Mexico began to understand abortion as a human right and the court has extended this guarantee to the entire country, unlike the United States, which left the responsibility to each of its entities, said Minister Alberto Pérez Dayán, at the Seminar of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) “Constitutional restrictions and conscientious objection” carried out within the framework of FIL Thought.
“Mexico understood that the interruption of pregnancy is a human right and all of us in this country are linked to that human right, which is that of life, the United States does not see it as a right but as a matter of competence and leaves it to each state to legislate it, if they want to legislate it they will accept it, the court left it to the decision of the states and it does not reach the generality of the country”, he explained.
He affirmed that in Mexico any woman can terminate her pregnancy if she wishes before 12 weeks, because she must deprive the right to decide on her body, regardless of whether there are regulations in her state.
Judge Yasmín Esquivel Mossa explained that in states where the legislation still penalizes abortion, women who are penalized for having performed it can request an amparo with the criteria established by the SCJN and the judge is obliged to grant it, even this applies to who are in jail for that reason.
“It is a criterion that the Court has already established, and the judge is obliged to adjust to the criteria in those states in which interruption is still penalized. Those women who could be in jail can request their protection and leave immediately because there is already a criterion that permeates the entire country, if you are not in jail but subject to criminal proceedings for this reason, you will have the possibility of freeing yourself from the process through that protection,” he explained.
In the talk moderated by the journalists Carmen Aristegui and Javier Solórzano, the magistrates affirmed that this issue is subject to conscientious objection by officials and the medical team that can treat cases of pregnancy interruption, but the institutions are obliged to give tracking or service.
“The right to conscientious objection is not above the person’s right to health, for now there is no legal vacuum, if we add all the provisions that bind all health institutions, the answer is that they cannot do it. Conscientious objection is an individual and not a collective right”, therefore the institutions cannot rely on it to not care for the patient, said magistrate Javier Laynez Potisek.
In doing so, the hospital or medical institution would be committing discrimination, since the SCJN provision determined that there must be at least one professional who does not submit to conscientious objection so that patients can access this right.
Debate over the legalization of marijuana
The magistrates and magistrates also addressed the issue of the legalization of marijuana, in which the Congress of the Union has not advanced in generating a law in this regard and that it has committed an inaction before the provision of the SCJN by indefinitely postponing the theme.
Given this, the country’s highest judicial body has the power to dismiss Congress to force legislators to create regulations.
carefully
“Think and Work”
“2022, Guadalajara, Home of the International Book Fair and World Book Capital”
Guadalajara, Jalisco, November 26,
Text: Mariana González-Márquez
Photography: Abraham Arechiga