main points
1
The 59th session of the United Nations Commission on Population and Development (CPD59) was held in New York.
2
After several days of intense negotiations, the chair of the session—Burundi’s ambassador to the UN, Zéphyrin Maniratanga—withdrew the draft of the final document. As a result, the Commission did not adopt a substantive resolution on the session’s topic.
3
The negotiations broke down due to disputes over provisions on “sexual and reproductive health” and the linking of this concept to human rights and gender equality policy.
4
Some member states, as well as the Holy See, opposed the expansion of these terms in UN documents.
5
This was yet another CPD session that ended without the adoption of an outcome document due to a lack of consensus on the scope of “sexual and reproductive health and rights.”
During the most recent session of the United Nations Commission on Population and Development (CPD), which was held in April in New York, it was not possible to adopt a final document in the form of a resolution. The meeting was titled “Population, technology and research in the context of sustainable development.” Negotiations between the member states ended in a stalemate, which—in accordance with UN practice—means no new political agreements in this area.
The dispute concerned primarily attempts to expand the provisions concerning the so-called sexual and reproductive health and to link this concept with human rights and gender equality policy. Some states, with the support of the Holy See, opposed the introduction of new or more elaborate wording in this regard.
Consequently, the consensus necessary for the adoption of the final document could not be reached. From a formal standpoint, this means that neither a new resolution nor an agreed negotiating text was adopted. In practice, this keeps the existing international agreements in effect without expanding them to include new, contentious elements.
The Commission on Population and Development is a functional commission of the United Nations responsible for monitoring the implementation of the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD). The documents it adopts—though formally non-binding—play an important role in shaping international standards and the public policy directions of countries.
Delegations from many countries expressed regret at the lack of consensus. The European Union, in its concluding statement, emphasized that it had engaged constructively in the negotiations, but ultimately it was not possible to achieve a common text that would reflect the “collective ambitions” regarding the implementation of the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD). A similar position was adopted by other Western countries, pointing to the importance of human rights, gender equality, and so-called sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in the context of new technologies.
For her part, the Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund, Diene Keita, stated in her closing remarks that the negotiations were conducted in good faith, despite differences in positions. She emphasized, however, that the absence of an agreed intergovernmental document does not diminish the urgency of the issues under discussion or the importance of the Commission itself as the sole dedicated UN forum for discussions on population, rights, and development.
The session chair and representatives of some states from the African Group and other regional groups, for their part, stressed the need to respect the diversity of member states’ views and the principle of consensus. They pointed out that some of the proposed provisions—especially in the area of SRHR—raised serious concerns and could not gain widespread acceptance.
The absence of a final document at CPD59 is not unusual—last year as well, the Commission concluded its session without adopting a substantive resolution precisely because of deep differences of opinion over the scope and content of references to so-called sexual and reproductive health and rights. The Commission adopted only procedural decisions, including those concerning the topics of future sessions and the organization of further work.
“The non-adoption of a resolution shows that within the UN system there is no unified consensus regarding the interpretation of terms such as “reproductive health” or “gender equality”. In practice, this means that attempts to give them new meaning, especially aimed at creating new international obligations, face significant resistance from member states. Such situations confirm that the scope of these terms remains a matter of dispute rather than an established standard of international law,” notes Julia Książek of the Ordo Iuris Center for International Law.
See also:
• Media Censorship and Pressure to Include Women in the Clergy – Recommendations of the UN Committee
Source of cover photo: iStock
