# Nauru - United States Department of State

- Nauru HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Nauru				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Nauru																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																																																		f. Transnational Repression																																																																											g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																											c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in Nauru during the year.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of:  serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media freedom, including government control of all media; and extensive gender-based violence, including domestic or intimate partner violence and sexual violence.The government took credible steps to identify and punish officials who may have committed human rights abuses.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were no reports the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, during the year.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The constitution prohibited such practices, and there were no reports government officials employed them.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						There were no significant reports regarding prison conditions that raised human rights concerns.Administration:  There were no reports authorities failed to conduct proper investigations of credible allegations of mistreatment.Independent Monitoring:  The government permitted prison and detention center monitoring visits by independent human rights observers.  There were no reports such visits occurred during the year.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The law prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention while providing for the right for any person to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court, and the government generally observed these requirements.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						Authorities made arrests based either on warrants or for proximate cause by a police officer witnessing a crime.  Police could hold a person for a maximum of 24 hours without a hearing before a magistrate.  Authorities informed detainees promptly of the charges against them.  The bail system functioned properly.  The law provided for accused persons to have access to legal assistance, but qualified assistance was not always available.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The constitution provided for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected judicial independence and impartiality.																Trial Procedures						The constitution provided for the right to a fair and public trial, and an independent judiciary generally enforced this right.There was no legal provision for traditional reconciliation mechanisms; however, as a mitigating factor in sentencing, apologies and reconciliation frequently played an informal role in criminal proceedings.  This was sometimes due to communal pressure.The law limited defendants’ access to overseas lawyers, barring them from participating in local cases unless instructed by a local lawyer or pleader with 10 years of legal experience in Nauruan law.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.																										f. Transnational Repression										Not applicable.																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution										Not applicable.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The constitution prohibited such actions, and there were no reports the government failed to respect these prohibitions.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media; however, the government owned all media and exercised some editorial control over content.Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media:  The government owned all media, giving it significant control over published and broadcast content.Libel/Slander Laws:  By law “unlawful vilification” and “criminal defamation” were punishable by a maximum three years’ imprisonment.  There were no reports of arrests for breach of the law.																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The constitution provided for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										Neither the constitution nor the law specifically provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, but the government generally respected these rights for its citizens.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other humanitarian organizations in providing protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, asylum seekers, stateless persons, or other persons of concern.Access to Asylum:  The law provided for the granting of asylum or refugee status, and the government had a system for providing protection to refugees.  The law included a provision for nonrefoulement.  Refugee advocates noted, however, the government allowed refugees to reside in the country only temporarily pending resettlement to a third country.  The government did not provide a pathway to gain citizenship.Abuse of Refugees and Asylum Seekers:  As of June 30, the last refugee held in Nauru departed the Regional Processing Center, ending the Australian government’s offshore processing of asylum seekers in the country.  However, In September, another 11 asylum seekers were sent from Australia to the offshore processing center.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The constitution and law provided citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections:  International observers considered the most recent parliamentary election, held in September 2022, to be generally free and fair, although interlocutors noted allegations of vote buying and constituency hopping prior to the election.Participation of Women and Members of Marginalized or Vulnerable Groups:  No laws limited participation of women and members of marginalized or vulnerable groups in the political process, and they did participate; however, due to the cultural expectation that women’s roles were in the home and a lack of access to information on election fundraising, the number of women holding elected office was significantly lower than that of men.  There were two women in the 19-member parliament.The country had an almost entirely homogeneous Micronesian population.  There were no members of minority groups in parliament or the cabinet.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						The law provided criminal penalties for corruption by officials, and the government generally implemented the law effectively.  There were no reports of government corruption.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						The government did not restrict the establishment or operation of local human rights organizations, but no such groups existed.  No international human rights organizations maintained offices in the country.Government Human Rights Bodies:  The Department of Justice had a Human Rights Section, which was adequately staffed and generally effective.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence:  Rape of women or men was a crime and carried a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment.  The law applied penalties for spousal and intimate partner rape.  Police generally investigated reported rape cases, and the courts prosecuted cases, although observers said many instances of rape and sexual abuse went unreported.  The law did not address domestic violence specifically, but authorities prosecuted domestic violence cases under laws against common assault.  The maximum penalty for simple assault was one year in prison.  The maximum penalty for assault involving bodily harm was three years’ imprisonment.Police and judiciary treated major incidents and unresolved family disputes seriously.Police stated they received frequent complaints of domestic violence.  Families normally sought to reconcile such problems informally and, if necessary, communally.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment:  There was no law against sexual harassment, but authorities prosecuted harassment involving physical assault under assault laws.Discrimination:  The country was traditionally a matrilineal society, and the law provided the same legal status and rights for women and men, including under family, religious, labor, property, nationality, and inheritance laws.  The government did not enforce the law effectively.The law did not prohibit discrimination based on sex in employment.  The law required that public servants receive equal pay for work of equal value, and although women had access to leadership positions within the public sector, women working in the private sector did not.The government did not effectively enforce the law, and discrimination against women in employment and wages in the private sector occurred.  Societal pressure to provide care for the family and lower wages limited opportunities for women.  There were no reports the government took action to prevent or respond to employment discrimination.Reproductive Rights:  There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.The UN Population Fund (UNFPA) reported a high unmet need for family-planning commodities.  Causes of this included limited access to adequate sexual health and reproductive services, perceptions of family planning services as inconvenient, unsatisfactory, or culturally insensitive; cultural or religious opposition; lack of skills among those dispensing contraceptives and family planning services; and misconceptions regarding side effects.Emergency contraception as part of the family planning and contraception method mix was available to individuals.  The government provided some access to sexual and reproductive health services, including emergency contraception and postexposure prophylaxis, for survivors of sexual violence.  Such access, however, was limited by social stigma, cultural practices, and popularly accepted misconceptions.  According to UNFPA, access to adolescent reproductive health services and information was limited.  Other causes were inadequate access to contraceptives and cultural factors.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The constitution stated, “every person in Nauru...has the right, whatever his race, place of origin, political opinions, color, creed or sex,” to life, liberty, security of the person, property, and the protection of the law; to freedom of conscience, of expression, and of peaceful assembly and association; and to respect for their private and family life.It was unclear whether the government enforced these provisions effectively.																																				Children										Child Abuse:  The law prohibited child abuse and established comprehensive measures, including mandatory reporting, to protect children from abuse.  According to civil society groups, child abuse was a problem.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage:  The law prohibited marriage by persons younger than 18.  It was unclear whether the government effectively enforced this law.Sexual Exploitation of Children:  The law prohibited the sale of children, offering or using a child for commercial sexual exploitation, and practices related to child pornography.  The minimum age for consensual sex was 17.  There were standardized penalties for sexual exploitation of children; intentional sexual intercourse with a child younger than age 16 was punishable by 25 years’ imprisonment.  Sexual intercourse with a child younger than 13 carried a penalty of life imprisonment.The law established penalties for taking images of children’s private acts and genitalia.  If the child was younger than age 16, the maximum penalty was 10 years’ imprisonment, and if younger than 13, it was 15 years’ imprisonment.  The law prescribed tougher penalties for involving children to produce pornographic material.  The maximum penalty if the child was younger than 16 was 15 years’ imprisonment and 20 years’ imprisonment if the child was younger than 13.  The law outlawed the electronic publication and transmission of child pornography.Authorities enforced laws against commercial sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.																																				Antisemitism										The country did not have a Jewish community, and there were no known reports of antisemitic incidents.																																				Trafficking in Persons										There were no confirmed reports during the year that traffickers exploited domestic or foreign victims in Nauru or that traffickers exploited victims from abroad.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization:  No laws criminalized consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults.Violence and Harassment:  The law did not specifically cite sexual orientation.  No law addressed hate crimes.  No criminal justice mechanisms existed to aid in the prosecution of bias-motivated crimes against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) individuals.  There were isolated reports of violence against persons based on sexual orientation and gender identity.Discrimination:  The law did not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics; nor did it recognize LGBTQI+ individuals, couples, and their families.  Observers noted instances of social discrimination and some police intimidation.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition:  Legal gender recognition was not available.  There were no nonbinary or intersex options on government documents.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices:  There were no reports of involuntary or coercive medical practices or so-called conversion therapy targeting LGBTQI+ individuals.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly:  There were no reports of such restrictions.																																				Persons with Disabilities										Persons with disabilities could access education, health services, some public buildings, and transportation on an equal basis with others.  No legislation mandated services for persons with disabilities or access to public buildings.  Although the government installed mobility ramps in some public buildings, many private buildings were not accessible.  The Department of Education had a special education adviser responsible for education for students with disabilities and operated an Able and Disable Center that provided training for teachers and classes for students with learning difficulties and disabilities.There were no reports of discrimination against persons with disabilities in employment, but social stigma likely led to decreased opportunities for employment.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law provided for the right of workers to form and join independent trade unions or other associations.  It restricted freedom of association for police.  While the right to strike was neither protected nor prohibited by law, a civil servant could not foment or take part in a strike and could be summarily dismissed if found guilty of organizing a strike.  The law was silent on the right of workers to bargain collectively.  The law did not prohibit antiunion discrimination, and there was no legal requirement to reinstate workers dismissed due to union activity; however, workers could seek redress through the civil court system.The government effectively enforced the law, although gaps in worker protections remained.  Penalties for violations included fines, which were commensurate with those for other laws involving denials of civil rights.  Penalties were regularly applied against violators.The country lacked formal trade unions.  Worker interests were represented by informal associations.  The transient nature of the mostly foreign workforce hampered efforts to organize trade unions.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										The constitution prohibited but did not criminalize all forms of forced or compulsory labor.  The government did not effectively enforce the law.  The law did not stipulate penalties, and there were no labor inspectors.  Civil courts handled cases of forced labor.  There were no reports of forced labor or of government efforts to investigate, prosecute perpetrators, or remove victims of forced labor.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										There were no confirmed reports during the year of the worst forms of child labor.  The worst forms of child labor were not prohibited.  The law set the minimum age of employment at 16.  No regulations governed the type of work, occupation, or hours for workers younger than age 18, nor did they identify hazardous occupations.  The government effectively enforced the law in the public sector but conducted no workplace inspections of private businesses.  Penalties were not commensurate with those for other analogous serious crimes but were regularly applied against violators.The two largest employers – the government and the phosphate industry – respected minimum age restrictions.																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws:  The minimum starting salary for public-sector employees was above the poverty level.  There was no minimum salary for the private sector.  The law outlined a standard eight-hour workday for permanent and contract employees; workers were not required to work longer than nine hours.Public-service regulations governed salaries, working hours, vacation periods, and other employment matters for government workers, who constituted more than 90 percent of salaried workers.  The government had a graduated salary system for public-service officers and employees.  The law provided for maternity leave after a woman had completed six months of employment.There was no limit to the maximum number of accumulated overtime hours and no prohibition on excessive or compulsory overtime for workers in the public sector.  No specific regulations governed overtime or overtime pay for private-sector workers.Occupational Safety and Health:  Although the government set some occupational safety and health (OSH) standards, they did not have the force of law.  The law did not provide workers the right to remove themselves from a hazardous workplace without jeopardizing their employment.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement:  The Department of Human Resources and Labor effectively enforced OSH standards in the public sector.  Enforcement was lax in the private sector, but no violations of labor regulations were reported.  The law allowed the department the right to inspect a workplace without prior notification.  Authorities could charge an employer with a criminal offense if found to be in violation of the labor law or the provisions of an employment contract.  Penalties were commensurate with those for similar violations and were regularly applied.  The number of inspectors was insufficient to monitor compliance fully.Enforcement of workplace health and safety requirements was lax.Most workers were employed in the informal sector in subsistence agriculture, fishing, and copra gathering.  Laws and regulations on working conditions applied to the informal sector but were not enforced.  Violations were reportedly common, but inspections of the informal sector did not occur.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											The Bahamas											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																				f. Transnational Repression																																																						g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																						c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs																								Nauru
- Nauru National Day Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the United States of America, I wish to extend my congratulations to the Republic of Nauru as it celebrates the 56th anniversary of its independence.As proud members of a common Pacific family, the United States and Nauru share a history of democratic values and strong people-to-people ties. We will continue to work together to address the shared challenges facing our two countries, including confronting the climate crisis, advancing economic prosperity, and promoting a free and open Blue Pacific region. As we look ahead to deepening our bilateral relationship over the next year, my best wishes are with the people of Nauru.
