A Civilised Society Does Not Permit Abortion Because the Baby is a Girl
23-year-old Woman Who Seeks Justice Against Doctors who Permit Sex-Selective Abortion is Being Forced to Pay Crippling Legal Fees
23-year-old Woman Who Seeks Justice Against Doctors who Permit Sex-Selective Abortion is Being Forced to Pay Crippling Legal Fees
A 23 year old woman, Aisling Hubert, who brought a private prosecution against two doctors who approved abortion on the grounds that the child was a girl, has been ordered by the courts to pay £47,000 in legal fees. £36,000 of this sum is to be paid to the doctors who approved sex-selective abortion.
Background: in 2012, during an undercover investigation by a national newspaper, Manchester-based Dr Prabha Sivaraman and Birmingham-based Dr Palaniappan Rajmohan were separately filmed offering abortion to a pregnant woman who said that she was carrying a female child but did not want to have a baby girl.
Despite the fact that there was a realistic prospect of conviction by the Crown Prosecution Services’ (CPS) own admission, the CPS did not proceed with the case because it was not in the public interest.
The case was subsequently taken up by Aisling Hubert in a rare private prosecution against the two doctors. To cut a long story short (read the full story here), the CPS intervened and blocked the case.
Following the intervention of the CPS Aisling was ordered to pay £36,000 to the two doctors. Unable to pay the bill, Aisling is expected to appear in court and she could face prison time.
It remains unclear whether the disgustingly misogynistic practice of sex-selective abortion is legal under British law – it is, after all, almost exclusively female children who are aborted as a result of this practice. But precisely because the law is unclear, it is an additional injustice against Aisling, that she should have to pay the legal fees of the defendants.
In other words, by forcing Aisling to pay the legal fees of the defendants, the courts are implicitly supporting the doctors in this case and implicitly supporting sex-selective abortion. Yet it remains unclear whether or not this practice is actually legal.
We therefore call on the Director of Public Prosecution, because the legality of sex-selective abortion remains unclear, to do all within her power to ensure than Aisling is not required to pay the legal bills of the defendants.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11470814/Door-wide-...
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/british-woman-faces-hefty-fine-for-try...
http://www.christianconcern.com/our-concerns/abortion/23-year-old-who-pu...
Complete your signature
Sign this petition now!
Private Prosecutions Must Not Be Landed with Unjust Crippling Legal Fees
For the Attention of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders CB,
Dear Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders CB,
I am sure you are aware of the Crown Prosecution Service’s decision, in 2015, to drop the private prosecution undertaken by Ms Aisling Hubert against two doctors known to approve sex-selective abortions in the UK.
Ms Hubert is now having to pay the legal bills of the two doctors as well as her own. She cannot possibly be expected to pay this combined legal bill (£47,000) and, as a result, she could face jail time.
Your predecessor, Keir Starmer, failed to clarify the law in respect to this case and it remains legally unclear whether or not sex-selective abortion is permitted in the UK. As such, the fact that Ms Hubert is having to pay the doctors’ legal fee implies that the law is on the side of the doctors and that the law permits sex selective abortion.
However, as the Abortion Act 1967 is not clear about the legality of sex-selective abortion and since the act has not in fact been clarified, it is entirely unjust that Ms Hubert have to pay the doctors’ legal bill.
I ask you therefore, because the legality of sex-selective abortion remains unclear, to do all within your power to ensure than Ms Hubert is not required to pay the legal bills of the defendants.
Private Prosecutions Must Not Be Landed with Unjust Crippling Legal Fees
For the Attention of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders CB,
Dear Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders CB,
I am sure you are aware of the Crown Prosecution Service’s decision, in 2015, to drop the private prosecution undertaken by Ms Aisling Hubert against two doctors known to approve sex-selective abortions in the UK.
Ms Hubert is now having to pay the legal bills of the two doctors as well as her own. She cannot possibly be expected to pay this combined legal bill (£47,000) and, as a result, she could face jail time.
Your predecessor, Keir Starmer, failed to clarify the law in respect to this case and it remains legally unclear whether or not sex-selective abortion is permitted in the UK. As such, the fact that Ms Hubert is having to pay the doctors’ legal fee implies that the law is on the side of the doctors and that the law permits sex selective abortion.
However, as the Abortion Act 1967 is not clear about the legality of sex-selective abortion and since the act has not in fact been clarified, it is entirely unjust that Ms Hubert have to pay the doctors’ legal bill.
I ask you therefore, because the legality of sex-selective abortion remains unclear, to do all within your power to ensure than Ms Hubert is not required to pay the legal bills of the defendants.
