💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › workers-solidarity-movement-abortion-rights.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 14:51:52. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Abortion Rights Author: Workers Solidarity Movement Date: 1992 Language: en Topics: abortion, Ireland, Workers Solidarity Source: Retrieved on 9th October 2021 from http://struggle.ws/ws92/story35.html Notes: Published in Workers Solidarity No. 35 — Summer 1992.
IN 1983 anti-choice campaigners pushed the government into holding a
referendum on abortion. The Eight Amendment was then passed by 33% of
the electorate (the turn out was 54.6%). Abortion was already prohibited
under the 1861 Offences Against the Persons Act. The Eight Amendment
copperfastened this ban preventing any reforming legislation.
SPUC’s next step was to take those clinics which provided non-directive
counseling to court. In the Hamiliton Judgement of 1987 the High Court
placed injunctions on the Well Women Centre and on Open-Line Counseling
prohibiting them from operating non-directive counseling services. The
clinics failed in their appeal to the Supreme Court.
The ruling by Justice Finlay extended the Hamiliton interpretation by
declaring the imparting of any information relating to the procurement
of abortion to be unlawful. It was this ruling that was then used to
take the Student Unions to court. The Well Woman Centre and the
Open-Line Counseling service then took their case to the European Court
of Human Rights.
The Defend the Clinics Campaign attempted to get liberal/left Irish
politicians to raise the issue but many like Emmet Stagg and Micheal D
Higgins of the Labour party refused to give even paper support,
frightened for their Dáil seats.
SPUC continued on the offensive, taking the Union of Students in Ireland
(USI), Trinity College and UCD Student Union to court. SPUC lost the
case initially on very dubious grounds. There was a large amount of
publicity surrounding the case arising from student demonstrations
outside the courts. At the last moment the Justice that was supposed to
hear the case was replaced by Irelands only female judge, Justice Mella
Carroll.
She ruled that all the evidence against the students was hearsay and so
could not be used. This is in spite of the fact that the students had
widely said in newspapers and interviews that they would provide
abortion information and had included it in Student Union guide books.
The judgement seemed to be a cop out for the Irish ruling class who did
not want to be seen to be sending students to jail for contempt of
court.
This ruling was appealed by SPUC who won, a temporary injunction being
placed on the Student Unions. The Students Unions are being brought back
to court by SPUC on July 19^(th) this year in order to have this
injunction made permanent.
The student union campaign took two turns. The leadership within the
Unions toned down the level of campaigning on the issue, concentrating
solely on appealing to Europe. Those activists that argued that the law
should be publicly broken were told that we would be jeopardising the
case by angering the judges. In the end the European Court found that
the Students Unions could not give out abortion information.
It is still illegal to give out information on abortion. Within the
individual student unions, many anti-choice groups held referenda aimed
at overturning the Unions’ mandate to distribute information. These
anti-choice groups only succeeded in reversing a pro-information policy
in one of the universities, UCD. However they were defeated in all but
one of the Regional Technical Colleges. Overall, more students voted for
giving out abortion information than against.
While the Student Union leaders waited for Europe, the Abortion
Information groups in most universities ceased to exist. Meanwhile the
Censorship of Publications Act was used to ban books and sections of
magazines which contained information on where to get an abortion.
Cosmopolitan and other British magazines now carry a blank page where
ads. for British abortion clinics should be. Recently the Guardian
newspaper was not distributed because of an advertisement for the Mary
Stopes Clinic.
In 1991 the Trinity College Right to Information Group held a public
meeting in order to launch a Dublin group. Following from this the
Dublin Abortion Information Campaign (DAIC) began to meet regularly.
Initially they concentrated on defying the ban in in order to draw more
people into the campaign and to provide information. More public
meetings were held to highlight the issue and information leaflets were
distributed in O’Connell Street.
Dublin County Council voted to remove two health books from the library
which contained abortion information. Though DAIC attempted to replace
the book the issue got very little coverage. DAIC decided to slow down
to one activity a month in order to try and maintain some interest over
a very bleak period.
