Continuing Resumed Session, Non-Governmental Organizations Committee Recommends 57 Entities for Consultative Status, Defers Action on 26

ECOSOC/6916-NGO/871
22 May 2018
19th & 20th Meetings (AM & PM)

Continuing Resumed Session, Non-Governmental Organizations Committee Recommends 57 Entities for Consultative Status, Defers Action on 26

The Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations, continuing its resumed session, today recommended 57 entities for special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council, while deferring action on the status of 26 others and awaiting the translating of 1 application.

Action on a number of applications was postponed as Committee members requested additional information from the candidates about sources of funding and the status of their projects, among other things.

In the afternoon, the Committee held a question-and-answer session, during which it heard from six non-governmental organizations, granting three of them consultative status and deferring action on another three.

During that session, non-governmental organizations were given an opportunity to answer questions posed by Members.  Those whose applications were postponed were asked to provide additional details in writing.

The 19-member Committee considers applications submitted by non-governmental organizations, recommending general, special or roster status on the basis of the applicant’s mandate, governance and financial regime.  Organizations with roster status can attend meetings of the Economic and Social Council.  Those enjoying special status can attend meetings and issue statements, while those with general status can speak during meetings and propose agenda items.  Those with roster status can only attend meetings.

The Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations will meet again at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 23 May, to continue its session.

Interactive Dialogue

The representative of Domuni (France) said her organization — an online university — wanted to improve its links with the United Nations.  It had created a network of researchers, teachers and partner institutions, as well as a platform for dialogue between cultures, languages and religions.  It focused especially on those living far from universities or who lacked time.  Operating in five languages, Domuni also undertook research which sought to cross cultural and linguistic borders.  By entering a wider network, that of the United Nations, Domuni hoped to contribute to its work.

The representative of Cuba asked for details on where the group operated in Latin America.

Responding, the representative of Domuni said her group had strong links with educational institutions in Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Peru.

The Committee then granted the organization special consultative status.

The representative of GAHT-US Corporation (United States) said his organization, which had submitted its application two years ago, aimed at educating and improving understanding of historical events in the world, particularly those which occurred in the twentieth century.  It published articles and delivered speeches, and it had engaged with the United Nations in various capacities, including universal periodic reviews and the Commission on the Status of Women.  Responding to written questions from the Committee, he said it tried to get its information from primary sources and that a reference to Taiwan on its website was a quotation, and not its own words and his organization was not referring to Taiwan as a country.

The Committee then granted the organization special consultative status.

The representative of Hardwired, Incorporated (United States) invited delegations to ask questions, but no representatives did.

The Committee then granted the organization special consultative status.

The representative of the World Association for Sexual Health (United Kingdom) said her organization was committed to the advancement of the Sustainable Development Goals, especially those relating to health, education and gender equality.

The representative the Russian Federation asked about which organizations the group worked with.

Responding, the representative of the World Association for Sexual Health said it worked with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in the area of comprehensive sexual education and establishing international technical guidelines.  She added that her organization had individual members in the Russian Federation, which had a history of good research on human sexuality.

The representative of India asked for a written reply to her delegation’s questions about its work with other United Nations bodies, such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).

The representative of Nicaragua asked about the organization’s work in Latin America.

The Committee then postponed consideration of its application.

The representative of Women’s Refugee Commission, Inc. (United States) said her organization was a non-profit dedicated to protecting and improving the lives of women, children and youth displaced by conflict and crisis.  It provided research to humanitarian actors, with a strong focus on Europe and the United States.  Its application had been deferred last year because, due to a change in personnel, it had neglected to note its website address.  She went on to discuss her organization’s participation on the sidelines of the Economic and Social Council’s humanitarian affairs segment and the Commission on the Status of Women, among other events.  It had no presence outside the United States, but conducted research trips to other countries with the approval of their Governments.  Special consultative status was important for her organization to improve access to the United Nations and to better share its expertise with Member States.

The representative of China asked about funding received from Government sources and how that impacted on its independence.

Responding, the representative of Women’s Refugee Commission, Inc. said independence was “our most valuable asset”.

