Human Rights and International Humanitarian Laws

A Project on

Abortion: pro life v. pro choice

  

  

 SUBMITTED TO:                                                                       SUBMITTED BY:

Mr. Vikas Gandhi                                                               Anuj Tiwari- 11A024

Assistant Professor of Law       Shubhrajeet Chawla -11B144

Semester-VI

GUJARAT NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

2014
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
 

S. No.     TOPIC                                                                  Page No.

1 ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………
………….1
2 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………
…………...2

3 THE PROCESS OF ABORTION LEGISLATION IN

INDIA…………………………...3

4 ABORTION RIGHT: A PART OF WOMAN’S

RIGHT…………………………………5

5 RIGHTS OF UNBORN
CHILD………………………………………………………….7

6 INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS RELATING RIGHT TO

ABORTION ………….9

7 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………
…………..11

8 BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………. 
…...…….13                                           
 ABSTRACT

This project mainly focuses on the aspect of abortion. Firstly it defines what abortion is and how
is it a human rights concern. Abortion is one of the most controversial and ethical issues because
it concerns the taking of a human life. Adding to it, it deals with basic two questions i.e.
 Whether right to abortion violates right to life of unborn child?
 Whether restriction imposed by State on right to abortion of woman violates their human
rights?

Apart from this, the project also deals with the understanding about the human rights of the
unborn child and prospective mother while analyzing the debates, international conventions,
laws and implementation of said laws on the subject of ‘right to abortion’.

Adding to it, lastly the project emphasis on the different paths which are taken to reach the
objective i.e. as follows:-

 Examine the concept of abortion in relation to religion, acceptance of it as right in foreign

countries and development over the years.
 Process of abortion legislation in India –whether violates human rights of woman
 When unborn child amounts to person under law and has right to life
 Balancing right of prospective mother with right of unborn child.

Moreover, at the end the project focuses on the international perspective along with case laws on
the concern topic.

1. INTRODUCTION
1
Abortion is one of the most controversial and ethical issues because it concerns the taking of a
human life. The debate and deliberation revolves around the issue of morality and abortion, who
has right to make decision regarding life of unborn child mother or the state.

Woman by nature possess a right to have a child. She should not be deprived of such a natural
right just by a statute. A woman having become pregnant, it is her fundamental right to have a
child. She cannot be forced to abort the child. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees
right to personal liberty which may include right to conceive a child and give birth to it. At the
same time there are other legal provisions which have given ample liberty and discretion to
woman in matters of procreation, abortion and sterilization.

Issues of sexual and reproductive autonomy and the quest for privacy lie at the core of
passionately held ideological, religious and cultural notions of female gender identity. Nothing
would advance women’s welfare more than respecting their reproductive autonomy. Such
autonomy must include and protect the personal intimacies of marriage, motherhood, procreation
and child bearing.1 This autonomy is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or
not to terminate her pregnancy. Reproductive and sexual issues frequently present the context for
trampling of woman’s right by or with deliberate acquiescence of the State. However,
regulations limiting women’s right may be justified only by a compelling State interest, and that
legislative enactment must be narrowly drawn to express only the legislative state interest at
stake.2

However, those who favor abortion argue that abortion represents a woman’s “right to choose”
i.e. whether to continue her pregnancy or not. On the other hand, Pro-Lifers or anti-abortionists,
generally make a religious argument as the spearhead of their collective opposition to abortion.
Human Rights are those rights, which should be available to every individual without any
discrimination of any kind. This right to abortion is universal right of mother but at the same
time it should be balanced with the rights of unborn.

