Kenya: Attorney General urges the Court to dismiss petition challenging the constitutionality of HIV criminalisation statute

AG opposes suit seeking to decriminalise deliberate HIV transmission

The law says any person who deliberately infects another with life threatening STD is guilty of an offence.

Attorney-General Paul Kihara Kariuki wants the High Court to dismiss a petition that seeks to decriminalise deliberate transmission of HIV or any other life-threatening sexually transmitted disease.

He says the petition filed by six people living with HIV/Aids lacks merit since the law that is being challenged, Section 26 of the Sexual Offences Act, is necessary to curb the spread of the disease.

“In examining the purpose, effect, historical background behind the enactment of the disputed law, and the intention of the legislature, we urge the court to take judicial notice of the fact that Kenya and in general Africa, continues to be ravaged by the scourge despite the scientific gains that have been made towards reducing the mortality rate,” states the AG.

“By passing the disputed law the Legislature was not acting in a vacuum but responding to a situation in which the State needed to intervene”.

The law says any person who deliberately and intentionally infects another with HIV or any other life threatening sexually transmitted disease is guilty of an offence, whether or not he or she is married to that other person, and shall be liable upon conviction to imprisonment for a term of not less than 15 years but which may be enhanced for life.

It also allows the taking and storage of samples, such as blood and urine, from those accused of spreading life threatening sexually transmitted diseases until the finalisation of the criminal case.

The said law also provides that any person who hinders or obstructs the taking of an appropriate samples from the accused is guilty of an offence of obstructing the cause of justice.

Upon conviction, such a person is liable to imprisonment for a term of not less than five years or to a fine of at least Sh50,000

The petitioners argue that the law creates criminal sanctions and punishes persons living with HIV and is thus unconstitutional for violating their rights, such as the right to freedom from discrimination.

Criminal sanctions are not of any use in the reduction of transmission of HIV and are wholly inappropriate where a person does not know he or she is HIV positive or does not understand how HIV is transmitted. Laws such as Section 26 of the Sexual Offences Act merely increases stigma and discrimination of people living with HIV and makes it less likely that they will pursue health affirming behaviour,” state the petitioners.

They also argue that the law limits the right of people living with HIV to consensually start a family with any person of their choice who is not infected with the virus. They said the law is being used to harm persons living with HIV.

Section 26 fails to consider the scientific gains made in the fight against HIV, where there are treatments that suppress the viral load of an infected person to the extent of rendering the chances of transmission to be extremely low or all together nonexistent,” they argue.

But the AG argues that the rights of persons living or affected by HIV are not absolute and that this must be weighed and interpreted with limitations provided under the Constitution.

Mr Kihara says the disputed section of the law only prohibits deliberate transmission of HIV and does not create an obligation to persons who suffer from HIV/Aids to disclose their status to their sexual partners, thereby maintaining their right to privacy.

He states that the law was enacted to protect the vulnerable population of young girls and women.

A declaration of unconstitutionality of the impugned law will undermine public health goals and create a legal vacuum in enforcement of laws protecting persons from deliberate HIV transmission. In light of such legal vacuum, the general public and more particularly the vulnerable population stands to suffer irreparable loss,” says the AG.

We humbly call on this court to breathe life into Section 26 of the Sexual Offences Act and not to stifle the intention of the law maker.

While referring to data from the National Aids Control Council (an Interested Party in the case), state counsel Gracie Mutindi told the court that 21,000 Kenyans (4,333 children and 16,664 adults) die of HIV related causes every year.

It is her position that the disputed law neither constitutes discrimination against people living with HIV simply due to their health status nor does it violate a patient’s right to privacy. Furthermore, the right to privacy is not absolute.

She also denied the petitioners’ allegations that the disputed law violates their right to dignity, freedom from cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by the manner in which it authorises the taking of blood, urine or tissue samples from persons suspected to have infected another with HIV or any other life threatening sexually transmitted disease.

The taking of blood, urine or any other medical or forensic evidence as provided is not done for sadistic pleasure. It is rather aimed at ensuring that all material is availed to enable the court reach a just determination,” states Ms Mutindi

She contends that the right to privacy cannot be used as a tool for circumventing a just legal process intended to prove an offence. The case will be mentioned on February 10.

By Joseph Wangui

[Update]US: New Jersey Governor signs new law repealing old HIV criminalisation statute

New Jersey Repeals Outdated HIV Crime Laws and Fights Stigma

The new law “is a step in the right direction toward reforming the system” regarding HIV and STI prosecutions in New Jersey.

In January, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed legislation that decriminalizes sexual activity by people living with HIV or a sexually transmitted infection (STI) in specific instances. What’s more, the law tackles HIV stigma because it requires that whenever a person is prosecuted under appropriate circumstances, the names of both the accused and the accuser be kept confidential.

The summary of the legislation—S3707/A5673—reads: “Repeals statute criminalizing sexual penetration while infected with venereal disease or HIV under certain circumstances; requires that in prosecutions for endangering another by creating substantial risk of transmitting infectious disease, name of defendant and other person be kept confidential.”

The legislation’s primary sponsors included Senators Joe Vitale (D–Middlesex) and M. Teresa Ruiz (D–Essex) and Assembly Members Valerie Vainieri Huttle and Joann Downey, according to a press release from Governor Murphy.

“Unfortunately, over the years, there has been a culture of criminally targeting HIV-positive individuals in general, rather than targeting those who intentionally expose others. The criminal code is meant to punish actions that harm others, not discriminate against people living with a chronic health condition,” Senator Ruiz said in the press release. “Signing this piece of legislation into law is a step in the right direction toward reforming the system.”

HIV criminalization refers to the use of laws to target people who have HIV—notably African-AmericanLatino and LGBTQ populations—and punishing them because of their HIV status, not because of their actions. Under outdated laws, people with HIV can be sentenced to prison in cases where HIV was not transmitted, simply for allegedly not disclosing their status.

Of note, repealing HIV laws does not mean that people can’t be held accountable for intentionally transmitting HIV. Other laws may apply to the situation.

“Hyacinth AIDS Foundation applauds Governor Murphy signing S3707/A-5673, which would repeal New Jersey specific HIV criminalization statute. New Jersey’s HIV criminal law was based on stigma and fear, rather than modern science,” Axel Torres Marrero, Hyacinth’s senior director of public policy and prevention, said in the press release. “In 2022 it no longer reflects the current science of treatment and transmission of HIV. Today we recognize that no one should be singled out and punished solely on the basis of their HIV status. Taken together with the attorney general’s recent guidance that only a clear, successful intent to do harm should be punished, today New Jersey acknowledges that health care policy and the fight to end the AIDS epidemic must be anchored in the updated science of treatment and transmission of HIV.”

Marrero was referring to HIV-related guidance issued in October by Andrew Buck, who was the acting attorney general at the time. When deciding whether to charge someone under the state’s HIV crime laws, Buck directed prosecutors to consider three factors:

  • Whether the individual forced or coerced their partner to engage in sexual activity;
  • Whether the individual engaged in sexual activity for the purpose of transmitting HIV to their partner; and/or
  • Whether the individual was adhering to a medically appropriate HIV treatment plan at the time of the sexual activity.

“It is virtually impossible,” the guidance states, “to imagine a scenario where it would be appropriate for a prosecutor to charge an individual…when that person’s HIV viral load was undetectable at the time of the sexual activity and no aggravating factors existed.”

One of the goals of the new HIV law and the guidance is to base possible prosecutions on updated science, notably that people with HIV who take meds and maintain an undetectable viral load do not transmit HIV sexually, a fact referred to as Undetectable Equals Untransmittable, or U=U.

Another goal is to fight HIV stigma and encourage testing and treatment. “For decades, the HIV epidemic has had devastating effects on New Jersey, particularly in our LGBTQ+ communities and communities of color,” the governor said in the press release“Repealing the outdated law will eliminate the stigma and fear associated with testing for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, encouraging more individuals to be proactive in learning about their health. This new law, coupled with advances in modern science and medicine, will bolster our efforts to end the HIV/AIDS epidemic in New Jersey.”

In related news, New Jersey also passed a series of harm reduction laws. One allows more syringe exchanges to open; another makes it legal to possess a syringe; and a third creates a review panel to study overdoses.

New Jersey isn’t the only state to decriminalize HIV. Last year, Illinois became the second state to repeal its discriminatory HIV laws (California did so in 2017). And lawmakers in Missouri, Nevada and Virginia have reformed similar laws. For more, see “Breaking HIV Laws: A Roundup of Efforts to Decriminalize HIV.”


Published in Insider NJ on 11/01/2022

Legislation to modernise criminalisation law passed by New Jersey Senate

Senate Passes Vitale-Ruiz Bill to Modernize NJ Statutes Related to HIV/AIDS Transmission

Trenton – In an effort to modernize New Jersey’s statutes related to the transmission of HIV/AIDS and reduce the stigma suffered by individuals living with HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (STI), legislation sponsored by Senators Joe Vitale and M. Teresa Ruiz that would eliminate crimes that are solely applicable to individuals living with HIV/AIDS and STIs was passed by the Senate.

The bill, S-3707, would repeal current statutes that make it a crime for a person to commit an act of sexual penetration under certain circumstances while knowing that he or she is infected with a venereal disease, HIV, or AIDS. The bill maintains and updates the provisions of the statute that criminalizes endangering another person, therefore maintaining an avenue for prosecution in appropriate cases involving the transmission of non-airborne infectious or communicable diseases, without specifically targeting individuals living with HIV/AIDs and sexually transmitted infections.

“While working with advocates to identify areas to improve our harm reduction system of care, they identified updating these statutes to reflect what we now know about the transmission of certain diseases, especially in light in the advances in treatment, as a huge priority,” said Senator Joe Vitale (D- Middlesex). “The current law serves only to criminalize some of our most vulnerable populations, primarily those with HIV, dismissing what we know about the treatment of HIV and how it is and can be transmitted. I am thankful to the advocates who brought this issue to our attention, not only for leading the way on solid public health policy, but also in serving those in need in New Jersey.”

The current laws in place target individuals based on their HIV/AIDS status, rather than their actions. They disproportionately impact certain communities that are more likely to be living with the virus including members of the LGBTQ+ community, Black and Latinx people and transgender women. The new legislation will work to remove the negative stigma and criminalization that these communities and others currently face.

“This legislation is a step in the right direction of inclusivity and removing the stigmatization that surrounds individuals living with HIV. Over the years, there has been criminalization targeting HIV-positive individuals, rather than those who are intentionally harming others,” said Senator Ruiz (D-Essex). “The criminal code is meant to punish actions that harm others, not discriminate against people living with a chronic health condition.”

The bill passed the Senate by a vote of (25-11).

Russia: Laws that restrict migrants with HIV and deny them medical care increases the burden on the health care system

Legal barriers to migrants with HIV are not working

Automated translation via Deepl.com. For original article in Russian, please scroll down.

Laws that restrict the stay of foreign nationals with HIV, as well as the denial of free medical care, may be one of the causes of a hidden epidemic, writes the EECA Regional Platform.

The Regional Expert Group on Migrant Health conducted research in two EECA countries, Armenia and Uzbekistan. The aim was to identify the legal barriers to HIV faced by citizens of the countries who have returned from migration.

Challenges for migrants with HIV

Social isolation and stigmatization, lack of permanent relationships, language barriers, unstable material resources, and limited access to health care services are the main challenges faced by labour migrants with HIV.

Inability to obtain a legal patent because of HIV infection leads to administrative offences:

  • Among migrants: illegal labour activities, commercial sex services
    Among the citizens of host countries: illegal sale of patents and HIV certificates etc.

The problem with getting ARV treatment leads to resistance and a general deterioration of the health of migrants living with HIV. This ultimately increases the burden on the health care system: patients’ opportunistic infections need to be intensified, ART regimens need to be changed, etc. Moreover, returning migrants contribute to the spread of HIV in their home countries.

Currently, the Russian Federation, which receives the largest number of migrants from the EECA region, is one of 19 countries that restrict the stay of foreign nationals with HIV. People living with HIV entering Russia specify visiting relatives, tourism/travel or medical treatment as the purpose, rather than employment.

At the end of 2021, a law came into force in the Russian Federation which requires foreign nationals to be tested for HIV, banned substances and dangerous infectious diseases every 3 months. But foreign business associations, as well as the media, have reacted quite sharply to the Russian law. The business community sent a letter to the Russian Government asking it to simplify the rules and not to subject highly qualified specialists to testing.


Законодательные барьеры для мигрантов с ВИЧ не работают

Законы, которые ограничивают пребывание в стране иностранных граждан с ВИЧ, а также отказ в бесплатной медицинской помощи, могут быть одной из причин скрытой эпидемии, пишет Региональная Платформа ВЕЦА.

Региональная экспертная группа по здоровью мигрантов провела исследование в двух странах ВЕЦА — Армении и Узбекистане. Целью было определить правовые барьеры в связи с ВИЧ, с которыми сталкиваются граждане стран, вернувшиеся из миграции.

Проблемы мигрантов с ВИЧ

Социальная изоляция и стигматизация, отсутствие постоянных отношений, языковой барьер, нестабильный материальный уровень, ограниченный доступ к медицинским услугам — основные проблемы, с которыми сталкиваются трудовые мигранты с ВИЧ.

Невозможность получения легального патента из-за наличия ВИЧ-инфекции ведет к административным правонарушениям:

  • среди мигрантов: незаконная трудовая деятельность, коммерческие секс-услуги;
    среди граждан принимающей страны: нелегальная продажа патентов и сертификатов об отсутствии ВИЧ-инфекции и т.д.

Проблема с получением АРВ-терапии приводит к резистентности и общему ухудшению здоровья мигрантов, живущих с ВИЧ. Это в конечном итоге повышает нагрузку на систему здравоохранения: необходимо усиливать лечение оппортунистических инфекций пациентов, менять схему АРВТ и т.д. Более того, вернувшиеся домой мигранты способствуют распространению ВИЧ в своих странах.

В настоящее время Российская Федерация, принимающая наибольшее количество мигрантов из региона ВЕЦА, является одной из 19 стран, которые ограничивают пребывание иностранных граждан с ВИЧ. Люди, живущие с ВИЧ, въезжая в Россию, указывают в качестве цели не трудоустройство, а посещение родственников, туризм/путешествие или лечение.

В конце 2021 года в РФ вступил в силу закон, согласно которому иностранные граждане обязаны каждые 3 месяца сдавать анализ на ВИЧ, запрещенные вещества и опасные инфекционные заболевания. Но зарубежные бизнес-ассоциации, а также СМИ достаточно остро отреагировали на российский закон. Бизнес-сообщество направило письмо в Правительство РФ с просьбой упростить правила и не подвергать проверке высококвалифицированных специалистов.

US: Women account for 62 percent of HIV-related arrests despite making up just 17 percent of Kentucky’s HIV-positive population

Two-thirds of HIV-related arrests in Kentucky are women, study finds

Women account for 62 percent of HIV-related arrests despite making up just 17 percent of the state’s HIV-positive population, according to a report by the Williams Institute.

Story at a glance

  • At least 32 people have been arrested since 2006 under Kentucky laws that criminalize people living with HIV.
  • All but one of those arrests were related to sex work, and, in 44 percent of arrests, the HIV-related offense was the only reason for contact with law enforcement.
  • People living with HIV in Kentucky may face felony charges which carry a prison sentence of up to five years for engaging in sex work or donating blood, tissues, or organs.

Women account for nearly two-thirds of HIV-related arrests in Kentucky, new research has found, even though less than a quarter of the state’s population of people living with HIV are women.

At least 32 people have been arrested since 2006 under Kentucky laws that criminalize people living with HIV, according to a report by the Williams Institute, a public policy think tank studying issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity.

Women account for 62 percent of those arrests despite making up just 17 percent of the state’s HIV positive population, according to the report, which uses Uniform Crime Reporting data collected by Kentucky State Police.

