The Government will carefully reflect on today’s judgment by the European Court of Human Rights that the Government has failed to properly implement the constitutional right to life of a woman and the right to an abortion where her life is at risk.
In a statement this evening, the Government said the judgment confirms that Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution is in conformity with the European Convention on Human Rights. "In the case of two of the three applicants, Ms A and Ms B, the Court dismissed their applications, finding that there had been no violation of their rights under the Convention," it said.
"In the case of the third applicant, Ms C, the Court found that Ireland had failed to respect the applicant's private life contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, as there was no accessible and effective procedure to enable her to establish whether she qualified for a lawful termination of pregnancy in accordance with Irish law," it added.
"The Government will examine the judgement carefully and consider what steps are required to implement the judgment."
Acknowledging the ruling was binding on the State, Minister for Health Mary Harney said the Government would have to come forward with proposals. "However, this will take time as it is a highly sensitive and complex area," she said
Ms Harney said it was "reassuring" that the court found there was no contradiction between the Irish Constitution and European Convention of Human Rights. She expressed "huge personal sympathy" for the women in all three cases.
Taoiseach Brian Cowen said the ruling raised “difficult issues” that needed to be carefully considered. Speaking in Brussels, he said it was much too early to make any decision on whether legislation would be required in light of the court’s decision.
However, Labour's health spokeswoman Jan O'Sullivan said there was now an obligation on all parties in the Oireachtas to face up to the implications of the ruling.
The ruling that Ireland had violated the rights of a woman with a rare form of cancer who was forced to travel to the UK for an abortion was “an embarrassment” for the country, Ms O’Sullivan said.
She also claimed the Strasbourg court merely restated an earlier Supreme Court ruling which the Oireachtas failed to act upon.
“The Supreme Court upheld the right to a termination in certain limited circumstances but the absence of legislation has left those with crisis pregnancies and members of the medical professional in an impossible position,” she said.
Ms O’Sullivan called for legislation to introduced to provide for the termination of a pregnancy in a very limited number of circumstances; a risk to the life of the woman, including the risk of suicide; foetal abnormality which is such that the foetus will never be born alive; a risk of significant injury to the physical health of the mother.
The court early ruled that the rights of one of three women who took a case challenging Irish abortion laws were breached because she had no “effective or accessible procedure” to establish her right to a lawful abortion.
The woman – known only as “C” – had a rare form of cancer and feared it would relapse when she became unintentionally pregnant.
Senator Ivana Bacik said: “This judgment does not change the substance of Irish law, since applicant “C” sought an abortion because she was suffering from cancer and the continuance of her pregnancy could have endangered her life.”
Under the 1992 “X” case, where the Supreme Court ruled terminating a pregnancy is lawful where the life of a mother is at risk, the woman should have been entitled to an abortion here, Ms Bacik said.