Prime Minister Julia Gillard's 'forced adoption' speech

Two Australian Prime Ministers have now apologised for the enormous emotional and psychological damage caused by the removal of Aboriginal children from their families and from 'forced adoption'. These discredited forms of social engineering have been exported Cambodia and given rise to a thriving industry for NGOs in the business of 'rescuing' poor children from their families and, all too often, forcing them to become Christians - only to be turfed back on the street when they turn 18 and are no longer the kind of cute kids that open the hearts and wallets of sponsors and donors.

LICADHO is the leading human rights organisation in Cambodia. It is headed up by Naly Pilorge. Chab Dai is a coalition of around 50 Christian NGOs and is headed up by Helen Sworn. Citipointe is a member of the Chab Dai coalition.

This blog entry was inspired by Prime Minister Julia Gillard's apology on Friday 22nd March to all those who suffered as a result of 'forced adoption' last century in Australia 

Dear Naly and Helen

You have ignored my letter to you of 13^th March:

http://citipointechurch.blogspot.in/2013/03/for-naly-pilorge-licadho-and-helen.html

You have also chosen to ignore my “13 Questions for Chab Dai and LICADHO” published on 17^th March:

http://citipointechurch.blogspot.in/2013/03/13-questions-for-chab-dai-and-licadho.html

The quotes below, from a speech delivered yesterday by Prime Minister Julian Gillard to the Australian parliament, resonate with the realities faced by the parents and children of poor families in Cambodia today:

Today, this Parliament, on behalf of the Australian people, takes responsibility and apologises for the policies and practices that forced the separation of mothers from their babies, which created a lifelong legacy of pain and suffering.

We acknowledge the profound effects of these policies and practices on fathers.

And we recognise the hurt these actions caused to brothers and sisters, grandparents, partners and extended family members.

We deplore the shameful practices that denied you, the mothers, your fundamental rights and responsibilities to love and care for your children.

This is in reference to the removal of babies from their parents care last century! In this century, in March 2013, NGOs such as Citipointe, through the church’s ‘shameful practices’, creates a ‘lifelong legacy of pain and suffering’ for parents such as Chanti and Chhork and ‘adopted’ (stolen) girls such as Rosa and Chita, in March 2013!

You were not legally or socially acknowledged as their mothers. And you were yourselves deprived of care and support.

Chanti’s rights as a mother have been abrogated by Citipointe church, with the tacit approval of Chab Dai and LICADHO – through the silence of both organizations during the past close to five years. To add insult to injury, Citipointe (again with full knowledge of Chab Dai and LICADHO) has deprived Chanti of any “care and support.”

To you, the mothers who were betrayed by a system that gave you no choice and subjected you to manipulation, mistreatment and malpractice, we apologise.

Chanti was manipulated by Citipointe in mid 2008 into placing her thumb print on a document that she believed constituted an agreement between herself and LICADHO for her daughters to be provided with temporary care until hers and Chhork’s financial crisis had passed. Upon having her daughters stolen from her by Citipointe (with full knowledge of Chab Dai and LICADHO) she was “betrayed by a system that gave (her) no choice.”

We say sorry to you, the mothers who were denied knowledge of your rights, which meant you could not provide informed consent. You were given false assurances. You were forced to endure the coercion and brutality of practices that were unethical, dishonest and in many cases illegal.

In being presented with a document that she could not read and which was explained to her in false terms, Chanti never had the opportunity to give her “informed consent”. Chanti was given “false assurances” by Citipointe church and it seems, on the basis of the documents that I have at my disposal, that the church’s removal of Rosa and Chita was, for a period of 15 months, illegal under Cambodian law.

Naly, Helen, you are both women and perhaps mothers. Can’t you see that the actions that Prime Minister Julia Gillard is deploring on behalf of Australians, which took place many decades ago, are precisely the actions that NGOs such as Citipointe practice today? And Citipointe is not the only NGO within the Chab Dai coalition that practices this forced ‘adoption’. In some ways, the forced ‘adoption’ by NGOs working in Cambhodia is worse because the children adopted are then abandoned by the NGOs when they turn 18 or 19.

