Anambra Abortion Law: Time to bring out this law and quash it

By Sonnie Ekwowusi

Unknown to many, including numerous citizens from Anambra State, abortion is legalized in Anambra State. Both you and your pregnant wife hail from Anambra State. If one day your pregnant wife woke up on the wrong side of the bed and informed you that she had unilaterally decided to undergo an abortion to terminate your fifth child in the womb, citing the argument and pseudo-rationalization that her body belonged to her and she could do anything she liked with it, and you attempted to stop her from procuring an abortion, she could refer you to the Anambra State abortion law or even take you to court for trying to prevent her from exercising her “right to choose.” This is one consequence of the Anambra abortion law. Of course, there are other undesirable consequences.

Can you believe that abortion is legalized in Anambra State, a state that has produced figures like Blessed Cyprian Iwene Tansi, Cardinal Francis Arinze, intellectuals, prominent politicians, academics, and business tycoons, among others? Yes, the Anambra State abortion law is officially titled “Women’s Reproductive Right.” I still have a copy of the law in my possession. This law came into effect on March 17, 2005, during the administration of Chris Ngige. Professor Brian Adinma, who was the Commissioner for Health in Anambra State at that time, and is, in fact, a Knight of the Catholic Church, was the driving force behind the legalization of abortion in Anambra.

The same Professor Adinma succeeded in converting six public health institutions in Anambra State at that time into abortion centers equipped with Manual Vacuum Aspirators (MVA) for performing abortions. Isn’t it a significant scandal? Why do Nigerian abortion advocates and international organizations like the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), Ipas, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Ford Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation, UNIFEM, and DFID employ euphemisms and ambiguous language when promoting abortion in Africa and Nigeria? It’s because the term “abortion” is considered repugnant in our socio-cultural and religious context. Additionally, previous attempts to legalize abortion and contraceptives in Nigeria have consistently faced strong opposition. When the idea of legalizing abortion was initially proposed during the Shehu Shagari government or thereabouts, a group of women and mothers from Imo State threatened to stage a nude protest in Abuja. Following that threat, the idea was abandoned. During Babangida’s military regime, there was another attempt to legalize abortion, but it was thwarted at the last moment. In 1991, the campaign by some medical doctors in Lagos to legalize abortion led to the conduct of an opinion poll on the matter. When the poll results were revealed, nearly half of every 10 Lagos residents (47%) were opposed to it.

1 ABORTION IS ILLEGAL IN NIGERIA

By virtue of the combined effects of Sections 228, 229, 230, and 328 of the Criminal Code, as well as some sections of the Penal Code, abortion is illegal in Nigeria. In fact, Section 328 of the Criminal Code specifically states that: “Any person who, when a woman is about to be delivered of a child, prevents the child from being born alive by any act or omission of such a nature that if the child had been born alive and had then died, he would have been deemed to have unlawfully killed the child, is guilty of a felony and liable to imprisonment for life.”

The 1999 Constitution is the grundnorm of Nigeria. Section 33 of the constitution guarantees the right to life, stating that no person shall be deprived of their life except in execution of a sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offense of which they have been found guilty in Nigeria. Section 17 of the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy in our Constitution stipulates that the Nigerian social order is founded, among other things, on the sacredness of human life. Similarly, Section 38 of the constitution guarantees the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. It stipulates that every person in Nigeria is entitled to propagate their religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice, and observance. Therefore, before the National Assembly can pass a bill on such a sensitive and volatile subject matter as abortion, a constitutional amendment to the aforementioned provisions of the 1999 constitution will be required. Even prior to the amendment, there will be a need for a referendum on the matter to afford the stakeholders and the public the opportunity to express their opinions.

So, abortion is illegal in Nigeria. This is not speculation; it is the law. Can the law be enforced? Yes, the police can do so if citizens lodge complaints and petitions. Our law firm has successfully compelled the Nigerian police to shut down and charge some abortion clinics in Nigeria to court. The most recent operation by our law firm involved petitioning the police to shut down the notorious abortion clinic, Marie Stopes, located in Lagos. I accompanied the police in that operation. The abortion doctor, Dr. Bernard, was handcuffed as the police searched the abortion clinic for abortion-related evidence

2 WHAT IS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH OR RIGHTS?

Considering that abortion is illegal in Nigeria, coupled with the vehement systematic opposition to the attempts to legalize abortion in Nigeria, abortionists and radical feminists promoting abortion in Nigeria have resorted to using euphemisms and coded phrases like “Reproductive Rights or Health,” “Family Planning,” women’s health, women’s rights, “Maternal Mortality,” and “Safe Motherhood” to promote abortion in Nigeria, so that nobody will suspect what they are doing. With the term “women’s rights,” they mean the right of women to procure abortion; “family planning” or “family planning services” is another euphemism of theirs. It means giving women access to abortion clinics to procure abortion, while “Safe Motherhood” means abortion and contraceptives on demand.

