News
Featured Image
 Shutterstock.com

LONDON, March 17, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) — A British pro-life activist is being forced to drop her lawsuit against two abortionists who were caught in an undercover sting operation agreeing to perform sex-selective abortions for women who did not want baby girls.

With the help of the Christian Legal Centre, 21-year-old pro-life activist Aisling Hubert sued abortionists Palaniappan Rajmohan and Prabha Sivaraman after the Daily Telegraph newspaper filmed the pair offering to abort baby girls based only on their sex – a practice that is widely considered illegal in the U.K., despite the law’s failure to specifically address the topic. 

Raimohan and Sivaraman originally faced criminal charges brought by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), with the case being widely seen as an opportunity to formally clarify U.K. law regarding abortion based on a baby’s sex.  But under heavy pressure from pro-abortion campaigners, the CPS ultimately dropped the case, saying that prosecution of the abortionists was “not in the public interest,” and that any potential consequence would be better dealt with by the General Medical Council, not the courts.

After that, Hubert took up the case as a private prosecution with the help of the Christian Legal Centre.  But this week, the CPS stepped in to halt the private lawsuit.

“In relation to the private prosecutions, we have concluded that they should be taken over by the CPS and stopped,” the agency said in a statement.

“Taking in to account all the other evidence we are aware of, whilst there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction, this is truly very finely balanced indeed.  However, the public interest considerations in not pursuing a prosecution outweigh those in favour.”

The CPS decision comes just weeks after the House of Commons rejected a proposed law that would have explicitly outlawed sex-selective abortions.  Trade union activists joined with pro-abortion groups in urging MPs to vote the bill down, arguing that “[t]o force a woman to continue a pregnancy to term and to go through labour because we do not like her reasons for wanting an abortion would be a significant retrograde step.”

In the video made public by the Telegraph, Sivaraman is told by a pregnant mother that she recently discovered she was having a girl, and now wanted an abortion because she had been “hoping for a boy.”

Sivaraman readily agreed.  “I don’t ask questions,” the abortionist said. “If you want a termination, you want a termination.”  Sivaraman then called a colleague to ensure that the woman could have the abortion done by him at an NHS hospital, but pay privately in order to avoid unwanted “questions.”

Click “like” if you are PRO-LIFE!

After the CPS halted Hubert’s lawsuit against the abortionists, the young pro-life activist said it was “a really sad day for women in the UK.”

“We have abhorred the practice in China and India, where millions of baby girls are killed simply for being girls,” Hubert said. “Yet when a case like this is exposed in the UK, the CPS actively works to stop a lawful prosecution.”

Concluded Hubert, “We have opened the door to gender selection abortion in this nation.”

Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, the group helping Hubert with the lawsuit, also criticized the decision.

“This latest decision is a huge disappointment and demonstrates the strength of opposition to bringing to account doctors who were willing to break the law,” Williams said.

“I think it is very disingenuous of the CPS to do this,” she added.  “On the one hand the Government has been saying there is no need for clarity on the law for this.  Yet we have a situation where the CPS say that despite the evidence it is not in the public interest to prosecute this case. There is clearly a great lack of clarity.”

“What more evidence do we need than someone caught on camera? And still the prosecution authorities turn a blind eye,” Williams said, and vowed: “This is not the end of the matter. We will be looking at ways to challenge this decision.”

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

0 Comments

    Loading...