African Woman and Child Feature Service

In a bid to avoid controversy, governments have opted for a declaration to be adopted instead of an outcome document following the Beijing+15 review. Activists are divided on what this means, with some decrying the way that the historic meeting is being dumbed down; others say it’s safer not to open up debates that could risk fragile gains made 15 years ago on such touchy issues as sexual and reproductive rights.

In the past few weeks before they landed in New York for the 54th session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, several gender advocates had been voicing their concerns over the lack of an outcome document for this forum.

Information that has been trickling in indicates that only a Political Declaration, which is not as detailed as an outcome document, is going to be issued by Member States, who will reaffirm their commitment to the realisation of the 12 critical areas of concerns in the Beijing Platform for Action.

Unlike the political declaration, an outcome document offers a comprehensive assessment of what has been achieved in the past 15 years, the challenges and obstacles encountered, and recommend, in clear terms, a road map of actions that are needed at the national and international levels to push the Beijing agenda beyond 2010.

Many gender advocates see the lack of an outcome document as an indication of the diminishing importance the United Nations and governments are placing on the rights of women and the unwillingness of such stakeholders to make specific commitments on how to fully actualise the Beijing Platform for Action.

During this forum, it has emerged that emphasis will only be on sharing of experiences and good practices as a framework for overcoming remaining obstacles and new challenges in the implementation of the Platform for Action.

A draft political declaration dated February 12, 2010, titled Declaration on the Status of Women on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of the Fourth World Conference on Women, states what specific actions governments and internal community are to take on the 12 key areas of Beijing Platform for Action.

An excerpt from the political declaration states:

“We welcome the progress made thus far towards achieving gender equality, stress that challenges and obstacles remain in the implementation of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action and the outcome documents of the 23rd Special Session of the General Assembly, and in this regard, pledge to undertake further action to ensure their full and accelerated implementation.”

What kind of actions is not defined. This turn of event has left many wondering as to why there will not be an outcome document for an important process such as this.

Reasons for this state-of-affairs are as varied as there are delegates attending this conference. One school of thought believes the many failures that exceed the successes registered in the past 15 years are making member states uncomfortable with a document that addresses such issues.

They further argue that governments and other stakeholders are not willing to make specific commitments on actions to be taken to implement the 12 critical areas of the Beijing Platform for Action before the 2015, which is also the timeline for the Millennium Development Goals.

A second school of thought argues that the failure to have a negotiated and agreed upon outcome document is the reason why there is no such paper. They too think governments fear an outcome document may give more strength to the women’s movement.

The current development is eliciting mixed reactions on which is better: the political declaration, the outcome document or both. There are those who believe a political declaration is much better than having an outcome document.

“If we insist on an outcome document, then we might open up negotiations on the Beijing Platform for Action, which has made so much advances,” says Ms Marsha Weinstein, a gender advocate from the United States.

“Even now there are many people in governments and the United Nations who are uncomfortable with women making advances and they will use any opportunity to water-down efforts to strengthen women’s rights,” she says.

Weinstein argues that if there is any outcome document, then it should build on and strengthen what was agreed on in 2005.

There are others who fear that coming up with an outcome document may open-up areas such as women’s reproductive rights for new negotiations.

Ms Vivian Pender, Chair of the NGO Commission on Status of Women, New York, says the Political Declaration which will be issued at this forum is much better than an outcome document since it is a representation of the political will.

“With the Political Declaration, governments will accept they have made mistakes and reaffirm their willingness to work on them,” says Pender. She adds: “But the outcome document will detail what has happened, challenges encountered and make recommendations which might not have political support.”

But Martha Rugena from Women Rights Advancement group in Uganda says she would have wished to have both the Political Declaration and an Outcome Document issued at this important session.

The last time an outcome document was produced was during the Beijing +5 review session in 2000, when the 23rd Special Session of the General Assembly came up a document that addressed what had been achieved since the 1995 Beijing Platform of Action, the challenges and obstacles that existed and how they were going to be addressed.