NGO COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS SEVEN ORGANIZATIONS FOR SPECIAL CONSULTATIVE STATUS WITH ECOSOC, AS IT CONCLUDES 2003 SESSION

Committee on NGOs

36^th & 37^th Meetings (AM & PM)

NGO COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS SEVEN ORGANIZATIONS FOR SPECIAL CONSULTATIVE

STATUS WITH ECOSOC, AS IT CONCLUDES 2003 SESSION

Ten Organizations Approved for Roster Status,

Fifty-eight Recommended for Special Status During Resumed Session

Concluding its resumed 2003 session, the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations today heard from representatives of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Eminent Persons on United Nations/Civil Society Relations, and adopted the draft provisional agenda for its 2004 session and its 2003 report.  It also recommended special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) for seven non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

The 19-member Committee makes recommendations on a non-governmental organization’s standing or reclassification with ECOSOC using a variety of criteria, including applicant mandate, governance and financial regime.  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.

In her closing remarks, the Committee’s Chair, Mihaela Blajan (Romania), noted it was the first time that the Committee had concluded its annual session in the calendar year.  During its resumed session, the Committee had recommended 10 NGOs for roster status and 58 for special status.  It had recommended two NGOs for reclassification from roster to special status, and one from special to general status.  It had taken note of 74 deferred and new quadrennial reports.  In total this year, the Committee had recommended 125 NGOs for consultative status, reclassified five NGOs, and taken note of 141 quadrennial reports.  It had considered seven special reports and complaints.  The “Paperless Committee” would be fully implemented despite setbacks.

In her presentation, Mary Racelis, Member of the Panel of Eminent Persons, said the 13-person panel had been established in March at the invitation of the Secretary-General, to come up, by April 2004, with recommendations for civil society involvement and interaction with the United Nations.  The Panel had consulted with a broad range of civil society constituencies, not only NGOs, but also local government authorities, parliamentarians, indigenous peoples’ groups, trade unions and others who felt they had as much right to be heard as civil society groups.  The Internet was used to gather responses to a questionnaire.

Last week, the Panel had met to review input and to begin drafting the report, she continued.  After the report’s submission, the Secretary-General would decide how to follow up.  The report contained two types of recommendations:  those the Secretary-General could carry out on his own, and recommendations requiring consultations with the General Assembly.

One of the issues to be addressed was a definition of civil society, she said.  The Panel preferred the term:  “constituencies of concerned groups”.  Another aspect was how civil society could interact with the Organization without being physically present in New York, Geneva or Vienna.  Civil society groups might be satisfied with having access to national or regional United Nations bodies on issues of their particular concern, she said, thereby alleviating the backlog in the accreditation process.

John Clarke, Project Manager of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Eminent Persons, stressed that the world nowadays did business in a different way than

50 years ago.  Now, work was done in a more ad-hoc way.  There was a tendency to build coalitions in addressing global issues, spanning central governments and other actors.  The global alliance to fight HIV/AIDS was an example of that.  The Panel was looking at the implications of the new trend.

Following the presentations, an exchange of views took place between the Panellists and representatives of China, Cuba and Germany.

Prior to those proceedings, the Committee decided to recommend special consultative status for seven NGOs, including:  Project One, an international NGO based in the United States; Global 2000 (2010) International, a United-States based organization; Avocats sans frontiers (France); The Links, Incorporated, an international organization also based in the United States; International Academy of Ecology and Life Protection Sciences, based in the Russian Federation; and the Russian Public Movement “For Civil Rights”.

Before deciding to recommend special consultative status to the seventh NGO -– the World Population Foundation, a national organization based in the Netherlands -- the observer delegate for the Holy See said his delegation would express its reservation, as it was unclear what the organization meant by “access to appropriate health care services”.

Also this morning, the Committee deferred taking a decision on the request for status by the Foundation for Human Rights and Relief international, as there was a request for further clarification on some aspects of the NGO’s applications.

The Committee decided to postpone to its May 2004 session consideration of a special report filed by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in response to a Libyan complaint filed in May.

The Committee’s 2004 session will take place from 10 to 28 May.

In approving the Committee’s 2003 report, introduced by Committee Vice-President Ishtiaq H. Andrabi (Pakistan), the Committee authorized him to finalize it in consultation with the Bureau and the Secretariat and after receiving Committee members’ comments.  The report will be issued as document E/C.2/2003/L.2.

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.

* *** *