We know you have suffered enduring effects from these practices forced upon you by others. For the loss, the grief, the disempowerment, the stigmatisation and the guilt, we say sorry.

To each of you who were adopted or removed…and who were denied the opportunity to grow up with your family and community of origin and to connect with your culture, we say sorry.

Prime Minister Gillard’s speech goes on in this manner for much too long to quote here in full but the full text can be found online. I will end with one last quote:

We resolve, as a nation, to do all in our power to make sure these practices are never repeated. In facing future challenges, we will remember the lessons of family separation. Our focus will be on protecting the fundamental rights of children and on the importance of the child's right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.

Prime Minister Gillard may well have resolved that such practices are never repeated in Australia but both Chab Dai and LICADHO are turning a blind eye to such practices as they occur on a daily basis in Cambodia.

The time has come for Chab Dai and LICADHO to state publicly that both organizations deplore the practices Prime Minister Gillard is referring to. And it is time for the Cambodidan government to close down those ‘orphanages’ and other such NGOS who engage in such practices.

for Claudia Karvan, Rachel Perkins and Richard Keddie

Dear Claudia, Rachel and Richard

Your blithe banning of myself, a fellow filmmaker, from making development applications to Screen Australia, on the basis of what you know to be a lie, has not prevented me from continuing to work on CHANTI'S WORLD. This letter, to Foreign Minister Bob Carr, speaks for itself of where I am at with this project - a DVD of the promo of which you and your fellow board members have decreed would place members of Screen Australia's staff at risk were they to view it:

Senator, the Hon Bob Carr
Foreign Minister
R.G. Casey Building
John McEwan Crescent
Barton
ACT 0221 Australia

11th March 2013

Dear Senator Carr

This letter concerns a poor Cambodian family whose two eldest daughters were 'stolen' by an Australian-run NGO in Phnom Penh close to five years ago. The NGO, Citipointe church, based in Brisbane, refuses to return the girls - Rosa, aged 11 and Chita, aged 10 - to their family's care, in contravention of UNICEF'S 'Convention on the Rights of the Child') and despite multiple requests by the parents (Yem Chanthy and Both Chhork) that the church do so.

I have attempted, without success, to raise this matter with Australia's Ambassador to Cambodia, Penny Richards, in five letters - hand delivered by myself to the Australian Embassy in Phnom Penh, on 20th, 22nd, 26th, 28th Feb and 4th March. Ambassador Richards has not acknowledged receipt of any of my letters. It is for this reason that I am writing to you - on the hope that, as Foreign Minister, you will either be able to provide me with answers to my questions and those of Yem Chanthy (whom I know as Chanti) or inform me that the illegal removal of Chanti's children from their family in 2008 by an Australian-based NGO is not a matter in which the Department of Foreign Affairs can intervene or take an interest.

The first of my letters to Ambassador Richards can be found at: 

http://citipointechurch.blogspot.com/2013/02/to-australian-ambassador-penny-richards.html

My subsequent letters to Ms Richards can also be found on my blog, along with my letters to various other parties whom I believe should have an interest in the right of Rosa and Chita (to quote the Convention on the Rights of the Child) "to participate fully in family, cultural and social life." 

On my blog can also be found my response to Citipointe's Pastor Mulheran's not-so-thinly veiled threats to have me 'forcibly removed', arrested, jailed and banned from coming to Cambodia. Having filmed the illegal removal of the community living adjacent to the (then) new Australian Embassy I have had some first had experience of what 'forcible' means in a Cambodian context Forcible removals of Cambodians from their homes and land is an almost daily occurrence in Cambodia. That Pastor Mulheran believes that he can pick up the phone and request of the relevant Cambodian Government Minister that I be 'forcibly removed' and put in jail speaks volumes of Citipointe's modus operandi and the way in which the concept of 'civil society' manifests itself in Cambodia. The rich and powerful of all nationalities can break the law with impunity in Cambodia. 

