EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (IISD) WRITTEN AND EDITED BY: PAMELA CHASEK ANILLA CHERIAN ANNE CHARLOTTE DE FONTAUBERT LANGSTON JAMES GOREE VI "KIMO" A SUMMARY REPORT ON THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT (ICPD) Vol. 6 No. 39 Wednesday, 14 September 1994 SUMMARY OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT 5-13 SEPTEMBER 1994 In a city known for both its history and its burgeoning population, the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) met in Cairo, Egypt, from 5-13 September 1994. An estimated 20,000 government delegates, UN representatives, NGOs and media representatives descended on Cairo for the nine-day Conference and the parallel NGO Forum. Although the issue of abortion proved to receive most of the media attention, Conference participants also addressed a number of important, and often controversial, issues including immigration policy, reproductive health and reproductive rights, the empowerment of women, urbanization and access to healthcare. During the course of the Conference, delegates negotiated a sixteen-chapter Programme of Action that sets out a series of recommended actions on population and development, including those that lead to sustained economic growth within the context of sustainable development, protection of the integrity of the family, combatting HIV/AIDS, protecting the health of adolescents, and closing the gender gap in education. The negotiations were not easy and there were times when it appeared as though consensus would be impossible on such controversial issues as abortion, sexual and reproductive health, family reunification and the definition of the family. Yet, by the time the last chapter was adopted and the last speech was given, thousands of weary delegates, observers and NGOs agreed that in spite of some difficult moments, the Conference was a success and the Programme of Action, compared with earlier documents on population and development, represents a "quantum leap." A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ICPD The International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) was created by United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) Resolution 1989/91 in 1989. The Secretary- General of the Conference is Dr. Nafis Sadik, the Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). PREPCOM I The Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) for the Conference held its first substantive session in New York from 4-8 March 1991. This session defined the objectives and themes of the Conference, and proposed convening expert group meetings, regional population conferences and two additional sessions of the PrepCom. The PrepCom identified six clusters of priority issues: population, environment and development; population policies and programmes; population and women; family planning, health and family well-being; population growth and demographic structure; and population distribution and migration. These clusters were addressed by a series of expert group meetings organized by the Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis of the UN Secretariat, in consultation with UNFPA. Another source of input was a series of regional population conferences held in Asia, Africa, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Middle East. PREPCOM II The second session of the Preparatory Committee was held in New York from 10-21 May 1993. The overriding objective was to reach agreement on the form and substance of the final document to be adopted in Cairo. Delegates agreed on a set of issues to be discussed and elaborated a conceptual framework for the final document. There was support for adoption of a new, free-standing document to include action-oriented recommendations to effectively address population and development challenges into the next decade. Delegates also reached consensus on the inclusion of a number of issues in this document, including the relationship between population, environment, sustained economic growth and development; the empowerment of women; population ageing; health and mortality; population distribution, urbanization and internal migration; international migration; reproductive health and family planning; and partnership between Governments and NGOs. 48TH UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY The ICPD was considered by the 48th session of the UN General Assembly on 4-5 November 1993. An annotated outline, based on the work of PrepCom II, was the focus of many statements during the Second Committee debate. During the discussion, delegates raised a number of key points, including: the centrality of population issues must be maintained in the Cairo document; the recommendations should be action-oriented, clear and concise; the rights of the individual must be central to the document; the chapter on the empowerment of women must be strengthened; the document should give more attention to sexuality and the family planning needs of youth and adolescents; the Secretariat should provide information on the costs of various proposals; means of implementation should be given a high priority; the chapter on follow-up to the Conference is inadequate; the issues of consumption and lifestyles should be given more attention; the perspective and needs of countries in transition should be reflected; the section on indigenous people needs strengthening; and the role of NGOs should be spelled out more carefully. PREPCOM III The third session of the Preparatory Committee was held in New York from 4-22 April 1994. Delegates tried to reach agreement on as much of the draft final Programme of Action as possible. During the first week of the PrepCom, delegates proposed amendments to the Secretariat's draft text (A/CONF.171/PC/5). Two working groups, under the chairmanship of Nicolaas Biegman (The Netherlands) and Lionel Hurst (Antigua and Barbuda) were responsible for negotiating the chapters in the draft Programme of Action. During the second and third weeks, the Working Group Chairs produced revised versions of each chapter for the consideration of delegations. During the last three days of the PrepCom, delegates considered each chapter one final time in Plenary. Although the Chair had hoped to remove as many of the remaining brackets as possible, some of the more divisive issues could not be resolved. Thus, the PrepCom adopted the final draft Programme of Action and sent the text, brackets and all, to the Conference in Cairo. PrepCom III made a number of concrete advances during its three-week session. These include: the focus shifted from family planning to overall reproductive health; population is placed in the overall development context; the chapter on empowerment of women (Chapter IV) is much stronger than anyone had ever expected, in fact it is considerably stronger than any of the draft language for the upcoming Womens' Conference in Beijing ; it contains reference to unsustainable patterns of production and consumption; and it recognizes the special needs and rights of indigenous people. Nevertheless, a number of key issues were left to be resolved in Cairo: the definition of family planning, reproductive and sexual health and rights, and safe motherhood; the reproductive and sexual health needs of adolescents; the preamble and principles (Chapters I and II); and the resource requirements needed for implementation. PRE-CONFERENCE CONSULTATIONS Pre-Conference consultations were held on Saturday and Sunday, 3-4 September 1994, to reach agreement on several procedural and organizational matters. Mohamed Adel El Safty, Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs of Egypt, was elected as Chair of the Pre-Conference Consultations. Delegates recommended to the Conference the adoption of the provisional rules of procedure, as contained in document A/CONF.171/2. With respect to the election of officers, the recommendations concerning the composition of the General Committee, and the distribution of the posts therein, were endorsed. The proposal to recommend to the Conference the election of His Excellency Mohamed Hosni Mubarak, President of Egypt, for the post of President of the Conference was accepted. With respect to the election of the members of the Bureau, the Chairs of the Asian Group and the Eastern European Group indicated that negotiations were still ongoing and that the Vice-Chairs had not yet been designated. The Latin American Group nominated Brazil, Mexico, Uruguay, Suriname and Venezuela. The Vice-Chairs designated by the Western European and Others Group were Malta, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Canada and Greece. The African Group nominated Zambia, Tunisia, Kenya, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Senegal and the Central African Republic. Negotiations were still in progress regarding the designation of the Rapporteur-General. There was no objection to the recommendation that the agenda be adopted and the participants also agreed that the general debate should be extended in Plenary until the afternoon of Monday,12 September. Delegates agreed that the following States would comprise the Credentials Committee of the Conference: Austria, the Bahamas, China, Côte d'Ivoire, Ecuador, Mauritius, the Russian Federation, Thailand and the US, and also recommended the accreditation of the intergovernmental organizations listed in A/CONF.171/8. In addition, it was noted that the ICPD PrepCom had accredited over 900 NGOs at its three sessions, and the accreditation of the NGOs listed in A/CONF.171/7 and Add.1 was recommended. The delegates agreed that participants in the Main Committee would designate three Vice-Chairs and a rapporteur and the Chair expressed hope that agreement would be reached before the opening of the Conference so that their election could be carried out by acclamation. The Secretariat suggested a possible time-frame for discussion on the various chapters of the programme. Algeria, on behalf of the G-77 and China, and Germany, on behalf on the EU, noted that delegations would have to be given the time and opportunity to hold further consultations. The Chair asked delegates for their comments on the possibility of adopting a final declaration. Austria said that this practice is neither customary nor infrequent and added that a more succinct version of the Programme of Action could be useful. Argentina said that the developing countries wished to discuss this issue within the context of G-77 consultations and The Gambia asked if the ICPD Secretariat had prepared a draft declaration or if the Conference itself would have to do it. The Chair said that there was no draft at this point and that it was still unclear who would draft it. The Pre-Conference Consultations adopted paragraph 20 of document A/CONF.171/3, which recommends that friends of the Rapporteur-General be designated by each regional group to help him with the preparation of the final report. The Pre-Conference recommendations were forwarded to the Conference in document A/CONF.171/L.2. Regarding the election of the Chair of the Main Committee, Gabon, on behalf of the African Group, nominated Dr. Fred Sai (Ghana) as Chair of the Main Committee. Algeria, on behalf of the G-77 and China, also supported the