inter-American text was the same as the one adopted by the United Nations in article 6(1) of the Covenant.” 314 208. The Brazilian delegation justified its proposal to delete the phrase by considering that “[t]his final phrase is vague and, thus, would not be effective to prevent the States Parties to the future convention including in their domestic law the most diverse cases of abortion.” 315 It argued that “[t]he said phrase could […] raise doubts that would impede not only the acceptance of this article, but also its application, if the actual wording is retained,” 316 concluding that “thus, it would be better to eliminate the phrase ‘in general, from the moment of conception,’ because this is a matter that should be left to the legislation of each country.” 317 209. The United States delegation, supporting Brazil’s position, suggested that “this text should be harmonized with article 6, paragraph 1, of the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” 318 210. The delegation of Ecuador proposed the deletion of the words “in general” 319 and the Venezuelan delegate considered that “regarding the right to life from the moment of the conception of the human being, no concessions can be made,” 320 considering “inacceptable a convention that did not establish this principle.” 321 211. Finally, by majority vote, the Conference adopted the text of the draft submitted by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, 322 which became the present text of Article 4(1) of the American Convention. 212. When ratifying the Convention, only Mexico made an interpretative declaration, clarifying that “regarding paragraph 1 of Article 4, [it] considers that the expression ‘in general’ […] does not constitute an obligation to adopt or to maintain in force legislation that protects life “from the moment of conception,’ because this matter pertains to the domain reserved to the States.” 323 314 Cf. “Observations and comments on the draft convention for the protection of human rights presented by the Government of the Dominican Republic, June 20, 1969”, p. 57. 315 Cf. “Observations and amendments to the draft inter-American convention for the protection of human rights presented by the Government of Brazil, November 10, 1969,” in: Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, San José, Costa Rica, November 7 to 22, 1969, Proceedings and Documents, p. 121. 316 Cf. “Observations and amendments to the draft inter-American convention for the protection of human rights presented by the Government of Brazil, November 10, 1969,” p. 121. 317 Cf. “Observations and amendments to the draft inter-American convention for the protection of human rights presented by the Government of Brazil, November 10, 1969,” p. 121. 318 Cf. Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, San José, Costa Rica, November 7 to 22, 1969, Proceedings and Documents, p. 160. 319 Cf. Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, San José, Costa Rica, November 7 to 22, 1969, Proceedings and Documents, p. 160. 320 Cf. Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, San José, Costa Rica, November 7 to 22, 1969, Proceedings and Documents, p. 160. 321 Cf. Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, San José, Costa Rica, November 7 to 22, 1969, Proceedings and Documents, p. 160. 322 Cf. Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, San José, Costa Rica, November 7 to 22, 1969, Proceedings and Documents, pp. 161 and 481. 323 Cf. Interpretative Declaration by Mexico. Available at: http://www.oas.org/es/cidh/mandato/Basicos /convratif.asp (Last visited November 28, 2012)