NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE CONCLUDES TWO-WEEK SESSION

Press Release
NGO/368

NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE CONCLUDES TWO-WEEK SESSION

The Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations this afternoon suspended its resumed session and decided to recommend that the Economic and Social Council authorize it to meet again from 8 to 19 January 2001 to complete the work of its 2000 session.

It also adopted a draft provisional agenda for that session, as well as its draft report, introduced by its Rapporteur, Munawar Saeed Bhatti (Pakistan), for the current session, which began on 12 June.

Also this afternoon, the Committee decided to suspend the Transnational Radical Party’s consultative status with the Economic and Social Council for three years.

The Government of the Russian Federation had complained that during the fifty-sixth session of the Commission on Human Rights, held in Geneva from 20 to 27 April, the representative of the Chechen separatists and terrorists, A. Idigov, had addressed the Commission under the name of the Transnational Radical Party. The Russian Federation also expressed grave concern about narcotic-related activities by the NGO. The Committee had deferred taking action on the complaint until today to give delegations time to consult with their respective governments.

In other action, the Committee approved the requests of a number of non- governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council –- Population Communication International; World Information Transfer Inc.; and Association Feminine Tunisie 21 –- to speak to the Council in connection with items in its provisional agenda of its 2000 substantive session. The organizations would be represented by the Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in consultative relationship with the United Nations.

The Committee also approved the requests of other NGOs in consultative status with the Council -– International Federation of Settlements and Neighbourhood Centres; International Movement ATD Fourth World; NGO Committee on Human Settlements; and International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies –- to speak to the Council, on their own behalf, at its 2000 substantive session.

The Committee also decided to request that the non-governmental organization United Towns for North/South Cooperation submit a special report at its resumed session in January 2001, as was earlier proposed by the Cuban delegation.

The Committee, a standing body of the Economic and Social Council, considers applications for consultative status submitted by non-governmental organizations and their requests for reclassification. It also considers quadrennial reports

Committee on NGOs - 2 - Press Release NGO/368 763rd Meeting (PM) 23 June 2000

submitted by those organizations; implements the provisions of Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31 and the monitoring of consultative relationships; and considers other issues as requested by the Council. Non-governmental, non-profit voluntary organizations can be admitted into consultative status with the Council if they meet the requirements detailed in Council resolution 1996/31, regarding the organization’s activities, decision-making processes and resources.

Non-governmental organizations with consultative status are classified under the “general”, “special” or “roster” categories. Those in the general category must be concerned with most of the activities of the Economic and Social Council and its subsidiary bodies. The special category concerns those groups which have a special competence in, and are concerned specifically with only a few of the fields of activity covered by the Council. The roster category relates to non- governmental organizations that can make occasional and useful contributions to the Council’s work or those of its subsidiary bodies.

Different privileges and obligations are accorded to each category. Organizations with general status can propose items for the Council’s agenda, attend and speak at its meetings and circulate statements. Those with special status can attend meetings and circulate statements, while those on the roster can only attend meetings. Organizations with general and special status must report every four years on their activities in support of the United Nations.

In his closing remarks the Chairman stated that during the session there had been a rich exchange of views and the Committee had been able to ensure the fruitful participation of NGOs in the work of the United Nations. Particular concern was given to complaints brought by four members of the Committee against NGOs who, they alleged, had misbehaved during the fifty-sixth session of the Human Rights Commission held in Geneva earlier in the year.

Representatives of Algeria, Chile, China, Cuba, France, Germany, India, Lebanon, Pakistan, Russian Federations, Sudan, Tunisia and the United States spoke during the afternoon’s deliberations.

Addressing the Committee in their capacity as observers were the representatives of Canada, Netherlands, Syria, Palestine and Israel.

Statements

The representative of the Russian Federation said that the discussion that had ensued in the Committee on the misconduct of the Transnational Radical Party had further emphasized that its consultative status with the Economic and Social Council should be withdrawn.

The representative of Cuba said that his delegation did not have any difficulty with the principles or with the members of the party. However, the Russian delegation had indicated that a serious violation had taken place and the entity did not strictly comply with resolution 1996/31. Cuba supported the request of the Russian delegation.

The representative of Pakistan said he understood that there was a very strong urge within the Committee to make decisions on the withdrawal of consultative status by consensus. If that was not the case now, the Committee should vote for a suspension of the Party’s consultative status.

The representative of the Russian Federation said that it was in favour of the suspension, as the NGO had breached its relationship with the United Nations. He preferred, however, that the Committee agree by consensus that the NGO be stripped of its consultative status with the Economic and Social Council for three years. That action would send a clear message that all NGOs should comply with the principles of resolution 1996/31 and with the provisions of the United Nations Charter.

The Committee had also discussed the circulation of negative material about his country by the organization, the representative of India said. However, he wished to underscore that India would always require NGOs to comply with the principles of the Charter.

The Committee then decided to suspend the consultative status with ECOSOC of the Transnational Radical Party for three years.

Explanation of Position

The representative of France said the resolution 1996/31, which regulated the relationship between non-governmental organizations with consultative status with the Council and the United Nations, was explicit and that the measure of suspension was a severe one.

The representative of Germany said it had joined the consensus with reservation. He did not think the issue had been extensively discussed in the Committee. The representative of the Radical Party had yesterday fully responded to the issues raised by the Russian Federation.

The representative of the United States dissociated himself from the consensus, noting that the three-year suspension was a harsh punishment. It had apologized and had informed the Committee of the steps it was taking to rectify issues raised in the complaint. The organization’s stance on drug-trafficking did not indicate that it was involved in it.

The representative of India hoped that delegations that joined in the consensus would do so again when the issue came up before the Council.

Commenting on the decision, the representative of Canada, an observer, said it did not appear that the complaints against the Transnational Radical Party constituted a violation of Economic and Social Council resolutions and principles of the Charter. The Party did not indulge in terrorism or drug trafficking. The purpose of having NGOS in consultative status was to afford them an opportunity to make statements, however critical of Member States.

The observer from the Netherlands expressed doubts about the decision to recommend suspension of the organization. He could not discern the motives for that action as there was no written complaint. From the provisions of the Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31 -– on which the Russian complaint was based -– there was no evidence of the organization’s influence in the drug trade. It was also questionable whether there was a pattern of abuses by the organization, contrary to the principles of the Charter.

New Applications for Consultative Status

Addressing the application of HADASSAH/The Women’s Zionist Organization of America, Inc., the representative of Lebanon noted that the letter had indicated that two representatives would be present at the Committee’s session. However, the Committee had not yet been informed of that presence.

The Chairman of the Committee, M. LEVENT BILMAN (Turkey), pointed out that after sending the letter, the NGO had informed the Secretariat that those two persons had to travel abroad for a meeting and would therefore be unavailable to attend the session.

The representative of Lebanon said it seemed that such a large organization was being irresponsible by not being able to send a representative. The Committee had asked that the NGO respond to questions on its policies and procedures. It had not done that.

The representative of Cuba said that it was a matter of concern that an organization based in New York could not make a representative available to appear before the Committee.

The representative of Germany said it would be beneficial if the Committee could wait for HADASSAH’s responses and take up the matter at its resumed session in January 2001.

The CHAIRMAN then suggested a deferment of the matter, as well as a decision, to the resumed session.

The representative of Lebanon said it was understood that the Committee would wait for an answer from the organization. However, the organization, among others, was taking the time of the Committee for granted. Resolution 1996/31 provided for NGOs to respond to the Committee, but set no deadline. His delegation still had questions for the organization. Its mission statement in its application and the one on its Web site were contradictory. He wondered whether HADASSAH was a part of the Zionist World Union and did it accept the Jerusalem programme? Did it have any relationship or partnership with the Jewish National Fund? Also, what was its position on application of the Fourth Geneva Convention concerning the Palestinian Authority? It had formerly evaded all those questions, among others. He requested that Amy Goldstein represent the NGO at the next session of the Committee.

The Committee then deferred its consideration of the organization’s application to its January 2001 resumed session with a view to taking a decision.

The representative of Syria, speaking as an observer, said his delegation had taken note of the decision to defer its consideration of HADASSAH’s application. However, it was surprised at the conduct of the NGO. That was a demonstration of its lack of responsibility. The NGO had its headquarters in New York and that overruled any excuse it might have for its absence. In addition, the organization had been successful at concealing its true activities. The representative of the organization had spoken of the centrality of Israel. How did it express its support for the Arab people? Also, through its support of the Israeli nuclear programme, it showed no regard for the United Nations, he added.

The observer of Palestine, said her delegation was also directly affected by the policies and practices of the organization. She would support the Committee’s recommendation for deferment, but would request that the questions of the Observer of Palestine be directly answered by HADASSAH at the time its application was taken up.

The representative of the United States said that the organization had been honest with the Committee in its responses to questions raised last January. It was perfectly fine with his delegation that action was postponed. It was perfectly reasonable for the NGO to request more time. The organization would tell the Committee that it did not discriminate and that they truly do help all kinds of people. His delegation welcomed the flexibility shown by the Committee in waiting until January. Nothing could cloud the humanitarian work of the organization.

The representative of Lebanon said the organization had not shown responsibility in responding to the questions raised by the Committee.

The representative of Israel, in his capacity as observer, said he reserved the right to respond to some of the allegations made about Zionism, Israel and HADASSAH at the January session.

