Conflict of Laws in Surrogacy Cases: A Comparative Study Between French Private International Law and Arab Legal Systems

الملخص

Surrogacy is one of the most prominent issues in reproductive rights, at its core it interferes with fundamental rights and the integrity of the most intimate human choice, the procreation of the human species. Surrogacy or “reproductive tourism” is said to be an artificial conception made possible through scientific techniques employed through the direct or indirect involvement of a surrogate mother. Surrogacy is permitted in some countries such as Canada, Georgia, India, Mexico, the Netherlands and the United States, while it is barred by law in others such as Norway, Italy, Sweden, Germany and France. The legal rivalry towards surrogacy raises an essential issue: what is the legal effect when a child enters a country that prohibits such an agreement? This question becomes even more difficult when confronted with the multiplication of the states’ respective laws and their interstellar reach. The paper analyzes these questions through case studies found in both French and Arab legal systems. This interest in jurisdictions that historically approach the same coldness towards procreative contract is heightened by their recent growth in international commercial law. However, while there are common points in the analysis of the outcomes, the rigidity of the French State is contrasted with the enduring flexibility in Arab states. The final question this paper endeavors to answer is whether such flexibility is ideal. What does the future hold in a world befuddled by state confrontations and travel bans