All but one of the arrests were related to sex work, and, in 44 percent of HIV-related arrests, the HIV-related offense was the sole reason for contact with law enforcement.In Kentucky, people living with HIV, which lives in the blood and other bodily fluids, who engage in sex work or donate blood, tissues, or organs may face Class D felony charges, which carry a prison sentence of one to five years.

More than 15 percent of HIV-related arrests were “almost certainly for conduct that did not involve sex acts,” according to the report, which noted that arrests for allegations of sex work do not need to include actual sex acts.

“A person can be arrested for sex work in the state without engaging in actual sex acts,” the study’s lead author, Nathan Cisneros, said in a statement. “That means Kentucky law can apply a felony charge — which carries a prison term of up to five years — to people living with HIV without requiring actual transmission or even the possibility of transmission.”

More than two-thirds of U.S. states and territories have enacted HIV criminal laws, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

US: Arrests for HIV crimes fell disproportionately on Black men in Virginia

Black people account for 68% of HIV-related arrests in Virginia

Incarcerating people for HIV-related offenses has cost Virginia at least $3.2 million.

LOS ANGELES – Since 2001, at least 97 people have been arrested under Virginia laws that criminalize people living with HIV, hepatitis B, and syphilis, according to a new report by the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law. HIV-related crimes are disproportionately enforced on the basis of race and sex, with Black men being the most likely to be arrested and convicted.

Using data obtained from the Criminal Justice Information Services Division of the Virginia Department of State, researchers found that charges were filed in over 70% of HIV-related arrests in Virginia and more than half of them resulted in a guilty outcome, resulting in sentences averaging 2.1 years.

HIV criminalization is a term used to describe laws that either criminalize otherwise legal conduct or increase the penalties for illegal conduct based upon a person’s HIV-positive status. More than two-thirds of U.S. states and territories have enacted HIV criminal laws.

Until this year, Virginia’s HIV criminalization statute contained a felony provision—which prohibited people living with HIV, Hepatitis B, or syphilis from engaging in sexual activity of any kind with the intent to transmit the infection—and a misdemeanor charge for engaging in sexual activity without disclosing a positive status.

“In reality, people have been charged with felony crimes under Virginia’s HIV criminal laws simply for not disclosing their status,” said lead author Nathan Cisneros, HIV Criminalization Analyst at the Williams Institute. “For two decades, Virginia law has singled out people living with HIV for criminal prosecution without requiring actual transmission or even the possibility of transmission. Moreover, the law ignored whether the person living with HIV is in treatment and virally suppressed, and therefore cannot transmit HIV.”

KEY FINDINGS

  • At least 97 people in Virginia have been arrested for HIV-related criminal offenses since 2001.
  • Black people account for 20% of Virginia’s population, but 58% of the state’s people living with HIV, and 68% of all those arrested for HIV-related offenses.
  • Men comprise 75% of people living with HIV in Virginia, but 87% of people arrested for HIV-related offenses.
    • Black men are 40% of people living with HIV in Virginia, but 59% of all people arrested for HIV-related offenses.
  • Nearly one-fifth (18%) of those arrested for HIV-related crimes had no other criminal history.
  • Charges were filed in over 70% of HIV-related arrests in Virginia. And over half (54%) of all charges filed resulted in a guilty outcome.
  • Guilty outcomes resulted in an average sentence of 2.1 years.
  • Incarcerating people for HIV-related offenses has cost Virginia at least $3.2 million.

Virginia is one of four states, including Missouri, Illinois, and Nevada, to modernize its HIV criminal laws in 2021. Virginia’s new law only criminalises actual, intentional transmission, which remains a felony, and it removes HIV-specific language. Virginia also revised its donation law to align with the federal HIV Organ Policy Equity Act.

Read the report

Belarus: 34 prosecutions for HIV infection in 2021

Translated with Deepl.com – For original article in Russian, please scroll down.

34 criminal cases related to the human immunodeficiency virus were opened in 2021. This was reported by the Investigative Committee.

December 1 is the International AIDS Day. The day was established to raise awareness about the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. This date annually urges the entire world community not only to remember this as yet incurable disease, but also to be tolerant to those who are already carriers of the disease.

“Deliberately transmitting the disease is punishable under criminal law,” the agency said.


СК: в 2021 году возбуждено 34 уголовных дела по факту заражения ВИЧ

1 декабря, Минск /Корр. БЕЛТА/. В 2021 году возбуждено 34 уголовных дела по факту заражения вирусом иммунодефицита человека. Об этом БЕЛТА сообщили в Следственном комитете.

1 декабря отмечается Международный день борьбы со СПИДом. День учрежден с целью повышения осведомленности о синдроме приобретенного иммунодефицита. Эта дата ежегодно призывает всю мировую общественность не просто помнить об этой пока неизлечимой болезни, но и быть терпимыми к тем, кто уже является переносчиком этого заболевания.

“Умышленное заражение этим заболеванием преследуется в уголовно-правовом порядке”, – отметили в ведомстве.-0-

 

US: Identical bills filed in Florida Senate and House of Representatives to bring outdated criminal law in line with science

Florida Lawmakers Introduce Bills to Modernize HIV Criminal Law on World AIDS Day

Coinciding with World AIDS Day, Senator Jason Pizzo (D-Miami) and Representative Felicia Robinson (D-Miami Gardens) have introduced identical bills in the Senate (SB 1074) and House of Representatives (HB 813) to bring an outdated criminal law in line with the contemporary understanding of HIV. Florida’s laws written at the height of the HIV/AIDS epidemic makes it a felony punishable by up to 30 years in prison for a person living with HIV to have sexual contact without first disclosing the diagnosis to their potential sexual partner, regardless of whether the contact presents any risk of transmission. The bills limit criminal liability to situations in which the person living with HIV intends to cause harm and engages in conduct that can transmit HIV.

“This modernization of Florida’s HIV-focused criminal laws is long overdue,” said Rep. Robinson upon filing the bill in the House. “Today, people living with HIV who are receiving appropriate treatment live long, healthy lives—and those same treatments make it impossible to transmit HIV sexually. Given these advances, the criminal law should stop treating HIV differently from any other transmissible infection.”

Advocates view the prospects for these bills as good given how COVID-19 has changed public perceptions regarding transmissible disease and the appropriate role of the government in controlling choices about the risks that people take, particularly in the privacy of their own homes.

“Imposing criminal penalties to attempt to control a transmissible disease was never sound public policy—and COVID-19 has made that clear to more people,” said Sen. Pizzo. “We hope to see bipartisan support this session for fixing these laws that turn law-abiding citizens into criminals based on the fact that they are living with a manageable, transmissible disease and choose to live their lives like anyone else.”

Kamaria Laffrey, who leads the Florida HIV Justice Coalition, noted the benefits to public health and efforts to end the HIV epidemic in Florida: “We want people to get tested for HIV and to remain engaged in care and treatment if they test positive, but the threat of criminal prosecution under the current law is a barrier to these things,” said Laffrey. “By eliminating criminal penalties and reducing the intense stigma associated with HIV, we make it easier for people to seek the testing and care they need and for everyone to have frank conversations about the risks involved in any sexual encounter.”

States including Virginia, Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, and Michigan have recently revised similar HIV criminalization laws, recognizing the significant advances in science for treatment and prevention from the laws’ original enactments.

Since 1988, World AIDS Day has been observed on December 1, and is a time to raise awareness of the HIV/AIDS Epidemic and remember those lost to AIDS.

Equality Florida is the largest civil rights organization dedicated to securing full equality for Florida’s LGBTQ community. Through education, grassroots organizing, coalition building, and lobbying, we are changing Florida so that no one suffers harassment or discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity. www.equalityflorida.org 

El Salvador: Stigma Index reports that 23 women were sterilised without their knowledge or consent in the past year

El Salvador forced sterilisation of HIV-positive women

Translated via Deepl.com – For original article in Spanish, please scroll down –

Written by Fátima Escobar

When Lizz found out she was pregnant, she was also told she had HIV. When she gave birth to her only daughter, at the age of 17, she was forcibly sterilised by medical staff at one of El Salvador’s main public hospitals. The Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Central American country only recognised that her right to reproductive health was violated. Eleven years later, she still wants to become a mother again. This text is part of the collaborative journalism project #ChangeTheStory, supported by the Deutsche Welle Akademie.