The representative of Cuba asked that her organization provided, in writing, an updated financial statement, as well as details of its work with the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment (UN-Women).

The Committee then postponed consideration of its application.

The representative of the Andrey Rylkov Foundation for Health and Social Justice (Russian Federation) said her organization worked in the Russian Federation to facilitate, develop and promote humane drug policies based on the protection of human rights and health.  Much of its work was focused on HIV among drug users and it cooperated with various United Nations committees and human rights bodies.

The representative of the Russian Federation asked for details of projects, funding from the Open Society Foundation and on international activities.

Responding, the representative of the Andrey Rylkov Foundation for Health and Social Justice elaborated on its work with drug users in Moscow, noting that about 3,000 people drew on its services every year.  Her organization had stopped getting financial help from Open Society Foundation since its prohibition in the Russian Federation.  On its international activities, she said that, while its HIV prevention efforts were focused on Moscow, its advocacy work was much broader in nature.

The Committee then postponed consideration of its application.

Requests for Special Consultative Status

The Committee recommended that the Economic and Social Council grant special consultative status to the following 54 organizations:

Acção Nacional para o Desenvolvimento Comunitária (Guinea-Bissau);

Agir Pour l'Epanouissement de l'Enfant et de la Femme en Afrique (Togo);

Ligue pour la solidarité congolaise (Democratic Republic of the Congo);

Maharat Foundation (Lebanon);

Mothers Pride and Development Initiative (Nigeria);

Mouvement panafricain Jeunes pour la reconstruction, la reforme et la revolution culturelle au Tchad et en Afrique (Chad);

Nigerian Association of Commercial Commuters (Nigeria);

Observatoire National pour les Droits de l'Electeur (Morocco);

Organization for Community Development Project (Nigeria):

Pars Non Trading Development Activists Co. (Iran);

Partners for Transparency (Egypt);

Paryavaran Mitra, Thaltej Ahmedabad (India);

Projonma Academy (Bangladesh);

Proslavi Oporavak (Bosnia and Herzegovina);

Rede Nacional De Combate Ao Trafico De Animais Silvestres (Brazil);

Red Dot Foundation (India)

Rivers of Hope and Humanitarian Initiative (Nigeria)

Self-Help Association for Rural people through Education and Entrepreneurship (Bangladesh);

Sheba Shangstha (Bangladesh);

Singapore Children's Society (Singapore);

Sociedade Maranhense de Direitos Humanos (Brazil);

Society for Public Education Cultural Training & Rural Action (India);

Soroor Mehr Andishan Rastin Institute (Iran);

Students' Care Service (Singapore);

Sunny Trust (Pakistan);

Sustainability for Seychelles (Seychelles);

Synergy Care Development Initiative (Nigeria);

Terra de Direitos (Brazil);

The Association of People with Disability (India);

Trung tâm Phát triển Nông thôn Bền vững (Viet Nam);

Trust for Youth Child Leadership (India);

Trybe Limited (Singapore);

VIKALP (India);

Vie et Santé du Centre (Cameroon);

Welfare and Nature Club of Naikhyongchari (Bangladesh);

Women in Law and Development in Africa [Femmes, Droit et Developpement en Afrique Section Togo] (Togo);

Yayasan Wafaa Indonesia Gemilang (Indonesia);

Yellowjerrycan Save a Child Foundation (Nigeria);

Academy of Dentistry International (United States);

African Cultural Promotions Inc. (United States);

Aziz Mahmûd Hüdâyi Vakfı (Turkey);

Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic (Canada);

Biofutura, Asociación Civil (Mexico);

Bufete de Estudios Interdisciplinarios AC (Mexico);

Conoscenza e Innovazione –Scuola di sociologia e di ricerca interdisciplinare (Italy);

Coral Guardian (France);

Danske Handicaporganisationer (Denmark);

Dementia Action Alliance (United States);

Dialogue Afrique-Europe (Belgium);

EcoHealth Alliance (United States);

Eşit Haklar İçin İzleme Derneği (Turkey);

Family Development and Samaritan Foundation, Inc. (United States);

Femmes Informations Juridiques Internationales Rhône-Alpes (France); and

Fundación ONCE para la Cooperación e Inclusión de Personas con Discapacidad (Spain).

