The UN Human Rights Council successfully adopted several resolutions this week focusing on women and gender rights, despite a concerted effort by Russia and its allies to remove what they deemed “controversial concepts” surrounding issues like reproductive rights. Diplomats and observers have been sounding the alarm about an escalating trend to erase references to women’s rights and eliminate language related to sexual orientation and gender identity within UN documents, elements that were previously accepted without challenge. These tensions, which have sharply divided mainly Western nations from conservative, predominantly Muslim states, were dramatically evident during the latest session of the Human Rights Council, concluding on Friday.
As is customary during the June-July session of the council, women’s issues, gender, and sexuality were central to a significant number of the resolutions debated. Among the resolutions discussed were one aimed at eliminating all forms of discrimination against women and girls and another addressing human rights in the context of HIV and AIDS. While these resolutions were ultimately adopted, they faced numerous attempts to alter “controversial” wording in the texts, all of which failed to gather enough support.
The council was required to debate and vote on a total of 15 proposed amendments, primarily introduced by Russia, before approving the two resolutions. Russia’s representative, Ilia Barmin, expressed his dissatisfaction to the council, labeling the resolutions as “promoting controversial concepts.” The proposed changes included calls to “delete gender,” “delete sexuality,” and remove references to women’s and girls’ “right to bodily autonomy.” One proposed amendment also challenged the long-standing focus on “key populations,” including men who have sex with men and gender-diverse individuals, in HIV and AIDS prevention efforts. The amendment suggested that “each country should define the specific populations that are key to their epidemic and response.”
These efforts sparked strong rebukes from representatives of primarily Western nations. The US ambassador, Michele Taylor, stated to the council, “We believe that efforts to change this definition (of key populations), are driven not by sound epidemiological evidence, but in fact by prejudices.” Meanwhile, German ambassador Katharina Stasch firmly condemned the proposal to remove references to women’s “bodily autonomy,” asserting that it “should not be something we have to debate about in this council.” She emphasized that “Free and informed decisions over one’s own body is about protecting the very foundation of human rights.”
All of the proposed amendments were ultimately rejected, with most garnering support from fewer than a dozen of the council’s 47 members. The amendment that garnered the most support originated from Kuwait, seeking to remove references to “universal access to evidence-based comprehensive sexuality education” – a concept labeled as “controversial and non-consensual” by Kuwaiti ambassador Naser Abdullah Al Hayen. The amendment argued that this should be replaced with “universal access to scientifically accurate and age-appropriate education that is relevant to cultural contexts.” Ghana’s ambassador, Emmanuel Kwame Asiedu Antwi, emphasized the need for sex education to be “culturally sensitive.” French ambassador Jerome Bonnafont strongly criticized attempts “to undermine progress obtained by the international community in guaranteeing sexual and reproductive rights.”
The Human Rights Council is not the only UN forum where heated debates over language are occurring. Last month, the World Health Organization’s decision-making assembly was forced for the first time to put a resolution to a vote, rather than adopting it by consensus, due to opposition over gender-related terminology. A conservative alliance of countries, including Egypt, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, objected to the term “gender-responsive” in the text, although their attempt to alter it ultimately failed.