My several attempts to raise the matter of the illegal removal of Yem Chanthy's daughters with the previous Australian Ambassador to Cambodia (along with the impending illegal removal of the Australian Embassy's neighbours) were ignored. When I refused to accept silence as an appropriate response, my subsequent letters and emails were responded to by DFAT spin doctors who answered none of my questions but merely directed me to the DFAT website. I made a video of this illegal eviction - carried out in the total absence of even the mildest protest from the Australian Embassy until five hours before the eviction itself. My video (Losing Ground - Group 78 Eviction - Part 1) can be found at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmyWzWnc-SQ

I have enclosed a photocopy of a letter written by the Commune Chief of the village in which (Yem Chanthy and Both Chhork) own a home. It speaks for itself of the determination of Chanti and Chhork to have their daughters returned to them – five years after their illegal removal, and to be supplied with evidence of the legality of Citipointe church’s actions. A translation of the letter to Ith Sam Heng, Cambodia’s Minister of Social Affairs, reads as follows:

I am writing on behalf of Yem Chanthy and her husband Both Chhork and their two daughters – Rosa and Chita.

Rosa and Chita live in Citipointe church’s She Rescue Home in Phnom Penh. Yem Chanthy and Both Chhork have asked Citipointe church many times in the past four years to return their daughters to their care. They are not victims of Human Trafficking. They went to stay with the She Rescue Home in 2008 when Yem Chanthy and Both Chhork had financial difficulties and were very poor. In Nov 2008 they were not poor. They had two businesses and were earning money but Citipointe church refused to return Yem Chanthy and Both Chhork’s daughters.

Yem Chanthy and Both Chhork now own a house in Prey Veng and a tuk tuk and can I can afford to take care of all of their children. I request on their behalf that Rosa and Chita be released back into the custody of their parents.

Could you please also provide me with copies of the contracts that Citipointe church made with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Social Affairs that allowed the church to hold Rosa and Chita this long period of time. I have requested copies of these contracts but Citipointe church as refused to supply them.

Thank you Minister Ith Sam Heng.

Since Nov 2008 Citipointe  has refused to provide the parents of Rosa and Chita (Chanti and Chhork) with copies  of any contract or other agreement the church has entered into with the Ministries of Foreign or Social Affairs that give Citipointe the right to retain custody of the girls and to ignore the frequent requests of the parents that they be returned to the care of the family. Chanti and Chhork have no idea why their children were forcibly removed by an Australian church; why, close to five years later, they remain in the care of an Australian-based Christian NGO or what they must do to have their children returned to the family.

The Cambodian Ministry of Social Affairs likewise refuses to provide Chanti and Chhork with a reason why the girls were removed from their care, with copies of any contractual agreements the Ministry has entered into with Citipointe church or any information at all regarding what then parents must do to get Rosa and Chita back.

It would seem, from Pastor Mulheran’s 21st Feb letter to myself (in which he threatens to have me ‘forcibly removed’) that some part of the justification for not returning Rosa and Chita to the care of their parents (or perhaps the entire justification) resides in Rosa and Chits being ‘deemed’ by the church and the Ministry of Social Affairs to be victims of Human Trafficking. Citipointe knows, as does the Ministry of Social Affairs, that the girls were not and never have been victims of Human Trafficking. Indeed, it is only recently that Citipointe has introduced the ‘Human Trafficking’ element to the church’s seemingly never-ending reasons not to release Rosa and Chita back into the care of their family. That Citipointe church can simply wave its magic wand and turn two girls into ‘victims of Human Trafficking’ speaks for itself of the church’s clutching at straws to justify its actions.

