UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL,
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION
Address by
Mr Koïchiro Matsuura
Director-General
of the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO)
at the opening of the Round Table of Ministers of Science
"Bioethics: International Implications"
UNESCO, 22 October 2001
Mr President of the General Conference,
Madam Chairperson of the Executive Board,
Distinguished Ministers of Science,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is with great pleasure that I welcome you all to this Round Table of Ministers of Science on Bioethics. I am very much looking forward to our debates and discussions on this vital subject, which touches upon issues that are often fascinating and sometimes very troubling. It is my hope that, on the basis of our shared values regarding human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms, we shall find considerable common ground in our deliberations.
You will be interested to know that, in anticipation of this meeting and with a view to widening the scope of public debate on bioethics, UNESCO has held an interactive discussion forum on the Internet from 9th to 19th October. During the course of my presentation this morning, I shall make reference to some of the results of this consultation.
Major developments have occurred in recent years which have enormously increased our knowledge of the fundamental bases and mechanisms of life. And the pace of change is not relenting. In the fields of genetics and embryology, for example, advances are ongoing in gene therapy, pre-implementation diagnosis, and the storage of gametes and tissues.
The new biotechnologies, and the sciences on which they are based, are shaping all our futures. However, serious ethical concerns have arisen both on the part of specialists and within civil society and the international community. Along with our greater knowledge and understanding of life’s secrets and our stronger command of the techniques of intervention into nature, we are required to reflect deeply on the meaning and possible implications of these developments. And we must reflect with speed: given the astonishing pace of change, this reflection is needed urgently.
The reason why bioethics has developed so much in recent years is because a number of scientific and technological advances have come to pose serious challenges for human rights and respect for human dignity. We all agree that scientific research and its applications should aim at one goal, namely, the well-being of the whole of humankind. We all agree that our scientific knowledge and technologies always should be used with wisdom and responsibility. However, the age of scientific innocence is over. We now know that, despite the best of intentions, scientific and technological advances may have unintended, adverse consequences for human life and human welfare.
Bioethics is our response in the field of life sciences and biotechnology. It demands that, in all our thoughts and actions, we remain conscious of the ethical implications of scientific discoveries and results. This ethical reflection, however, cannot be an afterthought, but must be integrated into the very process of scientific and technological research. It is not, therefore, an external or imported consideration ; on the contrary, the ethical dimension is inherent in science as a practice. What, then, of the freedom of research ? This must be respected, of course. Freedom of research is a real value but, in the perspective of bioethics, it is not absolute or omnipotent. It is necessary, therefore, to reconcile different principles and values, which is the real test of wisdom.
If originally it was largely reactive in character, bioethics today must also be anticipatory. It is imperative that we are fully aware not only of ongoing developments in science but also of their potential ramifications and future directions. The anticipatory character of bioethics requires that it is truly integrated into the research process from the outset. It is important, therefore, to conceptualize the research process not as the private domain of scientists, technologists and their institutions but as a matter of fundamental public interest. And given the role of Ministers of Science in promoting scientific research, we look to you to ensure that the ethical dimension is embedded within it.
Policy-makers and decision-makers like yourselves need to be fully informed if you are to be sensitive to all the nuances and implications involved in a particular issue. You need to be well-informed about the scientific background and about all the possible aspects and consequences of adopting a certain line of scientific research. The ethical implications must figure most prominently.
Informed decision-making, of course, must also be based on public debate. Through educational processes, information and public debate, citizens need to be informed about what is at stake. Some of our Internet respondents have highlighted the need for popularizing and democratizing the subject of bioethics so that it becomes more accessible to ordinary people.
In some countries, national committees of ethics have been established to examine bioethical issues and their policy implications. Made up of key stakeholders and representatives of relevant disciplines of study, these national committees are a valuable means for focusing debate and consultation on bioethical concerns. UNESCO, by the way, stands ready to assist countries in setting up such committees, which often play a vital role within the wider democratic context of decision-making in this area.