1
Gobind v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr., AIR 1975 SC 1378
2
Roe et al. v. Wade, District Attorney of Dallas Country, (1973) 410 US
2
Therefore, regulations limiting woman’s right may be justified only by a compelling State
interest, and that legislative enactment must be narrowly drawn to express only the legitimate
state interest at stake.3

2. THE PROCESS OF ABORTION LEGISLATION IN INDIA

In the mid-1960s, the government of India appointed a committee under the chairmanship of a
medical professional Shantilal Shah. A report was submitted on December 30, 1966, and in
1971, the MTP Act was passed by Parliament. This law significantly liberalized the abortion
laws in India. Prior to enactment abortion was justified for bona fide purpose for saving the life
of the woman. The Act aimed at eliminating abortion by untrained conditions, thus reducing
maternal morbidity and morality.4

As per this Act, women can terminate an unintended pregnancy by a registered medical
practitioner in a hospital established or maintained by the Government or a place being approved
for the purpose of this Act by the Government. However, not all pregnancies could be
terminated.

Section 3 of the MTP Act said that pregnancy can be terminated if:

 Therapeutic indication: in order to prevent injury to the physical or mental health of the
woman.
 Eugenic indication: in view of the substantial risk that if the child were born, it would
suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to seriously handicap.

 Humanitarian indication: as the pregnancy is alleged by a pregnant woman to have been

caused by rape.

 Social indication: as the pregnancy has occurred as result of failure of any contraceptive
device or method used by married woman or her husband for the purpose of limiting the
number of children.
3
Ibid
4
Government of India (GOI) 1971, The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act (Act. No. 34 of 1971), Statement of
objects and reasons.
3
  The termination of pregnancy is to be carried out in a government hospital or at a place
approved by the government and two medical practitioners are necessary if the pregnancy
is more than 12 weeks but less than 20 weeks duration; for less than 12 weeks one
medical practitioner can terminate it.

 The consent of woman alone is required if she above 18 year of age, but if she is a minor
or lunatic, consent of the guardian is necessary.

GREY AREAS IN MTP ACT:

 The act confers a monopoly on medical opinion in matters related to the length type of
pregnancy. Accordingly, pregnancies up to 12 weeks necessitate the authorization of one
doctor while those between 12 to 20 weeks necessitate the opinions of two doctors. The
need for doctor/s to certify opinion for abortion is an unnecessary restriction imposed by
law.5 Such a provider dependant policy results in denial of abortion care to woman in
need.

 How grave must the risk be “to justify the termination of pregnancy”? The statutory
language is vague. It leaves individual doctor with very wide discretion in determining
what really a matter of life and death. Further making them ultimate gatekeepers.6

 The Act creates two major legal restrictions to the accessibility of abortion services. It
specified that abortion can be performed only by a registered medical practitioner "who
has such experience or training is gynecology and obstetrics" and that it can be
conducted only a place that is sanctioned by the appropriate authority. There is no dispute
on the necessity of having properly trained medical personnel and well-equipped centre’s.
With about 73 per cent of India's (mostly indigent) population living in rural areas, the
provision of free and accessible health care is more than just an essential prerequisite for
the maintenance and improvement in health status of the people (and especially of

5
Hirve Siddhivinayak, 1994, “Abortion Policy in India: Lacuane and Future Challenges, Abortion Assessment
Project, Centre for Inquiry into Health and Allied Themes (CEHAT)”, p.30
6
Jalan Varsha & Bajoria Vivek, “The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 A Doctrinal Anachronism
Discounted By Society”, AIR 2009 Journal Section 131, Vol. 96- Part 1149
4
 women who experience morbidity following abortions). However, the ground realities are
quite different.7

 The pregnant woman seeking abortion cannot avoid giving an explanation. To say that
pregnancy was wanted at the time of conception, but is unwanted now easily disqualifies
her. She is required to furnish explanations that fit into the broad liberal - and yet,
restrictive - conditions, listed in the Act. This situation keeps the act open to differing
interpretations.

 The right to abortion is only one such right which enables woman to regain control over
their bodily integrity. Therefore, it must be understood to the right to abort any fetus
before its viability. In India, the right to abort a deformed fetus is recognized only till 20th
week of pregnancy. Beyond this gestation, no pregnancy can be terminated except on the
ground of risk to the life of mother. This Act has not served as the “enlightened
legislation” one hoped for. It does not empower women but allows medical practitioners
to perform abortion whenever they want, for ‘family planning’ or for money in private
practice.

