International Mission of Hope response to allegations of baby
International Mission of Hope response to allegations of baby
trafficking in the World Security Newspaper on December 27, 2001
(©2002 Cherie Clark. Cherie Clark, Executive Director of International Mission of Hope, bears full
responsibility for the contents of this document.)
On December 27, 2001, the World Security Newspaper published an article about
the work of International Mission of Hope in Viet Nam. Unfortunately, the article
contains many inaccuracies – including allegations of baby-trafficking. Since then,
the U.S. INS office in Ho Chi Minh City has faxed and distributed the article by mail
to Senators and other US elected representatives to support INS’ concerns about
IMH’s activities in Viet Nam as the basis for detaining eight families with their nine
children in Ho Chi Minh City. As only one example, on January 15, 2002 Mr. Rick
Sell, Acting Officer in Charge of US INS in Ho Chi Minh City, sent a copy of the
article addressed to the Honorable Zell Miller, Member of Congress, Atlanta,
Georgia. The article was attached as a “supporting document” and in his letter Mr.
Sell commented: “I have also included a copy of an original article appearing in the
Security World newspaper along with a translation regarding IMH”. Therefore,
because INS officers have sent this article to so many elected officials, we have no
choice but to respond.
IMPORTANT NOTE:
described by the Far Eastern Economic Review as vying "for the same lurid appeal"
as the "raunchiest" tabloids in Viet Nam:
The World Security Newspaper (An Ninh The Gioi) has beenhttp://www.feer.com/articles/2001/0103_29/p024region.html
The Far Eastern Economic Review is published by the Dow Jones corporation,
which also publishes The Wall Street Journal. The Far Eastern Economic Review is
described as "Asia's premier business newsweekly," founded in 1946 with a
circulation of about 100,000. It is a
business professionals in Asia. It has the highest credentials there and it recently
won the runner-up award in the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced
International Studies-Novartis International Journalism Competition.
The following is a point-by-point response to the allegations made against
International Mission of Hope in the World Security Newspaper (An Ninh The Gioi)
on December 27, 2001.
very well-respected news magazine read by most(1) "International Mission of Hope"-called "IMH"-is a non governmental
organization with the head-office in Denver, Colorado, U.S.A. and 79/15
Sukhumvit Soi 15 Bangkok, Thailand. The operating network of IMH
spreads all over the U.S., led by Cherie Clark. IMH has had representatives
in nearly all of the Vietnamese provinces.
IMH does NOT have offices outside of Vietnam. IMH’s head office is located at 31
Le Duan, Ha Noi, Vietnam and a branch office at 168 Hai Ba Trung, Ho Chi Minh
City, Vietnam. IMH representatives are only located in these two offices. When
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
2
Cherie Clark’s children attended school in Thailand before the United Nations school
opened in Viet Nam in the early 90’s she rented a house at the above address but
that residence has not been rented or visited by IMH in more than six years.
(2) IMH has a license for setting up a Project Office, which was issued by
PACCOM (The Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations) mentions
clearly that: "...be able to do humanitarian aid activities, but not include
adoption."
IMH does have a license no. 023/UB/GP for a permit for establishing a project office
by the Government’s Committee on Foreign NGO’s Affairs (PACCOM) which was
issued on August 1, 1997. IMH is also sponsored by the Ministry of Labour, Invalids,
and Social Affairs of Vietnam (MOLISA). All licenses for NGO's are given with that
statement that this is not for the purpose of work in adoption - ALL licenses.
Currently, no regulations exist that provide for the licensing of Vietnamese or
Foreign adoption agencies in Vietnam, i.e. it is not possible to obtain an adoption
license in Viet Nam. In practice, governmental figures suggest that over 30 NGO’s in
Vietnam plus nearly 40 other agencies are making international adoption placements
for Vietnamese children (see Bringing the Vietnamese Children Abroad for Adoption,
by Manh Quan –Dong Ho, on
that “[in Vietnam] adoption facilitation is allowed unofficially in return for charitable
work and/or contributions from the NGO and agencies” (see Interview with Larry
Crider, Officer in Charge, Ho Chi Minh City INS, October 2001, on
www.theadoptionguide.com). INS itself recognizeswww.adoptvietnam.org
.)(3) At the end of 1990, contacting with an American working in the field of
social affairs in the American-Vietnamese Committee, we knew that "Cherie
Clark is an international child-trafficker who has been expelled from India,
Korea... and now, she comes to Viet Nam because it is a new market; easy
to do business."
Cherie Clark has never been expelled from any country. She worked in India from
1978 to 1989. In 1989, she resigned as President of International Mission of Hope
(India) Society to be able to give more of her time to the need in Vietnam.
International Mission of Hope (India) Society is still a recognized and respected
orphanage in India. (See
Indian Social/Child Welfare Agencies Recognized by Government of India.”) Ms.
Clark frequently visits International Mission of Hope (India) Society but is no longer
the President of IMH India or working with the Society that she established with the
assistance of Mother Teresa.
