Monday, March 3, 2014

# 27 Twelfth letter to members of the Global Development Group board, dated 3rd march 2014


James Ricketson

Phnom Penh
015 611 478; 017 898 361

Directors of the Global Development Group Board
Unit 6, 734 Underwood Road
Rochedale, QLD 4123                                                                                   

3rd  March 2014

Dear    David James Pearson, Geoffrey Winston Armstrong
Ofelia (fe) Luscombe, Alan Benson, David Robertson

Today I conducted an interview with ‘Srey Pal’, whom I mentioned to you in a recent letter. I decided to interview  Srey Pal and her brother ‘Seny’ separately to minimize the possibility that they might influence each other with their answers. Seny was not present for my interview with Srey Pal.

I videotaped the interview. In the first part of it I got Srey Pal to tell me the whole story uninterrupted in Khmer. I then got what she had said translated and conducted the rest of the interview in English and Khmer. I went over key parts of the story she told me three and four times to make sure that nothing had been lost in translation. Srey Pal’s story, in brief, is very similar to the one she told me in broken English last week. It is this:

Srey Pal is the oldest daughter in a very poor family. For reasons that are not relevant to this story, she became the family’s primary breadwinner.  It was  struggle for her to feed, clothe and accommodate her younger siblings.

Srey Pal was approached by a Khmer woman whom she knew worked for an NGO  that I know, from the GDG website, to be funded by the Global Development Group. The Khmer woman told her that if she and her younger brother, Seny, were to place their thumb prints on a document accusing a foreigner of taking Seny to his hotel room for sex, the bribe solicited by the police ($5,000) would be split between the police and Seny and Srey Pal. In other words, Seny and Srey Pal would make $2,500 if they were to falsely implicate a foreigner in having sex with Seny. Both Seny and Srey Pal refused to sign the document.

The reason why the Khmer woman had approached Seny and Srey Pal with this proposition was that Seny had befriended this particular foreigner, who had given Seny a mobile phone. Whoever it was that was keeping an eye on this particular foreigner presumed that his motives were not pure and, it seems, presumed that Seny had agreed to have sex with this man in exchange for a mobile phone. It was their presumption that Seny had had sex with him that led the police and the Khmer woman from the GDG funded NGO to make the offer they did. When Seny denied having sex with the man the police took him into custody and delivered him to the NGO funded by the Global Development Group.  A doctor working for this NGO examined Seny and claimed that there was no evidence that he had had sex with the foreigner. And Seny continued to deny that he had.

Despite the lack of evidence and Seny’s denial, the Khmer woman continued to put pressure on Seny and his sister, Srey Pal, to sign the document with their thumb print and earn themselves $2,500. This was the equivalent of around two years earnings for Seny and Srey Pal combined. They  had younger siblings to take care of and the temptation to place their thumb print on the document was great.

Eventually, Seny did sign the document with his thumb print – not because he had had sex with the foreigner but because he and his family, without a mum and dad capable of earning money at the time, could not afford to eat or to pay rent. Seny signed with his thumb print. The foreigner is now in jail. I cannot speculate on the foreigners guilt or innocence of crimes against other children but, in the case of Seny, both he and his sister stick to their story that he did not have sex with Seny.

After the foreigner was arrested, Seny, one of only two bread-winners for the family, was taken into custody by the Global Development Group funded NGO. What authority this NGO had to take one of the only two bread-winners for the family into custody I do not know and was not able to find out from Srey Pal I do, however, know that Seny’s 7 year old younger sister had to step into his shoes and become one of the family’s primary bread-winners and so was (and continues to be) exposed to the dangers that any 7 year old child selling books  is to tourist is exposed to.

In rescuing Seny from ‘the street’, the Global Development Group-funded NGO, had made it necessary for his 7 year old sister to work under conditions that forced her to be confronted by the same dangers, and they are very real, that the NGO had ‘rescued’ Seny from. This is the reality, on the ground, that well-meaning but incompetent NGOs intent on ‘rescuing’ children are all too often blissfully unaware of.

With what no doubt were the best of intentions, this particular NGO ‘rescued’ Seny – thus depriving the family with one of its two primary bread-winners. And all thanks to an NGO funded by the Global Development Group. Big hearted Australians who have read the Global Development Group’s glossy brochures, believe that they are ‘making a difference’; that they are helping materially  poor Cambodian families (and other such materially poor families elsewhere in the world) when in fact they are contributing to the breakup of families  and  to  the alienation of these children from their families, from their communities, from their religion and their culture. With the best intentions in the world, and with ‘best intentions’ underwritten by the tax-deductible status of their financial contributions to the Global Development Group, generous Australians are enabling, through their donations, the very human rights abuses that I have outlined in this and other blog entries.

Chanti and Chhork will be in Phnom Penh again tomorrow if any one of your three Global Development group staff based in Phnom Penh are interested in meeting with them.  I would also be quite happy to screen for a Khmer-speaking member of GDG’s Cambodia-based staff the interview I filmed with ‘Srey Pal.’

Finally, curious as I am to find out how it is that Geoff Armstrong knew two days prior to its happening that I was to be charged with ‘hindering’, I have written the following to the Phnom Phnom court. I will have it translated in the morning and deliver it personally by hand.

“Could you please explain to me how it is that Geoff Armstrong, Executive Director of the Global Development Group, an Australian NGO that provides funds to Citipointe church’s ‘SHE Rescue Home’, knew on 24th Feb that I was to be charged with ‘hindering’, when the court document given to me is dated 26th Feb?”

best wishes

James Ricketson

No comments:

Post a Comment