SEARCH C-FAM
Friday Fax UN Blog
Facebook 
Twitter
International Tax Proposed to Aid MDG Funding
9/3/2010 01:00 PM
UNFPA Executive Director Departs
9/1/2010 09:36 AM
"The Future of the European Union"
9/1/2010 08:51 AM
Independent Audit Panel Finds Flaws in UN Climate Reports
8/31/2010 10:56 AM
Conscientious Objection Objected to by European Politicians
8/31/2010 06:56 AM
Volume 4, Number 5
January 18, 2001
Plans for Excluding Pro-Lifers at Child Summit Hatched at Beijing+5
(NEW YORK - C-FAM) Pro-lifers have charged that UNICEF has taken two actions to not only limit participation of pro-life non-governmental organizations (NGOs) but also to ensure UNICEF's allies can flood the upcoming ten-year review of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. UNICEF first moved to limit the number of participants to no more than four per NGO. Even more controversial, UNICEF also decided to allow two other categories of NGOs, those that are called "UNICEF NGOs" and other NGOs that have a "special relationship" with UNICEF. Pro-life groups report that one such "UNICEF NGO" has been allowed to accredit 40 people. This same NGO is also screening participants to ensure they are pro-abortion.
UNICEF asserts NGO participation has been restricted because of the severely limited NGO seating in UN conference rooms, which can seat perhaps 200. What UNICEF officials do not say is that most NGO participants show little desire to follow the frequently tedious negotiating sessions of the governmental delegations, preferring instead to attend more exciting NGO meetings and panel discussions held in other parts of the building. Governmental negotiating sessions, the essential purpose of UN conferences, are frequently almost completely empty of NGO representatives. The conference room may be packed on the opening day of the session, but then most NGO representatives drift away.
UN governmental negotiating sessions move with the speed of ancient glaciers. Governmental negotiators move through the draft document word by word and negotiators get bogged down in the minutiae of language and even punctuation. [At Cairo+5 two years ago negotiators held a lengthy debate over the use of a semi-colon]. NGO meetings, on the other hand, take on the feel of political rallies which inexperienced NGO participants find more fun. There is also the almost overpowering allure of New York City to which NGO participants drift for sightseeing and shopping.
Radical NGOs and UN bureaucrats were shocked at what they saw as the large numbers of pro-life participants at the Beijing+5 prepcom last spring. Over a two-week period only twelve pro-life NGOs accredited roughly 300 people. More than two hundred pro-abortion NGOs accredited a few thousand people for the same meeting. The complaint of radical NGOs and UN bureaucrats was that pro-life NGOs accredited large numbers through only a few NGOs, asserting they had broke a rule that NGOs should accredit only a few people. Officials at the UN Economic and Social Council insist there is no such rule.
Even though vastly outnumbered at Beijing+5, pro-lifers won sweeping victories, thwarting radical proposals to expand abortion and special rights for homosexuals. At that time radical NGOs and UN bureaucrats spoke openly of the need to limit participation of pro-life NGOs. During a meeting of the powerful Women's Caucus at Beijng+5 one participant said "They (pro-lifers) should not be allowed to be here." Another said, "They should be stopped." One woman said, "I am a lesbian and this has been our only safe place and now they have destroyed it." Racial NGOs also circulated a "hit-list" of pro-life groups at the meeting.