The Committee postponed consideration of the following 23 organizations:

La Vie Pour Tous (Democratic Republic of the Congo) — after the representative of Turkey asked for more information about its partnership with an agency in the area of sustainable energy.

National Human Rights Civic Association “Belarusian Helsinki Committee” (Belarus) — after the representative of China requested details about “shadow reports” prepared for United Nations treaty bodies and for the universal periodic review procedure.

Organisation Tamaynut (Morocco) — after the representative of Cuba questioned a discrepancy between the application’s support documents and financial information.

Safe Care Trust International (Pakistan) — after the representative of Pakistan requested details about administrative expenses and how it planned to maintain its financial stability.

Sensitization Centre (Ghana) — after the representative of Nicaragua asked for details about projects and activities.

Shrushti Seva Samiti (India) — after the representative of Pakistan asked for details of ongoing projects, which were not available on its website.

Society for Participatory Research in Asia (India) — after the representative of Pakistan requested details of its collaboration with other civil society actors.

South Saharan Social Development Organisation (Nigeria) — after the representative of Cuba requested to know more about how it selected projects and maintained its independence, given that 21 per cent of its funding came from international organizations.

Southern African AIDS Trust (South Africa) — after the representative of Uruguay, noting that the organization was registered in several countries, asked for all registration documents and dates of registration.  The representative of South Africa, echoing that request, also asked which 22 countries it operated in, which international organizations it received funding from and whether it intended to carry out projects in South Africa.

The Family Planning Association of Sri Lanka (Sri Lanka) — after the representative of Nicaragua requested details about funding from international organizations.

The Public Association “Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law” (the Republican Status) — after the representative of China requested details about sources of funding.

World Historic and Cultural Canal Cities Cooperation Organization (China) — after the representative of the United States asked for details on outcomes and results of efforts to strengthen links with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), International Council on Monuments and Sites, Pacific Economic Cooperation Council, Inland Waterways International and other organizations and to be part of their themed meetings.

YOUTHLEAD (Jeunes Leaders) (Togo) — after the representative of Nicaragua asked if it had an Internet presence other than a Facebook page.  She also asked for a list of projects.

Alternative Perspectives and Global Concerns (Canada) — as the representative of Iran requested details of its regional branches.

Asia Initiatives Inc. (United States) — as the representative of Cuba, noting that the organization had offices in Costa Rica, requested details about projects in Latin America.

Association Duval (France) — as the representative of Cuba requested details about income from the private sector.

Belgische associatie voor mensenrechten en ontwikkeling (Belgium) — as the representative of Iran requested more information on its activities in countries neighbouring Iraq.

Broad National Movement Ltd. (United Kingdom) — as the representative of Cuba requested information on how it planned to complete projects, given its very low budget.

Canadian Canola Growers Association (Canada) — as the representative of China raised a question about references to Taiwan in its policy document on the Trans‑Pacific Partnership.

Eri-Platform (Belgium) — as the representative of South Africa asked in which countries, besides Eritrea, did the group have projects and activities; what engagement — if any — it had with the Government of Eritrea; and how it intended to translate activities outside Eritrea into concrete change within that country.  The representative of Venezuela, noting that the group spent 20 per cent of its 2015 income on projects, requested clarification on its finances.

Ethiopian Genocide Committee 1935-1941, Inc. (United States) — as the representative of Turkey asked for more information about its plan to establish an online university and virtual museum.

European Coalition for Just and Effective Drug Policies (Belgium) — as the representative of the Russian Federation asked whether it carried out projects outside the European Union.

Fondazione del Monte di Bologna e Ravenna (Italy) — as the representative of Turkey asked about regional or international partnerships in the implementation of its projects.

In addition, the Committee delayed consideration of Education Globale et Développement (Belgium) pending the availability of an English translation of its application.

For information media. Not an official record.