Last edition, we reproduced a piece published in the Guardian newspaper of 4 July 2007 protesting the attempt to pass the innocuously titled "Convention for the Elimination of all, forms of Discrimination against Women" (CEDAW) into Nigerian law. The. author, Dr. Asogwa made some crucial points in that piece, which we shall summarise, for ease of reference:
a) Article 12 of CEDAW guarantees the right to abortion under the guise of "reproductive rights", and the CEDAW committee of the UN which oversees its implementation has relentlessly focused on widening the availability of abortion in states party to the CEDAW treaty;
b) CEDAW "deliberately uses vague language and undefined terms to permit interpretations that are destructive to social order and harmful to individuals, e.g. defining same sex unions as "families" entitled to a" the rights accorded to families, including the right to adopt children";
c) CEDAW is "fundamentally flawed in its social analysis and totalitarian in its methods", requiring that even religious laws (which it considers to be antiquated) should be reviewed so as to permit the elimination of the "stereotyped concept of the role of men and women".
This last point, when taken with other provisions of CEDAW, demands the review of social and religious doctrines which apparently "discriminate" against women and promotes prostitution, homosexuality and lesbianism as being compatible with sexual freedom. It is this convention that the Nigerian House of Representatives is being urged to pass into Nigerian law.
It is mind-boggling that anybody would even dream of passing such an abhorrent piece of legislation into law in a country such as Nigeria (or maybe not, since it is in force in certain other Muslim countries). But, here we are. The bill had even passed the first reading at the last session of the former House of Representatives and was on its way to being sneaked into law, but for the concerted efforts of concerned Nigerians. Indeed, about the same time as this was being done, Mrs. Daisy Danjuma was also attempting to secure the passage of the pro-abortion National Institute of Reproductive Health (NIRH) Bill at the Nigerian Senate. All of these go to illustrate why we must maintain untiring vigilance over the actions of those who we must maintain untiring vigilance over the actions of those who
For any right-thinking person, the attempt to legalise abortion, prostitution and homosexuality/lesbianism (on the ground that they are mere manifestations. of sexual' and reproductive-rights) must rank as the most odious aspects of the CEDAW agenda. But that is not the most fundamental issue about the convention. In fact, the aim of CEDAW is to bring about social change. Not social change in the benign or benevolent sense, but sweeping change based on an extreme version of radical feminism which is championed by a very tiny minority. It is confounding that the United Nations has lent its umbrella to this perverse abuse. In this regard, one might well ask, what is the business of the UN (an organisation ostensibly formed to preserve international security) with fomenting such a perverse doctrine? We shall touch on this later.
How does the CEDAW seek to achieve its objectives? First, the treaty is presented as humanitarian intervention which seeks to guarantee the 21st Century woman some basic rights apparently denied her in traditional patriarchal societies. And so, it opens with the unattributed quote:
"...the full and complete development of a country, the welfare of the world and the cause of peace require the maximum participation of women on equal terms with men in all fields ".
But these words (as with most of its other provisions) mask the more sinister aspects of the convention. Articles I0(h), 12, 14(b) and 16 of CEDAW respectively which guarantees unfettered access to family planning services are in fact a guise for the legalization of "abortion, sterilisation of women to control population (and) prostitution, under the soft language of family planning".
As Dr. Asogwa noted, the main tool of its implementation is the CEDAW committee formed pursuant to the Convention. It is in the work of the Committee that we actually see the real intention of the drafters of the convention playing out. The committee meets yearly and oversees the implementation of the Convention. Under this guise, it evaluates the reports submitted by each state entity and points out areas where the country must make changes.
Reading through its reports, one gets the impression of an imperious headmistress laying down school rules to a bunch of addled pupils. So absolute are the powers that the committee has arrogated to itself, so authoritarian and absolute is its clout that it sets agenda for states, raises questions on their reports and even gives them timelines within which to achieve those tasks that it sets for them. The committee functions without the least regard for individual states' cultural beliefs and peculiar circumstances, or even the concept of state sovereignty. Burundi, Paraguay, Portugal and Uruguay have been condemned for either criminalizing abortion or restricting its availability. Brazil was upbraided for not permitting homosexuality, and so on, ad nauseum. But these pale into insignificance when one considers the committee's attitude to Islamic doctrines.
In researching this piece, we had the benefit of reading the committee's reports on Pakistan, Mauritania and some other predominantly Muslim countries. The energetic effort the committee puts into systematically examining every aspect of their cultural mores and prescribing immediate change to Islamic doctrine leaves no one in doubt that its open agenda is simply the elimination of cultural values however remotely based on Islamic mores, which it describes as "patriarchal attitudes".
