The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission has rephrased it will ‘cross appeal’ legal challenges to abortion law in Northern Ireland.
In December, a conclude ruled the law does not comply with the European Convention on Human Rights in cases of toxic foetal abnormality or sexual crime.
The case was brought by the commission.
Cleave to the ruling, Stormont’s justice minister and Northern Ireland’s attorney encyclopedic said they would lodge appeals to the High Court hold sway over.
On Wednesday, David Ford announced he was lodging an appeal to the ruling that abortion law in Northern Ireland is “clashing” with human rights law.
He said he was concerned that a lack of “permissible certainty” could lead inadvertently to abortion on demand.
On Monday, Northern Ireland Attorney Loose John Larkin also lodged an appeal to the judgement.
The current legislation differs from the brace of the UK as the 1967 Abortion Act was never extended to Northern Ireland.
Currently, a termination is only permitted in Northern Ireland if a woman’s flair is at risk or if there is a risk of permanent and serious damage to her mental or medico health.
In a statement on Wednesday, the chief commissioner of the Northern Ireland Lenient Rights Commission, Les Allamby, said: “The commission will now cross supplicate both the De rtment of Justice and the attorney general.
“We will re-introduce all of the master grounds brought before the court.
“The choice of accessing a termination of pregnancy in circumstances of serious malformation of foetus (categorizing fatal foetal abnormality), rape or incest, without being criminalised for doing so, should be clear out available in Northern Ireland.
“The commission continues to seek a change to the law so that the magnanimous rights of women and girls are protected when facing these naughty decisions.
“The High Court held that Article 8 of the European Rule on Human Rights, the right to family and private life was breached by the habitual prohibition of abortions in cases of fatal foetal abnormalities and pregnancies as a consequence of bodily crimes.”
The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission took acceptable action against Mr Ford’s De rtment of Justice as rt of its cam ign for a substitute in the law.
Mr Ford will now challenge rt of December’s ruling at the High Court in Belfast, where the decree talked about the balance to be struck between the Article 8 rights of a gravid woman and the Article 2 rights of a foetus.
The minister mean this could lead to an “incremental widening of abortion law”, square further than the 1967 Abortion Act allows in the rest of the UK.
Speaking on BBC’s Proper Morning Ulster programme, he said: “The real danger is that the way the discretion read human rights law, specifically the article A right to a private existence of the woman, against what was said to be no article 2 rights for a foetus.”
Mr Ford remarked this potentially goes “beyond the 1967 act as it applies in the rest of the Mutual Kingdom”.
He added that “the way in which the decision was expressed” suggested that “all rights to upon lay with the woman, up to the point of viability for the foetus”.
Mr Ford explained that this is not the took place elsewhere in the United Kingdom, adding: “I believe that is not what people in Northern Ireland choice wish to see.
Pointing the finger at the executive for the lack of legislation on abortion, Mr Ford believed: “Ultimately the executive should be approving a per from the Be subject to of Justice and the assembly should be legislating to ensure that women conveying a foetus with a fatal abnormality are able to access an abortion.”
He said his expectation is that his appeal longing be heard before the summer, but added that there was “nothing within the court handle which would stop the executive and the assembly moving forward with legislation” on the eve of then.
The minister is also appealing the judge’s determining on sexual crimes, again on the grounds of clarity.
He said it is very scabrous to define when sexual crimes have been committed – princi lly in a court of law – before a pregnancy has reached full term.
“The reality is that my responsibility consulted over a year ago on the issue of both fatal foetal uncommonness and sexual crime,” he said.
“In that consultation, it was not possible to see an credulous way through as to how you would determine if a sexual crime had happened.”