- Nauru Officially Breaks Ties with Taiwan Matthew Miller, Department SpokespersonWhile the Government of Nauru’s action on January 15 to sever its diplomatic relationship with Taiwan is a sovereign decision, it is nonetheless a disappointing one.Taiwan is a reliable, likeminded, and democratic partner. The PRC often makes promises in exchange for diplomatic relations that ultimately remain unfulfilled. We encourage all countries to expand engagement with Taiwan and to continue to support democracy, good governance, transparency, and adherence to the rule of law.The United States will continue to deepen and expand our engagement with Taiwan on our many shared interests and values, support Taiwan’s meaningful participation in the international community, and deepen our economic ties, consistent with our longstanding one China policy.
- Digital Press Briefing with Daniel J. Kritenbrink, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs and Dr. Mira Rapp-Hooper, Special Assistant to the President and NSC Senior Director for East Asia and Oceania Daniel J. Kritenbrink, Assistant SecretaryBureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDr. Mira Rapp-Hooper, Special Assistant to the President and NSC Senior Director for East Asia and OceaniaMODERATOR:  Greetings from the U.S. Department of State’s Asia Pacific Media Hub.  I would like to welcome journalists today to the on-the-record briefing with Daniel J. Kritenbrink, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, and Dr. Mira Rapp-Hooper, Special Assistant to the President and National Security Council Senior Director for East Asia and Oceania.  The speakers will provide a readout on the U.S.-Pacific Islands Forum Summit.With that, let’s get started.  Dr. Rapp-Hooper, I’ll turn it over to you for your opening remarks.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Thanks so much, and thanks to you all for being here this evening, this morning.  We’re glad to have the opportunity to read you out the President’s really consequential summit of Pacific Islands Forum leaders here in Washington just a few days ago, and thrilled to be joining my friend and colleague Dan Kritenbrink to do so.As you know, this week, leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum were all in Washington for the second-ever U.S.-Pacific Island Leaders Summit.  By all accounts, this was an extremely successful and productive visit for the PIF leaders and for the President.  I’ll start with a brief recap of the leaders’ engagements over the past few days, and then I’ll discuss in brief some of the key deliverables that were announced over the course of the summit before handing the floor over to Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink.In advance of the formal meetings that took place in Washington, we got our summit started early on Sunday when Pacific Island Forum leaders took a trip from New York on a special Amtrak train down to Baltimore.  In Baltimore, the leaders attended a Baltimore Ravens game, where they were recognized for their role as American friends in the Indo-Pacific.  They even made it onto the field, where they were recognized before the game began.After the game, they toured a Coast Guard cutter ship in the Baltimore Harbor, the USS Forward, and had a meeting and opportunity to exchange views with Commandant of the Coast Guard Admiral Linda Fagan on key issues to Pacific Island leaders, including combating illegal fishing and effectively managing maritime domains.Following the Pacific Island Forum leaders’ trip to Baltimore, the leaders came to Washington, where they were hosted by President Biden at the White House on Monday for the second-ever U.S.-Pacific Summit.  They also attended a climate roundtable hosted by Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry as well as a dinner hosted by Secretary Blinken and Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield about which Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink will say more in just a moment.On Tuesday, the leaders also met with members of the philanthropic community, U.S. businesses, and members of Congress.  We closed out the summit with a reception hosted by our friends at the Australian embassy, emphasizing the depths of our people-to-people ties.  And I look forward to Dan speaking to those engagements in a bit more detail very soon.At the summit with PIF leaders on Monday, President Biden reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to shared regional priorities and to deepening our cooperation, including to tackling the climate crisis, advancing economic growth, promoting sustainable development, countering illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, and expanding our people-to-people ties.Before getting into the deliverables that we unveiled on Monday, I’d first like to take a step back and recognize the milestones of engagement with PIF countries that we have passed over the course of the last couple of years.Just in the last year, we have opened new embassies in the Solomon Islands and Tonga in record time, thanks in no small part to the extraordinary work of our colleagues at the State Department.  We opened a USAID regional mission in Fiji and are returning the Peace Corps to the region after years of relative absence.  We are enhancing our engagement with the Pacific Islands Forum as the region’s leading institution, and we continue to expand U.S. cooperation and assistance programs throughout the region.At this year’s summit, we announced expanded ties with our recognition, our diplomatic recognition, of the Cook Islands and Niue, and the establishment of diplomatic relations with both of these Pacific Island nations.Since last year’s summit, this May, Secretary Blinken met with the Pacific Island Forum leaders in Papua New Guinea, and at this week’s summit, the Biden-Harris administration has continued to show that we are delivering on our promises.  All told, we have now announced a commitment to work with Congress towards over $8 billion in new funding and programs for the Pacific Island region.  And again, this is just in the last year.On Monday, President Biden announced a new slate of activities, including plans to work with Congress to request and provide nearly $200 million in new funding.  These programs seek to address the priority issues we hear about from Pacific Island leaders, including the climate crisis – which is existential for many of our Pacific Island friends – and we always stand shoulder to shoulder with them as they work to meet the challenge to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.The President on Monday also reaffirmed his commitment to the security of the Blue Pacific Continent, and to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, the United States has announced that it will provide over $11 million to bring cutting-edge maritime domain awareness technology to the Pacific through the Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness to help improve the maritime picture and law enforcement information analysis and provision amongst our Pacific Island friends.We’re also delivering on our promise to invest in the prosperity of the region.  As the President has announced, we will invest an additional $40 million working with Congress to expand our Pacific Islands Infrastructure Initiative.  Through this initiative, we’re bringing technical assistance and project preparation work needed to identify commercially viable projects through partners in the U.S. Government, including the U.S. Trade and Development Agency.These are just a few of the key initiatives announced as part of our summit.  One more that I’d flag that we’re happy to go into during our question-and-answer period involves a new microfinance facility that will offer small and micro loans to Pacific Island businesses so that entrepreneurs there have the chance to thrive.  And these deliverables we are working towards illustrate the depths of our collaboration with the Pacific Islands and the promise of expanding our partnership for many years to come.As President Biden has said, the United States is and will long remain a proud Pacific nation.  And as a Pacific nation, the United States is here for the long haul and will continue to deliver on our promises to our partners in the region.I’ll hand the floor over to Dan to talk more about Secretary Blinken’s consequential engagements with the PIF leaders throughout the summit.  Dan, over to you.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, thanks so much, and good evening, everyone.  I think, as my esteemed colleague Dr. Mira Rapp-Hooper has outlined, this was a tremendously successful summit that I think demonstrates further the breadth and depth of America’s commitment to the Pacific.  And Mira, I thought that was really a tremendous rundown of a momentous series of events related to the U.S.-Pacific Islands Forum Summit.I thought that I would focus my remarks a bit more narrowly on some of Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s significant engagements with the Pacific Island leaders here in Washington, and then also mention briefly the engagement involving the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry’s meetings during the summit as well.As Secretary Blinken put it, our engagements were designed to show that we’re seizing on the possibilities of this moment to build a more secure, resilient, inclusive, and prosperous Pacific region.As Secretary Blinken also said on Monday night, the fundamental fact is this:  Our fates are tied together.  We’ve long been committed development partners to the Pacific Islands, and we’re excited to bring new energy and resources to the Pacific, working with partners in the Pacific Islands on our shared goal of meeting Pacific priorities and supporting Pacific institutions.We saw this last week, last Friday at the UN – at the end of the UN General Assembly High-Level Week, when Secretary Blinken hosted a Partners in the Blue Pacific ministerial in New York.  And at that meeting on Friday, we aimed to highlight the tremendous work we’ve done to advance more effective and efficient cooperation and engagement with our Pacific partners, designed to strengthen Pacific regionalism and to facilitate and encourage other partners and institutions to engage and consult with the Pacific.  And of course those efforts flowed nicely into the Pacific Islands Forum Summit itself, which began, as Mira indicated, on Monday.I think a clear sign of our commitment to the Pacific region came through the establishment of diplomatic relations with both Niue and the Cook Islands.  Following an announcement from President Biden earlier on Monday, Secretary Blinken hosted Niue Premier Dalton Tagelagi and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown for two separate signing ceremonies here in the State Department Treaty Room to make these momentous occasions.  These historic announcements reaffirmed our joint commitments to deepen our cooperation as equal and sovereign partners, guided by respect, genuine engagement, and partnership.  We fully anticipate working even closer with Niue and the Cook Islands on our shared priorities, which include the climate crisis, renewable energy, Pacific regionalism, and good governance, among many others.Secretary Blinken then had the pleasure of joining the millennium compact corporation CEO Alice Albright and iKiribati President Taneti Maamau for a signing ceremony for an MCC-Kiribati threshold program grant agreement that will provide up to $29.1 million to promote safe, accessible, decent, and inclusive employment opportunities for Kiribati workers, both in Kiribati and across the region.  This will be the United States’ largest direct grant investment in Kiribati to date, and it is an agreement that we believe will deliver clear results and benefits to people in the Pacific Islands and solve real challenges to shape our future.I wanted to mention, also on Monday evening, Secretary Blinken hosted really a spectacular dinner here at the State Department in the newly renovated Benjamin Franklin Room, which was an opportunity for the Secretary and other leaders across the U.S. Government to meet with all of the Pacific Island leaders and to discuss in more detail ways that we can expand our cooperation in the future.  The Secretary was delighted to host the banquet with his co-host, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield – of course, America’s Permanent Representative to the UN – and at the dinner, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield announced that she will be America’s representative to the next Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Summit in November of this year.I think the final event of the summit, the two-day summit, for Secretary Blinken was his meeting with representatives from the Freely Associated States.  Namely, he met with Marshall Islands Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Ading, he met with Federated States of Micronesia President Simina, and with Palau President Whipps.  That was on Tuesday, late Tuesday afternoon.During the meeting, the Secretary took the opportunity to underscore the strong people-to-people ties and shared history underpinned by the Compacts of Free Association between the U.S. and these three Freely Associated States.  The Secretary commended the dignitaries for the progress in the negotiations on the compact-related agreements, which we believe signals a new era in our partnerships that will help advance a secure, free, and open Pacific.  And we look forward to further progress on these Compacts of Free Association agreements in the months to come.Finally, of course, climate change, as Mira indicated, was a major topic of discussions since it is such an existential challenge, and we recognize it, as our partners do, as the single greatest threat facing the Blue Pacific.Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry met with Pacific leaders on Monday to discuss the climate crisis and ocean resilience.  Secretary Kerry reiterated the United States’ new policy on sea-level rise and statehood that President Biden had earlier announced as well as new investments in strengthening early warning systems and sustainable development.So in the interest of time, why don’t I stop there.  I know that Mira and I will be delighted to take your questions.  Thanks.MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Thank you, Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink.  We’ll now turn it over to the question-and-answer portion of today’s briefing.  The first question will go to Ralph Jennings from the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong, who sent his question in advance:  “How does the recent U.S. engagement with the South Pacific help offset China’s economic influence in the region?”ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, do you want to take that one first or you want me to dive in?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  I’m happy to take that one, Dan.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Please.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  And I’ll turn to you in just a moment to add your thoughts.  Thanks for the question.  I would say just as a topline matter, when we’re working with our Pacific Island friends, we’re really not focused principally on China.  We’re focused on what the United States can offer as a likeminded partner to this group of countries.  And we are very focused on delivering positive, attractive alternatives to these countries that can help them and their people thrive.  