The World Congress of Families: A prime example of today’s anti-rights lobby

On Thursday 25 May 2017, ultra-conservative activists and policy-makers will come together in Budapest, Hungary for the 11th international World Congress of Families (WCF) under the title “Building Family-Friendly Nations: Making Families Great Again”.

As the biggest annual meeting of the right, the organizers have stated their hopes that this year’s WCF will “help launch a new global pro-family alliance of countries dedicated to defending marriage, the family and the sanctity of human life.

Throughout the four days (25-28 May) delegates from the clergy, civil society, the business world, and politics will build relationships and learn from each other’s tactics for achieving regressive change – all under the auspices of the Prime Minister of Hungary.

While extremely troubling, the WCF is not an exceptional event.  In fact, it can be seen as an archetypal example of much broader trends.  A new report released this week, documents the rise in numbers, increased coordination, and increasingly strategic approaches of anti-rights actors operating in international spaces, and the significant impact they have made so far.

Behind the Research

In 2016 a group of organizations and activists, including AWID, launched a collaborative project called the Observatory on the Universality of Rights – OURs, for short.

The project stemmed in part from a strategy meeting on religious fundamentalisms held by AWID in 2013, during which a number of participants raised concerns about the effects of ultra-conservative groups on our human rights, and shared the work they were doing already to resist.

A clear trend was visible: These anti-rights actors, both state and non-state, were working more concertedly than ever to undermine a core concept of human rights: their universality.

Universality is a cornerstone of international human rights law.  It encapsulates that we are all equally entitled to our human rights simply by being human – whatever our nationality, place of residence, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, language, sexuality, or any other status.

The OURs initiative decided to undertake a comprehensive study of the forces working to undermine universality, the impact they have had so far, and ultimately what this might mean for people’s lives.

© HazteOir.org | Flickr | WCF 2012

What did we find?

1. A large and complex anti-rights lobby

The research revealed an unprecedented level of engagement by anti-rights actors in international human rights spaces today.   Following an initial foray in the UN arena during the Beijing and Cairo conferences in the 1990s, these ultra-conservative actors have been increasingly targeting the international policy arena.

One of the most notable trends found is the tendency towards strategic alliances. The report maps a complex and evolving anti-rights lobby at the UN, with older forms of affiliation, based on religion or institution, giving way to pragmatic organizing according to shared goals.

2. An evolving repertoire of strategies

A striking finding of the research is that ultra-conservative actors – despite all their rigidity when it comes to worldview – very much move with the times when it comes to strategy.

Where anti-rights actors may have previously been explicit in their religious or “moral” motivations, they now often appeal to supposedly intellectual or “social science” arguments.  What is more, when certain human rights bodies prove difficult to infiltrate or influence, anti-rights groups find new points of entry.

Across all the strategies of these actors, some key trends are visible:

  • Learning from the organizing strategies of feminists and other progressives.
  • Adapting successful national-level tactics for the international sphere.
  • Moving from an emphasis on symbolic protest against the human rights system, to becoming subversive system “insiders”.

3. Expert “double-speak”

The report paints a picture of the myriad creative discourses anti-rights actors use to undermine the universality of rights.  In several cases, these actors take a legitimate concern or struggle and appropriate it for their agenda.

A good example is the way that anti-imperialist discourse is used by both ultra-conservative states and civil society organizations. This narrative revolves around the idea that national governments are being unjustly targeted by UN bodies, or by other states acting through the UN.

Of course, there is much to be said about the instances in which national governments are bullied by other states and by international institutions.

However, we documented the ways this discourse is co-opted to cast a powerful institution – the state – as the victim, in order to justify national exceptions to universal human rights standards. Tellingly, many of those who employ this discourse are in fact global North-based organizations.

Another striking finding is the trend towards co-opting the very language of human rights, women’s rights, and even the notion of “universal” itself.

To give just one example, conservative players have attempted to construct a new category of “parental rights”, which has no support in existing human rights standards.

While sounding something like a genuine area of human rights, this dangerous framework in fact works to twist the rights protections children have, as articulated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to support the rights of parents to control their children and limit their rights and autonomy.

