and for the integrity of his person.” 380 The authors of the Charter expressly ruled out the use of terminology that would protect the right to life from the moment of conception. 381 The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (Protocol of Maputo), does not refer to the beginning of life, and establishes that the States must take all appropriate measures to “protect the reproductive rights of women by authorizing medical abortion in cases of sexual assault, rape, incest and where the continued pregnancy endangers the mental and physical health of the mother or the life of the mother or the fetus.” 382 C.2.e) Conclusion concerning systematic interpretation 244. The Court concludes that the Constitutional Chamber based its decision on Article 4 of the American Convention, Article 3 of the Universal Declaration, article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the 1959 Declaration on the Rights of the Child. However, it is not possible to use any of these articles or treaties to substantiate that the embryo can be considered a person in the terms of Article 4 of the Convention. Similarly, it is not possible to reach this conclusion from the preparatory work or from the systematic interpretation of the rights recognized in the American Convention or in the American Declaration. C.3) Evolutive interpretation 245. This Court has indicated on other occasions 383 that human rights treaties are living instruments, whose interpretation must keep abreast of the passage of time and current living conditions. This evolving interpretation is consistent with the general rules of interpretation established in Article 29 of the American Convention, as well as in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. 384 In making an evolutive interpretation, the Court has granted special relevance to comparative law, and has therefore used domestic norms 385 or the case law of domestic courts 386 when analyzing specific disputes in contentious cases. For its part, the European Court 387 has used comparative law as a mechanism to identify the 380 African Charter of Human and People’s Rights, approved on June 27 1981, Art. 4, Doc. OUA CAB/LEG/67/3 Rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982) (in force since October 21, 1986). 381 Proposal for an African charter of human and peoples’ rights, Art. 17, Doc. OUA CAB/LEG/67/1 (1979) (where the wording of Art. 4(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights is adopted, replacing “moment of conception” for “moment of birth” – “This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of his birth”). 382 Protocol to the African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, adopted by the second ordinary session of the Assembly of the African Union, on July 11, 2003, Art. 14.2.c. 383 Cf. The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law. Advisory Opinion OC-15/97 of November 14, 1997. Series A No. 15, para. 114, and Case of Atala Riffo and daughters v. Chile, para. 83. 384 Cf. The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law, para. 113, and Case of Atala Riffo and daughters v. Chile, para. 83. 385 In its analysis in the Case of Kawas Fernández v. Honduras, the Court took into account that: it can be seen that a considerable number of States Parties to the American Convention have adopted constitutional provisions that expressly recognize the right to a healthy environment. 386 In the cases of Heliodoro Portugal v. Panama and Tiu Tojín v. Guatemala, the Court took into account the judgments of the domestic courts of Bolivia, Colombia, Mexico, Panama, Peru, and Venezuela on the inapplicability of the statute of limitations for permanent crimes such as enforced disappearance. In addition, in the case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru, the Court used rulings of constitutional courts of the countries of the Americas to support its definition of the concept of enforced disappearance. Other examples are the Case of Atala Riffo and daughters v. Chile and the Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. 387 For example, in the Case of TV Vest As & Rogaland Pensioners Party v. Norway, the European Court took into account a document of the European Platform of Regulatory Authorities which compared 31 countries in the