Women and Justice: Keywords

A parliamentary minority requested that the Constitutional Court declare unconstitutional a Ministry of Health decree that determined the availability of family planning methods and permitted distribution of emergency contraception by national health centers. The constitutional court noted that the “right to life” is fundamental under the Chilean Constitution. It rejected scientific arguments that emergency contraception did not affect the life of a conceived but unborn embryo. In a dissenting opinion, one judge noted that the rights protecting the reproductive rights of women were enshrined in CEDAW in conflict with the Constitutional Court’s decision. The Constitutional Court’s decision did not prevent all distribution of emergency contraception in Chile, but banned it from being distributed by clinics and hospitals that are part of national health system. The constitutional court decision was effectively overruled in January 2010 by Law No. 20.418, promulgated by President Bachelet, which permitted distribution of emergency contraceptive pills in both public and private health centers, including to persons under 14 without parental consent. The law also requires high schools to enact sexual education programs.

Una minoría parlamentaria solicitó a la Corte Constitucional que declare inconstitucional un decreto del Ministerio de Salud que determinaba la disponibilidad de métodos de planificación familiar y permitía la distribución de anticonceptivos de emergencia por los centros nacionales de salud. El tribunal constitucional señaló que el “derecho a la vida” es fundamental en la Constitución chilena. Rechazó los argumentos científicos de que la anticoncepción de emergencia no afecta la vida de un embrión concebido pero no nacido. En una opinión disidente, un juez señaló que los derechos que protegen los derechos reproductivos de la mujer estaban consagrados en la CEDAW, en conflicto con la decisión del Tribunal Constitucional. La decisión de la Corte Constitucional no impidió toda la distribución de anticonceptivos de emergencia en Chile, pero prohibió su distribución en clínicas y hospitales que forman parte del sistema nacional de salud. La decisión del tribunal constitucional fue efectivamente cancelada en enero de 2010 por la Ley No. 20.418, promulgada por la presidenta Bachelet, que permitía la distribución de píldoras anticonceptivas de emergencia en centros de salud públicos y privados, incluso a personas menores de 14 años sin el consentimiento de los padres. La ley también requiere que las escuelas secundarias promulguen programas de educación sexual.

Ms M.V. (the claimant) was sterilized while giving birth to her second child. She was informed that sterilization would be performed on her shortly before delivery by C-section, to which she did not give her written consent. The day after giving birth, while inquiring about her own health and that of her child, she was informed that sterilization was performed due to health reasons, as another pregnancy could be dangerous. She was given a form to sign for the “sake of her health,” which she did without reading or inquiring due to her concerns about the well-being of her newborn child. The claimant only later found out that sterilization was not a “life-saving” procedure after speaking with a representative from a non-governmental organization. Her claim was dismissed by the district and regional courts based on hospital records which contained her written consent and the testimonies of the doctors and other staff members. She filed a claim with the Constitutional Court which held that the decisions of the district and regional courts did not sufficiently address the claimants claims, in breach of the claimants' right to a fair trial. The Constitutional Court awarded the claimant EUR 1,500 damages and ordered the re-examination of the matter by the district court.