IPPF European Network has developed a YCA toolkit with the aim of improving the confidence and capacity of young people and adults to implement, upgrade and expand youth participation in our members. But the principles of the approach could be applied in other organizations outside IPPF who want to involve more youth voices in their work. The toolkit was developed during YCA coaching initiatives with IPPF members. As a result: Members redesigned youth policies, strategies and practices Youth groups were revived, and the number of young volunteers increased Youth became more involved in decision-making within our member associations Youth-friendly working spaces were set up Working relations between youth and members were strengthened Best practices were exchanged between members

COVID-19 created the largest health and socio-economic crisis of our generation. Many health systems were pushed to the brink by restrictive measures rushed in to respond to the pandemic, resulting in the deprioritisation of some existing healthcare services. In almost all European countries, COVID-19 had a negative impact on the delivery of vital sexual and reproductive healthcare, including maternal health and family planning, for women and groups that face barriers to accessing care, including young people. The pandemic also uncovered weaknesses within our systems and exposed the fact that countries are not adequately prepared to deal with health emergencies. To help bring about positive change for young people, IPPF European Network is working to strengthen healthcare systems through the project Youth Voices, Youth Choices, and to remove all kinds of barriers preventing youth from accessing essential care in five Balkan countries: Albania; Bosnia & Herzegovina; Bulgaria, Kosovo and North Macedonia. We are focusing particularly on the needs of those living in remote areas, as well as those from communities that face challenging social conditions, such as the Roma. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS In October 2022, IPPF EN launched a set of regional policy recommendations that call on decision-makers to listen to young people and uphold their SRHR as they build back health and social systems in the wake of the pandemic. Presented at the European Parliament on 26 October by youth advocates and experts, with the support of MEP Fred Matić, the recommendations were developed by a group of specialists who came together to develop a blueprint for designing systems that prioritise access to youth-friendly SRH care, and better support of young people’s health and well-being. The policy recommendations are available for download below. RESEARCH REPORT  As a basis for this work, in 2021 and early 2022, we conducted a study to provide us with a clearer picture of the impact of the pandemic on young people’s SRHR. The data was published in a series of reports presenting the findings of the study, carried out by and among youth in five Balkan countries. The reports, available for download below, document young people’s SRH needs and experiences and the perspectives of healthcare providers and other relevant stakeholders on these needs. They also capture the latter’s needs as they deliver services, information and education to young people, building on their experience of COVID-19. YOUTH VOICES Young people are at the heart of this work. They were part of the teams that carried out the research presented in the reports below. They participated in the expert groups that developed our regional recommendations for policy change (below) at national and regional level, and they are being supported and empowered to advocate for these changes. Youth were also in the lead at our 'Healthy Youth – Healthy Future' multi-stakeholder meeting in Tirana in spring 2023, where together with staff from our partner organisations they held discussions with decision-makers and experts from the field, concluding with the signing of a joint declaration on protecting the health and social wellbeing of young people during and beyond moments of crisis - available for download below.     Young people also carried out a series of interviews among their peers to share stories of how the pandemic affected their access to SRHR, and what their vision is for a more youth-friendly future that listens to the younger generations and upholds their SRHR.

Civil society organisations write to the European Commission and the Council asking them to refrain from approving recovery funds to the governments of Poland and Hungary and instead provide direct support to local authorities, civil society and human rights defenders providing for refugees of the war. Neither Poland, nor Hungary, have made meaningful progress to restore the checks and balances necessary to uphold the rule of law and reinstate an independent judiciary.  The war in Ukraine should not be used as a pretext to weaken the rule of law mechanism and let any Member State get away with serious rule of law violations. If anything, this war shows the very real dangers that come with a country dismantling the rule of law and democratic oversight. This is not the time to set aside concerns about the rule of law and respect of fundamental rights in EU Member States. Unblocking funds whereas the concerns in the countries remain as serious as ever, would be detrimental.  

