VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0516/01 1631623
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 111623Z JUN 08
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4416
INFO RUEHUB/USINT HAVANA 0270
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 3255

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000516 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AORC CU PHUM
SUBJECT: UN ECOSOC COMMITTEE ON NGOS: THE HUMAN RIGHTS 
FOUNDATION 
 
REF: STATE 60300 
 
¶1.  Summary and action request: On June 6 ECOSOC's NGO 
Committee, acting at the behest of the Cuban delegation, 
rejected an application for consultative status from a New 
York-based NGO called the Human Rights Foundation.  The Cuban 
delegate called one of the Foundation's board members, former 
Cuban political prisoner (and former U.S. ambassador to the 
UN Commission on Human Rights) Armando Valladares, a 
terrorist.  The U.S. delegation called for deferring the 
first-time application until the Committee could hear from a 
representative of the NGO, but this was rejected by a vote of 
6 (U.S.)-12-1.  Cuba then moved to reject the application. 
Rather than accept a consensus decision, the U.S. called for 
a vote and the motion to reject the application was approved 
13-4 (U.S.)-2.  When ECOSOC meets June 30-July 25 and reviews 
the Committee's report, we recommend the United States seek 
to overturn the Committee's decision.  End summary and action 
request. 
 
¶2.  Background: the Committee on NGOs of the UN's Economic 
and Social Council is a 19-member body that meets twice a 
year to review applications from NGOs for consultative status 
with ECOSOC.  Its terms of reference (ECOSOC resolution 
1996/31) stipulate that NGOs granted status shall be 
concerned with matters falling within ECOSOC's competence, 
shall have aims and purposes that conform with the UN 
Charter, and shall undertake to support the work of the UN. 
The resolution also says the NGO shall be of recognized 
standing within its particular field, shall have a 
democratically adopted constitution and a representative 
structure, and shall disclose the sources of its financial 
support. 
 
 
¶3.  The Human Rights Foundation was registered in the United 
States in 2005 and submitted its application for ECOSOC 
consultative status earlier this year.  On June 2, after an 
initial review of the application, the NGO Committee put 
additional questions in writing to the Foundation, which the 
Foundation answered in writing on June 4.  One of the 
questions states: "How do you explain your affirmation that 
you don't and didn't have any links with any person involved 
in terrorist activity considering Armanda (sic) Valladares's 
presence in the Board of Directors of this organization, as 
chairman of this entity?"  The Foundation's answer points out 
among other things that Valladares was a prisoner of 
conscience in Cuba and so designated by Amnesty 
International, and a U.S. representative to the UN Commission 
on Human Rights with the rank of ambassador. 
 
¶4.  In the June 6 debate the Cuban delegate accused the 
Foundation of "insolent, lying, and slanderous" attacks on 
Cuba and Venezuela, claimed Valladares is a terrorist, passed 
out copies of largely illegible Cuban court documents and 
newspaper articles allegedly supporting this claim, and asked 
the Committee to reject the application.  Sudan, China, 
Guinea, Egypt, Russia, Burundi, Dominica, and an observer 
delegate from Venezuela supported Cuba.  The U.S. delegate 
pointed out that Valladares had been a prisoner of conscience 
in Cuba, his Foundation is now dedicated to promoting the 
freedom of speech he was denied in Cuba, and the Committee 
had only heard one side of the story and should invite a 
representative of the Foundation to come and speak to it at 
its next session in January 2009.  He recommended that action 
on the application be deferred. 
 
¶5.  The Cuban delegate called for a vote on its request to 
reject the application.  The UK, Israel, and Peru supported 
the U.S. call for a deferral, pointing out that it was 
customary for the Committee to give first-time applicants an 
opportunity to address the Committee and unusual for the 
Committee to take action on so recent an application.  The 
Cuban delegate called for a vote on the U.S. request.  The 
request for a deferral was defeated by a vote of 6 (USA, 
Colombia, Israel, Peru, Romania, UK) to 12, with one 
abstention (India). 
 
¶6.  Cuba then repeated its request to the Committee to reject 
the application, calling Valladares a "clown" and "a member 
of a criminal gang."  The Committee chairman (Sudan) asked if 
the Committee wished to adopt the resolution by consensus, 
but the U.S. delegate called for a vote.  The motion to 
reject the Foundation's application was adopted by a vote of 
13 to 4 (USA, Colombia, Israel, Peru), with two abstentions 
(Romania and the UK). 
 
¶7.  June 6 was the final day of the Committee's resumed 2008 
session.  Its report will be submitted for approval to 
ECOSOC, the Committee's parent body, which meets in New York 
June 30-July 25.  We recommend that at this meeting the 
United States seek to overturn this decision, or 
 
 
alternatively send the case back to the Committee.  Such a 
request would need to be supported by demarches in the 
capitals of most of ECOSOC's 54 member states. 
Khalilzad