Women on Web: An Emblematic Case

During the COVID-19 pandemic, sexual and reproductive health services faced limitations, leading WomenonWeb.org to be a valuable alternative. This online platform became the only option for many women seeking access to a safe abortion and information about their reproductive autonomy, especially vulnerable groups such as adolescents, migrants, and victims of gender violence.

In this context, the Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products (AEMPS) ordered blocking of the Women on Web website. The decision was based on inaccurate and false information about the organization’s services. Without any evidence, it was claimed that the website marketed abortion pills, and without scientific basis, it was argued that Women on Web’s services put women’s health or lives at risk. 

In 2021, Women’s Link Worldwide, representing WoW, filed a lawsuit seeking to unblock its website. The Spanish Supreme Court ruled STS 1231/2022 in favor of WoW, which considered that the information, recommendations, and opinions on abortion on the Women on Web website are protected by the fundamental rights to freedom of information and freedom of expression. 

The case does not end there. The Court maintained the blocking of the section “I need abortion pills” within the site, accepting the criterion of the alleged sale of abortion pills. 

The only technical route to partially unblock the site is for WoW to change the secure browsing protocol (HTTPS) it uses to a less secure one (HTTP), which is unfeasible because it risks the security of the users’ information and potentially contravenes the General Data Protection Regulation of the European Union (EU).

Given this panorama, we undertook two legal routes. First, on behalf of Women on Web, we presented an appeal for protection before the Constitutional Court of Spain requesting the complete unblocking of the page. The Court decided not to examine the merits of the matter, considering that the appeal had no “special constitutional significance.” 

After the ruling, the AEMPS, with the support of the State Attorney, argued that this unblocking is technically unfeasible, so in its opinion, the page should remain blocked in its entirety. Our second legal action in the face of this refusal is an “execution incident” that states that given the alleged technical impossibility, the corresponding thing to comply with the sentence is the complete unblocking of the site. For now, the first instance judge has ruled in favor of the AEMPS, and at this time, the action is pending resolution on appeal.

Gema Fernández, legal director of WLW in Europe, tells us about the positive consequences of the case: