VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHQT #0407/01 1532131
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 022131Z JUN 09
FM AMEMBASSY QUITO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0424
INFO RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 8165
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 3564
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ JUN LIMA 3222
RUEHGL/AMCONSUL GUAYAQUIL 4348

C O N F I D E N T I A L QUITO 000407 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958:  DECL:(##) 
TAGS: PGOV SENV PHUM EAID ECON EC
SUBJECT: ECUADORIAN NGOS RESIST GOE MOVES TOWARD GREATER CONTROL 
 
Reftel A: Guayaquil 125, B: Quito 225 
 
 
Classified by Ambassado...




id: 209794
date: 6/2/2009 21:31
refid: 09QUITO407
origin: Embassy Quito
classification: CONFIDENTIAL
destination: 09GUAYAQUIL125|09QUITO225
header:
VZCZCXYZ0000
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHQT #0407/01 1532131
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 022131Z JUN 09
FM AMEMBASSY QUITO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0424
INFO RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 8165
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 3564
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ JUN LIMA 3222
RUEHGL/AMCONSUL GUAYAQUIL 4348


----------------- header ends ----------------

C O N F I D E N T I A L QUITO 000407 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958:  DECL:(##) 
TAGS: PGOV SENV PHUM EAID ECON EC
SUBJECT: ECUADORIAN NGOS RESIST GOE MOVES TOWARD GREATER CONTROL 
 
Reftel A: Guayaquil 125, B: Quito 225 
 
 
Classified by Ambassador Heather Hodges.  Reason:  1.4 b and d. 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary:  The GOE has taken steps in the past year to 
expand its regulation of NGOs in Ecuador.  It also attempted to close 
a prominent environmental NGO in March 2009, in a move many believed 
was politically motivated.  The NGO community is attempting to 
organize in response to these measures and hopes to work with the GOE 
to shape regulations that do not hinder their effectiveness.  End 
Summary 
 
¶2.  (SBU) The GOE has taken steps in the past year to assert greater 
control over NGOs by raising capital requirements, expanding the 
government's investigative capability, and insisting that NGOs' 
potentially sensitive internal information be publicized in an 
internet registry.  The GOE has also attempted to expand the range of 
NGOs it can regulate, by claiming authority to supervise both those 
that receive public funds as well as NGOs whose work the government 
decides has an impact on the public interest.  The government's moves 
have had a significant impact on religious organizations as well 
(Reftel A). 
 
GOE Asserts Goal is Transparency 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶3.  (C) Ramiro Rivadeneira, Undersecretary for Judicial Affairs at 
the Ministry of Government, told us that the GOE sought to improve 
the public's access to NGO information.  Rivadeneira said the GOE's 
main objective was to centralize the public registry of NGOs in an 
internet database.  He said that the process of organizing this had 
revealed many NGOs registered under incorrect GOE ministries. 
Rivadeneira also suggested that some NGOs and religious organizations 
have splintered into smaller groups that have abused the parent 
organization's not-for-profit status.  (Note: The Embassy has heard 
anecdotal reports of this from other sources.  In a recent meeting, a 
U.S. religious figure told the DCM that he knew of religious NGOs 
that had been set up for the sole aim of raising money for the 
personal use of the NGO's founders.  End Note.)  Rivadeneira denied 
that there was anything authoritarian or restrictive about the 
government's intentions, and said the GOE's moves were simply 
intended to eliminate this abuse and to organize an increasingly 
chaotic situation with thousands of poorly-understood NGOs operating 
in the country.  Rivadeneira said the GOE planned to engage in 
dialogue with both NGOs and religious groups to create new regulatory 
laws. 
 
¶4.  (C) The government initially sought to implement its expanded 
authority through Presidential Decree 982, which was issued in March 
¶2008.  NGOs in Ecuador have criticized this decree for allowing the 
Government a wide range of discretion in enforcing regulations and 
expanding its powers to close non-compliant NGOs.  The decree states 
that if NGOs "repeatedly violate the provisions of the ministries," 
the government may shut them down.  The NGO Grupo FARO's executive 
director voiced concern about the decree to POLCOUNS last spring. 
Some observers argue that the GOE measures are vague and 
unconstitutional, saying they violate guarantees of freedom of 
expression and due process.  In December 2008, the Ministry of 
Economic and Social Inclusion (MIES) began drafting a new law that 
would expand even further the government's regulatory powers, 
particularly over NGOs that do not accept public funds.  The NGO 
community is attempting to organize in an effort to moderate aspects 
of the new law and to remove the elements of Decree 982 that it 
believes are unconstitutional. 
 
GOE Attempts to Shut Down Prominent NGO Accion Ecologica 
--------------------- ----------------- ---------------- 
 
¶5.  (SBU) The NGO's efforts have taken on a new urgency following a 
GOE effort in March 2009 to dissolve a prominent environmental NGO 
called Accion Ecologica.  On March 2, the Ministry of Health (MOH) 
revoked Accion Ecologica's government certification, claiming that it 
had not "fulfilled the mission for which it was founded."  Without 
government certification, NGOs are not able to operate legally within 
Ecuador.  Accion Ecologica is one of the most outspoken critics of 
the GOE's environmental policies, and was particularly critical of 
the recently passed mining law (septel).  It was widely believed that 
the GOE was "sending a message" to the broader NGO community through 
its action. 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Accion Ecologica representatives said they were "perplexed" 
by the move and called it "political persecution."  The MOH denied 
this, saying that it was just moving Accion Ecologica to the more 
appropriate Ministry of the Environment (MOE).  The MOH claimed that 
Accion Ecologica "did not coordinate its work with the government" as 
it was supposed to, and said that six other NGOs had also been closed 
in 2008 for being registered with the wrong ministry.  Others have 
disputed this assessment, however, saying that the MOH did not 
provide appropriate notification, and that the likely six month 
recertification process placed an unreasonable burden on Accion 
Ecologica, which would have to cease operations during this period. 
Critics of the move pointed out that the Ministry of Environment did 
not exist when Accion Ecologica was founded 20 years ago, and that 
its registration with the MOH had previously never been a problem. 
 
¶7.  (C) A lawyer who works with Ecuadorian NGOs told EconOff that 
Accion Ecologica could have challenged the government's move in the 
courts, and she was certain it would have won.  She noted, however, 
that a court battle would have lasted at least a year.  Accion 
Ecologica instead attempted to keep a low profile and negotiate a 
compromise with the government.  The negative press coverage, public 
outcry, and support from international NGOs eventually forced the 
government to suspend the revocation on March 21. 
 
¶8.  (SBU) EconOff encountered a range of views about the GOE's 
actions.  One lawyer EconOff spoke with suggested that proposed law 
would severely limit the independence and effectiveness of the NGOs. 
She felt a unified effort by the NGO community was necessary to 
prevent the GOE from overreaching.  Another environmental lawyer was 
more sanguine about the GOE's actions, however, noting that the GOE 
had proposed similar regulations several times before, but it had 
never succeeded in limiting NGO independence.  While differing on the 
seriousness of the threat, both lawyers expressed optimism that the 
NGOs could use the drafting of the new law by MIES to build bridges 
with the government and perhaps eliminate unconstitutional provisions 
from Decree 982. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶9.  (C) Given the Correa government's limited tolerance for dissent 
(Reftel B), its obsession with bringing everything in line with state 
planning, and the negative precedents elsewhere in the region, we do 
not take NGO concerns lightly.  The Embassy will continue to monitor 
carefully whether GOE actions impose significant restrictions on NGO 
independence. 
 
Hodges 

=======================CABLE ENDS============================