Thus, bioethics serves as a vital bridge between science and the human condition. It guides us towards further and deeper reflection on nature and life, providing us with the ethical principles and guidance appropriate to the scientific and technological advances taking place. However, in bioethical debates, the possibility of reaching universal agreement and consensus is far from a settled question. It is clear that bioethical issues are extremely complex and sensitive, especially when it comes to questions of life and death. In this on-going debate, different economic, social, philosophical, cultural and religious values influence people’s judgements and decisions.
In the case of embryo research, for example, different laws and regulations exist, varying from State to State depending on the very perception of the status of an embryo. Furthermore, the questions raised by advances in genomics and proteomics have different implications according to different legal, intellectual and ethical traditions.
However, controversy is both the essence and the motor of any meaningful ethical debate. The aim of an ethical debate is not to impose one’s values on others, but to bring different perspectives and value systems to bear upon an issue in order to reach the most appropriate and defendable decision.
Despite the difficulties, we believe that a universal agreement and set of principles on bioethics are needed. We believe we must try to make substantive progress in this direction. The very nature of bioethical issues endows them with universal relevance and importance. Developments in the life sciences and biotechnology have implications not only for the whole of humanity today but for all generations to come. If reproductive human cloning occurs in one country, all countries will be affected. If the idea of the human genome as the heritage of all of humankind is compromised, then all of humankind will be bear the consequences. In the domain of bioethics, universality is the rule.
This is why international cooperation is so vital in this area. In fact, this is why this Round Table has been convened. It is the first time the world’s Ministers of Science have met specifically to debate the question of bioethics. This meeting is designed to take international discussion of bioethics to another level. It also turns out to be a timely meeting since the subject of bioethics will shortly be addressed by the United Nations General Assembly.
It is my hope that a clear and strong message comes from this Round Table and the General Conference. This message has two main aspects : first, that a universal instrument and set of principles on bioethics are indeed required ; and, second, that UNESCO, as the sole organization within the UN system entrusted with a responsibility for the ethical dimension, is best equipped to take this matter forward.
Naturally, we welcome the high profile that debate in the United Nations General Assembly will bring to the question of bioethics. We also welcome and respect the contributions that other organizations in the United Nations system bring to the developments and issues addressed by bioethics. It is our hope that, at this crucial juncture, the highly respected and well-functioning mechanisms established by UNESCO are not thrown into disarray by needless duplication of effort. International cooperation in regard to bioethics already has a productive, responsible and reputable framework, the framework which has been created and sustained by UNESCO. This framework – with its international, intergovernmental and inter-agency dimensions – is well placed to take the bioethics debate forward.
In light of the foregoing remarks, allow me to outline the agenda of the Round Table and to offer some brief explanations for purposes of clarification.
During the first session of the Round Table, we shall revisit and examine in depth the founding concepts and principles of bioethics. This revisiting is necessary because a number of concepts that were current just ten years ago have been rendered obsolete or outdated by the rapid developments in the life sciences and biotechnology as well as within bioethics itself. Some of our Internet respondents have queried how the principle of solidarity can be reconciled with profit-making. Others have asked whether the right of ownership of one’s body as well as its free use might not, paradoxically, encourage traffic of human organs. Clearly, interesting questions continue to rise.
The second session is devoted to current challenges that we are facing in bioethical debates. In addition to questions relating to the beginnings and the end of human life, bioethics now covers numerous issues raised by advanced medical treatments and scientific research such as the donation of organs, tissues and cells, including gametes; the participation of human beings in experimental research and treatments; equitable access to health services; the scientific, epidemiological, diagnostic and therapeutic use of genetics; and so on. I am sure that different questions regarding the national, regional and international level will be raised during the forthcoming discussions. Indeed, we are here to listen to all voices and all concerns arising from the different regions of the world. It is our task to fully understand what are the urgent issues at stake and how they should be addressed. Our Internet consultation, by the way, found an overarching pre-occupation with the respect for the dignity of human beings. Issues of eugenics and euthanasia also were raised.
