Ministry of Social Affairs
# 788 Monivong Blvd
Sangkat
Boeng Trbek
Khan Chomkamon
Phnom Penh 29th Oct 2012
To Minister of Social Affairs
re Yem Chanthy’s daughters Rosa and Srey Mal
Following on from my previous letters.
I have returned to Phnom Penh to buy a tuk tuk for Yem Chanthy and her husband Chhork in order to give them an opportunity to become self-sufficient. Last week I acquired the first half of the tuk tuk - a motor bike. This week I will buy the passenger cabin that is towed by the motor bike.
Yem Chanthy’s daughters, Rosa and Chita (Srey Mal), were to have visited their family home yesterday, Sunday 28th Oct. At the last minute, with no explanation why, Citipointe church cancelled the visit, causing yet more distress for Chanthy. This occurs often - arrangements made and then changed at the whim of the church with no regard for any plans Yem Chanthy may have made involving her daughters. And it is distressing for Rosa and Chita also - to be expecting a visit with their family and then to have it cancelled at the last moment.
For four years now Citipointe church has been making promises to Yem Chanthy that it does not keep. For four years now Citipointe church has insisted that its goal has been the re-integration of Rosa and Chita into the family, yet it has never made any move to do so by formulating a re-integration programme. How long must Yem Chanthy endure this treatment from Citipioite church? As you will be aware, Citipointe church has, this past four years, done nothing to help Yem Chanthy and her husband become self-sufficient. It has provided no food when the family had none or any assistance when a member of the family was in need of medical care - as was the case with Chanthy a few months ago. Is this because it suits the church’s purposes for Yem Chanthy and her family to remain in poverty? Is it because, for as long as the family is poor, Citipointe can present the poverty of the family as a reason to maintain custody of Rosa and Srey Mal? For the amount of money it costs to keep Rosa and Srey Mal in Citipointe church’s ‘She’ refuge it could, at any point in the past four years, have provided an interest-free loan to the family to buy a tuk tuk, provided all of the family (and not just two members of it) with access to medical and dental care, bought school uniforms and generally helped the family get on its feet.
Four years ago Yem Chanthy accepted Citipointe church’s offer to help take care of her two eldest daughters whilst she was in the midst of a financial crisis and found it difficult to feed, clothe and educate them. The agreement, at the time (all well documented), was that Chanti would have regular access to her daughters and that they would be returned to her care when she was in a financial position to care for them adequately. Almost immediately upon making this agreement with Citipointe (one that I was involved in) the church severely restricted Yem Chanthy’s access to her daughters. And, when Chanthy and her husband Chhork had a home and an income and requested that Rosa and Srey Mal be returned to the family, Citipointe church refused. At the time Citipointe had no legal right to retain custody of Rosa and Srey Mal - the so called ‘contract’ it had got Chanthy to place her thumb print on being without legal status. Not only did the ‘contract’ not contain any of the terms or conditions that Citipointe had told Chanthy it contained, it was also unsigned by any member of the church and thus worthless in accordance with Cambodian law. At this time, indeed for 15 months, Citipointe had no legal right to be holding Rosa and Chita against the wishes of their mother and ignoring her many repeated requests that her daughters be returned to her. In accordance with Cambodian law, Citipointe church was, at the time, guilty of ‘people trafficking’.
Citipointe clearly has no intention of returning Yem Chanthy’s daughters to her. This is a breach of the human rights of the daughters (who wish to live with their family) and of the mother, who wishes to bring her own children up and not have them indoctrinated in the Christian faith in an institution that has been set up, according to Citipointe, to take care of young girls who have been rescued from the sex trade. Rosa and Srey Mal were never in any way involved with the sex trade. They were simply the daughters of a poor mother who had no reason to doubt the integrity of the Christians who arrived in her life and offered to help her. (I wonder how many, if any, of the girls in Citipointe church’s ‘She’ refuge have actually been rescued from the sex trade and how many of them, like Rosa and Chita, are merely the daughters of poor families who, unable to read or write, like Chanthy, have applied their thumb prints to worthless ‘contracts’ and lost custody of their daughters?
As I have made clear, I am prepared to guarantee that Rosa and Chita (along with Yem Chanthy’s other children) will be well fed, clothed, educated and have access to medical and dental care. If Citipointe church is genuine in its desire, as outlined on its website, to help families such as Yem Chanthy’s, it will make a contribution to their care whilst living with their parents and siblings. I am, as I have said many times, prepared to work with Citipointe church to help Chanthy’s family become self-sufficient.
Citipointe church has told Yem Chanthy that Rosa and Chita will come to visit the family on Friday afternoon. I trust that this is not another promise made by the church that it will break at the last minute.
