COMMITTEE ON NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS RECOMMENDS REJECTING HUMAN RIGHTS GUARD"S APPLICATION FOR CONSULTATIVE STATUS

Press Release
NGO/330

COMMITTEE ON NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS RECOMMENDS REJECTING HUMAN RIGHTS GUARD’S APPLICATION FOR CONSULTATIVE STATUS

The Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations this morning recommended that the Economic and Social Council reject Human Rights Guard’s application for consultative status. It left pending its recommendation on the application of the Human Rights International Alliance, and discussed a special report received from the World Confederation of Labour, as its two-week resumed 1999 session continued.

The Committee, in recommending rejection of the Human Rights Guard application, acted on the proposal of the observer from Yemen, who said the group was a political front waging activities against Yemen that had nothing to do with human rights. The group was a political arm of a party associated with a war of secession in which thousands had been killed. The group had submitted to the Committee erroneous and contradictory information about its objectives. Yemen applauded activities that promoted human rights, and was trying to improve its human rights record, but the organization in question had no integrity.

Sudan’s representative recalled that the Committee had posed questions to the group in an earlier session. The group had then amended its constitution in order to get around those questions, he said. In light of the contradictory information that the Committee was faced with, he supported Yemen’s request to reject the application. Similarly, Tunisia’s representative expressed concern about discrepancies between the initial file and information provided subsequently. The Committee had before it a letter from the group’s leadership claiming that earlier submissions were falsified. The group was trying to violate the territorial integrity of a country.

Cuba’s representative said the group was clearly politically motivated, and in such cases the Committee had to send an unambiguous message. Further, the group’s credibility must be questioned, because of the lack of honest information. She welcomed the Committee’s consensus decision to reject the application of a group that was politically motivated against a Member State. When there was evidence of politically motivated activity aimed against a Member State, the Committee should act in this way, without distinction.

Also at this morning’s meeting, the Committee took up a note from the Secretary-General (document E/C.2/1999/3/Add.1), which transmits special reports from three organizations. The reports were requested by the Committee in response to a letter submitted to the Committee by the Government of Iran stating that several organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council had accredited individuals belonging to a terrorist group to participate in the

Committee on NGOs - 2 - Press Release NGO/330 727th Meeting (AM) 25 January 2000

fifty-fourth session of the Commission on Human Rights. This morning, it considered the special report of the World Confederation of Labour.

The accusation by the Government of Iran was originally submitted to the Committee in 1998 and the Committee requested each organization to submit a special report. In December 1998, the Committee reviewed the reports and, in the case of the World Confederation, it requested additional information and that representatives of the organization attend the 1999 session of the Committee to answer questions. In June 1999, after reviewing the report and hearing from a representative, the Committee requested a new special report, which was submitted on 10 November. An addendum was also submitted on 14 December, following a response to the report by the Permanent Mission of Iran.

In its new special report, the World Confederation states that in the event it was provided with verifiable evidence proving beyond doubt that the members of the Democratic Union of Iranian Workers (DUIW) were terrorists, then said organization would be expelled forthwith. An 8 December letter from Iran’s representative, submitted in response to the report, states that the report lacked information on the proceedings of the meeting with the Mojahdeen/National Council of Resistance, as well as the reaction of the World Confederation, thereon. The World Confederation was determined to continue to support the members of Mojahdeen/National Council of Resistance, which his delegation was concerned could be accredited by the organization again to the Commission on Human Rights and other forums.

Today, Iran’s observer explained further that his delegation had referred the application for review because the World Confederation had allowed itself to be represented by terrorist groups. Since that time, no assurances had been received that the organization would not continue to associate with terrorist groups. The Democratic Union of Iranian Workers spread hatred and violence and was trying to inspire its Iranian members to overthrow the Iranian Government. The DUIW was definitely affiliated with the Mojahdeen/National Council of Resistance.

A representative from the World Confederation of Labour said that his organization had no relationship whatsoever with the Mojahdeen/National Council of Resistance. The World Confederation had a number of affiliates worldwide and one of them was the DUIW, based in France. That organization helped organize migrant workers. He said that some members that had participated in the Commission on Human Rights had been linked to terrorist groups through newspaper reports. The World Confederation considered those allegations to be very serious and had recommended that the participation of those individuals be “frozen,” pending further investigation. He said that his organization was in intensive discussions on the matter with International Labour Organisation (ILO) representatives in Geneva.

Several representatives noted that the World Confederation appeared to be making a genuine effort to bring the issue to closure. But, they cautioned that such a large, high-profile organization should be more meticulous and exacting when selecting its members.

Committee on NGOs - 3 - Press Release NGO/330 727th Meeting (AM) 25 January 2000

The Committee decided to leave pending its decision on the application of Human Rights International Alliance until it received further information on some delegations’ concerns, although a number of speakers expressed support for granting consultative status. Chile’s representative said that despite budgetary constraints, the Alliance was doing important work. Its focus on developing countries reflected the unfortunate truth that it was in such States that its work was sometimes most needed. Noting what seemed to be agreement regarding granting consultative status, France’s representative said the matters being raised seemed to pertain to intellectual interest in the connection between civil and political rights, on the one hand, and economic and cultural rights, on the other. He stressed that the Committee’s role should be confined to evaluating the organization’s ability to contribute to the Council.

Noting that one of the Alliance’s main objectives was securing freedom for “prisoners of conscience”, Cuba’s representative asked what this meant and how it was accomplished. Did the Alliance cooperate with local governments? she asked. While the group focused on human rights in developing countries –- and specifically those in the Middle East -- human rights should be universal.

China’s representative noted that in its application, the organization had referred to Tibet as a separate State. The entire United Nations system recognized Tibet as part of the People’s Republic of China, he said, and any non-governmental organization seeking consultative status with the Economic and Social Council should respect the sovereignty of Member States.

The representative from the Human Rights International Alliance said his group operated at all times within the boundaries of the United Nations Charter when identifying “prisoners of conscience” and taking up their cases. The Alliance used diplomacy and cooperated with local governments. For example, in some cases it cooperated with governments to provide free legal counselling. On the issue of Tibet, he said that his organization respected China’s sovereignty and a correction to reflect United Nations nomenclature had been made in its application. He admitted that the Alliance had not been familiar with this matter until the Committee informed it so in June.

The representatives of Pakistan, Algeria, Ireland, Russian Federation, United States, Colombia, Romania, Bolivia, Ethiopia, Senegal and India spoke this morning, as did the observer from Syria.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. today to continue its two-week resumed 1999 session.

* *** *