4. The impact on our rights is grave… but there is hope

Anti-rights actors have already had a substantive impact on our human rights framework, especially rights related to gender and sexuality.

Take the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), for example.  Precisely when addressing women’s human rights is of urgent importance, the very space dedicated to this has become extremely harder and harder to make advances in. Our energy is taken up trying to hold the ground against conservative backlash – sometimes even on agreements made 20 years ago!

At the Human Rights Council (HRC), in between progressive gains, we have increasingly witnessed ultra-conservative states aggressively negotiating out positive language and introducing hostile amendments to resolutions.

In a whole range of spaces beyond these two examples, the presence of regressive actors is being keenly felt.  However, we should not see this as a done deal.  

First of all, we should remember that these advances have, at least in part, been a response to the gains of feminism and other progressive movements – a backlash that indicates the extent of our power.

We can also take courage from the many times when anti-rights actors’ attempts were unsuccessful due to the strong efforts of progressive activists.

From the limited amount of regressive language conservative actors managed to insert into Agenda 2030, to the repeated fruitless attempts to block the new mandate of the Independent Expert on sexual orientation and gender identity, to the strong provisions on sexual and reproductive rights and health in the 2016 HRC resolution on discrimination against women – these regressive agendas can and will be thwarted.

Understanding the attacks, to strengthen our rights

This research was founded on the belief that to counter the advance of our “opponents” in human rights spaces we must have an intimate knowledge of the ways they operate. As the first report to come out of OURs, we have focussed most of our attention on the threat itself.

One might wonder if this detailed look at anti-rights efforts risks over-emphasis on the negative aspects of the picture. Our hope is that this first report will act as a strong foundation for building awareness and action in this area.  As we go on, the plan is to build upon these findings, including by documenting the important gains feminists and other progressive actors have made in recent years.

There are many progressive activists doing remarkable and sustained work on our rights related to gender and sexuality – we are many, and we are strong.  Our hope for this research is that it will provide the knowledge to make our collective struggle more strategic, more proactive, and ultimately more effective.


Let’s work together to defend the universality of rights!

Add your voice and apply to become an institutional member. Get in touch to learn more

Seventeen Years of Tracking the World Congress of Families

Today, the World Congress of Families is one of the major driving forces behind the U.S. Religious Right’s global export of homophobia and sexism.

The Political Research Association first reported on the World Congress of Families (WCF) in 2000, noting its role within the coalition of Christian Right groups that was beginning to emerge as a well-organized and influential force at the United Nations. Writing for The Public Eye, Jennifer Butler observed that the Christian Right had “discovered the power of organizing in the international arena,” and was working to “delay and where possible derail progressive change that might be obtained through UN conferences and treaties.”

In the years following the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo and the 1995 World Conference on Women in Beijing—the outcomes of which were hailed by progressive feminists as major victories for gender equality and sexual and reproductive health and rights—Butler reported that “Conservative Catholics, Mormons, Conservative Evangelicals and to a much smaller degree, Muslims and Jews, are developing institutional structures, political rhetoric and mobilized networks to bring their ‘family values’ message to the UN and the world.” She credited WCF with playing a key role in solidifying the group’s platform and collaboration.

Today, WCF is one of the major driving forces behind the U.S. Religious Right’s global export of homophobia and sexism. From its headquarters in Rockford, Illinois, WCF pursues an international anti-choice, anti-LGBTQ agenda, seeking to promote conservative ideologies that dictate who has rights as “family,” and who doesn’t. Through WCF’s advocacy and strategic support, these ideologies are increasingly being codified into regressive laws and policies all around the world, from the United Nations to the Kremlin.

In the lead up to WCF’s 2015 gathering in Salt Lake City, Utah, PRA co-produced an overview of the group and its key affiliates, along with a glossary of key terms used by the organization’s network of Religious Right accomplices to further thwart pro-LGBTQ and women’s rights initiatives

Read the full article from Political Research Associates.

What is a family? UN Women video

UN Women has published a video titled “What is a family?” to promote the diversity of different forms of families worldwide.

