The is a collaborative study between the Asian Pacific Resource and Research Centre for Women (ARROW) and CJLS. This study identifies and critically examines the abortion laws and their impact on access to safe abortion rights in ten countries in South Asia and Southeast Asia i.e. Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam. Eighty one respondents who are activists, healthcare workers, researchers and lawyers at the forefront of the abortion rights movements were interviewed for this report. The study also reveals ongoing efforts towards legal reforms in some jurisdictions and concludes with broad recommendations

In an attempt to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government of India announced a nation-wide lockdown in March 2020, which was implemented without providing adequate time and resources.

Notably, the lockdown had an unprecedented impact on people’s ability to access safe abortion services for three broad reasons: (i) the suspension of transport, (ii) lack of adequate services for non-COVID related healthcare issues, and (iii) the legal framework of abortion.

This report highlights disadvantages faced by pregnant persons, especially marginalised persons, during the COVID-19 pandemic and critically engages with the legal barriers on access to safe abortions.

CJLS undertook a comprehensive empirical study of the district-wise availability of specialist doctors (obstetrician/gynaecologists, paediatricians, and radiologists) across states and union territories.

This study found that the setting up of functional Medical Boards is practically impossible since, (i) there is an abysmal shortage of doctors and healthcare facilities in India, and (ii) on average, states and and union territories recorded a shortfall of 80% in obstetricians and gynaecologists, and (iii) some states such as Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Sikkim record a shocking 100% shortfall of paediatricians.

This report is the culmination of research undertaken by students in the Gender Legal Recognition Clinic by the Law and Marginalisation Clinic at Jindal Global Law School.

The report analyses the legal status of gender-variant persons in ten countries. This report highlights the range of issues confronting gender-variant persons across jurisdictions, thereby emphasising the need for flexible and multi-dimensional laws that protect the rights of marginalised communities. The report also aims to serve as an information and advocacy tool for activists, lawyers, and policy makers.

CJLS, in collaboration with IPAS India, undertook a research project to clarify provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, highlight contradictions and gaps in this Act and related laws, including the Pre-Conception Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994 and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act, 2012, and examine the implications on abortion rights of the language and legal conclusions in judgments from the Supreme Court, High Court, District Courts and Consumer Forums up to 2016.

This brief is the result of collaboration amongst the students and faculty of the Cornell International Human Rights Clinic, the Avon Global Center for Women and Justice at Cornell Law School, the University of Chicago Law School’s International Human Rights Clinic, and the Law and Marginalisation Clinic at CJLS.

The objective of this policy brief is to inform policy makers of the points of departure between India’s obligations under the UN Trafficking Protocol and the country’s current anti-human trafficking policies and the realities of human trafficking in India on the ground. Specifically, the policy brief aims to provide details on these points of departure and provides concluding observations on how to bring India’s policies in line with the UN Trafficking Protocol in light of information received from interviews with key stakeholders.

We undertook a study on the right to contraceptive services and information for women in Haryana, India. The primary objective was to delineate whether the state of Haryana is fulfilling its obligations to provide women with access to contraceptive services and information.

The report presents findings from a multi-stakeholder analysis and human rights assessment of the various policy, social, and cultural barriers that impede women in Haryana from realising their fundamental right to contraceptive services and information. This report provides a nuanced depiction of the policy, economic, social, and cultural barriers to contraception and contributes to a deeper understanding of the state’s obligation to ensure the right to contraceptive services and information.

This report aims to determine and analyse the impact of the landmark judgment of the Delhi High Court in July 2009 that held that Section 377 infringed upon fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution of India, and declared the section to be unconstitutional to the extent that it criminalised private consensual sexual activity between adults.