Daniela Ibáñez: “More than 85% of companies that receive money do not register their activities” | Interview | NGO | Law | Congress principle

Meera: Against humanity: These are the cases that would be archived if Congress approves, the attorney general’s office said.

—As current regulations dictate, what control capacity does Peru have over money flowing into NGOs from abroad?

precisely, What is currently being discussed is to extend the margin of transparency and oversight to NGOsEspecially those receiving money from international technical cooperation. According to statistics from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, more than 85% of companies that receive money from international technical cooperation do not register their programs, projects or activities with the APCI (Peruvian Agency for International Cooperation)., the agency responsible for overseeing these types of companies. Therefore, monitoring capacity is limited at present. According to APCI, there are about 1,800 registered NGOs, less than 70 are audited and less than 270 voluntarily submit their reports annually. Therefore, there is a gap in some of the funds these NGOs receive from abroad and how they are used.

What is the role of the Financial Intelligence Unit (UIF) in managing these funds?

The FIU supervises the financial activities of non-profit organizations (NPOs), many of which are NGOs. The purpose of the Act is to create a body working with APCI and linked to Sunat, so that there can be greater oversight of international technical cooperation NGOs. They want to do this because the FIU detects many suspicious activities of NPOs and seeks to know which ones should be reported to NGOs. Of course, there are things that need to be fixed in this jurisdiction, for example, the opinion calls for three days to fix APCI’s observations, but these procedures are better, especially for NGOs that are not related to political activities. , but are related to charitable or humanitarian purposes.

—What are the most important points of departure from accepted opinion?

Of course the most important aspect to be discussed is to increase the transparency about the funds they receive, precisely because of what we are talking about: now the powers are less, perhaps, concerns about diverting funds and especially , because these are tax-exempt companies. So it is important to be transparent about what kind of activities they are doing. Now,​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Exists​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ have have already there has done in the past, there must be some improvements to be made. It is important for Congress to read more about examples from, for example, the US, UK, Australia, etc., which monitor non-governmental organizations with political activism elements and protect freedom of expression.

Does such a concept deserve better analysis?

Yes, I think it should be reviewed. There are many observations from various groups including SBS. So I think it’s important to have a review, and it’s transparency and the principle of what APCI is going to be with these increased powers is well-crafted, and the criteria for making it transparent is how these funds are being used, not politicized, but technical criteria. NGOs definitely have some percentage of political activity, not all of them but some do, the criterion on APCI’s side is a technical criterion, not a politicized one..

Meera: 10 Most Controversial Votes in Congress in 2023-2024

—But even as you point out the improvements, you support the proposition….

Yo I support the principle of transparency for the money that enters Peru from international technical cooperation, and that the people in charge of these institutions use this money in the way they say they will use it.. Because this is true and this is very worrying, there are major indications of diversion of funds towards undeclared activities and, I believe, It is important for citizens, in a democracy, to have transparency about the type of money used for political activity.. This must be understood in the context of the electoral regulations in Peru, especially with the 2020 change, where political entities can receive contributions from foreign non-profit legal entities for training, coaching and research. However, this is limited to other national and foreign non-profit legal entities. Therefore, it is important to be transparent about what this money is being used for.

-The ruling establishes a series of minor, serious and very serious violations for these NGOs. Does this not create a disincentive or a disincentive to international cooperation that has important contributions in other respects?

I think it’s important to distinguish between humanitarian and charitable actions, and that deadlines are reasonable. A minor violation would violate the three-day deadline for reporting, and perhaps it could be eased, however, it is important for NGOs, especially those receiving payments above a threshold, to report this money quickly, especially if this money goes to political activity, which is a fact and something other countries do. For example, the United Kingdom has a law that requires non-governmental organizations or organizations seeking political influence in the country to be registered, and that these activities must be transparent, and that failure to register is considered a crime. The US has a Foreign Agent Registration Act. It is important to guide ourselves through these types of models.

– Criticism against this concept endorsed by the Commission on Foreign Relations indicates that it affects freedom of association. What is your opinion on that?

I think freedom of association should not be affected if it is a good example. What is demanded above all is transparency. Freedom of association should not be limited under any criteria unless there is some kind of illegal activity or diversion of funds or these kinds of issues. The operation of companies that receive money from abroad is not prohibited in Peru, this should not be allowed under any circumstances, but it should be transparent.

– Now, but is the context in which this occurs more appropriate? Continual criticism of Congress…

Yes, I think recently Congress has been looking at many reforms in a very accelerated and efficient manner. This past week was the closing day of the Legislature, and we see many things approved, perhaps even premeditated. In the case we are talking about, this is a delicate case, very important for our country, and I think it should be discussed quietly. I believe that the ‘self-pressure’ demanded by the Congress as the next election is approaching is certainly that the bodies involved in foreign-funded political activities are not properly monitored and transparent. I believe that in the political calculus of Congressmen they are trying to include this in the package of political reforms. I think that’s why Congress feels this urgency, but it’s important that these kinds of regulations are planned in advance and very quiet.

Meera: Patricia Cirenos seeks to disqualify the National Prosecutor for documenting the trial of Martin Vizcarra: Arguments of the new complaint

– In a situation not seen before, at least in recent years, 16 embassies, including the European Union, have expressed their concern about the implementation of the project. Doesn’t approving this initiative harm the country’s international reputation?

We need to collect observations held by international embassies. Now, it is also true that the signatories to this statement also have legislation that oversees the work of organizations such as NGOs in their own countries. Even the OECD, which houses many of the countries in the report, has in the past recommended standards for transparency and curbing foreign political influence in many of its member states. The worry is that many have expressed that we may be getting closer to a Nicaragua or Venezuela model, something that certainly shouldn’t happen.

How serious is this nexus between these NGOs who do not register their activities in the money laundering issue?

is something to study. Part of the objective of making finance transparent is to seek out information that is not, at present, available in detail. Now, it is important to distinguish between an NGO and an NGO that receives money from international technical cooperation; That is why criteria should be specified which can provide adequate transparency.

I mentioned earlier that there are more than 3 billion dollars worth of suspicious activities.

Yes, this is a study conducted by the UIF between 2018 and 2020, and this amount that may come from suspicious activities comes from non-profit organizations (NPOs), of which NGOs are a subset, it should not be a small percentage and that is why it is important to study it. (…) There are favorable tax incentives for NGOs and the sums of money that can enter these organizations, if they are not properly controlled, can be diverted towards these types of activities and money laundering assets. Tax havens, illegal mining. We can talk about a series of illegal activities that they may be included. Right now there is no information, so we don’t know for sure, which is why it is important above all to open the transparency criteria.

Precisely, the APCI suggests keeping an updated register of NGOs fostering political activity with funding from technical cooperation. Isn’t this entering more ideological territory? How does one define what is and what is not political activity in an NGO?

Yes, I think it should definitely be categorized correctly. again, We did not invent wildfires, but in OECD countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, the categorization of NGOs with political activities is happening. Along with reasonable criteria, there are incentives within the APCI system, it is important to study the type of rules such that this classification is as technical as possible and is not politicized or interfered with by political interests. Some political activists should be harassed. It’s not about what it’s about, it’s about making information transparent.

—We are currently in parliamentary recess, but should this proposal be seen in the Standing Committee as soon as possible?

The Permanent Commission is a small committee of Congress, so while it can be debated (it is possible if the Permanent Congress makes it a priority), perhaps it is not the most appropriate because it is a small Congress and not fully nationally representative. And because, at this point, I think there are too many criteria to adjust.