The concept of reproductive health and rights is one of the most abused concepts used by the United Nations Population Funds (UNFPA), Planned Parenthood Associations, pro-choicers, some NGOs, etc. The phrase might sound palatable to the ears of the unwary, human rights activists, and women’s NGOs who least suspect the sinister motives behind the concept. First, the word “reproductive” in the context in which it is commonly used by its proponents is inappropriate because a human person doesn’t reproduce; a human being procreates. Procreation carries much more exalted meanings than the biological process of reproduction.

The World Health Organization (WHO) unfortunately promotes abortion, especially in African countries. This is not a conspiracy theory, nor is it hearsay. I have witnessed it. The WHO has produced an official definition of the concept of Reproductive Health during its preparation for the United Nations International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo in 1994. It defined it as: “Reproductive health implies that people are able to have responsible, satisfying, and safe sex (underline mine), and they have the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when, and how often to do so. Implicit in this last condition are the rights of men and women to be informed of and to have access to safe and effective, affordable, and acceptable methods of fertility regulation (underline mine) of their choice, and the right of access to appropriate healthcare services (underline mine) that will enable a woman to go safely through pregnancy and childbirth and provide couples with the best chance of having a healthy infant.”

The same WHO defined fertility regulation as: “the process by which individuals and couples regulate their fertility. Methods that can be used for this purpose include, among others, delaying childbearing, using contraception, seeking treatment for infertility, interrupting unwanted pregnancies (underline mine), and breastfeeding.”

he above definition, as luminous as it may seem, is simply a great euphemism for promoting illicit sex and abortion, or what Professor Steven Pinker has dubbed neonaticide (the killing of a child on the day of its birth) or filicide (the killing of a child at some later stage).

So, let us decode the hidden time bombs in the above definition under the following subheadings: (a) “Safe Sex” or “condom sex” means indulging in immoral casual sex and relishing in its pleasure while avoiding its consequences. (b) “Fertility regulation” and “interrupting unwanted pregnancies” mean abortion on demand. (c) “Access to appropriate health care services” means access to abortion clinics.

3 ADOLESCENT SEXUAL REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH: CORRUPTION OF INTEGRATED SCIENCE SYLLABUS, AND TEACHING OF IMMORALITY IN SCHOOLS

“Adolescent Sexual Reproductive Health” is another coded phrase or euphemism for the promotion of abortion, illicit sex, and contraceptives among students in Anambra State schools, Lagos State schools, and other states. Can you imagine teaching a ten-year-old boy/girl in JSS1 the techniques of masturbation, dating, putting on condoms, sexual communication and negotiation, how to do abortion in secret, how to practice “safe sex” in secret without getting pregnant by using contraceptives like IUCD, injectables, vaginal foams and jellies, diaphragms, hormonal implants, oral contraceptive pills, touching and examination of male and female reproductive organs, naked body images, erection, ejaculation, kissing, caressing, sterilization procedures for males by making an incision in the scrotum and by cutting and tying the Vas deferens, sterilization procedures for females by cutting and tying the Fallopian tube, infertility under the guise of sex education?

About 17 years ago, some concerned mothers in Lagos went to the Federal High Court, Lagos, to challenge the teaching of the above immoralities in secondary schools in Lagos State under the corrupted Integrated Science Schemes of Work in junior secondary school and Sexuality Education Scheme of Work for students in senior secondary school. Sylva Shinaba SAN (may her soul rest in peace) led us in that matter at the Federal High Court, Lagos. Happily, the Lagos State government opted for an amicable settlement on the grounds that it would withdraw the corrupted Integrated Science Curriculum.

Prior to the corruption of this new Integrated Science Scheme, the old Scheme of Work for 1999/2000-2001/2002 Sessions for junior secondary school in Lagos State did not contain any of the aforementioned immoralities. What is happening in Nigerian schools? Find out what they are teaching your children in school. Inspect the Integrated Science and Social Science notebooks of your son/daughter.