nomination of Dr. Sai. The Chair then asked for comments on the non-paper issued by the Secretariat on Saturday on the organization of work in the Main Committee. Canada suggested a reorganization of the order in which the Main Committee will review the chapters of the Programme of Action. After a further amendment suggested by the Russian Federation, the following schedule was recommended: Monday: Chapters 1 and 2; Tuesday: Chapters 8 and 7; Wednesday: Chapters 9 and 10 (morning); Chapters 11, 13, 14 and 16 (afternoon); Thursday: Chapters 3, 4, 5, 6, 12 and 15. OPENING PLENARY ICPD Secretary-General Nafis Sadik opened the Conference Monday, 5 September 1994, at 9:30 am. The Conference then adopted: the rules of procedure; the agenda; the organization of work, including establishment of the Main Committee; participation of intergovernmental organizations in the work of ICPD; appointment of members of the Credentials Committee and adoption of the Report of the Credentials Committee; and consideration of the chapters of the draft Programme of Action. UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali welcomed delegates to Cairo and noted that the ICPD is a turning point for the relationship between population and development in addressing many important issues, including poverty, the role of women, environment and development. He highlighted three principles for the ICPD: demands made in a world whose population is growing rapidly; tolerance regarding the ethical and religious issues relating to population measures that must be displayed on a mutual basis; and conscience that would allow us the right to carry out our lives, but with full respect for other rights, particularly those of women. His Excellency Mohamed Hosni Mubarak, President of Egypt, was then elected President of the Conference. Mubarak hoped that the ICPD would be a bridge between North, South, East and West and outlined the goals to be realized in the ICPD, including free dialogue ruled by a spirit of solidarity and shared responsibility, and a balanced satisfaction of spiritual and material needs. He noted that the relationship between population and development must be translated into an integrated vision that would pay more attention to education, health services and the role of women, in conformity with religious and ethical values. ICPD Secretary-General Nafis Sadik welcomed delegates and highlighted the involvement of many countries, IGOs, NGOs and the media. She called on delegates to work on the action-oriented draft Programme of Action to address the issues of empowerment of women, education, health and family planning services. Prime Minster Gro Harlem Brundtland (Norway) asked participants to turn away from the media dramatization of the Conference and to focus on the issues of education and health, particularly for women. She sought a pledge to change policies that would promote women's needs and ensure social development and she said that the benefits of successful population policies result in savings in public expenditures. She highlighted the importance of the ICPD in addressing the spread of STDs and also stated that she did not understand how the term "reproductive health" could be construed as supporting abortion. Vice President Albert Gore (US), noted that the rapid and unsustainable growth of population is a grave problem, especially in the lives of women and girls. The education and empowerment of women, literacy and the availability of contraceptives must occur in a holistic manner. He pointed out that the US did not seek to establish an international right to abortion, since policy making should be within the purview of each Government. Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto (Pakistan) stated that as a woman, a mother, a wife and the leader of the largest democratically-elected Muslim Government and the ninth most populous country, she saw the ICPD as a historic opportunity. She expressed her dream of a world where every pregnancy is planned and every child loved and a commitment to the development of human life and not its destruction. She noted that the Programme of Action should not be viewed as a universal charter seeking to impose adultery and abortion. It should take into account different cultural, religious and ethical values, but at the same time participants should not let a narrow-minded minority dictate the agenda. She rejected abortion as a method of family planning and emphasized the role of the traditional family. It is not ideology, but lack of infrastructure that is crucial in tackling population matters. Prime Minister Mbilini (Swaziland) noted the importance of the ICPD for African countries, given high rates of population growth, infant and maternal mortality, the spread of HIV/AIDS and economic difficulties. He said that at the recent OAU Summit in Tunisia, African countries reaffirmed the need to address population policies, with an emphasis on the role of women. Before adjourning the meeting, it was announced that the nominations for Vice-Chairs from the Asian Group were: Bangladesh, China, Indonesia, Japan, the Marshall Islands and Pakistan. Vice-Chairs from the Eastern European Group were: Hungary, Romania and The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. During the five and a half days that followed, the general debate was conducted in Plenary. Representatives from 183 countries and numerous intergovernmental organizations, NGOs and the media heard over 230 speakers, including 155 UN member States and observers, 24 UN agencies, programmes and funds, 15 intergovernmental organizations and 37 non-governmental organizations. PROGRAMME OF ACTION Most of the substantive negotiations took place in the Main Committee, which met continuously from Monday afternoon, 5 September through Monday evening, 12 September 1994, under the chairmanship of Dr. Fred Sai (Ghana). The Vice-Chairs were: Amb. Lionel Hurst (Antigua and Barbuda); Amb. Nicolaas Biegman (The Netherlands); Dr. Bal G. Baidya (Nepal) and Jerzy Holzer (Poland), who also served as the rapporteur. The Main Committee's task was to finish what the PrepCom had begun and it focused its work on achieving consensus on the draft Programme of Action, as contained in document A/CONF.171/L.1. During the course of the long week, the corridors and conference rooms were host to numerous small informal-informal consultations on many of the contentious paragraphs as delegates sought consensus. Although it had been originally hoped that the Main Committee could complete its work by Friday, 9 September 1994, difficult negotiations on Chapters II (principles), VII (reproductive rights and reproductive health), VIII (abortion) and X (family reunification) forced the negotiations to continue through the weekend. The Main Committee finally adopted the entire Programme of Action and forwarded it to the Plenary at 7:00 pm on Monday, 12 September. The following is a chapter-by-chapter summary of the Programme of Action, with particular emphasis on the text that was negotiated in Cairo. I. PREAMBLE The Preamble had not been negotiated by the Preparatory Committee. During the last week of PrepCom III, the Secretariat circulated a revised version of a 21-paragraph preamble. This text was the subject of informal consultations during the intersessional period. After an initial round of discussions on the first day of the Main Committee, the Chair moved the discussion to the "Friends of the Chair," who met several times during the week to examine this chapter. The Preamble now contains 15 paragraphs. Paragraphs referring to: changes in attitudes toward family planning; levels of infant morbidity and mortality, maternal mortality, and education; roles and status of women; and population ageing have been deleted. The Preamble references a number of topics, including: the socio-economic and political challenges facing the international community; population growth and the demographic future; the relationship between the ICPD and other Conferences; the relationship between population and sustained economic growth within the context of sustainable development; internal and international migration; quantitative and qualitative goals for population and development; objectives of the Programme of Action; and a new global partnership. In Paragraph 1.12, the objectives of the Programme of Action are discussed: sustained economic growth in the context of sustainable development; education, especially for girls; gender equity and equality; infant, child and maternal mortality reduction; and provision of universal access to reproductive health services, including family planning and sexual health. The changes in the Preamble include the addition of a footnote on the source (World Population Prospects: 1994 Revision. UN Publication, forthcoming) for the world population estimate of 5.6 billion. The recognition that the ICPD builds on the consensus achieved in other international activities was highlighted by including references to: the World Conference to Review and Appraise the Achievements of the UN Decade for Women, held in Nairobi in 1985; the World Conference on Nutrition, in Rome in 1992; and the Global Conference for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, held in Barbados in 1994. On the issue of mobilization of resources for the objectives and actions of the Programme of Action, reference is made to the "adequate mobilization of resources at the national and international level" and "new and additional resources to the developing countries from all available funding mechanisms, including multilateral, bilateral and private sources." Financial resources will also be required for strengthening the capacity of national, regional, sub-regional and international institutions. Finally, while the Programme of Action does not create any new international human rights, the Preamble affirms the application of universally recognized human rights standards to all aspects of population programmes. The Preamble also notes that the "Programme of Action will require the establishment of common ground, with full respect for the various religious and ethical values and cultural backgrounds." II. PRINCIPLES This chapter was initially discussed in the first session of the Main Committee on Monday, 5 September 1994. Canada reported on an informal meeting held on 13 July in New York where delegates agreed that there should be fewer principles, which should be reordered and merged. Algeria, on behalf of the G-77, introduced a new draft with a few amendments. Germany, on behalf of the EU, said that more time was needed for group consultations. Mali expressed some reservation with regard to Principle 5, which called for an end to unsustainable patterns of production and consumption, since some developing countries might have problems meeting this goal. Iran suggested that in Principle 7 of the G-77 text, the reference to "individuals" be deleted. El Salvador suggested that the word "individuals" be replaced with "persons." Honduras proposed an amendment that would reiterate the universal right to life, liberty and security of the person. On Principle 8, China suggested adding "without any form of coercion" and deleting the reference to some specific forms of