But it’s really about what we stand for together alongside our Pacific Island partners, not about who or what we’re against.But with that in mind, I will note that, as the President announced, our $200 million in new programs for Pacific Island Forum nations do include some really consequential new programs that we believe are going to help our friends in the Pacific to generate the economic dynamism that they’re looking for to offset and combat climate change and to continue their recovery from the pandemic, where they were especially hard-hit.Just as a few examples, we’re stepping up our infrastructure efforts.  Specifically, as I mentioned, the President announced $40 million to new infrastructure projects in the Pacific Islands.  He also announced that the United States will be undertaking new submarine cable projects in the Pacific Islands to build secure, reliable connectivity amongst Pacific Island nations and to ensure that our friends there have the basic digital infrastructure that they need, like reliable, speedy internet on which so many businesses and individuals rely.  And of course, that submarine cable work builds on work we have been doing in recent years, including with the East Micronesia Cable, where we’ve already begun work to improve high-quality and more reliable secure communications for over 100,000 people in the Pacific Islands.  So infrastructure is a big part of our work.We are also delivering a new Millennium Challenge Corporation project with the Government of Kiribati, which is intended to advance economic growth in Kiribati in partnership with the International Labor Organization and American Councils of International Education to bolster and promote safe, accessible, and inclusive employment opportunities for Kiribati workers.Through the Quad, we are partnering with the Government of Palau to implement the deployment of a new ORAN network that is a next-generation, secure mobile network to help Palau get the secure connectivity that it needs.  And as we mentioned at the top of the call, the U.S. Trade and Development Agency is working throughout the Pacific Islands to identify through its technical work opportunities for more viable projects in the months and years to come.So this is just a sampling of the work that we’re doing to try to bring the economic tools we have to bear to help Pacific economies thrive, but I’ll hand it back to Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink to see what he might like to add.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, that’s a brilliant answer.  I – all I could really do is foot-stomp what Mira has already said.  We approach the region from the perspective of advancing our affirmative agenda – the shared interests and values that we hold in common with our Pacific partners.That’s our focus, not any notion of focusing on a third party.  And as we often say, we have a regional strategy.  We’re focused on our affirmative agenda.  And I think if we continue to deliver benefits to our partners in the Indo-Pacific, I’m very confident and optimistic about our future together.In particular, as Dr. Rapp-Hooper has indicated, our entire approach to the Pacific is predicated on meeting our Pacific Island friends where they live.  In other words, in conversation with our Pacific partners, we have understood clearly what their needs and concerns and interests are, as outlined very clearly in the Pacific Islands Forum’s 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.  And by design, our work and the work of our other partners through the Partners in the Blue Pacific is specifically designed to address the needs that they themselves have outlined in their strategy.Again, that is the focus of our efforts, not any third parties.  Thank you.MODERATOR:  Okay.  The next question is going to go to Rurika Imahashi, who submitted the question on the chat, the Q&amp;A box here on Zoom.  “Our understanding is that the Marshall Islands parliament will soon certify the compact deal with the U.S.  What is the U.S. understanding on the development of the agreement?”  So we’ll answer that part.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, why don’t I take an initial stab at this one and we’ll ask you, obviously, to add anything else that you would like.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Sounds good.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  I guess what I would say to any friends with questions about the compacts, I would just simply underscore that the compacts remain of vital importance to the United States.  I think they recognize our deep and historic ties to the three Freely Associated States.  I think they embody the strong ties between the peoples and the governments of the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau.  And we remain very optimistic about the progress that we’ve made in the compact-related negotiations.I know when Secretary Blinken sat down with the leaders of the three Freely Associated States, he really commended them for the progress that we’ve made.  I think as everyone is tracking, we signed COFA-related agreements with Palau in May and with the Federated States of Micronesia in May, and we’ve made tremendous progress with our friends in the Marshall Islands.  We’re confident that we will conclude all of these agreements very soon and we will continue to build out these incredibly significant relationships that are central to everything we hope to achieve in the Pacific.And I think, as friends are tracking, that these compacts really are extraordinary agreements that are 20-year agreements in duration, and again, we’re confident that we will conclude them and implement them very soon.But, Mira, would you like to add anything to that?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Not much that I could add, Dan, except just to foot-stomp the point that we believe we are well on our way; we’ll soon be at a successful conclusion and very much look forward to being able to mark that milestone after months of really terrific cooperation with all of the Freely Associated States.  That’s all for me.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Yeah, and maybe just one final comment.  I think Mira’s comments reminded me that I do want to recognize that obviously this work is all being done at the direction of President Biden and Secretary Blinken, but our Special Presidential Envoy for Compact Negotiations Joe Yun and his team have also done a brilliant job and I really commend them.  And as Mira indicated, we’re very close and look forward to implementing them very soon.MODERATOR:  The next question will go to Stephen Wright from Radio Free Asia’s BenarNews Service.  Stephen, I also see that your hand is up.  If you’d like to unmute and ask your question, please go ahead.  Yeah, please go ahead and unmute.QUESTION:  Yeah, thanks.  Prime Minister Sogavare didn’t attend the recent summit and subsequently he said the U.S. should show respect to Pacific Island leaders and not lecture them at summits.  What do you think that shows about the progress of U.S. and Solomon Islands relations?  And are there any plans to have an ambassador at the new but smaller embassy in the Solomon Islands?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Thanks very much.  This is Mira; I’m happy to take a first crack at this, and Dan, perhaps I’ll pass to you just on the embassy piece.We were disappointed that Prime Minister Sogavare was unable to attend the summit in Washington.  We did reach out, including at the very highest levels, to encourage him to join us for this terrific conversation that we’ve been laying out for you here, this opportunity to engage amongst friends, and we’re disappointed that he declined to do so.I don’t have much to say about the specific comments except to note, I think as we have been throughout this call tonight, that the conversation with the President, with the Secretary of State, with every cabinet official and member of Congress at the Pacific Island Forum leaders met with was collaborative, constructive, forward-looking, and I think most importantly involved an incredible amount of listening by U.S. Government officials to continue to refine their understanding of what our Pacific Island Forum friends are most looking for from us.So that’s the approach that we’re going to continue to take.  We continue to believe that it’s the right approach.  We feel that our three really dynamic days of programming show that we’re on the right track, and we look forward to continuing that work on the road ahead.Dan, over to you.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Thank you, Mira.  Maybe specifically on the question regarding our presence in the Solomon Islands, I’ll just note that we were excited and honored to open our new U.S. embassy in Honiara in January of this year, which was less than one year after Secretary Blinken announced our intent to do so.  Really excited about the work that our embassy colleagues there, led by Chargé Russ Comeau – excited about the work that they’re doing, again, to build our friendship and our ties with the people of the Solmon Islands and ensure that we work to deliver tangible benefits to our partners there.Of course, any new first step in opening an embassy involves staffing it, and of course our chargé d’affaires currently leading our embassy efforts there, and we recognized him for his really stellar work there.I would simply say at this point we have taken a number of steps internally to identify the U.S. ambassador, the next U.S. ambassador to the Solomon Islands, and I don’t have anything to announce to you this evening.  But I hope we’ll have something to announce in the near future, but we are certainly working towards that end.  Thank you.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Dan, if I may just jump in really quickly to add one additional detail.  I did want to note, as Dan noted, the – our wonderful Chargé Russ Comeau in the Solmon Islands was given a really important inaugural award at the dinner so graciously hosted by Secretary Blinken during the Pacific Island Forum Summit.  That inaugural award commemorates intrepid diplomacy in the Pacific Islands, and Chargé Comeau really embodies that to a T.  He has been just absolutely indefatigable in working to build U.S.-Solomons ties.I underscore that because I do want to make clear that the purpose of an award like this is to continue to draw attention to and raise up Americans who are doing their utmost on the ground to build ties with the Pacific Islands.  And I think the fact that we’ve established this award this year, that it was given by the Secretary of State, is just yet another demonstration that we are continuing to create incentives, recognize achievements so that Americans continue to step up and deliver on our promises throughout the Pacific.MODERATOR:  Okay.  I realize that we’re running a little bit over.  We started a few minutes late, so we’ll take a couple more questions.  We have one from Daniel Hurst from The Guardian.  “To what extent is the United States concerned about the newly announced comprehensive strategic partnership between Timor-Leste and China?  Why or why not?”ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Perhaps I can take an initial crack at that one and then ask Mira to chime in.  Look, I think as we indicated earlier, our message to partners in the region is that we’re not asking countries to choose.  We’re in the business of trying to ensure that countries have the ability to make their own sovereign decisions and their own choices free from coercion.My second point would be, as indicated earlier, we’re focused on our affirmative agenda in the region, including with friends in Timor-Leste, and we’ll continue to do that.  We’ll focus on how we can further build out our friendship and partnership with counterparts in the region, including Timor-Leste, and focus on the great work that we can do together.But again, we’re not in the business of asking countries to choose, and I don’t really think it’s beneficial to try to get into some kind of a comparison game or comment on engagement of other partners with the PRC.But, Mira, what would you like to add to that?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Nothing to add, Dan.  I’m in violent agreement.MODERATOR:  Great.  We are – let’s see.  If the speakers are okay, can we take one more question?ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Absolutely.  Please.MODERATOR:  Great.  Great.  And this one is from Mar-Vic Cagurangan from the Pacific Island Times, based in Tamuning, Guam, who sent it in advance:  “How will a federal shutdown affect the Compact of Free Association, COFA?  Will the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Marshall Islands, and Palau continue to receive funds throughout the shutdown?  Do you think this affect – this will affect the U.S. credibility with the Freely Associated States?”ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, perhaps I could provide an initial answer on this one as well and then be happy to turn to you.  Yeah, I really do appreciate the question, and I’ll just underscore what I mentioned earlier.  We’re really excited about the progress we’ve made in the compact negotiations and we’re confident that all of these agreements will be concluded soon.The issue that you raised here was discussed in some detail in the meeting between Secretary Blinken and the three leaders from the Freely Associated States, and I can assure you that we are in very close and constant communication with our friends both in the Freely Associated States and with leaders on Capitol Hill to make sure that we have a plan going forward under all circumstances that will allow us to meet our obligations under the compacts.I think, as friends may be tracking, that the draft Compact of Free Association agreements, the draft legislation on the Hill includes authority to continue programs and services at the same levels provided under current agreements until the new agreements are in place so as to avoid a lapse in services.  And we’re also working very closely with our friends so that if there were to be any kind of a lapse in appropriations that we can take the appropriate mitigating steps wherever possible to minimize any possible impacts on our friends in the Freely Associated States.But I think that I can assure you we’re in close and frequent contact with our friends in the Freely Associated States and I’m confident we have a plan to work through any contingency.Mira, what would you like to add?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Nothing to add, Dan.  Thanks so much.MODERATOR:  Thank you.  And for our closing remarks, I’d like to turn it back to Dr. Rapp-Hooper.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Thanks so much, folks, for joining us this evening.  I think from this conversation you’ve gotten a pretty good lay of the land of the incredibly substantive set of conversations that took place in Washington this week.  The point I want to emphasize before we let you go is that for us, this project, this promise to renew our ties, renew our commitment to the Pacific Islands, is really about much more than a three-day summit.  It’s about delivery on the promises that we’ve made in the last two years, which I think we showed in spades this week, but on delivery on those new conversations and those new commitments that have been made just this week.We have clear instructions from the President, the Secretary of State, the National Security Advisor, and many others to move out expeditiously on everything that we announced alongside our Pacific Island friends earlier this week, and we intend to literally put our money where our mouth is and deliver on everything that we seek to do together in the Pacific, whether that is providing finance so that friends in the Pacific can more quickly and readily adapt to climate change or providing micro and small loans to entrepreneurs and small businesses so that women leaders in particular can get the financing they need to allow them to contribute to increasingly dynamic Pacific economies.So we’re really just still in the opening chapter of the new Pacific story that we’re writing here under the Biden administration, but we feel like we have made tremendous progress in just the last two years, and we are emerging from this week’s summit energized and ready to hit the ground running with this new set of programs and new set of promises, and we look forward to being back in touch to share more about how this exciting work is all going.MODERATOR:  And Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink, I’ll turn it over to you for any closing remarks.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  I can’t say it any better than that.  Beautifully summarized by Mira.  Really grateful to all of our friends in the media for joining us here tonight.  And as Mira indicated, we’re committed to now implementing all of the agreements and the objectives that we’ve set out flowing from this latest summit, and very optimistic, again, about our future ahead with friends in the Pacific.  Thanks again for joining us tonight.MODERATOR:  That brings us to the end of our time today.  Thank you for your questions and thank you to Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink and Dr. Rapp-Hooper for joining us.  We will provide a transcript of this briefing to participating journalists as soon as it is available.  We’d also love to hear your feedback, and you can contact us at any time at AsiaPacMedia@state.gov.  Thank you again for your participation and we hope you can join us for another briefing soon.
