Daily report for 7 September 1994

MAIN COMMITTEE

PARAGRAPH 8.25: When the Chair, Nicolaas Biegman, reopenedthe debate on his text for paragraph 8.25, delegates took the floorto identify problems they had with the text.

Slovakia, supported by Malta and El Salvador, expressed difficultywith the "need for abortion" and suggested it be replaced with "toaddress situations which cause women to have recourse to abortion."Malta suggested that the reference to unsafe abortion be retainedif a footnote was attached, containing the WHO definition of unsafeabortions. Afghanistan, Tanzania, Indonesia and El Salvador askedthat the reference to unsafe abortion be deleted. Several delegatessaid that abortion should be referred to as an "important" ratherthan "major" public health concern.

The reference to "legal abortion" was one that also gave rise toheated debate. Malta expressed difficulties since a State cannot beexpected to legalize something it considers illegal. Afghanistan,Guam and Honduras asked that reference to legal abortion bedeleted. Guatemala said that to have legal abortion was tantamountto having legal robbery or legal rape. On the other hand, Zambiasaid that keeping the reference to legal abortion was their rockbottom position. Brazil offered compromise language by referring to"cases and circumstances where abortion is not penalized." Ecuadorcould not go along with the new draft and Argentina said that itshould reflect on the fundamental right to life as a human right.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, Cyprus, supported by Canada,highlighted some of the amendments he had made on pre- andpost-abortion counselling that had not been taken into account.Canada said that if the text was open to comments by thosecountries who oppose abortion, the views of others should also bereflected. Cyprus suggested an amendment calling on nationalgovernments and relevant IGOs and NGOs to deal with the healthimpact of unsafe abortion and to address women's health issues.Norway said that the text is carefully crafted and balanced. TheHoly See said the text has taken into account ethicalconsiderations and the sensitivities of others.

CHAPTER IX -- POPULATION DISTRIBUTION, URBANIZATION AND INTERNALMIGRATION: The Chair noted that the text in paragraph 9.9 hadbrackets around "the indigenous people[s]." Australia proposedaddressing this later, since it is currently being examined in theparallel discussions on Principles. Likewise, paragraph 9.22, withthe bracketed terms "reproductive health services and familyplanning," was not considered since it will be dealt with inChapter VII.

A considerable amount of time was spent discussing the bracketedtext "[nationally and internationally]" in paragraph 9.25. TheChair initially announced that the delegation most interested inincluding these terms at PrepCom III has withdrawn its proposal, sothe phrase could be deleted. Several alternative phrases wereproposed. Brazil, supported by Canada, Guatemala, the US, Austriaand others, proposed "at the national level with internationalcooperation." Colombia, supported by Argentina, sought to add tothe Brazilian proposal, "for the principle of non-intervention inthe internal affairs of state." Ethiopia, supported by Rwanda andothers, stated that international cooperation should be at therequest of the State. Haiti wanted to retain the phrase"international measures." India and Croatia wanted to delete thebracketed text, but Cyprus wanted to retain it. Austria added areference to the UN Charter. The US suggested reference to relevantUN resolutions. Consensus was finally achieved and the text reads:"at the national level with international cooperation, asappropriate, in accordance with the UN Charter."

CHAPTER X -- INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION: The first bracketsappeared in paragraph 10.3, "to ensure the [human] rights of[individuals belonging to] minorities, and indigenous people arerespected." Delegates made a variety of proposals before Algeriaproposed language from a 1992 UN General Assembly Resolution: "toensure that the rights of persons belonging to ethnic, religious orlinguistic minorities and indigenous people are respected." Afterfurther discussion, delegates agreed to accept this proposal.