Cherie Clark visited Korea on only one occasion for three days with a friend. She
has never facilitated adoptions from Korea nor was she ever expelled from the
country.
http://travel.state.gov/adoption_india.html under “List of(4) From July 25, 1989 to September 1992, IMH visited Binh Dinh and Quy
Nhon many times under the cover of doing charitable activities, but in
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
3
actuality did not help these provinces in any way. Wherever she came, she
used to promise to help, sponsor, but after collecting some children and
taking them to the U.S., Ms. Cherie Clark disappeared.
IMH did visit the province where both Binh Dinh and Quy Nhon are located on
several occasions between 1989-1992 to assess the need of the orphanages,
hospitals and clinics. However IMH never promised or signed any contracts of
agreement to do charitable activities. IMH has
removed a child from Quy Nhon province nor attempted to do adoptions or desired
to do adoptions from this region of Viet Nam.
Quy Nhon is the birthplace of Cherie’s son whom she adopted in 1974 and Binh
Dinh is the birthplace of Cherie’s daughter whom she adopted in 1973. The visits
were social visits by Clark family members to visit the Catholic Sisters who cared for
the Clark children prior to their adoption. Furthermore, IMH built a clinic in My Lai
which was at that time in the same province as Binh Dinh and Quy Nhon during the
same time period (1991). This project was sponsored by the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and is an ongoing project of IMH. The provinces are now separate provinces.
IMH has never facilitated or attempted to facilitate or desired to facilitate any
adoptions from Quang Ngai province despite significant aid work in this province.
never facilitated an adoption nor(5) In Hanoi and some Northern provinces, IMH also operated vivaciously in
many areas. In 1993, IMH signed an agreement with the People's Committee
of Tu Liem, Hanoi on "Sponsorship Project for nurturing center of
orphaned children in Mai Dich, Tu Liem" with $80,000 for constructing the
center; feeding 50 orphaned and abandoned children from newborn to 4
years. In fact, this is a pilot by which IMH lost little, but gained alot. Since
the construction, IMH has used the center as a gathering place, feeding
children collected from other provinces, then looking for Americans who
have a need to adopt by "selling". Because of a change in administrative
border, on December 21, 1998, under the decision of the People's
committee of Hanoi, this center belonged to the People's Committee of Cau
Giay district.
The Cau Giay Center for Orphaned and Malnourished Children (“the Center”) was
developed by Tu Liem District People’s Committee pursuant to Hanoi People’s
Committee Decision no. 2660/QD-UB of November 2, 1992 and the Tu Liem District
People’s Committee’s Certification of Receipt of Full Contributions from IMH dated
September 25, 1994. These documents indicate that the Center is an orphanage
administered by the Tu Liem District People’s Committee. (By Hanoi’s People’s
Committee’s Decision no. 5447/QD-UB of December 21, 1998, the Center was
transferred to Cau Giay District’s People’s Committee.) All the funding agreements
with IMH have a limited term and do not offer IMH ownership of the Center; the
Center is set up and run by the government.
It is lawful for IMH to fund the Center under an agreement with the government.
Under the Regulation on Foreign Non-government Organizations ("Foreign NGOs")
in Vietnam promulgated by the Prime Minister’s Decision 340/TTg of 24 May 1996, a
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
4
Foreign NGO, including a socio-cultural fund, institution, university, education
Center, and a foreign individual, must obtain a license from the relevant government
agency in Vietnam in order to operate in (i) development assistance, and/or (ii)
humanity aid without profits in Vietnam. The Foreign NGO then must operate in
Vietnam within the scope of the license.
Under IMH’s extended License BM023/UB-DA, dated 30 September 2001, IMH is
authorized to aid children facing difficulty conditions. We believe that children facing
difficult conditions include orphaned children, and the License covers the right to
fund orphanages. This is confirmed by various official letters by the government and
agreements between IMH and the government. Just by way of illustration, MOLISA’s
agreement with IMH for the period 1998-2000 provides for IMH’s funding of various
orphanages in different provinces, including the Center in Ha Noi. Various official
letters by the Ha Noi People’s Committee propose that PACCOM extend IMH’s
license on the ground that IMH should be allowed to continue to fund the Center.
Based on these proposals, IMH received its extended License BM023/UB-DA.
(6) Since then, this center has given a hand to IMH to implement successfully
many cases exporting Vietnamese children to the U.S. for profitable
purposes. According to individuals who "sold" their children to IMH, it was
Ms. Hoang Thi Vinh, Director of the center who directly came, persuaded
and received their babies; brought them back to Cau Giay center for
feeding. Understanding more about the way this center works, we know
that in Phu Tho province, there have been 90 children who were fed in Cau
Giay and then "exported" to America. It was easy for Mrs. Vinh to collect
children in Phu Tho because she has a nephew, a "Trojan horse", named
C.T.K, who works as a doctor in the obstetric ward in Phu Tho Hospital.
