Addendum to Report of the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals

An Addendum has been issued to the Report of the Open Working Group (OWG) on Sustainable Development Goals (See: Open Working Group adopts Outcome Document on Sustainable Development Goals)  (A/68/970/Add 1) giving explanations of position and reservation on the report.

Apart from many reservations that were issued on Goal 16, a number of countries made reservations on Goal 3, target 3.7 and on Goal 5, target 5.6.

1 Summary of types of reservations on sexual and reproductive health and rights and related issues

Para 17

Use of the term “gender” re data and statistics – Libya, Mauritania, Senegal

Target 3.7 

Conformity with sharia law – Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia (in 1.4)

Sexual and reproductive health, reproductive rights interpretation to include abortion, sexual health, sexual rights – Chad, Ghana, Honduras, Libya, Yemen

Comprehensive sexuality education (rights of parents Universal Declaration on Human Rights, Convention on the Rights of the Child and other relevant international human rights instruments)—Chad, Iran, Libya, Nigeria, Senegal, Yemen, Holy See

Sovereign rights – Iran, Senegal

Target 3.8 

In conformity with national legislation – Chad, Libya, Mauritania

In conformity with sharia law – Afghanistan

Target 5.4

Women’s right to own. Inherit and control land and property – Israel, Netherlands

Unpaid care and domestic work -- Netherlands

Definition of household/family – Chad, Iran, Libya, Mauritania, Yemen

Target 5.6 

In accordance with national legislation – Ecuador

References to follow-up/review  conferences – Chad, Iran, Nigeria, Sengal

conformity with sharia law – Afghanistan

“Gender”, Sexual orientation, gender identity, same sex couples – Cameroon, Iran, Libya, Yemen, Holy See

Sexual health, sexual rights, reproductive rights (interpretation to include abortion), and abortion – Cameroon, Ghana, Honduras, Libya, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia , Yemen, Holy See

Cultural values, ethical, cultural and religious concepts – Cameroon, Chad

Other under Goal 5

Maternal, newborn and child health – Canada

Child, early and forced marriage – Canada

2 Specific reservations summarized

Afghanistan enters reservations on targets 3.7, 3.8 and 5.6, saying that it will support them “as long as they are in conformity with Islamic sharia law and are not in conflict with article of the Afghanistan constitution. It also reiterates its reservations, as included in the report of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD).

Cameroon expresses a reservation on all terms and all possible interpretations in the document that contravene its national laws. Specifically on target 5.6, implementation or interpretation shall “in no case refer to or imply the concept of sexual orientation, gender identity, same-sex couples or abortion.”  It will not therefore “accept at any point any policies, monitoring, evaluation or reporting on target 5.6 which will include or tend to include, explicitly or implicitly, the concepts of sexual orientation, gender identity, same-sex couple s or abortion.” 

The ICPD Programme of Action, Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences, according to Cameroon, “are not intended to standardize the cultural values of peoples around the globe.” It will therefore address the concepts contained in target 5.6 in full accordance with its national legislation, as well as the ethical, cultural and religious concepts and convictions of its society.

Canada makes additional reservations insofar as much remains to be done to achieve the unfinished business of the MDGs related to maternal, newborn and child health. There should be a strong focus at the highest level on maternal, newborn and child health within the post-2015 agenda and maternal, newborn and child health should be a stand-alone goal and ending child, early and forced marriage should be included as a distinct target in the post-2015 agenda.

Chad says that in target 3.7, in accordance with its laws, “the reference to sexual health should not be construed as meaning systematic recourse to abortion for family planning.” Concerning the reference to sexuality education, it believes that parents are responsible for the education of their children, as recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other relevant international instruments, and that this paragraph must be read in the light of national legislation. Target 3.8 on universal health coverage should also be defined in accordance with national legislation

Chad also makes reservations on target 5.6 related to “the procedure for inclusion of the point in the final document without negotiation and consensus.” It does not consider itself bound by “the reference to follow-up conferences, which add other elements not defined in international law.” The entire paragraph, moreover, “must be read in the context of respect for domestic law and cultural and religious values.” Chad understands “household to mean a family, comprising a man and a woman.” Chad asks for the “controversial paragraphs to be revised, especially 5.6, and notes that there are paragraphs in the final document with unspecified percentages, which should be corrected during the session of the General Assembly.”

