Committee on NGOs

30^th & 31^st Meetings (AM & PM)

as session concludes, committee on non-governmental organizations recommends 36

 

groups for consultative status, reclassification of another, notes 111 reports

(Issued on 28 May 2009.)

With the conclusion of its resumed 2009 session, the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations recommended that the Economic and Social Council grant consultative status to 36 bodies and reclassify one group, and took note of 111 quadrennial reports.

According to the Committee’s report on the session (document E/C.2/2009/L.4), adopted by consensus following its introduction by Rapporteur Suljuk Mustansar Tarar (Pakistan), the Committee also closed the file, without prejudice, on two applications for consultative status and closed consideration of another.  In addition, it recommended that the Economic and Social Council suspend 95 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that had not fulfilled the requirement to submit quadrennial reports (see annex to document E/C.2/2009/L.2/Rev.1 containing their names).  The Committee deferred consideration of more than 100 applications to its next session.

Among other actions, the Committee voted to close consideration of the Dynamic Christian World Mission Foundation, because, according to China’s representative, the NGO refused to answer questions about members’ names and locations in China, an action about which the representative of the United States said:  “We are embarrassing ourselves and embarrassing the United Nations.”

Interested non-governmental organizations are granted general, special or roster status with the Council upon recommendation by the 19-member Committee, which reviews the suitability of each applicant on the basis of various criteria, including mandate, governance and financial regime.  Groups enjoying general and special consultative status can attend meetings of the Council and circulate statements.  Those holding general status can, in addition, speak at meetings and propose items for the Council’s agenda, while organizations with roster status can only attend meetings.  Organizations with general and special status are required to submit a report every four years.

During today’s meetings, the Committee recommended special consultative status for the following organizations:

Gen ève pour les Droits de l’Homme/ Geneva for Human Rights, a Swiss organization seeking to help those engaged in promoting human rights in the field;

Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council, a United States-based NGO which seeks education on and support for the health of the Yukon River watershed;

Regards de Femmes, an organization in France which addresses stereotypes among boys and girls and combats violence against women, among other things; and

Passionists International, an international NGO based in the United States which promotes internationally the vision of the Passionist Family.

In a recorded vote of 12 in favour to 4 against (Israel, Romania, United Kingdom, United States), with 3 abstentions (Colombia, Dominica, Peru), the Committee closed the file on the application submitted by the Dynamic Christian World Mission Foundation, a United States-based NGO engaged in religious education which seeks to operate a mission to share the “Gospel of Jesus Christ”.

Proposing to close the file, China’s representative said the organization had since 2007 refused to answer questions about the names and location of its members in her country because, according to the NGO, there was no freedom of religion there.  Besides having displayed a pattern of disrespect for the Committee, the NGO did not meet the requirements of Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31, which guides the accreditation process.

Speaking before the vote, the representative of the United States said that, by taking the decision, “we are embarrassing ourselves and embarrassing the United Nations”.  Providing the names and residential addresses of an NGO’s members in any country was not a requirement under the resolution.  As for questions about the organization’s budget, it was the Committee’s policy not to close the file as long as questions remained outstanding.

In a general statement after the vote, he said the Committee had a clear mandate from the Economic and Social Council faithfully to accredit qualified NGOs in order to allow more voices to provide input in the democratic institution of the United Nations.  The Committee, however, had spent more time trying to exclude NGOs than include them.

The observer representative of Switzerland said one of the issues raised in the discussion was the data protection of NGO members, which could constitute problems in respect of the right to privacy and other rights protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

In his general statement, Romania’s representative said that, sadly, voting in the Committee was biased in a repetitive pattern on issues that had nothing to do with the resolution or the United Nations Charter.

Representatives who had voted in favour of closing the file or abstained pointed out in their general statements or explanations of position that any Committee member could ask questions, which NGOs were required to answer.  Egypt’s representative added that he was not convinced that the NGO could contribute to the work of the Economic and Social Council.

Others who made general statements or explanations of position were the representatives of the United Kingdom, Pakistan, Turkey, Peru, Israel and the Sudan.

The Committee suspended consideration of the application submitted by the Ethiopian Human Rights Council, which aims to encourage the Government’s acceptance of and compliance with all international instruments dealing with human rights by conducting human rights education and advocacy programmes.  The observer representative of Ethiopia said the NGO had not yet registered under a new law in the country and therefore had no legal status;

Pending receipt of requested information, the Committee referred to its next session applications submitted by: 

Erevna International Peace Center Inc., an organization based in Cyprus, whose activities include conflict resolution, training of mediators and research in conflict resolution methodology, after Turkey’s representative asked about the organization’s national or international status, activities and budget;

European Foundation for Democracy, a group based in Belgium which aims to promote universal human rights, freedom of conscience, individual liberty and pluralism of peaceful ideas throughout the world.  China’s representative asked about its affiliations while Egypt’s representative reiterated his question about donors.  Israel’s representative, however, remarked that an NGO did not have to give the names of donors if it wanted them to remain confidential;

European Renewable Energy Council, a group headquartered in Belgium which aims to provide information and consultancy on renewable energy for political decision makers at the local, regional, national and international levels, when the representatives of Egypt and Cuba asked about its activities;

Forest Products Association of Canada, an organization dedicated to providing leadership in advancing the lawful interests of forest product companies.  Egypt’s representative asked about its donors, finances and whether it had participated in the Commission for Sustainable Development;

Human Rights House Foundation, an organization based in Norway, working to strengthen human rights organizations worldwide through the establishment of human rights houses, as China’s representative asked about its donations to “Voice of Tibet” and what activities it had participated in jointly with the “Norwegian-Tibet Committee”.  India’s representative requested information about its lobbying activities;

