Source from Cambodia Daily
By Simon Marks - November 7, 2013
Weighing in on revelations that fabricated sexual
slavery stories were used to promote the work of Agir Pour Les Femmes en
Situation Precaire (Afesip) in Cambodia, which was founded by global
anti-trafficking activist Somaly Mam, a longtime aid worker said that staff at
the organization were aware that some victims were not in the desperate
situations they claimed to be.
Pierre Fallavier, who said he advised Afesip between
1999 and 2007, wrote in a series of recent emails that from the beginning of
his relationship with the organization, concerns were raised by staff that
information on victims that was being disseminated by Afesip was “exaggerated.”
Mr. Fallavier, who holds a Phd from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and has worked for NGOs and multiple U.N. agencies in
Africa and Asia, also claimed that, like Afesip, many aid groups create
“composite” stories of the lives of people being helped by their organizations
as a means to raise funds.
“I started working as an adviser to Afesip in 1999, and
stopped in 2007. From the start, people around me—all Khmers—were saying the
stories Somaly told about herself and some of the girls were exaggerated. At
that time I did not want to listen, because I could see the good Afesip was
doing. The level of violence against women then was higher than anywhere else
in Southeast Asia,” Mr. Fallavier wrote in an email.
“A few courageous individuals then set up organizations
to rescue such women. Among them, Afesip decided it would also lead a
‘political’ struggle to get the rights of women and children recognized…. [S]o
at that time, what counted were results. Everyone knew that some victims lied
and were not in the desperate situations they claimed to be, but they were
still in so much need of help that it did not seem to matter,” he wrote.
“And then, at the same time, donors were getting an
interest, and were sending their people with crews of journalists to take
pictures and extracts selling stories. I used to tell Somaly to send them away,
that all they wanted were exotic stories of violence and sex, with the picture
of a beautiful hero saving children so they could sell their papers. But they
came with the funders, or with promises their articles and reports would help
advocate for the rights of women. And they were the first ones to manipulate
the images and the stories.”
Mr. Fallavier said that the recent spotlight on the
Somaly Mam Foundation, following revelations that at least two alleged victims
of the sex trade helped by her organization had fabricated stories, should be
extended to include many other humanitarian groups.
“[I] find it unfair to point solely at Afesip for
fabricating stories about its typical beneficiaries. This has been and still is
the approach that all major international NGOs use, in Cambodia and elsewhere,”
he wrote.
“They take bits and parts of the life stories of
different beneficiaries and make up a ‘typical’ sob story that they use to
raise funds with.”
Mr. Fallavier, who worked for Handicap International
(H.I.), said that he left the organization because of such a practice in 2000
because he believed it to be “unethical.”
“But the point is that all NGOs do so, that they are
unapologetic, and that it is well known to anyone working in that sector,” he
continued.
“Just take one of the stories from Cambodia that Oxfam,
World Vision, Care, etc. use in their advertising campaigns ‘at home,’ and try
to trace them. You will see how the majority of these stories are ‘composite’
of different realities,” Mr. Fallavier claimed.
“They justify it very bluntly: This is marketing they
need to raise money, and it is only with extreme stories that they will get
people to give the cash they need to undertake their work. In fact, in many
cases, back home, private marketing companies are in charge of the advertising,
and they sell NGO work in the same way they would with any other service.”
Responding to Mr. Fallavier’s claims, the communications
department at the Somaly Mam Foundation said it would not comment as Mr.
Fallavier had never held an official position with Afesip.
“[W]e can’t speculate about allegations made by someone
who had no formal affiliation with the organization,” the communications
department said in a statement.
“Mr. Fallavier has been a good friend of Somaly Mam and
supportive to Afesip Cambodia on a personal and unofficial capacity. He has
never held any official positions or roles at Afesip Cambodia. We do not know
when his relationship with Afesip and Somaly Mam began, yet it is an amicable
and supportive one that still continues today,” the statement continues.
Pierre Legros, who helped found Afesip in 1996 and is
the ex-husband of Ms. Mam, confirmed Mr. Fallavier had advised Afesip.
At one time, Afesip’s funding from the European Union
(E.U.) was sent through H.I. and Mr. Fallavier had acted as an intermediary
between the two organizations, Mr. Legros said.
“In 1999 we received money from the European Commission.
