Committee on NGOs

27^th & 28^th Meetings (AM & PM)

NGO COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS NINE ORGANIZATIONS FOR CONSULTATIVE STATUS

WITH ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL

Defers Action on Applications by Heritage Foundation, Seven Other Organizations

As it continued in its 2002 resumed session, the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) recommended nine organizations for consultative status to the Economic and Social Council during two meetings today.  It also decided to defer action on several applications, including the United-States-based Heritage Foundation and the French organization, Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l’antisemitisme (LICRA).

The NGO Committee uses a variety of criteria to make recommendation for general, special and roster status to the Council, including mandates, governance and financing.  Organizations that have general and special consultative status can attend meetings of the Council and circulate statements of a certain length; those with general status can, in addition, speak at meetings and propose items for the Council’s agenda.  Organizations with roster status can only attend meetings.

Recommended for special consultative status were:  Cercle des amis de la foret pour le 21 siecle, a national organization based in Cameroon; Fondation internationale carrefour, an international organization; Association of Garbage Collectors for Community Development, an Egypt-based national organization; FEMVISION, an international organization; China Green Foundation, a national organization; Institute for Cognitive Science Studies of Iran; Institute for Women's Studies and Research, also of Iran; Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, a national organization; and Girl Scouts of the United States of America.

The Association de soutien aux orphelins du Viet Nam, an international organization, was also recommended for roster status.

Following a request by the delegate of Cameroon, the Committee decided to leave pending the application of the Cameroon-based international organization, Conscience africaine.  That country’s representative raised several questions about the organization’s application, including the names of the NGO's founding members, its financial statement and the nature of its contributors. 

In the ensuing discussion, the representatives of Senegal, Cuba, Sudan, and China agreed that legitimate concerns had been raised and supported the proposal to defer consideration pending further clarification.  Chile’s representative, however, felt that the organization’s application contained sufficient information

for the Committee to reach a decision.  From the organization's reply, she was clear on the nature of contributions it received and what kind of projects it developed.

Another application left pending was that of the French-based international NGO, Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l’antisemitisme (LICRA), following concerns raised by the representatives of Pakistan, Iran and Turkey.  The representative of Iran, while stressing that the organization was involved in a noble cause, asked for clarification regarding the phrase "combating negativism, revisionism and apologies for genocide and crimes against humanity", saying it was important to ensure that those terms did not contain political connotations.  Pakistan’s representative expressed similar concerns and raised technical questions including on the organization’s funding.  The representatives of China, Cuba and the Russian Federation shared the view that LICRA should be asked to clarify issues raised during the debate before acting on the NGO’s application.

The representative of France, who had proposed granting the NGO general consultative status, responded by saying that the organization had been involved in combating negativism and in recognizing the horrors of the Second World War.  The terms used in the organization’s application were specific to France and reflected currents of thinking linked to the history of the Second World War.

Chile’s representative pointed out that the original French version of LICRA’s application did not include the word "revisionism".  The non-governmental organization was developing remarkable work and it was important for it to be better involved in the work of the Economic and Social Council.  She did not see a reason to postpone a decision on the application and suggested that it receive special consultative status.  Regarding terminology used by an NGO, she welcomed new points of view as they broadened the understanding of the United Nations and contributed to its pursuit of solutions to global issues.

In the afternoon session, following extensive discussion on the application for consultative status by the Heritage Foundation, the Committee deferred action to give delegates more time to pose questions in writing and to study the information already supplied by the NGO.  Issues addressed in the discussion included terminology regarding Taiwan; a breakdown of the organization’s finances; the nature of conferences sponsored by the Foundation; the nature of the financial contributions it received; and the relevance of the Foundation’s work to that of the Economic and Social Council and its subsidiary bodies.

Responding to the many questions raised during the debate, the representative of the Heritage Foundation said that he and others at the Foundation had felt that the Foundation’s previous attitude had been highly critical of the United Nations.  That perception had been based in large part on a misunderstanding of the United Nations and its important work around the world.  He had persuaded the Heritage Foundation that it would be appropriate for the Foundation to involve itself in the work of the United Nations.  Constructive criticism should be constructive, not destructive.  The Foundation existed to further economic and social goods -- such as free trade -- and had an important role to play in consultation with the Economic and Social Council.

Regarding the reference to Taiwan, he said the Heritage Foundation fully acknowledged the terminology used by the United Nations which designated Taiwan as

Taiwan, Province of China.  On the organization's finances, he said the Foundation was financially viable.  Detailed financial documents had been provided to the Secretariat.  The Heritage Foundation took no funds from a governmental entity or even a "pass through" from a government.  The NGO worked on numerous domestic subjects, many of which had international relevance.  As a research and policy institution, the Heritage Foundation researched both national and international issues.

Delegates participating in the discussion included China, Cuba, Pakistan, India and Germany.

Also left pending were the applications of Cross-Cultural Solutions and the Arias Foundation for Peace and Human Progress, a national organization in Costa Rica.  At the request of Pakistan, the applications of the Indian Social Institute and the Asian-Eurasian Human Rights Forum were also deferred pending the receipt of further information.

An application of the International Network of Liberal Women, an international organization based in the United Kingdom, was also deferred following a round of questions posed by the delegations of Pakistan, China and Cuba on several issues, including its finances, membership and reference to Taiwan.

In other matters this afternoon, the Committee elected Meshack Kitchen (Zimbabwe) as Committee Vice-Chairman to serve for the unexpired term which expires at the end of the 2002 session.

Information on the NGOs considered today can be found in documents E/C.2/2002/R.2/Adds. 6-8 and Adds. 13-15.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. tomorrow, 10 January, to continue the work of its resumed session.

* *** *