22-November-2004 -- EWTNews Brief
NEW YORK, USA, November 22 (CNA) - Contrary to
earlier press reports released by most major media Friday, pro-life
organizations have cried victory after the United Nations shelved competing
proposals for a treaty to ban human cloning. The UN agreed to meet to discuss
the issue again in February during the current session of the Sixth Committee in
order to finalize a compromise proposal put forward by the Italian delegation.
The compromise means that the UN General Assembly will not vote on rival
resolutions as erroneously stated in earlier press reports, claiming that the
February discussions would lead to a less powerful declaration.
The Italian compromise proposal calls for countries to prohibit any attempts
at the creation of human life through cloning and any research intended to
achieve that aim and to ensure that in the application of life sciences human
dignity shall be respected in all circumstances.
In particular, the compromise states that women shall not be exploited
(millions of eggs would be needed in order to carry out the research).
The compromise, however, does not preclude any subsequent consideration of a
Convention.
The Costa Rican Resolution calling for a convention to Ban all human cloning
would have no legal effect for several years due to the long process of
negotiations and ratification and would only legally bind those countries
ratifying it. Thus, the immediate effect of passage of both the Costa Rican
proposal for a total ban and the Italian Declaration would be to send a strong
message that the world community wants countries to pass legislation banning all
forms of human cloning.
A key pro-life insider at the United Nations explained to Catholic News
Agency that "the reason our side did not pursue voting on the Costa Rican
proposal (although we had over 60 co-sponsors and many more who promised to vote
for it; and the other side had about 20 co-sponsors and we thought we could win
a vote on the substance) was because the other side threatened a procedural 'No
Action' motion that would delay action until next year's meeting of ... the
General Assembly in September."
The source revealed that many small countries - although almost all are for a
total ban- are under enormous pressure from the opposition. According to the UN
insider, there are only a small handful of countries that do not support a total
ban on human cloning.
"The most important result of our over three years of work is that we
have prevented the passage of a Convention that would approve of 'therapeutic
cloning,' which appeared to be on a fast track at the beginning because of the
total lack of knowledge and misinformation," the source said.
The side supporting a total ban on human cloning has a strong, legally
consistent message. It claims that if the UN condones therapeutic cloning it
would be the first time the international organization condones the creation of
human life for the express purpose of using it for experimentation, a process
that necessitates killing human beings in their embryonic stage for their stem
cells.
In addition, for the first time, the UN would not only approve this, but
would also require states to pass and enforce laws requiring that it be carried
out.
Pro-lifers argue that the UN has never condoned or required the violation of
the basic human rights of another human being, even though some countries were
engaged in such violations.
The UN, therefore, has a responsibility to set ethical standards for the
protection of the lives, dignity and worth of all human beings, even if some
countries choose to violate these rights, pro-lifers say.
Costa Rica's ambassador to the UN, Bruno Stagno Ugarte, suggested that the
United States and others would not be willing to bend on the words, "human
life." He underscored that there was nothing in the Italian resolution on
the issue that would prevent his country from reviving calls for an
international treaty.
According to an AP story, the Belgians (sponsors of the resolution allowing
research cloning) object to using "human life" because they fear it
could be interpreted to ban all forms of human cloning. They would rather have a
document that uses the language "human being." "This is the best
compromise you are going to find," Stagno Ugarte told The Associated Press.
"It's an important word, I can see that. But it's either that or it's
'embryo.'"
U.S. State Department spokesman Adam Ereli told the AP that the United States
was still pleased with Friday's vote.
"It's our longstanding position that all human cloning is wrong, and we
are proud of our efforts to prevent human cloning," he said. "So the
fact that there isn't any action by the UN to endorse cloning is a moderate
success."
"This, in effect, sends a very strong message: this is the direction in
which the UN wants to go," said Jeanne E. Head, vice-president for
international affairs for National Right to Life, commenting on the Italian
resolution.