There is nothing to support this allegation. In fact, according to an affidavit signed by
Dr. Vinh, former Director of Cau Giay Center appointed by the District People’s
Committee, the Center was the only institution of this kind in northern Viet Nam that
was adequately equipped for many years following its establishment:
“Upon the People’s Committee’s receipt of the funds from International Mission of
Hope for the development of the Center, the People’s Committee committed in its
acknowledgement of receipt that ‘the Center shall accept orphans sent from
different provinces’…
“The Center was well known to many hospitals and maternity wards in the north
because many doctors in those institutions were my fellows in medical school…
The rate of babies who were abandoned or who were born into poor families in
Northern provinces is much higher than that in Hanoi, but there was almost no
orphanage in those provinces or, if there was any, the sources of funding were
very limited. For this reason, the Center frequently received requests for
acceptance of babies from Northern provinces. Gradually, the Center became
known as a destination for children who were orphaned, abandoned, malnourished,
or who faced extremely poor conditions…
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
5
Only a few years after the establishment of the Center, many mothers from
distant provinces after getting some information about the Center from their
friends or acquaintances have taken their babies to the Center to request for
help. With the conscience of a physician and the sense of responsibility of a
person with a charitable mission, we have found it to be a must for us to accept
those helpless children and to find parents for them. Some mal-nourished babies
have looked as though they would be unable to survive when they were first
found or were sent to the Center. However, after a period of extensive care in
the Center, they recovered and were adopted. About 50% of the babies were
mal-nourished when arriving at the Center. We had to have some of them
immediately taken to the hospital to save their life. Some others suffered
disabilities or mental disorders and have remained in the Center for many years
without any chance of being adopted…
Upon receipt of an abandonment notification and a request of the police, hospital,
maternity house, etc., as the case may be, we send a doctor to examine the
baby’s health conditions and complete the procedures required by law to take the
baby to the Center. One of the compulsory procedures to be completed is to
have a minutes of abandonment prepared by the police, the hospital or the
maternity house as the case may be. In case that the baby’s birth mother or
family sends their baby to the Center, they have to manifest their wish by writing
a letter of application in which they declare that they voluntarily refer to the
Center for help.”
(7) Another ruthless fact is that when the delegation of the American
Immigration and Naturalization (INS) came to check the real situation of
some children in Cau Giay center, who were waiting to complete
procedures to go to the U.S., director Vinh asked the guard to lock the door
preventing the delegation from entering inside. During that time, Mrs. Vinh
herself looked slyly through the bush to see what the reactions of the
American staff were. Guard of Cau Giay Center under the guideline of
Director Vinh closed the door preventing authoritative officers to come in.
Dr. Quy, the current Director of Cau Giay Center, has stated in a signed affidavit
that:
“The Center never received an American INS as ‘a delegation’. There are some
times appearing only 2 persons: one foreigner and one Vietnamese as an
interpreter. They came to the Center and declared by themselves that they were
from the American INS and they wanted to visit the Center. It is hard to
understand that their visits are always out of working time and without any
introduction. The details as follows:
The first visit: 2 persons came to the Center at 16:00. At that time, Mrs.
Vinh, the Director, ended her work and prepared to go home, but for a
courtesy, she received them although they did not have any introduction.
After 30 minutes, Mrs. Vinh asked them that she would work with them next
day if they had an introduction, and then she saw them off. During seeing
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
6
them off, Mrs. Vinh was shot the picture as mentioned in the article with its
untrue content.
The second visit: Next day, these 2 guests returned the Center out of
working time and no introduction, so Mrs. Vinh had to ask them another day.
The third visit: At noon on a Saturday these 2 guests came to the Center
again without any introduction, like as 2 previous times. The foreigner
showed his card: Larry Crider – Chief of the American INS in Vietnam.
Saturday is day off, so no leader works. There were only nurses, with their
professions, taking care of children. Of course, the nurses could not be on
half of their leader to receive the “Delegation” of 2 persons who, without any
introduction, came to the Center on day off. So the nurses did not open the
gate but only asked them to return on Monday in working time. The gate
has to be locked out of working time and days off to assure for children
under the Center’s regulations. The picture of the locked gate on the
newspaper is misleading.”
It is the Vietnamese government who requires foreign officials to seek permission to
visit the center. The INS officials never presented any such document. When
officials visited from the Italian Government they were accompanied by Vietnamese
Government officials and warmly received. They spent more than two hours
discussing all aspects of the working of the Center. Despite the fact that the Director
of the Cau Giay Center did not have a permit to allow the INS officers to visit, she
allowed them to come into the center and even to take photographs. However the
third visit was on a Saturday morning when the Director of the orphanage was not
present. The nurse informed the officers of this and asked that they return on
Monday when the Director could meet with them. The center is locked after hours
just as the INS office in Ho Chi Minh City locks its doors after operating hours.
Failure to do so by the Center would raise serious suspicions of irresponsible care of
children.
(8) IMH also launched a document in Internet, the first page of this document,
they wrote: "Because all the orphanages in Phu Tho were full, IMH decided
to bring them to Cau Giay center for taking care and nurturing..." (you can
check at the website address:
ridiculous fact is that some authoritative officers came directly to the
Protection Center for Children, Viet Tri, Phu Tho and saw two rows of
houses with ten each row having ten rooms. There were only four
orphaned children below 12 months. This is a real trick in order to hide the
children trafficking activities of IMH.
http://www.imh-vn.org/phutho1.htm". AIn a statement from the Director of Cau Giay Center, Dr. Quy states the following:
“The Feeding Center for Orphaned & Malnourished Children (Center) was
established in 1992 under the Decision No. 2660/QD-UB signed by the Hanoi
City People's Committee on November 20th, 1992. Since its establishment, the
Center has been operated according to its functions & obligations under the
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
7
official correspondence No. 304/UB signed by the Tu Liem District People's
Committee on April 20th, 1993 on guiding for strengthening its operation system
and accepting children into the Feeding Center for Orphaned & Malnourished
Children. At the time of the establishment, there was only one Feeding Center for
Orphaned & Malnourished Children in the North, but children in Hanoi under the
policy were very few, meanwhile there were a lot of ones in special need from
many Northern provinces that had no Feeding Center for Orphaned &
Malnourished Children. At that time, the International Adoption Office of the
Ministry of Labor, Invalids & Social Affairs granted the Center to contact Northern
Provinces to receive children under the policy to bring them to the Center. After
receiving some children from Northern provinces, some families with similar
situation, by themselves, contacted and came to the Center for sending their
children into. Since then, the Center has accepted children from provinces with
the form that birth families voluntarily bring their children under objects of the
policy to the Center and complete all legal documents regulated. When any child
has enough conditions for domestic or international adoption, the Center makes
all paperwork according to the Decree No. 184 of the Ministry of Labor, Invalids &
Social Affairs that a child from what province will be completed all adoption
procedure and organized his giving & receiving ceremony at the Justice
Department of that province.”
(9) What is called "humanitarian support" of IMH was taken off by its victims.
Nguyen Thi Ly, living in Khet hamlet, Kim Duc district, Phu Ninh, Phu Tho
was one of the many victims that sent a complaint letter to the U.S.
Embassy, accusing that: "On November 1, 2000, a group of five people
came to my house by car, introduced themselves as representatives for
IMH, a charitable organization in Tu Liem, Hanoi and asked to buy my child
with 46 million vnd. They gave me 25 million VND in advance as a deposit.
The remaining amount of money, they said that when my child came to Sai
Gon or the U.S. without any difficulties, they would pay me. But so far, I
have never seen what they promised". Thus, is it possible for us to call
those actions as a kind of children trafficking of IMH?
Ms. Nguyen Thi Ly voluntarily relinquished her child to the Cau Giay Center and
signed the appropriate relinquishment form on November 7,2000 which is confirmed
to be factual by the People’s Committee of the province where she resides. To this
date, the child remains in the custody and care of the Center (see photo below). Her
complaint to the USA Embassy is due to a person who came to her house and
deceived her to write a petition with the content as mentioned in the newspaper in
order to defame IMH. Her affidavit on this matter follows:
My name is Nguyen Thi Ly. I was born in 1969. Now I live in Kim Duc commune,
Phu Ninh district, Phu Tho province. My job is farming.
1. On 1 November 2000, I delivered a baby girl and named her Nguyen Thi Ha.
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
8
2. As I was alone and homeless and had to raise another child (who was born in
1993), I faced many difficulties. I decided to send my newly-born child to Cau
Giay Centre one day after I gave birth to her.
3. I decided to send my child to Cau Giay Centre at my own will and also wished
that Ha would be adopted by a family with better conditions.
4. About one month after Ha was sent to Cau Giay Centre, a young man, a little
hunch-backed, around 30 year-old, with a fair complexion and with a black
briefcase came to meet me when I was having lunch with my parents and my
sister’s family at my sister’s house. In the presence of all people at my sister’s
house he introduced himself as a officer of a hospital for mothers and children
and asked me to go out for a talk.
5. When there were only two of us, the man identified himself as Nguyen Van
Tuan, a policeman. He informed me that my child had been sent to the United
States and asked me whether I had received any money from the US
Embassy. In reply I said that I did not know anything about that. In fact, I was
very surprised. The man went on that all the mothers who had their children
adopted by Americans were paid USD 500, an equivalent of VND 46 million.
He said that he was very surprised that I did not receive that amount. He said
that he wanted to help me. The man told me that to obtain the money, I had to
write a letter to the US Embassy under his guidance.
6. I thought that the man was a policeman who was investigating the case and
who meant to help me, so I agreed to write the letter. In fact, I did not know
who was "Peter Peterson," what "INS" meant, and how many Vietnamese
dongs the 500 US dollars were worth. I simply did what the man asked me to
do.
7. The man dictated the letter to me. I had to write three times before the letter
became satisfactory to him. My family told him to let us have the letter
certified by the communal People’s Committee. He said that was not
necessary and took the letter from me and hurriedly left. Before leaving he
promised that I would receive the money in one week. Until now I have not
received any information from him.
