International court `could pave way' to introducing abortion

The International Criminal Court could pave the way for the introduction of abortion, according to a group set up to campaign…

The International Criminal Court could pave the way for the introduction of abortion, according to a group set up to campaign for a No vote in the referendum on it.

Mr Pat Buckley, chairman of the "No to International Criminal Court Campaign" told a press conference yesterday that one of the crimes referred to in the statute setting the framework for the court was "forced pregnancy".

"Forced pregnancy is not rape," he said. "It is the denial of access to abortion, in certain circumstances. It is the denial of access to abortion that is the new crime.

"Under the so-called complementary clause, national laws will have to be brought into line with the statute. Pressure groups see huge potential for social change in the long term in this requirement. Conceivably, the term `forced pregnancy' could be forced on to the Irish statute book.

READ MORE

"This would render any pro-life amendment either vulnerable or impossible to draft."

Former High Court judge Mr Rory O'Hanlon said he believed an attempt was being made to rush through these amendments. "It is scandalous that the Irish electorate should be confronted with all these important issues and only given four weeks," he said.

We did not need an international criminal court. "I have always been convinced that in the Irish Constitution we have one of the finest documents in the world. When we are told we should vote in favour of this court we are being told there is some body of criminal law which is being taken away from our courts and given to an international court. We are left in the dark as to what laws in the future will be added to it. Our Constitution and our criminal code are perfectly adequate to protect us."

He said the Norris case was an example of where an international court overruled the correct decision of the Supreme Court, bringing about a change in the law, and overturning values cherished by all the Christian churches.

Mr Dan Smyth, a Canadian barrister, said there were two opposing principles at stake in relation to this court. "Are non-elected judges, based on foreign soil, best placed to make decisions affecting Irish people? Or does democracy lie in the relationship between a voter and his representative?"