On International Women’s Day, the European Commission proposed the first ever EU law to combat violence against women and domestic violence. IPPF EN thanks the Commission for this historic and ambitious initiative. We very much welcome this draft Directive, which proposes a wide range of crucial measures to combat violence at all stages, from prevention to prosecution. The Directive will help protect women and girls in the EU from forms of violence that affect them disproportionately. The EU must ensure that the Directive protects women and girls in all their diversity. IPPF EN stands for the protection of all people from all forms of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV), and calls upon the EU to ensure the safety of everyone.   Sexuality education recognised as key to prevention IPPF EN is particularly pleased that the Commission has recognised the need to strengthen sexuality education, as an essential tool to prevent violence. Harmful gender stereotypes, which are at the root of gender-based violence, must be combatted from an early age. The Directive affirms the importance of education programmes in schools and in early-childhood education and care, to combat these stereotypes, and to strengthen the socio-emotional skills that young people need to be able to develop healthy and respectful relationships.   Criminalisation of rape as lack of consent, FGM and online violence  IPPF EN also very much welcomes the criminalization of rape based on the absence of consent. Shockingly, 18 EU Member States still require force or threats to have been used in order for rape to be punishable. All Member States must urgently review their legislation, to bring it in line with this consent-based definition, as already adopted in the 2008 Istanbul Convention. The criminalisation of female genital mutilation (FGM) in the Directive is also critical. FGM causes women and girls great harm and suffering, in violation of their sexual and reproductive rights. Finally, in this digital world, the Directive also crucially criminalises online stalking, harassment, incitement to hatred, and revenge porn. Member States must step up their efforts to ensure the internet is a safe space for women and girls. Women who are active in public life, especially those who defend women’s rights, are amongst those most systematically targeted, with the intent of silencing them, threatening their well-being and even physical safety, as is the case in Poland for instance.    But all forms of GBV should be eliminated, including violations of SRHR IPPF EN calls on the European Commission to work towards eliminating all forms of SGBV. The Directive refers to a number of specific forms of violence that violate women’s sexual and reproductive rights, including forced abortion and forced sterilization, in addition to sexual violence and FGM, which we welcome. Broader violations of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), such as gynaecological and obstetric violence, forced pregnancy, and the denial of abortion care – which has caused the deaths of at least three women in Poland, should also be recognized as violence and combatted.   Victims should have access to comprehensive support services, including SRH care The Directive proposes several measures to ensure victims’ access to support services. We regret however that the Directive fails to grant sufficient importance to access to healthcare services for victims/survivors. Access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care specifically is not mentioned as an essential type of healthcare that victims/survivors of sexual violence must have access to.   All victims should be protected and supported IPPF EN aims to protect everyone from SGBV, including people with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities and expressions and sex characteristics. We encourage the EU to adopt an inclusive and intersectional approach to truly protect the safety of all Europeans. The definition of rape in particular should protect all victims, regardless of their sex or gender, in line with the internationally agreed language in the Istanbul Convention. IPPF EN welcomes the recognition that some groups of women are particularly at risk, or have specific needs that must be addressed, including women sex workers, and women fleeing armed conflict. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has forced high numbers of women to flee their homes. In their response to the crisis, the EU and its Member States must urgently protect them from SGBV, particularly rape and human trafficking, which always proliferate in crisis situations, and address their SRHR needs, both in and out of the EU.   What's next IPPF EN will now work with the European Parliament and Member States during upcoming negotiations, to advocate for the swift adoption of the strongest text possible. In parallel, we call on the Council to achieve the EU accession to the Istanbul Convention by qualified majority, following the ruling of the Court of Justice of the EU, thereby overcoming the current political stalemate preventing this vital instrument from protecting women and girls in the EU. All EU Member States must also urgently ratify and implement the Istanbul Convention. 