In paragraph 10.12, the "right to family reunification" wasbracketed. Many G-77 delegates wanted to delete the brackets andrecognize this right. Canada, Australia, Switzerland and the UScommented that their commitment to the objective of familyreunification is clear, however, their Governments retain theability to define family and limit the number of family members.These countries also thought that family reunification issufficiently covered in paragraph 10.13. Three compromises wereproposed: Austria suggested "in accordance with nationallegislation," Guatemala suggested replacing "right" with"principle," and Brazil proposed "promote family reunification."Since neither the EU nor the G-77 were in a position to acceptthese compromises, the Chair suspended further discussion and askedinterested delegations to work out a compromise.

In paragraph 10.13 (rights of documented migrants), the word "age"was bracketed. At PrepCom III, the Philippines had asked for thisword, since migration patterns are often discriminatory based onage, and Australia had insisted on the brackets. The Philippinessuggested deleting "age" and adding a new phrase at the end of thesentence: "including the special needs of children and theelderly." This formulation was approved.

In paragraph 10.20, the phrase "in accordance with internationallaw" was bracketed, when referring to human rights protection. TheUS proposed, and Cuba amended, alternative text, which wasaccepted. It now reads: "in accordance with relevant internationalinstruments." The brackets in paragraph 10.25 remain untilagreement is reached on Chapter VII.

CHAPTER XI -- EDUCATION, POPULATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:The Chair, Amb. Lionel Hurst (Antigua and Barbuda), indicatedthat the paragraphs that deal with fertility regulation and sexualand reproductive health would not be addressed until the issue isresolved in Chapter VII.

The brackets were quickly removed in paragraph 11.2 after Canadasuggested referring to respect for the cultural and religiousbackgrounds of migrants. On paragraph 11.4, the delegates had tochoose between an original and an alternative draft. Uganda saidthat the new draft deals better with the interests of bothdeveloped and developing countries and the issue of rural-urbanmigration and the "brain drain." After an amendment proposed byChile, which calls for a harmonious development of educationalsystems, was accepted, the alternative draft was adopted.

The discussion then turned to paragraph 11.23, dealing with the useof entertainment programmes as a means to encourage publicdiscussion of topics related to the implementation of the Programmeof Action. There was lengthy debate on the point of knowing whetherthe use of such programmes should be "greater," "appropriate,""better," "effective," or "with greater effectiveness." Algeria,supported by the EU, Jamaica and Austria, asked whether this wasreally a substantial point and suggested that compromise languagebe adopted in order to move along. Delegates agreed on "greaterand effective."

CHAPTER XIII -- NATIONAL ACTION: The Chair pointed out thatbracketed text in paragraphs 13.1, 13.9 (c), 13.10, 13.12, 13.13and 13.14 (a) and (b) could be skipped, since they are pendingdiscussion elsewhere. Delegates spent a long time deliberating onparagraph 13.15, which deals with estimates and allocation ofprogramme costs that were bracketed. Many delegations commented onthe figures and the components in brackets and several amendmentswere made. Debate revolved around whether these figures wereestimates and, if so, whether these were workable estimates. Therewere amendments and amendments to amendments.

The EU suggested an addition in the chapeau saying that these areindicative cost estimates of four components and are calculated indifferent ways by experts. Algeria and others asked whether theestimates had been carefully studied. The Secretariat reported thatthese were estimates related to the development of projections onfamily planning because that is where much of the research has beendone with the assumption that these would be expanded into otherservices later. Guatemala wanted a heading earmarked for educationand Chile wanted to include a focus on population education.Zimbabwe suggested removing the brackets and keeping thecomponents. The US suggested some modifications to the EU amendmentand also proposed deleting sub-paragraphs (a)-(d). The Chairpointed out that this latter proposal, which was similar to theMexican one, would not be acceptable because it would in effectremove agreed-upon text.

Norway recommended using rounded figures rather than detailed onesthat gave the impression of being precise and added that thefigures should reflect the shift from family planning toreproductive health. The EU, supported by the US, read a secondamendment that was a modification of its original one. The USwanted to substitute in the text "in the order of" instead of "upto." The Chair suggested that the interested parties work outacceptable language for a footnote to be presented on Thursday andmeet in order to discuss the figures.

