CCPR/C/116/D/2324/2013 Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 6.1 Before considering any claim contained in a communication, the Committee must decide, in accordance with rule 93 of its rules of procedure, whether the case is admissible under the Optional Protocol. 6.2 The Committee has ascertained, as required by article 5 2 (a) of the Optional Protocol, that the same matter is not being examined under another international procedure of investigation or settlement. 6.3 The Committee notes that the State party does not dispute the admissibility of the communication. All admissibility criteria having been met, the Committee considers the communication admissible and proceeds to its examination on the merits. Consideration of the merits 7.1 The Committee has considered the communication in the light of all the information made available to it by the parties, as provided under article 5 (1) of the Optional Protocol. 7.2 The author in the present communication was informed by public medical professionals, in the twenty-first week of her pregnancy, that the fetus had congenital defects and would die in utero or shortly after birth. As a result of the prohibition of abortion in Irish law, she was confronted with two options: carrying to term, knowing that the fetus would most likely die inside her, or having a voluntary termination of pregnancy in a foreign country. Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution of Ireland stipulates in that respect that “the State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right”. The State party argues that its constitutional and legislative framework reflects the nuanced and proportionate approach to the considered views of the Irish electorate on the profound moral question of the extent to which the interests of a fetus should be protected and balanced against the rights of the woman. 8 The State party also indicates that article 40.3.3 of the Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, provides that it is lawful to terminate a pregnancy in Ireland only if it is established as a matter of probability that there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the woman (as distinct from her health), which can only be avoided by a termination of the pregnancy. 7.3 The author claims to have been subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment as a result of the legal prohibition of abortion, as she was, inter alia, denied the health care and bereavement support she needed in Ireland; compelled to choose between continuing to carry a dying fetus and terminating her pregnancy abroad; and subjected to intense stigma. The State party rejects the author’s claim by arguing, inter alia, that the prohibition seeks to achieve a balance of competing rights between the fetus and the woman; that her life was not in danger; and that there were no arbitrary decision-making processes or acts of “infliction” by any person or State agent that caused or contributed to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The State party also states that the legislative framework guarantees citizens’ entitlement to information in relation to abortion services provided abroad. 7.4 The Committee considers that the fact that a particular conduct or action is legal under domestic law does not mean that it cannot infringe article 7 of the Covenant. By 8 At the time of the events at issue, the provisions of the Offences Against the Person Act imposed a criminal penalty of life imprisonment for a woman or a physician who attempted to terminate a pregnancy (see para. 3.22 above). 15