Ecuador (also on behalf of Bolivia (Plurinate State of)) but speaking in its national capacity, interprets the language of target 5.6 in accordance with the outcome of the ICPD, its Constitution and its national legislation.

Ghana states “the use of the terms “sexual and reproductive health” and “reproductive rights” in targets 3.7 and 5.6 cannot be understood or used to imply or presume any obligation on Member States to permit the destruction on innocent human life in the womb through induced abortion or other methods.”

Honduras refers specifically to targets 3.7 and 5.6 and says “… for Honduras, concepts such as sexual health, reproductive health, sexual rights, reproductive rights and family planning do not include or contemplate abortion or termination of pregnancy, nor [does it] accept them as a way of controlling fertility or regulating population. Honduras takes this position based on its Constitution and relevant legislation and internationally recognized human rights, “which state that the right to life is inviolable, including for the unborn child, and that life starts from the moment of conception”.”

Iran (Islamic Republic of) makes the following observations and reservations:

•  “…the sovereign rights of countries to implement the provisions in a manner consistent with their national legislation and development priorities, as well as cultural and ethical values, religious background, and in line with internationally recognized human rights” as recalled in the ICPD Programme of Action and the Beijing Platform of (sic) Action. Therefore, “reproductive right”, in its general terms, is not agreed language, and that the proper terminology would be “sexual and reproductive health”. The report even “encroaches on the agreed language of the outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in this regard.”
•  “The outcomes of the regional review conferences of the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and the Beijing Platform of (sic) Action are not always globally agreed ones,” and therefore, “certain elements in these documents might be against national policies, legislation, and religious and cultural values, and should not be referred to as agreed language.”
•  Contrary to agreed language in the UN Conference on Sustainable Development outcome document, para 9, in which “sex” is used in relation to disaggregated data, in the OWG report the term “gender” is used in the chapeau and some other parts of the text, and Iran believes should strictly mean “male” or “female”.
•  “Household” as in the report should be construed only as the “family”, which is a union, founded on the marriage of one man and one women, as the natural bond, which constitute the “household” as the building block of society.
•  Sex education, in target 3.7, should be “age-appropriate and interpreted as to “ensure the religious and moral education of the children in conformity with their own convictions. This right is clearly recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and must be respected.”

Israel regrets that the text is weaker in targets 5.4 and 5.a than that agreed in Rio and that the “women’s rights to own, inherit and control land and other forms of property is not properly recognized in the OWG report.

Libya comments that

•  With respect to the references in para 17 to “data and statistics disaggregated by …gender”, that it understands this to refer to sex-disaggregated data, reflecting the two biological sexes, male and female.
•  It does not join consensus on target 3.7 and 
  •  on “sexual and reproductive health-care services”, “family planning” and “reproductive health”, it reiterates its reservations on the report for ICPD and the Beijing Platform for Action, “and states that under no circumstances are these terms to be understood to include recourse to abortion.” In particular, the ICPD “rejects recourse to abortion for family planning, denies that it creates any rights in this regard and recognizes that this matter may be determined only through national legislation. Abortion is always gravely illicit and can never be called “safe” for the child who is killed on the mother who is brutalized.”
  •  On “”information and education”, Libya denies it may be “defined to include “comprehensive sexuality education”, and reaffirms that the “prior right” of parents to choose the kind of education given to their children, a right recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, must be respected.” Such education programmes it recognizes as being “subject to the binding legal obligation of States parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to “undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents …to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions”.”
•  Libya understands “universal health coverage” under target 3.8 to be defined in accordance with national law.
•  Under target 5.4 it understands “within the household” to refer to the “family”, founded on the marriage of one man and one women, as the natural and fundamental group unit, which comprises the “household” as the basic building block of society.
•  It does not join the consensus on target 5.6 and reaffirms its reservations asserted more fully to the ICPD and Beijing Platform for Action as under 3.7. On “reproductive rights” Libya expresses “a grave objection to the attempted inclusion of abortion aspects under a framework advancing women’s rights, and reaffirms in this regard that no right to abortion exists under international law.” In this context it refers specifically to the “Convention on the Rights of the Child, which guarantees that “every child has the inherent right to life.” Legal status and entitlement to legal protection of children before birth is recognized expressly in this Convention, which holds that “the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth”.This ‘target’s language it interprets “as strictly limited by the specific sovereign commitments and reservations undertaken by States to respective documents.”
•  “Gender” means “male or female” only and “to have no meaning other that the customary and general usage of the term.’

