As of June 20, 1997, a number of countries such as Germany, United Kingdom, Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland and Australia, have laws that ban human cloning, experimentation on human embryos, eugenic selection, etc. Following are sections from some of those laws which explicitly prohibit human cloning and experimentation, as well as those laws which indirectly ban human cloning.
Federal Republic of Germany
The Embryo Protection Law of December 13, 1990, (Bundesgesetzblatt, Part 1, December 19, 1990,pp. 2746-2748):
5. (1) Any person who artificially alters the genetic information of a human germline cell shall be punished by up to five years’ imprisonment or by a fine.
(2) The same penalty shall be imposed on any person who uses a human germ cell with artificially modified genetic information for fertilization.
Clones
6. (1) Any person who artificially causes a human embryo to develop with the same genetic information as another embryo, fetus, living person, or deceased person shall be punished by up to five years’ imprisonment or by a fine.
(2) The same penalty shall be imposed on a person who transfers an embryo as specified in subsection 1 into a woman.
(3) Attempts shall be punishable.
Creation of chimeras and hybrids
7. (1) A penalty of up to five years’ imprisonment or a fine shall be imposed on any person who attempts:
1. to unite in one syncytium embryos with different genetic information, involving the use of at least one human embryo;
2. to combine a human embryo with a cell that contains different genetic information from the embryo cells, and which is capable of subsequent differentiation;or
3. by fertilization of a human egg cell with the sperm of an animal or by fertilization of an animal’s egg cell with the sperm of a man, to produce an embryo capable of differentiation.
(2) The same penalty shall be imposed on any person who attempts:
1. to transfer an embryo produced by a procedure as specified in subsection 1 into:
(a) a woman; or
(b) an animal; or
2. to transfer a human embryo into an animal.
Definitions
8. (1) For the purpose of this Law, the term “embryo” means the human egg cell, fertilized and capable of development, from the time of fusion of the nuclei, as well as each totipotent cell removed from an embryo that is capable, in the presence of other necessary conditions, of dividing and developing into an individual. International Digest of Health Legislation, 1991, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 60-63
United Kingdom
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 (Chapter 37, November 1,1990):
“Prohibitions in connection with embryos
3. (1) No person shall
(a) bring about the creation of an embryo, or
(b) keep or use an embryo, except in pursuance of a licence.
(3.) A licence cannot authorise
(b) placing an embryo in any animal,
(c) keeping or using an embryo in any circumstances in which regulations prohibit its keeping or use, or
(d) replacing a nucleus of a cell of an embryo with a nucleus taken from a cell of any person, embryo or subsequent development of an embryo.
International Digest of Health Legislation, 1991, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 69-70
Denmark
Law No. 503 on the scientific ethics committee system and the examination of biomedical research projects (Lovtidende, 1992, Part A, June 26, 1992, No. 84, pp. 2017-2020):
Sec. 15. The following experiments shall be prohibited:
1. experiments whose purpose is to enable the production of genetically identical human beings;
2. experiments whose purpose is to enable the production of human beings by the fusion of genetically different embryos or parts of embryos prior to their implantation in the uterus;
3. experiments whose purpose is to enable the production of living human beings who are hybrids with a genetic constitution including components from other species; and
4. experiments whose purpose is to enable the development of human beings in the uterus of another species.
Karnovs Lovsamling 2, 1995, p. 2819
Translation from: International Digest of Health Legislation, 1992, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp. 758-760
Switzerland–Basel-Stadt
Law of October 18, 1990, on reproductive medicine in humans:
Sec. 6 prohibits interventions on the genetic material of gametes, live embryos, and fetuses. It likewise prohibits measures aimed at influencing the sex or inherited characteristics of the unborn child.
Sec. 8 states that live embryos, fetuses, and parts thereof may not be used for research purposes. The following are prohibited: cloning; the creation of chimeras; interspecific hybridization; and extracorporeal procreation.
International Digest of Health Legislation, 1993, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 256-257
Australia–Victoria
Infertility (Medical Procedures) Act 1984, No. 10163, November 20, 1984, p.1733:
Part II. Regulation of Procedures
Prohibition of certain procedures
6. (1) A person shall not carry out a prohibited procedure.
Penalty: 100 penalty units or imprisonment for four years.
(2) In sub-section (1) “prohibited procedure” means
(a) cloning; or
(b) a procedure under which the gametes of a man or a women are fertilized by the gametes of an animal.
Spain
Spanish Civil Code, November 22, 1988, 48 Law 35, Article 20, Section 2:
B. These are very grave infractions:
a) To fertilize a human ovum with any purpose other than human procreation.
b) To obtain human embryos [the text says “pre-embryos,” but this misleading term is no longer used; it means “embryo”] by uterine lavage for any reason.
d) To keep embryos alive with the purpose of obtaining usable parts.
e) To buy or sell embryos or their cells; also, their importation or exportation.
k) To create identical human beings, by cloning or other procedures for racial selection.
l) The creation of human beings by cloning in any of its variations, or any other procedure that can initiate identical human beings.
m) Parthenogenesis, or stimulating the development of an ovum by any method, physical or chemical, without fertilization by sperm, by solely feminine descent.
n) Sex selection, or genetic manipulation that is not therapeutic, or is therapeutic but not authorized.
o) The creation of embryos from persons of the same sex, for purposes of reproduction or any other purpose.
p) The fusion of embryos or any other procedure for producing chimeras.
q) Any intermingling of human genetic material or recombining with other species to produce hybrids
r) The transfer of human gametes or human embryos to the uterus of another animal species, or the inverse operation, without authorization.
s) Ectogenesis, or the creation of a human individual in a laboratory.