3. ABORTION RIGHT: A PART OF WOMAN’S RIGHTS:

Since its inception the United Nations has maintained that reproductive freedom is a basic human
right.8 The Governments of various Nations theoretically recognize this right but has not yet been
accepted as a part of Municipal law due to absence of political will. However, some have taken
steps to include the abortion right in their constitution. During the past few decades a number of
US writers claim that the right to abortion is a woman’s right.9

ABORTION: WHEN PERMISSIBLE?

Abortion continues to be completely illegal or severely restricted by law in almost every country.
However, today in most of the countries abortions are permitted on grounds of namely: (a) to

7
Jesani Amar and Iyer Aditi, “ Women And Abortion”, (source: http://docs.google.com/viewer?
a=v&q=cache:t0ylyVv5T1QJ:www.cehat.org/go/uploads/Publications/a14.pdf+abortion+-
+right+of+women&hl=en&gl=in&sig=AHIEtbQ23CD1jzWW8h4cadEmzAvd34j7vA, accessed on 27.03.12)
8
Vide AIR 1996 Journal Section 129 at p. 131.
9
Ibid
5
preserve the life or physical or mental well being of the mother; (b) to prevent the completion of
a pregnancy that has resulted from rape; (c) to prevent the birth of a child with serious deformity,
mental deficiency or genetic abnormality; or (d) to exercise birth control, that is to help from
having a child for social or economic reasons. Though, some countries have adopted liberal laws
which permit abortion when requested by the concerned woman. Those who advocate abortion
on demand, are implicitly valuing the claim to life of a fetus as less important than the claim of
woman to choose the size of her family, pursue an uninterrupted educational ands service career,
or avoid bringing up unwanted child.10 In India, it is illegal to terminate a pregnancy unless it is
carried out under the requisites of MTP Act.

SITUATION IN OTHER COUNTRIES:

It is important to examine the laws in other countries on this issue. As of 2000, among the 152
most populous countries, 54 either banned abortion entirely on religious beliefs (El Salvador and
Chile have endorsed a complete ban) or permitted it only to save the life of the pregnant woman.
In contrast, another 44 banned late-term abortions e.g. after a particular gestational age: 12
weeks (Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cuba,
Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Georgia, Greece, Kazakhistan, Kyrgyz Republic,
Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Norway, Russian Federation, Slovak
Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Ukraine, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan,
Uzbekistan and Yugoslavia), 13 weeks (Italy), 14 weeks (Austria, Belgium, Cambodia,
Germany, Hungary and Romania), 18 weeks (Sweden), viability (Netherlands and to some extent
the United States) and 24 weeks (Singapore and the United Kingdom).11 However, Canada goes
to the extent of not interfering with the issue at all and leaves it entirely to the woman and her
physician. The woman is perceived as having complete liberty upon her person and the fetus is
seen as a part of her body, acquiring the status of a person only after birth. India, by contrast, has
chosen a middle path instead of a this-way-or-that-way approach. Balance the rights of both
woman and unborn child.

10
Supra note 8, p.129
11
Kanojia Ravi, “Rights of an unborn baby versus the social and legal constraints
of parents: Birth of a new debate”, J Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeon, Jul-Sept 2008, Vol 13, Issue 3,
(source: http://medind.nic.in/jan/t08/i3/jant08i3p92.pdf, accessed on 23.03.12)
6
 4. RIGHTS OF UNBORN CHILD:

The right of an unborn child or fetus was brought before European Human Rights Court in 'Vo v.
France'12 as the European Convention on Human Rights provides that 'Everyone's right to life
shall be protected by law'. This ‘everyone’ was the main issue before the Court in present matter
created furors. However, insufficient judgment in Vo v. France leads to controversy especially
regarding as to whether an ‘unborn child/fetus/embryo’ too is entitled to ‘right to life’? 13

Further, the right to privacy has been held to include the right to abortion. But does the exercise
of such right affect the right to life of the unborn child? The answer to this question would
obviously depend on the answers to the two questions, namely (1) whether or not an unborn
child is a person within the meaning of the Life/Liberty clause in Article 21 and (2) whether or
not it has life.

