A chara, – Salil Shetty, Amnesty's secretary general, says the organisation has no political "axe to grind" in its call for a more liberal abortion regime in this country, claiming to come "at it purely on the basis of international human rights standards. Ireland is in breach. It's just a fact" ("Head of human rights organisation defends call for repeal of Eighth Amendment", June 15th). In a word, rubbish.
There is no international agreement of any kind, written, verbal, or simply understood to exist on a nod and a wink, when it comes to abortion. Therefore there can be no international standard for Ireland to be in breach of. There is, however, agreement among abortion activists, many of whom like to cloak themselves in the mantle of human rights, about what they would like to see put in place internationally.
Those are the “standards” of which Mr Shetty speaks. He may like to argue his organisation has no political axe to grind, but it most certainly has an ideological one, being pursued using the tactics of political pressure groups. And that, to paraphrase the secretary general, is simply a fact. – Is mise,
Rev PATRICK G BURKE,
Castlecomer,
Co Kilkenny.
Sir, – Colm O'Gorman (June 13th) seeks to demolish your Editorial (June 11th) calling for a cautious approach when gleaning a right to abortion from our international obligations. There is, however, more steam than steamrolling in his letter. Mr O'Gorman's distorted interpretation of the obligations allegedly contained in international treaties would make empty bottles out of these agreements. Amnesty International may wish to fill these wide containers with its wholly permissive abortion ethic, but this approach completely misreads international treaty law.
Mr O’Gorman is quite right that ratifying states often give more precise “content and meaning” to broad international treaties. But like our sister jurisdictions in common law, the Irish legal system is not monist but dualist. This means that the terms of an international agreement do not inhere in domestic law unless clearly incorporated by or under an Act of the Oireachtas.
What is transparent is that Mr O’Gorman does not like the current content our sovereignty has given to whatever broad international charters he refers to (he cites none). Indeed, the Irish people, the Irish courts, and the Irish government have already passed several times on the precise question of abortion. And no free-standing right to abortion yet lies in Irish law. The fact that the UN and Amnesty dream this to be so does not change that plain reality.
If Mr O’Gorman’s organisation wants permissive abortion statutes, it should rely less on international treaties and more on the ancient method of persuading its fellow citizens to pass a law. This it has failed to do. – Yours, etc,
Dr SEAN
ALEXANDER SMITH,
Sandyford,
Dublin 18.