14 DAY TRIAL // The Polish government is forced to compensate the victim of a rape who was denied pregnancy termination, even though the law states that abortions will only be granted should a woman be the victim of a rape or face major health risks.
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled in favor of the girl, 14 years old at the time she was raped. Poland is to pay €30,000 ($39,000) to the victim, only known as P. to international press, thenews.pl reports.
In May 2008, the teenager attempted to have the termination of the pregnancy at a hospital in Lublin, south east Poland.
Her mother had to previously obtain a certificate from a prosecutor, attesting that the child was the fruit of a criminal act, but, even after doing so, could not see that her daughter get the procedure.
Hospital staff denied her needed medical attention, due to heated Pro Life vs. Pro Choice debates in Poland. The girl then tried getting the procedure done in the capital city of Warsaw, but got into more trouble.
Hospital workers leaked her information to local press, and she was approached by Pro Life campaigners and the police.
The teenager's mother took her to Gdansk, northern Poland, where she succeeded in ending her pregnancy, only after filing a complaint with the Ministry of Health.
The girl's mother was seen an unfit, and both were harassed by police and medical workers. She was also compensated with €15,000 ($19,500).
The Strasbourg court concluded that several articles of the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated.
Article 8 on “the determination of access to lawful abortion”and “the disclosure of the applicants’ personal data” were among them.
Apart from that, the girl's rights to liberty and security (Article 5 and 1) were breached, and she received inhuman and degrading treatment (a violation of Article 3).
“The applicants had been given misleading and contradictory information and had not received objective medical counseling; and, the fact that access to abortion was a subject of heated debate in Poland did not absolve the medical staff from their professional obligations regarding medical secrecy,” the ruling reads.