The third session is devoted to exploring the possibility of establishing a universal instrument on bioethics. Bioethics has become a major issue in the international and political sphere: for example, on 30 March 2001, Mr Jacques Chirac, President of the French Republic, speaking before the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, mentioned the possibility of drawing up a universal instrument on bioethics. Indeed, for the reasons given earlier, UNESCO is convinced that it would be greatly beneficial for the international community to provide itself with an instrument covering all the domains of bioethics; the benefit of such an instrument is exemplified by the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, elaborated in the framework of the Council of Europe, adopted in 1997.
As a result, I wrote to the Secretary-General of the United Nations to propose that President Chirac’s suggestion, which I think an excellent idea, could be studied and indeed acted upon by UNESCO in view of the expertise on hand. Naturally, UNESCO would work in close cooperation with other relevant international organizations.
As I have already mentioned, reaching agreement on a universal text is not an easy endeavour, a fact which our Internet respondents also point out in recognition of the different appraoches to bioethics among different cultures and civilizations. But UNESCO has considerable experience and expertise to draw upon. As you know, The Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights has been highly appreciated by the international community since it was adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO at its 29th session in 1997 and endorsed by the General Assembly of the United Nations at its 53rd Session in 1998. This Declaration, while focusing specifically on the Human Genome, incorporates all the fundamental principles concerning bioethics. Furthermore, Article 11 of the Declaration states that "Practices which are contrary to human dignity, such as reproductive cloning of human beings, shall not be permitted."
As noted earlier, the United Nations General Assembly, in its 6th Commission scheduled to take place in November 2001, will discuss the possibility of drawing up an international convention against the reproductive cloning of human beings. The very basis of its discussion will be Article 11 that I just referred to, which is the first internationally agreed statement directed against reproductive human cloning.
As you are aware, The Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights was drafted by the International Bioethics Committee of UNESCO (IBC), which is comprised of outstanding specialists from the whole world. One of the persons most responsible for the Human Genome Declaration, Ms Noelle Lenoir, was the first chairperson of the IBC. I am delighted she is with us today and that UNESCO, her natural home, can benefit from her enormous knowledge and expertise.
The IBC demonstrated its high-level competence in drafting the Human Genome Declaration as well as in preparing a number of expert reports. Recent work of the IBC includes the reports on the "The Use of Embryonic Stem Cells in Therapeutic Research" and on "Solidarity and International Cooperation between Developed and Developing Countries concerning the Human Genome", which were presented at the seventh Session of the IBC. In addition, highly commended draft reports on "Follow-up of the International Symposium on Ethics, Intellectual Property and Genomics" and on "Collection, Treatment, Storage and Use of Genetic Data" were presented at the eighth IBC session. The IBC exercises outstanding leadership in international bioethical discussions and I am convinced it will continue to do so in the future.
The work of the IBC is much appreciated by the Intergovernmental Bioethics Committee (IGBC), to which the IBC reports. The governmental representatives and experts on the IGBC review the IBC’s output and draw out its implications for policy and legislation. The IGBC is a vital mechanism for promoting international cooperation in the field of bioethics.
Turning next to the fourth session of the Round Table, we shall discuss questions concerning awareness-raising, education, information and public debate in regard to bioethics. Bioethics education, which requires a multidisciplinary approach, is a new challenge in the field of education. UNESCO is ready to help in facing this challenge since it has a long and rich experience as the leading world organization in the field of education.
We are all aware of the ever-increasing concern of the public over bioethical issues and its eagerness for information about them. Our Internet consultation has confirmed this. The importance of involving all parties and stakeholders - decision-makers, researchers, health care professionals, patients, their families and the community as a whole - in the discussion is abundantly clear. Effective systems of disseminating information, assisting the decision-making process and assessing the consequences should be established.
In the final session, the Communiqué of the Round Table will be examined. This Communiqué will be the fruit of your collective hard work, drawing upon the rich debates and exchanges of experience. The Round Table’s Communiqué will be an important step forward in the debate on bioethics and on the way international cooperation may be advanced.
I wish you every success in your deliberations.
Thank you for your kind attention.