This money we could not receive directly as we had to pass through an NGO that
had an agreement with the E.U. So we received money passed to us by an
intermediary NGO. It was Handicap International that was chosen to be the
intermediary with Afesip,” Mr. Legros said.
“Pierre Fallavier was hired by Handicap International to
serve as someone who was responsible for the programs run by Afesip using
Handicap International money. He was the adviser to Afesip in making the link
between Handicap International and Afesip.”
Mr. Fallavier’s emails followed a recent story revealing
that a 14-year-old girl being rehabilitated by Afesip had been coached in 1998
to tell a fabricated story of sexual slavery in a documentary for French
television. Other stories promoted by Afesip of sex slavery, trafficking and
even killing have also proven to be false.
In his emails on the subject of victim fabrication in
the aid industry, Mr. Fallavier reserved some of his harshest criticism for
Handicap International France (HIF).
According to Mr. Fallavier, in 1999, when he was working
in Cambodia with HIF, the organization launched a campaign to send hundreds of
thousands of letters to raise funds from individuals in Europe using stories of
child victims of land mines. The campaign, run out of HIF’s headquarters in
France, gained immense traction because of its focus on child landmine
victims. However, child victims of landmines represented only a tiny proportion
of the work HIF was actually carrying out in Cambodia—most of its work was in
roads, irrigation and access to water.
Though he does not claim that the landmine stories were
fabricated, Mr. Fallavier said they greatly exaggerated the extent of the
problem.
“I learned that if work with children victims of
landmines represented less than ten percent of HI operations worldwide, the
fundraising campaign that showed HI largely as supporting these children
brought in 90 percent of the private funds it used to complement institutional
funding in all its operations,” Mr. Fallavier said.
“So, somehow HIF was collecting the majority of its
funds on a belief they built among the public that the money would be used to
support these children,” though Mr. Fallavier admits that a disclaimer was
written in tiny print at the bottom of H.I.’s call for funds.
Arnaud Richard, head of the Federal Information team for
H.I., said last week that the organization “does not fabricate stories” when
publicizing its work in some of the world’s poorest countries.
“The stories are personal stories which give the general
public an insight into both the wider situation and the lives of many of our
beneficiaries. This enables us to raise the awareness of the public and private
donors in countries where HI is represented by national associations (UK,
France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Switzerland, Canada and USA). We would
also point out that beneficiaries are informed of HI’s actions and are asked
to give their permission to use their image,” he said.
“Several people who have worked for our organization for
many years remember that Mr. Fallavier once worked for Handicap International.
However, he left the organization more than 13 years ago, and we do not
currently have any further information on his reasons for leaving Handicap
International,” he said.
Mr. Richard said that H.I. promotes its work abroad
through a team of four people dedicated to gathering testimonies and
information from its operations and programs.
These four people, dubbed the “Federal Information
team,” regularly travel to the field to meet with beneficiaries. The stories
can then be used as part of the organization’s attempts to raise funds.
Asked about Mr. Fallavier’s claims that H.I.’s
fundraising techniques were misleading the public, Mr. Richard said the
organization engages in focused campaigns in order to draw the attention of
donors to its activities.
“These campaigns were indeed run during the period you
have mentioned in order to raise funds,” Mr. Richard said referring to H.I.’s
campaign carried out during 1999 and 2000.
“However, to be totally clear, at no point during these
fundraising campaigns did the organization state that the money collected would
be specifically used for our actions in Cambodia. We are always careful to
point out that donations are used to help people with disabilities and to
improve their living conditions. For example, we might highlight the cost of
fitting a disabled person with an orthopedic device or providing them technical
aids in order to give donors an idea of the potential impact of their donation.
“In order to avoid misunderstandings on this point,
however, the documents sent out to donors specifically state that the
testimonies are offered as examples only. The reply slip also clearly states
that, by making a donation, the donor ‘authorizes Handicap International to
allocate its aid to the most useful and urgent activity.’”
Mr. Richard also took issue with Mr. Fallavier’s
interpretation of H.I.’s work.
“We strongly refute the idea that these stories were
invented or that we misled donors regarding the use of their donations.
Although we are sure that Mr. Fallavier—who appears to have made a good
impression on those who worked with him at Handicap International—is acting in
good faith, his interpretation of an activity of which he has very little
knowledge—fundraising—is totally false,” he said.
Other organizations in Cambodia working with women and
children also denied Mr. Fallavier’s claim that they engage in exaggerating
stories, and that any stories on victimhood are presented accurately using
real, consenting people or composites of real life situations.
Talmage Payne, CEO of Hagar International, said the
practice of using victim testimonies in order to sell an NGO’s work abroad
raises serious questions due to the pervasiveness of using images in
fundraising that fully identify the face and names of sexual abuse or trafficked
minors.
“This violates a number of best practice protocols about
protecting clients and many national laws—even if the story is true,” Mr. Payne
said.
He added that the Somaly Mam Foundation’s use of a
14-year-old alleged victim of sex slavery could even be in violation of
Cambodia’s Law on the Suppression of Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation,
which states that “Newspapers and all other mass media shall be prohibited from
publishing or broadcasting or disseminating any information which can lead to public
knowledge of identities of victims in the offences stipulated in this law.”
“The well known and well regarded [NGO] brands are very
careful about this with strict protection standards. It’s a problem on the
fringes. It’s not a norm or mainstream,” Mr. Payne said.
Mr. Payne said that in his organization’s publications a
researcher may create a composite case study of many stories in order to
“create victimology of certain types of abuse and recovery,” all of which is
disclosed in any writing on the matter. He added that all stories are based on
the subject’s consent and that identifying images are never used in cases of
trafficking or sexual abuse.
Andrew Moore, country director for Save the Children,
also said fabricating victims’ stories is not practiced by his organization.
“Save the Children does not fabricate stories for
fundraising purposes,” he said. “We adhere to high standards of child
protection and child safeguarding in gathering stories from the field, and all
our staff are trained on child safeguarding.
“Our publicity work is done in-house, with thorough
approval protocols that ensure that only factual reports that safeguard the
interests of children are released.”
In a recent article, Sebastien Marot, executive director
of Friends International, an NGO that helps disadvantaged children living
in urban areas in Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Indonesia, Honduras, Mexico, Egypt
and Burma, said the situation regarding the fabrication of victims’ stories had
arisen as “a direct consequence of the interconnected actions of the child
protection organizations, the media, the donors and the general public; all
wanting the best for these children, but instead turning them into victims.”
“[A] large number of organizations get sucked into using
children to raise funds: making them talk about the abuse they survived in
front of a camera, having their picture in a pitiful situation published for
everyone to see, allowing non-professional visitors into their centers [like
orphanage tourism],” Mr. Marot wrote.
“In worst cases, the truth is distorted or the stories
invented to attract more compassion and money,” Mr. Marot said in the article
published on his organization’s website.
“The impact on the lives of these children is terrible:
if they come from an abusive situation, such a process retraumatizes them and
in any case it stigmatizes them forever.”
Mr. Marot said the media was complicit, and searched out
and published emotionally-charged stories in order to attract readers.
Moreover, donors tend to react to these stories.
“As regulators of the money it is easy, if specific
guidelines are not in place, to fund projects on a purely emotional basis. For
example we have witnessed a rapid increase of orphanages in Cambodia (funded by
local and foreign private donors), despite the fact that most of these children
are not orphans and it is against current Cambodian Government policies,” he
wrote.
“Like the general public, donors react to highly
emotionally charged stories that in some cases are built to please them or are
told at the expense of the same children they want to protect. Many donors do
not have the capacity or desire to check these stories, so we end up in
situations of ‘embellished’ story lines.
“A main consequence of this is that in some instances
organizations end up selling the wrong problem to the donors: since donors will
fund based on emotions and not on the more mundane facts, this can lead to the
creation of programs built on entirely wrong assumptions which do not provide
the right solutions to the beneficiaries. They may give the ‘right’
message/image back to the donors but end up further hurting the children with
the money that was intended to protect them,” he continued.
Aarti Kapoor, who was a legal adviser to Afesip between
2003 and 2006 and still works to combat sexual abuse against children, said
child protection has become highly sensationalized.
“The image of human trafficking has become highly
sensationalized, often to get media attention and raise funds through emotive
reactions. The reality of trafficking is often more complex,” Ms. Kapoor said.
“The tragedy is that sensationalized perceptions of
trafficking end up hindering our ability to identify and respond to the
majority of cases on the ground.”
No comments:
Post a Comment