Legislacion sobre Sanidad, pp. 574-575
New Penal Code, November 23, 1995, Law 10, Article 161:
1. There will be a penalty of one to five years in prison and also ineligibility for public employment or office for six to ten years for fertilizing a human ovum with any purpose other than human procreation.
2. The same penalties apply for the creation of identical human beings by cloning or otherprocedures directed to racial selection.
Comentarios al Nuevo Codigo Penal, pp. 773-776
France
Respect of the Human Body, Law No. 94-653, July 29, 1994, Civil Code Article
16, Section 1, states the principle of the inviolability of the human body. Section 4 says “All eugenic practices for organizing any selection of persons are prohibited.”
Code Civil, Chapitre II, “Du Respect Du Corps Humain,” pp. 43-46
Any eugenic procedure for race selection is a crime punishable by 20 years imprisonment.
Nouveau Code Penal, “Infractions En Matiere D’Ethique Biomedicale,” Article 511-1, p. 192
Asked whether human cloning was against the law in France, the French National Committee of Ethics responded that this section of the law “clearly prohibits any possibility of human cloning.” But the committee urges that the code of public health clarify the prohibition by mentioning cloning explicitly.
Le Monde, April 30, 1997, p. 32
China
The Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), the country’s premiere scientific research body, has banned “all kinds of research related to the use of cloning technology to copy humans,” according to Professor Xu Zhihong, the country’s leading biologist and CAS vice-president. Banning the use of cloning to copy humans is absolutely necessary to maintain ethical morality which holds today’s human society together’ Xu said.”
China Daily, Vol. 17, No. 4928, May 14, 1997, p. 1
In addition to those countries which explicitly prohibit human cloning, there are other countries that have laws banning the creation of, and experimentation on, human embryos. Some of these countries, for example Sweden and Western Australia, interpret such laws to include a ban on human cloning.
Sweden
Sweden has enacted certain laws, for instance Law No. 115, which indirectly tackle the issue of cloning and presumably lead to the conclusion that human cloning in Sweden is forbidden.
Dr. Claes Ortendahl, Director-General of the Swedish Social Department, said “All research on living embryos lacks support in law and is therefore prohibited.” This statement was made in a letter addressed to the Medical Research Center of Sweden and to the Minister of Social Affairs.
Svenska Dagbladet, March 7, 1997, p. 9
Law No. 115, which entered into force on October 1, 1991, “concerning measures for the purposes of research or treatment in connection with fertilized human oocytes” states under Section 2 that “the purpose of experimentation shall not be to develop methods aimed at causing heritable genetic effects.”
Svensk f”rfattningssamling, 1991:115, March 14, 1991, p. 300, Translation from: International Digest of Health Legislation, 1993, Vol. 44, No. 1, p. 58
Australia–Western Australia
The Human Reproductive Technology Act, No. 22, October 8, 1991, states in its Preamble:
B. Parliament considers that the primary purpose and only justification for the creation of a human egg in the process of fertilisation or embryo in vitro is to so assist these couples to have children, and this legislation should respect the life created by this process by giving an egg in the process of fertilisation or an embryo all reasonable opportunities for implanting.
C. Although Parliament recognises that research has enabled the development of current procedures and that certain non harmful research and diagnostic procedures upon an egg in the process of fertilisation or an embryo may be licit, it does not approve the creation of a human egg in the process of fertilisation or an embryo for a purpose other than the implantation in the body of a woman.
International Digest of Health Legislation, 1993, Vol. 44, No. 4, p. 630
Calls for an International Ban
World Health Organization
The Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO), Hiroshi Nakajima, has “condemned the use of cloning to replicate humans as ethically unacceptable,” as it would violate some of the basic principles governing medically assisted procreation.”
Nature, Vol. 386, March 20, 1997, p. 204
Germany and France
Germany’s research minister, Jurgen Ruttgers, and French president, Jacques Chirac, have called for a worldwide ban on human cloning. Chirac declared his “vehement, categoric and definitive ethical condemnation of all reproductive cloning of human beings.” And Ruttgers presented a statement from “seven leading German scientific experts on the biological, ethical and legal aspects of cloning. He said he agreed with their conclusion that the “cloning of humans is ethically unjustifiable, and called for the rapid introduction of an international ban.”
Nature, Vol. 387, May 8, 1997, p. 111
European Commission
The European Commission’s bioethics advisory panel announced at the Hague that “human cloning in ethically unacceptable’ and said it should be prohibited by law.” “The European ethics panel also specifically rejected the idea of taking natural embryos at an early stage and splitting them into multiples, [embryo splitting] another form of cloning, in order to increase the success rate of test-tube reproduction for infertile couples.”
The Washington Post, June 10, 1997
“The 40-nation Council of Europe, which includes countries outside the European Union, is currently developing a convention on human rights and bioethics. The council says work will start soon on a specific protocol on the protection of the embryo and the human fetus, which could include a ban on human cloning.”
Science, Vol. 275, March 7, 1997, p. 1415
June 20, 1997
Sheena J. Talbot, Public Policy Director
American Life League