Showing symbols of different families, the video says that “families come in many forms” and “it’s time for policies to recognize their diversity”.

Watch the full video from UN Women’s Twitter Account.

Conservatism abets failure to reach consensus on CPD50 resolution – ARROW’s response

The 50th Session of Commission on Population and Development (CPD) on the theme, “Changing Population Age Structures and Sustainable Development”, took place from 3-7 April, 2017 at UN Headquarters in New York. After weeks of strenuous negotiations, the session ended without an outcome document and with a summary of deliberations by the Chair.

The decision was made after weeks of informal and formal negotiations and a draft text which was put forward by the Chair. However, there were consistent disagreements on several issues including sexual and reproductive health and rights, families, and comprehensive sexuality education. The draft text emphasised that population and development, gender equality and women’s empowerment, and the promotion and protection of the full enjoyment of all human rights, especially sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights, are essential for sustainable development. It also reaffirmed to strive to provide young people with a nurturing environment for the full realisation of their rights and capabilities and to help member states to benefit the demographic dividend by investing in policies and programmes that ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and quality education.

However, after an exchange between the representatives of multiple regional blocs, including US, there was no consensus on the draft which was withdrawn by the Chair. Instead of a resolution, the session ended with a Chair’s summary.

We express our deep regrets on the lack of an outcome document for the 50th Session of CPD. The International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action (ICPD PoA) remains the most comprehensive negotiated action document on many aspects of sexual and reproductive health (SRH) and reproductive rights (RR). At its 20-year review, all governments agreed that the agenda should be continued until it is fully achieved, yet many member states were disputing over references to SRH and RR. These non-negotiable population issues are inalienably people’s rights. And the Commission’s failure to reach agreement on these issues – which should be based solely on scientific evidence – casts a shadow on future success of intergovernmental negotiations. It was also disappointing to note that there were huge gaps between what member states were implementing at national level and what they were advocating for at UN; the country statements were far from the actual realities and programmes and development needs at grassroots level.

We hope subsequent CPD sessions uphold the ICPD PoA and further the agenda by protecting and fulfilling universal access to SRHR, including full range of SRH information and services, access to full range of safe, effective and affordable contraceptive services, safe and legal abortion services, comprehensive sexuality education and youth friendly health services for young people, and gender equality and empowerment of women and girls, SOGI, taking into account the lived realities of people and the emerging population and development priorities.

ARROW is deeply committed to continuing to work towards a just, equal, and equitable world together with member states, UN agencies, and civil society organisations.

ARROW’s response to the absence of an outcome document from the 50th Session of Commission on Population and Development (CPD). See ARROW’s oral statement during the event here.

United Nations calls on Government to take direct action after Italy fails to apply law 194

The United Nations Human Rights Committee has expressed serious concerns about the difficulties women face across Italy in accessing legal abortion services as a result of the Italian authorities’ failures to address serious gaps in services due to the high number of health care professionals denying care across the country.

The report released today found that the Italian government’s failure to ensure adequate availability of abortion care violates women’s human rights and compels many women to seek clandestine abortions.

The United Nations Human Rights Committee urged the Italian Government to take the necessary measures to guarantee unimpeded and timely access to legal abortion services across the entire country to all women seeking these services.

Among the necessary measures, the Italian government must create an effective referral system for women who are refused abortion care by medical professionals

“This requires establishing protocols and guidelines ensuring that hospitals that do not provide abortion services can guarantee that patients receive them at other health facilities,” explains Irene Donadio, from IPPF EN.

“This outcome is an important result for women in Italy. For a long time, too many women in Italy were maltreated when they requested the provision of a service guaranteed by law. After the Council of Europe, the United Nations demanded respect for the rights and dignity of women. Now the Italian government must take appropriate measures.”

LAIGA, Vita di Donna, the International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network (IPPF EN) and the Center for Reproductive Rights submitted a report to the United Nations Human Rights Committee highlighting Italy’s breaches of its human rights obligations to guarantee women’s access to legal abortion services.

Dr Silvana Agatone, gynaecologist and president of LAIGA, said: “If the Italian government follows the recommendations as it must, women will finally be guaranteed that when hospitals do not provide the service, there is a well-documented path to another service provider in a short time. It is a step forward!”

