FY 2010 PEDOPHILIA CERTIFICATION

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 STATE 120274 SENSITIVE C O R R E C T E D C O P Y (SENSITIVE CAPTION ADDED) SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PHUM SOCI SUBJECT: FY 2010 PEDOPHILIA CERTIFICATION REF: A. A. REF:MONTREAL 000031 ¶B. B. REF. USUN NEW YORK 000134 STATE 00120274 001.2 OF 003 ¶1. (U) Summary: This is an action message. In order to comply with legislative requirements, responses are requested no later than December 23, 2009. Please see paragraphs 7-11. ¶2. (U) Section 102 (g) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act P.L. (102-236) requires the Department each year to reduce funds for the UN and its affiliated agencies until the President certifies that no United Nations agency or United Nations affiliated agency grants any official status, accreditation, or recognition to any organization which promotes and condones or seeks the legalization of pedophilia, or which includes as a subsidiary or member any such organization. ¶3. (U) Department requires Mission assistance in complying with the certification requirements for FY ¶2010. Missions should follow the steps outlined below (paras 7-11) and respond to the Department no later than December 23, 2009. End summary. -------------- Background -------------- ¶4. (SBU) In July 1993, the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) granted consultative status (roster) to the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA). During the fall of 1993, USUN learned that the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA),a group that had endorsed pedophilia, was a member of ILGA. USUN contacted ILGA to seek clarification and to make clear U.S. opposition granting direct or indirect ECOSOC consultative status to pro-pedophilia groups. Responding to the ILGA controversy, Senator Jesse Helms introduced an amendment to the biennial State authorization bill in January 1994, to ensure that pro-pedophilia groups are not affiliated with the United Nations. This amendment became Section 102 (g) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for fiscal years 1994 and 1995 (the Act). ¶5. (SBU) ILGA agreed to expel NAMBLA and any other pro-pedophilia groups at its annual meeting in June 1994. ILGA subsequently identified two additional groups (Project Truth/Free Will of the U.S. and Vereniging Martijn of the Netherlands) in its membership as pro-pedophilia. ILGA's full membership voted to expel NAMBLA and the other two groups on June 30, 1994. However, it was subsequently revealed that there was at least one remaining ILGA member that may have condoned or promoted pedophilia. In September 1994, ECOSOC suspended ILGA's consultative status because ILGA could not provide convincing assurance regarding the aims of its members. The Department was then able to make the requisite certification for FY 1994 and FY 1995. After successfully conducting the same reviews as described in paras 7-11, the Department also made the requisite certification for subsequent fiscal years. -------------- Certification Strategy -------------- ¶6. (U) To meet the certification requirement for FY 2010, the Department again must determine that no UN agency or UN-affiliated agency grants any official status, accreditation, or recognition to any organization which promotes or condones, or seeks the legalization of pedophilia, or which includes as a subsidiary or member any such organization. ¶7. (U) Mission action is required for the certification process. For the purpose of this review, the Department has compiled a list of UN bodies that have STATE 00120274 002.2 OF 003 arrangements with Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs),most often in the form of consultative status or implementing partnership: --Berlin: UNV --Geneva: UNCTAD, UNHCR, UNITAR, ILO, WHO, ITU, WIPO, UPU, WMO, UNRISD, UPOV --London: IMO --Madrid: WTO (World Tourism Organization) --Nairobi: UNEP, UNCHS --New York: ECOSOC (including the additional NGOs accredited to the CSD),UNICEF, DPI --UNESCO PARIS: UNESCO --UN Rome: FAO, IFAD, WFP --Santo Domingo: INSTRAW --Tokyo: UN University --UN Vienna: UNDCP, UNIDO, INCB, IAEA If Missions are aware of any other UN agencies or affiliated agencies headquartered in their cities that should be reviewed for such organizations, they should be added to the list. Per reftel A and B, UNCDF, UNDP, UNFPA, UNIFEM and ICAO do not accredit NGOs and have been removed from the certification tasker. ¶8. (U) In order to comply with the Congressional certification requirement, the Department requests Missions to: 1) obtain a list of any NGOs affiliated with organizations headquartered in each city; 2) review the list to determine whether an organization promotes and condones, or seeks the legalization of pedophilia or includes as a subsidiary or member any such organization; 3) report back to the Department on their findings. If an organization no longer has NGOs affiliated with it, Missions should so indicate. ¶9. (U) Missions should carefully review the list of NGOs affiliated with each UN body. NGOs which are unknown to Mission personnel and which cannot otherwise be ruled out by their names or other relevant factors must be examined further. This would include reviewing brochures, constitutions, publications, and other relevant information to determine whether the organization promotes and condones pedophilia or has subsidiaries or members that do. If the NGO in question itself has subsidiary organizations or has organizations as members (e.g., if it is a parent organization or an umbrella group),the subsidiaries or membership roster must also be examined. Missions should produce these lists and any additional information obtained in the context of this review for the Department's files and explain how the review was conducted. ¶10. (U) Department wishes to emphasize that Missions should conduct a thorough but reasonable review. In the absence of any indication that any UN-affiliated NGOs are pro-pedophilia, the President or his delegate will report that the Department has made appropriate inquiries in the field to our posts, which have conducted thorough reviews and responded to the Department. In the event that the review reveals prejudicial information (e.g. that an NGO supports pedophilia),missions are instructed to notify the Department immediately for further guidance. ¶11. (U) Missions should cable Department, slugged for IO/HR by December 23 with the results of their relevant organizations. Mission should also transmit separately a list of the NGOs reviewed to IO/HR (room 5336-Main State). In their cables Missions should cover the following points: --Identify each UN body separately and for each indicate the number of affiliated NGOs. STATE 00120274 003.2 OF 003 --Describe how the review was conducted per para 10. In particular, detail the steps that were taken with respect to unknown NGOs or suspected pro-pedophilia NGOs. Provide a Mission official as a follow-up contact point. --Provide a statement for each UN body for which the Mission is responsible. If warranted the response cable must include the sentence: (UN body) does not grant any official status, accreditation, or recognition to any organization which promotes and condones or seeks the legalization of pedophilia or has subsidiaries or member organizations that do. --Provide information on the total amount of staff time devoted to complying with this request. ¶12. (U) Note, in prior years, Department listed Embassies Paris, Rome and Vienna as action addressees for this process. However, based on feedback from the field, Department has replaced them with UNESCO Paris, UN Rome and UNVIE Vienna as action addressees. ¶13. (U) Comment: Department greatly appreciates Missions, efforts to fulfill this legal requirement. CLINTON