- Nepal HomeReportsOffice to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons2023 Trafficking in Persons Report&#8230;Nepal				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Trafficking in Persons Report: Nepal																																					Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons																																																																																																				 In this section										/																							NEPAL (Tier 2)																																													NEPAL (Tier 2)																															PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:																																																																																		PROSECUTION																																																																																		PROTECTION																																																																																		PREVENTION																																																																																		TRAFFICKING PROFILE:																																																																																																								NEPAL (Tier 2)				The Government of Nepal does not fully meet the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking but is making significant efforts to do so.  The government demonstrated overall increasing efforts compared with the previous reporting period, considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, if any, on its anti-trafficking capacity; therefore Nepal remained on Tier 2.  These efforts included increasing investigations and identifying more trafficking victims.  Nepal’s Anti-Human Trafficking Bureau (AHTB) developed a training manual for investigating trafficking crimes.  In addition, the government introduced a new policy to allow previously unregistered migrant workers to regain legal registration to work abroad.  However, the government did not meet the minimum standards in several key areas.  The government’s laws do not criminalize all forms of labor trafficking and sex trafficking, and the government did not finalize its long-pending draft amendments.  The government convicted fewer traffickers and concerns continued about official complicity in trafficking crimes.  The government did not finalize pending SOPs for victim identification and did not report if any identified victims were referred to services.  Officials’ identification of, and protection for, male trafficking victims and transnational labor trafficking victims remained inadequate.  The government continued to allow Nepali migrant workers to pay recruitment fees and related expenses with few measures to protect migrants from exploitation.																																					PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:						    																																															Amend the Human Trafficking and Transportation (Control) Act (HTTCA) to criminalize all forms of sex trafficking and labor trafficking, in line with the 2000 UN TIP Protocol; implement victim-witness protection provisions; and remove a provision that allows the judiciary to fine victims if they fail to appear in court.  Increase investigations and prosecutions, including allegedly complicit officials, and seek adequate penalties for convicted traffickers, which should involve significant prison terms.  Constitute Local Coordination Committees on Human Trafficking (LCCHTs) in all localities.  Establish SOPs for law enforcement to investigate human trafficking cases, including referrals between agencies.  Finalize SOPs for victim identification while training front-line responders to increase referrals of trafficking victims to services. Expand availability and capacity of victim care, including shelter and repatriation, for all victims, especially men and boys and workers exploited abroad. Increase staff, training, and resources to the Department of Foreign Employment (DoFE) to facilitate full implementation and monitoring of the low-cost recruitment policy, and take steps to eliminate recruitment or placement fees charged to workers by Nepali labor recruiters.  Engage destination country governments to create rights-based, enforceable agreements that protect Nepali workers from human trafficking.  Consistently enforce strong regulations and oversight of labor recruitment agencies and sub-agents, and hold fraudulent labor recruiters criminally accountable.  Significantly increase monitoring of children’s homes and orphanages and hold accountable those that do not meet the government’s minimum standards of care. Provide documentation to stateless individuals, internationally-recognized refugees, and asylum-seekers to allow them to work, attend school, and access social services.																																												PROSECUTION						    																																															The government maintained anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts.  The 2007 HTTCA criminalized some forms of sex trafficking and labor trafficking.  The HTTCA’s definition of trafficking was inconsistent with the international definition of trafficking.  It limited the definition of human trafficking to the purchase or selling of a person and to causing another person to go into prostitution; did not include a demonstration of force, fraud, or coercion as an essential element of the base offense; and did not explicitly address forced labor.  The law separately defined “human transportation” as the taking of a person from their home or place of residence through force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of prostitution or keeping a person as a slave or bonded laborer.  The HTTCA prescribed penalties ranging from five to 20 years’ imprisonment and a fine, which were sufficiently stringent and, with respect to sex trafficking, commensurate with those prescribed for other serious crimes, such as rape.  The 2017 Labor Act, which is enforced by specialized labor courts, criminalized forced labor and prescribed penalties of up to two years’ imprisonment, a fine of up to 500,000 Nepali rupees (NPR) ($3,780), or both.  Additionally, the 2002 Bonded Labor (Prohibition) Act abolished bonded labor and prescribed civil penalties of a fine between 15,000 NPR and 25,000 NPR ($113-$189).  The 2000 Child Labor Act criminalized forced child labor and prescribed penalties of up to one year’s imprisonment, a fine of 50,000 NPR ($378), or both.  None of these laws prescribed sufficiently stringent penalties.  The 2007 Foreign Employment Act (FEA) criminalized fraudulent and deceptive labor recruitment of Nepali workers for employment abroad and was often utilized in labor trafficking cases in lieu of the HTTCA.  For the eighth consecutive year, the government continued to work on revisions to the HTTCA.  In August 2022, a federal parliamentary committee directed the government to amend 12 existing laws to harmonize statutes with the Palermo Protocol, and the National Human Rights Commission continued advocacy efforts to align the country’s laws with the UN TIP Protocol.The Nepal police and Office of the Attorney General continued to lead anti-trafficking law enforcement efforts.  During the Nepali fiscal year from July 16, 2021, to July 15, 2022, the police conducted 145 investigations involving 291 suspects, compared to 134 investigations involving 162 suspects in the previous reporting period.  The government initiated prosecution against 682 suspects in 386 cases, compared with 300 suspects in 146 cases in the previous reporting period.  District courts convicted 162 traffickers in 82 cases and acquitted 189 individuals in 85 cases under the HTTCA, compared to conviction of 164 traffickers in 72 cases and 189 acquitted suspects in 87 cases during the previous reporting period.  Nepal’s high courts and Supreme Court also heard trafficking in persons appeals involving cases originating in district courts; high courts upheld the convictions of traffickers in 49 cases and acquitted individuals in 82 cases while the Nepali Supreme Court upheld the convictions of traffickers in 26 cases and acquitted individuals in 16 cases.  The government did not report the sentences prescribed to convicted traffickers or provide disaggregated data on sex and labor trafficking.  The government did not provide any data on bonded labor cases and efforts to investigate or prosecute bonded labor crimes were unknown.The Nepal police and its AHTB, a specialized police unit dedicated to anti-trafficking, investigated trafficking crimes.  The Nepal Police Women’s Cells (NPWC) had female officers in all 77 districts to investigate crimes against women and girls, including trafficking, but not all district offices had fully operational units.  While investigative capacity was improving, Nepali law enforcement did not proactively identify trafficking cases and often relied on referrals from civil society, thereby undermining evidence collection and prosecution efforts.  Some police and prosecutors previously investigated and prosecuted suspected traffickers for non-trafficking offenses such as rape, fraud, or labor exploitation.  Law enforcement continued to rely on victim testimony and regularly dropped cases or acquitted defendants due to a lack of evidence, as victims often chose not to participate in court proceedings due reluctance to assist in cases against perpetrators who were friends or relatives, social stigma, threats or bribes from traffickers to drop cases, and a lack of available victim-witness assistance.  Additionally, traffickers often operated in other countries beyond the reach of law enforcement.  The government continued to misidentify the majority of transnational labor trafficking cases as labor violations and resolved most cases administratively through the Ministry of Labor, Employment, and Social Security (MoLESS) in lieu of criminal investigation, with inadequate sentences for perpetrators.  The Foreign Employment Board (FEB) had responsibility for monitoring and reporting labor violations, but the agency could not conduct enforcement operations and referred cases to DoFE and the Foreign Employment Tribunal, often resulting in adjudication of migrant labor complaints.  Prosecutors could pursue a case under both the HTTCA and the 2007 FEA for transnational labor trafficking and foreign employment fraud, respectively; however, prosecutors typically declined to do so.  Many district courts did not comply with the 2013 Supreme Court directive to adopt a “fast-track” system to complete trafficking cases within 90 days; accordingly, the government reported that most trafficking cases heard at district courts took one year.The government did not report any prosecutions or convictions of government employees complicit in human trafficking crimes; however, corruption and official complicity in trafficking crimes remained a concern, inhibiting law enforcement action.  The MoHA suspended the head of the Kathmandu international airport immigration office on allegations of complicity in the transportation of potential trafficking victims using tourist visas; however, no further action was taken following an initial investigation.  The former director general of DoFE and two DoFE officials filed an appeal following their conviction in 2022 for attempting to collect a bribe from a foreign employment agency; the cases remained pending in the Supreme Court.  Traffickers reportedly bribed government officials to include false information in Nepali passports and provide fraudulent documents to prospective labor migrants or foreign employment agents; in addition, some government officials, including parliamentarians, maintained close ties to foreign employment agencies, resulting in potential conflicts of interest.  Operators of unregistered children’s homes, which sometimes exploit children in forced begging, were often politically connected and viewed favorably within their community; observers stated that even when arrested, they were almost never prosecuted.  Some police and political leaders were allegedly complicit in sex trafficking through financial involvement in the AES.The government had standard training for labor, immigration, judicial, law enforcement, and foreign employment officials that included general definitions of human trafficking.  Most police lacked specialized training and resources to interact with trafficking survivors using a victim-centered approach.  The AHTB, in coordination with civil society, developed a training manual on investigating trafficking crimes, and AHTB officials trained police personnel.  The Office of the Attorney General also conducted specialized training for prosecutors.  The National Judiciary Academy had SOPs on investigation and prosecution of trafficking cases; however, implementation of the SOPs varied.  Nepal police informally coordinated on international investigations of trafficking-related crimes with other foreign governments, particularly India, and INTERPOL.&nbsp;																																												PROTECTION						    																																															The government decreased efforts to identify and protect trafficking victims.  The government identified 207 victims, including 129 sex trafficking survivors and 78 labor trafficking survivors, compared with 187 victims in the previous reporting period.  Nearly 70 percent of identified victims were exploited in Nepal while 30 percent were exploited in India, Cambodia, Laos, Russia, and the Gulf countries.  The government continued to allocate 10 million NPR ($75,610) for victim services, including repatriation assistance for victims abroad, during fiscal year 2021 to 2022.The government did not have formal SOPs for victim identification and referral to services, impeding proactive identification efforts; the Ministry of Women, Children, and Senior Citizens (MoWCSC) previously drafted SOPs that remained pending final approval by the end of the reporting period.  