The UK government is under increasing pressure from European countries and human rights groups to explain why commitments to abortion and sexual health rights have been dropped from an official statement on gender equality.
Norway and Denmark have approached the Department for Foreign Affairs, Community and Development (FCDO) “to protest the substantial changes” that have been made to a document that resulted from a UK-hosted conference on freedom of religion and belief that opened by Liz Truss earlier this month, the Guardian has learned.
More than 20 countries, including those now complaining, signed the original text, which included a commitment to repeal all laws that “allow harmful practices or restrict women’s and girls’ sexual and reproductive health and rights, bodily autonomy.”
But those phrases were removed from a later version of the international pact, which is now online and has been signed by six countries, including the UK and Malta, where abortion is illegal. The country was not one of the original signatories.
In an open letter to Truss, the foreign secretary and Tory leadership candidate, published on Friday, more than 20 human rights, pro-choice and international aid groups demanded the government immediately reverse the deletions and explain why they were made.
“At a time when abortion access around the world is under serious threat due to the overturning of Roe v Wade, it has never been more important for the UK Government to protect sexual and reproductive health and rights and bodily autonomy,” the organizations wrote , including Humanists UK, British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), MSI Reproductive Choices and Amnesty International UK.
Expressing “serious concern” about the changes, they added: “We urge you to reverse this move and hope you can explain why the change happened in the first place.”
The International Ministerial Conference on Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) took place in early July in London. The Prime Minister’s Special Envoy for FoRB, Conservative MP Fiona Bruce, was heavily involved in the event. Bruce co-chairs the all-party parliamentary group of pro-life MPs.
The document in question was the result of a UK-hosted conference on freedom of religion and belief earlier this month. Photo: Courtesy of the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
The resulting amended statement on gender equality commits to challenging “discriminatory laws that justify, tolerate or reinforce violence, discrimination or inequalities based on religion, belief or gender and that limit women and girls’ full and equal enjoyment of human rights” . It makes no mention of sexual or reproductive rights or bodily autonomy.
In a statement to the Guardian, a spokesperson for the Norwegian Foreign Office said: “Norway and Denmark have approached the UK and the Netherlands, who are chair and co-chair respectively of the International Religious Freedom or Belief Alliance (IRFBA), to inquire about and protest the substantial changes to the statement and how the changes were made.
He added: “Norway has not yet decided whether to sign the amended version of the statement.”
The Danish Foreign Ministry declined to comment. Asked whether the Netherlands would sign the latest version of the statement, a Dutch foreign ministry spokesman said: “We are assessing the situation together with like-minded [countries].”
Marie Juul Petersen, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for Human Rights, who was close to the process of drafting the first statement, said the second version of the text came as a “big surprise” and a big disappointment.
“I saw the initial statement as a big step forward because it was a very contentious area – the relationship between freedom of religion and belief and gender equality. For so many years, there has not been much attempt to find synergies and overlaps or to demonstrate how these two sets of rights are actually compatible and actually intertwined and inseparable. And I thought that statement was really a big step forward in that direction, showing that these two rights are not in opposition to each other, but can actually reinforce each other. So I was really disappointed.”
Petersen said he expected the UK, as host of the conference, to resolve the issue, criticizing the process by which the statement was amended as “wrong and unreasonable”.
Andrew Copson, chief executive of Humanists UK, also said the government had a duty to withdraw the amendments.
“The government must surely be aware that, given recent events in the United States, abortion rights are at risk.” Therefore, to amend an agreed statement in such a way, omitting these rights, is particularly ill-timed,” he said.
“Unfortunately, this displacement of personal freedom under the guise of ‘religious freedom’ is an example of the abuse of the right to freedom of religion or belief to infringe on the rights of others.”
Becky Ashmore of Plan International UK, who also sent a letter of complaint to the Trust about the rewording, said: “The UK Government has long been a supporter of SRHR [Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights] and gender equality globally, and we are concerned that with this move the government is failing to fulfill its commitments to “boldly defend and advance SRHR for all”.
The FCDO has been approached for comment.
Add Comment