26 January 2022 – One year after the ruling of Poland’s discredited Constitutional Tribunal banning access to abortion in almost all circumstances took effect, its devastating impact on the lives of women and all those in need of abortion care continues. The ruling has increased the extreme barriers women seeking access to abortion face and has had tragic consequences for many of them and their families. Since the ruling took effect on 27 January 2021, more than 1000 women have turned to the European Court of Human Rights in an effort to vindicate their rights, challenging Poland’s highly restrictive abortion law and seeking justice. These groundbreaking cases mark the first direct challenges to be filed before the European Court against Poland’s abortion law and the 2020 Constitutional Tribunal ruling. The applicants claim that the Polish abortion law causes them grave harm and violates their rights to privacy and freedom from torture and other ill-treatment. The Court is expected to begin ruling on some of these cases: K.B. v. Poland and 3 other applications; K.C. v. Poland and 3 other applications; and A.L.- B. v. Poland and 3 other applications. Nine leading international human rights organizations have filed third-party interventions to the European Court of Human Rights in these cases, including Amnesty International, the Center for Reproductive Rights, Human Rights Watch, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network (IPPF EN), Women Enabled International, Women’s Link Worldwide, and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT). The interventions provide evidence and analysis drawing on international human rights law, comparative European law and guidelines from the World Health Organization. They outline the profound implications that highly restrictive abortion laws have on the lives and health of women and girls of reproductive age.   Restrictive abortion laws such as Poland’s are contrary to international and European human rights standards and public health guidelines. They compromise women’s freedom, dignity, health, and lives. Our organizations’ interventions seek to highlight critical human rights aspects of such restrictive laws, and we are proud to support efforts to hold Poland accountable for these ongoing human rights violations, the organizations said.      Background Poland has one of Europe’s most restrictive abortion laws. Together with Malta, it is one of only two European Union Member States that has not legalized abortion on request or broad social grounds. In Poland, abortion is only permitted in situations of risk to the life or health of a pregnant woman, or if a pregnancy results from rape. In practice, however, it is almost impossible for those eligible for a legal abortion to obtain one. Every year thousands of women leave Poland to access abortion care in other European countries, while others import medical abortion pills or seek extra-legal abortion in Poland. Polish women, particularly those in difficult socio-economic situations, have to depend on the crucial help from civil society organizations, with often limited resources. On 22 October 2020, Poland’s discredited Constitutional Tribunal ruled that abortion on grounds of “severe and irreversible fetal defect or incurable illness that threatens the fetus’ life” was unconstitutional. The ruling followed a case filed by members of the Polish Parliament and formally supported by the Prosecutor General. The ruling came into force on 27 January 2021. Both the European Court of Human Rights and the European Commission have found that the Constitutional Tribunal does not meet fair trial requirements due to its lack of independence from the legislative and the executive powers. The ruling eliminated one of the only remaining legal grounds for abortion under Poland’s highly restrictive law and its entry into force means that there is now effectively a near-total ban on abortion in Poland. Previously, over 90 percent of the approximately 1,000 legal abortions annually performed in Poland were on this ground. The ruling came as the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions made travel for abortion care prohibitively difficult and costly. It  spurred the country’s largest public protests in decades, led by women human rights defenders. Activists and women’s rights organizations report that the ruling is having a significant chilling effect as medical professionals fear repercussions even in situations where abortion remains legal. Women human rights defenders and civil society organizations advocating for the ruling to be overturned and for reform of Poland’s abortion law have faced threats of violence and several protestors have been prosecuted.   Read the third-party submissions here. For more information about the cases filed by 12 Polish women see: K.B. v. Poland and 3 other applications K.C. v. Poland and 3 other applications A.L.- B. v. Poland and 3 other applications   For more information on the developments following the Tribunal’s ruling see e.g.: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_7070   For more information, please contact: For the International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network, Irene Donadio: [email protected], +32 491 71 93 90, Twitter: @ippfen

