It is telling that the Mauritius Family Planning Association (MFPA), rather than the Party of the Majority, asked for a debate on abortion during the political campaign. The call inevitably fell on the deaf ears of the political class. Abortion is a touchy subject, throwing politics and religion into a potentially explosive mix. Ireland is an example where these two incompatible structures have conspired to keep the abortion debate on a medieval level.

Abortion is illegal in Ireland. Under Irish law, travels outside the state for an abortion are only permitted when the mother is suicidal. This was based on a Supreme Court decision in 1992, a verdict which eventually came to be known as the X case. The life of the unborn is specifically protected by Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution. However, every year, over 6000 women take the short plane trip to England to terminate unwanted pregnancies.

Ireland and Malta are the only two countries in the EU to have such regressive anti-abortion laws. The US allows abortion, despite the increasing influence of the Christian right within the present administration. Countries where abortion is on request are few, though a degree of leniency applies in certain places. The law in England is based on the medical definition, where abortion is legal to protect the mental and physical health of the mother. In Africa, Mauritius is in good company, since only South Africa has a pro-choice legislation.

<B>The question of the soul</B>

However, despite a blanket ban in many countries, every year there are 45 million induced abortions worldwide according to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). Of these 19 million are performed in unhygienic conditions, resulting in 70 000 deaths. The UNFPA estimates that up to 13% of annual pregnancy-related deaths result directly from unsafe abortions. In Sub-Saharan Africa, nearly 50% of gynaecological beds are occupied by patients with abortion complications.

Despite such bleak figures, why are women denied a choice over decisions that affect their own bodies? An obvious reason is because of the patriarchal nature of many societies, where women are always assigned a subordinate role. This accounts for the ban on abortion in Africa, throughout all the differentto religions. However, the Catholic Church cannot be absolved from blame in this dismal situation. The late Pope John Paul II even likened abortion to the Holocaust. Such inflated remarks, comparing the tragedy of real, living people to that of anonymous unborn ones reflect the Church’s monolithic position on the subject.

The Catholic doctrine, in relation to abortion, centres on the soul, which it says enters the body at the moment of conception. The foetus then becomes a person, according to the Church’s teaching, because of the presence of the soul. Medically, abortions are performed up to the 24th week of pregnancy. According to London’s Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, foetuses feel pain only after 26 weeks gestation when the nerve and brain structures have fully developed. (Some scientists believe it takes place at 20 weeks). Clearly, religious teaching is at odds with science.

However, the Catholic Church did not always espouse a hard-line stance. Early Christian practice did not consider abortion a homicide. In the 5th Century, St. Augustine condemned abortion as a sexual sin. In the 13th Century, St. Thomas Aquinas, said that abortion was not a homicide, and believed the soul entered the body 40 days after conception for a male and 80 days for a female. That abortion was a sin, equal to murder and thus liable to excommunication, only took root in 1869, under Pope Pius IX. Excommunication became the penalty for abortion at any stage of pregnancy. In 1917, the pu thetnishment was extended to doctors and nurses who hel-ped a woman in abortion. By 1974, the ‘right to life’ of an unborn foetus, inheritor of the soul at conception, became the major argument for the Catholic Church.

Nothing has changed since, except for a hardening of attitudes. Last year, during the campaign for the presidency in America, Catholic groups called on priests to deny Holy Communion to politicians who dared to support abortion. John Paul II was notorious for his vociferous opposition to the practice. The new Pope has confirmed that the status quo will prevail on the subject.

<B>Power and intolerance</B>

With its structure and influence, the Catholic Church represents a formidable opposition for pro-choice campaigners. Even the UN backs away in the face of such an edifice of moral values. Though the UNFPA is an advocator of post-abortion counselling, access to treatment for abortion-related trauma etc, it will not take a position, insisting that it is not pro-choice. This is because it has been warned by the US (who previously pulled out of Unesco in the 80s) that it will face budgetary cutbacks.

In the context of such hypocrisy, the UN even has the temerity to question Mauritian laws on abortion. In the recent review of the human rights committee, it asked if Mauritius would consider relaxing the legislation in certain cases. This categorically ignores the power of the Catholic Church in the country and the sycophantic relationship of our politicians with religious bodies.

Despite abortion’s special place in the spleen of the Church, its illegality arises as much from the political classes’ cold electoral calculations. None of the candidates would dare attract the ire of the Church for the mere reason that they could lose votes. And none would declare their position, contributing to the systemic paralysis over the abortion issue.

But given the imbecilic and infantile nature of Mauritian politics, where politicians prefer character assassination to debates on issues, it is no wonder that abortion does not figure on the agenda. Meanwhile, political, religious and social reactionary forces all conspire to deny women any rights over their own bodies. Sounds like the same old story for the fairer sex. But in this one, the health, and in many cases, the lives of real, living people are being put at risk.

<B>Diren valayden Outlook Correspondent in Dublin</B>