Home
| About the NCC | Education | Justice | Public Witness | Unity | NCC News | Directory | Search | Make a Gift
A Perspective on the 2001 United
Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS The first United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) ever convened to
discuss a health issue was held June 25-27, 2001, in New York. The weight of the AIDS pandemic forced the
international community to confront the magnitude of lives lost, the cycle of
impoverishment, the lack of development and access to health care. A National Council of Churches / Church World Service Ecumenical Team was
formed to participate in the Special Session on HIV/AIDS and to support the June 23
rally calling for action by governments around providing Dollars, Debt Cancellation, and
Drugs. One chant summarized it all, “
Donate the Dollars, Drop the Debt, Treat the People”.
Liz Franklin, a professional psychologist with extensive experience with AIDS
counseling, Kathy Todd, from the International Justice and Human Rights office, and
Heather Nolen with the International Development and Global Issues office attended on
behalf of Church World Service. Member
communions of the National Council sent representatives who came together to form the
broader NCC / CWS ecumenical team including: Vina Nadjibulla, United Methodist Church,
General Board of Global Missions, Sophony St. Cloud, United Methodist Church General Board
of Church in Society, Eric Olsen, Lutheran World Federation, and Dan Hoffman and Bridget
Robinson with Global Ministries of the United Church of Christ / Disciples of Christ. At the end of the Special Session, all 189 countries adopted – by consensus – the “Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS”. “Member states are on record in support of strong language on gender,”
commented Vina Nadjibulla with the United Methodist Church, General Board of Global
Ministries, “but the age group most affected by the pandemic was largely ignored
during the Special Session – youth.”
Such are the post-UNGASS reports: mixed
in their reviews on what was achieved and what remains undone. On how the final Declaration can be useful, Heather Nolen had this to say: “The
document will provide a useful advocacy tool to use with national governments and
international bodies, but the language still lacks a fundamental sense of urgency and a
commitment to justice for People Living with HIV/AIDS.” “This whole situation with AIDS looks like
another form of global apartheid,” added Liz Franklin, “and the international
community is not responding rapidly to the injustices that fuel the pandemic—the lack
of education, disparities in country wealth, poor development, and unjust international
trade policies.” Most targets within the final Declaration could be described as incremental and it is unclear how governments will ultimately implement some without civil society groups mobilizing to hold them accountable. The NCC/CWS Ecumenical Team concluded that, in addition to strong follow-up with governments, especially the United States government, more work was needed in four key areas: (1) The Prevention, Care and Treatment Continuum: Prevention continued to be listed as the
“mainstay” of the response. Although
efforts by the Rio Group (Argentina, Bolivia, Brasil,
Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, México, Panamá, Paraguay, Perú, Uruguay, Venezuela)
succeeded in elevating the importance of providing access to and affordability of
treatment, no clear commitments toward making treatment a reality were adopted. The document remained silent on intellectual
property rights laws and their safeguards as instruments that currently allow for the
generic production of anti-retrovirals in affected countries or the importation of
anti-retrovirals at the cheapest price regardless of a the drugs’ patent status. The
sustainability of treatment was also not addressed. Governments agreed to adopt or strengthen strategies ensuring
access to primary and secondary education by girls and boys, a critical component in
building prevention strategies. Food
security was only mentioned once in the document but it should be viewed as integral to
the prevention, care and treatment continuum. (2) Resources and the Global Fund: The wealthiest countries
made no sizable monetary commitments during the Special Session. Most still fall far short
of a previous commitment to provide .7% of GNP for development assistance. Civil society efforts to include substantive language on debt
cancellation failed. Instead, member states adopted a status quo approach and stopped
short of calling multilateral creditors to provide 100% cancellation of impoverished
country debt. The Global AIDS AIDS, TB, and Malaria Fund has only brought in
country pledges totaling $860 million of the $7-10 billion proposed by UN Secretary
General, Kofi Annan. An additional $100
million has been pledged from private sources. (3) Vulnerable Groups:
persons suffering the highest levels of marginalization and the highest incidence
of HIV/AIDS should be explicitly named and included in program design and implementation. Instead, the Declaration allows for a judgmental
stance on sexual behavior and leaves open how
vulnerable groups should be defined. (4) Human Rights: Member states failed to adopt a
human rights-based approach that would build upon current international law including the
International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment—critical
documents which, if implemented globally, could help curb the devastating impact of
HIV/AIDS. More specifically, member states
refused to consider reference to the United Nations International Guidelines on HIV and
Human Rights that address the human rights of People Living with HIV/AIDS directly. During the UNGASS, the NCC/CWS Ecumenical Team co-sponsored a briefing on “The
HIV/AIDS Crisis: Grassroots Responses by Churches.” The session included presentations from the
United Evangelical Lutheran Church of Argentina, the United Evangelical Lutheran Church in
India, the Global Ministries of the United Church of Christ, and the Maryknoll AIDS Task
Force. Rev. Lissandro Orlov with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Argentina began by urging
the church to work in solidarity with people living with AIDS and for it to be focus on
its own “behavior change”—the need to create a more inclusive community
where no one is a stranger. He further
cautioned against the church positioning itself to receive funds as its primary objective.
Panelists spoke about their work with sex workers, orphans, HIV positive mothers, gays,
lesbians and transgendered persons despite the pervasive silence on vulnerable groups in
the final UN Declaration. Bridget Robinson with Global Ministries of the United Church of
Christ emphasized the need to advocate for street children and to understand how they can
be overlooked by the public health sector when they do not carry identifying papers. Sister Veronica Schweyen with the Maryknoll AIDS Task Force highlighted many of the
real challenges on the ground: customs,
stigma, ignorance, and user fees. One
customary practice that increases a woman’s risk of infection is the remarrying of a
woman to her deceased husband’s brother upon her husband’s death. In Tanzanian society, more often than not, those
who are HIV infected are treated as outcasts. The
lack of education contributes to the disease’s spread because individuals are not
fully informed on how to protect themselves or to protect others from transmission. Many persons seeking health care are simply turned
away because of their inability to pay the user fees necessary to access health care.
Panelists consistently raised the issue of user fees as impediments to development and
an obstacle for persons infected and affected by HIV/AIDS.
These fees are generally required by the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund to help “restructure economies,” but their results have been
devastating for many in poor communities. Dr. Sheila Shyamprasad with the United Evangelical Lutheran Church in India recounted
the strong ecumenical linkages and the linkages between churches, youth and women’s
groups who continue to tackle the AIDS pandemic together in India. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in India has used
a community-based training model where a pastor, a teacher, a social worker, and a nurse
receive AIDS training as a core team. The
core team then returns to their original community where they are already well known. Dr. Shyamprasad
cited the lack of access to anti-retrovirals as “a major frustration,” on the
basis that stigma around AIDS is perpetuated in much the same way as that of leprosy. Without access to care and treatment, efforts to
engage individuals in a larger discussion about the existence of the disease as well as
how it is transmitted are more difficult. As
a consequence, People Living with HIV/AIDS are more easily ostracized. The National Council of Churches and Church World Service will continue to refine their policies on responding to the global pandemic to more fully address some of the controversial issues faced by churches. Prepared by Heather Nolen, NCC/CWS Washington Office
|