Mauritania understands (para 17) “data and statistics disaggregated by …gender” to refer to “sex-disaggregated data, reflecting the two biological sexes, male and female.” It also states later that “gender”, in addition to meaning “male and female” has no meaning other than the “customary and general usage of the term.”

“Universal health coverage” in para 3.8 is understood to be defined in accordance with national law. In target 5.4 it understands “within the household” to refer to the “family”, founded on the marriage of one man and one women, as the natural and fundamental group unit, which comprises the “household” as the basic building block of society.

With respect to “reproductive rights”, it has a “grave objection to the attempted inclusion of abortion aspects under a framework advancing women’s rights and reaffirms in this regard that no right to abortion exists under international law…”

Netherlands (also on behalf of Australia and the United Kingdom) states that they have issues on gender “where a woman’s right to own, inherit and control land and other forms of property is not properly recognized.” Also the attitude to unpaid care and domestic work is “inadequate”.

Nigeria reiterates its reservations on targets 3.7 and 5.6. They are concerned about the reference to the outcomes of regional conferences in 5.6, stating that “some elements in the outcome to be against [their] national legislation and religious and cultural values.” Sex education should be the “primary responsibility of parents” in 3.7.

Saudi Arabia says that “inheritance” should be removed from target 1.4, as it is based on sharia law and that its inclusion “hinders [its] right to practice Islamic law within its borders.” It would also like target 5.6 deleted as the “reference to “reproductive rights” contradicts tenets of Islamic law.”

Senegal asked for greater clarity on the use of the word “gender” in para 17, which should be “sex” in accordance with the French version. On reproductive rights and comprehensive sex education in target 3.7 it believes that the goal should be implemented in accordance with the ICPD Programme of Action, which “recognizes the religious and cultural values of individual countries and their sovereignty in this regard.” It therefore expresses a reservations about target 3.7 “in the event that its implementation conflicts with the laws in force on this matter, and with the cultural and religious values of individual countries.”

On target 5.6 it believes that the reference to the outcome documents of the ICPD review conferences is “inappropriate, since there are still widely divergent views on these documents as they contain concepts, which have not yet achieved consensus at the intergovernmental level.”

Yemen  in para 17 understands “gender” to reflect “the two biological sexes, male and female”.  Yemen:

• did not join the consensus on target 3.7 on “sexual and reproductive health-care services”, reiterating its reservations in the report of the ICPD that “under no circumstances are these understood to include recourse to abortion.” In particular the ICPD rejects “recourse to abortion for family planning, denies that it creates any new rights in this regard and recognizes that this matter may be determined only through national legislation. Abortion is always gravely illicit and can never be called “safe” for the child who is killed or the mother who is brutalized.”
•  denies that “information and education” may be defined to include “comprehensive sexuality education” and reaffirms the “prior right” of parents to choose the kind of education for their children, as recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Such education programmes are subject to legal obligations of States parties to the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to “undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents... to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.”
•  understands under target 5.4 “within the household” only as defined in reference to the “family”, founded on the marriage of one man and one women, as the natural and fundamental group unit, which comprises the “household” as the basic building block of society.
•  did not join the consensus on target 5.6 and reaffirmed its reservations on the report of the ICPD. On “reproductive rights” it expressed its “grave objection to the attempted inclusion of abortion aspects under a framework advancing women’s rights”. It reaffirmed that “no right to abortion exists under international law”, stating the context of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which guarantees “every child has the inherent right to life” and which holds that “the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.”
•  Understands “Gender” to mean “male or female” only, and to have “no meaning other than the customary and general usage of the term.”

Holy See makes reservations including:

•  “to “sexual and reproductive health”, so-called “reproductive rights”, “family planning” and other language on which the Holy See has registered reservations in Cairo and Beijing.” They have been set out more fully in the ICPD Programme of Action and the Beijing Platform for Action. It states that the ICPD “rejects recourse to abortion for family planning and denies that it creates any new rights in this regard.
•  on  so-called “education” or “information” on “sexuality”, it reaffirms that “primary responsibility” and the “prior rights” of parents, including their right to religious freedom in the education and upbringing of their children, as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
•  “gender” to mean “male and female” only and to have no meaning other than customary and general usage of the term.