Months earlier, Lizz had received the news of her pregnancy and the positive test result for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) at the same time. She says she was more concerned about the news of her pregnancy than the HIV diagnosis.

One morning in December 2010, Lizz* felt her baby kicking loudly in her belly and demanding to come into the world. Her pregnancy, marked by the despair of an unforeseen diagnosis, was nearing full term.

Upon her arrival at the National Women’s Hospital “Dr. María Isabel Rodríguez”, the most important women’s hospital in El Salvador, medical staff asked her if she wanted to be sterilised, but Lizz said no. Because of her HIV status, she had to be sterilised. Because of her HIV status, she had to have a caesarean section and was taken to the operating room that night.

Minutes before she was to be anaesthetised for the caesarean section, a nurse asked her again if she was going to be sterilised and handed her a form to authorise the procedure. Lizz signed without being fully informed of the consequences.

Eleven years later, she talks about that day via video call. She pauses, takes her eyes off the screen and says: “They were practically going to let me die, they told me that if I didn’t sign they wouldn’t treat me. I signed because I couldn’t stand the pain.

After giving birth to her only daughter, Lizz had part of her reproductive organ mutilated in surgery to prevent her from having children again when she was only 17.

Four years later, Lizz’s case was taken to the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of El Salvador, where it was found that she did not have full capacity to give informed consent to be sterilised because she was a minor.

I A pillar of support
When Lizz was just 16, she had a relationship with a man eight years her senior. A few months later, she began to feel sick and had severe headaches. She went to the doctor in the community of Cojutepeque, less than an hour from the capital, and after tests she was told that she was pregnant and that she was also HIV-positive.

“At that moment, what worried me most was that I was pregnant. I didn’t think about the HIV diagnosis,” she says.

When she told her partner the news, he was not surprised. He already knew he was HIV-positive and offered to live with her as a couple. Lizz moved out of her parents’ house and stopped her studies. Today she believes that she became pregnant as a result of rape because she was still a minor.

For the next few months, she had to go to the Women’s Hospital, the only one in the country for maternal care, where she received a course of retrovirals. At birth, her baby was born with a negative diagnosis. She was free of the virus.

The human immunodeficiency virus attacks the immune system and weakens defence systems against infections and certain cancers. It is transmitted through the exchange of body fluids from an infected person, such as blood, breast milk, semen or vaginal secretions.

State data show that the chances of a child being infected with HIV at birth are very low. According to the Ministry of Health of El Salvador (MINSAL), one in every 100 babies born to mothers with HIV are diagnosed with the virus. These figures are consistent with those reported by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), which states that the risk of a woman with HIV transmitting the virus to her child is reduced to 5% or less with effective treatment.

Lizz received the treatment stipulated by MINSAL. Indeed, the same report states that by 2010, 100% of known HIV-positive pregnant women in the country received antiretroviral drugs to reduce the risk of infant transmission. These figures reflect that Lizz could safely have more children.

In 2019, El Salvador’s Ministry of Health reported 26,893 people living with HIV in the country, 34% of whom were women.

Lizz followed her and her baby’s health status at her local hospital, some 18 km south of the country’s capital, and there she was connected to HIV support organisations when she went to her medical appointments.

“I used to go for check-ups at Cojutepeque Hospital, where I joined a support group and feminist non-governmental organisations. He (her ex-partner) was an alcoholic and beat me. I suffered a lot of physical abuse. But by joining these groups I became empowered. I became very empowered,” she says in an energetic tone. When her baby was three months old, she decided to separate and returned to her parents’ home.

At the hospital she met members of the Asociación Atlacatl Vivo Positivo, which works for the rights of people living with HIV. They provided her with a scholarship to finish high school. Psychological therapies and group sessions contributed to her education and empowerment. And she says that after a very difficult healing process, she can now talk more easily about it.

II More women with HIV sterilised

Lizz’s case is not unique. Other HIV-positive women and minors have been systematically sterilised in El Salvador.

In her amparo lawsuit, it was found that “in hospital practice, girls and adolescents are sterilised with the sole requirement that they sign an authorisation form to that effect”. In the ruling to which Alharaca had access, it is documented that one of the doctors questioned in the process said that “a minor under twelve years of age can be sterilised according to family planning regulations”.

The Technical Guide for Family Planning Care (GTAPF), mentioned in the amparo, does not stipulate that sterilisations of certain patients on the basis of age are allowed, but only requires the patient’s informed consent.

Lizz’s case was brought to the judiciary thanks to the Asociación Nacional de Personas Positivas Vida Nueva (ANP+VN), which focuses on reducing HIV disease in El Salvador.

Together with other civil society organisations and authorities, they participated in conducting the People Living with HIV Stigma Index (INDEX) 2019, interviewing patients in 19 hospitals of the public health system.

The report documented that 23 out of 514 people surveyed were sterilised without their knowledge or consent in the past year. All of those who said they had been sterilised were women. Most of them are poor and have little access to education, says Catherine Serpas, executive director of ANP+VN.

The same study found that 7.2 per cent of respondents were advised not to have children and 5.6 per cent said they were pressured, encouraged or induced to become permanently sterilised through tubal ligation or vasectomy.

Serpas added that the study also found three more cases of minors recounting their experience.

“It was alarming to come across cases of forced sterilisation. The first case we collected was from a woman who experienced this in 1998. Also, here we found cases of girls, minors,” says Serpas. She says that the association did not keep records of all of them, but after contacting some women, many decided not to participate in legal proceedings for fear of stigma.

One of those who did manage to follow up was Lizz, after conducting the INDEX 1.0 study. “The case happened in 2010, but she only spoke about it in 2014,” she explained.

III The legal battle
Organisations protecting the rights of people with HIV are often part of support groups like the one Lizz attended. There she met peers who had gone through the same thing and were persuaded by medical staff to be sterilised. This motivated her to speak out and start a legal process with the support of ANP+VN.

In 2014, they filed an injunction seeking recognition of the violation of Lizz’s reproductive health rights and HIV-related discrimination by medical staff at the National Women’s Hospital “Dr. María Isabel Rodríguez”.

A key element in bringing the case was to have the medical file, which they requested from the hospital through the Institute for Access to Public Information (IAIP), but were denied. Until they were taken to the amparo trial, the hospital authorities handed over the file, which had no evidence to justify the sterilisation.

Lizz’s defence had access to statements from some of the medical staff that it made “no sense” for people with HIV to continue having babies.

The hospital director denied before the Chamber any act of HIV discrimination or that the patient was forced to undergo sterilization.

The Constitutional Chamber declared in 2015 that there had been “violation of her fundamental rights to reproductive health, reproductive self-determination and personal integrity – in relation to the fact that, being a minor, and therefore not having full capacity to give her informed consent to be sterilised”.

“We did manage to prove that there was discrimination (on the grounds of HIV), but the Court did not admit it,” said Crissia Pérez, her lawyer and legal representative.

The Chamber’s ruling ordered the promotion of a process for material and moral damages and guaranteed adequate psychological treatment to overcome the consequences of the act of sterilisation.

IV Maternity. A right denied

Lizz suffered from recurrent bouts of depression. After the trial she wanted to regain her fertility.

Surgical sterilisation is a procedure in which the fallopian tubes, which carry the egg from the ovary to the uterus, are blocked. This can be by tying and cutting the tubes, by cauterisation, or closure with a ring or clamp.

About 20% of sterilised women regret their decision, but there are cases that cannot be reversed. One of them was Lizz’s.

“There are different ways of cutting the tubes, but the cut the doctor made was flush. There was no way to reconstruct the tubes. We interpret this as a practice of violence and an act against humanity,” says Catherine Serpas.