International Center for Transitional Justice, a United States-based NGO seeking to help countries pursuing accountability for past mass atrocities or human rights abuses, because Cuba’s representative asked about activities in the Caribbean island nation and other Latin American countries not in conflict or post-conflict situations.  Turkey’s representative also requested clarification;

International Dalit Solidarity Network, based in Denmark, which seeks to contribute to the elimination of caste-based discrimination worldwide.  The representative of the Russian Federation asked about the NGO’s possible contributions to the outcome document of the Durban Review Conference and its position on slavery and the slave trade.  India’s representative asked about the NGO’s seeking redress for discrimination through existing national or international institutions;

International Federation of Liberal Youth, a Belgium-based NGO providing a forum for cooperation, exchange of resources and ideas as well as intercultural learning among liberal youth organizations, after China’s represented asked the NGO to respect the correct United Nations terminology for the Chinese Province of Taiwan.  Cuba’s representative asked about the NGO’s interpretation of “self-determination of peoples” and whether its political activities involved politically motivated acts against Member States;

International Gas Unit, an organization based in Norway seeking to promote the technical and economic progress of the global gas industry, when China’s representative asked the NGO to correct its website to accord with the correct United Nations terminology for geographical places.  Egypt’s representative asked whether its board members were nominated in their individual capacities or as representatives of member companies;

International Reading Organization, a United States-based organization dedicated to the promotion of high levels of literacy for all.  Cuba’s representative asked, among other things, whether it carried out projects in Latin America and the Caribbean, while Egypt’s representative asked about a change in its status and its compliance with correct United Nations terminology;

International Sustainable Energy Organization, an NGO based in Switzerland, which seeks to promote sustainable energy worldwide and implement the Global Energy Charter for Sustainable Development, as Egypt’s representative noted that the organization had not responded appropriately.  The Committee decided to send a letter requesting the NGO to respond to the Committee in a proper manner;

Kashmiri American Council, an NGO based in the United States which wishes to promote international education on human rights and human dignity, and to inform the public about the honourable causes of oppressed peoples, their internationally recognized right to self-determination and the conflicts that erupt when human rights are violated.  India’s representative asked, among other things, if the organization was of the opinion that the dispute over Jammu and Kashmir should be solved in a bilateral and peaceful manner;

Kosmos Associates Inc., an NGO in the United States which aims to build a new world community, through an approach that includes raising individual consciousness and dialogue among civilizations, because Egypt’s representative asked about its status and its affiliations;

LESTIME, a Swiss organization offering the lesbian community in Geneva a framework for information and solidarity, when Egypt’s representative asked numerous questions, including some about same-sex marriage, protection of the rights of children of same-sex marriage, how lesbians could have children, Sharia law and why the organization did not include any male members.  The observer representative of Switzerland, noting that the organization had answered many questions and had twice sent representatives to the Committee who had not been heard, asked that the Committee take a decision on its application within a reasonable time span;

Lesbenorganisation Schweiz, an organization in Switzerland which defends equality for the lesbian lifestyle and opposes all forms of discrimination.  Qatar’s representative asked the organization’s opinion about the blocking of its website by the Berne school district, and Egypt’s representative asked about its activities, among other things;

National Association of Home Builders of the United States, an NGO that seeks to improve the climate for housing and the building industry, as Egypt’s representative asked about its status;

The Peacebuilders, an NGO in Japan which wishes to contribute to peacebuilding by working with people in conflict-affected countries.  China’s representative asked about its affiliations with other organizations and with the Government;

Press Emblem Campaign, an NGO in Switzerland which seeks to improve access to information for and protection of journalists worldwide, because Cuba’s representative asked about its affiliations, while the representative of the United Kingdom proposed special consultative status;

Spirituality for Kids Europe Limited, an NGO in the United Kingdom which seeks to end the suffering and chaos of children worldwide.  Sudan’s representative asked about the organization’s affiliations, while Egypt’s representative requested more details about its contributors;

Sub-Priorato del Piemonte dell’Ordine di San Fortunato Onlus, an organization based in Italy which helps the poor, in particular poor children in the city and region of Piedmont.  Egypt’s representative requested tax documentation and asked about the NGO’s decision-making processes;

WITNESS, a United States-based organization which seeks to open the eyes of the world to human rights violations, when Sudan’s representative asked about its activities in his country, information disseminated on Darfur, and how its staff had entered the country.  The representatives of China and Egypt also sought additional information about its financials, among other things;

World Igbo Congress Foundation, a United States-based NGO seeking to promote, protect and advance Igbo culture, after Egypt’s representative asked about its membership and Burundi’s representative inquired as to whether the organization covered Igbo people outside Nigeria; and

Asian-Eurasian Human Rights Forum, an NGO based in India which seeks to create a climate of solidarity and responsibility, when China’s representative sought more clarity about the link on its website to the group World Citizenship.  Pakistan’s delegation said it would submit other questions.

At the end of the afternoon meeting, the representative of the Russian Federation noted that the interest of NGOs in activities of the United Nations was constantly rising with a consequent increase in the number of applications for consultative status.  While that interest was welcome, some NGOs abused the system by discrediting candidate Member States before elections to such bodies as the Human Rights Council -– actions that were impermissible.  While NGOs in consultative status had rights, they also had duties and responsibilities, including the duty to behave properly.

In other matters, the Committee adopted its provisional agenda for its 2010 session, which would take place from 25 January to 3 February and 24 May to 4 June 2010.

The Committee also took note of a list containing 11 NGOs that had ceased to exist, withdrawn their applications or requested a name change, approving changes in the names of 9 such bodies.

Members of the Committee are Angola, Burundi, China, Colombia, Cuba, Dominica, Egypt, Guinea, India, Israel, Pakistan, Peru, Qatar, Romania, Russian Federation, Sudan, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record