Civil society organisations say hold-ups at the NGO committee mean marginalised people are not being heard at the UN

Vulnerable people are prevented from gaining representation at the United Nations by a committee dominated by countries with repressive regimes, according to concerned NGOs.



Organisations have told the Guardian how they face lengthy hold-ups, bizarre questioning and intimidation as they negotiate with the UN committee on non-governmental organisations, the group which decides which organisations get official UN status, and is currently made up of countries including Cuba, China, Russia, Pakistan and Qatar.

Aid worker: I was drugged and raped by another humanitarian in South Sudan Read more

Last month, Freedom Now, which works with prisoners of conscience around the world, finally won a six year battle to get official status, in the face of fierce opposition from China. It took an intervention from US ambassador Samantha Power, who said she was determined “to put an end to the inexcusable attempt to deny Freedom Now’s official NGO status”.

But this case is far from unique, with NGO workers from around the world warning that vulnerable people are being denied representation at the UN by the dysfunctional nature of the NGO committee and its parent body the Economic and Social Council (Ecosoc), which produces policy and makes recommendations on economic, social and environmental issues at the UN.

In order to work at the UN, make speeches and gain access to important officials, organisations need to submit applications for special consultative status to the NGO committee. The UN offers no guidance or time limit on how long it takes for applications to be processed by the committee.

The 19 members of the committee are elected by other states every four years. The committee must always contain a set number of countries from each region; with four from Asian states and five from African states, for example.

Jessica Stern, from the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission which took three years to get special consultative status, told the Guardian that it is “almost impossible” for NGOs to operate in the UN as without this official status. She added that negotiating with the committee can be both costly and time-consuming, meaning that many organisations simply give up.

Stern reported that she felt “intimidated” by the constant questioning from committee members. The group faced 44 questions in three years, as well as two face-to-face interviews.

“It feels like the very purpose of your organisation is being undermined by the UN,” she said.

“States are denying access for NGOs dealing with vulnerable groups. The groups being denied access to the UN are the same communities being denied representation in their home countries.”

For Homosexuelle Initiative Wien (Hosi-Wien), an LGBT organisation based in Austria, it took six years and more than 50 questions to get accredited. The questions focused on the group’s attitude to children, the age of consent for homosexual sex and a series of enquiries about LGBT issues.

“The impression I got was that they wanted to delay and delay,” said Kurt Krickler, the organisation’s executive director.

Freedom Now faced a similar array of questions in the years the organisation fought for UN recognition. Documents shared with the Guardian show that the committee were particularly keen to hear about the group’s activities in Bahrain and China.

Leaked cables: Morocco lobbied UN to turn blind eye to Western Sahara in 'House of Cards' operation Read more

The NGO committee seems designed to “keep human rights organisations like ours out” and “prevent civil society collaboration” said Maran Turner, Freedom Now’s executive director.

“For years, we were blocked by committee members who used every opportunity to harass us through repetitive, inappropriate, and irrelevant questioning,” said Turner.

“There were no legitimate grounds on which to deny our application and based on the questioning we received it was clear that the concerns of committee members stemmed from our human rights advocacy work. This was most noticeable in those member states that had little or no tolerance for domestic civil society.”



Turner added that some questions about country partners and family members of clients “amounted to threats”, and that the cumbersome process distracts from the day-to-day work of organisations like Freedom Now. “The injustice is far greater, however, for isolated organisations that lack the resources to mount a large campaign with the support of an influential committee member,” she said.

Other activists bemoan the way the NGO accreditation process appears to benefit organisations in wealthy western countries with liberal democracies, able to lobby the UN, and harms those in poorer countries.

Muse Tegegne from Felege Guihon International, which supports social and human development in the Horn of Africa, said the organisation was forced to spend “a significant portion” of its meagre budget on flights to New York, as well as hospitality to entertain committee members during a lengthy battle to get UN accreditation from 1999.

For Stern, the hold ups at the NGO committee are more than frustrating, they undermine the work of the UN as a whole. “The dysfunctionality of the NGO committee slows down the work and impact of UN programmes in the developing world,” she said.

A spokesperson from the UN told the Guardian there are “well-established institutionalised processes to promote, encourage and accommodate civil society participation in all major UN events”.

The spokesperson added “UN member states have continually acknowledged the importance of deepening civil society contributions to advancing the values and purposes of the organisation.”

Kerry Kennedy: Morocco has pressured UN to ignore Western Sahara Read more

Offering a robust defence of the NGO committee’s behaviour, the spokesperson said the delays in granting official status would not impact on the representation of minorities at the UN:

“Delays in the review process affect all NGOs and are not restricted to any particular category. Although there have been delays in the review process for some applications, the delays are not restricted to applications that cover freedom of expression and LGBT issues.”

Join our community of development professionals and humanitarians. Follow@GuardianGDP on Twitter.