coercion. Algeria responded that Principle 8 should not be discussed, but considered in brackets until the issues it deals with are addressed in the discussion of Chapters VII and VIII. The Philippines and Pakistan agreed that the phrase "sexual and" should be deleted in the reference to the right to health care services. The Philippines, supported by Indonesia, said that abortion should in no way be considered a method of family planning. The Holy See said that this set of principles should also refer to the duty that the international community has in matters of human rights violations. El Salvador said that the rights provided in Principle 1 should be balanced with matching duties and that Principle 10 should make clear that the family is the basic unit of society. Iran asked that the reference to various "forms of the family" be deleted in Principle 10. The US suggested a series of amendments on the principal objective of the Programme of Action, gender equity and equality, migrants, indigenous communities and references to sustainable development. The Chair asked the US to submit these amendments in writing. After this initial discussion in the Main Committee, the "Friends of the Chair" became the primary negotiating forum on this chapter. These often protracted negotiations continued until Monday, 12 September. The most contentious issue was the chapeau, which qualifies not only how the principles are to be interpreted but also provides that the implementation of the whole Programme of Action will be carried out at the national level and according to each State's laws, religious and ethical values. Part of the chapeau now reads: "The implementation of the recommendations in the Programme of Action is the sovereign right of each country, consistent with national laws and development priorities, with full respect for the various religious and ethical values and cultural backgrounds of its people, and in conformity with universally recognized human rights." Principle 1 states that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights, including all the rights and freedoms of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and have the right to life, liberty and security of person. Principle 2 calls on all nations to ensure that all individuals are given the opportunity to make the most of their potential, since human beings are at the center of concerns for sustainable development, and they are the most valuable resource of any nation. Principle 3 states that the right to development is a universal and inalienable right and an integral part of fundamental human rights, and the human person is the central subject of development. Principle 4 calls for advanced gender equality and equity and the empowerment of women, and the elimination of all kinds of violence against women. The human rights of women and the girl-child are an inalienable, integral and indivisible part of universal human rights. Principle 5 says that population-related goals and policies are integral parts of cultural, economic and social development, the principal aim of which is to improve the quality of life of all people. Principle 6 identifies sustainable development as a means to ensure human well being. States should reduce and eliminate unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and promote appropriate policies in order to meet the needs of current generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Principle 7 calls on all States to cooperate in the essential task of eradicating poverty as an indispensable requirement for sustainable development. Principle 8 says that everyone has the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health and that States should take all appropriate measures to ensure universal access to health-care services, including those related to reproductive health care, family planning and sexual health. Principle 9 states that the family is the basic unit of society, and as such, should be strengthened. In different cultural, political and social systems, various forms of the family exist. Principle 10 says that everyone has the right to education, which shall be directed to the full development of human resources, and human dignity and potential, with particular attention to women and the girl-child. Principle 11 calls on States and families to give the highest priority to children. The child has the right to the highest attainable standards of health, and the right to education. Principle 12 calls on countries receiving documented migrants to provide proper treatment and adequate social welfare services for them and their families, and to ensure their physical safety and security, bearing in mind the special circumstances and needs of countries, and, in particular, those of developing countries. Principle 13 states that everyone has the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. States have responsibilities with respect to refugees, as set forth in the Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees. Principle 14 calls on States to consider the development and population needs of indigenous people, to recognize and support their identity, culture and interests, and enable them to participate fully in the economic, political and social life of the country, particularly where their health, education and well-being are affected. Principle 15 requires that in the context of sustainable development and social progress, sustained economic growth be broadly based, offering equal opportunities to all people. All countries should recognize their common but differentiated responsibilities and the developed countries acknowledge the responsibility that they bear in the international pursuit of sustainable development. III. INTERRELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN POPULATION, SUSTAINED ECONOMIC GROWTH AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT This chapter contains three sections: integrating population and development strategies; population, sustained economic growth and poverty; and population and the environment. Delegates had reached agreement on the majority of this chapter at PrepCom III. Only four paragraphs contained brackets (other than the brackets around "reproductive health, which occurred throughout the document, pending resolution in Chapter VII). This chapter was addressed by an informal session of the Main Committee on Friday, 9 September 1994. In paragraph 3.16, the G-77 suggested retaining the part of the paragraph that recalls the right to development, but wanted to delete the reference to eliminating discrimination against women. The EU proposed the opposite. The US suggested a compromise amendment, which was accepted, whereby the right to development is retained as one of the human rights that should be guaranteed. Reference to eliminating discrimination against women was deleted, but particular attention is given to the socio-economic improvement of poor women in developed and developing countries. Paragraph 3.19 calls for special attention to underserved members of society who should be provided with jobs, skill development and reproductive health services. The Holy See pointed out that children are listed as one of the categories of the underserved, but they should not be provided with all these services. As a compromise, the words "as appropriate" were inserted after the word "children" in the footnote attached to this paragraph that lists the categories of underserved populations. In paragraph 3.21 (job creation), the G-77 wanted to delete the part of the paragraph that calls for an end to corruption, good governance, democratic institutions, and the reorientation of budget priorities toward social sectors and resource development. The EU wanted to retain the text. The US once more provided compromise language by suggesting that the paragraph refer to "investment on an environmentally sound basis, greater investment in human resources development and the development of democratic institutions and good governance." Delegates also agreed to delete the brackets around paragraph 3.22, which calls on the international community to continue to promote a supportive economic environment for developing countries and countries with economies in transition in their attempt to eradicate poverty and achieve sustained economic growth in the context of sustainable development. IV. GENDER EQUALITY, EQUITY AND EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN This chapter contains three sections: empowerment and the status of women; the girl child; and male responsibilities and participation. Egypt, supported by Jordan, Tunisia and others wanted to amend paragraph 4.17 (value of the girl child) because the word "equitable" in the English text was different in the Arabic translation and Egypt also sought to delete "inheritance rights." The EU agreed to delete the brackets in paragraph 4.18, which states the goal of universal primary education by 2015. Egypt and Iran proposed changes to unbracketed text. Egypt wanted to drop "in particular by providing alternatives to early marriage" in paragraph 4.21 (marriage) and the words "alternatives to early marriage, such as" were later dropped. Iran wanted to delete the words "forced prostitution" in paragraph 4.9 (elimination of exploitation) and it was replaced by "exploitation through prostitution." During the discussion, the Chair pointed out that unbracketed text could not be reopened and that the English version of the text would be the basis on which translation problems would be worked on. Several countries, including Zimbabwe and the British Virgin Islands supported the Chair's clarification. Algeria and Iran said that at some point it would be a choice whether to save the Conference or to save the rules of procedure. V. THE FAMILY, ITS ROLES, RIGHTS, COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE This chapter contains two sections: diversity of family structures and composition; and socio-economic support to the family. A potential problem with the definition of the "family" in paragraph 5.1 at PrepCom III was solved when delegates agreed to use the language in the UN General Assembly resolution on the International Year of the Family: "While various concepts of the family exist in different social, cultural, legal and political systems, the family is the basic unit of society and, as such, is entitled to receive comprehensive protection and support." This unbracketed text was reopened after Iran requested that "concepts of the family" be replaced with "forms of the family." Likewise, Egypt, Pakistan and Morocco had difficulties with the reference to "other unions" in paragraph 5.5 on the elimination of coercion and discrimination. In both cases the Chair had argued that this was unbracketed text and could not be reopened, but there was such disagreement that a small working group was convened and the following two amendments were adopted: in the first sentence of paragraph 5.1, the word "concepts" was replaced by the word "forms," and in the first sentence of paragraph 5.5, the words "related to marriage, other unions and the family" were deleted, so the sentence now reads: "Governments should take effective action to eliminate all forms of coercion and discrimination