Human Rights Comission: Introduction and The Debate

Human Rights Comission: Introduction and The Debate

Dylan Khumalo

Independent Journalist

March 14 2019

The Human Rights Comission started off in a calm mood, although the presentation was not completed due to technical difficulties. The delegates were grouped according to their allies, regarding the topic of euthanasia .They began by discussing the issue in their groups and tried to create a resolution amongst themselves for debate that took place later on this afternoon.

Afternoon Debate

The afternoon debate started with the delegates debating on clause 5, on whether or whether or not to scrap it. Clause 5 called for the creation of an animal universal conference for specialized people in the medical field to allow them to:

  1. Undergo further studies to improve medication and test new painkillers
  2. Hold further experiment of alternatives for assisted suicide and  euthanasia
  3. Delegate of Belgium discuss about the reduction of conferences
  4. Potential choice of having euthanasia said by the delegate of Peru

The delegate of Belgium spoke out against the clause saying that “those who suffer should have the choice to live or not due the lack of medication in modern day to cure diseases that could be terminal.” On the contrary, the delegate of the United states is for clause 5 in addition to the creation of medication as it will bring society together in peace, and will better their nation as it will push them forward. Operative clause 5 was scrapped due to the overwhelming majority vote against the clause (9 for, 15 against).  The second clause up for debate was clause 8, which consisted of

  1. Asks member nations to draft legalization alloying hospitals or individual doctors to refuse to carry out CDS based on personal or religious beliefs under conditions that:
    1. The patient must be referred to another physician or healthcare facility who are willing to carry out the treatment
    2. The doctor and hospital must register their activities with the government or respective nation to endure theirs the patient receives the requested treatment in a timely manner

The delegate of the Uk ask that the patients should do it in the privacy in their own homes and that doctors shouldn’t have to have the burden of killing someone. In response to this claim, the delegate of India sais that doctors are allowed to refuse and that there should be a certain doctor carrying out the euthanizing. The delegates went back and forth, arguing whether or whether or not people should have a choice to be killed. After the voting procedures, the chair ensures that the delegates are not getting confused with suicide, and being assisted by a Doctor. Operative Clause 8 was not scrapped due to an overwhelming majority (For scrapping 5, Against scrapping 17) The afternoon session concluded with the overall debate of the resolution. The delegate of australia spoke about why the resolution should be scrapped, on the ground of the resolution not helping countries that are poor, and provides no way forward as a nation. In response to this, the delegate of Cuba suggested that the resolution could be flexible. The delegate of Australia points out that the problem should be focused on now, rather than focus on solutions for the future. The delegate of Latvia was the final speaker of the afternoon, and believed that the resolution should be passed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *