The equality bill currently going through parliament is a landmark piece of legislation that will increase safeguards against discrimination and ensure that people are not treated less favourably solely because of their personal characteristics. For example, the equality bill will ensure that a gay person is not treated less favourably than a straight person and that a woman is not treated less favourably than a man.

We’re sure the vast majority of our population would support better safeguards against discrimination because nobody would want to be discriminated against because of their personal characteristics such as gender, age or skin colour. However, this noble legislation has fallen victim to a concerted attack by conservative forces in our country who resent equality and a lot of misconceptions about the equality bill have arisen.

One of these misconceptions is that the equality bill needs a conscientious objection clause for, otherwise, doctors in our country will be “forced to perform abortions”, as one anti-choice organisation recently put it. This is not the case.

First of all, abortion is currently illegal in Malta and it is not true that the equality bill has any provisions to legalise abortion. Therefore, no doctor in Malta can be forced to perform abortions after the equality bill has passed because abortion will remain illegal.

This noble legislation has fallen victim to a concerted attack by conservative forces in our country who resent equality

If, in the future, a law to legalise abortion is presented in parliament, then that would be the time to determine how abortion services could be provisioned and discuss the rights of doctors to conscientiously object from offering abortion services. But, for now, abortion is not relevant to the matter at hand and is simply being used as a distraction.

Secondly, the equality bill will not outlaw conscientious objection. Professionals will still be able to refuse to offer a particular service, as long as they are consistent in their objections. What they will not be able to do – to use IVF as an example – is to offer IVF services to a heterosexual couple but then refuse IVF services to an otherwise eligible homosexual couple because this would be classed as discrimination. They would either have to offer IVF services to all people eligible at law or to none at all.

Similarly, if abortion were to be legalised in the future, they would either have to offer abortion services to all pregnant people eligible at law or to none at all. They would not be able to, for example, offer abortion services to a white woman but refuse to serve an eligible black woman.

If a conscientious objection clause is added as an exception to the equality bill, the negative consequences of this will be too great. Such a clause would allow professionals to discriminate between their clients and would torpedo the equality bill’s aim of ensuring that all people in our country can access services they are entitled to.

Such a clause would, paradoxically, be a downgrade on the status quo because a right to discriminate would be enshrined in law, ironically in a bill that is intended to have the opposite effect.

Therefore, if the government intends to follow through on its promise of upgrading discrimination protections in law, it will have to reject calls to include a conscientious objection clause in the equality bill. The right of minorities to access services must be safeguarded and we hope the equality bill will do just that.

Christopher Barbara on behalf of Doctors for Choice Malta