As we anticipated in a previous blog, it is likely that the position of the Constitutional Court regarding conscientious objection requires the analysis of other legal elements that emerge from the report of the United Nations Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity (‘SOGI Expert’).
Although the report suggests a preference for not allowing the use of conscientious objection in medical services, it indicates that in the event that a State is inclined to allow its invocation, certain rules must apply.
In particular, the report mentions: ensuring an adequate number and distribution of providers who are willing to provide the service, allowing the invocation of conscientious objection only at the individual and non-institutional level, establishing effective referral systems to willing providers, reject the invocation of the objection in cases of emergency and establish supervision mechanisms to ensure compliance with these rules.
In line with the opinion of the Constitutional Court regarding conscientious objection, a potential writ of amparo could also indicate the absence or insufficiency of willing providers or the existence of an emergency situation. These two situations are also envisaged as minimum standards in the SOGI Expert’s report.
At CELIG we provide specialized services to the LGBTQI+ community. If you want more information or make an appointment with us, call us at 48-000248 or write to info@celigcr.com.
We are located in San José, Barrio Escalante.
M.Sc. Ana Isabel Sibaja Rojas
CELIG – Center for Equal Litigation