8. As the event occurred so quickly and suddenly, my family and I did not realise
that we had been cheated until the man left.
9. In April 2001, a group of people from a charity association came to meet me;
they looked very tense. I realized that they came from the charity association
that Mr Tuan dictated to me in the above letter; I had never met or heard of
this association before. I told them the story and agreed to write a report and
give it to them. I also accompanied them to the Department of Justice to tell
the story to the State authorities.
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
9
10. Then they took me to Cau Giay Centre to visit my daughter Nguyen Thi Ha
and to take a photo with her. Because of what I did, now no adoption
procedures could be completed for my daughter, and my child would have to
stay in the Centre forever
that I wanted the Centre to help me and continue to raise my child, because I
could not afford to raise her.
I undertake that all the above-said is true and shall be responsible to the law for
it.
. I am so sorry for Ha and for what I did. I saidNguyen Thi Ly
IMH is aware of another letter, which is almost identical to Nguyen Thi Ly’s letter to
the US Embassy. The two letters to the US Embassy were written in December
2000. They are written by two women, residing approximately sixty miles apart from
each other, in small villages and the women have never met each other. The
description of the man who solicited the letters is identical.
In January of 2001 Amy Monk of the US Embassy in Hanoi faxed these letters to
Rick Sell (INS) in Ho Chi Minh City. Exhibits in the NOIDs show at the top of the
letter that it was faxed with a notation to Rick Sell from Amy Monk and marked,
“URGENT!!!” IMH came to know of the existence of these letters on April 3, 2001
through MOLISA. On April 4, 2001 Cherie Clark and staff of IMH and Cau Giay
Center visited Nguyen Thi Ly in her village. On that day she signed an affidavit at
the Provincial Department of Justice with the Provincial Police present. Her
explanation was witnessed by the People’s Committee of her commune. On the
same day IMH asked Ms. Nguyen Thi Ly if she would like to come to Hanoi to see
her baby and she agreed. The child was residing at the Cau Giay Center and still
resides there.
On the following day, April 5
meeting in Hanoi at the United States Embassy for adoption facilitators working in
Viet Nam. IMH was present at the meeting as were representatives of other
organizations such as Holt International. Cherie Clark, Executive Director of IMH,
gave Mr. Larry F. Crider (Officer in Charge, INS) a copy of the letter executed by Ms.
Ly, her original relinquishment, and the affidavit executed by Ms. Ly the day before.
She also provided Mr. Crider with photographs of Nguyen Thi Ly with her child.
Cherie Clark showed the contents of the folder to Mr. Crider and handed it over in
the presence of officials of the US Embassy and other adoption facilitators.
At no time were additional questions asked of IMH regarding these papers. Ms.
Nguyen Thi Ly and the other woman, Ms. Luong Thi Trieu, have both stated that INS
never visited or investigated their cases. The letter addressed to Peter Peterson,
Ambassador and Larry Crider OIC INS has surfaced in newspaper stories without
any further explanation. Both women have stated that they have no idea who Peter
Peterson or Larry Crider are. Although these letters were faxed in January of 2001
th, officials of the US Embassy had arranged for aIMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
10
and INS processed more than 135 orphan visas from the same center, the letters
were never questioned. A full year later the letters were used as supporting evidence
in nine NOIDs issued to IMH families between the date of December 27
January 5
received letters from Vietnamese woman claiming that agents of IMH and Cau Giay
Center purchased their babies” and the letter is attached as exhibits B and C to the
NOIDs.
The letters have also been widely distributed by INS to anyone asking for
information on IMH cases - as in the case of Christopher M. Green who filed for
information regarding a delay in his adoption of the child Nguyen Thi Thuong under
the Freedom of Information Act. Mr. Green received the letters from Mr. Larry F.
Crider as “exhibits B and C.” It was not mentioned that the cases had never been
investigated by INS and there was no clarification that IMH had provided INS with
affidavits regarding these cases.
At a meeting with Cherie Clark on October 31, 2001 in the IMH office in Hanoi, Mr.
Crider acknowledged that Cherie Clark had provided him with the letter and the
explanation from Nguyen Thi Ly. IMH and the Phu Tho Police never saw the second
letter from Luong Thi Trieu until it appeared in the NOIDs issued to IMH families.
Luong Thi Trieu has since executed an affidavit stating that she signed the letter
when a man appeared and stated that harm would come to her child if she did not
sign the letter. This threat was made in the presence of her family members.
