Dear Dr Kek Galibru
Why does LICADHO turn a blind eye to
the removal of thousands of Cambodian children from their families by non
government organizations?
‘Google’ “Licadho orphanage policy”,
for instance, and the most recent LICADHO policy document that comes up come up
is a Jan 2002 paper entitled:
“ABUSES RELATED TO THE INTERNATIONAL ADOPTION PROCESS IN CAMBODIA”.
Google “licadho orphanage tourism”
and “licadho cambodia orphanages”
and the results are meagre:
Cambodia Daily on 8th
April 2013
“…observers of Cambodia’s orphanage
industry say the growing orphanage sector is borne more out of poverty than a
lack of parents…
…With almost every third Cambodian still
living below the poverty line, parents struggling to survive in rural areas are
easily persuaded into giving their offspring to an orphanage in the city that
promises to provide food and education.
Chao Leak Vanna, provincial coordinator
for Licadho, said that fraud, mismanagement and abuse are common inside
orphanages….running an orphanage, Ms. Leak Vanna said, has become a lucrative
business due to the high number of Western tourists wanting to add an element
of altruism to their holiday.
“In general, it’s a good business model
and the founders can make a fortune with it,” she said, adding that in some
scenarios she has even seen the director’s own children posing as orphans.”
If “fraud,
mismanagement and abuse are common inside orphanages” why does LICADHO
remain silent about such abuses in late 2016?
A more recent google
result (Global Post, 21st July 2014) reads as follows:
“More
than 9,000 children living in orphanages have at least one remaining parent.
By
advertising them as orphans and showcasing their plight, however, good money is
to be made. In Cambodia, orphanages can be lucrative, multi-million dollar
businesses, according to major rights group Licadho and other Cambodian rights
watchdogs.”
If there are indeed
9,000 children living in orphanages who have at least one living parent, why
does LICADHO have no policy regarding the removal of children from their
families by NGOs? Is not such removal a human rights abuse?
And, as far as I can
tell, LICADHO also has no policy regarding ‘orphanage tourism’? Why not? Does
LICADHO approve of ‘orphanage tourism’
or is it opposed?
If LICADHO is,
indeed, a ‘watchdog’, the dog is asleep and not doing its job when it comes to
the children of impoverished families who are pawns in NGO money-raising scams.
Or is there a policy
and I have simply been unable to find it online? If this be the case could you
please direct me to it? And please direct me also to any recent statements from
LICADHO that I might have missed in which Cambodia’s pre-eminent human rights
NGO actually advocates the rights of children to live with their families; for
disadvantaged children to be assisted in a family and community context?
That you have clearly
been aware of this problem is to be found in a 9th
March 2007 Phnom Penh Post article:
“According to activists and
NGOs, "orphanage tourism" is a growth industry.
Tour guides, tuk-tuk
drivers and motodups now regularly include "orphanage tours" in their
pitch to visitors, and many take a subsequent cut for their troubles.
At the orphanages, the
visitors are greeted by children who dance and sing, while the managers appeal
for donations to help fund the orphans' care.
But rights groups and
protection agencies are becoming increasingly critical of the poor regulation
and monitoring of orphanages, with those that actively solicit tourists of
greatest concern.
"This kind of
'orphanage tourism' raises many questions," Kek Galabru,
founder and director of
rights NGO Licadho told the Post. "Are visitors properly screened and
supervised to ensure the safety of the children? What financial accountability is
there to guarantee that donations actually go toward the care of the children? How
can an orphanage which relies on day-to-day donations possibly ensure
long-term, good quality care of children?"
Whilst LICADHO pulls no punches in
criticizing human and legal rights abuses practiced by the Cambodian
government, why does LICADHO have so little to say about human and legal rights
abuses practiced by non government organizations? Why does LICADHO not actually
do something to prevent such abuses?
A few years ago you tried, Dr
Gaibru, to help me secure the release of two young girls illegally removed from
their family by Citipointe Church’s SHE Rescue Home. This removal and illegal
detention received the tacit approval of Naly Pilorge, of Helen Sworn (Chab
Dai) and Geoff Armstrong, of the Global Development Group. (This is all well
documented).
I am thankful for the assistance you
provided me personally and it is a pity that you, las for myself at the time,
were unable to persuade the SHE Rescue Home to give up the girls in illegal
detention. Their release was achieved a couple of years later when Citipointe
Church, having arranged for me to be tried in absentia for having “threatened
to dishonor” the church, eventually gave up their fight and, one afternoon,
simply dumped the girls back with their family – with a bag of rice and two
second hand bicycles. No reintegration
program, no explanation, no offer of assistance. Nothing. After having held the
girls for six years illegally!
In a country in which there were
rule of law, in a country in which judges, the judiciary, were not for sale,
Pastor Leigh Ramsey would have faced kidnapping charges and be liable for a
jail sentence. In Cambodia, however, the kidnapping of children is condoned and
made possible by the silence of so many who should speak out, including
LICADHO.
There were no consequences for
Citipointe as a result of breaking Cambodian law and the church continues to
remove girls from their families with impunity. As you know, if you have money,
whether you be a politician, a businessman or an NGO, you can do as you please
in Cambodia and no-one will stop you or even speak out against you in public.
I contend that Scott Neeson’s
Cambodian Children’s Fund has likewise broken Cambodian law in a variety of
ways – all well documented on my blog. Most of these breaches of the human and
legal rights of Cambodian’s, most of Neeson’s scams, could be independently
confirmed by anyone who spent an hour or two doing some internet research and
asking a few questions of Scott Neeson.
Other CCF breaches of the human and
legal rights of parents and children could be confirmed by anyone who bothered
to speak with children and parents who have been on the receiving end of CCF
‘assistance’. I have invited LICADHO (and AD HOC) along with journalists from
both the Phnom Penh Post and Cambodia Daily to meet some of these families and
find out for themselves. These offers have been ignored and I wonder why?
Is Scott Neeson untouchable because
be is part-owner of the Phnom Penh Post, well connected politically and/or a
major contributor to LICADHO? Neeson has the money to buy whatever and whoever
he pleases and I can’t help but wonder if, in some way, he has bought the
silence of LICADHO?
Are not the human rights of
(approximately) 9,000 children removed from their families, Dr Galibru, of sufficient importance to LICADHO to at lest
warrant speaking with their families?
cheers
Licadho is busy trying to trigger the Regime Change in Cambodia. No matter what the Cambodian Gov. does it is always in the center of Licadho's criticism. Most laughable is the Licadho attempt to politicize the Capitol Bus Driver Demonstrations when the Bus Company decided to fire some 50 Bus Drivers.
ReplyDeleteAnyone travelling with this Bus Company can confirm that the Bus Drivers often took liberties (like picking up passengers on route and pocketing the cash) which as a breach of their contract and company policy. When the former Bus Drivers held repeated Demonstrations at the Capitol Bus Station Headquarter at O'Roussey Market and clashed with Tuk Tuk Drivers who saw their Customer Base dwindle, leaving them with no income LICADHO was quick to jump onto the occasion and publish/edited video footage of the Feb.6, 2016 clash claiming human rights violations by the Cambodian Gov.
The fact is that foreign funded Unionists promised the former Bus Drivers that Capitol Bus could never replace 50 Bus Drivers overnight and that therefore their fight to found a Union was a guarantee for higher wages, more time off etc. Unfortunately Capitol DID replace the 50 Bus Drivers over night and the former Bus Drivers now find themselves unemployable throughout the entire country. No other Bus Company will ever employ them.
So in essence Licadho took the opportunity to politicize the Bus Drivers Demos but did very little to look at the consequences of this struggle for the average Khmer Citizen. Capitol has operated successfully since the end of the Khmer Rouge Era. They offer budget prices, transport a massive amount of goods and luggage to 23 destinations, several times a day with a lot more Busses over the Holidays. When Licadho claims to protect Human Rights where does this leave my fellow, low income Khmer Citizens who in the event of the successful re-employment of the renegade Bus Drivers (lured in a trap by some unscrupulous foreign funded Unionist) would have had to pay double the fare of before ? Who would transport goods and even letters/documents (and thereby providing a postal service that does not exist in Cambodia) with the service and pricing (AND social awareness) that Capitol does ? This all is of no concern to Licadho.
How will NGO's ever repay the children, the families or Cambodia for the damage that they do and the creation of this lost generation?
ReplyDeleteThere’s a reason why we don’t have orphanages like that in the west anymore. They brutalise and cause damage to children in so many unimaginable ways, damage that sustains throughout their adult lives and that’s why orphanages shouldn’t be in the developing world either. "
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing, nice post! Post really provice useful information!
ReplyDeleteGiaonhan247 chuyên dịch vụ mua hàng mỹ từ dịch vụ order hàng mỹ hay nhận mua nước hoa pháp từ website nổi tiếng hàng đầu nước Mỹ mua hàng ebay ship về VN uy tín, giá rẻ.