Between January 2013 and July 2021, 36 sterilisations were performed on women who verified delivery with a primary diagnosis of HIV out of a total of 280 deliveries in the country’s public hospitals, according to MINSAL data provided through the Institute for Access to Public Information (Instituto de Acceso a la Información Pública).

***

A gynaecologist working for the public health system, whose name she wishes to withhold for her own safety, warns that it is a moot point to recommend that a woman with HIV should not have children.

“If you go back to the 1980s, a diagnosis of HIV infection was practically a death foretold. Today we have the facility that there are various support programmes for these patients, including antiretroviral therapy, screening tests and social and psychological support groups,” she explains.

She says that if the patient is responsible for her health and her medication, she can become pregnant and have her pregnancy monitored regularly.

“Now, if the situation is different with a patient who has had poor adherence to her treatment or is irresponsible in her controls, who has uncontrolled secondary diseases or a poor prognosis,” she warns, “it becomes necessary to avoid pregnancy to prevent maternal or foetal complications.

Serpas explains that reproductive health issues are not seen as a problem. “This happens because we live in a world that is seen as totally masculine, especially on issues such as HIV,” she says.

ANP+VN often receives complaints about the lack of support in terms of family planning, she adds. “There is still a belief that the person is diagnosed and forgets about their sex life… We have found that when it comes to cytology (testing for the human papillomavirus, which causes cervical cancer) they have been mistreated by health staff, always with the interpretation ‘why are you still having sex’. The HIV response has evolved, but the thinking is still poor.

IV Migration
Lizz not only faced obstetric violence in her home country, during the trial she also received anonymous phone calls threatening her life. During her visits to the hospital for psychological treatment, medical staff tried to persuade her to drop her lawsuit.

The Head of the HIV and Human Rights Department of the Human Rights Ombudsman’s Office, Jaime Argueta, acknowledged that “there is no system of protection that can give guarantees to the person who has had the courage to file a complaint, to protect her against the state itself. She even began to be questioned when she received her treatment”.

Stigma is becoming less and less common in the health and workplace, she says, but “HIV testing is still required for employment as part of a battery of tests”.

At the community level, he warns that there is still a lot of discrimination and people’s diagnoses are disclosed in the places where they live.

“Maybe they work in a beauty salon and someone starts spreading the diagnosis and they lose their customers. Or they sell any kind of ready-made food for consumption and their livelihoods are also affected,” she said.

Lizz lived in an area declared to be at high risk of gang violence. This became another reason for her to migrate to the United States with her daughter and her current partner. There, more than 10,000 kilometres away from the country that expelled her, she is now trying to rebuild her life.

“I wanted a better life for my daughter. Fear also played a part in my decision to migrate,” she said.

V A new life
Despite her irregular migration status, Lizz has managed to access retroviral treatment through a protocol at a research centre in the United States, which she accessed through a hospital.

For now she is working, studying English and wants to go back to university to study law to help others: “My dream is to work in an organisation that helps with human rights or migration”.

According to the International Community of Women Living with HIV and AIDS (ICW Latina), in El Salvador the legal framework that establishes sanctions for health personnel in the case of forced sterilisation of women with HIV has a positive rating, that is, according to this organisation, doctors do receive penalties in these cases. However, those who attended Lizz’s case did not receive any penalty.

At the close of this investigation, an interview was requested with the head of the National STI/HIV/AIDS Programme, Dr Ana Isabel Nieto Gómez, to find out her position on Lizz’s case, but no response was received. Dr. Nieto was in the same position in 2010, when Lizz was forcibly sterilised.

Nieto is now an official in the government of President Nayib Bukele. His regime has been criticised for lacking accountability, giving little access to the press and declaring public information “confidential”.

ANP+VN currently works to provide legal support, training, psychological care, job reinsertion and alternative income generation for people living with HIV. It also has a close relationship with support groups for people with HIV in the national hospital network. Hundreds of people have benefited from its projects. Their lawyer shared that when the press covered Lizz’s case, they became aware of more cases that they could follow up and bring to justice if they had the funds.


El Salvador forzó la esterilización de mujeres con VIH

Cuando Lizz se enteró de que estaba embarazada, también le informaron que tenía VIH. Al momento de parir a su única hija, a la edad de 17 años, fue esterilizada de manera forzada por el personal médico de uno de los principales hospitales públicos de El Salvador. La Sala de lo Constitucional en la Corte Suprema del país centroamericano solo reconoció que se violó su derecho de salud reproductiva. A once años de lo ocurrido, mantiene el deseo de volver a ser madre.

Lizz había recibido meses antes de forma simultánea la noticia de su embarazo y el resultado positivo a la prueba del virus de inmunodeficiencia humana (VIH). Asegura que le preocupaba más la noticia de su embarazo que el diagnóstico del virus

Una mañana de diciembre de 2010, Lizz* sintió en su vientre que su bebé pateaba fuerte y con ello exigía su llegada al mundo. Su embarazo, marcado por la desesperanza de un diagnóstico imprevisto, estaba por llegar a término.

Desde su llegada al Hospital Nacional de la Mujer “Dra. María Isabel Rodríguez”, el más importante para la atención de la mujer en El Salvador, personal médico le preguntó si quería ser esterilizada, pero Lizz respondió que no. Por su condición de VIH le tenían que hacer una cesárea y en la noche fue llevada a la sala de operaciones.

Minutos antes de que se le aplicara la anestesia para practicarle la cesárea, una enfermera le preguntó de nuevo si se iba a esterilizar y le entregó un formulario para autorizar el procedimiento. Lizz firmó sin haber sido informada plenamente de las consecuencias.

A once años de lo ocurrido, habla sobre ese día a través de una videollamada. Hace una pausa, quita la mirada de la pantalla y dice: «prácticamente me iban a dejar morir, me dijeron que si no firmaba no me iban a atender. Yo firmé porque no soportaba el dolor».

Después de dar a luz a su única hija, a Lizz le fue mutilada una parte de su órgano reproductivo en una intervención quirúrgica para impedir que volviera a tener hijos cuando sólo tenía 17 años.

Cuatro años después, el caso de Lizz fue llevado a la Sala de lo Constitucional de la Corte Suprema de El Salvador, donde se comprobó que no tenía la capacidad plena para otorgar su consentimiento informado para ser esterilizada por el hecho de ser menor de edad.

I Un pilar de apoyo

Cuando Lizz tenía apenas 16 años, tuvo una relación con un hombre ocho años mayor que ella. A los pocos meses, comenzó a sentir malestar y dolores de cabeza intensos. Fue al médico en la comunidad de Cojutepeque, a menos de una hora de la capital, y después de hacer estudios le dijeron que estaba embarazada y que también era portadora de VIH.

“En ese momento lo que más me preocupó fue estar embarazada. No dimensioné el diagnóstico de VIH”, relata.

Cuando le dio la noticia a su pareja, él no se sorprendió. Ya sabía que era portador del virus y le ofreció vivir en pareja. Lizz salió de la casa de sus padres y suspendió sus estudios. Hoy considera que quedó embarazada por un acto de violación porque aún era menor de edad.

De su comunidad tuvo que ir los siguientes meses al Hospital de la Mujer, el único para atención materna en el país, donde recibió un tratamiento de retrovirales. Al nacer, su bebé nació con diagnóstico negativo. Estaba libre del virus.

El virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana ataca al sistema inmunitario y debilita los sistemas de defensa contra las infecciones y contra determinados tipos de cáncer. Se transmite a través del intercambio de líquidos corporales de la persona infectada, como la sangre, la leche materna, el semen o las secreciones vaginales.

Los datos del Estado reflejan que las probabilidades de que un menor se infecte de VIH al momento de su nacimiento son muy bajos. Según el Ministerio de Salud de El Salvador (MINSAL) uno de cada 100 bebés nacidos de madres con VIH son diagnosticados con el virus. Estos datos coinciden con los reflejados en el Programa Conjunto de las Naciones Unidas sobre el VIH/Sida ONUSIDA, donde se asegura que el riesgo de que una mujer con VIH le transmita el virus a su hijo se reduce a un 5 % o menos con un tratamiento eficaz.

