Pastor
Brian Mulheran
Executive
Pastor
Citipointe
Church
322
Wecker Road
Carindale
QLD
4152
22nd
Feb 2013
Dear
Brian
I will respond to the contents of
your letter of 21st Feb in the next day or two. I will publish your
own letter to me in its entirety on my blog, along with my response to it. In
the meantime, for reasons that will become apparent, it needs to be pointed out
that the bulk of your letter is based on the premise that Chanti’s daughters, Rosa
and Chita, are “child victims of human
trafficking.” You know, Brian, that they
are not. Leigh Ramsay knows that they are not. Citipointe church knows that
they are not. And so does the Ministry of Social Affairs. You attempt to get
around this well-established and mutually acknowledged (but highly
embarrassing) fact, by writing:
“The government deems both girls as child victims
of human trafficking according to the law.”
The government can ‘deem’ all it
likes but the fact remains that Rosa and Chita were never victims of human
trafficking – other than during the 15 months that Citpointe held the girls against
the wishes of their mother Chanti and her often expressed desire that her
daughters be returned to her care. In
contravention of Cambodia’s own trafficking laws the church justified its
actions using a sham and legally worthless contract that gave Citipointe church
no rights at all to be holding the girls. The ‘contract’ contains none of the
‘conditions’ the church led Chanti to believe it contained and is not even
countersigned by the church. Only 15 months later did the Ministry of Social
Affairs (the same Ministry that deems that Rosa and Chita are victims of human
trafficking, regardless of the facts) provide Citipointe with retrospective
justification for having essentially stolen Chanti’s daughters.
As you know I was filming with
the family at the time that Citipointe made its offer to provide temporary care
for Rosa and Chita in mid 2008. I had been filming on and off for all of the
girls’ lives and can attest (as does my footage and as do numerous witnesses)
that the girls were never victims of human trafficking in any form. No
reference was made to human trafficking when Leigh Ramsay, Rebecca Brewer and I
had dinner together to discuss the offer being made by Citipointe church to Chanti
– the terms of which Citipointe has never adhered to. Nor is there any mention
of trafficking in any of the early correspondence between myself and Citpointe
when it became clear that Citipointe had no intention of abiding by the promises
it made to Chanti and myself. You, Leigh Ramsay and Citipointe church have
inserted the ‘human trafficking’ angle to into this argument about
reintegration in order to provide yourselves with retrospective justification
for holding Rosa and Chita for 15 months against the express wishes of their
mother, Chanti, and with nothing other than a sham ‘contract’ to provide the
church with the illusion of legality. As
you know, I have a copy of this ‘contract’, have had it translated and sought
legal opinion both in Cambodia and Australia regarding it validity.
There is another reason why
Citipointe chooses to push the ‘human trafficking’ angle. It is a great
marketing ploy: Citipointe has rescued these two delightful young girls from
the ‘human trafficking’ that would have destroyed their young lives! If it
weren’t for Citipointe what would have happened to poor unfortunate Rosa and
Chita? How could anyone with a conscience, anyone who cares about, who loves
children, not want to open their wallets and make a significant financial
contribution to a wonderful organization such as Citipointe? That Rosa and
Chita are not victims of human trafficking, that they have a mum and a dad and
siblings and a home (two homes now) and two extended families are details that
interfere with the narrative that Citipointe chooses to present in order to
keep those donations rolling in.
The other point I wish to make here
relates to the what you write at the top of page 5 of your letter:
“We ask graciously for you to give the government
and us a chance at reintegration without your involvement and with your
compliance on the terms we have requested. However, for a speedier
reintegration of the girls and the family, if we don’t have that opportunity we will have no option but to use the law
against you.” (italics added by myself)
I will deal with the question of
reintegration in my next letter but suffice it to say here, Citipointe has done
absolutely nothing this past close to five years to facilitate reintegration of
Rosa and Chita into their family. Fully half of these girls’ lives has been
spent living in an institution whilst Citipointe makes promise after promise to
Chanti and then reneges on every one of them – causing her enormous distress. Your
reference to ‘speedier reintegration’ is disingenuous – to say the least. There
is much more to be written on this topic bot for the time being I will confine myself to your thinly veiled threat
to use the law against me. A very crude form of intimidation, Brian! Use the
law against me? Which law?
For
the record, Brian, the last time both Leigh Ramsay and I were in Phnom Penh
together, in the middle of last year, I told no-one where I was staying other
than Leigh. One night I returned to my guesthouse to be informed that the
police had come looking for me. They did not say why but did say that they
would be returning to speak with me. As I say, only Leigh (and presumably Citipointe
church) knew where I was staying. At the recommendation of the woman who runs
the guesthouse I moved into a hotel and heard nothing more about it. I mention
this incident now just to place it on record. If I get another visit from the
police it will be fairly clear who has instigated it.
You
write also, “We sincerely do not want to go down a legal path of seeing you
forcibly removed from the situation to achieve the object of reintegration as
that would be the worst possible outcome.” Yes, this would be the worst
possible outcome for Chanti since Citipointe has not done anything this past
close to five years to facilitate reintegration and clearly has no intention of
ever returning Chanti’s children to her care, regardless of her financial
ability to care for her children. With me out of the way (“is it jail you have
in mind, Brian?” it will be business as usual – Citipointe providing its
cashed-up ‘poverty tourists’ with an opportunity to enrich Rosa and Chita’s
lives by washing their hair and all with the blessing of the Ministry of Social
Affairs which, with a wave of its magic wand, has deemed both girls to be
victims of human trafficking.
Having
me arrested (‘forcibly removed’) would be a very short term solution to
Citipointe’s problems, Brian, as I am sure the church’s media advisors will
tell you. Long term it would be a public relations disaster. Even in Cambodia
it would be difficult to convince a court of law that my helping Chanti’s
family as I do is a form of human trafficking, as you suggest in your letter.
As for how this would run in the media in Australia well, I will leave it to
you imagination, Brian. Have me arrested by all means but I suggest that it is
a ploy that will backfire on you and the church and result in questions being
asked that Citipointe will not want to answer – the very questions I have been asking
for years now and which Citipointe has consistently refused to answer.
Rather
than threatening to have me arrested (this is Cambodia and I know such things
are possible!) the more appropriate response from Citipointe would be to put
down in writing, today, just what the church proposes to do by way of
facilitating reintegration. This should include a time frame and a set of goals
that need to be met by both Chanti and Chhork and by Citipointe. Each and every
time the church has entered into a verbal agreement with Chanti it has, once
Chanti has been true to her side of the deal, reneged on its promises.
Not
only will I publish this letter to you on my blog, I am also sending a copy of
it to various media outlets in Australia, along with a copy of your letter.
I
will address the contents of your 21st. Feb letter when time
permits.
best
wishes
James
Ricketson
No comments:
Post a Comment