Ms
Sam Mostyn
President
Australian Council for
International Development
25th Feb. 2014
Dear Ms Mostyn
Geoff Armstrong’s letter to me of 24th
Feb makes it apparent that the Global Development Group is in possession of the
documents that Citipointe believes has given the church the right to retain
custody of Rosa and Chita this past five years against the express wishes of
their parents – Chanti and Chhork.
Chanti and Chhork and I, as their advocate, have
been asking to be provided with copies of these documents for five years. Both
Citipointe and the Ministry of Social Affairs have refused to provide them. Now
we know that GDG has copies; that the Global Development Group is satisfied
that the docments do, indeed, give Citipointe the right to act they have.
I have asked Geoff Armstrong, in my letter of
earlier in the day, to provide Chanti
and Chhork with copies of these contracts or agreements. The dismissive tone of
Geoff’s letter to me, his total lack of interest in having any representative
of GDG meet and speak with Chanti and Chhork, suggests that he will not do so. I would be
delighted to be proven wrong in this. Perhaps Geoff will, upon reflection,
realize that of course Chanti and Chhork have a right to their own copies of
these documents!
In the event that Geoff Armstrong, on behalf the
Global Development Group, does not believe that the parents of children removed
by Citipointe church have a right to be provided with such documents, the
question then is:
“Does the Australian Council for
International Development believe that parents whose children have been removed
by an NGO have a right to be given copies of any agreements of contracts the
NGO, funded by Australian tax-deductible dollars, has entered into with a
government department in the country in which such a removal has occurred?”
This question is not specifically related to Chanti
and Chhork but is a general one. It goes to the heart of ACFID’s Code of
Conduct and has relevance to every recipient of aid from an Australian-based
NGO that has signed on to the ACFID Code of Conduct? Could you please provide
me with an answer to this question?
Whilst the question is a general one, it is
relevant to whether or not Chanti and Chhork decide to go ahead and make a
formal complaint to ACFID. If ACFID does not request of the Global Development
Group that it provide copies of the documents GDG has in its possession, how
can ACFID make an informed and independent decision regarding the legality or
otherwise of Citipointe church’s actions in 2008? How can ACFID ever make an
informed and decision regarding the legality of any NGO actions anywhere in the
world if the NGO is under no obligation to provide evidence of the legality of
its actions?
best wishes
James Ricketson
No comments:
Post a Comment