Lizz recibió el tratamiento estipulado por el MINSAL. Incluso, el mismo informe asegura que para el año 2010 el 100 % de embarazadas con VIH conocidas en el país, recibieron medicamentos antirretrovirales para reducir el riesgo de transmisión infantil. Estas cifras reflejan que Lizz podía tener más hijos de forma segura.

En 2019, el Ministerio de Salud de El Salvador reportó 26,893 personas vivas con VIH en el país, de ellas el 34 % eran mujeres.

Lizz dio seguimiento a su estado de salud y el de su bebé en su hospital local, unos 18 km al sur de la capital del país, y ahí tuvo conexión con organizaciones de apoyo a personas con VIH cuando iba a sus citas médicas.

“Yo iba a controles al Hospital de Cojutepeque, ahí me uní a un grupo de apoyo y a organizaciones feministas no gubernamentales. Él (su expareja) era un hombre alcohólico y me golpeaba. Sufrí mucho abuso físico. Pero al unirme a estos grupos me empoderé. Me empoderé muchísimo”, dice en tono enérgico. Cuando su bebé cumplió tres meses, decidió separarse y volvió a casa de sus padres.

En el hospital conoció a integrantes de la Asociación Atlacatl Vivo Positivo, que trabaja a favor de los derechos de las personas con VIH. Ellos le brindaron una beca para terminar sus estudios de educación media. Las terapias psicológicas y las sesiones grupales contribuyeron a su formación y empoderamiento. Y asegura que después de un proceso de sanación muy difícil, ahora puede hablar con mayor facilidad sobre el tema.

II Más mujeres con VIH esterilizadas

El caso de Lizz no ha sido el único. Otras mujeres con VIH y menores de edad han sido esterilizadas de forma sistemática en El Salvador.

En su juicio de amparo, se comprobó que “en la práctica hospitalaria se esteriliza a niñas y adolescentes con el único requisito que estas suscriban un formulario de autorización para tal efecto”. En el fallo al que tuvo acceso Alharaca, se documenta que una de las doctoras interrogadas en el proceso dijo que «una menor de doce años de edad puede ser esterilizada según la normativa de planificación familiar».

La Guía Técnica de Atención en Planificación Familiar (GTAPF), mencionada en el amparo, no estipula que exista esterilizaciones a ciertos pacientes en razón de edad, únicamente exige que haya un consentimiento informado del paciente.

El caso de Lizz fue llevado al Poder Judicial gracias a la Asociación Nacional de Personas Positivas Vida Nueva (ANP+VN), enfocada en la reducción de la morbilidad del VIH en El Salvador.

Junto con otras organizaciones de la sociedad civil y autoridades, participaron en la realización del Índice de Estigma en Personas con VIH (INDEX) 2019, haciendo entrevistas a pacientes en 19 hospitales del sistema público de salud.

En el Informe se documentó que 23 de 514 personas encuestadas fueron esterilizadas sin su conocimiento o su consentimiento en el último año. Todas las que afirmaron este hecho eran mujeres. La mayoría de ellas son de escasos recursos económicos y tienen poco acceso a educación, señala Catherine Serpas, directora ejecutiva de ANP+VN.

El mismo estudio reflejó que a un 7.2 % de las personas encuestadas le aconsejaron no tener hijos y un 5.6 % menciona que fue presionado, motivado o inducido para esterilizarse de forma permanente por medio de ligadura de trompas o vasectomía.

Serpas añadió que en el estudio también encontraron tres casos más de menores de edad que contaban su experiencia.

“Fue alarmante encontrarnos con casos de esterilizaciones forzadas. El primer caso que recolectamos fue de una mujer que vivió esto en 1998. Además, aquí encontramos casos de niñas, menores de edad”, expresa Serpas. Ella dice que la asociación no guardó registro de todos, sin embargo, al realizar contacto con algunas mujeres, muchas decidieron no participar en procesos legales por miedo al estigma.

Una de las que sí lograron dar seguimiento fue Lizz, luego de realizar el estudio INDEX 1.0. “El caso ocurrió en 2010, pero ella habló de este hecho hasta 2014”, explicó.

III La batalla legal

Las organizaciones de protección de los derechos de personas con VIH suelen formar parte de los grupos de ayuda como a los que asistía Lizz. Ahí conoció a compañeras que pasaron por lo mismo y que fueron persuadidas por el personal médico para ser esterilizadas. Eso la motivó a hablar e iniciar un proceso legal con el acompañamiento de ANP+VN.

En 2014 promovieron un amparo para que se reconociera la violación de los derechos de salud reproductiva de Lizz y discriminación en razón del VIH por parte del personal médico del Hospital Nacional de la Mujer «Dra. María Isabel Rodríguez».

Un elemento clave para llevar el caso era tener el expediente médico, el cual solicitaron al hospital por medio del Instituto de Acceso a la Información Pública (IAIP), pero les fue negado. Hasta que fueron llevadas al juicio de amparo, las autoridades del hospital entregaron el expediente, el cual no tenía pruebas que justificaran la esterilización.

La defensa de Lizz tuvo acceso a declaraciones de parte del equipo médico que señalaban que “no tenía sentido” que las personas con VIH siguieran teniendo bebés.

El director del hospital negó ante la Sala cualquier acto de discriminación por VIH o que se haya forzado a la paciente para ser sometida a esterilización.

La Sala de lo Constitucional declaró en 2015 que sí hubo «vulneración de sus derechos fundamentales a la salud reproductiva, a la autodeterminación reproductiva y a la integridad personal —con relación al hecho de que, siendo menor de edad, y por lo tanto no teniendo la capacidad plena para otorgar su consentimiento informado para ser esterilizada».

“Sí logramos probar que hubo discriminación (en razón de VIH), pero la Sala no lo admitió”, lamentó su abogada y apoderada legal Crissia Pérez.

En el fallo de la Sala se ordenó la promoción de un proceso por los daños materiales y morales y garantizar un tratamiento psicológico adecuado para superar las secuelas por el acto de esterilización.

IV Maternidad. Un derecho negado

Lizz sufrió cuadros de depresión recurrentes. Después del juicio quiso recuperar su fertilidad.

La esterilización quirúrgica es un procedimiento en el que las trompas de Falopio, que transportan el óvulo desde el ovario hasta el útero, se bloquean. Esto puede ser por atadura y corte de los conductos, por cauterización, o cierre con un anillo o grapa.

Un 20 % de las mujeres esterilizadas se arrepiente de su decisión, pero hay casos que no se pueden revertir. Uno de ellos fue el de Lizz.

«Hay diferentes tipos de cortar las trompas, pero el corte que le hizo el médico era al ras. No había forma de reconstruir las trompas. Nosotros interpretamos esto como una práctica de violencia y un acto de lesa humanidad», señala Catherine Serpas.

Entre enero de 2013 hasta julio de 2021 se realizaron 36 esterilizaciones en mujeres que verificaron parto con un diagnóstico principal VIH de un total de 280 partos en los hospitales públicos del país, según datos del MINSAL brindados por medio del Instituto de Acceso a la Información Pública.

***

Una ginecóloga que trabaja para el sistema de salud público, cuyo nombre desea omitir para resguardar su seguridad, advierte que es una temática discutible el recomendar a una mujer con VIH no tener hijos.

“Si nos remontamos a los años ochenta, el diagnóstico de infección por VIH era prácticamente una muerte anunciada. Hoy tenemos la facilidad de que hay diversos programas de apoyo para estos pacientes, que incluyen la terapia antirretroviral, exámenes de control y grupos de apoyo social y psicológico”, explica.

La médica asegura que si la paciente es responsable de su salud y sus medicamentos, puede embarazarse y llevar el control periódico de su embarazo.

“Ahora, si el panorama es diferente con una paciente que ha tenido poca adherencia a su tratamiento o sea irresponsable en sus controles, que tenga enfermedades secundarias no controladas o de mal pronóstico», advierte, «se vuelve necesario evitar el embarazo para evitar complicaciones maternas o fetales”.

Serpas explica que los temas de salud reproductiva no son vistos como un problema. “Eso pasa porque vivimos en un mundo que se ve totalmente masculino, y más, en temas como el VIH”, dice.