The Public Security of Phu Tho province has thoroughly investigated both of these
cases, reported their findings to the Ministry of Public Security and written the
following report:
MINISTRY OF PUBLIC SECURITY
P
OF
th andth 2002. The NOIDs state that: “INS and the American Embassy haveUBLIC SECURITY SERVICEPHU THO PROVINCENo.: 08/PA39
Ref. to Imposture concerning adoption
Viet Tri, 2 January 2002
To: Madam Director,
Centre for Orphaned and Malnourished Children (“Centre”)
Hanoi City
Re.:
A swindle case relating to the adoption of a childThe Public Security Service of Phu Tho province acknowledges receipt of letter
215 dated 31 December 2001 of the Centre in which you requested verification of
the allegation that Ms Nguyen Thi Ly of Quarter 10, Kim Duc commune, Phu
Ninh district, Phu Tho province sent her newly born baby girl Nguyen Thi Ha,
who was born on 1 November 2000, to the Centre for fostering and then
submitted a letter to the US Embassy to claim that the Centre had allegedly
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
11
purchased the child at VND 46 million. We have conducted an investigation and
come to the following conclusion.
Ms Ly had totally volunteered to send her baby to the Centre, and this act was
conducted in proper compliance with the procedural requirements imposed by
the law. She did not demand any consideration or support in exchange for so
doing. After the baby had been sent to the Centre, a man who claimed himself to
be a Hanoi Police officer and who then claimed himself to be Tuan from the
Centre, went to Ms Ly’s house to swindle Ms Ly and her family. The man said
that if Ms Ly wrote a petition to the US Embassy, the US Embassy would
intervene in the case and the person who wished to adopt her child would have
to pay her VND 46 million. The man provided Ms Ly some guidance and dictated
her a letter to be sent to the US Embassy to request the adopter to pay the
amount to her. After Ms Ly completed the letter, the man took the letter and
promised that several days later a person from the US Embassy would come to
make payment. Ms Ly said that the letter should be certified by the communal
People’s Committee, but the man replied that there was no need to do that. Ms
Ly and her family became doubtful of being swindled and requested for repossession
of the letter. The man did not return the letter and hired a motorcycle
(xe-om) to escape. At that time, Ms Ly and her family were sure that they had
been swindled, and they reported the whole story to the police.
This was not the only case of this kind. We have found that at the same time, the
man conducted another, similar swindle case in Tam Nong district of Phu Tho
province.
The Public Security Service of Phu Tho province has determined from
investigations that this was a swindle case which gave rise to unhealthy social
opinions and adversely affected the social security and safety and the
Vietnamese traditions and customs. Efforts are being made to identify and arrest
the man in accordance with the law. However, until now the man has not been
identified. We hereby request that your Centre keep track of and identify any
suspect and furnish us with any relevant information for the purpose of resolving
the case.
We hope that the above is helpful to you and look forwards to your co-operation.
By order of the head of Public
Security
Service of Phu Tho province
(Signed and sealed)
Lieut.-Col.
Chief of Department
Nguyen Ngoc Oanh,This document was translated and certified to be accurate translation by VILAF – HONG DUC
(Vietnam International Law Firm) on 10 January 2002.
VO HA DUYEN
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
12
The child of Ms. Nguyen Thi Ly at the Cau Giay Center:
Nguyen Thi Ha, child of Ms. Nguyen Thi Ly
The child of Luong Thi Trieu has been adopted by a Vietnamese family.
(10) Knowing the illegal activities of IMH in Viet Nam, on Nov 12, 2001, the
International Relations Department of the Ministry of Labour, War Invalids
and Social Affairs had a working time with Ms Cherie Clark. At the
meeting, Ms Cherie Clark said that: " IMH implements non-profit and
humanitarian projects in Viet Nam, for the adoption activities, IMH only
cooperates with other organizations which have license from the American
authoritative organs".
A meeting did take place on November 12
authorities. There were no reporters present at this meeting who could have quoted
the conversation at the meeting with Vietnamese Government officials. However,
Cherie Clark did respond to an email from INS OIC Larry Crider when she returned
home from the meeting. A car from the US Embassy was at the Ministry that day.
The purpose of this meeting was to obtain a letter requested by INS officials in order
to clear a group of families who were being delayed by INS in HCM City when they
arrived for visa processing with their legally adopted children. At no time did the
authorities of MOLISA, IMH’s legal partner in Viet Nam, ever state that IMH was
working illegally. To the contrary, they issued a letter to help clarify the Cau Giay
Center and IMH’s work in Viet Nam to enable IMH to clear the group of families
being delayed by INS. Upon receipt of the letter by INS, the families were cleared to
travel to the United States with their adoptive children.
th between Cherie Clark and the MOLISAIMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
13
As stated previously, no regulations exist that provide for the licensing of
Vietnamese or foreign adoption agencies in Vietnam. (See item #2.)
IMH assists families in adopting from Viet Nam. These (American) families must go
through a legally licensed adoption agency in the US. All families adopting from Viet
Nam must have an approved I-600A approval which requires that the family must
meet all State regulations regarding adoption and have an approved homestudy
from a licensed adoption agency and/or Social worker.
(11) This is really a contradictory with the contract that IMH signed with
adoptive parents. There appears many absurd clauses: "Clause 1:
Application fee for adoption dossier: an adoptive family has to pay $1,500
along with the dossier for IMH; when the family gets information about the
introduced children (through IMH) and agrees to adopt him, they must pay
$8.000 more..."