I ask the Minister to please give this matter urgent attention as Yem Chanthy’s requests that her daughters be returned to her, made many times this past four years, have been (and continue to be) ignored by Citipointe church.
best wishes
# 788 Monivong Blvd
Sangkat
Boeng Trbek
Khan Chomkamon
Phnom Penh 29th Oct 2012
To Minister of Social Affairs
re Yem Chanthy’s daughters Rosa and Srey Mal
Following on from my previous letters.
I have returned to Phnom Penh to buy a tuk tuk for Yem Chanthy and her husband Chhork in order to give them an opportunity to become self-sufficient. Last week I acquired the first half of the tuk tuk - a motor bike. This week I will buy the passenger cabin that is towed by the motor bike.
Yem Chanthy’s daughters, Rosa and Chita (Srey Mal), were to have visited their family home yesterday, Sunday 28th Oct. At the last minute, with no explanation why, Citipointe church cancelled the visit, causing yet more distress for Chanthy. This occurs often - arrangements made and then changed at the whim of the church with no regard for any plans Yem Chanthy may have made involving her daughters. And it is distressing for Rosa and Chita also - to be expecting a visit with their family and then to have it cancelled at the last moment.
For four years now Citipointe church has been making promises to Yem Chanthy that it does not keep. For four years now Citipointe church has insisted that its goal has been the re-integration of Rosa and Chita into the family, yet it has never made any move to do so by formulating a re-integration programme. How long must Yem Chanthy endure this treatment from Citipioite church? As you will be aware, Citipointe church has, this past four years, done nothing to help Yem Chanthy and her husband become self-sufficient. It has provided no food when the family had none or any assistance when a member of the family was in need of medical care - as was the case with Chanthy a few months ago. Is this because it suits the church’s purposes for Yem Chanthy and her family to remain in poverty? Is it because, for as long as the family is poor, Citipointe can present the poverty of the family as a reason to maintain custody of Rosa and Srey Mal? For the amount of money it costs to keep Rosa and Srey Mal in Citipointe church’s ‘She’ refuge it could, at any point in the past four years, have provided an interest-free loan to the family to buy a tuk tuk, provided all of the family (and not just two members of it) with access to medical and dental care, bought school uniforms and generally helped the family get on its feet.
Four years ago Yem Chanthy accepted Citipointe church’s offer to help take care of her two eldest daughters whilst she was in the midst of a financial crisis and found it difficult to feed, clothe and educate them. The agreement, at the time (all well documented), was that Chanti would have regular access to her daughters and that they would be returned to her care when she was in a financial position to care for them adequately. Almost immediately upon making this agreement with Citipointe (one that I was involved in) the church severely restricted Yem Chanthy’s access to her daughters. And, when Chanthy and her husband Chhork had a home and an income and requested that Rosa and Srey Mal be returned to the family, Citipointe church refused. At the time Citipointe had no legal right to retain custody of Rosa and Srey Mal - the so called ‘contract’ it had got Chanthy to place her thumb print on being without legal status. Not only did the ‘contract’ not contain any of the terms or conditions that Citipointe had told Chanthy it contained, it was also unsigned by any member of the church and thus worthless in accordance with Cambodian law. At this time, indeed for 15 months, Citipointe had no legal right to be holding Rosa and Chita against the wishes of their mother and ignoring her many repeated requests that her daughters be returned to her. In accordance with Cambodian law, Citipointe church was, at the time, guilty of ‘people trafficking’.
Citipointe clearly has no intention of returning Yem Chanthy’s daughters to her. This is a breach of the human rights of the daughters (who wish to live with their family) and of the mother, who wishes to bring her own children up and not have them indoctrinated in the Christian faith in an institution that has been set up, according to Citipointe, to take care of young girls who have been rescued from the sex trade. Rosa and Srey Mal were never in any way involved with the sex trade. They were simply the daughters of a poor mother who had no reason to doubt the integrity of the Christians who arrived in her life and offered to help her. (I wonder how many, if any, of the girls in Citipointe church’s ‘She’ refuge have actually been rescued from the sex trade and how many of them, like Rosa and Chita, are merely the daughters of poor families who, unable to read or write, like Chanthy, have applied their thumb prints to worthless ‘contracts’ and lost custody of their daughters?
As I have made clear, I am prepared to guarantee that Rosa and Chita (along with Yem Chanthy’s other children) will be well fed, clothed, educated and have access to medical and dental care. If Citipointe church is genuine in its desire, as outlined on its website, to help families such as Yem Chanthy’s, it will make a contribution to their care whilst living with their parents and siblings. I am, as I have said many times, prepared to work with Citipointe church to help Chanthy’s family become self-sufficient.
Citipointe church has told Yem Chanthy that Rosa and Chita will come to visit the family on Friday afternoon. I trust that this is not another promise made by the church that it will break at the last minute.
I ask the Minister to please give this matter urgent attention as Yem Chanthy’s requests that her daughters be returned to her, made many times this past four years, have been (and continue to be) ignored by Citipointe church.
best wishes
James
Ricketson
No comments:
Post a Comment