ANP+VN recibe con frecuencia reclamos sobre la falta de apoyo en términos de planificación familiar, agrega. “Todavía se cree que la persona recibe el diagnóstico y se olvida de su vida sexual… Hemos detectado que a la hora que se les hace la citología (prueba de detección del virus del papiloma humano, que causa el cáncer de cérvix) han recibido maltrato por parte del personal de salud, siempre con la interpretación de ‘¿por qué sigue teniendo relaciones sexuales?’. La respuesta del VIH ha evolucionado, pero el pensamiento sigue siendo mediocre”.

IV Migración

Lizz no solo enfrentó la violencia obstétrica en su país, durante el juicio también recibió llamadas anónimas donde la amenazaban con atentar contra su vida. En sus visitas al hospital para recibir tratamiento psicológico, hubo personal médico que la intentó persuadir para que desistiera en su demanda.

El Jefe Departamento de VIH y Derechos Humanos de la Procuraduría General de Derechos Humanos, Jaime Argueta, reconoció que “no existe un sistema de protección que pueda dar garantías a la persona que ha tenido el valor de presentar la denuncia, para protegerla contra el mismo estado. Incluso, ella empezó a ser cuestionada al momento de recibir su tratamiento».

Cada vez es menos frecuente es el estigma en ámbito de salud o en el ámbito laboral, dice, pero aún se pide la “prueba de VIH para el ingreso a un empleo como parte de la batería de exámenes”.

En el ámbito comunitario, advierte que todavía hay mucha discriminación y se divulgan los diagnósticos de personas en los lugares donde ellos viven.

“Tal vez trabajan en una sala de belleza y alguien empieza a divulgar el diagnóstico y pierden sus clientes. O venden cualquier tipo de alimentos ya preparados para el consumo y también son afectadas en sus formas de vida”, expuso.

Lizz vivía en una zona declarada de alto riesgo de violencia por pandillas. Esto se convirtió en una razón más que la llevó a migrar a Estados Unidos junto con su hija y su actual pareja. Allá, a más de 10 mil kilómetros del país que la expulsó, ahora intenta rehacer su vida.

“Quería una vida mejor para mi hija. El miedo también tuvo que ver en mi decisión de migrar”, expresó.

V Una nueva vida

A pesar de su condición migratoria irregular, Lizz ha logrado tener acceso a un tratamiento de retrovirales a través de un protocolo en un Centro de Investigación en Estados Unidos, al cual accedió por medio de un hospital.

Por ahora trabaja, estudia inglés y desea regresar a la Universidad a estudiar leyes para ayudar a otras personas: “Mi sueño es trabajar en una organización que ayude en los derechos humanos o migración”.

Según la Comunidad Internacional de Mujeres viviendo con VIH Sida (ICW Latina), en El Salvador el marco legal que establece sanciones para el personal sanitario en el caso de la esterilización forzada a las mujeres con VIH tiene una calificación positiva, es decir, según esta organización los médicos sí reciben penalidad ante estos casos. Sin embargo, los que atendieron el caso de Lizz no recibieron ninguna penalidad.

Al cierre de esta investigación se solicitó una entrevista con la jefa del Programa Nacional de ITS/VIH/SIDA, Dra. Ana Isabel Nieto Gómez, para conocer su postura respecto al caso de Lizz, sin embargo no se recibió respuesta. La doctora Nieto fungía en ese mismo cargo en 2010, cuando Lizz fue esterilizada de forma forzosa.

En la actualidad Nieto es funcionaria del Gobierno del presidente Nayib Bukele. Su régimen ha sido señalado por nula rendición de cuentas, dar poco acceso a la prensa y por declarar “confidencial” información pública.

En la actualidad ANP+VN trabaja para brindar apoyo legal, capacitaciones, atención psicológica, reinserción laboral y generación de alternativas de ingresos para personas con VIH. Además, tiene estrecha relación con los grupos de apoyo de personas con VIH de la red hospitalaria nacional. Cientos de personas se han visto beneficiadas por sus proyectos. Su abogada compartió que cuando la prensa cubrió el caso de Lizz, tuvieron conocimiento de más casos a los que podrían dar más seguimiento y llevar a la justicia si contaran con los fondos.

 

Russia: Medical documents showing negative HIV status and no drug addiction required for stays over 90 days

Migrants may be required to provide the Ministry of Internal Affairs with a certificate of the absence of HIV infection

Automated translation – For original article in Russian, please scroll down

MOSCOW, November 19. / TASS /. Labor migrants and foreign citizens who have arrived in Russia for a period of more than 90 days may be obliged to provide the Ministry of Internal Affairs with medical documents showing the absence of drug addiction and HIV infection from December 29. This follows from the draft order prepared by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, which was reviewed by TASS.

“To approve the procedure for submission by foreign citizens and stateless persons who arrived in the Russian Federation for purposes not related to the implementation of labor activities, for a period exceeding 90 calendar days, or for the purpose of labor activity, to the territorial body of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation <…> documents confirming the passage of a medical examination for the presence or absence of the fact of their use of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances without a doctor’s prescription or new potentially dangerous psychoactive substances, infectious diseases that pose a danger to others, <…> and a disease caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV -infection) “, – the document says. At the same time, it is noted that “this order comes into force on December 29, 2021”.

As follows from the document, foreigners must submit medical documents to the Ministry of Internal Affairs within 30 days from the date of expiration of the previously issued medical documents confirming that they have passed a medical examination. In the event that a foreign citizen has not reached the age of 18 or is recognized by a court as incompetent, documents can be submitted by one of his parents, guardians or trustees.

“Medical documents can be submitted at the place of residence of a foreign citizen on paper – directly to the migration department of the territorial body of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, or to an enterprise or an authorized organization, or in the form of an electronic document signed with an enhanced qualified electronic signature, using the federal state information the system “A single portal of state and municipal services (functions)” to the territorial body of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, “the draft order says.

In the event that the documents are drawn up in a foreign language, then they must be translated into Russian, the correctness of which must be notarized. Upon admission, the authorized person must check the full compliance of the documents with the established standards, and then issue a certificate of receipt. At the same time, if a migrant submits medical documents in electronic form, then an electronic message is sent to him about their acceptance no later than the working day following the day they were received. Subsequently, information about the receipt of medical documents is entered into the information system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, intended for the provision of public services, within three working days from the date of their receipt.


Мигрантов могут обязать предоставлять в МВД справки об отсутствии ВИЧ-инфекции

Приказ может вступить в силу 29 декабря
МОСКВА, 19 ноября. /ТАСС/. Трудовых мигрантов и иностранных граждан, прибывших в Россию на срок более 90 дней, могут обязать с 29 декабря предоставлять в МВД медицинские документы об отсутствии у них наркозависимости и ВИЧ-инфекции. Это следует из подготовленного МВД РФ проекта приказа, с которым ознакомился ТАСС.

“Утвердить порядок представления иностранными гражданами и лицами без гражданства, прибывшими в РФ в целях, не связанных с осуществлением трудовой деятельности, на срок, превышающий 90 календарных дней, либо в целях осуществления трудовой деятельности, в территориальный орган МВД РФ <…> медицинских документов, подтверждающих прохождение медицинского освидетельствования на наличие или отсутствие факта употребления ими наркотических средств или психотропных веществ без назначения врача либо новых потенциально опасных психоактивных веществ, инфекционных заболеваний, представляющих опасность для окружающих, <…> и заболевания, вызываемого вирусом иммунодефицита человека (ВИЧ-инфекции)”, – говорится в документе. При этом отмечается, что “настоящий приказ вступает в силу с 29 декабря 2021 года”.

Как следует из документа, представить медицинские документы в МВД иностранцы должны в течение 30 дней со дня истечения срока действия ранее выданных медицинских документов, подтверждающих прохождение ими медицинского освидетельствования. В случае, если иностранный гражданин не достиг 18 лет или признан судом недееспособным, документы может представить один из его родителей, опекунов или попечителей.