Katrine Thomasen, Senior Legal Advisor at the Center for Reproductive Rights added: “Women in Italy face serious risks to their health and wellbeing as a result of Italian authorities’ failures to guarantee access to quality reproductive health services. Today the Human Rights Committee made it clear that the Italian government cannot ignore its human rights obligations and must guarantee women’s access to legal abortion services. It’s time the government prioritizes women’s health and works swiftly to implement measures that give women timely access to the full range of reproductive health services, including legal abortion.”

Read the full statement from the International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network.

HRC34: Joint statement on the Rights of the Child Resolution

Following the adoption of a resolution on the protection of the rights of the child  at the 34th session of the Human Rights Council, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the Sexual Rights Initiative, and Child Rights Connect have released a joint statement.

Today, March 24th, the Human Rights Council adopted a resolution on the protection of the rights of the child in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The resolution, led by the EU and GRULAC, aimed to provide a child’s rights lens to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, the adopted text does not represent the most advanced human rights standards pertaining to the protection of the rights of the child and falls below the agreement reached in the 2030 Agenda.

In particular, the resolution fails to incorporate the right to be heard, the right to participate, adolescents’ rights to sexual and reproductive health, and the principle of evolving capacities.  Moreover, the resolution neglects the particular needs of children with disabilities and LGBTI children and does not recognize that family environments are often sites of violence, especially for girls.

As the highest political body dedicated to the promotion of human rights, the Council has a duty to move beyond the status quo, to champion the core principle of universality of human rights for all and to move forward in the development of norms and standards. The Council must demonstrate the political will and leadership necessary to address the protection of the rights of all children everywhere, bearing in mind that they are active agents in their own lives and rights holders under international human rights law.

Read the full text from Sexual Rights Initiative.

Sexual Rights at HRC34

Sexual Rights Initiative has published a breakdown of expected discussions and outcomes from the 34th session of the UN Human Rights Council.

The session will take place between 27 February and 24 March 2017. The summary includes sexual and reproductive health and rights related resolutions, panels, reports, Universal Periodic Review outcomes and events.

Expected resolutions relevant to sexual rights

  • The rights of the child (EU, GRULAC)
  • Human rights defenders (Norway)
  • Right to privacy in the digital age (Austria, Brazil, Germany, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Norway, Switzerland)
  • Freedom of religion or belief (EU)
  • Freedom of opinion and expression (USA, Uruguay, Latvia, Benin)
  • Birth registration and the right of everyone to recognition everywhere as a person before the law (Mexico, Turkey)
  • Realisation of cultural and economic rights (Portugal)

Sexual rights related panels

Panel discussion on preventable maternal mortality and morbidity and human rights This panel discussion will aim to generate concrete recommendations on actions that States and other stakeholders may take in order to accelerate progress in reducing maternal mortality and morbidity while upholding guarantees of human rights. Click here to download the concept note

Annual full-day meeting on the rights of the child
Theme: Protection of the rights of the child in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
The meeting will contribute to the discussion on how the 2030 Agenda can advance the rights of the child, in particular by leaving no one behind and reaching the furthest behind first. It will stress the importance of mainstreaming children’s rights in the implementation, follow-up and review of all Sustainable Development Goal. Click here to download the concept note

Annual interactive debate on the rights of persons with disabilities 
Theme: Article 5 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities regarding equality and non-discrimination
The debate will seek to identify good practices in promoting the human rights of persons with disabilities in order to achieve substantive equality and to ensure non-discrimination. It will also contribute to raising awareness of the challenges that persons with disabilities continue to face in enjoying their human rights, particularly on accessing reasonable accommodation. Finally, the debate will provide an opportunity to highlight the importance of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development for the realization of the human rights of persons with disabilities and to reduce inequalities. Click here to download the concept note