WHEN DOES LIFE BEGIN?

“…..all human life- from the moment of conception and through all subsequent stages- is sacred,
because human life is created in the image and likeness of God.”14

Most people in pro-life camp believe that human personhood begins at conception. This is, a
newly formed zygote is a full human being and must be protected as such. It has right, including
the right not to be deprived of its own life.15

There are three views on the answer to this question are:16

1) The first view holds that an embryo becomes a person from the moment of conception.

2) The second view states that personhood is enacted at the moment of birth, when
independent life and human relationships are possible.

12
App. No. 53924/00, Eur. Ct. H.R., 8 July 2004
13
“Right to Life and Right to Death: A Study”, (source: http://www.amicus.iupindia.org/RighttoLife_ovw.asp,
accessed on 27.03.12)
14
Pope John Paul II, 1979 Capitol Mall in Washington D.C
15
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_when4.thm, accessed on 23.03.12
16
“Lyon’s medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology”, 11th ed., Delhi Law House, 2005, p. 245
7
 3) The third view holds that a fetus becomes a person upon attainting viability, which in
itself is linked to biological development. This view represents the middle path between
the first and second views.

However, experts form the respective discipline of medicine, philosophy, and theology are
unable to arrive at any consensus, and the judiciary, at this point not in position to contemplate as
to the answer. 17 Considering fetus is not a living person but still a potential person, many nations
have come forward to protect the right of fetus to be at viability to have a meaningful life outside
the mother’s womb. 18

UNBORN OFFSPRING IS ALSO A “PERSON”:

If the life is supposed to exist from the moment of conception, the right to birth must also
commence from that stage only. Therefore, the word “person” used in Art 21 of the Indian
Constitution includes unborn offspring at the stage of a gestation. Hence, it is the duty of State to
protect the life of unborn child from arbitrary and unjust destruction. 19

VARIOUS LAWS TREATING UNBORN CHILD AS PERSON:

Indian legislations have recognized the right of unborn child. In Law of Torts, the unborn child is
entitled to recovery of damages before reaching stage of viability.20 Hence, treats the unborn
child as a person.21The Law of Succession have provided explicit statutory protection to rights of
the unborn by guarding their interests in property, amongst others. Courts have begun to
recognize the worth of the unborn in deciding cases of compensation for road accidents. The
Indian Penal Code prescribes imprisonment and fines as punishment for offences against
expectant women and unborn children. The severity of punishment increases if the offence is
caused to the detriment of a ‘quick child’ or an unborn baby that begins to move, usually around

17
Supra note 2
18
Ibid
19
Basu Palok, “Law relating to Protection of Human Rights- Under the Indian Constitution & Allied Laws”,
Modern Law Publications, 2005, p. 1056
20
Willims v. Marison Rapid Transti Inc, 152 Ohio 114, 87 N.E. 2d 334 (1949); Sylvia v. Gobeille, 2210-A 2d 222
(RI 1960)
21
Supra note 8, p.140
8
five months of gestational age. Even the Code of Medical Ethics urges doctors to respect human
life from the point of conception onwards.22

5. INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS RELATING RIGHT TO

ABORTION:

The unborn find protection under many international laws. Preamble to the Declaration of the
Right of the Child adopted by the UNO on November 20, 1959, provides that the child by reason
of his or her physical or mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care including her
appropriate legal protection before as well as after birth.23

Article 1 of the American Declaration of Rights and Duties of Man and the Inter American
Commission of Human Rights say that abortion is legalized until the end of First trimester. 24
Right to life is protected from the moment of its conception as per Articles 6(1) of the ICCPR25,
Article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights26 and Article 4 of the African Charter of
Human and People's Right27. But they are silent on the issue of when does life begin. But the
interpretations have forced us to believe that the child is not to be protected from the time of its
inception. The right to life of the fetus has to be balanced with the rights of the mother. Further,
International courts and tribunals have not addressed the difficult philosophical issue of when
life begins, but have focused on the meaning of the language used in the relevant treaties. They