High on the list of things that Viktor Orban doesn’t want you to know: homosexuality is a Hungarian invention. Before human rights campaigner Karl-Maria Kertbeny sat down to write a quiet letter to a leading German activist in 1868, the word homosexual did not exist. Neither did heterosexual. When he invented these terms, Kertbeny became the first European thinker to give queer people a neutral label for their experience, and to say it was equal to straightness. Many people continue to lay flowers at his grave in Budapest in recognition of this important Hungarian contribution to the history of LGBQ* dignity. Until recently, Hungarian society has continued in this vein, not always a pioneer but frequently showing its neighbours an example of steady advancement in the field of human rights. Homosexual sex was decriminalized there in 1961, relatively early compared to other contemporary socialist states in Europe – East Germans and Bulgarians, for example, had to wait until 1968. In the EU era, Hungary’s parliament adopted the bill to approve civil partnerships in 2007, making them accessible to their citizens substantially faster than in Croatia (2014), Greece (2015) or Italy (2016). And earlier this year, an independent poll demonstrated that the Hungarian people are still carrying on this tradition of reaching gradually for social progress: 59% of Hungarians believe that gay couples should have equal rights to adopt a child, an increase from the 42% who felt the same way in 2013. This historical trajectory is rather inconvenient to Mr Orban. He would like Hungarians to believe the European value of LGBTQI* freedom is a Western import, a foreign ‘ideology’, rather than something their country did much to realize long before the inception of the European Union. Fidesz, his ruling right-wing party, has a particular passion for victimizing LGBTQI* people, parcelling up actions that trample on trans and queer people’s human rights with measures designed to shut down intellectual life and access to education. Academic gender studies have been banned in Hungarian universities since 2018. In 2020, transgender and intersex people were robbed of their access to legal gender recognition. Summer 2021 saw the regime manoeuvring its wide-ranging package of amendments to “Child Protection” and “Family Protection” laws into place: as of July, it is illegal to share information about LGBTQI* lives with young people under the age of 18. Sexuality education that tells the truth about the range of human sexuality and gender has been banned in schools; no content relating to queer or trans people can be shown on television if a child might see it; booksellers within two hundred metres of a school or a church face prosecution for stocking literature featuring queer or trans characters. Political homophobia spreads  Hungary is of course not alone in falling victim to such deterioration. These measures are fed by, and feed into, a wave of human rights rollbacks threatening millions of Europeans. Hate against LGBTQI* people is increasingly legitimized through measures that forbid any public mention of their existence, on the pretext of shielding children from supposedly harmful knowledge. In Romania this summer, far-right party AUR felt emboldened enough by Hungary’s latest move to announce its own proposed law to “limit the representation or promotion of homosexuality and gender reassignment among minors”. While the party are not currently in government, and were likely angling for attention during a quiet period, this threat comes hot on the heels of several years of attempts to give parents the right to control what information about gender and sexuality their children receive in school, and to enshrine homophobia in the country’s constitution with a proposed amendment regarding marriage rights. Just as in Hungary, a homophobic, transphobic and anti-education bill that was presented in Poland’s parliament in 2019 was dressed up as a protection against paedophilia. It would make anyone providing comprehensive sexuality education to young people in schools a criminal. That bill is currently frozen in legislative process, neither adopted nor rejected. Recent announcements suggest that it will soon reappear in the form of a much broader, more dangerous anti-LGBTQ* law, more similar to Hungary’s, that will apply to many other settings beside schools. Since then, there has been a continuous escalation in brutal state violence committed against those protesting Poland’s shutdown of reproductive healthcare – their shocking testimonies must be read to be believed. Anyone following the situation can see how a law preventing street demonstrators even mentioning LGBTQI* rights – in case a child reads a placard - will be hugely destructive for any and all people taking a stand on these connected struggles. The paradox of conservative censorship Thinking about public expression is key to understanding what exactly is going on here. It is, after all, categorically strange for right-wing parties to be so enthusiastic about state intervention in private life, and so violently opposed to the protection of that profoundly libertarian value: the right to say what you like. This is not a phenomenon unique to central Europe, but a trend across the continent – consider the appetite for sexuality-related censorship of far-right groups Fratelli d'Italia, VOX in Spain, and Portugal’s Chega. Certainly for those hardline conservatives who are in power, one goal is to misdirect public attention from their mishandling of economic, and latterly pandemic, issues. Framing LGBTQI* citizens as the current major threat to national stability is a smoke-and-mirrors diversion tactic, designed to disguise holes in a manifesto or deflect state accountability for preventable deaths, rocketing unemployment, and spiralling hopelessness. These leaders are exploiting multiple issues that trigger primal fears (“other” groups threatening social order, harm coming to one’s children and so on), in order to make loss of freedoms seem more palatable and therefore get away with shutting down dissent. A clear message from European leaders The fight to win back decades of gains in human rights, sexual autonomy and self-determination depends on affected citizens participating fully and freely in national and international exchange. This is what IPPF EN seeks to facilitate. We bring together activists operating on different progressive causes in challenging European contexts to share knowledge, increase their sense of community, and help them develop their tactics. The strong stances we saw from European leaders expressed in June’s letter from the EU Council have been an encouraging sign of international solidarity, as have the Commission’s infringement procedures launched against Poland