Commisioned by oxfam gb southern african regiona study undertaken by rosemary semafumu

Termination of Pregnancy

Article 14 2c) calls upon member states to protect the reproductive rights of women by authorizing medical abortion in cases of sexual assault, rape, incest, and where the continued pregnancy endangers the mental and physical health of the mother or the life of the mother or the fetus. In South Africa, the Choice of Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1996 makes termination of pregnancy legal up to 12 weeks. It is also legal between the 13^th and 20^th week under certain conditions and upon recommendation by a medical practitioner or midwife, taking into account factors such as the socio-economic condition of women, rape, incest, health risk. Article 14 2.c is therefore more restrictive than South African legislation. On the issue of sexuality, many people have expressed the concern that provisions in this area actually reinforce traditional gender stereotypes and expectations that equate women with reproduction.
On the other hand the article is an advance on Zambian legislation, which requires a panel of 3 doctors to agree that the mother’s heath is threatened and does not provide for termination even in cases of rape sexual assault or incest. In Mozambique women do not have a right to abortion and the issue is considered a taboo subject. It is likely to be among the major bonds of contention during the debate on the ratification of the Protocol.

Protection from Retrogression

There is currently a rise in international and national conservatism and religious fundamentalism that could threaten to undermine the gains made by women over the last few decades. This is reflected in trends like the Bush administration’s reduction of support for family planning programmes. There is an emphasis on a return to family values, moral regeneration and abstinence. While the emphasis on moral regeneration is in itself a positive development, every effort should be made to ensure that it does not take place at the expense of women’s hard won gains. The onus must not be put on women to promote family values and prevent HIV/AIDS. It must be an equal partnership between the genders. The Protocol could play a positive in protecting some of the gains made and in the process of harmonizing customary law and statutory law in a manner that benefits women. Women should take full advantage of Article 17, which enshrines the right to live in a positive cultural environment, and to participate at all levels in the determinations of cultural policies.
Conclusion

The Protocol can be a useful tool for improving the lot of women in all three countries. It can strengthen legislative and policy frameworks. In areas where they are adequate it can help bridge the glaring gap between laws and policies and the actual situation by giving impetus to their implementation. The Protocol is an additional tool that can help ensure the harmonization of customary and religious law with statutory law, in a manner that advances the rights of women. As a shield from retrogression, it can help protect the rights of women when changes in national and international policies and actors threaten to roll back hard won gains. In all the three thematic areas, the Protocol will need to help address a number of challenges if it is to improve the lot of women. These seemingly daunting challenges should be used as starting points to build inroads for action.

CHAPTER FOUR: AWARENESS ABOUT THE PROTOCOL

Matrix of Awareness and Influence⁵

Figure 9

Introduction

This matrix maps out the levels of awareness of different actors against their capacity to reach grassroots women. On the whole the level of awareness about the African Women’s Protocol was woefully low. Unfortunately, it was lowest among two categories of actors that are crucial to its implementation; the media and community based organizations. Most CBO’s had never heard of it and media coverage of the African Women’s Protocol was negligible. In S. Africa not even its ratification managed to catch the news.

The level of awareness was highest among actors (government officials, members of parliament and NGO’s) who have actually been involved in the process of its promotion, adoption, and ratification. They were knowledgeable enough about it to use it to advance women’s rights. The level of awareness was therefore higher in South Africa, which has ratified the African Women’s Protocol. In Zambia, which has not signed the African Women’s Protocol and where debate has been limited, officials interviewed apart from the line department are largely ignorant of the African Women’s Protocol and its content. A limited number of NGO’s were sufficiently conversant with the African Women’s Protocol to use it to advance women’s rights. In the circumstances, the popularization of the African Women’s Protocol must remain high on the agenda if it is to be an effective tool for change.

South Africa

Policy makers
All three of the three gender machinery representatives rated themselves with a grade of 5, indicating that they were able to use the Protocol to promote women’s rights. One of the three relevant sectoral ministry interviewees rated himself a five. The other two knew of its existence but could not speak to its relevance for their particular sectors.
Civil Society organizations

All seven of the civil society representatives could use the Protocol to promote women’s rights. However, one of the interviewees rated human rights NGOs and academics in general as a 2, denoting that she believed that civil society organizations might (at best) know of its existence, but were ignorant of its content. This level of knowledge and awareness decreased to a 1 in reference to CBOs and the media, denoting that she believed that in general they had never heard of it.

The discussions that have been held within the country around the Protocol have counted on the participation of a limited number of NGOs in relation to the number of NGOs that exist in the country. In addition, government functionaries in general apart fronm those who have participated in the processes of negotiation, signature or ratification, are ignorant of the actual content of the Protocol. This would not be the case with Members of Parliament who would have participated in discussions of the Protocol during sessions. However, mainly the members of the Portfolio Committees on Justice and Constitutional Development and Foreign Affairs, and members of the governmental delegation who participated in the actual negotiation process, would have any degree of in-depth knowledge of the Protocol and its applicability.