Committee on NGOs

24^th & 25^th Meetings (AM & PM)

NGO COMMITTEE APPROVES THREE ORGANIZATIONS FOR CONSULTATIVE STATUS

WITH ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL, DEFERS FOUR APPLICATIONS

Also Takes Note of Six Quadrennial Reports, Considers Two Complaints

By a roll-call vote of nine in favour to four against with six abstaining, the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) today recommended roster consultative status with the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) for the International Society for Human Rights, a Frankfurt (Germany)-based network.

Continuing its 2003 regular session in two meetings today, the Committee also recommended an NGO for special status and one for roster, deferring four applications and taking note of six quadrennial reports.  Also considered were two complaints and 22 requests by NGOs to be heard at ECOSOC’s regular session in July. 

The 19-member Committee makes recommendations on an organization’s standing or reclassification with ECOSOC using a variety of criteria, including applicant mandate, governance and financial regime.  Currently, 2,234 NGOs have such status.  Those with roster status can attend meetings; those with special status can attend meetings and circulate statements; and those with general status can attend meetings, circulate statements and propose items for the Council’s agenda.  NGOs in special and general standing are required to submit quadrennial reports on their work relevant to that of the United Nations.

In explanation of position before the vote, Germany’s representative said a decision on the question of recommending status for the NGO was a priority.  China’s representative said he would vote against recommending consultative standing for the NGO.

     Voting in favour of granting roster status to the NGO were Germany, Peru, Romania, Turkey, United States, Cameroon, Chile, Colombia and France.  Voting against were Russian Federation, Zimbabwe, China and Cuba.  Abstaining were India, Iran, Pakistan, Senegal, Sudan and Côte d’Ivoire.

In explanation of position after the vote, Iran’s representative said he regretted that the process of examining the NGO had led to the taking of action.  He would have preferred consensus before making a decision.  However, now that the NGO had received the recommendation for roster status, the NGO would hopefully observe its obligations by resolution 1996/31, particularly when it came to the issue of Islamic law.

Cuba’s representative said he had voted against the organization because the NGO’s answers to the Committee’s questions had been vague and ambiguous.  There was proof that the organization was politically motivated.  Sudan’s representative recalled that the Committee’s usual course of action was to ensure that all members were satisfied with an NGO’s answers prior to recommending the granting of consultative status.  With a roster standing, the organization would not be required to provide quadrennial reports.  The Committee would keep a close eye on it.  Pakistan’s representative said he had abstained from the vote because the Committee should have had more time to consider the NGO’s request.

In general statements after the vote, China’s representative said the request for a vote had been shocking.  Hopefully, this vote would not set a regrettable precedent and China’s protest should be included in the record.  Germany’s representative said transparency had been paramount in the action.  The vote could have been avoided had more information been made available.

In addition today, the Committee recommended special status for Kids Can Free the Children, a request from a Canada-based international network.

Three requests by India-based NGOs previously deferred were again deferred pending further clarification at Pakistan’s request:  Centre for Research in Rural and Industrial Development; “Nirdhar” Women and Child Development Organization; and Society for Promotion of Youth and Masses.  The request of Nigeria-based African Hebrew Organization was also deferred again after previous deferral at Nigeria’s request. 

Taken up today was a complaint by Viet Nam against the Transnational Radical Party.  That complaint had been addressed by a special report from the NGO, an organization in general consultative status with ECOSOC.  The original complaint stemmed from the Transnational Radical Party’s accrediting an organization to the Human Rights Commission when that organization was alleged by Viet Nam to be connected with known terrorist activities.

Viet Nam’s representative spoke as an observer to say he was not satisfied with the report.  It denied documented connections between itself and the group in question and denied responsibility for incendiary actions.  Evidence was available, including from Human Rights Watch.  Giving examples, he demanded an apology and reassurances that the Transnational Radical Party would not give a forum to the terrorists in question.  If the NGO failed to comply, he would call for stronger actions to be taken.

     China, Cuba, Germany, Iran, Sudan, Russian Federation, France, United States, Senegal, India, Pakistan and Italy took part in a debate.  At issue were whether the mandate of resolution 1996/31 had been violated and what relevance the issue of terrorism held for the Committee’s work. 