and Hungary in July, and the tabling of a wider parliamentary resolution on protecting LGBTQI* rights across Europe in the September 13th plenary. As these darkly conservative narratives play out to the same rhythm, again and again, it’s clear that such messages from European leaders must be backed up with financial support for activists if we want to combat an increasingly organized international threat. It might seem counterintuitive, but the upcoming referendum that Orban has scheduled on his offensive law should offer a glimmer of hope. The referendum questions are patently biased, written to confuse and manipulate, leaving people no way to express disagreement with the law and therefore no choice but to boycott it if they don’t support hate. We should see this as an admission of weakness. Orban fears he cannot count on a free vote to deliver a result against human rights, and so has engineered a rigged one. He knows there are plenty of people left who will resist him if they feel it is possible. It is down to the rest of us to ensure that it is. *Note: when we write LGBTQI*, we are referring to everybody who isn't straight and cis   Written by Catherine Bailey Gluckman, IPPF EN Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

“Sex without consent is rape”. This statement sounds self-evident. And yet our laws and our lived experiences show that it is still far from being universally recognized and understood. On two recent occasions, watching fiction with friends - Game of Thrones and Basic Instinct - where scenes of rape were depicted, we found ourselves debating whether these were in fact rapes. To me, it was very clear that the female characters on screen did not consent to sex. But since in both scenes, they knew the men, and had previous relationships with them, others felt that this was somehow enough to downplay these situations and question whether they did constitute rape. This brought home for me, once again, how far we still have to go. If my friends, who are pretty committed to gender equality, cannot identify rape in fiction, then what about broader society, and most importantly what about real life?   A societal problem Polls reflect this alarming reality. More than a quarter of Europeans believe that sexual violence can be excused: 27% said that "sexual intercourse without consent can be justifiable" in certain situations, most such circumstances having to do with the behaviour of the victim. When surveys don’t use the word “rape” but factually describe situations that constitute rape, they expose how pervasive it is: a poll in France revealed that out of almost 100 000 female respondents, more than half (53.2%) reported having experienced non-consensual penetrative sex with one or more partners. On the other side of the same coin, recently 63 male students out of 554 surveyed in the UK admitted to having committed 251 sexual assaults, rapes, and other coercive and unwanted incidents. The study also showed that these perpetrators were significantly more likely to believe that women are to blame for being assaulted, and to hold hostile views about women. We are still collectively terrible at identifying, and condemning, sexual violence. It’s not a mystery why. We live in a society which blames victims/survivors, in order to let violent men off the hook: that is the primary function of rape culture. Laws are the result of the patriarchal culture we live in and reflect this toxic mindset. We need urgent and concrete actions to address sexual violence on both fronts: to change legislation, and to change mentalities.   Reflected in legislation In Europe, shockingly, most countries do not criminalise sex without consent. Their laws usually require the use of force or coercion as an additional factor in order for a non-consensual act to be considered as sexual violence. According to a review of the legislation of European countries done by Amnesty International in 2020, only 12 European countries out of 31 analysed had laws that define rape as sex without consent. This is despite the fact that most countries have ratified the Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention, the first legally binding comprehensive instrument to prevent and combat violence against women and domestic violence. The Convention clearly states that engaging in non-consensual sexual activity constitutes sexual violence. It further says that “consent must be given voluntarily as the result of the person’s free will assessed in the context of the surrounding circumstances”. How is it possible that so many countries ratified this landmark treaty, yet have not changed their legislation to bring it in line with its binding requirements? Inadequate laws on sexual violence have a devastating impact on victims/survivors. They encourage victim blaming, excuse violence, and fail to prosecute rapists. Instead of looking for proof that the perpetrator used enough force or assessing whether the victim/survivor put up enough resistance, the legal system should focus on whether the victim/survivor explicitly consented to sex. And if not, that should be enough to constitute sexual violence. “Yes means Yes” laws represent a necessary change of paradigm to protect victims/survivors more effectively.   