Sexual Rights Related Reports

A/HRC/34/27
Protection of the rights of the child in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Click here to read the report »A/HRC/34/45
Annual report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Violence against Children. Click here to read the report »A/HRC/34/58
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities. Click here to read the report »A/HRC/34/56
Report of the Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights. Fundamentalism and extremism and their grave impact on the enjoyment of cultural rights. Click here to read the report »A/HRC/34/25
Question of the realization in all countries of economic, social and cultural rights. Report of the Secretary-General. Click here to read the report »

A/HRC/34/29
Realization of the right to work. Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Click here to read the report »

UPR Outcomes 
Outcomes from the 26th session of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) will be adopted during this session of the HRC. The 26th session of the UPR was held from the 31 October to 11 November 2016.
Fourteen countries were reviewed: Haiti, Iceland, Lithuania, Moldova (Republic of), South Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Timor-Leste, Togo, Uganda, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Zimbabwe

For additional information visit the SRI website

Trump’s New “Global Gag Rule” is Much, Much More Far Reaching than George W. Bush’s Policy

President Trump yesterday signed a presidential memorandum re-instating the Global Gag Rule.

For most of the day yesterday the actual text of the memorandum was not released so much of the media coverage — including our own — was based on the understanding that Donald Trump simply re-instated the same policy that existed during the George W. Bush-era administration. In fact, he did not. Rather, after the text became public last night it became clear that Trump dramatically expanded the scope of the Global Gag Rule to include all global health assistance provided by the US government.

Previously, the restrictions embedded in the Global Gag Rule were limited exclusively to NGOs that receive US government assistance for family planning and reproductive health, like contraception. These restrictions include prohibiting that NGO from counseling women that abortion is an option or lobbying foreign governments to liberalize their abortion laws. Even if the funding sources for abortion counseling come from another source, that NGO must cease that counseling or either relinquish its US funding for, say, condom distribution or obstetric surgeries.  That’s how it worked in the Bush administration–to disasterous effect.

But the Trump memo takes this a huge step further. Rather than applying the Global Gag Rule exclusively to US assistance for family planning in the developing world, which amounts to about $575 million per year, the Trump memo applies it to “global health assistance furnished by all department or agencies.” In other words, NGOs that distribute bed nets for malaria, provide childhood vaccines, support early childhood nutrition and brain development, run HIV programs, fight ebola or Zika, and much more, must now certify their compliance with the Global Gag Rule or risk losing US funds. According to analysis from PAI, a global health NGO, this impacts over $9 billion of US funds, or about 15 times more than the previous iteration of the Global Gag Rule which only impacted reproductive health assistance.

Read the full article from UN Dispatch

Joint Statement on Trump’s Global Gag Rule Re-Enactment

We, the undersigned organizations, strongly condemn President Trump’s signing of the Global Gag Rule on January 23rd 2017, one of his first acts as President of the United States.

During the Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. administrations, the Global Gag Rule prohibited foreign NGOs receiving U.S. assistance related to family planning and reproductive health from using non-U.S. funding to provide abortion services, information, counseling or referrals and from engaging in advocacy for access to safe abortion services. This policy causes real and serious harm to women around the world and is a violation of international development agreements signed by the United States. The policy leads to shortages in resources, the closure of health facilities offering services for women, a chill-effect on all related care (including the provision of family planning, contraceptive counselling, etc.) and the denial of lawful safe abortion services.

President Trump’s version of the Global Gag Rule is more extreme than past administrations and will extend to all global health assistance provided across US departments. The political and financial impacts will be significant and far-reaching. According to PAI, in monetary terms, this expanded policy will apply to as much as $9.458 billion in global health funding, which includes programming for maternal health, family planning, HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment, and more.

As the largest donor in the area of sexual and reproductive health, the United States has played a critical role in supporting countries to fulfill women’s rights through improved access to modern methods of contraception, strengthening of health systems, provision of essential health services to survivors of gender-based violence, among other areas. These are priority areas identified by partner countries as critical to their own development goals and their obligations under international human rights law.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, unanimously adopted by 193 countries, specifically targets universal access to sexual and reproductive health as critical to the reduction of poverty and the fulfillment of human rights. With the stroke of a pen, the United States has put this agenda in jeopardy and women around the world will suffer the indignities and often fatal consequences of this action.