Families must pay an application fee to IMH for preparation of the adoption dossier.
IMH will assist the family in obtaining authentication, notarization and translation of
the documents for the purpose of adoption. Portions of the fee are also used to
support the many humanitarian projects of IMH in Viet Nam. A quick review indicates
that IMH fees are consistent with other agency/facilitator’s fees. (See
http://www.adoptvietnam.org/adoption/agency.htm
.)(12) More absurd clauses are those such as: "We consent and agree not to
contact any congressional, senatorial, or US Embassies officials in
Vietnam without the express consent of IMH, That further, I/we understand
that I/we or any agent (ie: friend, relative, or attorney) on our behalf can
not and will not contact the Orphanage, Ministries or any Vietnamese
authorities without the consent of IMH. And should I/we elect to do so
without the consent of IMH, I/we understand that IMH may withdrawal their
approval of my/our application and all fees paid to IMH will be nonrefundable."
This was added to the
Embassy Officials, US INS and the Orderly Departure Program in Bangkok, Thailand
told us specifically that we should
because of the volume of work it created. It is a statement that is in most
agreements between other agencies and families in the US and overseas. The same
information in the above two paragraphs is present in the nine NOID’s issued to US
families. At no time was the
Viet Nam, however this information was personally handed to US INS official Rick
Sell in the Ho Chi Minh City INS office by an IMH volunteer.
Statement of Understanding many years ago when USNOT allow our families to contact them personallyStatement of Understanding given to any newspaper in(13) Another obvious law violation is that on August 9, 2001, the Ministry of
Justice has official letter proposing all Departments of Justice not receive
adoption dossiers of foreigners through foreign non-governmental
organizations... Yet, January 4, 2001, Mrs. Ha Thi Kim Quy, new director of
Cau Giay Protection and Nourishment Center for Orphaned Children (Mrs.
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
14
Vinh suddenly had resigned on November 1, 2001 without any explanation)
still signed on the document asking for 10 children to go abroad as
adopted ones.
Dr. Vinh did not “suddenly resign on November 1, 2001 without any explanation.” Dr.
Vinh was a government employee assigned to the Center and was past retirement
age. Due to her health, the District People’s Committee issued a decision for her to
retire and concurrently granted a decision for Dr. Ha Thi Kim Quy to become the
Director of the Center on November 1, 2001. Dr. Vinh was 61 years old at the time of
retirement and the usual age of retirement is 55 for most Vietnamese women.
On 9 August 2001, the Ministry of Justice did indeed issue Official Letter 590/TP-HT.
However, Official Letters are not laws or regulations; they are issued from time to
time to publish the government’s policies. Official Letter 590 reads in its pertinent
part:
“the Ministry of Justice respectfully proposes that provincial People’s
Committees: …
2. Instruct your Department of Labor, War Invalids and Social Affairs or other
local departments, pending a new decree,… for existing [aid] projects, they
should continue to be performed, but should not be attached to the Vietnamese
side’s obligation to assign children to [Foreign NGOs] for adoption referrals.”
First, IMH's Agreement with Cau Giay People’s Committee dated 21 May 1999 for
the funding of the Center does not require the Center to “assign” children in the
Center to IMH for adoption referrals. Second, Official Letter 590 is a mere proposal
to local People’s Committees, and some provinces chose not to implement the
proposal as stated. Failure to implement a proposal is not a violation of Vietnamese
law. Even Official Letter 590 states that "existing [aid] projects should continue."
Following is a statement by Dr. Quy regarding the documents signed for the 10
children:
“The Center has 10 children who have had the Decisions on Adoption issued by
People's Committees of City and Province and had the giving and receiving
ceremony on adoption to foreigners implemented by Justice Departments.
Previously, on the foreign adoption procedure, if having a decision of accepting a
child into the Center based upon the Decision No. 154/LDTBXH of the Ministry of
Labor, Invalids and Social Affairs, all Vietnamese competent authorities as well
as American INS recognize. But recently, after these 10 children has finished
their legal procedure, the American INS has not accepted that paper because
they feel that the Decision No. 154/LDTBXH is invalid. That is why I write to
explain the reasons and request them to accept the old procedure as we did
previously. I has not signed any document to request for these 10 children to
foreign countries for adoption as mentioned by the newspaper.”
(14) To deal with the new band, Cau Giay center has changed all center
certificates by the People's Committee certificates in introducing adopted
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
15
children. This once more breaks law because under the law of Viet Nam,
the district level has no power to implement adoption procedures. This
power belongs to the Department of Justice and the local People's
Committee. It is possible to say that Cau Giay center has many
"mysterious" activities which we will pay concentrate in the next issues.
Following is a statement by Dr. Quy, Director of Cau Giay Center, regarding the
documents signed for the ten children:
The Cau Giay District People's Committee granting certifications and introducing
children to adoption as mentioned in the newspaper are untrue. The District
People's Committee granting the certification after having Proces-Verbal on
adoption issued by the City Justice Department and Decision on Adoption issued
by the City People's Committee is that previously for children to adoption, both
Vietnamese and USA sides accepted the certification from the Center, not from
the District People's Committee, the authority manages directly the Center.