in policies and practices." VI. POPULATION GROWTH AND STRUCTURE This chapter contains the following sections: fertility, mortality and population growth rates; children and youth; elderly people; indigenous people; and persons with disabilities. In addition to "sexual and reproductive health care," the only brackets in this chapter were around indigenous people[s]. This matter was discussed primarily within the negotiations on the principles, where Australia eventually agreed to withdraw its demand that reference be made to "indigenous peoples," but said that this would need to be addressed by the UN. Several countries also tried to amend unbracketed text. Argentina, supported by Brazil, asked that the reference to "territories" be replaced with "land" in paragraph 6.27 (indigenous people). Bolivia argued that these are two different concepts that should not be confused. Brazil added that land ownership should not be substituted for land tenure. Delegates finally agreed to replace "own and manage territories" with "have tenure and manage their lands." VII. REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH This chapter covers some of the most controversial issues to be addressed by the ICPD and brought the Holy See and certain Catholic and Islamic States head-to-head with those who advocate or do not object to sexual and reproductive health programmes, including family planning, which may include abortion and contraception. This chapter contains five sections: reproductive rights and reproductive health; family planning; sexually transmitted diseases and HIV prevention; human sexuality and gender relations; and adolescents. This chapter was the subject of lengthy and often heated discussion both in the informal sessions of the Main Committee and in a working group chaired by Hernando Clavijo (Colombia). On Wednesday, 7 September, delegates discussed the former paragraph 7.1 (now 7.2), which gives the definition of reproductive rights and reproductive health. The primary issue in this paragraph was the "right" of men and women to have access to methods of "fertility regulation." A number of delegations could not accept this because fertility regulation can be interpreted to include abortion. When consulted, the WHO confirmed that according to its working definition, fertility regulation includes family planning, delayed childbearing, the use of contraception, treatment of infertility, interruption of unwanted pregnancies and breastfeeding. The final compromise text reads: "Implicit in this last condition is the right of men and women to be informed and to have access to safe, effective, affordable and acceptable methods of family planning of their choice, as well as other methods of their choice for the regulation of fertility which are not against the law...." During a lengthy debate on Saturday, 10 September, more than 70 delegates commented on the former paragraph 7.2 (now 7.3) on sexual and reproductive rights. Issues in this paragraph included: ambiguities in the first sentence on the relationship between sexual and reproductive rights and human rights; the use of the term "sexual rights;" and the right of "couples and individuals" to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children, as well as the right to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence. Many Central American and Muslim delegates called for deletion of the reference to "individuals." Zimbabwe pointed out that if the term "individuals" was deleted, it would remove the right of individuals to remain celibate and he did not think the Holy See would be happy about that. Furthermore, individuals should have the right to reject sexual advances because of AIDS, STDs or unwanted pregnancy. The Chair responded that the phrase "couples and individuals" has been accepted language since the 1974 Population Conference in Bucharest. He agreed that the individual right is as much about saying "no" as saying "yes." The compromise text for this paragraph reads: "...reproductive rights embrace certain human rights that are already recognized in national laws, international human rights documents and other relevant United Nations consensus documents. These rights rest on the recognition of the basic right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children and to have the information and means to do so, and the right to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health. It also includes the right of all to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence...." The compromise on this paragraph was reached only after agreement was secured on two other issues. A new paragraph 7.1 was added: "This chapter is especially guided by the principles contained in Chapter II, and in particular, the chapeau." The second agreement that led to the overall compromise, was that reproductive health care was defined to include sexual health. This led to the deletion of the term sexual health in many places in this chapter, as well as in the document as a whole. Throughout the chapter, the term "fertility regulation" was replaced with "family planning" or "regulation of fertility." In former paragraph 7.43 (now 7.45), the issue of adolescent sexuality led to considerable debate within the working group. Whereas the old paragraph ensured that sexual and reproductive health information and care would be available to adolescents, while safeguarding their right to privacy, the new paragraph has an emphasis on the rights, duties and responsibilities of parents. The paragraph also states "...these services must safeguard the rights of adolescents to privacy, confidentiality, respect and informed consent, respecting cultural values and religious beliefs." VIII. HEALTH, MORBIDITY AND MORTALITY This chapter contains sections on: primary health care and the health-care sector; child survival and health; women's health and safe motherhood; and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Vice-Chair Nicolaas Biegman opened discussion on the most contentious issue, abortion, as referred to in paragraph 8.25 on Tuesday, 6 September. Delegates were urged to move swiftly on this issue to show the world and the media that this Conference was not about abortion, but about population and development. Nevertheless, during the course of the week, scores of delegations took the floor to comment on this paragraph. Delegates addressed most of their comments to the alternative version of paragraph 8.25, which was originally proposed by the EU at PrepCom III. The following positions emerged during the course of the debate. Norway, the US, South Africa and others said they preferred the original 8.25, but would agree to the alternative 8.25 in order to reach consensus. The EU, Japan, Brazil, India and many others supported the alternative 8.25. The Holy See, Malta, Ecuador and Argentina accepted the alternative 8.25 as a basis for discussion, but indicated reservations on endorsing legal abortion and the terms "safe" versus "unsafe." Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and others suggested removing the qualifiers before the term "abortion" and replacing "legal" with "permitted" or "allowed." Substantive amendments to the alternative 8.25 were suggested by Barbados, supported by the Caribbean States, the US, Kenya and others who said that Governments should not have recourse to punitive measure and access to reliable health care should be provided. Pakistan, supported by Iran, Egypt, Malaysia and Indonesia, stated that in no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning. Zimbabwe supported by Cyprus, Zambia, Bangladesh and others, wanted to retain reference to post-abortion counselling, education and family planning. Late that evening, Biegman circulated a new "compromise" text and the issue was reopened for debate once again Tuesday night and Wednesday morning. The reference to "legal abortion" gave rise to heated exchanges. Malta expressed difficulties, since a State cannot be expected to legalize something it considers illegal. Guatemala said that to have legal abortion was tantamount to having legal robbery or rape. Ecuador could not go along with the new draft and Argentina said that it should reflect the fundamental right to life as a human right. On the other hand, Zambia said that keeping the reference to legal abortion was their "rock bottom" compromise. Cyprus, supported by Canada, said that references to pre-and post-abortion counselling must be taken into account. Norway said that the new draft reflected the consensus. Since discussion in the Main Committee was getting nowhere, a small working group, chaired by Pakistan, was established to negotiate a compromise. The group included: Iran, Egypt, the US, Norway, Indonesia, the EU, the Russian Federation, Barbados, South Africa, Nicaragua, Trinidad and Tobago, El Salvador, Benin and Malta. The consensus text was distributed in English in the Main Committee on the evening of Thursday, 8 September, and was available in all languages the following morning. Several delegations noted translation problems and it was agreed that these would be addressed in the final version. The Holy See, Argentina, Peru, Malta and the Dominican Republic withheld their assent until the end of discussions on Chapters VII and VIII. The Central American States said that they were working on the Spanish text and would reserve their position, pending the translation. A host of countries, including Barbados (on behalf of the Caribbean States), Germany (on behalf of the EU), the Solomon Islands (on behalf of the Pacific Island States), China, India, the US and Brazil supported the text. Egypt, Bahrain, and Jordan noted that they would be interpret the text in accordance with their national and religious laws. Paragraph 8.25 now reads: "In no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning. All Governments and relevant intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations are urged to strengthen their commitment to women's health, to deal with the health impact of unsafe abortion* as a major public health concern and to reduce the recourse to abortion through expanded and improved family planning services. Prevention of unwanted pregnancies must always be given the highest priority and all attempts should be made to eliminate the need for abortion. Women who have unwanted pregnancies should have ready access to reliable information and compassionate counselling. Any measures or changes related to abortion within the health system can only be determined at the national or local level according to the national legislative process. In circumstances in which abortion is not against the law, such abortion should be safe. In all cases, women should have access to quality services for the management of complications arising from abortion. Post-abortion counselling, education and family planning services should be offered promptly which will also help to avoid repeat abortions." The footnote reads: "*Unsafe abortion is defined as a procedure for terminating an unwanted pregnancy either by persons lacking necessary skills or in an environment lacking the minimal medical standards or both." Delegates were only then able to address the remaining bracketed text. Quantitative goals in paragraph 8.5 (life expectancy), 8.16 (infant mortality) and 8.21 (maternal mortality and morbidity) were unbracketed. In paragraphs 8.17 and 8.19, the term "safe motherhood" had been bracketed. The Chair proposed adding a footnote containing the WHO definition for safe motherhood: "Safe motherhood aims at attaining optimal maternal and newborn health. It implies reduction of maternal mortality and morbidity and enhancement of the health of newborn infants through equitable access to primary health care, including family planning, prenatal, delivery and postnatal care for the mother and infant, and access to essential obstetric and neonatal care." Delegates agreed and thus the term "safe motherhood" was unbracketed throughout the document. In paragraph 8.35 (prevention of HIV infection), the Holy See reminded delegates that although they agreed to remove the brackets around "condoms," they will not join the consensus on this specific word in this specific paragraph. IX. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION, URBANIZATION AND INTERNAL MIGRATION This chapter contains three parts: population distribution and sustainable development; population growth in large urban agglomerations; and internally displaced persons. Delegates reached agreement on most of this chapter at PrepCom III. During discussion of this chapter in the Main Committee on Thursday, 8 September, a considerable amount of time was spent discussing the bracketed text "[nationally and internationally]" in paragraph 9.25, which addresses solutions to questions related to internally displaced persons, including their right to voluntary and safe return to their home of origin. Several alternative phrases were proposed before consensus was finally achieved. The text reads: "Measures should be taken at the national level with international cooperation, as appropriate, in accordance with the United Nations Charter to find lasting solutions to questions related to internally displaced persons, including their rights to voluntary and safe return to their home of origin." X. INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION This chapter contains four sections: international migration and development; documented migrants; undocumented migrants; and refugees, asylum seekers and displaced persons. Four major issues remained unresolved at the end of PrepCom III: the rights of minorities and indigenous people; the right to family reunification; the rights of documented migrants; and the human rights of undocumented migrants. Brackets appeared in paragraph 10.3, "to ensure the [human] rights of [individuals belonging to] minorities, and indigenous people[s] are respected." Delegates made a variety of proposals before Algeria proposed language from a 1992 UN General Assembly Resolution, which was accepted. The phrase now reads: "to ensure that the rights of persons belonging to ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities and indigenous people are respected." In paragraph 10.13 (rights of documented migrants), the word "age" was bracketed. At PrepCom III, the Philippines had asked for this word, since migration patterns are often discriminatory based on age, and Australia had insisted on the brackets. The Philippines suggested deleting "age" and adding a new phrase at the end of the sentence: "including the special needs of children and the elderly." This formulation was approved. In paragraph 10.20, the phrase "in accordance with international law" was bracketed, when referring to human rights protection of undocumented migrants. The US proposed, and Cuba amended, alternative text, which was accepted. It now reads: "in accordance with relevant international instruments." The "right to family reunification" in paragraph 10.12 proved to be one of the more difficult issues to solve at the Conference. Many developing countries wanted to delete the brackets and recognize this right. Canada, Australia, Switzerland and the US commented that their commitment to the objective of family reunification is clear, but their Governments retain the ability to define family and limit the number of family members. These countries also thought that family reunification was sufficiently covered in paragraph 10.13. Other countries were concerned since the right to family reunification is not a universally recognized human right, and this Programme of Action should not establish any new rights. When it appeared as though the Main Committee was unable to make headway on this issue, a working group, chaired by Soliman Awaad (Egypt), was established. The group met over the course of three days before a compromise emerged. When the new text, which did not refer to the right of family reunification, was announced on Saturday, 10 September, over 35 delegates expressed their regrets, frustration, sadness, difficulties and even reservations. Several delegates asked that the draft be rejected since it was not fully endorsed. The working group reconvened and announced a new compromise on Monday afternoon: "Consistent with Article 10 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and all other relevant universally recognized human rights instruments, all Governments, particularly those of receiving countries, must recognize the vital importance of family reunification and promote its integration into their national legislation in order to ensure the protection of the unity of the families of documented migrants." Egypt added that there was strong support in the working group for a global conference on international migration and development and that the report of the conference should note this support. XI. POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION, EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION This chapter contains the following sections: education, population and sustainable development; and population information, education and communication. On Thursday, 8 September, Vice-Chair Lionel Hurst indicated that the paragraphs that deal with fertility regulation and sexual and reproductive health would not be addressed until the issue was resolved in Chapter VII. In paragraph 11.2 (education), brackets around "taking into account religious and cultural values of migrants" were quickly removed after Canada suggested "which respects the religious and cultural backgrounds of migrants." In paragraph 11.4 (education of young people), delegates had to choose between an original and an alternative draft. Uganda said that the alternative draft dealt better with the interests of both developed and developing countries, the issue of rural-urban migration and the "brain drain." Chile proposed an amendment calling for harmonious development of educational systems. The alternative draft was accepted with this amendment. In paragraph 11.16 (raising awareness through information), the following text was added: "More education is needed in all societies on the implications of population-environment relationships, in order to influence behavioural change and consumer lifestyles, and to promote sustainable management of natural resources. The media should be a major instrument for expanding knowledge and motivation." Discussion then turned to paragraph 11.23, which deals with the use of entertainment programmes as a means of encouraging public discussions of topics related to the implementation of the Programme of Action. There was a lengthy debate whether the use of such programmes should be "greater," "appropriate," "better," "effective,"or "with greater effectiveness." Algeria, supported by the EU, asked whether this was really a substantial point and delegates finally agreed on "greater and effective." XII. TECHNOLOGY, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT This chapter contains three sections: basic data collection, analysis and dissemination; reproductive health research; and social and economic research. The footnote attached to paragraph 12.20, which lists underserved groups, was completely bracketed, as was "indigenous people[s]." The EU felt that the footnote included too many groups. Canada proposed adding language at the beginning of the footnote to read "which could include." This amendment was accepted and the [s] was also deleted at the end of "peoples." In addition, the words "individuals and" were inserted before the word "families" in paragraph 12.20(b), which deals with the use of research findings to improve the formulation of policies, and the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of programmes and projects that improve the welfare of individuals and families. XIII. NATIONAL ACTION This chapter contains three sections: national policies and plans of action; programme management and human resource development; and resource mobilization and allocation. The latter proved to be the most contentious section. As at PrepCom III, delegates questioned and challenged the Secretariat on the methodology used to derive the cost figures in paragraph 13.15, which deals with estimates and allocation of programme costs for four major components of basic reproductive health services: family planning, basic reproductive health services, sexually transmitted disease/HIV/AIDS prevention, and basic research, data and population and development policy analysis. After a lengthy debate in the Main Committee, interested delegates met and worked out a compromise. The chapeau now includes the following: "These are indicative cost estimates prepared by experts based on experience to date of the four components referred to above. These estimates should be reviewed and updated on the basis of the comprehensive approach reflected in paragraph 13.14 of this Programme of Action, particularly with respect to the costs of implementing reproductive health service delivery." In paragraph 13.16, it was agreed at PrepCom III that up to two thirds of the costs will continue to be met by the countries themselves. The phrase "and up to one third from external sources," however, remained in brackets. After various attempts at amending the phrase, delegates agreed on "in the order of one third from external sources." In paragraph 13.23, Senegal, supported by Zimbabwe, Mali and others, proposed an amendment where Governments would devote at least 20% of public sector expenditures to the social sectors, and 20% of official development assistance, stressing poverty eradication. Algeria noted that the G-77 did not have a position on this concept -- known as the 20/20 Initiative -- pending the outcome of discussions at the forthcoming World Summit for Social Development. Sweden highlighted its commitment to social development assistance, but pointed out that adoption of the 20/20 Initiative would require increased understanding. Germany, on behalf of the EU, supported by Japan and others, preferred to use the phrase "an increased proportion" rather than endorsing the 20/20 Initiative. Delegates finally reached a compromise, which was part of a package deal with paragraph 14.11: "In this regard, Governments are urged to devote an increased proportion of public sector expenditures to the social sectors, as well as an increased proportion of official development assistance...." XIV. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION This chapter contains two sections: responsibilities of partners in development; and towards a new commitment to funding population and development. There were numerous brackets in this chapter at the end of PrepCom III, but only one issue caused protracted discussion in Cairo. In paragraph 14.3, one of the objectives, which had been proposed by the US, dealt with human rights. China called for its deletion, since the issue of human rights is covered in the principles. After both the G-77 and the EU proposed alternatives, the Chair decided to postpone further discussion, pending the outcome of deliberations on this issue in Chapter II. The text for 14.3(f), which was agreed to on the last day, reads: "To urge that all population and development programmes, with full respect for the various religious and ethical values and cultural backgrounds of each country's people, adhere to basic human rights recognized by the international community and recalled in the present Programme of Action." Sub-paragraph 14.3(b) was bracketed, since some developed countries did not think that the ICPD was the place to deal with macroeconomic policies. In Cairo, delegates reached agreement on: "To urge that the international community adopt favourable macroeconomic policies for promoting sustained economic growth and sustainable development in developing countries." The brackets in paragraph 14.11 (actions to be taken by the international donor community) were removed as part of package deals with paragraphs 13.23 and 13.15. The contentious part of this paragraph now reads: "...the need for complementary resource flows from donor countries would be in the order of: $5.7 billion in 2000, $6.1 billion in 2005, $6.8 billion in 2010 and $7.2 billion in 2015. The international community takes note of the initiative to mobilize resources to give all people access to basic social services, known as the 20/20 Initiative, which will be studied further within the context of the World Summit for Social Development." Paragraphs 14.13, 14.15 and 14.16 all contained reference to countries with economies in transition. Delegates agreed to: retain the reference to this group of countries in 14.13 (the need for donor coordination); delete the reference in 14.14 (allocation of external financial resources); and remove the brackets from 14.15, which was amended to read: "Countries with economies in transition should receive temporary assistance for population and development activities...." In paragraph 14.17, the brackets were removed and the text reads: "Innovative financing, including new ways of generating public and private financing resources, including various forms of debt relief, should be explored." XV. PARTNERSHIP WITH THE NON-GOVERNMENTAL SECTOR This chapter contains two sections: local, national and international non-governmental organizations; and the private sector. Delegates had reached agreement on this chapter during intensive negotiations at PrepCom III. The Main Committee considered this chapter on the last day and, at the same meeting, approved the text. XVI. FOLLOW-UP TO THE CONFERENCE This chapter contains three sections, dealing with national activities, subregional and regional activities, and activities at the international level. The only brackets were in paragraph 16.3 on implementation, monitoring and review, where delegates had to choose between three possible options: consistency with human rights and ethical principles, the adoption of indicators, or consistency with the principles and objectives of the Programme of Action. The US, supported by Ethiopia, suggested an amendment to the third option so that reference would be made to human rights and ethical principles, while Mexico offered to retain the second version as a compromise. Although some delegates wanted to retain reference to the need for qualitative and quantitative indicators, they agreed to the retention of the third option: "Implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the Programme of Action at all levels should be conducted in a manner consistent with its principles and objectives." CLOSING SESSION On Tuesday morning, 13 September 1994, the Plenary convened at 11:00 am to formerly adopt the Programme of Action and conclude its business. The first item on the agenda was the adoption of the report of the Credentials Committee, as contained in A/CONF.171/11 and Corr.1. The Rapporteur-General, Peeter Olesk (Estonia), then introduced the draft Report of the Conference (A/CONF.171/L.4). Delegates adopted the report of the Credentials Committee and authorized the Rapporteur-General to complete the Report of the Conference and submit it to the General Assembly. ADOPTION OF THE PROGRAMME OF ACTION: The Chair, Dr. Maher Mahran, then invited Main Committee Chair Dr. Fred Sai to introduce the Programme of Action. Jerzy Holzer (Poland), the rapporteur of the Main Committee, introduced document A/CONF.171/L.3 and Add.1-17, which contain the Programme of Action. The Chair then began the process of formally adopting each chapter. Chapter I (Preamble) was adopted without comment. In Chapter II (Principles), Iran registered its reservations on language that deals with sexual relationships outside of marriage and other behaviors that are not consistent with Islam. Chapter III (Interrelationships between population, sustained economic growth and sustainable development) was adopted without comment. In Chapter IV (Gender equality, equity and empowerment of women), Libya expressed reservations with all terms that contradict Islamic law, particularly those relating to inheritance rights and sexual behavior. In Chapter V (The family, its roles, rights, composition and structure), the Dominican Republic, supported by Pakistan and Zimbabwe, expressed concern about the absence of a UN instrument for family integration and proposed that the UN consider this need. Chapter VI (Population growth and structure) was adopted without comment. In Chapter VII (Reproductive rights and reproductive health), Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, Kuwait and Djibouti expressed their reservations on terminology that is in contradiction with Islamic Law, particularly the basic rights of couples and individuals. El Salvador also expressed reservations on the rights of individuals. Egypt made an observation that they had also called for deletion of the word "individuals." Algeria pointed out that the rights of individuals cannot be interpreted outside marriage. Syria said they would address these concepts according to the ethical, cultural and religious convictions of their society. Jordan said that they would interpret the document according to Islamic and national laws. Fred Sai pointed out that, according to the chapeau in Chapter II, nothing in this Programme of Action must be implemented if it is outside of national laws and religious values. After the chapter was adopted, Malta expressed reservations on the chapter's title, the terms "reproductive health," "reproductive rights" and the "regulation of fertility." Iran expressed reservations with the language that addresses sexual relations outside of marriage. Malaysia and the Maldives said they would interpret the chapter according to Islamic law. In Chapter VIII (Health, morbidity and mortality), Libya expressed reservations on the term "unwanted pregnancies." El Salvador pointed out that there were still problems with the Spanish translation. Yemen registered its reservations with a number of terms that are not in accordance with Islamic law. After the chapter was adopted, Malta noted its reservations with the portion of paragraph 8.25 with reference to circumstances when abortion is not against the law. Chapter IX (Population distribution, urbanization and internal migration) was adopted without comment. In Chapter X (International migration), the Philippines and Côte d'Ivoire regretted that the document does not acknowledge the right to family reunification and called for an international conference on migration and development. The chapter was then adopted. Chapters XI (Population, development and education), XII (Technology, research and development) and XIII (National action) were adopted without comment. In Chapter XIV (International cooperation), Australia pointed out that in the discussion on "indigenous people," they would have preferred the term "indigenous peoples," to give recognition to the diversity of these peoples, and that they will continue to fight for this idea in other fora. The chapter was then adopted, as were Chapters XV (Partnership with the non-governmental sector) and XVI (Follow-up to the Conference). The Conference then adopted the final part of the report (A/CONF.171/L.3/Add.17), which contained paragraphs where changes were made in an effort to harmonize the language throughout the Programme of Action. Algeria, on behalf of the G-77 and China, then introduced document A/CONF.171/L.5, which states that the ICPD adopts the Programme of Action, recommends to the General Assembly that it endorse the Programme of Action and consider the synthesis of national reports on population and development prepared by the Secretariat of the Conference. Twenty-four delegations commented or expressed reservations on the Programme of Action. Peru stated that it would implement the Programme of Action in line with its constitution, international human rights agreements and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Ecuador expressed similar reservations on paragraph 8.25, since it cannot accept principles that violate its constitution, sovereignty and laws. Argentina said that its reservations include: Chapter II -- since life begins at conception; Chapter V -- although the family may have different forms, its origin and foundation cannot be changed; and Chapter VII -- abortion is not a method of regulating fertility. The Dominican Republic also stated that life begins at conception and, accordingly, registered reservations on "reproductive and sexual health," "reproductive rights," "sexual rights" and "regulation of fertility," when they include abortion. They also placed a reservation on the term "couples," when it refers to people of the same sex, and on the term "individuals," when it refers to individuals outside of marriage. The United Arab Emirates said it will adhere to Islamic Law on abortion and inheritance. The Holy See stated that it could join the consensus on: the principles, as a sign of solidarity, as well as Chapters II, IV, V, IX and X. They could not join the consensus on Chapters XII-XVI because of their specific nature. They still have some concerns about the question of abortion and extramarital sex among adolescents in Chapter VII. Despite the many positive aspects of Chapter VII and VIII, the text has other broader implications, so the Holy See could not join the consensus on these chapters. He added that joining the consensus should not be seen as an endorsement of abortion, contraceptives, the use of condoms in HIV/AIDS prevention programmes, or sterilization. Nicaragua stated that every person has the right to life that begins at conception. It registered reservations on the terms "sexual rights," "reproductive rights," and "reproductive and sexual health," when they contain abortion or termination of pregnancy, as well as on the inclusion of abortion in the text. Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala made similar reservations and added that "types of family" and "other unions" will never mean unions of persons of the same sex. Paraguay also stressed the right to life and said that "termination of pregnancy" can not be recognized as legal under its constitution. Brunei placed reservations on Chapters VII and XIII, which contradict Islamic Law. A number of delegations took the floor to comment on the text, but did not offer specific reservations, including Belize, Chile, Venezuela, Costa Rica, Pakistan, Tuvalu (on behalf of the South Pacific island States), Guinea, Turkey, Zambia, Côte d'Ivoire and Cameroon. With a large round of applause, the Programme of Action was finally adopted. After adoption, Algeria (on behalf of the G-77 and China), Germany (on behalf of the EU), Australia, Indonesia, the US, Sweden, Trinidad and Tobago, Finland, Norway and Mexico took the floor to give additional comments. CLOSING STATEMENTS: Algeria, on behalf of the G-77 and China, then introduced document A/CONF.171/L.6, which thanked the Government and people of Egypt for their hospitality. The Conference adopted the document and the Chairs of the five regional groups, as well as Senegal, on behalf of the Islamic Conference and Dr. Florence Manguyu, on behalf of the NGOs, took the floor to thank the Government and the people of Egypt. The Egyptian Minister of Foreign Affairs congratulated the delegates on their fair and equitable dialogue over the past ten days. In her closing statement, ICPD Secretary-General Nafis Sadik congratulated delegates on crafting a Programme of Action for the next 20 years that starts from the reality of the world we live in and shows us the path to a better reality. She said that energetic and committed implementation of the Programme of Action will: bring women into the mainstream of development; ensure that every pregnancy is intended and every child is wanted; protect women from the results of unsafe abortion; protect the health of adolescents and encourage responsible behavior; combat HIV/ AIDS; promote education for all; and protect and promote integrity of the family. Delegates responded with a standing ovation. As he closed the Conference, the Chair, Maher Mahran, Egypt's Minister of Population and Family Welfare, said that as an obstetrician he had delivered hundreds of babies, but he had never seen such "a difficult and protracted delivery." He said that his Government is proud of the outcome of this Conference that focused the world's attention on the urgency of population and development. A BRIEF ANALYSIS OF THE ICPD The International Conference on Population and Development is now history. The Cairo International Conference Center is no longer buzzing with activity. The NGO Forum has packed up and moved out. Life in Cairo will continue on as before delegates from over 180 countries descended on the Nile Valley. Now, as participants and observers have a chance to look back on the Conference, it is time to assess the Conference's accomplishments, shortcomings and the challenge for the future. ACCOMPLISHMENTS As Nafis Sadik commented in her closing remarks, there are many aspects of the ICPD Programme of Action that represent a "quantum leap" for population and development policies. These include: a shift from the previous emphasis on demography and population control to sustainable development and the recognition of the need for comprehensive reproductive health care and reproductive rights; strong language on the empowerment of women; reflection of different values and religious beliefs; reaffirmation of the central role of the family; and recognition of the needs of adolescents. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: The Programme of Action recognizes that population and development programmes should be based on reproductive health, including sexual health, and reproductive rights for women, men and children. In so far as it goes beyond the traditional concept of family planning, the Programme of Action is in stark contrast with past negotiations on this matter. Experts and advocates have long argued that family planning in itself is not enough, especially when women have walked ten miles to a clinic to find that they cannot be treated for various reproductive tract infections. It has been argued that family planning should be part of a much wider range of reproductive health services. The objectives in the Programme of Action reflect this point of view when they call for ensuring that comprehensive and factual information and a full range of reproductive health-care services, including family planning, are accessible, affordable, acceptable and convenient to all users. EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN: Many delegates and NGO representatives have commented that the language in the Programme of Action on the empowerment of women goes much further than the text prepared for the Beijing Women's Conference. The objectives in the Programme of Action include: to achieve equality and equity based on a harmonious partnership between men and women and enable women to realize their full potential; to ensure the enhancement of women's contributions to sustainable development through their full involvement in policy- and decision-making; and to ensure that all women are provided with the education necessary for them to meet their basic human needs and to exercise their human rights. All countries are urged to ensure the widest and earliest possible access by girls and women in fulfilling the goal of universal primary education before the year 2015. Encouraging the full participation of the girl-child and speaking out against patterns of gender discrimination is also highlighted. This language finally meets the demands of those who have long argued that any sound population policy has to be implemented through those who are in a position to make a difference -- women. ICPD Secretary-General Nafis Sadik highlighted that all delegates who took the floor during the General Debate endorsed this position, proving that this is no longer a point defended by a minority. Although some countries argued that the language on equal inheritance rights between men and women goes against Islamic Law, nonetheless, the progress made towards empowerment of women is considered remarkable. REFLECTION OF DIFFERENT VALUES AND RELIGIOUS BELIEFS: Many commented that as a result of the concerns of the Vatican and certain Latin American and Islamic countries, the document now reflects different moral, ethical, religious and cultural values that should, in the end, make it more implementable and legitimate in many countries. A key element in giving the document greater sensitivity was the agreement on the chapeau of Chapter II (Principles), which clearly states that the implementation of the Programme of Action will be carried out within the context of national laws and development priorities, with full respect for the various religious and ethical values and cultural backgrounds of its people, and in conformity with universally recognized human rights. This not only enabled those countries with strong religious fundamentalist communities to join the consensus, but it also undermined the claim by some protesters that the Programme of Action is yet another manifestation of Western imperialism, where the view of a select few on contraception would be imposed on the developing world. Furthermore, this language served to neutralize some of the efforts undertaken by the Holy See, among others, to prevent consensus on certain issues, including abortion, contraception, fertility regulation and sexual and reproductive rights. Prior to the Conference, the majority of the media attention was on the so-called "un-holy alliance" between the Vatican and the fundamentalist Islamic countries. The media hype proved to be unfounded in the end, when even the Vatican admitted that it could join the consensus on Chapter II. REAFFIRMATION OF FAMILY AS THE BASIC UNIT IN SOCIETY: While everyone agreed that the family is the basic unit in society, the flexible nature of the Programme of Action is apparent once again as several countries "qualified" their conception of the family along religious or cultural lines. There was some debate on the matter as the EU and other developed countries wanted to retain the reference to "other unions," but this gave rise to such debate that eventually they "agreed to disagree." As a result the text is less than clear and it will be up to the individual States to implement as they see fit. RECOGNITION OF THE NEEDS OF ADOLESCENTS: The fact that an entire section of Chapter VII is dedicated to the needs of adolescents is indicative of the realization of the importance of the issue. Although some delegations disagreed that adolescents should have access to reproductive health care, including family planning services, the text states the need "to address adolescent sexual and reproductive health issues, including unwanted pregnancy, unsafe abortion, sexually transmitted diseases and HIV/AIDS, through the promotion of responsible and healthy reproductive and sexual behaviour, including voluntary abstinence, and the provision of appropriate services and counselling specifically suitable for that age group." MISSED OPPORTUNITIES: Although delegates agree that the Cairo Conference was a success, the Conference did not succeed in meeting all of its objectives. Several important issues, including the relationship between population and development, the relationship between population and environmental issues, patterns of production and consumption, the role of the individual, the needs of specific sectors of society, and implementation and follow-up did not receive sufficient attention. Although the Programme of Action does reference each of these issues, the protracted debate on abortion and reproductive health issues served to detract attention from these important concepts. POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT: As the title to this Conference indicates, this was supposed to be a conference on population and development. Yet, if a conference is to be judged by media attention and the number of minutes spent discussing certain issues, the Cairo Conference could have been called the Abortion Conference. So many hours were spent on paragraph 8.25, that it became almost synonmous with "abortion." Many delegates from developing countries commented that the Conference's lack of an emphasis on development will hurt them in the long run. Others complained that one issue should never have been allowed to monopolize the discussion. Nevertheless, the Programme of Action does reaffirm the right to development and there is a greater sense of awareness that the solution to population-related problems involves sustained economic growth within the context of sustainable development. POPULATION AND ENVIRONMENT: Along similar lines, numerous delegates and NGOs complained that the Conference did not sufficiently address the relationship between population and environmental issues. During PrepCom III, the Indian delegation argued that the UN Conference on Environment