The road ahead In June 2021, in a most welcome development only made possible by intense mobilization by women’s rights NGOs, Slovenia changed its law on sexual violence to adopt a consent-based legislative proposal. Spain is also currently reviewing its legislation on sexual violence, to adopt a consent-based model. The “Only Yes Means Yes” bill follows the shocking ‘La Manada’ case, where a group of men were initially found guilty of the lesser offence of sexual abuse instead of rape, because the prosecution could not prove that they used force against the victim/survivor. Other countries must follow suit, urgently. All European countries must ratify and implement the Istanbul Convention, including by changing their legislation to comply with its legal definition of sexual violence. Changing laws and mentalities goes hand in hand: putting an end to rape culture will require not just a change of legislation, but profound societal transformation too. Education is key in that regard. Relationship sexuality education, which teaches children and young people about consent in intimate relationships, is essential [1]. The European Commission is now working on a new legislative proposal to prevent and combat violence against women. This Directive should tackle the issue of sexual violence, and unequivocally adopt the definition of the Istanbul Convention, namely that sex without consent is rape. The Directive should also include comprehensive relationship and sex education as a key prevention measure, to improve young people’s understanding of consent, enable them to identify sexual violence, discourage them from perpetrating it, and empower them to report it.   By Camille Butin, Advocacy Adviser IPPF EN   [1] Facing the facts: the case for comprehensive sexuality education Can education stop abuse? Comprehensive Sexuality Education: Advancing Human Rights, Gender Equality and Improved Sexual and Reproductive Health Preventing Intimate Partner Violence Among Young People—a Qualitative Study Examining the Role of Comprehensive Sexuality Education

Over the past few days, the world has watched in horror and disbelief at the events unfolding in Ukraine. It is estimated that over 500,000 people have now fled – many of whom are women and children – into neighbouring countries such as Poland, Hungary and Romania. The UN anticipates 4 million refugees by July 2022. During Humanitarian crises, sexual and reproductive healthcare is often overlooked. But the reality is daily sexual and reproductive healthcare needs such as essential care for pregnant people, access to menstruation products for people who menstruate, as well as ensuring people who need sexual and reproductive health assistance have access to the right information, remains an urgent priority. IPPF is working with partners on the ground in Poland to link those fleeing the conflict with critical sexual and reproductive health services as well as provide them with essential items.  Julie Taft,  Director of Humanitarian for the International Planned Parenthood Federation, said:  

Joint Civil Society Reaction The African Union - European Union Summit that took place on 17 and 18 February 2022 aimed to deepen cooperation between the EU and the AU “based on shared interests and values” and resulted in a joint-political declaration. It was an opportunity for European leaders to work towards ending not only the COVID-19 pandemic, but also persisting epidemics like HIV, tuberculosis, malaria, and other diseases, by supporting sustainable mechanisms for building health systems worldwide. While we welcome the fact that health was high on the political agenda of the Summit, and Team Europe made wide-ranging commitments in the area of health, it remains unclear how some of these initiatives will be funded, what type of support will be provided (grants, loans, or blended finance), how these initiatives will connect to each other to create a coherent continental approach, or how sustainable they will be in the long run. The call from the AU and civil society to support the waiving of Intellectual Property rights on COVID tools was also not addressed, despite its urgency. We deeply regret the absence of a commitment to the achievement of universal access to Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) in the political declaration, despite the calls made by civil society and youth ahead of the Summit about the importance of prioritising SRHR. SRHR are critical to achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC), as well as gender equality and human development. While we welcome the development of a Team Europe Initiative on SRHR in Sub-Saharan Africa, we call on the EU and the AU to implement ambitious policies and allocate adequate funding to the achievement of SRHR for all. Download our full joint statement below.

Following the disturbing reports coming out of Ukraine, IPPF has released a media statement on behalf of the Federation and its Member Association in Ukraine.   Despite the fact that sexual and reproductive healthcare (SRHR) needs increase significantly during conflict and humanitarian situations, the significant vulnerabilities of affected populations and displaced people are often overlooked, especially the experiences of women, girls and marginalised populations who are at increased risk of unintended pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections and sexual and gender-based violence. IPPF’s Director-General, Dr Alvaro Bermejo, said:   "The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) is deeply concerned about the escalation of conflict in Ukraine. We take our responsibility to preserve the enormous gains made in life-saving sexual and reproductive healthcare across the country very seriously, especially for women, girls and marginalised populations, whose vulnerability and experiences are so often overlooked in humanitarian situations.  For 20 years, IPPF has consistently worked to strengthen and protect the reproductive rights of people in Ukraine, working in the frontline conflict zones of Lugansk and Donetsk since 2014, training medical specialists to provide life-saving reproductive healthcare, psychosocial support and quality care to survivors of sexual and gender-based violence. Our teams are now contingency planning across the region to address not only the needs of those still in Ukraine, but also the millions who are likely to be displaced by the conflict and who will require critical support to continue accessing healthcare. We will work closely with partners and other NGOs to ensure the least possible disruption to services. IPPF stands in solidarity with the international community and the brave people of Ukraine who for the last eight years have faced terrifying and difficult circumstances that nobody should ever have to suffer through.