22
“Law of Abortion in India”, (source: http://blogs.expressindia.com/showblogdetails.php?contentid=394265,
accessed on 28.03.12)
23
Supra note 19, p. 1050
24
Article I:  Every human being has the right to life, liberty and the security of his person.
25
Article 6 (1): Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall
be arbitrarily deprived of his life.
26
Article 2:
1. Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in
the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided
by law.
2. Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this article when it results from the
use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:
(a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent escape of a person lawfully detained;
(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.
27
Article 4: Human beings are inviolable. Every human being shall be entitled to respect for his life and the integrity
of his person. No one may be arbitrarily deprived of this right.
9
have generally held that the references to every human being or everyone or every person do not
include an unborn fetus.28

INTERNATIONAL HISTORIC CASE LAWS:

Roe v. Wade29 became one of the most significant decisions in the history of Supreme Court of
USA as dividing the nation into "pro-choice" and "pro-life" camps. This is a landmark judgment
establishes that most laws against abortion violate a constitutional right to privacy. Jone Roe, the
plaintiff wanted to terminate her pregnancy as it was a result of rape. Relying on the current state
of medical knowledge, the Court ruled that the State cannot restrict a woman’s right to an
abortion during the first trimester, the state can regulate the abortion during the second trimester
"in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health," and in the third trimester, demarcating
the viability of the fetus, a state can choose to restrict or even to proscribe abortion as it sees fit.
Thus, establishes balance between the state's legitimate interests with the individual's
constitutional rights.

As a result of which, the SC struck down several state restrictions on abortions like laws limiting
abortion, laws requiring parental consent for minors to obtain abortions, spousal consent laws,
spousal notification laws, laws requiring abortions to be performed in hospitals but not clinics,
laws barring state funding for abortions, laws banning most very late term abortions.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in the leading case of Morgentalor Smoling and Scott v. R30,
emphasize on the bodily security of the pregnant women. It held Criminal Code of the country
which required a pregnant woman who wanted an abortion to submit an application to a
therapeutic committee violates right to life, liberty and freedom and security of a person in the
light of Article 7 of the Canadian Charter31.

28
Garg Manisha, “Right to Abortion”, (source: http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/adp_tion.htm,
accessed on 27.03.12)
29
(1973) 410 U.S. 113
30
(1988) 44 DLR (4th ) 385
31
Article 7: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof
except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.
10
Further, in Paton v. United Kingdom32it was held that abortion is permitted if the continuance of
the pregnancy involves risk. The right to life of fetus is subject to an implied limitation allowing
pregnancy to be terminated in order to protect the life of a mother. The same was upheld in H v.
Norway.33

32
(1980) 3 EHRR 408
33
((1992) 73 DR 155)
11
 6. CONCLUSION:

The right to conception, right to abortion and right to birth are very much conflicting rights and
became controversial subject-matters of law and procedure of the time. It involved many
questions of values on moral, ethical, sociological and legal grounds. Any rigid statute to
regulate these rights will pose critical problems and challenges both to the well being of a
woman and unborn child. For e.g. when a woman has liberty to conceive, implies liberty to
terminate the pregnancy if she dislikes continuing it give rise to a new right to kill fetus. But the
right to kill in any manner cannot be inferred from the statute. Or when right to birth (life) is
recognized, it implies absence of right to abortion which in turn imposes a duty on woman to
carry on unwilling child. 34

Therefore, today’s existing law stands good and serves the purpose in this concern. Under the
present law a woman has given a right to have control over their body and consequently right to
have or not to have child. However, if this right is not allowed on demand, when a woman does
not want to carry her pregnancy, she would carry it and then abandon the newborn child
ultimately creating a burden on the society or leading to infanticide. This would create more
danger to the life of baby and burden on society. Further, when there is no possibility of
begetting a living child with all human potential, it is better to prevent such child to be born and
thereby save it from earthly miseries.

It is not illogical to think of a “rights” of some fetuses, (of course before viability) “not to be
born”35 and of the woman having an abortion in a spirit of love for the fetus and the person in
her life.36 Therefore, in India abortion should be allowed up to viability where it is expected that
the future child will suffer from a particularly severe abnormality or disease, which is considered
incurable.

"The touch of children is the delight of the body; the delight of the ear is the hearing of their
speech". A mother has got a natural duty to provide the maximum best possible to her offspring.
Therefore, right to abortion is an issue to be left to the decision of the mother at least up to the
34
Supra note 19, p. 1056
35
Luker K, 1984, “Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood”, p. 182, ref. by Jean Brausher, Book Review: Tribal
Conflict over Abortion. Feminist Legal Theory, Vol. I. N.Y. University Press.
36
Bandewar Sunita, India, 2001. “Advocating for Abortion Access: Eleven Countries Studies”, Women’s Health
Project, A Johannesburg Initiative, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa, p. 137
12
first 12 weeks of pregnancy unconditionally. I think the requirement of registration for the
purposes of termination of pregnancy Under the MTP Act should also be removed. It is pertinent
to mention here that private sector is a major source of health services in Indian and excessive
regulation over them induces it not to get registered and hence either the abortion is done
through. The back door for a hefty amount or the same is refused. This deprives the females of
availing best of facilities in the private sector.

However, State regulation protective of fetal life after viability has both logical and biological
justifications. 37The discretion for abortion is limited by IPC and MTP Act which allow abortion
under exceptional circumstances only. The unborn child under present law may loose its life only
when it poses a serious problem to its mother’s life or to itself where chances to born alive are
bleak. Thus the right to abortion is regulated and the child birth is guaranteed.38

To conclude it can be said that the discretion to extinguish life of unborn child must be exercised
with extreme caution. Advancement in medical science confers great power on humanity which
must be used for noble causes. Unfettered or arbitrary misuse of such power may lead to grave
consequences for the society on multiple fronts. Our traditional inclination towards non-violence,
tolerance and perseverance must be remembered to arrive at a decision that raises the standards
of society and sets an example for others to follow.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

37
Supra note 2
38
Supra note 19, p. 1056
13
BOOKS:
 Awasthi & Kataria (2007), Law Realting to Protection of Human Rights, 2nd ed., Orient
Publishing Co., Delhi
 Sehgal Singh B.P. (2004), Human Rights in India Problems & Perspectives, Deep &
Deep Publications Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.
 Basu Palok, J. (2005), Law Relating to Protection of Human Rights under the Indian
Constitution & Allied Laws, Modern Law Publications, Allahabad
 (2005), Lyon’s medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, 11th ed. 2005, Delhi Law House.

JOURNALS:
 Mian, Atif ,“Distance Constraints: The Limits of Foreign Lending in Poor Economies,”
Journal of Finance, 2006.
 Jalan Varsha & Bajoria Vivek, “The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 A
Doctrinal Anachronism Discounted By Society”, AIR Sept 2009 Journal, Vol. 96- Part
1149
 Lakshmi, K. Vijaya, “Women’s Rights Are Human Rights”, AIR Feb 2009 Journal, Vol.
96-Part 1142
 Kanojia Ravi, “Rights of an unborn baby versus the social and legal constraints of
parents: Birth of a new debate” , J Indian Association Pediatric Surgeon, Jul-Sept 2008,
Vol 13, Issue 3
 Goldman Tanya, “VO V. FRANCE AND FETAL RIGHTS: THE DECISION NOT TO
DECIDE”, Harvard Human Rights Journal,
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss18/goldman.shtml#fn1

STATUTES:

 The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971

 Constitution of India
14
  Indian Penal Code, 1860
 Hindu Succession Act, 1956
 Law of Torts

CONVENTIONS:

 American Declaration of Rights and Duties of Man

 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
 European Convention of Human Rights
 African Charter of Human and People's Right
 Canadian Charter

15