“Медицинские документы могут быть представлены по месту пребывания иностранного гражданина на бумажном носителе – непосредственно в подразделение по вопросам миграции территориального органа МВД России, либо в предприятие или уполномоченную организацию, либо в форме электронного документа, подписанного усиленной квалифицированной электронной подписью, с использованием федеральной государственной информационной системы “Единый портал государственных и муниципальных услуг (функций)” в территориальный орган МВД России”, – отмечается в проекте приказа.

В том случае, если документы составлены на иностранном языке, то они подлежат переводу на русский язык, верность которого должна быть нотариально засвидетельствована. Уполномоченное лицо при приеме должно проверить полное соответствии документов установленным нормам, после чего выдать справку об их получении. При этом, если мигрант подает медицинские документы в электронном виде, то ему направляется электронное сообщение об их приеме не позднее рабочего дня, следующего за днем их получения. В последующем сведения о получении медицинских документов вносятся в информационную систему МВД России, предназначенную для предоставления государственных услуг, в течение трех рабочих дней с даты их получения.

US: Supreme Court agrees that sex offender law struck down by Louisiana Supreme Court is unconstitutional

Supreme Court Declines To Hear Louisiana’s Defense of a Law That Stamped ‘SEX OFFENDER’ on Driver’s Licenses

The policy imposed an additional form of ritual humiliation on a reviled category of people without any plausible public-safety justification.

The U.S. Supreme Court today declined to hear Louisiana’s appeal of a decision against its 2006 law requiring that people on the state’s sex offender registry carry IDs or driver’s licenses that say “SEX OFFENDER” in orange capital letters. A year ago, the Louisiana Supreme Court concluded that the requirement amounted to compelled speech and could not be justified by the state’s legitimate interest in protecting public safety. In addition to raising First Amendment issues, Louisiana’s now-moribund law illustrates the longstanding tendency to impose additional punishment on people convicted of sex offenses in the guise of regulation.

The registries themselves, which require sex offenders to regularly report their addresses to local law enforcement agencies so that information can be made publicly available in online databases that also include their names, photographs, and physical descriptions, are primarily punitive, exposing registrants to ostracism, harassment, and violence while impeding their rehabilitation by making it difficult to find employment and housing. There is little evidence that the sort of public notification practiced by every state delivers benefits that outweigh those costs. Louisiana’s experiment in ritual humiliation, which branded registrants with orange letters they had to display in every transaction that required producing a government-issued ID, compounded those costs without offering any plausible benefits.

One problem with sex offender registries is that they cover a wide range of crimes, including many that do not involve violence, force, or physical contact. While people tend to imagine rapists or child molesters when they hear the term sex offender, the reality can be quite different, in ways that are important in assessing the danger that a person might pose to the general public or to people in particular age groups.

In Louisiana, for example, mandatory registration applies not only to crimes like rape and sexual assault but also to nonviolent offenses, such as voyeurism, possession of child pornography, consensual sex between adults who are closely related, sex between high school teachers and students (even when the student has reached the age of consent), and employment of a minor in “any practice, exhibition, or place, dangerous or injurious to the life, limbs, health, or morals of the minor.” Robert Suttle, who posted the picture of his driver’s license shown above, was forced to register because he was convicted of intentionally exposing someone to HIV, which resulted in a six-month prison sentence. After a bad breakup, he says, his former partner told the police he had not been informed of Suttle’s HIV status.

The second line of each record in the state’s registry shows the offender’s “tier,” which corresponds to various crimes classified by severity, ranging from Tier 1 (least serious, requiring registration for 15 years) to Tier 3 (most serious, requiring lifetime registration). Further down in the record, you can see the statute under which the registrant was convicted (e.g., “carnal knowledge of a juvenile”), which still omits potentially important details.

The driver’s license warning required by Louisiana’s law did not provide even that much information, meaning that anyone who saw it was invited to assume the worst. Tazin Hill, the man who challenged the law, completed his prison sentence in 2013. He was convicted of having sex with a 14-year-old when he was 32, which placed him in Tier 1. But anyone who saw his license had no way of knowing the nature or severity of his offense. Rebelling at this government-imposed badge of shame, Hill excised the “SEX OFFENDER” label from his license and covered the gap with clear tape, which resulted in the criminal charges that gave rise to this case.

Another problem with sex offender registries is the mistaken assumption that people who fall into this broad category are more likely to commit additional crimes than, say, robbers, burglars, or arsonists. When it upheld mandatory “treatment” of sex offenders in prison, for example, the Supreme Court relied on a highly dubious recidivism estimate that was repudiated by its original source but has nevertheless been cited repeatedly by lower courts. The “SEX OFFENDER” stamp on Louisiana driver’s licenses, even more than the registry, promoted such erroneous fears by implying that the bearer posed an ongoing threat, no matter the details of his crime, how long ago it occurred, or how he had behaved since he completed his sentence.

The empirically unjustified belief that sex offenders are highly prone to recidivism is especially inaccurate and damaging when applied to people convicted as minors, who are included in Louisiana’s registry and therefore had to carry “SEX OFFENDER” IDs or driver’s licenses. Judy Mantin, who this year testified before a state legislative committee that was considering revisions to Louisiana’s law in light of the state Supreme Court’s ruling, said her son “made a mistake” when he was 14 but today is “a very productive citizen.” She argued that “our children deserve a second chance in life.”

Legislators ostensibly have made the same judgment regarding adults convicted of sex offenses, who have notionally paid their debt to society once they complete their criminal sentences. Yet legislators imply otherwise by imposing additional burdens on those people for decades after their official punishment. In this case, any interaction involving a driver’s license—e.g., with cashiers, hotel clerks, bank tellers, employers, landlords, election officials, or airport security screeners—became a new invitation to close-range fear and loathing.

What was the justification for this requirement, which added to the burdens imposed by registration, public notification, and residence restrictions? The state argued that the “SEX OFFENDER” label facilitated law enforcement by alerting police officers to a person’s status. But police already could readily check that by consulting the state’s database. And as the Louisiana Supreme Court noted, the state could have eliminated even that slight inconvenience with a more discreet label: “A symbol, code, or a letter designation would inform law enforcement that they are dealing with a sex offender and thereby reduce the unnecessary disclosure to others during everyday tasks.”

Such a solution would not be adequate, the state argued in its petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, because “the Louisiana Legislature concluded that the public, and not merely law enforcement, needs to know of a sex offender’s status under limited circumstances.” Such as?

“A property manager needs to know a sex offender’s status when leasing an apartment—or the manager might incur liability if a tenant is raped on the premises,” the petition said. “A church or Red Cross facility may need to know a person’s status as a sex offender when providing shelter from a storm. People trick or-treating on Halloween may need a quick way to verify that their children are safe from predators.”

During a lower-court hearing, one of the state’s lawyers offered another example:

If I’m deciding who I want to be my babysitter and I know that I don’t want a sex offender to babysit my children, I say, “OK. I’d like to see your ID before I allow you to babysit my children.” And, “Oh, it says ‘sex offender.’ I’m not going to hire you.”

The Halloween scenario suggests the state’s desperation, not only because this particular hazard is an urban legend but also because it is difficult to imagine a situation in which parents would demand to see the driver’s licenses of neighbors handing out candy to trick-or-treaters. Even when the concerns are more reasonable, the public registry, for better or worse, already allowed anyone to look up an individual and see if he was listed; that was supposedly the whole purpose of creating a publicly accessible database in the first place.

“Louisiana’s branded-identification regime was an outlier in singling registrants out for public opprobrium,” Hill’s lawyers noted in their brief urging the Supreme Court not to consider the state’s appeal. “Just two other States require identification cards to display phrases like ‘SEX OFFENDER,’ while only six States have laws that require identification cards to include other types of sexual offense disclosure—typically a symbol or statute number recognizable only to law enforcement.”

Even as an outlier, Louisiana’s law suggests how ready politicians are to support practically any burden on sex offenders, whether or not it makes sense as a tool to promote public safety. Policies like these serve no useful purpose, but they do make life harder for a reviled category of people whose punishment never ends.