Interim Staff
On March 8, the United Nations General Assembly formally adopted an international declaration that calls on member states to enact legislation to “prohibit all forms of human cloning.” By a vote of 84-34, the assembly approved the measure, which serves to set an international standard that humans should not be created through cloning for any purpose. This places human life as a priority over scientific experimentation.
The news was highly praised by pro-life groups internationally as a considerable breakthrough. The international community united in condemning human cloning as exploitative and unethical.
Also included in the declaration are calls for member states to introduce measures preventing the exploitation of women for their eggs, especially in developing nations, and a proposal calling for wealthier nations to direct attention and funding to pressing medical issues such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. The declaration condemns all applications of any genetic engineering techniques that threaten human dignity.
The decision ends over three years of deadlock caused by countries seeking approval for embryonic stem cell research and so-called “therapeutic” cloning. The United Kingdom, Belgium and Singapore led the opposition to a total ban, insisting that a ban only apply to reproductive cloning, while permitting cloned embryos to be experimented on and killed for their stem cells.
The topic was originally introduced at the UN by pro-cloning countries to gain implicit international approval for so-called “therapeutic” cloning (creating human clones to experiment on and kill). In 2002, these countries requested that a treaty be drafted to ban only so-called “reproductive” cloning. The countries insisted that human clones are for research only and must never be allowed to be born.
The pro-cloning countries lost support as Costa Rica, the United States and pro-life groups took the lead to educate countries on how cloning violates the human rights of both cloned embryos and women. The pro-life coalition at the UN focused on two points to educate UN delegates: embryos would be created and destroyed at the whim of scientists for the sole purpose of experimentation; and women would be exploited and treated as commodities to harvest their eggs in order to create these cloned embryos.
Samantha Singson, Canadian Campaign Life Coalition’s UN representative, was part of a massive and sustained pro-life effort to educate delegates. When asked by The Interim about her experience, she said, “It was a difficult task trying to break down the complex scientific and ethical dilemmas surrounding cloning.”
Singson explained, “Most of the people we talked with had no idea that the process of therapeutic cloning entails the killing of an embryo. They were being fed promises of cures. We made a point of telling them that pro-lifers are not anti-stem cell research, but anti-embryonic stem cell research.”
A cloning primer compiled by a pro-life coalition was sent to all of the delegations at the UN. It clearly and succinctly explained the success of adult stem cells, the use of which is ethical, and how they are already providing near-miraculous treatments for patients with a variety of illnesses – such as Parkinson’s disease, spinal cord injury, heart failure, cancer and blindness –while cloning has yet to produce a single therapy.
Some have said the entire process is a “failure,” as the UN committee had originally been charged with the task of drafting an international convention. The pro-life coalition claimed victory in a press release sent out immediately after the vote in the General Assembly. “While it is true that this UN declaration is non-binding, its passage is a significant pro-life victory. The declaration has the same immediate effect as if the committee endorsed a convention, in that it sends a clear signal to countries that encourage the practice, and sets an international standard that calls on all states to respect all human life from its earliest stages.”
The actions of the Canadian government delegation continued to baffle and anger pro-life lobbyists. At every opportunity, the delegation reported to the committee that Canadian national legislation bans both cloning for reproductive and research purposes. However, instead of voting in favour of the only proposal that supported and reflected the view of its own national legislation, Canada voted against it – twice.
Immediately after the first vote took place in February, Canada’s representative, Hugh Adsett, delivered an explanation of the vote. Again, he made reference to Canadian national law and stated that it prohibits all forms of human cloning. He said while this was the case, Canada voted against the declaration, because the delegation viewed it as “divisive” and “not in the spirit of consensus.” At the General Assembly vote in March, Canada again voted against the declaration.
Singson expressed her frustration: “How can the Canadian delegation continue to go against its own national legislation at the United Nations? Last year, then-health minister Anne McLellan went on record during Question Period, stating that Canada would indeed support any effort at the UN for a total ban on all forms of human cloning. Obviously, this did not happen and the Canadian delegation and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should be questioned and called to account for their actions.”
Singson also noted that while Canada claimed to want consensus, and used the absence of such as an excuse to vote against the cloning ban, the very act of voting against it made consensus no more or less a reality.prohibits all cloning