European Parliament debate on human cloning collapses

POLICY AND PEOPLE

Deaths of 400 Taliban prisoners prompt calls for an inquiry Despite Amnesty’s call, “neither the UK government, nor the United States” have agreed to commission an inquiry into the incident, Michael

Rights were not granted to include this image in electronic media. Please refer to the printed journal. AP

mnesty International called for an “urgent inquiry” into “the single most bloody incident of the war” in Afghanistan when 400 Taliban prisoners were killed from Nov 24–28 by Northern Alliance, US, and British forces during a prison uprising. The prisoners were being held at Qala-i-Jhangi, a fort near Mazar-iSharif, when they revolted after reportedly being provoked by the sight of two members of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The CIA officials entered the fort to allegedly interrogate members of the al-Qaida group run by Osama bin Laden. The prisoners had been taken captive after they surrendered to Northern Alliance forces during the fall of Kunduz. A spokesperson for the US-led coalition said that there was no evidence that unarmed prisoners had been killed, nor that Northern Alliance forces had carried out mass executions anywhere else.

A

Inquiry into Taliban deaths demanded

Sivapragasam, a spokesperson for Amnesty, told The Lancet. “We are dismayed at the rejection by the United Kingdom [and the USA] of calls to establish an inquiry into the deaths.” “It gives cause for serious concern regarding the fate of other current and future prisoners in Afghanistan. If

abuses have been committed, denying an inquiry risks giving a green light to further abuses and perpetuating the culture of impunity already afflicting Afghanistan”, said Amnesty. It also argued that the rejection of an inquiry “raises questions about their commitment to the rule of law”. The humanitarian group suggested that an inquiry coordinated by the United Nations should be launched if the groups involved in the incident at the Qala-i-Jhangi fort were not willing to hold an investigation. The UN Human Rights Commissioner, Mary Robinson, who described the events as “very disturbing”, said she would support an international inquiry. “If there are contraventions of standards—for prisoners or civilians—the leaders of forces should be disqualified from a future government and the worst perpetrators brought to justice”, she said. Khabir Ahmad

European Parliament debate on human cloning collapses

T

he European Parliament voted by an overwhelming majority on Nov 29 to reject a report examining the ethics of human genetics research, which recommended that the European Commission (EC) ban reproductive and therapeutic cloning and any financing of embryonic stem cell research. The move comes only 15 days after the Parliament approved another report that suggested that embryonic stem cell research should be funded if such research is permitted in a member state, although making it clear that therapeutic or reproductive cloning research “shall not be financed” (see Lancet 2001; 358: 1785). Under the approved budget the EC will set aside about US$270 million for research on embryonic stem cell from aborted embryos and those left over from IVF. But the rejection of the ethics report by Francesco Fiori, the conservative rapporteur appointed by the Temporary Committee on Human Genetics and Other New Technologies in Modern Medicine, indicates that Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) are still undecided about embryonic stem cell work and therapeutic cloning. European Commissioner for

1974

Research Philippe Busquin said he understood the disparity of results because “ethical consequences poised by human genetics don’t have an easy answer”. However he said that the financial report drawn up by the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy— approved on Nov 14—that allows financing of embryonic stem cell research but prohibits cloning, is the reference document from now on. Spanish socialist MEP Elena Valenciano noted that “the overall result [of the debate on Fiori's report] is a big embarrassment for the Parliament. It’s the first time I’ve seen such a spectacle. 1-year of work by an European committee has been thrown overboard”. The Temporary Committee was set up on Jan 16 to examine the ethical, legal, and socioeconomic developments in human genetics and biotechnology “to provide Parliament with detailed information to enable it to take political decisions and lay down clear guidelines in the public interest”. After extensive research, the Committee published its final report on Nov 6 but disputes between members of the committee, drawn from the all parts of the political spectrum, meant that the

report was approved after 550 amendments of the original draft and a close final vote—18 in favour, 13 against, and three abstentions. In Parliament the report prompted a heated debate resulting in the MEPs voting 316 to 37, with 47 abstentions, against its main recommendation to ban reproductive and therapeutic cloning and EC financing of embryonic stem cell research. It seems that contradictions in the final text of the report led many MEPs to vote against the motion. The debate collapsed after the socialists won an amendment to allow therapeutic cloning. This prompted Fiori to advise his right wing European People’s Party and European Democrats to vote against his report. MEP Peter Liese, a member of Fiori’s party said it is better to vote against a report than pass a motion on a completely contradictory text. Elena Paciotti, spokeswoman for the socialist party, said her group voted against the report because although they won many amendments during the debate, by the end the text was “filled with contradictions”. Xavier Bosch

THE LANCET • Vol 358 • December 8, 2001

For personal use. Only reproduce with permission from The Lancet Publishing Group.