ACP-EU Treaty
What is the ACP-EU Agreement and why is it so harmful?
The proposed ACP-EU Agreement is a manipulative, binding 20-year treaty between African, Caribbean and Pacific countries and the European Union. Although it is largely an economic and trade agreement, it contains deceptive provisions that will advance abortion, CSE and LGBT agendas in ACP countries.
10 HARMFUL ELEMENTS IN THE ACP-EU AGREEMENT
1. Commits ACP governments to implement highly controversial “sexual and reproductive health and rights” (SRHR), (Article 36.2) a term always rejected by Member States in negotiated UN documents because according to the WHO’s guiding document “Sexual Health, Human Rights and the Law,” SRH encompasses abortion, LGBT rights, same-sex marriage, transgender surgeries, Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) without parental consent, etc. Further, the European Parliament in their report “On the Situation of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in the EU” (June 2021) defined SRHR to encompass abortion services, sexuality education, sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), etc. Moreover, a Guttmacher-Lancet Commission report on SRHR regularly relied on by UN agencies and donor countries also defines SRHR to include the same controversial issues.
2. Commits governments to provide “sexual and reproductive health” (SRH) “commodities” and “services” (Article 29.5), a provision that has never before been accepted in an international binding treaty.
2. Requires ACP governments to provide access to comprehensive sexual and reproductive health information and education [CSRHE] in accordance with the UN’s controversial “International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education” (A-Article 40.6, C-Article 48.7, P-Article 49.6). This UN-published sex education “Guidance” includes teachings on homophobia, transphobia, sexual pleasure, and more. CSRHE is a euphemism for controversial Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) (see StopCSE.org).
3. Obligates ACP governments to “cooperate with the UN’s human rights bodies and mechanisms [i.e., UN committees, Independent Expert on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity – SOGI] and to fully support the work of the UN Human Rights Council” (Article 80.3). These controversial UN human rights mechanisms intentionally misinterpret international human rights law claiming benign provisions like the right to health encompass abortion, sexual rights, LGBT rights and autonomous sexual rights for children.
4. Makes ACP governments accountable to the EU to implement their own regional documents that were manipulated by International Planned Parenthood Federation and UN agencies:
- African Protocol – Maputo Protocol and Maputo Plan of Action 2016-2030. These documents bring in abortion, CSE and SRHR. (Article 40.6)
- Caribbean Protocol – Montevideo Consensus on Population and Development (ICPD +20) (Article 48.7)
- Pacific Protocol – Asian and Pacific Ministerial Declaration on Population and Development (ICPD +20) (Article 49.6)
5. Elevates soft law documents to the status of treaty obligations (ICPD, Beijing) and makes African governments accountable to the EU for their implementation (Article 36.2).
6. Binds ACP governments to implement all of the controversial review conference outcome documents of ICPD and Beijing (Article 36.2). See information and excerpts from:
- ICPD +20 Health Review
- ICPD +20 Human Rights Review
- ICPD +20 Youth Review
- UNFPA ICPD +20 Operational Review
- ICPD +25 Nairobi Summit (see here and here)
- Beijing +25 Generation Equality Forum Reviews (see here and here) time code
7. Obligates ACP governments to “uphold [unspecified] international norms and agreements” deliberately leaving room for controversial interpretations.
8. Obligates ACP governments “to coordinate positions” and “voting” in “international and regional organizations and forums” (Article 79.1). Yet at these forums, the EU most often holds positions on life, family and sexual issues that violate the religious and cultural values and laws of African countries.
9. Is an all-out assault on the religious and cultural values of ACP countries, making financial aid contingent upon implementing harmful provisions which African governments have consistently rejected in other UN consensus documents and resolutions for very good reasons.
10. Violates the national sovereignty of ACP countries as it disallows reservations or statements of explanation regarding the meaning of terms in the Agreement and will bypass governments and allocate a great deal of the funding to NGOs and UN agencies.
DOCUMENTATION
Policy Briefs and Articles
- ANALYSIS: Twelve False Claims and Harmful Recommendations in the Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief
-
U.N. report promotes abortion, LGBT ‘rights’ over human rights
-
Human Rights Council Approves Abortionist as Special Expert on Right to Health
The following policy briefs and articles reveal a long history of UN entities overstepping their mandates.
- Threats to National Sovereignty: UN Entities Overstepping Their Mandates
- Abuse of Power: The Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education
- Ultra Vires Acts by UN Committee on the Rights of the Child
- The Report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights: “Technical guidance on the application of a human rights-based approach to the implementation of policies and programmes to reduce preventable maternal morbidity and mortality.”
- OHCHR Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health.