The Life Network Foundation Malta and the Malta Unborn Child Platform said that no international treaty recognizes the right to abortion as a fundamental right, adding that the law has an obligation to protect those who have no voice.
In a statement, the two entities said they follow with respect and love, the voices of concern about the suffering and dangers that a risky pregnancy can bring, but “we also acknowledge the silent voices of unborn children who may lose their lives in an abortion”.
They were referring to a judicial protest filed by pro-abortion activists claiming that the fact that Malta does not allow abortion violates their fundamental rights. “We respectfully say that this is untrue. Contrary to what is written in the protest, the European Convention on Human Rights does not recognize any fundamental right to abortion,” the statement said.
No ruling by the European Court of Human Rights has ever ruled that article 8, the right to privacy, includes the right to abortion. Nor did it ever say that not allowing an abortion amounts to inhuman or degrading treatment or discrimination, it added.
Nor does the European Union ever interfere in such a matter, which, according to the Treaties of the same Union, is a competence of the Member States, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and not of the European Union. While these activists have made erroneous assertions and give the impression that international law and international treaties recognize the right to abortion, this is not true.
No international treaty recognizes the right to abortion as a fundamental right. On the contrary, the American Convention on Human Rights recognizes the right to life from the moment of conception. Protesters who conveniently protested, failed to mention that the Maltese courts had recognized the fundamental rights of the unborn child.
This happened in the case of Emilio Persiano v. Commissioner of Police (August 2000) where the Court recognized the civil and constitutional rights of the unborn child; in contrast to that alleged in the protest. This sentence has never been changed or revoked. Activists say that the fact that the killing of unborn babies or the terminating of a pregnancy is not allowed in Malta, affects their "quality of life". In truth, if abortion were to be legalised, it would not only affect the life, but rather, it would eliminate the life of the unborn baby.
The two NGOs said that it is convenient to forget the rights of the voiceless and the weak. The law has an obligation to protect those who have no voice. There is no discrimination in the fact that there is no abortion in Malta. No one in Malta can participate in the destruction of an unborn child. Criminal law is by its very nature territorial and therefore applies only to Malta. In Malta no one can have an abortion, no matter who they are, regardless of their financial means.
There is neither inhuman nor degrading treatment in the fact that Malta does not allow abortion. It would be inhuman and degrading to allow human life to be destroyed under the pretext of a right to do what one wants with one's body. This right can never affect the right to life of another.
In a judicial protest, the group of doctors in favour of abortion, are proposing that an abortion can be performed when the mother's life is in danger due to the pregnancy. This is already allowed in our law, so much so, that no one has ever gone to Court. However, in the protest, this pro-abortion group proposes that the article in the Criminal Code on abortion be removed altogether.
This would mean that “on-demand” abortion could take place, even in the last month of pregnancy, with the result that we would end up with the most liberal abortion laws in Europe! We support the obligation of doctors to provide maximum care to a woman, especially in cases of a risky pregnancy or when the woman’s life is in danger, the statement said.
In such cases, women have always been treated with the highest level of care, and no woman has ever been left at risk due to her pregnancy, even if the baby is subsequently lost. "We confirm that ultimately, it would be selfish if we, who are already born, decide, that due to our own egoistic needs, that others, who are in their mother’s womb, as we once were, may not enjoy the right to life that we are enjoying today," the statement concluded.