The decision on the licensing of the morning-after pill should be taken by the Medicines Authority based on recommendations by Parliament, a joint meeting of the health, social affairs and family affairs committees concluded.

The committees, however, recommended that, if licenced, the contraceptive should not be sold over the counter.

The committees held a final joint meeting to discuss the introduction of the pill after a debate on the matter was sparked by a group of women who, in a judicial protest against the State in June, asked for it to be legalised.

During the meeting, the committees agreed that while experts had been given the opportunity to voice their concerns and opinions and the scientific literature available had been closely studied, the final decision should still be determined by the authority.

Health Minister Chris Fearne, present at the meeting, welcomed the members’, adding that after months of discussion they had come “full circle”.

“The government had from the start of the debate argued that it should be the authority that decides but we had agreed to hold these joint meetings to hear what experts had to say and now I’m proud to see we are all of the same opinion,” Mr Fearne said.

The members, however, argued that a set of recommendations, to be tabled in a report in Parliament next week, should still be taken into consideration by the authority.

Agreeing that it should be the Authority who takes the final decision, Health Shadow Minister Claudette Buttigieg warned that the recommendations should only serve as guidelines.

She insisted that the members’ ideas should not influence the recommendations, arguing that doing so could “open Pandora’s box” where Parliament is tasked to licence other medicines. Her sentiments were echoed by other Opposition MPs who agreed the meeting should only serve to provide the authority with recommendations.

The recommendations include establishing between the different types of morning-after pills available, mainly between those which allow for implantation and those which do not, allowing doctors to serve as conscientious objectors and to not make the pill available over the counter.

They also recommended that Malta’s laws on abortion are adhered to completely.

The judicial protest which led to the debate, filed by the Women’s Rights Foundation, was signed by 102 women, aged between 16 and 62.

The move sparked controversy, with those in favour of making the pill available arguing that it would be a breach of women’s rights if they did not have access to it.

On the other hand, those against argued that the pill could be abortifacient and should not be licensed.