Canada, and its allies, both governments and civil society organizations, must step up their efforts to safeguard and advance sexual and reproductive health and rights by increasing development financing in these areas in a comprehensive manner and by championing these issues within diplomatic efforts.

This U.S. policy position represents a gross violation of women’s rights and runs counter to the global trend of liberalizing abortion laws worldwide, which has led to significant decreases in unsafe abortions.

Canada cannot be complicit in the rolling-back of the hard-fought gains made over 20 years ago on women’s rights, specifically their sexual and reproductive rights. Together, we call on Canada and all sexual and reproductive rights allies to denounce the enactment of this expanded Global Gag Rule and to make concerted efforts to increase support for safe abortion care as part of a comprehensive package of sexual and reproductive health services, and to champion advocacy related to safeguarding and advancing sexual and reproductive rights locally, nationally and globally.

Signatories:

  • Abortion Access Now PEI
  • Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights
  • AidWatch Canada
  • Asia Pacific Alliance for Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (APA)
  • Asian-Pacific Resource & Research Centre for Women (ARROW)
  • ASTRA Network
  • ASTRA Youth and Federation for Women and Family Planning
  • Canadian Council for International Co-Operation
  • Comité québécois femmes et développement
  • Compass Centre for Sexual Wellness
  • Deutsche Stiftung Weltbevölkerung (DSW)
  • Federación de Planificación Familiar Estatal
  • FOKUS – Forum for Women and Development
  • Foundation for Leadership Initiatives (FLI)
  • Inter Pares
  • Island Sexual Health Society
  • International Planned Parenthood Federation – Western Hemisphere Region
  • McLeod Group
  • Margaret Pyke Trust, with the Population & Sustainability Network
  • PEI Abortion Rights Network
  • Planned Parenthood Ottawa
  • Planned Parenthood Toronto
  • Rutgers
  • Sexual and Reproductive Justice Coalition
  • Sexual Health Centre Saskatoon
  • Sexuality Policy Watch (Brazil)
  • Shanti Uganda Society
  • SHORE Centre
  • Simavi
  • Southern African AIDS Trust (SAT)
  • Women’s Global Network for Reproductive Rights (WGNRR)
  • WISH Associates

To include your organization as a signatory, please write to Sarah Kennell sarah@sexualhealthandrights.ca

Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights, 25th January 2017

IPPF: Why we will not sign the Global Gag Rule

On 23 January 2017 President Trump signed an executive order reinstating the Global Gag Rule, or the Mexico City Policy.

The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) believes in the right of every individual to decide about their own health and well-being.  As an organisation that seeks to protect and improve the lives of women, men and children around the world, IPPF and its partners in 170 countries will not sign a policy that denies human rights and puts the lives of women at risk.

The Global Gag Rule denies U.S. funding to organisations like IPPF if they use money from other donors to provide abortion services, counselling or referrals—even if abortion is legal in a country.

It blocks critical funding for health services like contraception, maternal health, and HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment for any organisation that refuses to sign it.

When it has been enacted by previous Republican Presidents, evidence has shown that the Global Gag Rule has not reduced the number of abortions; rather, by eliminating access to contraception, it has led to more unintended pregnancies and more unsafe abortions.

IPPF is the largest non-governmental provider of contraception in the world. It has worked with the U.S. government for decades. Our global network of local partners delivers more than 300 services every minute of every day, including 70 million contraceptive services every year.

The Global Gag Rule’s reinstatement will result in additional unintended pregnancies and countless other needless injuries and deaths.

It means IPPF will lose $100 million USD for proven programs that provide comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services for millions of women and youth who otherwise go without these vital services, including women suffering the burden of health and humanitarian crises.

Over the years USAID has been a huge supporter of family planning – with a budget of over $600 million per year. Reinstatement will mean that years of progress to increase access to essential services globally, will be lost.

We cannot—and will not—deny life-saving services to the world’s poorest women.  We will work with governments and donors to bridge the funding and service gaps the Global Gag Rule creates. We will ensure that women can exercise their rights and access safe abortion and family planning.

International Planned Parenthood Federation