FRIENDS OF THE CHAIR

The Friends of the Chair met twice on Wednesday to discuss ChapterII on Principles. Delegates based their discussions primarily onthe G-77 text. While there appears to be a tentative agreement onmost of the text, several principles and concepts are stillsomewhat contentious. These include: the definition of the right todevelopment; the right of individuals and couples to decideon the number and spacing of their children; human rights; andPrinciple 8 (sexual and reproductive health care). The Chair isexpected to table a new draft of both the Preamble and thePrinciples when the Group meets on Thursday afternoon.

CONSULTATIONS ON PARAGRAPH 8.25

A small working group, chaired by Pakistan, was established tonegotiate a compromise on paragraph 8.25. The group, which met lateWednesday afternoon and into the evening, included: Iran, Egypt,the US, Norway, Indonesia, the EU, the Russian Federation,Barbados, South Africa, Nicaragua, Trinidad and Tobago, ElSalvador, Benin and Malta. This group is expected to produce aconsensus text that can be accepted by the Main Committee (withreservations, if necessary) on Friday.

IN THE CORRIDORS

Although the motivations were mixed, there was general frustrationin the corridors on Wednesday. Many delegates who did not supportthe Chair's compromise text on paragraph 8.25 -- and who aregenerally opposed to abortion -- complained that they were notinvited to participate in the Chair's consultations on Tuesday thatdeveloped this text. Those who were willing to accept the Chair'stext, and put the debate on abortion behind them, were not pleasedto see that the Chair had apparently let an emerging consensus slipthrough his fingers. Some NGOs and delegates are afraid that theresult of this new set of consultations will be so weak that theimportant issues of empowerment of women and women's reproductiverights will also be compromised. Some delegates criticized the newworking group as exclusive rather than transparent. There was alsodoubt that the group could produce a text that could be accepted bythe Main Committee. As passions continue to run high, look forintense lobbying to continue throughout the day on Thursday.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY

PLENARY: This morning the Plenary will hear statements byrepresentatives of: Israel, the United Kingdom, South Africa,Ukraine, Zambia, Iran, Malta, Namibia, Cameroon, the Asian Development Bank, Switzerland, Portugal, International Food PolicyResearch Institute, Economic and Social Commission for WesternAsia, and the Religious Consultation on Population, ReproductiveHealth and Ethics.

Afternoon speakers are expected to include: International Fund forAgricultural Development, Senegal, Solomon Islands, Guatemala,Sierra Leone, Tajikistan, Suriname, Economic Commission for Europe,the Netherlands, Mongolia, Assembly's Committee on Migration,Refugees and Demography of the Council of Europe, Egypt, AfricanDevelopment Bank, Mozambique, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, the Cook Islands, Eritrea, Economic and Social Commissionfor Asia and the Pacific, Islamic Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization, International Federation of Settlements andNeighborhoods, International Union for the Scientific Study ofPopulation, The Population Institute, Union of ConcernedScientists, American Association for Retired Persons, InternationalPanel on Population and Development, Asian Forum ofParliamentarians for Population and Development, Centro deInvestigaciones Sociales y Estudios de la Mujer, National AudubonSociety, World Council of Churches and the Sasakawa PeaceFoundation.

MAIN COMMITTEE: The Committee will resume its discussion ofthe remaining bracketed text in Chapter XIII (National Action), andwill then move on to Chapter XIV (International Cooperation) and asmany of the other chapters as possible. Chapters VII and VIII willnot be discussed until Friday.

FRIENDS OF THE CHAIR: The Friends of the Chair are expectedto meet at 5:00 pm today to discuss the Chair's revised texts forthe preamble and the principles.

CREDENTIALS COMMITTEE: The Credentials Committee will holdits first meeting at 9:00 am in Mycerinos Hall C.