OSCE Special Rapporteur Warns of Growing Abortion Bans and “Anti-Gender” Movements

The report of the Special Rapporteur

Operating within the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE),– Canadian politician and physician Hedy Madeleine Fry, the Special Representative on Gender Issues published a report about the situation regarding “sexual and reproductive health and rights” in the region.

The document is essentially divided into three parts. In the first of these, the rapporteur discusses issues related to sexual and reproductive health and rights, highlights current threats and presents recommendations for the Member States. Part Two contains a summary of the Special Representative’s activities for 2024-2025. The final part of the report presents data on “gender balance” in the Bureau and Secretariat of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, statistics on women’s participation in statutory meetings of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, election observation missions, and ad hoc committees, as well as information on women’s representation in the national parliaments of OSCE participating States.

What are “reproductive and sexual rights”?

Although the authors of the report do not attempt to define the term “reproductive and sexual health and rights,” it is worth explaining what this concept entails for the purposes of the discussion presented in this publication. “Sexual and reproductive health and rights”, which in official documents of various international organizations and other entities also appears as “sexual and reproductive rights” or “reproductive rights”, is an undefined and broadly understood concept encompassing a set of rights related to human reproduction. In this context, it is especially worth noting that left-liberal circles derive from this concept a right to abortion, which, according to them, is meant to be an integral part of “reproductive and sexual rights.”

International law and reproductive and sexual rights

The substantive part of the report discussed here begins by recalling international commitments regarding “sexual and reproductive health and rights.” At the same time, the document wrongly emphasizes (as explained below) that “guarantees relating to sexual and reproductive health and rights have been affirmed in core international human rights conventions and agreements” (p. 5). In this context, reference is made, among other things, to the provisions of the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the recommendations of the body charged with overseeing the implementation of the Convention—the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), and the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development held in Cairo in 1994.

The report cites, for example, the provisions of the Convention guaranteeing women equal rights in deciding “freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and to have access to the information, education and means to enable them to exercise these rights” [Article 16(1)(2) of the Convention]¹, the 1999 recommendations of the CEDAW Committee, according to which the States parties to that international treaty should “”prioritize the ‘prevention of unwanted pregnancy through family planning and sex education and reduce maternal mortality rates through safe motherhood services and prenatal assistance.'”² as well as the content of the Programme of Action of the Cairo Conference, which, in the authors’ view, confirms that “reproductive and sexual health and rights” constitute part of human rights (p. 7).

In fact, in what they cite as the 1994 Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development, it was explicitly emphasized that “governments should take appropriate steps to help women avoid abortion,” and that abortion “should in no case be promoted as a method of family planning” (para. 7.24 of the Programme of Action)³. Furthermore, it is worth noting that the Program clearly stipulates that “any measures or changes related to abortion within the health system can only be determined at the national or local level according to the national legislative process.”

It should also be noted that none of the treaties contains provisions relating to the concept of “reproductive and sexual rights,” and no international agreement establishes a “right to abortion.” Many international human rights treaties contain provisions guaranteeing the right to life to every human being, such as Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (1950)⁴ and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966).⁵ Moreover, the cited recommendations of the CEDAW Committee are not legal norms but recommendations that could be classified as acts of so-called soft law. In summary, it is difficult to agree with the report author’s claim that “guarantees relating to sexual and reproductive health and rights have been affirmed in core international human rights conventions and agreements.”

Threats to “reproductive and sexual rights”

Later in the report, it is emphasized that movements opposing “gender equality “in the OSCE region and worldwide threaten “sexual and reproductive health and rights.” First of all, attention was drawn to “anti-gender movements”, which, according to the document’s author, have been increasingly active in recent years. It is noted that they are attempting, through organized campaigns and legislative measures, to influence legislation, policy, and public opinion. As an example of such actions, the rapporteur cites efforts to maintain or introduce a ban on abortion. It is said in the document that these movements also target human rights defenders and civil society organizations that work to promote and protect “reproductive and sexual rights.” Additionally, in some countries, civil society organizations addressing gender issues allegedly face difficulties in obtaining funding, participating in decision-making processes, and implementing certain activities due to legislation, policies, and public campaigns. The report also indicates that “anti-gender” movements are increasingly active at the international level.

Abortion trends in Europe

Citing data from the pro-abortion organization Center for Reproductive Rights⁶, the Special Rapporteur notes that over the past 30 years only four countries have tightened their abortion laws, and among OSCE member states only two—Poland and the United States. The Special Rapporteur emphasizes that in European countries there is a general trend toward liberalizing abortion laws and “removing barriers” in this area. On the other hand, the report notes that in many countries there are numerous obstacles to accessing abortion, manifested, among other things, by doctors invoking the conscience clause, hospitals not offering “services” related to terminating a pregnancy, and the introduction of regulations under which those seeking an abortion must undergo ultrasound examinations.

The Special Rapporteur, once again citing data from the Center for Reproductive Rights, notes that there are only five countries in Europe that have “very restrictive” abortion laws and do not permit abortion on broadly defined social or economic grounds or on request. It is worth noting that among this small group of countries, alongside Andorra, Liechtenstein, Malta, and Monaco, Poland is the only large OSCE participating State in which, whether de facto or de iure, abortion on request is not available. The remaining countries listed in this range are so-called microstates, that is, countries with a small area and a very small population.

What is particularly noteworthy, the report noted a 2020 ruling of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal declaring the eugenic ground for abortion unlawful, stating that Poland became “the only European Union member state in recent history to remove a legal ground for access to abortion” (p. 12). In doing so, the Special Rapporteur relies on the report⁷ of the CEDAW Committee, asserting that Poland has committed serious and systematic violations of rights under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. Furthermore, she cites the findings of the CEDAW Committee’s report, according to which Poland “created a regulatory framework of strict State control over women’s reproductive health and autonomy,” while domestic law compels women to “carry pregnancies to full term, thereby subjecting them to severe physical and mental anguish, constituting gender-based violence against women.”

In a later section of the OSCE report, the Rapporteur highlights the problems that Ukrainian women fleeing their country following the Russian aggression were reported to face in countries such as Poland and Hungary, with regard to “reproductive and sexual rights”, including access to abortion. “Access to safe abortion and post-abortion care was particularly challenging for displaced individuals in Germany, Poland, and Slovakia, in some cases forcing them to seek an abortion abroad,” it stated (p. 13).

Recommendations of the Special Rapporteur

Summarizing the part of the report concerning abortion, the Special Rapporteur underscores that longstanding efforts for sexual and reproductive rights and gender equality have reached a turning point. “Decades of global progress in the area of SRHR are being threatened by growing political and social polarization and anti-gender ideologies and movements” (p. 17). Therefore, the Special Rapporteur cursorily calls on OSCE member states to implement “appropriate guidelines,” including the WHO guidelines on abortion care from 2022.⁸ “I join my voice to those who have called on their governments to align their laws, policies and practices with the WHO recommendations in order to guarantee accessible, safe, legal, free and high-quality sexual and reproductive health services in their jurisdictions,” we can read in the report (p. 17).

It is worth noting that the referenced World Health Organization document contains a number of far-reaching and extremely controversial recommendations, as some of them call for introducing much more radical legal measures aimed at the lives of unborn children than those in place in the vast majority of Western countries, where abortion is in any case widely available on demand, either de jure or de facto. Among them, the WHO, through the referenced document, recommends to member states, among other things, the complete decriminalization of this practice, and furthermore advises that abortion be available to women, girls, or “other pregnant persons” on request throughout pregnancy, and opposes laws and other regulations that prohibit abortion based on gestational age limits. Moreover, the World Health Organization recommends eliminating mandatory waiting periods before abortion and that access to abortion not be restricted by barriers stemming from the use of conscience clauses. It should also be noted that the Special Rapporteur, in her report, does not mention the above-mentioned recommendations contained in the WHO guidelines, making only a general reference to the recommendations developed by the World Health Organization.

Furthermore, this OSCE Special Representative on Gender also reiterates the recommendation presented in the 2024 edition of the report⁹, in which she recommends that participating States create a legal environment that enables civil society organizations to access diverse sources of funding, including private and public, to support their activities. “Civil society organizations work on the frontlines of the SRHR space, and it is critical that they can provide services without hindrance or fear of political retribution,” the document emphasizes (p. 18).

It is also worth noting the appeal by the Special Rapporteur, who strongly urges the participating States within the OSCE structures to double their support for “sexual and reproductive health and rights” on the international stage through new financial commitments. In the Special Rapporteur’s view, this appeal stems from current political dynamics, including the liquidation of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and cuts to U.S. foreign aid. “Prior to its dismantling, USAID was the largest government agency for international assistance, funding critical development and humanitarian programmes around the world, including in the area of SRHR,” the report noted (p. 18).

