Human rights situation in the OT – Report of Cttee on NGOs – ECOSOC report (excerpts)

Report of the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations on its 2006 regular session

    (New York, 19-27 January 2006)

 I.   Matters calling for action by the Economic and Social Council or brought to its attention

…

 II.   Applications for consultative status and requests for reclassification

3.   The Committee considered item 3 of its agenda at its 1st to 8th and 10th to 12th meetings, held from 19 to 27 January 2006. It had before it a memorandum by the Secretary-General containing new applications for consultative status received from non-governmental organizations (E/C.2/2006/R.2 and Add. 1-22) and also one compilation of applications for consultative status deferred from previous sessions (E/C.2/2006/CRP.1).

  A.   Applications for consultative status and requests for reclassification deferred from previous sessions of the Committee

4.   The Committee considered item 3 (a) of its agenda, Applications for consultative status and requests for reclassification deferred from previous sessions of the Committee, contained in document E/C.2/2006/CRP.1, at its 6th to 8th and 12th meetings, on 23, 24 and 27 January 2006.

    Requests for consultative status

    Applications recommended

5.   The Committee recommended that the Council grant consultative status to 10 organizations whose applications had been deferred from previous sessions (see chap. I, draft decision I, subpara. (a)).

…

  BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights

…

    BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights 

6.   At its 8th meeting, on 24 January, the Committee decided to recommend special consultative status to the BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights. The representatives of Germany, France and the United States of America disassociated themselves from the consensus. They were of the view that while the organization was doing important work on the issue of Palestinian refugees, a number of serious concerns remained, including clarity on the organization’s position on equating Zionism with racism.

7.   The representative of Germany stated that he had serious concerns about organizations that had been involved in an attempt, in 2001, to reinstate General Assembly resolution 3379 (XXX) equating Zionism with racism. Although the representative of the organization had distanced BADIL from the call for reinstatement of that resolution, he would have preferred an opportunity to obtain clarity on the issue.

8.   The representative of France stated that BADIL was doing a good job on the ground. However, the fact that the organization did not unequivocally reject the equation of Zionism with racism prevented France from associating with consensus. France would follow closely the position of BADIL on this subject in the future.

9.   The Committee heard the representative of the organization, who underlined that it worked in close collaboration with a number of Jewish organizations, some of which had sent letters in support of its application for consultative status with the Economic and Social Council.

10.  The Sudan supported the work of the organization.

11.   Speaking as an observer delegation, the representative of Palestine stated that BADIL provided relevant analysis and information on Palestinian refugees, its work and analysis being based on international law, in line with the provisions of resolution 1996/31 and relevant to the work of the Economic and Social Council.

12.   The representative of Israel, speaking as an Observer State, believed that the organization was “aggressive and intolerant”. It had used anti-Semitic language in the past, a matter which needed to be addressed by the Committee in its communications with the organization. BADIL had openly supported terrorism and had given contradictory statements when asked about its views on the right of the Jewish people to self-determination.

_____________