NPWC had internal guidelines on victim identification, including treatment of victims.  The government had national standards for care of trafficking victims, which included procedures to refer victims to care; however, referral efforts remained ad hoc and inconsistent.  Observers reported the government lacked formal SOPs to refer victims to shelter services.  FEB and MoLESS continued to finalize an SOP to expand and improve procedures to guide referrals to shelter services for both male and female trafficking survivors and returning migrant workers; the current SOP and government practices focus on GBV and trafficking of women and girls.  The government continued to lack data on the number of victims it referred for care or how many survivors used these services.  NPWC typically referred trafficking victims to government-established, one-stop emergency centers or civil society organizations, both of which could provide shelter, medical, and legal services.  Although public hospitals provided some victim services, hospitals often charged civil society organizations for medical assistance to trafficking victims.  The pandemic continued to impact anti-trafficking efforts, including reducing resources and capacity to provide services to survivors.The MoWCSC, in partnership with civil society organizations, operated 10 shelter homes for victims of GBV and human trafficking, although civil society organizations led operations of most shelters.  These shelters provided services to 2,260 individuals, which may have included trafficking victims, compared to 2,628 during the previous period.  The government also operated two long-term shelters that could assist trafficking victims, offering counselling, health services, legal support, and employment programs.  In addition, MoWCSC supported 22 short-term service centers, a long-term shelter for women, and the first of several planned provincial shelters for GBV survivors, including trafficking victims.  MoWCSC paid for basic needs, including lodging, food, health services, and psychosocial counseling of victims receiving services, while civil society organizations covered other administrative and staff costs and provided most victim-care facilities.  Although most shelters served women and children, the government reported male trafficking victims were eligible for placement in government-funded shelters, and the National Committee for Controlling Human Trafficking (NCCHT) could reallocate funds if male victims sought services.  Shelters for individuals with disabilities remained inadequate.  The NCCHT monitored the 10 shelters and required its partner civil society organizations to periodically submit details of their operations; similarly, district anti-trafficking committees were required to conduct at least one monitoring visit to government-funded shelters every six months, and the NCCHT could conduct additional inspections as needed.  The National Child Rights Council, which monitored childcare homes remotely and with the assistance of civil society organizations, removed 72 children from exploitation in abusive and unregistered children’s homes and reunified 1,211 children with their families, compared with 84 children removed during the previous year.  MoWCSC provided anti-trafficking training for staff at victim shelters, and officials trained local government representatives and orphanage staff on minimum standards for operating care homes.  In December 2022, the government finalized a SOP for operating childcare homes and began efforts to reduce the overall number of children’s institutions; however, many positions to monitor children’s homes remained unfilled, hindering overall efforts.The government had some victim-witness assistance available to support victims participating in investigations and prosecutions, but lacked a formal victim-witness assistance program.  The government could provide psychosocial counseling, transportation, up to three months of shelter, and police security; however, the government did not report how many victims received assistance.  However, in civil suits, most victims remained unaware of the HTTCA provision granting the right to private representation; even in cases where victims had private representation, the attorneys often struggled to build strong cases due to obstacles in obtaining critical information from law enforcement.  The DoFE and police utilized a 2020 MOU which allowed labor trafficking victims to file complaints at local police stations, rather than traveling to Kathmandu, to increase victim participation in cases.  Victims could provide testimony via video or written statement; however, most courts did not have facilities for video conferences, and officials often did not make victims aware of the option.  Victims continued to report challenges in providing testimony, including threats from perpetrators.  Notably, resource limitations impeded authorities’ provision of a victim’s right to police protection, and observers stated victims were reluctant to file criminal complaints under HTTCA.  In addition, the HTTCA authorized the judiciary to fine victims who failed to appear in court and hold victims criminally liable for providing testimony contradicting their previous statements.  Due to a lack of formal identification procedures, authorities may have arrested, detained, and fined some unidentified trafficking victims, including some adult and child sex trafficking victims.  Police did not always recognize child sex trafficking victims as such and sometimes removed girls from trafficking situations, sent them home, and did not refer them to services or file criminal charges against the buyer or trafficker.  While a committee directed the MHA to provide shelter to foreign victims of trafficking, the government did not have legal alternatives to the deportation of foreign victims.  The government did not report whether officials screened for trafficking among foreign nationals prior to deportation.Victims could obtain restitution from traffickers through criminal proceedings.  The government could also provide back wages from an HTTCA rehabilitation fund if the government was unable to collect fines imposed on traffickers.  The government seldom initiated victim compensation and few victims knew about the HTTCA fund’s existence.  As in prior reporting periods, the government did not report if any courts ordered restitution or if any victims received compensation from the HTTCA fund.  DoFE settled most labor complaints of migrant workers administratively and did not refer violators to the FET for civil penalties nor to police for criminal investigation.  Many labor trafficking victims preferred to submit claims for compensation through the 2007 FEA in lieu of lengthy criminal prosecutions under the HTTCA to avoid the stigma associated with trafficking, the significantly higher potential for compensation through the 2007 FEA than HTTCA, and the lack of time and funding to access the centralized institutions charged with providing redress.The 2007 FEA required the government to appoint labor attachés in countries with more than 5,000 registered Nepali migrant workers to address claims of abuse or exploitation, and facilitate worker repatriation.  The government continued to have seven labor attachés and five labor counselors deployed in eight countries.  Although MoLESS assigned labor attachés and counselors to diplomatic missions with a high volume of migrant workers, limited resources prevented assigning attachés to all required countries.  While some embassies could provide temporary shelter and repatriate trafficking victims, officials acknowledged inadequate staffing, coordination, and resources to meet the high demand for services created delays in assistance, most shelters provided space only for women, and the quality of the government-run shelters abroad was inadequate.  Nepali embassies in most Gulf countries, Malaysia, and South Korea could each provide emergency shelter for approximately 25 female migrant workers, including trafficking victims, although host country policies often restricted missions from independently managing shelters and most embassies lacked shelters for migrant workers.  Embassies did not report the number of migrant workers assisted.The FEB, which is responsible for protecting migrant workers and maintains a welfare fund to support labor migrants registered with the DoFE, collected fees from registered migrant workers prior to departure for a welfare fund to provide repatriation and one year of financial support to families of injured or deceased workers, which could include trafficking victims.  During the fiscal year, the fund repatriated 215 migrant workers compared with 551 in the previous year.  The government did not report identifying any trafficking victims among those repatriated or initiating any criminal investigations.  Additionally, the government repatriated 213 bodies of Nepalis who had died while employed abroad, compared with repatriation of 892 bodies the previous year.  Although the government medically certified migrants prior to departure, many overseas deaths likely resulted from extreme working conditions such as severe weather exposure leading to organ failure.  MoWCSC funded some Nepali embassies, including the embassy in Oman, to repatriate Nepali trafficking victims.  Although there is no welfare fund to repatriate unregistered workers, FEB could repatriate undocumented migrants, including trafficking victims, by requesting funds through the finance ministry on an ad hoc basis, or referring victims to the non-resident Nepali association, but it could not provide any other financial support or services.  Civil society organizations bore the primary cost of repatriating Nepali trafficking victims from India where repatriation could take up to two years due to the lack of formal repatriation procedures between countries.  Nepal lacked formal agreements with neighboring countries to repatriate trafficking victims, often resulting in excessively long repatriation processes.  DoFE maintained an online portal that allowed migrant workers, or someone on the worker’s behalf, to file a request for repatriation assistance.  Since the site’s introduction, DoFE has received increasing requests for repatriation assistance, but the government did not report the percentage of successful repatriations.																																												PREVENTION						    																																															The government slightly increased efforts to prevent human trafficking.  The NCCHT, headed by the MoWCSC, continued to lead interagency efforts on human trafficking.  Some municipalities formed LCCHTs following Nepal’s transition to federalism; however, the LCCHTs were not mandated by law and did not receive national-level funding, thereby limiting sub-national anti-trafficking efforts.  While the NCCHT continued to meet with and train officials from the District Anti-Trafficking Committees (DCCHTs), observers noted the need for improved coordination between the NCCHT, DCCHTs, and LCCHTs as anti-trafficking efforts faltered due to uncertainty over responsibilities across all levels of the government.  Additionally, an office within the National Human Rights Commission focused on trafficking of women and children; however, the office remained understaffed and less active than the NCCHT.  The NHRC and MoWCSC published trafficking in persons reports providing policy analysis and recommendations to the government.  The government, in collaboration with an international organization, continued to develop a central trafficking database to address information gaps.  The MoWCSC previously formed a task force to revise the NAP; the NAP was pending formal approval by the end of the reporting period.  The government continued to conduct public awareness campaigns throughout the country, sometimes in partnership with civil society or international organizations, and operated digital displays featuring trafficking awareness messages in key locations. The government also produced radio and television programs to raise awareness and disseminated information about trafficking through various media sources.  The government operated hotlines for victims of crime, including human trafficking, and the Metropolitan Police Crime Division in Kathmandu continued to operate an anti-trafficking hotline.  The Department of Labor (DOL), in partnership with civil society, operated a hotline to report allegations of child labor.  The FEB also operated a hotline to receive complaints concerning migrant workers, including human trafficking incidents.The Department of Immigration lacked effective processes for detecting potential victims of trafficking as well as a mechanism for coordinating victim identification among intergovernmental agencies and civil society organizations.  Police lacked the staff, resources, and training required to patrol Nepal’s nearly 1,100-mile border with India, which Nepalis and Indians could cross without visas or passports.  Significant transnational trafficking reportedly occurred along the border; however, border officials did not conduct screenings and most cases were not proactively identified.  Police relied on civil society organizations to conduct screenings along the border, but these efforts focused almost entirely on intercepting female travelers.The DoFE, which regulates and monitors recruitment agencies and pre-departure orientation centers, maintained offices in all seven provinces to increase prospective migrant workers’ access to foreign employment-related services.  The FEB also operated approximately 41 migrant resource and information centers at the district level, which provided information on authorized recruitment agencies, maximum fees the agencies could charge workers, and information on the risks and challenges of working abroad.  The FEB continued to provide a two-day pre-departure orientation for migrant workers; however, the course was not mandatory and the quality varied.  The government offered free certifications for skills obtained abroad for migrant workers; it did not report how many workers utilized these services.  The government’s labor migration policies remained lengthy, costly, and sometimes discriminatory against women and the government struggled to implement and monitor regulations for foreign employment.  Although the Parliamentary Committee for Industry, Commerce, Labor and Consumer Welfare previously revoked its recommendation to ban the migration of female domestic workers younger than 24 years to Gulf states and Malaysia, the government maintained strict pre-conditions for female migrants that destination countries could often not fulfill, thereby increasing the likelihood of migration through irregular means and trafficking risks.  In July 2022, the government approved a directive encouraging returned migrants to use their skills and experience abroad to develop businesses in Nepal; the government also expanded the domestic social security program, including medical insurance and compensation for accidental death, to cover migrant workers.  In addition, the government removed a ban and introduced a new policy that to allow previously unregistered domestic workers who traveled abroad via irregular channels after April 2017 to begin formally registering for legal employment abroad.The DoFE continued regular monitoring and inspection of recruitment agencies and pre-departure orientation centers for migrant workers; however, officials did not report if the government identified or referred any civil or criminal cases of fraudulent recruitment agents or agencies during the reporting period.  