4 DANJUMA’S ABORTION BILL

You will recall that Senator Daisy Ehanire-Danjuma (representing Edo-South at the Senate at that time) sponsored an Abortion Bill at the National Assembly in 2006 under the euphemism: the National Institute of Reproductive Health bill. The Public Hearing of the Bill took place in the Senate on the 13th of February 2006. The Bill faced stiff opposition, with the strongest opposition coming from many mothers and women who arrived at the Senate early in the morning of that fateful day in two buses. I was one of the lawyers who argued the case for about 15 Nigerian NGOs and organizations at the National Assembly in opposition to the Bill. In their defense, the abortionists argued that the Bill was not an abortion bill since the word “abortion” was not specifically mentioned in the Bill. In response, we argued that even though the word “abortion” was not explicitly mentioned in the Bill, the concepts of reproductive health and adolescent sexual reproductive health mentioned in the Bill are all well-known euphemisms or soft language for promoting abortion, contraceptives among school children, teaching children the techniques of dating, masturbation, “safe sex” with condoms, etc., in Nigeria and all over the world.

Faced with opposition, Senator Danjuma elected to withdraw the Bill for possible amendment. However, we opposed the amendment. Between Thursday, April 27, and Sunday, April 30, 2006, the Senate Health Committee organized a 3-day retreat at the Presidential Hotel in Port Harcourt for a select group of 18 individuals to reconsider the Bill. After further consideration, the Abortion Bill was finally dismissed for lack of merit and for being incompatible with public morality and public interest.

5 ANAMBRA ABORTION LAW: THE WAY FORWARD.

The Anambra State “Women’s Reproductive Right” law consists of twelve paragraphs of legislation. Deceptively enough, the word “abortion” is not specifically mentioned in the law, which is understandable because the term “abortion” is considered repugnant in Nigeria’s socio-cultural and religious setting. Previous attempts to legalize abortion in Nigeria have faced stiff opposition. Organizations like UNFPA, UNIFEM, DFID, and other pro-abortion United Nations Agencies in Africa have been urged to use euphemisms and dodgy language to promote abortion in Africa and Nigeria. I attended the Reproductive Right Conference (Abortion Conference) in Abuja in 2003, where the idea of legalizing abortion in Anambra was first discussed. (In fact, that was where I first met Professor Adinma). During that Conference, the organizers instructed attending journalists (myself included) to use deceptive language in reporting on abortion to ensure that the public remained unaware of what was happening.

The controversial section of the Anambra abortion law is section 6(a)(b), which states:

“The woman’s viewpoint shall be considered in decisions: a. Regarding the number, timing, and spacing of children, and b. Concerning their shared responsibility in sexual relationships and reproduction, free from forms of violence. However, the best interest of the woman shall be paramount in situations where her health is at risk…”

To the uninformed, section 6(a) of the law might seem commendable, but trained lawyers familiar with the history and implications of Reproductive Rights will educate you that this phrase is a euphemism for abortion rights. The fact is that section 6(a) has consistently been interpreted globally as granting women the right to abortion and access to contraceptives. Section 6(a) was first acknowledged as an abortion right by the international community at the International Conference on Human Rights in Teheran. Subsequently, it has been consistently reaffirmed as an abortion right at various sub-international conferences, such as the International Conference on People and Development (ICPD) in 1994 and the Beijing Platform for Action in 1995.

Section 6(a) grants any pregnant woman in Anambra State the right to procure an abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy. The wording of this section is substantially similar to Article 16(e) of the controversial Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which also states that women are allowed to “decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children.” Consequently, both section 6(a) of the Anambra law and Article 16(e) of CEDAW guarantee any woman access to abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy. It’s worth noting that the United States has refused to ratify CEDAW due to Article 16(e), which promotes abortion. So, if the United States rejects CEDAW because of the offensive Article 16, why is Anambra State adopting and embracing it as its abortion law?

To really understand the meaning of Section 6(a) of the Anambra abortion law, one must read the publications of the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy at 120 Wall Street, New York, United States, from which the Anambra law was borrowed. The phrase “on the number, timing, and spacing of the children,” according to the publications, requires the government to make abortion services legal, safe, and accessible to all women. According to the publications: “Abortion is a woman’s choice,” “Women are entitled to have access to all safe, effective means of controlling their family size, including abortion,” “A woman has a right to make decisions regarding her own body.” Denying women access to abortion is a form of gender discrimination. “Safe abortion services protect women’s right to health.”

So, Section 6(a) of the Anambra abortion law gives Anambra women autonomy to decide the number of children to have, with or without the consent of their husbands. It gives an Anambra woman the right to determine the number of children she should have, with or without the consent of her husband. This may sound nice to the unwary, but for married women to procure abortion in their matrimonial home, with or without the consent of their husbands, is terrible. She is free to tell her husband that she doesn’t want to have babies at all for the rest of their marital life. She has the sole right to decide whether or not to have children, including the right to decide whether to carry or abort a pregnancy she does not want. We should be careful about adopting these Western lifestyles hook, line, and sinker. In Africa, a child does not only belong to the married woman; the child also belongs to her husband and, in fact, to the whole family and even the extended family. I think it is simply absurd for a pregnant married woman to proceed to abort her baby without the consent of her husband, who is, in fact, responsible for the pregnancy.