As an illustration, in the report of its 38th Session (14 May -I June 2007), the committee urged Mauritania "to view culture as a dynamic dimension of the country's life and social fabric, subject to many influences over time and therefore to change... " Having so belittled Mauritania's Islamic culture, the committee then proclaims that Mauritania be "more proactive and to put into place without delay a comprehensive strategy, including clear goals and Now, what does the CEDAW committee mean that culture is a "dynamic dimension ... subject to many influences over time and therefore to change"? Mauritania Is a Muslim country (officially, the Islamic republic of Mauritania) whose culture is premised on Islamic norms. What the committee is saying in essence (and what it will say to Nigeria if - God forbid - the law is domesticated) is that if European culture, against which the Committee apparently benchmarks other cultures, is now so amoral to recognize homosexuality and prostitution as normal facts of life which the state should even protect, then Islamic culture too, should demonstrate its contemporaneity by changing to recognize these perversions.
The committee even calls on Pakistan to undertake a "comprehensive and systematic review and revision of all discriminatory legislation" including its Citizenship law, its law of Evidence, and its rules relating to Hudood and Diyya "in consultation with civil society, including women's organizations"
Apparently, the sole essence of CEDAW is the free enjoyment and exercise of sexual freedoms. States should give free access to contraceptives and opportunities to terminate pregnancies at any stage so as to preserve a right to "safe motherhood and equal right with men". Prostitution and abortion should be legalized and protected. Cultural values which maintain a distinction between the roles and responsibilities of men and women should be totally eliminated. In this worldview, any practice that gives different rights and responsibilities to individuals based on the natural character and limitations of gender are abhorrent and must be discarded. Traditional concepts of women as caregivers and nurturers and of men as labourers and sentinels are "anachronistic" and antisocial, CEDAW says.
So that we are not misunderstood in this discussion, we need to state that there are indeed some harmful cultural practices against women which even our Islamic societies have fallen prey to. Crimes of violence against women (such as rape, domestic violence, assault, mutilation - not circumcision that is properly done, etc) should not be condoned in any Muslim environment. Low enrollment in schools (both Arabic and western), child trafficking and abuse, and the pauperization of large sections of communities are also to be condemned and remedied, whether they occur in Muslim society or elsewhere. But the perverse attitude of the CEDAW committee and its typecasting of all Muslim culture as "anachronistic" is beneath contempt; and any attempt to extend CEDAW and its committee's jurisdiction to this environment must be stoutly resisted.
Essentially though, our anger should not be directed just at the CEDAW committee and its "militant feminism". Theirs is a club that states can only join on their own volition. It is those our governments who are so blind as to submit our sovereignty to a bunch of bald-headed women and their acolytes that we should hold to account. We must wonder why/how come Pakistan, Mauritania and other Muslim countries chose to accede to the CEDAW treaty and even incorporated it into their domestic laws. It should serve as food for thought that even the USA, self proclaimed bastion of human rights and fundamental freedoms, has not ratified the CEDAW treaty.
Indeed, the feminist movement successfully lobbied the American Congress to pass the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the American Constitution in 1972, so as to make provisions similar to CEDAW part of the American constitution. But this was defeated when the states rejected the amendment. So why would an Islamic country accept such ideological servitude when indeed, Islam taught the world about the rights of women. Did somebody forget that women in Islam were free to own property when Europe still considered them the property of their husbands and fathers?
What should we now expect from the CEDAW lobby? As things stand, there is some quiet on the legislative front. But this is deceptive. The movers of CEDAW are an obstinate lot. It took over thirty years of work to put the treaty together before it was adopted at the UN in 1978. With a woman at the head of Nigeria's House of Representatives, it is likely that the passage of the bill may be smuggled through, if merely on the guise of giving some balm to her gender. With the horse-trading they call politicking; we should not be surprised if another quick attempt is made.
We should also expect that CEDAW will increasingly be justified on security basis. The UN is involved. The trend since September 11 is that practically any measure will pass if justified on security grounds. We will therefore hear the argument that the empowerment of women is the easiest way to guarantee social security and safety.
The times ahead promise to be interesting. The Sultan recently called attention to the threat posed by "certain International Conventions and foreign lifestyles, which if adopted in Nigeria, would destroy our cherished values and beliefs". Now that we have identified the source and evil potentials of that threat, the challenge before us is simple. To stand up for what we-believe
This article was culled from the publications of Deen Communication Limited