Turning to the application of Christian Solidarity Worldwide, the representative of Sudan said she was grateful that the organization had sent a response, but had expected that a representative would be present to respond to the Committee’s questions. The NGO further confirmed its clear and flagrant intentions to divide Sudan. It made clear distinctions between northern Sudan and southern Sudan, which was unacceptable to her people. There was only one Sudan, she stressed. The response had referred to “respect for territorial borders” which was against the principles of the United Nations, as the Organization usually referred to “territorial integrity”. The organization was also guilty of other misdemeanours.

She said the organization was conducting illegal activities in the Sudan. It was entering the country without receiving necessary clearance from the Government of Sudan. It also had direct relationships with rebel groups in the southern part of the country as it had indicated in its response to the Committee. Due to those flagrant violations, among others, the delegation could not recommend the granting of consultative roster status with the Council

The representative of Syria, another observer, said that his country noticed that the organization was also interfering with the relationship between his country and Lebanon. He also did not support granting of consultative roster status to the NGO.

The representative of India said a number of documents had been circulated about the organization, which his delegation had been unable to study. Other members might also have been unable to do so. Therefore, consideration of the application could be deferred, he suggested.

The representative of Sudan said the organization’s response was clear and the matter could be considered immediately. However, her delegation would reluctantly agree that action on the application should be deferred to its January 2001 session.

The Committee agreed to defer its consideration and decision on the application of the NGO until its resumed January 2001 session.

In his closing remarks, the CHAIRMAN said that during the session there had been a rich exchange of views and the Committee had been able to ensure the fruitful participation of NGOs in the work of the United Nations. During the session, particular concern was given to complaints brought by four members of the Committee against NGOs who, they alleged, had misbehaved during the fifty-sixth session of the Human Rights Commission.

He said the Committee would have to find a solution, which would assist it in handling the increasing number of applications from NGOs for consultative status with the Economic and Social Council. Presently, there were 2,012 such organizations and more than 400 were preparing their quadriennial reports for review. That issue could not be taken up during the current session because of the Committee’s volume of work.

Summary of Committee’s Draft Report

During its 2000 session which took place from 15 to 19 May and 12 to 23 June, the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations had before it 80 new applications for consultative status, and 37 applications deferred from 1998 and 1999. Of those applications, the Committee recommended 37 organizations for consultative status.

The draft report contains four draft decisions on matters calling for action by the Economic and Social Council.

By draft decision I, the Committee would recommend the Council: grant consultative status to 37 non-governmental organizations; and reclassify one organization from special to general consultative status.

By draft decision II, the Council would suspend the consultative status of the International Council of the Association for Peace in the Continents for three years.

By draft decision III, the Council would authorize the Committee to hold a resumed session for a period of two weeks to complete the work of its 2000 session.

By draft decision IV, the Council would take note of the report of the Committee on its 2000 session and approve the provisional agenda for its 2001 session.

Following is a list of organizations recommended for consultative status on draft decision I:

Special Consultative Status

-- Ahmedabad Women’s Action Group -- Aid Information Switzerland -- Alan Guttmacher Institute -- American Psychological association -- Annai Educational Society

-- Arab Center for the Independence of the Judiciary and the Legal Profession -- Asia-Japan Women’s Resource Center -- Asian-pacific Resource and Research Centre for Women-- Asian Women in Cooperative Development Forum -- Association Tunisienne des droits de l’enfant -- Child Welfare League of America -- China Society for Promotion of the Guangcai programme -- Climate Institute -- Development Promotion group -- Fonds E7 pour le developpememt energetique durable -- Fundacion ‘8 de Marzo’ para la Promocion de Mujeres y Jovenes -- Global Eco-Village Network -- Institute for Environment and Development Studies -- Institute of International Social Development -- International HIV/AIDS Alliance -- International Planned Parenthood Federation, South Asia Region’s Office -- International Presentation Association -- Islamic Centre (England) -- Kenya Alliance for Advancement of Children -- Mothers’ Union, The -- National Council of Women of Great Britain, The -- Network of Human Development -- Palestinian Center for Human Rights -- Peaceways -- Radin Institute for Family Name -- Research Centre for Feminist Action -- Society of Catholic Medical Missionaries -- Union of Kuwaiti Women Association -- Voluntary Network India

Roster

-- Cherokee Nation of New Jersey -- China Association of Women Entrepreneurs -- Union internationales des journalistes et de la presse de langue francaise

Reclassification from Special to General

-- World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts.

By the decision, the Council will also take note that the Committee did not recommend granting consultative status to the following five organizations:

-- Association pour la fondation Mohsen Hachtroudi -- Enchante Repertoire de la Tranquilite -- Kazem Rajavi International Association for Defense -- North America Taiwanese Women’s Association -- Tamil Center for Human Rights

The decision will also have the Council take note that the Committee decided to close its consideration of the Council for the Defence of Human Rights and Freedom and ask the following applicants to re-apply to be considered by the Committee at its 2001 session:

-- Dominicans for Justice and Peace -- Safari Club International * *** *