Let me briefly narrate to you one event from my life that I still find unbelievable. In 2003, I attended a Reproductive Health Conference in Abuja. One of the conference speakers was Professor Rebecca Cook from the Faculty of Law at the University of Toronto, Canada. When this lady got the nod to present her paper, she unbelievably started canvassing the idea that a married woman can choose to make herself impotent or take her husband to court for making her pregnant. After her presentation, I got up and told her that Africa is different from Europe or America, where all sorts of aberrations are allowed in the name of “equality between men and women” or in the name of “women’s sexual rights.” Her face turned red. She whispered to the moderator that I was intimidating her. In response, I told her that I was not intimidating her; rather, I was reminding her that she was in Africa, where infertility in marriage is often regarded as a curse, not a blessing.

Another dangerous section of the Anambra law is Section 7(1), which guarantees Anambra women free medical services, including free prenatal and postnatal care. Again, in principle, this is praiseworthy, but in practice, the section gives Anambra State women the right to solicit free prenatal and postnatal services in many government hospitals. And in the course of this solicitation, the women would be talked into procuring abortion and using contraceptives by government doctors and nurses on duty. In most cases, pregnant women who have had five children are scolded by government nurses not to have more babies. They are brainwashed by telling them that having more children is hazardous to their health.

6 THE WAY FORWARD

The way forward is to repeal the Anambra State Reproductive Right Law. We must put a stop to the teaching of techniques for secret abortions, the practice of “safe-sex” without the risk of pregnancy through the use of contraceptives like IUCD, injectables, vaginal foams and jellies, diaphragms, hormonal implants, and oral contraceptive pills. We must prevent the teaching of intimate examinations of male and female reproductive organs, naked body images, techniques of erection, ejaculation, kissing, and caressing, as well as sterilization procedures for males by making an incision in the scrotum and tying the vas deferens and sterilization procedures for females by cutting and tying the fallopian tubes, etc. Children are our future, and if we destroy their future, we are finished as a people.

Unfortunately, abortionists have infiltrated some Christian institutions in Nigeria. According to the Happy Home Foundation, a women’s NGO based in Enugu, abortionists have succeeded in penetrating Holy Rosary College, Enugu. Some Catholic Health Institutions in Enugu are now being used to promote abortion. In May 2006, IPAS, a notorious abortion agency, organized a seminar at Mother of Christ Hospital, Enugu, where a Manual Vacuum Aspirator (MVA) used for abortion was displayed for grabs. Recently, the Happy Home Foundation lamented that an award was given by the CMO to a well-known woman abortionist in Enugu. This is another scandal. Therefore, we must engage the Church hierarchy to address these Anambra Catholics who are being used by abortionists to promote abortion in Anambra.

We MUST speak up. We must take action earnestly. We must persuade the Anambra State House of Assembly to repeal the Anambra State abortion law. We must also urge the government to stop IPAS from distributing MVAs in our hospitals. Chigbo Nnagbo Esq. and I had tried in the past but failed. Why did we fail? Because the then-members of the Anambra State House of Assembly demanded a sum of N1.5 million from us as extortion in order to quash the Bill. We did not have that kind of money. I am a poor lawyer with no funds. My learned friend, Chigbo, I am certain, cannot come up with that kind of money from his pocket.

7 CONCLUSION

Nigeria must stop blindly adopting Western ideas without first assessing their suitability and relevance to our unique circumstances and culture. I appeal to you to stand up and be counted. Don’t remain on the fringe any longer. A world unfit for children is teetering on the brink of collapse. Natural law, from which our values spring, is inscribed in everyone’s heart. We cannot erase it from our hearts. Although our world is under the tyranny of vice, our strength lies in our primordial values. These values continue to be the foundation for building our national ethos. If we allow this ethos to be destroyed, a significant void will be left behind. And, as you well know, nature abhors a vacuum. To fill this void, we must return to our pristine values.

I challenge you to stand up and be counted. The future of Anambra rests in our hands. I invite you to lay the foundation for the creation of a new culture of love where human life is respected. We must learn to love because love surpasses instincts. “The greatest destroyer of love is abortion” (Mother Teresa). If we make the wrong choice by allowing our children to be aborted, if we heed the voice of the West and end the lives of our unborn children, our country will become a place of evil, and strangers will inherit our lands. Posterity will never forgive us. A word is enough for the wise.

Concluded