The government required employment agencies to obtain an operating license with minimum agency requirements.  Among the 854 manpower agencies currently licensed in Nepal, only 15 had authorization to recruit domestic workers, likely due to the government’s strict pre-conditions on female migrant domestic workers.  Observers reported government monitoring of employment agencies was ineffective to address non-compliance; agencies regularly charged migrant workers fees higher than the 10,000 NPR ($76) government-set limit.  The government’s 2015 labor migration guidelines included a policy requiring foreign employers to pay visa and transportation costs for Nepali migrant workers bound for Malaysia and the Gulf and restricted agency-charged recruitment fees to 10,000 NPR ($76).  Despite the government’s 2015 low-cost recruitment policy, employment agencies continued to charge Nepali workers for visas, airplane tickets, and service fees above the official cap.  Separately, officials expressed concern about decreased demand for labor through official channels due to COVID-19 restrictions and the low-cost recruitment policy, with destination countries drawing more workers from countries with looser regulations.  The government maintained 10 bilateral labor agreements or MOUs with destination countries in an effort to control costs for migrant workers.  In October 2022, the government reduced travel costs as part of its MOU with the Government of Israel to provide workers for the agriculture, construction, and hospitality sectors.  In August 2022, the government signed an MOU with the Government of the United Kingdom to provide Nepali healthcare professionals with no cost to the migrant workers.While the informal sector employed more than 70 percent of workers in the country, including nearly all child laborers, labor inspectors did not regularly inspect the informal sector for violations, including forced labor.  The government continued to fund and conduct inspections focused specifically on child labor; however, the DOL did not report referring any employers for criminal investigation or issuing any administrative penalties.  Action against child labor continued to be primarily reactive and the DOL did not undertake many unannounced inspections.  Although 37 percent of Nepali children ages 5 to 17 are involved in child labor, DOL did not report how many child laborers it identified or removed from exploitative conditions during the reporting period, and it typically only removed children whom employers physically or sexually abused.  DOL reportedly encouraged mediation over prosecution, including in cases of forced child labor.  The government promulgated guidelines and set a target to declare at least 25 municipalities child labor-free, but implementation stalled due to the pandemic.The government did not make efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex acts.  The government had special committees led by chief district officers to monitor the AES; however, committees remained highly dependent on individual officers and did not have a comprehensive regulatory framework for monitoring such establishments.  Existing laws did not permit labor inspectors to monitor AES establishments for labor violations, which allowed some establishments to use children and adult trafficking victims with impunity.  Observers estimated only half of AES establishments had valid registration.  Some municipalities, in partnership with an international organization, developed minimum standard monitoring guidelines for the AES.  Despite reports of foreign nationals involved in child sex trafficking, the government did not make efforts to prevent child sex tourism.  The government provided training on labor issues to its diplomatic personnel, and peacekeepers reportedly received anti-trafficking training prior to deployment overseas.																																												TRAFFICKING PROFILE:						    																																															As reported over the past five years, human traffickers exploit domestic and foreign victims in Nepal, and traffickers exploit Nepali victims abroad.  Men, women, and children are subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking.  In 2019, the National Human Rights Commission estimated that 1.5 million Nepalis are vulnerable to human trafficking.  Traffickers continue to target young, uneducated individuals from traditionally marginalized castes and ethnic minority communities with limited economic opportunities, and then lure victims with promises of work or education.  Observers report GBV, caste-based discrimination, child sexual abuse, and the absence of economic opportunities increase the vulnerability of many Nepalis, particularly women and girls, to trafficking.  Law enforcement data indicates Nepali women and girls from 11 to 25 years old are at high risk of trafficking.  Unregistered migrant workers &#8211; including Nepalis who travel via the open border with India to third country destinations &#8211; are particularly vulnerable to forced labor and sex trafficking.  Civil society organizations noted the economic impact of the pandemic increased vulnerability among at-risk groups such as day laborers, AES employees, women, and children.  Traffickers increasingly used social media and mobile technologies to lure and deceive victims.  The impact of climate change, particularly in the Himalayan region, increases vulnerability to trafficking following disasters and population displacement.Labor traffickers exploit Nepali men, women, and children in Nepal, India, the Middle East, and Southeast and East Asia in construction, factories, mines, domestic work, begging, and the adult entertainment industry.  The government estimates approximately 1.5 million Nepalis work in the Middle East, with most men in construction in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE.  Foreign employment is often regarded as a respectable way to earn money to support families, but many migrant workers are not well informed about their rights or applicable laws.  Nepalis work under oppressive conditions, which include forced labor, and ongoing reports indicate employers retain worker passports and sometimes withhold pay for months at a time.  Many Nepalis migrate through irregular channels and work without valid permits, increasing their vulnerability to trafficking.  Traffickers target unregistered migrant workers, including the large number of young Nepali women who transit India, or men and women who rely on unregistered recruitment agents.  Traffickers lure women with the promise of domestic work or the entertainment sector in the Middle East, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Malaysia.  Traffickers also bring Nepali victims to European countries and Australia on tourist, student, marriage, and work visas.  Some recruitment agencies and agents engage in fraudulent recruitment practices and impose high fees to facilitate forced labor.  Recruitment agencies sometimes provide inaccurate information about foreign employment, and migrants discover they will be required to work in jobs that differ from what they had been promised.  Some Nepali women who agree to arranged marriages through Nepali companies to men in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and South Korea are forced into domestic servitude.  Traffickers exploit some foreign migrants who transit Nepal en route to the Middle East, including Bangladeshis and Sri Lankans who use falsified Nepali travel documents.  The lack of a birth registration system in Nepal further contributed to the production of fraudulent identification documents.  Traffickers reportedly take advantage of more relaxed pre-departure screenings at Kolkata and Chennai airports, or bribe Indian officials in New Delhi and Mumbai, to fly Nepali migrant workers to third countries without proper documentation, which increases the workers’ vulnerability to trafficking.  Labor traffickers also transport Nepali victims through Sri Lanka and Burma onward to destination countries.  Traffickers from the PRC and possibly other countries reportedly recruit Nepali migrants with fraudulent labor promises and then coerce victims into forced labor in cyber scam operations and illegal activities abroad.Within Nepal, traffickers use forced labor and debt-based bondage to exploit adults and children in agriculture, brick kilns, the stone-breaking industry, and domestic work.  Agricultural bonded labor in Nepal has historically affected the Haruwa-Charuwa, the Haliya, and the Kamaiya communities disproportionally.  High-interest loans, landlessness, discrimination, limited livelihood opportunities, and inadequate government policies contribute to intergenerational bonded labor.  Households frequently take on high-interest loans for healthcare expenses, funeral costs, and other necessities while earning low wages, resulting in debts passed from one generation to the next.  Some Nepali brick kilns employ Indian migrant workers, including children, who take out large advances that require working over subsequent seasons.  Thousands of children work in brick kilns, including carrying loads, preparing bricks, and performing other tasks at kilns for extended periods.  Traffickers subject Nepali and Indian children to forced labor in agriculture, domestic work, brick kilns, the embroidered textile (Zari) industry, as well as in carpet factories and stone quarrying.  A 2021 study estimated that 1.1 million children are engaged in child labor, compared to 1.6 million children in 2008, with 87 percent of cases occurring in the agriculture sector; approximately 74 percent of children engaged in the informal sector work in hazardous conditions.  A government study documented more than 61,000 Nepalis &#8211; including approximately 10,000 children &#8211; in forced labor over the past five years, especially in agriculture, forestry, and construction.  Traffickers also exploit debts to compel adults and children into labor in carpet factories.  Recruitment agents promise Bangladeshi workers well-paying jobs in Nepali carpet factories, but procure tourist visas instead of work visas and pay less than the agreed wages.  Traffickers use children to transport drugs across the Indian-Nepali border.  PRC workers also faced risks of forced labor on infrastructure projects contracted to PRC companies.Sex traffickers exploit Nepali women and girls in Nepal, India, the Middle East, Malaysia, and, to a lesser extent, other Asian countries and Sub-Saharan Africa.  Traffickers exploit Nepal’s open border with India to transport Nepali women and children to India for sex trafficking.  Traffickers subject Nepali girls, boys, and transgender people to sex trafficking on the streets or the AES, including dance bars, massage parlors, and brothels.  According to a study of the Kathmandu Valley, approximately 17 percent of workers in the AES are minors and 62 percent of adult women in the AES started as minors.  The study estimated nearly 30 percent of minor workers in AES establishments are victims of forced labor, usually as restaurant staff, and employers later subject many to sex trafficking.  A study on commercial sexual exploitation of children found that children living on the street were highly vulnerable to trafficking.  Girls in early and forced marriages, especially in the Terai region among Dalit and Madhesi communities, are vulnerable to sex traffickers.Some orphanages and children’s homes force children into manual labor or begging, force them to entertain visitors for donations, and sexually abuse them.  Under false promises of education and work opportunities, some Nepali parents give their children to brokers who take them to frequently unregistered children’s homes and force the children to pretend to be orphans to garner donations from tourists and volunteers.  Approximately one-third of registered orphanages do not meet the government’s minimum standards, and some children’s home operators force children to beg or keep children destitute to attract donations.  Observers estimate nearly 11,000 children remain in registered children’s homes and “orphanages” despite approximately 80 percent having at least one living parent.  Seventy-five percent of registered Nepali orphanages and children’s homes are located in the country’s five main tourist districts, and police sometimes arrest tourists or international volunteers, mostly from Western countries, for sexual abuse of Nepali children, including child sex trafficking.The government recognized Bhutanese and Tibetans as refugees but regarded refugees and asylum-seekers of other nationalities as irregular migrants.  The government provided registered Bhutanese refugees an identification card, and provided cards to children upon reaching 16 years of age, requiring periodic renewal.  The government has not issued new refugee cards for Tibetan refugees since 1995 nor recognized any Tibetans who arrived after 1989, leaving most of the government-estimated 12,540 Tibetan refugees in the country undocumented, which prevents them from legally working, studying, traveling, and accessing public services.  According to some estimates, approximately 6.7 million individuals &#8211; one-quarter of Nepal’s population &#8211; lack citizenship documentation, rendering them de facto stateless.  Legal requirements on transferring citizenship continue to impose hardships on children whose fathers are deceased, unknown, or departed the country to work abroad.  Some women are also unable to obtain citizenship due to policies requiring formal attestation from a male family member.  Lack of documentation precludes the participation of all these groups in the formal economy and increases their vulnerability to traffickers.&nbsp;																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Aruba											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											The Bahamas											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Cote d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Curaçao											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											The Gambia											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hong Kong											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyzstan											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Macau											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia, Federated States of											Moldova											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nepal											Netherlands											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Sint Maarten											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey											Turkmenistan											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											United States											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe																										On This Page				search													>																										NEPAL (Tier 2)																PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:																																																	PROSECUTION																																																	PROTECTION																																																	PREVENTION																																																	TRAFFICKING PROFILE:																																																							Tags																					Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs																																Human Trafficking																															Nauru																								Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons
- Nauru HomeReportsOffice of International Religious Freedom2022 Report on International Religious Freedom&#8230;Nauru				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: Nauru																																					Office of International Religious Freedom																																																																																							Download Report																																																																																	 In this section										/																							Executive Summary																																													Executive Summary																															Section I. Religious Demography																																																																																		Section II. Status of Government Respect for Religious Freedom																																																									Legal Framework																																																																											Government Practices																																																																																	Section III. Status of Societal Respect for Religious Freedom																																																																																		Section IV. U.S. Government Policy and Engagement																																																																																																								Executive Summary				The constitution and other laws provide for freedom of conscience, thought, and religion, and for freedom to change one’s religion or beliefs. While the law requires registration for religious groups to conduct a full range of activities, religious groups stated they could conduct most normal functions without registration.Although The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Church of Jesus Christ) was, as in previous years, unable to register during the year, representatives of the church stated it had made progress towards registration and were optimistic it would obtain some form of official recognition after COVID-19 restrictions in the country were fully lifted.There were no reports of significant societal actions affecting religious freedom.The U.S. Ambassador to Fiji is accredited to the government. The U.S. embassy utilized social media to promote religious pluralism and tolerance, including highlighting comments by the U.S. President and other U.S. officials during major Christian, Jewish, Hindu, and Muslim celebrations, including Diwali and Ramadan, in support of religious tolerance and practices.																														Section I.													 Religious Demography												    																																															The U.S. government estimates the total population at 9,811 (midyear 2022).  According to the 2011 national census, approximately 95 percent of the population are Christian.  The Nauru Congregational Church (which includes the Nauru Protestant Church) is the largest Christian group, constituting 36 percent of the population, followed by the Roman Catholic Church at 33 percent, the Nauru Independent Assembly of God at 13 percent, and the Nauru Independent Church at 10 percent.  Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventists, Baptists, and members of the Church of Jesus Christ each constitute less than 1 percent of the population.  Two percent of the population reports no religious affiliation.  Ethnic Chinese residents, estimated to constitute 5 percent of the population, are Confucian, Buddhist, Taoist, Christian, or nonreligious.Data gathered by several nongovernmental organizations indicate that as of June 30, 100 persons fleeing their home countries lived in Nauru, a decline from 106 in 2021 due to resettlement.  Most of those coming to the country were from Muslim-majority countries, although some were Christian.																																					Section II.													 Status of Government Respect for Religious Freedom												    																																																Legal Framework										The constitution provides for the freedom of conscience, expression, assembly, and association, and for freedom to change one’s religion or beliefs. These rights may be restricted by any law that is “reasonably required” in the interests of defense or public safety, order, morality, or health.Under the law, religious groups must register with the government to operate in an official capacity, which includes proselytizing, building houses of worship, holding religious services, and officiating at marriages. A cabinet memorandum sets out requirements for registration of new religious groups, including having at least 750 enrolled members, land, a building in the country, and leadership by a Nauruan member of the clergy, who must reside in the country. The Catholic Church, Nauru Congregational Church, Assemblies of God, Nauru Independent Church, and Seventh-day Adventist Church are officially registered.Religious groups may operate private schools, and a number do so. In public schools, the government allows religious groups to have a weekly religious education program during school hours, but it does not require schools to offer such education. In schools where religious education is provided, students are required to attend the program led by the representative of their respective religious group. Students whose faith is not represented are required to undertake independent study during the class time devoted to religious education.The country is not a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.																																				Government Practices										Although the law requires registration for religious groups to conduct a full range of activities, local religious leaders stated the government continued to require such recognition only if a denomination’s clergy wished to officiate at marriages. Religious groups stated they could conduct most normal functions, including services and meetings, without registration. There were no reports the government discriminated in the registration process, although the requirements make it nearly impossible for any new group to register. Although the Church of Jesus Christ was, as in previous years, unable to register during the year, representatives of the church stated it had made progress towards registration and remained optimistic it could ultimately obtain some form of official recognition.																																					Section III.													 Status of Societal Respect for Religious Freedom												    																																															There were no reports of significant societal actions affecting religious freedom.																																					Section IV.													 U.S. Government Policy and Engagement												    																																															The U.S. Ambassador to Fiji is accredited to the government.  The U.S. government does not maintain an embassy in Nauru.The embassy utilized social media to promote religious pluralism and tolerance, highlighting comments by the U.S. President and posts during major Christian, Jewish, Hindu, and Muslim celebrations, including Diwali and Ramadan, in support of religious tolerance and practices.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahamas, The											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, Tibet, and Xinjiang)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Cote d’Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Gambia, The											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guyana											Guinea-Bissau											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyzstan											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											Netherlands											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Sudan											South Korea											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										Executive Summary																Section I. Religious Demography																																																	Section II. Status of Government Respect for Religious Freedom																																							Legal Framework																																																						Government Practices																																																			Section III. Status of Societal Respect for Religious Freedom																																																	Section IV. U.S. Government Policy and Engagement																																																							Tags																					Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs																								Nauru																								Office of International Religious Freedom																																Religious Freedom
- Nauru The constitution and law provide citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage.																				HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2022 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Nauru				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2022 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Nauru																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																								Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies																																																																																																																		f. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																											c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																																												Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption and Lack of Transparency in Government																																																																																		Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																																																																																		Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination with Respect to Employment and Occupation																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				Nauru is a constitutional republic. International observers deemed the September 24 parliamentary election to be generally free and fair. Parliament elected Russ Kun, a member of parliament since 2013, as president.The police force, under the minister for police and emergency services, maintains internal security and, as necessary, external security. The country has no military force. Civilian authorities maintained effective control over the security forces. Members of the security forces committed few abuses.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media, including full government control of all media; and lack of investigation of and accountability for gender-based violence, including domestic or intimate partner violence and sexual violence.There were no reports that government officials committed egregious human rights abuses or engaged in corruption, and impunity was not a problem. The government had mechanisms in place to identify and punish officials who may commit human rights abuses or engage in corruption.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were no reports the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The constitution prohibits such practices, and there were no credible reports that government officials employed them.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						There were no significant reports regarding prison conditions that raised human rights concerns.Administration:  There were no reports that authorities failed to conduct proper investigations of credible allegations of mistreatment.Independent Monitoring:  The government permitted prison and detention center monitoring visits by independent human rights observers.  There were no reports that such visits occurred during the year.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The law prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention and provides for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of his or her arrest or detention in court, and the government generally observed these requirements.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						Authorities made arrests based either on warrants issued by authorized officials or for proximate cause by a police officer witnessing a crime.  Police may hold a person for a maximum of 24 hours without a hearing before a magistrate.  Authorities informed detainees promptly of the charges against them.  The bail system functioned properly.  The law provides for accused persons to have access to legal assistance, but qualified assistance was not always readily available.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The constitution provides for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected judicial independence and impartiality.																Trial Procedures						The constitution provides for the right to a fair and public trial, and an independent judiciary generally enforced this right.There was no legal provision for traditional reconciliation mechanisms; however, as a mitigating factor in sentencing, apologies and reconciliation frequently played an informal role in criminal proceedings.  This was sometimes due to communal pressure.The law limits defendants’ access to overseas lawyers, barring them from participating in local cases unless specifically instructed by a local lawyer or pleader with 10 years of legal experience in Nauruan law.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.						Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies						The judiciary generally functioned in an independent and impartial manner in civil matters.  Individuals or organizations have access to the court to bring lawsuits seeking damages for, or cessation of, human rights abuses.																										f. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The constitution and laws prohibit such actions, and there were no reports the government failed to respect these prohibitions.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution and law provide for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media; however, the government owned all media and exercised some editorial control over content.Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media:  The government owned all media, giving it significant control over published and broadcast content.Libel/Slander Laws:  By law “unlawful vilification” and “criminal defamation” are punishable by a maximum three years’ imprisonment.  There were no reports of arrests for breach of the law.																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content, and there were no credible reports the government monitored private online communications without appropriate legal authority.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The constitution provides for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										Neither the constitution nor the law specifically provides for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, but the government generally respected these rights for its citizens.