Ivan Ilić

DOI Number
First page
Last page


Forced and coerced sterilization is a phenomenon that has a long history, as well as in Europe, and on other continents. It is a violation of basic human rights, especially the rights of women, ethnic and racial minorities, the mentally ill, and the persons suffering from HIV. Sterilization is a procedure that is abused for the purpose of implementation of eugenic policies. The author is dealing with the cases before the ECtHR, which referred to forced sterilization. The most important attitudes of the Court, regarding the violation of Articles 3 and 8 of the European Convention, presented. The author criticizes the attitude of the Court not to consider the applicants' claims of discrimination, and argues that this issue is of crucial importance for the further development of the Convention, as a "living instrument".

Full Text:



Against her will-forced and coerced sterilization of women worldwide, Open society foundation, 2011.

Forced Sterilization, Webster University, Retrieved 25.November, 2015 from

Gwendolyn, A, (2011).Forced sterilization and Romani womens resistencein Central Europe, Different takes, nr. 71, Retrieved 25. Nov, 2015 from

Hatcher, R. A, (1997). The Essentials of Contraceptive Technology, A Handbook for Clinical Staff , pp.9-22.

INTERIGHTS Manual for Lawyers –Prohibition of torture, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment according to ECHR (Art.3), Interights, 2005.

Leach, P, (2007).Taking a case to the European Court of Human Rights, Belgrade center on human rights.

Pichot, A, (1995), L'eugénisme ou les généticiens saisis par la philanthropie, Paris, Hatier

Rasevic, M, (1995). Voluntary sterilization in Serbia: unsatisfied needs (Voljna sterilizacija u Srbiji: nezadovoljena potreba), Stanovništvo 1-4.,pp.15-33

Concluding comments of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: Czech Republic, CEDAW/C/CZE/CO/5

Concluding Observations: Slovakia, U.N. Doc. CCPR/CO/78/SVK (2003)

Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, Council of Europe, Oviedo, 1997, CETS No.: 164 (1997)

Declaration on the Promotion of Patients’ Rights in Europe, WHO, (1994)

Guidelines on female contraceptive sterilization, FIGO (2011)

Guidelines regarding informed consent, FIGO Committee for the study of ethical aspects of human reproduction and women’s health, (2009)

Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, WHO (2004)

UNESCO, Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (2005)

A, B and C v. Ireland, no. 25579/05

Albert and Le Compte v. Belgium, no. 7299/75 7496/76

Biçici v. Turkey, no. 30357/05

Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, no. 7525/76

E.B. v. France, no. 43546/02

Evans v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 6339/05

Gafgen v. Germany, no. 22978/05

Gaskin v. the United Kingdom, no. 10454/83

Glass v. the United Kingdom, no. 61827/00

Gül v. Switzerland, no. 23218/94

Hoffmann v. Austria, no. 12875/87

I.G., M.K. and R.H. v. Slovakia, no.15966/04.

Ilhan v. Turkey, no. 22277/93

Ireland v. the United Kingdom, no. 5310/71

Jehovah’s Witnesses of Moscow v. Russia, no. 302/02

K.H. and Others v. Slovakia, no. 32881/04

Kurić v. Slovenia, no. 26828/06

Labita v. Italy, no. 26772/95

Laduna v. Slovakia, no. 31827/02

Malone v. the United Kingdom, no. 8691/79

Marckx v. Belgium, no. 6833/74

Mikheyev v. Russia, no. 77617/01

Mižigarova v. Slovakia, no. 74832/01

N.B. v. Slovakia, no. 29518/10.

Načova v. Bulgaria, no. 43577/98, 43579/98

Niemietz v. Germany, no. 13710/88

Poltoratskiy v. Ukraine, no. 38812/97

R.K v. Chech Republic, no. 7883/08.

Roche v. the United Kingdom, no. 32555/96

Stec and others v.United Kingdom, no. 65731/01 65900/01

Tyrer v. the United Kingdom, no. 5856/72

Tysiąc v. Poland, no. 5410/03

Ünal Tekeli v. Turkey, no. 29865/96

V.C. v. Slovakia, no. 18968/07

W. v. the United Kingdom, no. 9749/82

X and Y v. the Netherlands, no. 8978/80

X v. Austria, no. 8278/78

Y.F. v. Turkey, no. 24209/94

Z and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 29392/95


  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN 1450-5517 (Print)
ISSN 2406-1786 (Online)