Recently, after having all the above papers, the American INS persists to request
the certification from the District People's Committee of Cau Giay District under
the Decision No. 544/QD-UB dated December 12th, 1998 issued by the Hanoi
City People's Committee and the child is brought up at the Center.
This document was specifically requested by US INS officials in Ho Chi Minh City
by a form letter given to US families who were waiting for the visas of their adopted
children. The letter in part reads:
Date: November 28,2001
“This office has received and reviewed the above listed petition and determined
that the following documents are required for further processing….
It is then typed in:
“Documentation issued by the respective People’s Committee or other
government entity maintaining authority over the Cau Giay Orphanage, formally
conferring custody of the beneficiary to said orphanage.”
The document was submitted as asked for from the Cau Giay People’s Committee
and visas were granted to nineteen families in 24 hours by the US Consulate in Ho
Chi Minh City. One family had been delayed in Viet Nam for four weeks before this
request was given to them. The original copy of this document was not returned to
the families, which is normally done with all documents relating to their adoptions.
The information was not used for the Vietnamese side of the adoption process and
was only given over to the US INS office in Ho Chi Minh City for the processing of
the case. It is a confidential adoption document that was not given to any
Vietnamese newspaper by anyone at IMH or by any adopted family.
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
16
(15) So far, for IMH, we know quite clearly that all illegal activities of IMH are
being exposed, members of this organization are preparing for the plan
escaping from Viet Nam, but IMH still gets in stuck with 90 collected
children with whom IMH is trying to do the last haul before fleeing.
This allegation is totally false. None of the IMH representatives in Viet Nam are
planning or preparing to leave Viet Nam. Quite the contrary, they reside with their
families in Viet Nam on visas granted by the Vietnamese Government based on their
work in Viet Nam.
We would also like to comment on the three photos which were printed with the
article with misleading captions. The photo inside was taken during the visit of Mr.
Crider, INS OIC, HCMC and Mr. Dung, translator, at the Cau Giay Center. (There
was no newspaper reporter present when these photos were taken.) The
explanatory comments below the photos belong to Dr. Hoang Thi Vinh, former
Director of Cau Giay Center:
Collected children put in such bad conditions like this, waiting to go abroad!
This photo shows a “mother” playing with our children on a mat. (At the Centre, each
social worker is assigned the responsibility to take care of four to five children, and
we call her the “mother” of these children, so that they all have their “mother”.) In
the hot weather in Vietnam, it is normal to let children play on a mat during day time;
and the two visitors who took the photos were expected to see that our children all
had their own beds because the beds were put just near the mat. Nevertheless, the
newspaper footage’ note, with information provided by Mr Dung and Mr Crider,
reads, “Children collected by IMH are fostered in poor conditions (lying on the
ground), waiting to be leave Vietnam.”
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
17
Director Hoang Thi Vinh was lurking herself in the
bush to see what the delegation did.
The photo showing me seeing off Mr. Dung and Mr. Crider at their visit was given a
note which says, “Director Hoang Thi Vinh was hiding herself behind a bush to keep
an eye on the inspection team.” I believe that these notes were deliberately
distorted.
Guard of Cau Giay Center under the guideline of director Vinh closed the door
preventing authoritative officers to come in.
The article also alleged that the Centre had closed the gate to block away the
“inspection delegation.” We did not receive any “inspection delegation.” In addition,
it has been our practice, which is common all over the world as I believe, to close the
Centre’s gates on week-ends to ensure safety for our children, because fewer
IMH response to allegations of baby trafficking in the World Security Newspaper ©2002 Cherie Clark
18
workers are on duty on the week-ends then on working days. We are sure that even
other types of organizations, even the United States and Vietnamese government
offices, close their gates on week-ends.
The photo above is of Mr. Larry F. Crider, former Officer in Charge, INS, with a
Nurse at the Cau Giay Centre as published in the newspaper. The photo was taken
on a Saturday. The Nurse in the photo stated that only two people came that day:
Mr. Crider and a Vietnamese man. The gate is off the main road and down a small
alley. It would be highly unlikely that a newspaper reporter would have simply been
driving by and taken a picture of Mr. Crider at the gate and find it news worthy
enough to publish on the 30
Mr. Crider is in casual clothing and is attempting to visit a Government Center
without permission on a Saturday. The nurse had no idea who he was and could not
allow him or any other visitor into the center without stated permission and
appropriate officials of the center being present
We sincerely hope that the information we have provided in response to the
allegations in this newspaper article provides a more balanced view of the
th page of a tabloid newspaper. It should be noted thattruenature of IMH’s work in Viet Nam. We would be happy to discuss any of this
information further with interested parties.
International Mission of Hope
31 Le Duan
Hanoi, Viet Nam
imh@imh-vn.org
imhhn@hn.vnn.vn
imhhcmc@hcmc.netnam.vn