On Wednesday February 12^(th)., some of the Irish papers carried a short
piece about an injunction being granted against a 14 year old alleged
rape victim to prevent her traveling to Britain in order to obtain an
abortion. The case was not yet an issue. DAIC called a picket for the
following Monday and a rally the following Saturday. Though furious
about the case, given the present climate and the lack of advertising
many felt no more than about 200 would turn up. However 1,000 people
ended up marching to the attorney generals office.
Many of those on the march had not been involved in the campaigning
since the 1983 referendum, and quickly jostling took place as to who
would ‘in charge’ of any future campaigns. Secret meetings were called
by separate groups of feminists and liberals. Both groups wanted to
exclude the left as much as possible, when in fact, it was mainly left
wing activists who had being attempting to keep the issue alive for the
last 10 years.
Following the unexpectedly large turn out of the march, the press and
politicians started to speak out about the case. One grouping held a
silent vigil of the Dáil. DAIC realised that the turnout for the
Saturday rally would be big enough for a march. We hoped for 4,000. It
was this march that put the case right on top of the political agenda.
At least 10,000, mainly young people, marched and chanted ‘Right to
Choose’. It was noticeable that there were only five banners present,
indicating that many people had spontaneously come out. People were
angry.
Pressure was kept on by almost continual protests the following week.
The first item on the news was reports of scuffles at the Dáil. The
Government was coming under huge pressure. On ThursdayFebruary 20^(th).
the 14 year old was granted her appeal. The injunction was lifted and
soon after she traveled to Britain in order to get her abortion.
These days it’s not often that you have such a good example of how far
and how quickly public opinion can change. A delegate from the Cork
Abortion Information Campaign commented at a recent conferences, that
before the “X” case had arisen, the Cork group met to consider seeking
another referendum on abortion information in University College Cork.
Two years earlier UCC, an extremely conservative university had voted
massively against giving out information. The Cork group felt they would
probably loose but would attempt it anyhow. Then the 14 year old case
happened, and the UCC referendum was won with over 70% supporting
abortion information. A week later, Manooth, the university of the Irish
Catholic Clergy also overturned their policy and voted to distribute
abortion information.
Similarly, its not often as an socialist involved in campaigns that you
can see how your actions are changing society for the better. This case
is one of the few exceptions. DAIC consisted of a small group of
activists, perhaps 30 in all. Yet when things started happening, when
the case arose, we were there, ready and capable of responding. Without
DAIC, it is unlikely that the march would have been organised or that
the protests would have continued for so long. Without that pressure,
its unlikely that the 14 year old would have been able to travel to
Britain.
A section of the feminists called a conference in order to launch the
Repeal the Eight Amendment Campaign. (R8AC). DAIC affiliated to it. The
Conference itself was jumbled and frustrating. Those calling it had a
fixed agenda and were very hostile to any democratic attempt to amend it
through motions. Many activists found the actual conference demoralising
and antagonistic. It did however lead to the setting up of a campaign,
weakly based in the cities.
Most of the co-ordinating committee of REAC wanted to run a media
campaigning and set about getting sponsors and important speakers. They
however ran into troubles. Besides Democratic Left, no other political
party would come near it, expressing caution and wanting to wait and
see.
Many of Ireland’s womens organistations also refused to get involved.
Despite efforts the media refused to pick up on press statements. At the
moment the main weakness of the campaign is that is still attempting to
become an ‘important’ force at the expense of organising viable local
action groups.
REAC needs to stop looking to the politicians and the media to fight the
campaign for us. Stunts and theatrical events do have a place in a
campaign but they should be a backup to establishing a mass basis on the
ground throughout the 26 counties. REAC has failed to draw in new forces
in Dublin to campaign against Maastracht.
If we are to put repealing the 8^(th) amendment on the political agenda
we need more then stunts. We need to involve huge numbers of people
through activity in the unions and the community. We need to construct
action groups based around activities in all areas. This must become the
first priority of the campaign. We forced the government to overturn the
injunction when 10,000 marched in Dublin. We need to get out similar
numbers if we are to have any hope of forcing the government to hold a
referendum scrapping the 8^(th) amendment.