     Some delegations held that enough evidence had been presented to prove that the NGO had violated the mandate to comply with the Charter.  Delegations agreed that the Transnational Radical Party had not explained itself well in its report and that it had been ambiguous.  They called for a member of the NGO to address the Committee and clarify its position on the allegations Viet Nam had newly brought to light today.

Delegations warned against the Committee involving itself in the politically murky area of terrorism that was still undefined.  Some called for the Committee as a matter of principle to maintain that NGOs in consultative status with ECOSOC should not have ties to terrorist organizations.  Others called for discretion in using the term so that it would not be diluted or misapplied. 

The Committee should use reasonable caution in approaching situations where terrorism was alleged, it was stressed.  Responding to the comments, Viet Nam’s representative said a lack of definition for “terrorism” should not prevent the United Nations from putting out such a list.  It was decided that a letter would be sent asking the Transnational Radical Party to further clarify its position on Viet Nam’s complaint.  The situation would them be considered anew based on the new report.

Also today, the United States said two persons accredited by an NGO in consultative status with the ECOSOC, “Tupaj Amaru” (IMTA), had rushed at the United States delegation during a Human Rights Commission meeting in a threatening and alarming manner.  She asked that a letter be sent to the NGO with the following questions:  What procedures had it followed in deciding to accredit the individuals involved?  How long had each person been a member?  What actions had been taken to repudiate their actions and discipline the participants?  At what point had the NGO known of the actions?  What actions would Tupaj Amaru take to ensure such actions did not occur in the future?

     China, Cuba, France, Iran, Germany, Turkey, Sudan, India, Colombia and Russian Federation expressed support for the United States request.  Some said the group had already violated the rules of conduct and the Committee must take serious action.  Others said the serious charges should have been brought to the Committee earlier for vigorous examination.  It noted that there was a growing trend.  Human Rights Committee members could not feel secure at meetings.  The matter should be addressed.

     Turning to quadrennial reports, the Committee took note of reports by the following organizations holding special consultative status:  AFS Intercultural Programs; Catholic International Education Office; Femmes actives et foyer; Oxfam Great Britain; and World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters.  It also took note of the report of the International Association for Religious Freedom, holding general status, which had been deferred.

     Finally this afternoon, the Committee decided to grant the request of 15 NGOs in general consultative status to be heard by ECOSOC at the High-Level segment of its 2003 regular session:  Asian Legal Resource Center; Association Tunisienne des Meres; Associazione Volontari per il Servizio Internazionale; Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations (CONGO); Franciscans International; International Chamber of Commerce; International Confederation of Free Trade Unions; International Federation of Associations of the Elderly; International Federation of Settlements and Neighbourhood Centres; International Movement ATD Fourth World; Organization for Industrial, Spiritual and Cultural Advancement International (OISCA); Soroptimist International; World Family Organization; World Federation of United Nations Associations (WFUNA); and Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action.

     The request of seven NGOs to be heard by ECOSOC at the Coordination segment of its 2003 session was also granted.  Six of them holding general consultative status were:  Al-Koei Foundation; Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations (CONGO); International Chamber of Commerce; International Federation of Settlements and Neighbourhood Centres; World Federation of United Nations Associations (WFUNA); and Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action.  The seventh, World Vision International, has special standing.

Information about the organizations considered today can be found in documents, E/C.2/2003/Add.1, E/C.2/2003/R.2/Add.2 and E/C.2/2003/CRP.1, 4.  The information is also available in electronic form on laptop computers and overhead projection as part of the “Paperless Committee” initiative the Committee is launching during its current session.  (See Press Release NGO/497 of 5 May.)  A computerized chart issued this morning gives an overview of all papers before the Committee, both official documents and communications, indicating their status and e-form availability in the six official languages.

Current members of the NGO Committee are Cameroon, Senegal, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Côte d’Ivoire, China, Pakistan, India, Iran, Chile, Colombia, Peru, Cuba, Russian Federation, Romania, Germany, France, United States and Turkey.

     The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Friday, 23 May, when it is expected to conclude its 2003 regular session after a final review of quadrennial and special reports and applications for consultative status or reclassification.

* *** *