Written 7:52 PM Sep 9, 1994 by icpd:ngonetny in igc:icpd.general ---------- "Abortion Debate Deferred" ---------- Copyright, Women's Feature Service, All Rights Reserved Abortion Debate Deferred as More Voices Join the Vatican By Anne Shepherd Cairo, Sept. 8 (WFS) -- Following the Pandora's box opened by the Vatican in its eleventh hour objection to a compromise text on abortion, further discussion on this issue has been postponed to Friday, as a working group makes a last ditch effort to forge consensus on the issue. Also deferred to Friday is debate on the fraught Chapter Seven of the ICPD Programme of Action, which deals with Reproductive Rights and Family Planning (with Sexual and Reproductive Health in brackets). NGOs (notably the Women's Causcus) and some government delegations are reportedly putting pressure on Ambassador Nicolaas Biegman of Norway who is chairing the debate, to bring these two key chapters back to the Main Committe before Friday. "These are matters of great urgency for us: they are about our bodies, our lives," said a member of the Women's Caucus who is also accredited to a government delegation. In effect, the original strategy of the Main Committee -- where the substantive work of the conference takes place -- has now been reversed. Rather than get the controversial chapters -- and media attention on these -- out of the way first, these have had to be held over. Pundits speculated that it would now be a case of consensus by exhuastion, with the prospect of a weekend trip down the Nile for delegates to the Main Committee if they got done by Friday night helping to move things along. In a lighter moment during a press conference yesterday at which he found it difficult to conceal his frustration, US Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs Timothy Wirth quipped: "There is nothing like smelling the stable" to help things move along. But US officials with him said it was now inevitable that there would be dissenters to whatever text is now agreed. Vatican spokesperson Joaquin Navarro-Valls noted that the Vatican had signed some complete documents at the Vienna Conference on Human Rights noting reservations on particular sections. "But I can't say what will happen yet at this conference," he told reporters. According to conference sources, when Biegman reopened debate on the controversial paragraph 8.25 yesterday (after objections by the Vatican the night before scuppered hopes of consesus on a compromise text) he chided the press for picking on the Vatican. But after several countries, mostly from Latin America, backed the Vatican (while Western and African countries which had earlier been willing to compromise appeared to toughen their stance) the Holy See representative conceded that he had opened a can of worms. Praising the sensitivity with which the Chairman had handled the matter, he urged that the matter now be referred to a working group for what is now likely to be an "alternative to the alternative" text proposed by the Chairman in an effort to break the impasse. Among those who lined up behind the Vatican and proposed substantial wording changes are reportedly Malta, Guatemala, El Salvador,Peru, Ecuador, Honduras and Afghanistan. The objections centre on one phrase and one sentence in the Chairman's text. The first is the reference to governments dealing with the health impact of "unsafe abortions". As the delegate from Guatemala put it, the opposite (safe abortion) would be like talking about a "safe theft" or a "safe robbery". The sentence raising passions is the one which states that: "In circumstances in which abortion is legal, such abortion should be safe." Countries aligning with the Pope are opposed to the very notion that abortion could be legal. The Chairman reportedly had to sound a warning to one country in the reopened debate which suggested that countries which have legalised abortions are violating human rights. Brazil - which said it could have lived with the Chairman's text, but would now also offer amendments since the debate had been reopened - suggested a rewording to read: "in cases and circumstances in which abortion is not penalised." Joining the bunfight, Cyprus noted that it had in fact felt that the original 8.25 had not gone far enough. Cyprus wanted to emphasise that counselling should be offered before, during, and after abortion. Canada and Norway also noted that they had softened their positions in the interests of compromise, and might now bring up some of the points they wanted reflected. The US representative in the Main Committee emphasised at the press conference that despite the ongoing semantic tug of war, significant points of global consensus have been reached on abortion. These include: the fact that abortion should not be promoted as a means of family planning; legal aspects relating to abortion are a sovereign matter; priority should be given to the prevention of abortion; women with unwanted pregnancies should be treated compassionately and a strong statement on the attention that needs to be given to women's health. Significant progress has also been made in other areas of the negotiations. The Chairman of the Main Committee, Dr Fred Sai, has reportedly gone a long way in resolving with a group of 'Friends to the Chairman' an acceptable Preamble and Principles for the Programme of Action. In what was left of yesterday, the Main Committee reached agreement on most of the outstanding issues in Chapters nine to 13. Much of the discussion centred on the specific references in Chapter 13 to the funding required for the Programme of Action. The EU and US delegations wanted it emphasised that these figures were indicative and not set in stone. Developing countries, supported by Norway and Sweden, emphasised the importance of unqualified figures, to send a strong message of the commitment to matching words with deeds after the Cairo conference.