It’s the final day of the CPD and we’re far behind. To give
you sense of exactly how behind we are, the commission traditionally goes
through at least three readings of the text before a consensus is reached. As
of this morning, the second reading has not even been completed. Furthermore,
the ‘operational paragraphs’ which contain the important legislative clauses, have
barely been touched. Yesterday night the negotiations lasted until 10:30pm and
the delegates left the hall with a tangible sense of frustration.
The problem is two-fold. The facilitator of the negotiations
from the Philippines is being incredibly inefficient. The negotiations are
moving forward at a snail’s pace and tolerating long irrelevant soliloquies
discussing, for instance, the exact definition of internal migration. A
Brazilian delegate posed the question if her personal move from downtown to
uptown Rio would be considered internal migration. Unfortunately, it was not
uncommon to see such personal, or irrelevant discussions dominate the floor. It
is evident to many here that the commission does not have the time or capacity
to ponder such futile discussion and has resulted in this serious time-crunch.
Yet some delegates can’t seem to adopt a diplomatic approach during this CPD.
Another, more drastic predicament, is the inability to find
a consensus on SRHR. The commission is visibly divided about the issues. Certain
delegations such as Argentina, champions of the sexual health rights, won’t
budge on the language. Other delegations are united to remove any language
referring to the rights. It seems that conservative delegations are grouping
together SRHR, sexual rights, sexual orientation and gender identity rights,
sexuality education, and anything health related to sexuality and health all under
the same heading. Without these important distinctions, they emulate the important
issues that requires specific, precise attention and language. And, yet other delegations seem to be
attempting to persuade the commission that treating language about SRHR is entirely
irrelevant to the topic of migration...
Today is judgment day. Because time is running out, we are
expecting the chair to propose their own draft to reach a consensus. This would
mean we could, unfortunately, expect minimal language on SRHR. However it will be resolved, we are not losing sight of how important our work here is and
continue to press on for our sexual and reproductive rights here at the CPD.
-Vincent & Stefan
Comments
best,
Austin Ruse
President
C-FAM