Activities of the Special Rapporteur

Later in the report, a concise summary of the Special Rapporteur’s activities for 2024-2025 is included. In this context, those listed include, among other things, the preparation and publication of the previously mentioned document titled “Gender Report 2024. Fostering Free and Inclusive Societies: The Role of Civil Society Organizations in a Time of Democratic Decline,” a meeting in Bucharest with civil society organizations in Bucharest, and active participation in the work of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Ad Hoc Committee on Migration.

Data on women’s participation in OSCE bodies

The final part of the report analyzes gender representation within the Parliamentary Assembly and the International Secretariat of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, as well as the gender composition of parliaments in countries participating in the organization’s structures. It also includes an overview of “gender balance” among ambassadors and permanent representatives to the Vienna-based OSCE.

Among the data presented in this part of the document, it is worth noting the gradual increase in women’s representation in the Parliamentary Assembly of Europe, with men still clearly in the majority (in June 2025, women accounted for 32.6% of the Assembly’s members, including chairs of delegations, vice-chairs, members, and substitute members, which represents a slight increase compared to the previous year).

The rapporteur also notes, drawing on data in the report from the Inter-Parliamentary Union, that in recent years the percentage of women in the parliaments of the OSCE participating States has fluctuated. In this context, it explains that in 2020 the percentage of women in these legislative bodies was 29%. In 2021, it rose to 38%, and then fell to 30.75% in both 2022 and 2023. In 2024, this percentage increased slightly to 30.86%. As of April 30, 2025 (the latest data available at the time of preparing the report under review), the percentage of women is 31.40%. The report also notes that, in the OSCE region, Cyprus has the lowest percentage of women in parliaments (14.30%), followed by Hungary (15.20%). Andorra has the highest share of women in the legislature at 50%, followed by Iceland (46%), Monaco (45.80%), and Finland (45.50%).

Pressure on countries

When commenting on the information, arguments, and recommendations contained in the report of the Special Rapporteur on Gender, it should be noted that it constitutes an example of the pro-abortion activities of international organizations, in this case the OSCE. The document repeatedly uses the concept of “reproductive and sexual rights” to promote the so-called right to abortion on demand, using guidelines prepared by another international organization, namely the World Health Organization. At the same time, it is worth noting that the Special Rapporteur fails to take into account the provisions of the Program of Action of the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development, which clearly state that abortion should not be promoted as a method of family planning. Therefore, the report of the OSCE Special Representative on Gender Issues should be treated as yet another instrument falling within the category of so-called soft law, intended to exert gradual pressure on sovereign states in order to lower the level of protection of human life at its prenatal stage of development.

Patryk Ignaszaczak – analyst at the Ordo Iuris Center for International Law.

1 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 18 December 1979, Journal of Laws of 1982, No. 10, item 71; https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU19820100071, accessed: December 17, 2025).

2 GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY THE COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN Twentieth session (1999)* General recommendation No. 24 Article 12 of the Convention (women and health); https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/recommendations/index.html, accessed: December 17, 2025).

3 Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development Adopted at the International Conference on Population and Development Cairo 5–13 September 1994; https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/programme_of_action_Web%20ENGLISH.pdf, accessed: December 17, 2025.

4 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, signed in Rome on November 4, 1950, as amended by Protocols Nos. 3, 5, and 8 and supplemented by Protocol No. 2, Journal of Laws of 1993, No. 61, item 284; https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=wdu19930610284, accessed: December 19, 2025).

5 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights opened for signature in New York on December 19, 1966, Journal of Laws of 1977, No. 38, item 167, https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=wdu19770380167, access: December 19, 2025).

6 World’s Abortion Laws – Center for Reproductive Rights; https://reproductiverights.org/maps/world-abortion-laws/, accessed: December 17, 2025).

7 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. Inquiry concerning Poland conducted under article 8 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention, 2024; https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CEDAW%2FC%2FPOL%2FIR%2F1&Lang=en, accessed: December 17, 2025).

8 World Health Organization, Abortion Care Guidline, 2022; https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240039483, accessed: December 17, 2025).

9 2024 Gender Report: Fostering free and inclusive societies: The role of civil society organizations in a time of democratic decline, https://www.oscepa.org/en/documents/special-representatives/gender-issues/report-17/4995-2024-gender-report-fostering-free-and-inclusive-societies-the-role-of-civil-society-organizations-in-a-time-of-democratic-decline-eng/file, accessed: December 18, 2025).