In its analysis of the administration's lax approach to antitrust enforcement, the American Economic Liberties Project said that "Trump’s new antitrust enforcers have demonstrated a willingness to facilitate dealmaking through an uptick in early terminations and settlements."
"Despite pro-enforcement rhetoric early on from Trump’s heads of the FTC and DOJ Antitrust Division," the American Economic Liberties Project added, "it’s becoming increasingly clear that agency leadership is having trouble making their decisions in a vacuum—with a quiet tide of deals granted to companies that have been friendly to the White House."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular