Amnesty International: Reform 2004

Candidates' Forum - Questions and Answers, page 5

This page last updated: April 5, 2004

Question:
If you are elected to the Board, what will be your principal goals for the organization during your coming term of office?

Govind answers:
While of course I hope to fulfill the aims set out in the platform, I also will be a strong advocate for cutting out some of the waste that built up over the years in the organization. A small example is that Board members should not be treated to expensive meals during Board meetings. Certainly, Board members should have their costs reimbursed for providing a valuable volunteer service, but for a non-profit organization setting a per person limit for meals and drinks should be a reasonable request. Additionally, I will do all I can to strengthen the relationship between the staff and volunteers by stressing the importance of AIUSA's grassroots tradition. This means that incoming staff must be trained in a shared leadership model that continues to empower volunteers and staff to cooperate to further the aims of social justice and human rights.

Magdaleno answers:
If elected I would concentrate on the process of accountability of the board and the staff to the membership. And I would work with others to improve the diversity of the movement.

Rick answers:
- My priority will be to help bring a stronger resolve to the Board to strengthen structures and programs designed to help our grassroots activists, in local and student groups, so that their human rights work can be done in a timely and successful manner.

- I want to see a greater commitment to bring true democracy to AIUSA, by allowing our activists to participate in decision-making processes.This will entail a new design of our regional structures, so that our vast geographic regions (especially the South and the West) can be made more responsive to all our members. Regions must be small enough so that our members can afford to attend meetings within their regions; they must never again be disenfranchised simply because their region's vast geography prohibited them from attending meetings and giving their input.

- I will work steadfastly to re-open the Board's functioning processes, so that members get minutes and decisions from Board meetings in a much more timely and open manner than at present.

- I will make sure that in the new format of Amnesty's priorities, our traditional work (on behalf of Prisoners of Conscience, casework, etc.) is neither sacrificed nor forgotten at the expense of newer categories of human rights endeavors to which AI is now committed.

Paul answers:
Working to strengthen the grassroots nature of this movement. Our grassroots members provide Amnesty International its unique effectiveness and strength relative to other human rights organizations.

Helping to guide the movement through a consultative process that helps set the tone for how AI works on economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR) without losing any focus on our traditional work. This will be quite a challenge and I intend to make sure we do not surrender our unique work for the forgotten prisoners, while embracing the opportunity to expand Amnesty's range of concerns.

Steve answers:
Once the governance issues are settled my greatest concern is the direction that the Integrated Strategic Plan is taking and what its implementation means for individual casework. Frankly, I am deeply concerned by the presernt plans to limit casework to 17Country Action Porgrams. We have forgotten the "Forgotten Prisoner."

Phyllis answers:
A major reason that a group of us, all long-time AI activists, formed this reform slate, was to maintain the integrity of the organization as a whole, while it moves forward nationally and internationally away from our original mandate, and towards a full-spectrum approach. I have spent six years as a member of the board and know how difficult it is to fund programs adequately. So I believe that while we may want to be all things to all people, the reality is that we can't afford to do this, and do it well. Which in turn may hurt all our efforts, whatever the area, or more importantly, the individual. If I am elected to the board, I will continue to push for domestic concerns to be highlighted, along with POC work, world-wide.

Question:
Does your commitment 'to ensure that work on domestic abuses and coalitions does not inadvertently cloud AI-USA's credibility' mean that you support AIUSA's position of taking no action on behalf of Leonard Peltier?

Govind answers:
Just as there are human rights violations in Mexico, China, and Gabon, there are human rights violations in the United States that must be scrutinized by the organization. Thousands of AI activists from around the world have campaigned on human rights violations in the United States ranging from state organized killings (also called the death penalty) to police brutality to political prisoners like Leonard Peltier to incommunicado detentions like Jose Padilla, culminating in the international campaign on human rights violation in the United States in 1998-99. This will continue wholeheartedly while I am on the Board.

Magdaleno answers:
I think that there needs to be a new trial for Leonard. He did not have a fair trial and he was targetted just as many muslims today are incarcerated and judged by using secret information never released for the defense.
On this case there are many parts of his case that we can get involved with and ours should be a strong and persuasive voice. There are many ways to work with other groups and coalitions without embracing all of thier issues and still protecting the integrity of the organization.
To do nothing is a mistake.

Paul answers:
This is what I understand of AIUSA involvement on the Leonard Peltier case. I believe AI never took up his case because he didn't fit the definition of prisoner of conscience (POC), I believe mostly due to the violence issues of his case. Under our old mandate, we should have done more on the fair trial issue, but Amnesty never made an exception to the Work On Own Country (WOOC) rule so that AIUSA could do more on this case.

I wanted to relate that for our AIUSA 1999 Annual General Meeting (AGM), which was held here in Minneapolis, that we finally pushed the international movement into calling for Leonard's release due to the unfair nature of his trial. We even had his nephew as a featured speaker at the AGM. That was an incredibly exciting moment, and for those of us who knew how monumental an effort and ground-breaking this call was, truly inspiring.

I am very concerned about Amnesty's ability to be able to work on cases such as Leonard's, where the struggle for justice does not happen overnight. In our change to more work on human rights Amnesty has not previously emphasized, I am very concerned that some long-term and more traditional cases may be lost in our bureaucracy. Or even dropped altogether!

As to the current non-action on the Peltier case by AIUSA itself, AIUSA must do some follow-up on the case. This does not mean I favor making it our top priority - we have many of those now. But AIUSA could put out a webpage, and that alone would raise the hackles of Lenoard's oppressors.

Phyllis answers:
When AI first waved the WOOC (Work on Own Country) rule for AIUSA, so we could work on legislation, the death penalty and on behalf of refugees in the US, I was thrilled, but didn't feel we went far enough. We still didn't adopt Peltier as a POC, or even investigate sufficiently to my satisfaction. I thought we needed (and still do) to work on indigenous peoples' rights in the US not just in 1992 because it was a landmark date, but because it needed to be done. I have supported freedom for Peltier, the end to the death penalty, and certainly believe that the human rights situation, especially with the so called "War on Terror" (which I'm glad AIUSA is taking up as a priority for the next two year cycle) in the US needs a lot of attention.

Return to current questions ->

Acronyms explained:

IEC = International Executive Committee [in essence, the "International Board"]
UDHR = Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly on Dec. 10, 1948 [forms the basis of our work]
CEDAW = Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
FSA = Full Spectrum Approach [to our human rights work]
ICM = International Council Meeting [held every 2 years to make decisions for our movement]
ISP = Integrated Strategic Plan
NGO = Non-Governmental Organization [not just an AI acronym]


		Candidate Question Time
	Candidates' Forum - Questions and Answers, page 5 This page last updated: April 5, 2004 Question: If you are elected to the Board, what will be your principal goals for the organization during your coming term of office? Govind answers: While of course I hope to fulfill the aims set out in the platform, I also will be a strong advocate for cutting out some of the waste that built up over the years in the organization. A small example is that Board members should not be treated to expensive meals during Board meetings. Certainly, Board members should have their costs reimbursed for providing a valuable volunteer service, but for a non-profit organization setting a per person limit for meals and drinks should be a reasonable request. Additionally, I will do all I can to strengthen the relationship between the staff and volunteers by stressing the importance of AIUSA's grassroots tradition. This means that incoming staff must be trained in a shared leadership model that continues to empower volunteers and staff to cooperate to further the aims of social justice and human rights. Magdaleno answers: If elected I would concentrate on the process of accountability of the board and the staff to the membership. And I would work with others to improve the diversity of the movement. Rick answers: - My priority will be to help bring a stronger resolve to the Board to strengthen structures and programs designed to help our grassroots activists, in local and student groups, so that their human rights work can be done in a timely and successful manner. - I want to see a greater commitment to bring true democracy to AIUSA, by allowing our activists to participate in decision-making processes.This will entail a new design of our regional structures, so that our vast geographic regions (especially the South and the West) can be made more responsive to all our members. Regions must be small enough so that our members can afford to attend meetings within their regions; they must never again be disenfranchised simply because their region's vast geography prohibited them from attending meetings and giving their input. - I will work steadfastly to re-open the Board's functioning processes, so that members get minutes and decisions from Board meetings in a much more timely and open manner than at present. - I will make sure that in the new format of Amnesty's priorities, our traditional work (on behalf of Prisoners of Conscience, casework, etc.) is neither sacrificed nor forgotten at the expense of newer categories of human rights endeavors to which AI is now committed. Paul answers: Working to strengthen the grassroots nature of this movement. Our grassroots members provide Amnesty International its unique effectiveness and strength relative to other human rights organizations. Helping to guide the movement through a consultative process that helps set the tone for how AI works on economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR) without losing any focus on our traditional work. This will be quite a challenge and I intend to make sure we do not surrender our unique work for the forgotten prisoners, while embracing the opportunity to expand Amnesty's range of concerns. Steve answers: Once the governance issues are settled my greatest concern is the direction that the Integrated Strategic Plan is taking and what its implementation means for individual casework. Frankly, I am deeply concerned by the presernt plans to limit casework to 17Country Action Porgrams. We have forgotten the "Forgotten Prisoner." Phyllis answers: A major reason that a group of us, all long-time AI activists, formed this reform slate, was to maintain the integrity of the organization as a whole, while it moves forward nationally and internationally away from our original mandate, and towards a full-spectrum approach. I have spent six years as a member of the board and know how difficult it is to fund programs adequately. So I believe that while we may want to be all things to all people, the reality is that we can't afford to do this, and do it well. Which in turn may hurt all our efforts, whatever the area, or more importantly, the individual. If I am elected to the board, I will continue to push for domestic concerns to be highlighted, along with POC work, world-wide. Question: Does your commitment 'to ensure that work on domestic abuses and coalitions does not inadvertently cloud AI-USA's credibility' mean that you support AIUSA's position of taking no action on behalf of Leonard Peltier? Govind answers: Just as there are human rights violations in Mexico, China, and Gabon, there are human rights violations in the United States that must be scrutinized by the organization. Thousands of AI activists from around the world have campaigned on human rights violations in the United States ranging from state organized killings (also called the death penalty) to police brutality to political prisoners like Leonard Peltier to incommunicado detentions like Jose Padilla, culminating in the international campaign on human rights violation in the United States in 1998-99. This will continue wholeheartedly while I am on the Board. Magdaleno answers: I think that there needs to be a new trial for Leonard. He did not have a fair trial and he was targetted just as many muslims today are incarcerated and judged by using secret information never released for the defense. On this case there are many parts of his case that we can get involved with and ours should be a strong and persuasive voice. There are many ways to work with other groups and coalitions without embracing all of thier issues and still protecting the integrity of the organization. To do nothing is a mistake. Paul answers: This is what I understand of AIUSA involvement on the Leonard Peltier case. I believe AI never took up his case because he didn't fit the definition of prisoner of conscience (POC), I believe mostly due to the violence issues of his case. Under our old mandate, we should have done more on the fair trial issue, but Amnesty never made an exception to the Work On Own Country (WOOC) rule so that AIUSA could do more on this case. I wanted to relate that for our AIUSA 1999 Annual General Meeting (AGM), which was held here in Minneapolis, that we finally pushed the international movement into calling for Leonard's release due to the unfair nature of his trial. We even had his nephew as a featured speaker at the AGM. That was an incredibly exciting moment, and for those of us who knew how monumental an effort and ground-breaking this call was, truly inspiring. I am very concerned about Amnesty's ability to be able to work on cases such as Leonard's, where the struggle for justice does not happen overnight. In our change to more work on human rights Amnesty has not previously emphasized, I am very concerned that some long-term and more traditional cases may be lost in our bureaucracy. Or even dropped altogether! As to the current non-action on the Peltier case by AIUSA itself, AIUSA must do some follow-up on the case. This does not mean I favor making it our top priority - we have many of those now. But AIUSA could put out a webpage, and that alone would raise the hackles of Lenoard's oppressors. Phyllis answers: When AI first waved the WOOC (Work on Own Country) rule for AIUSA, so we could work on legislation, the death penalty and on behalf of refugees in the US, I was thrilled, but didn't feel we went far enough. We still didn't adopt Peltier as a POC, or even investigate sufficiently to my satisfaction. I thought we needed (and still do) to work on indigenous peoples' rights in the US not just in 1992 because it was a landmark date, but because it needed to be done. I have supported freedom for Peltier, the end to the death penalty, and certainly believe that the human rights situation, especially with the so called "War on Terror" (which I'm glad AIUSA is taking up as a priority for the next two year cycle) in the US needs a lot of attention. Return to current questions -> Acronyms explained: IEC = International Executive Committee [in essence, the "International Board"] UDHR = Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly on Dec. 10, 1948 [forms the basis of our work] CEDAW = Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women FSA = Full Spectrum Approach [to our human rights work] ICM = International Council Meeting [held every 2 years to make decisions for our movement] ISP = Integrated Strategic Plan NGO = Non-Governmental Organization [not just an AI acronym]