It is telling that neither Citipointe church nor a representative of the Ministry of Social Affairs has visited the villages of either Chanti’s or Chhork’s families (20 minutes part in Prey Veng province) to talk with their respective Commune Chiefs. It is telling also that no representative of the Ministry of Social Affairs has ever visited the current home of Chanti and  Chhork (or any of their previous homes this past five years) to make an assessment regarding the suitability of the living conditions for Rosa and Chita. As my documentary reveals the family home is far superior in every respect to the homes that 80% of Cambodians live in.

Chanti and Chhork now own a tuk tuk (a three wheeled taxi) and have a regular (if modest) income. Chanti and her mother Vanna supplement the family income with jobs that involve making and selling artifacts for tourists. And the family is the owner of a home in the village of Chhork’s family in Prey Veng – a village in which many members of Chhork’s extended family live. (Chhork is one of 15 brothers and sisters). Twenty minutes up the road is the village in which Chanti’s mother Vanna’s extended family lives. Again, it is telling that in the close to five years that Rosa and Chita have been living in the She Rescue Home, Citipointe has refused every request made by Chanti and Chhork that the girls be able to visit their two extended families in Prey Veng – a mere two hour drive from Phnom Penh – or to take part in any Buddhist or family celebrations.

By Cambodian standards Chanti and Chhork’s family could now be characterized as lower middle class – struggling to keep their heads above water financially, as is the case for the bulk of Cambodian families. And yet Citipointe church refuses to return the two eldest daughters of the family to the care of the family. A question:

Do you, as Foreign Minister, have the moral authority to request that Citipointe church present Chanti, Chhork and DFAT with copies of any and all contracts or agreements that give the church the legal right to hold Rosa and Chita against the wishes of their parents?

On 13th Feb 2008, ten Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said the following in his apology speech to the ‘Stolen Generations’ of Australian Aboriginals.

We reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those who were stolen generations - this blemished chapter in our nation's history. The time has now come for the nation to turn a new page in Australia's history by righting the wrongs of the past and so moving forward with confidence to the future. We apologise for the laws and policies of successive parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians. We apologise especially for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country. For the pain, suffering and hurt of these stolen generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry. To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry.”

In ten or twenty years time will the then Prime Minister of Australia be issuing a similar apology to the children and parents of Cambodian families broken up by NGOs such as Citipointe’s ‘She Rescue Home’? Why, in 2013, are Australian NGOs able to export the thoroughly discredited form of social engineering that led to the ‘Stolen Generation’ apology to third world countries – in some cases whilst in receipt of funding from AusAID? Again I ask, do you as Foreign Minister have the moral authority to at least publicly denounce this practice?

In Nov 2012, whilst in Phnom Penh, Prime Minister Julia Gillard announced that Australia would  (I am quoting a press release here):

“…fund a $50 million Asia-Asia Program to combat Trafficking in

Persons, which will reduce trafficking in persons by strengthening

criminal justice systems in Cambodia….Investigators and prosecutors

will be supported to increase convictions and reduce opportunities for

trafficking, while victims of trafficking will be supported through

the criminal justice system. Trafficking in persons is a global issue

that ruins the lives of its victims and profoundly affects their

families and communities…”

Whilst trafficking takes many forms, it is the headline-grabbing manifestations that capture the attention of the media – particularly young girls who have been trafficked for the purposes of sexual exploitation. There are less headline grabbing forms of trafficking, however – such as the one that Chanti and her daughters Rosa and Chita have fallen victim to. I need not recount, in detail, how it was that Citipointe church used a combination of bribes, deceit and outright lies to acquire custody of Rosa and Chita. This is well documented in my letters to Ambassador Richards and documented in full on my blog:

http://citipointechurch.blogspot.com/

There is a thriving orphanage industry in Cambodia – not because there is a glut of orphans (there isn’t) but because running an orphanage or a rescue centre for victims of Human Trafficking is a great draw card for non government organizations wishing to cajole members of the donor pubic into opening their hearts and wallets. The problem is, in Cambodia in 2013, that roughly 75% of orphans living in orphanages are not orphans! They have at least one living parent but he or she is poor.  Likewise, only 16 % of the girls living in the She Rescue Home are (by church’s own admission) actual victims of Human Trafficking. However, by a verbal sleight of hand the church can (and does) present the 84% that are not victims of Human Trafficking as being victims of Human Trafficking. This is very effective fund-raising ploy but a totally dishonest one.

Consider the following quote from Cambodia’s:

Law on Suppression of Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation

Article 8:Definition of Unlawful Removal

The act of unlawful removal in this act shall mean to:

1)      Remove a person from his/her current place of residence to a place under the actor’s or a third persons control by means of force, threat, deception, abuse of power or enticement, or

2)      Without legal authority or any other legal justification to do so to take a minor person under general custody or curatoship or legal custody away from the legal custody of the parents, care taker or guardian.

Article 9: Unlawful removal, inter alia, of Minor

A person who unlawfully removes a minor or a person under general custody or curatorship or legal custody shall be punished with imprisonment for 2 to 5 years.

The italics are mine and are a neat summary of the way in which Chanti and Chhork’s daughters, Rosa and Chita, were removed from their care.

I would like to finish with a quote from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child,  to which Australia is a signatory:

Built on varied legal systems and cultural traditions, the Convention is a universally agreed set of non-negotiable standards and obligations. These basic standards—also called human rights—set minimum entitlements and freedoms that should be respected by governments…. It spells out the basic human rights that children everywhere have: the right to survival; to develop to the fullest; to protection from harmful influences, abuse and exploitation; and to participate fully in family, cultural and social life.

Rosa and Chita have been denied, by Citipointe church, the right “to participate fully in family, cultural and social life”. They have been denied to right to participate in any way at all in family, cultural and social life – other, that is, than a few hours of supervised visits each month – amounting to around 24 hours per annum.

yours sincerely

James Ricketson

Threatened with arrest and imprisonment in Phnom Penh

I am in Phnom Penh now, still working on CHANTI'S WORLD - the documentary whose unfortunate history with Screen Australia has led to my being banned! After being arrested twice in the foyer of Screen Australia for doing nothing other than sitting there waiting to get answers to questions, I am again due to be arrested soon if Citipointe church follows thorough with its scarily veiled threats.

“Using the law is the last thing that we want to see happen, because for you to be convicted of a crime and serve a sentence may mean that you will never have the opportunity to re-enter Cambodia again.”

So writes Pastor Mulheran in Citipointe church’s latest attempt to intimidate me into abandoning CHANTI’S WORLD. It is Citipointe church that has ‘stolen’ the two eldest daughters of Chanti – the now 28 year old ‘star’ of my documentary.

“You either cease all aspects of production of the documentary film or remove all content which would identify the mother and the girls who are or were all child victims.”

What Pastor Mulheran suggests in his long letter to me is that it is OK for me to make CHANTI’S WORLD as long as I conceal the identity of Chanti and her daughters Rosa and Chita on the grounds that they are the victims of Human Trafficking. The fact that Rosa and Chita are not victims of Human Trafficking (and nor is Chanti) is no obstacle to Pastor Mulheran.

“Both the girls are deemed by Cambodian law to be victims of Human Trafficking. Irrespective of your opinion or the opinion of others, Cambodian law and the Cambodian Government deem the girls to be victims of Human Trafficking.”

In the world inhabited by Pastor Mulheran (Alice in Wonderland and Orwellian in an equal mix) Rosa and Chita don’t need to be actual victims of Human Trafficking. What is important is that they are ‘deemed’ to be. And why or how can they be so ‘deemed’? Because Citipointe church’s ‘She Rescue Home’ has ostensibly been set up to rescue victims of Human Trafficking. Therefore, given that Rosa and Chita reside at the She Rescue Home they must be (or at least can be ‘deemed’ to be) victims of Human Trafficking. Confused? You should be, dear Reader.

“While we acknowledge that you have regularly contributed to the financial support of the family, is this just another form of trafficking in order to pay the family so that you can continue to film them for your personal interest and the financial gain that you would receive from the profits of your documentary?”

Right. So, my filming this past 18 years, which has probably cost me around $100,000, is not just for financial gain but is a ‘form of trafficking’! Mmmmm!

We sincerely do not want to  have to go down a legal pathway of seeing you forcibly removed…”

Oh dear, as if being arrested twice in the foyer of Screen Australia was not enough, now I have an Australian based Christian church threatening to have me ‘forcibly removed’ and convicted of a crime – the crime being identifying ‘victims of Human Trafficking’ who are not actual victims but are ‘deemed’ to be.  The fact that Rosa and Chita are demonstrably NOT victims of Human Trafficking is, in Pastor Mulheran’s view, merely an opinion. Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s famous saying comes to mind:

“Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts.”

This dispute, as with my battle with Screen Australia, has been going on for years. The stakes are much higher here, however, as Chanti’s daughters were stolen from her close to five years ago and we are no closer to getting them back than we were in 2008.

For those who want to get a better sense of what is going on, visit:

http://citipointechurch.blogspot.com/2013/03/citipointe-not-ok-bracelets-cost-3.html

If this whets your appetite for more, read my 3^rd March letter to Penny Richards, Australia’s Ambassador to Cambodia entitled:

Is Chanti entitled to be provided with copies of contracts Citipointe has entered into with the Cambodian Ministries of Foreign and Social Affairs?

The latest letter is to the head of a coalition of 50 Christian NGOs that has either turned a blind eye to Citipointe’s stealing of Chanti’s children or actually approves of the removal of Buddhist children from their family’s care to be forcibly brought up as Christians. Winning souls for Jesus Christ! It is entitled:

Does the Chab Dai Christian coalition support the exploitation of children in 'poverty' or 'orphanage' tourism?

A brief recap of the Screen Australia aspect of this story is in order: After 14 years of self-funding I found myself with no money and needing some help from Screen Australia to continue filming. I made an application fort a relatively small amount od development funding. As a result some kind of cockup within Screen Australia my 'promo' for CHANTI'S WORLD was not viewed by any of the three people in whose hands the fate of my development application lay - Claire Jager, Ross Mathews and Julia Overton. This triggered correspondence from me (ignored) which eventually led to Fiona Cameron claiming that I had placed on file, in writing, my belief that I came away for the meeting in which Ross and Julia admitted to not having seen my 'promo' with the belief that my development application had been 'green lit'. This was nonsense but it took 2 years to get Fiona Cameron to eventually release the correspondence which, of course, contained no statement from me that implied or inferred that I had come away from the meeting with Ross and Julie believing that my project had been 'green lit'. That the facts were not in synch with Fiona's assertions presented no problem at all for the Screen Australia Board which, at Ruth Harley's behest, banned me (a first in Australian film history) from making applications to Screen Australia on the grounds that I had, in my correspondence, intimidated and placed at risk members of Screen Australia's staff. The fact that there is not one shred of evidence that I have done so (and I have asked countless times for any such correspondence to be made public) matters not at all to the Screen Australia Board – three members of which are practicing filmmakers!

So here I am in Cambodia, in my 18th year of filming CHANTI'S WORLD on a less than shoestring budget. It will be an interesting film. Very interesting. And it will only get more so as the years pass – presuming, of course, that I am not in a Cambodian jail thanks to Citipointe! One day CHANTIS WORLD will be completed and I think all those who have put such a lot of effort into placing any and every obstacle they could in my way (spite and vindictiveness at its worst) will look very foolish indeed. By then, of course, most of the relevant bureaucrats will be gone.