and Development already addressed environmental issues and that the ICPD should focus only on population and development. Despite their objections, there is a section in Chapter III on the relationship between population and environment. Many continue to argue, however, that the treatment of issues such as excessive consumption and wasteful production patterns and the need to integrate population, environment and development issues in policies, plans and programmes, did not receive the emphasis or attention that they deserved. LACK OF EMPHASIS ON THE NEEDS OF THE ELDERLY AND ADOLESCENTS: Delegates and NGOs alike commented that although there are sections on both the needs of the elderly and adolescents in the text, there was insufficient recognition of the fact that these are two growing segments of society. The populations of many developed countries are getting progressively older while the populations of many developing countries are getting younger. As Sweden pointed out in the closing Plenary, it would have been useful to focus on adoloscents as there will be over one billion of them in the near future. THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL: During the 48th General Assembly, delegates gave their initial comments on the first draft of the Programme of Action. During that two-day debate, many delegates commented that the rights of the individual must be central to the document. In spite of this advice, the "individual" was subject to much scrutiny in Cairo. Numerous Latin American and Islamic countries tried to remove reference to the right of individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children and the right of individuals to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence. Yet, one finds it hard to disagree with the right of a woman or a man to say "no." As Zimbabwe rightly pointed out, Catholic priests as individuals choose to remain celibate. Girls and women should have the right as individuals to say "no" if they want to avoid the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, HIV/AIDS and unwanted pregnancy. Many participants and observers commented that the questions on the rights of individuals in the document were largely the results of religious and cultural homophobia. However, now not only does the document fail to respect the full rights of homosexual women and men, it also erodes the rights of heterosexual women and men. IMPLEMENTATION AND FOLLOW-UP: Although there was lengthy debate on the chapters on national action, international cooperation, partnership with the non-governmental sector and follow-up to the Conference at PrepCom III, issues relating to implementation and follow-up received scant attention in Cairo. Several participants and observers commented that this was the first Conference they could remember where issues related to financial resources and means of implementation did not dominate the discussion during the final days. The Programme of Action does include reference to the need for new and additional financial resources, the target of 0.7% of GNP for ODA and the fact that countries are expected to finance up to two-thirds of the costs themselves. There are also detailed recommendations for follow-up to the Conference within the UN system. However, at the Conference, there was little dialogue on how to translate the words into action. There were no pledges of additional financial support for population and development programmes and no firm agreement on how bilateral and multilateral aid flows will be readjusted to meet the objectives of the Programme of Action. CHALLENGES FOR THE FUTURE Now that the Conference is over, the challenge before Governments, international organizations, the UN system and NGOs is to ensure that the Programme of Action is translated from words to action. Some of the specific challenges include: national implementation; UN system implementation; changes in bilateral and multilateral aid flows for population programmes; NGO follow-up and ensuring that the gains made in Cairo are not lost in Copenhagen or Beijing. NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION: Governments now have to take the Programme of Action home and implement it. This will take a great deal of political will, particularly since Governments will have to determine what is relevant for their country and how to proceed with "sensitive" issues. While it may lead to uneven levels of implementation, this procedure will ensure that all States have the means to implement the Programme of Action. With such a sensitive issue, it also allows for developing States to participate in international cooperation programmes and yet to see their national sovereignty respected. Some Governments or regions have already planned follow-up activities. For example, the Ministers of Southern African States will have a conference on population and development in Cape Town, South Africa, next year to implement the Programme of Action in their region. There is always a risk that some Governments will ignore their implementation duties or fail to respect some of the rights that were highlighted in the Programme of Action, but at least they now have a set of norms according to which they can be scaled, and successes and failures will be more identifiable. As a result, the incentive to succeed -- or at least to try to -- will be that much greater. UN SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION: The first step for the UN system's implementation of the Programme of Action will be at the 49th session of the UN General Assembly. Chapter XVI calls on the General Assembly to organize a regular review of the implementation of the Programme of Action. Furthermore, the General Assembly is called on to promote an integrated approach in providing system-wide coordination and guidance in the monitoring of the implementation of the Programme of Action as well as giving consideration to the establishment of a separate Executive Board for UNFPA. ECOSOC has been asked to consider the specific roles of the relevant UN organs dealing with population and development. It is also likely that some countries will request the General Assembly to pass a resolution establishing an International Conference on Migration and Development to be held in 1997. Implementation of the Programme of Action at the international level depends largely on these and other activities. Therefore, it will be important for the 49th General Assembly to "keep the ball rolling" so that the UN System can begin to make the necessary adaptations in its policies and programmes. BILATERAL AND MULTILATERAL FUNDING: One of the outcomes to the Cairo Conference should be a change in the flow of funds from multilateral and bilateral institutions to comprehensive reproductive health programmes rather than limited family planning programmes. It is still unclear whether in practice the implementation will be as all-encompassing as the Programme of Action calls for. If, for example, financial resources are too limited, priority may well be given to family planning, to the detriment of other aspects of reproductive health. Many NGOs have already begun to lobby the World Bank and other financial supporters of family planning and population-related activities to change their funding priorities. On another front, UNICEF and UNDP will continue to build support for the 20/20 Initiative within the context of the preparations for the World Summit for Social Development. A number of countries already are looking favorably at this initiative, although others still have serious questions and are waiting for more substantive details. NGO FOLLOW-UP: The role of NGOs in implementation is key both in developed and developing countries. The success of the Programme of Action will depend on how it is implemented. It is up to grassroots and international NGOs to keep the pressure on Governments to implement the recommendations in the document. In many cases, the grassroots NGOs are the ones dealing with problems as they occur and who will be able to monitor both the efforts that are carried out and the effects that these efforts have on those concerned. In this respect, the role of NGOs will be that of watchdogs who can call attention to the blatant failures or violations of the Governments' commitments. International NGOs will also need to lobby multilateral and bilateral funders to ensure that their policies reflect the recommendations in the Programme of Action and actually serve to meet the needs of their intended beneficiaries. NGOs will also be active on the UN front, to ensure that the Programme of Action stays alive and forces change in the relevant UN organs. TOWARDS COPENHAGEN AND BEIJING: With the success of the Cairo Conference behind them, it is now up to Governments, the UN system, international and non-governmental organizations and the media to ensure that progress is made and ground is not lost at the forthcoming World Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen and the fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995. It may well be that some countries will feel, in retrospect, that too many concessions were made, particularly in terms of empowerment of women. This will be relevant at two levels in the upcoming Conferences. On the one hand, new, weaker language cannot be permitted, but on the other, not confirming this "success" in other fora will mean that this was just a stroke of luck and that the mentalities and genuine willingness of Governments have not been changed. Finally, without active participation of people at all levels -- local, national, regional and international -- the Programme of Action will not be worth more than the paper it is written on. Earth Negotiations Bulletin (c) is written and edited by Pamela Chasek , Anilla Cherian , Charlotte de Fontaubert (acvdf@chopin.udel.edu), Langston James Goree VI "Kimo" (kimo@iisd.org), with French translation by Mongi Gadhoum. Funding for this volume of the Bulletin has been provided by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (iisd@web.apc.org), the Pew Charitable Trusts through the Pew Global Stewardship Initiative, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the Agence de Coope'ration Culturelle et Technique (ACCT). The authors can be contacted at their electronic mail addresses. IISD can be contacted by phone at +1-204-958-7700, by fax at +1-204-958-7710 or at 161 Portage Avenue East, 6th Floor, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3B 0Y4, Canada. The opinions expressed in Earth Negotiations Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD and other funders. Electronic versions of the ENB can be found on the gopher at and in searchable hyptertext through the Linkages WWW-server at on the Internet. This volume of the Bulletin is uploaded into the APC conferences and . The Earth Negotiations Bulletin may not be reproduced, reprinted or posted to any system or service outside of the APC networks, the POPIN gopher and the ENB listserver, without specific permission from the International Institute for Sustainable Development. This limitation includes distribution via Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print media and broadcast. For more information, send a message to .