COMMITTEE ON NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS RECOMMENDS EIGHT GROUPS FOR CONSULTATIVE STATUS WITH ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL

Press Release
NGO/334

COMMITTEE ON NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS RECOMMENDS EIGHT GROUPS FOR CONSULTATIVE STATUS WITH ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL

The Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations this morning recommended that eight groups be granted special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council and decided to leave pending its decisions on seven additional applications.

The recommendations were made as the Committee approaches the end of its two-week resumed 1999 session. The Committee is charged with reviewing and making recommendations on applications by non-governmental organizations for consultative status in roster, special or general categories. Each classification entails a set of privileges and responsibilities which are, overall, aimed at developing mutually beneficial relationships between civil society groups and the Council.

The following groups were recommended for special consultative status this morning: Admiral Family Circle Islamic Community; Al-Haq, Law in the Service of Man; Catholic Daughters of the Americas; Development Promotion Group; Mukuno Multi-Purpose Youth Organization; Recontres: International Association of French- Speaking Anglicans and Episcopalians, Inc.; World Information Clearing Center; and National Association of Negro Business and Professional Women’s Clubs, Inc.

In two cases, the Committee recommended a status different than that requested by the group involved. The Admiral Family Circle Islamic Community had requested roster status, and the Committee recommended the broader category. Catholic Daughters of the Americas had requested general status, which carries with it the broadest set of privileges and responsibilities.

It decided to leave pending its decisions on: the Islamic Centre England, London; Minbyun-Lawyers for a Democratic Society; Norwegian Refugee Council; Union of Kuwaiti Women Associations; Peaceways; National Opinion Research Center; and Olabisi-Olaleye Foundation.

The Committee also decided to leave pending its decision on quadrennial reports that had been deferred. It took up the quadrennial report of the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial, and heard from that group’s representative.

In addition to the report, the Committee had before it a 19 July letter from the Director of the Memorial’s Center for Human Rights responding to requests for clarification. In it, the Committee was informed that the Memorial had accredited an officer of Human Rights in China for the 1999 session of the Commission on Human Rights. To fulfil its mandate to promote human rights in China, the Center had worked in close partnership with Human Rights in China for five years, and the two groups had prepared joint interventions for the Commission on Human Rights in previous years.

Committee on NGOs - 2 - Press Release NGO/334 731st Meeting (AM) 27 January 2000

The delegate from the Sudan asked for clarification of the organization’s procedure in granting its annual Human Rights Award for international laureates. A recent recipient had been Sudanese, but the organization’s documentation failed to give his name. Was this a standard practice? he asked.

China’s representative questioned the practice of having other organizations participate in United Nations activities under the name of a group with consultative status. When a group did that, it should be sure that such groups or persons were not connected to activities that violated the United Nations Charter and Council resolution 1996/31, which provided that non-governmental organizations could not abuse consultative status, violate the Charter or carry out political actions against a country. It was not acceptable to have a non-governmental organization insist on having personnel of such groups participate in the activities of the United Nations under its name. Regarding the point made by the representative of the Sudan, failing to reveal the identity of laureates violated the spirit of transparency.

France’s representative said, however, that in the field of human rights it fell within an organization’s prerogative to establish prizes and decide on the conditions under which they were awarded. That was especially the case when someone’s safety was the issue. The principles outlined by China’s delegation had been accepted and recognized by the Memorial.

The Memorial’s representative explained that the while the general procedure was that all recipients of the annual Human Rights Award were identified, the Sudanese laureate had specifically requested that his or her name not be revealed, and the Memorial had complied.

She said that her organization took the concerns of China’s delegate very seriously. The methods through which persons or organizations were chosen to represent the Memorial or act in its behalf absolutely reflected the principles laid out in resolution 1996/31. The Memorial respected those principles and upheld them. She assured the Committee that all representatives of the Memorial that had spoken on its behalf did so with the understanding that they must abide by the general rules and procedures of the United Nations and the Council.

Chile’s representative said the issue of accreditation was complex, but the Kennedy Memorial had acted in a transparent manner, and its explanations satisfied his delegation. Human right issues were sometimes delicate and it was difficult to find the dividing line between human rights issues and political issues. Regarding the issue of anonymity in the field of human rights, Chile had experienced events not too long ago that enabled it to understand the problem.

Also this morning, the representative of the Admiral Family Circle Islamic Community responded to questions that had been asked yesterday. To questions about leadership, the representative said leaders were chosen according to general Islamic practices. The entire organization considered candidates who were appointed only after consensus was reached. It had also been suggested that the nature of the organization’s work focused on Islamic issues, he noted. However, the Community had created the Malik Shabazz Human Rights Institute in order to broaden its outreach programmes beyond the Muslim community. The Institute had been named after Al Hajj Malik Shabazz, Malcolm X. That great African-American civil rights leader had insisted that all people needed to understand the principles outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

When the Committee turned to the application of the Islamic Centre England, London, several delegations asked about finances and fund-raising. The delegate from the Russian Federation asked for a written response to his questions. He was particularly concerned about the Centre’s fund-raising programmes for homeless persons in Chechnya and earthquake victims in Afghanistan. Did the Centre recognize that Chechnya was a part of the Russian Federation? he asked. What were the specific channels through which the aid was transmitted? Were the funds going to the northern or southern regions of Afghanistan?

A representative of the organization said it was funded mainly through individual donations from international businessmen. On fund-raising in Chechnya and Afghanistan, the Centre recognized no political boundaries; it responded to requests for aid from all over the world.

Statements were also made this morning by the representatives of India, Cuba, Tunisia, Chile, Algeria, Russian Federation, Sudan, Ireland, France, Colombia, Romania, China, Ethiopia, United States, Pakistan and Lebanon.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. today.

* *** *