RE: DEMARCHE ON RESTITUTION FOR TANZANIAN TIP

C O N F I D E N T I A L STATE 007269 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/25/2020 TAGS: KTIP ELAB KCRM KWMN PGOV PHUM PREL SMIG TZ SUBJECT: RE: DEMARCHE ON RESTITUTION FOR TANZANIAN TIP VICTIM REF: STATE 13172 Classified By: AF/E GEETA PASI 1.(C) SUMMARY: In response to a joint Protocol-AF demarche on the U.S. court judgment against Tanzanian diplomat Alan Mzengi for involvement in trafficking in persons, an uncharacteristically defensive Ambassador Sefue argued that USG views on the case are one-sided. He expressed disbelief that the alleged victim was never paid, and recounted his efforts to bring the two parties together. However, in spite of his efforts to dispute the facts of the case, he clearly heard the message that the Government of Tanzania must respond to our request for information and assistance. END SUMMARY. ¶2. (SBU) Chief of Protocol Ambassador Capricia Penavic Marshall, Acting AF/E Director David Reimer, and Deskoff delivered reftel demarche to Tanzanian Ambassador Ombeni Sefue on the U.S. federal court default judgment against Tanzanian diplomat Alan Mzengi and his wife for damages due to trafficking and ill treatment of their domestic worker, Zipora Mazengo, on January 19, 2010. ¶3. (C) After a welcome and introduction to the subject by Ambassador Marshall, AF/E Acting Director delivered the demarche points. In response, Ambassador Sefue attempted to debate the facts of the case. He said that although he has limited personal knowledge of the case, he believes the USG is biased in favor of Mazengo because we lack knowledge of Mzengi's perspective. Citing two examples, he mentioned that Mzengi and Mazengo are family and that, before Mazengo came to the United States, Mzengi paid for her education. He expressed disbelief that she was never paid anything, asking how she could have clothed herself for four years without money. He also recounted efforts to bring Mazengo and Mzengi together at the embassy and his residence for dialogue. He said the efforts ultimately failed because Mazengo's lawyers would not let her go to the embassy. (Note: Mazengo's lawyer offered to meet in a neutral setting, which Mzengi reportedly rejected.) 4.(C) AF/E Acting Director responded that our intention was not to debate the facts of the case but to solicit a response from the GOT to the points raised in the demarche. We reiterated the final point of potential suspension of A-3 and G-5 visa privileges if the GOT was unresponsive to the demarche request. In response to a direct question from AF/E Acting Director on Mzengi's whereabouts, Ambassador Sefue said he thought Mzengi was in Tanzania, but was unsure exactly where. ¶5. (C) COMMENT: Normally amiable and articulate, Ambassador Sefue appeared taken aback and consistently tried to steer the conversation back to a debate of the facts of the case. However, it was clear that he heard and understood the message that the Tanzanian Government cannot ignore our requests for information and assistance. Working closely with Post, the Department will continue to press the GOT on this issue. CLINTON