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other humanitarian organizations in providing protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, asylum seekers, stateless persons, or other persons of concern.Access to Asylum: The law provides for granting asylum or refugee status, and the government has established a system for providing protection to refugees. The law includes a provision for nonrefoulement. Refugee advocates noted, however, the government allowed refugees to reside in the country only temporarily pending resettlement to a third country. The government did not provide a pathway to gain citizenship.Abuse of Migrants and Refugees: As of June 30, 112 individuals remained in Nauru, including those formerly housed at the Australian government’s Regional Processing Center in the country (used to house individuals seeking refuge or asylum in Australia), a site criticized for its poor conditions, and likely others born after the center’s closure. Of these individuals, 83 were recognized as refugees, 17 were deemed nonrefugees, and 12 remained in the Refugee Status Determination process. The most recent refugees to leave the center departed in 2019 and all those remaining in the country were living in the local community, according to the Refugee Council of Australia.Durable Solutions: The government grants five-year visas to asylum seekers after they receive refugee determination.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																																															The constitution and law provide citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage.																																				Elections and Political Participation										Recent Elections: International observers considered the most recent parliamentary election, held on September 24, to be generally free and fair, although interlocutors noted allegations of vote buying and constituency hopping prior to the election. The resulting 19-member parliament elected Russ Kun, who ran unopposed, as president. Members of Parliament have 90 days in which to challenge individual seats, which may result in a president losing majority support.Political Parties and Political Participation: Although political parties have the legal right to operate without outside interference, there were no formal parties.Participation of Women and Members of Minority Groups: No laws limit participation of women or members of minority or other historically marginalized groups in the political process, and they did participate; however, participation by women was significantly less than by men. Two of the 11 women who ran in the September general election were elected to the 19-member parliament.The country has a small and almost entirely homogeneous Micronesian population. There were no members of minority groups in parliament or the cabinet.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption and Lack of Transparency in Government												    																																															The law provides criminal penalties for corruption by officials, and the government generally implemented the law effectively.  There were no reports of government corruption.																																					Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																																															The government did not restrict the establishment or operation of local human rights organizations, but no such groups existed.  No international human rights organizations maintained offices in the country.Government Human Rights Bodies:  The Department of Justice has a Human Rights Section staffed by a human rights adviser, two human rights officers, and a liaison officer from the secretariat of the Pacific Community’s Regional Resource Team.  The section was generally effective.																																					Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence: Rape of women or men is a crime and carries a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment. The law specifically applies penalties for rape of married and de facto partners. Police are required to investigate all reported rape cases. They generally did so, and the courts prosecuted cases. Observers said many instances of rape and sexual abuse went unreported. The law does not address domestic violence specifically, but authorities prosecuted domestic violence cases under laws against common assault. The maximum penalty for simple assault is one year’s imprisonment. The maximum penalty for assault involving bodily harm is three years’ imprisonment.Both police and judiciary treated major incidents and unresolved family disputes seriously.Police officials stated they received frequent complaints of domestic violence, announcing that from March through September 2021, the Domestic Violence Unit “recorded 158 cases of domestic dispute,” the most recent information available. Families normally sought to reconcile such problems informally and, if necessary, communally.Sexual Harassment: There is no specific law against sexual harassment, but authorities could and did prosecute harassment involving physical assault under assault laws.Reproductive Rights: There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.A 2019 report by the Population Reference Bureau indicated that among women ages 15-49, the prevalence of any contraceptive use was 35.6 percent, and 25.1 percent of that age cohort used modern methods. The UN Population Fund (UNFPA) reported there was a high unmet need for family-planning commodities. Causes of this unmet need included limited access to adequate sexual health and reproductive services, especially for individuals in the outer islands; perceptions of family planning services as inconvenient, unsatisfactory, or culturally insensitive; cultural or religious opposition; lack of skills among those dispensing contraceptives and family planning services; and misconceptions regarding side effects.Emergency contraception as part of the family planning and contraception method mix was available to individuals. The government provided some access to sexual and reproductive health services, including emergency contraception, for survivors of sexual violence. Such access, however, was limited by social stigma, cultural practices, and popularly accepted misconceptions. According to UNFPA, access to adolescent reproductive health services and information was limited, and the World Health Organization reported the 2012-2020 adolescent birth rate for girls ages 15 to 19 was 94 per 1,000. Other causes of this problem were inadequate access to contraceptives and cultural factors.Discrimination: The law provides the same legal status and rights for women and men, including under family, religious, labor, property, nationality, and inheritance laws. The government did not enforce the law effectively. Discrimination in employment and wages occurred with respect to women (see section 7.d.).																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The constitution states, “every person in Nauru...has the right, whatever his race, place of origin, political opinions, color, creed or sex,” to life, liberty, security of the person, property, and the protection of the law; to freedom of conscience, of expression, and of peaceful assembly and association; and to respect for their private and family life.It was unclear whether the government enforced these provisions effectively.																																				Children										Birth Registration: Children derive citizenship if one of their parents is a citizen. The constitution also provides for acquisition of citizenship by birth in the country in cases in which the person would otherwise be stateless. The law requires registration of births within 21 days to receive citizenship, and families generally complied with the law.Child Abuse: The law prohibits child abuse. The government does not maintain data on child abuse, but it remained a problem, according to civil society groups. The law establishes comprehensive measures, including mandatory reporting, to protect children from abuse.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage: The law prohibits marriage by persons younger than 18.Sexual Exploitation of Children: The law prohibits the sale of children, offering or using a child for commercial sexual exploitation, and practices related to child pornography. The minimum age for consensual sex is 16. There are standardized penalties for sexual exploitation of children; intentional sexual intercourse with a child younger than age 16 is punishable by 25 years’ imprisonment. Sexual intercourse with a child younger than 13 carries a penalty of life imprisonment.The law establishes penalties for taking images of children’s private acts and genitalia. If the child is younger than age 16, the maximum penalty is 10 years’ imprisonment, and if younger than 13, it is 15 years’ imprisonment. The same law prescribes tougher penalties for involving children to produce pornographic material. The maximum penalty if the child is younger than 16 is 15 years’ imprisonment and 20 years’ imprisonment if the child is younger than 13. The cybercrime law outlaws the electronic publication and transmission of child pornography.Authorities enforced laws against commercial sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.																																				Antisemitism										The country does not have a Jewish community, and there were no known reports of antisemitic acts.																																				Trafficking in Persons										There were no confirmed reports during the year that traffickers exploited domestic or foreign victims in Nauru or that traffickers exploited victims from Nauru abroad.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization:No laws criminalize consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults.Violence against LGBTQI+ Persons: The law does not specifically cite sexual orientation, but it could be used to aid in the prosecution of bias-motivated crimes against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) persons. There were isolated reports of violence against persons based on sexual orientation and gender identity.Discrimination: The law does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics; nor does it recognize LGBTQI+ individuals, couples, and their families. Observers noted instances of social discrimination and some police intimidation.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition:Legal gender recognition, by which the government allows individuals to change their gender identity marker on legal and identifying documents to bring them into alignment with their gender identity, was not available.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices Specifically Targeting LGBTQI+ Individuals: There were no reports of involuntary or coercive medical practices or so-called conversion therapy targeting LGBTQI+ individuals.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly: There were no reports of restrictions on those speaking out on LGBTQI+ matters.																																				Persons with Disabilities										Persons with disabilities can access education, health services, some public buildings, and transportation on an equal basis with others. No legislation mandates services for persons with disabilities or access to public buildings. Although the government has installed mobility ramps in some public buildings, many private buildings were not accessible. The Department of Education has a special education adviser who is responsible for education for students with disabilities and established an Able and Disable Center that provided training for teachers and classes for students with learning difficulties and disabilities.There were no reports of discrimination against persons with disabilities in employment, but social stigma likely led to decreased opportunities for employment.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law provides for the right of workers to form and join independent trade unions or other associations. It restricts freedom of association for police. While the right to strike is neither protected nor prohibited by law, a civil servant may not foment or take part in a strike and may be summarily dismissed if found guilty of organizing a strike. The law does not specifically provide for the right of workers to bargain collectively, but it does not prohibit it. The law does not prohibit antiunion discrimination, and there is no legal requirement to reinstate workers dismissed due to union activity; however, workers may seek redress through the civil court system.The government effectively enforced the law, although gaps in worker protections remained. Penalties for violations include fines, which were commensurate with those for other laws involving denials of civil rights, such as discrimination. Penalties were regularly applied against violators.The country lacked formal trade unions. Worker interests were represented by informal associations. The transient nature of the mostly foreign workforce hampered efforts to organize trade unions.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										The constitution prohibits but does not criminalize all forms of forced or compulsory labor. The government did not effectively enforce the law. The law does not stipulate penalties, and there were no labor inspectors. Civil courts handled cases of forced labor. There were no reports of forced labor or of government efforts to investigate, prosecute perpetrators, or remove victims of forced labor.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										The worst forms of child labor were not prohibited. The law sets the minimum age of employment at 16. No regulations govern the type of work, occupation, or hours for workers younger than age 18, nor do they identify hazardous occupations. The Department of Human Resources and Labor is responsible for enforcing the law. The government effectively enforced the law in the public sector but did not conduct any workplace inspections of private businesses. Penalties were not commensurate with those for other analogous serious crimes, such as kidnapping, but were regularly applied against violators.The two largest employers – the government and the phosphate industry – respected minimum age restrictions.																																				d. Discrimination with Respect to Employment and Occupation										Labor laws and regulations do not prohibit discrimination in respect of employment and occupation. The law requires that public servants receive equal pay for work of equal value. Women working in the private sector did not have a similar entitlement.The government did not effectively enforce the law, and discrimination against women in employment and wages occurred. Societal pressures, lower wages, and the country’s general poverty limited opportunities for women. While women headed approximately one-third of all households, fewer than one-quarter of heads of household engaged in paid work were women. There were no reports the government took any specific action to prevent or respond to employment discrimination.																																				e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws: The minimum starting salary for public-sector employees is above the poverty level. There is no minimum salary for the private sector; approximately 26 percent of the population lived at the subsistence level. The law outlines a standard eight-hour workday and one-hour meal break for permanent and contract employees; workers were not required to work longer than nine hours. The law stipulates that for “each year of service, an employee is entitled to four weeks of recreation leave on full salary” and that it can be accumulated for up to three years, at which time the employee must take leave to reduce the balance or “cash out” an amount of recreation leave to reduce the total leave balance accrued.Public-service regulations govern salaries, working hours, vacation periods, and other employment matters for government workers, who constituted more than 90 percent of salaried workers. The government has a graduated salary system for public-service officers and employees. The law provides for maternity leave after a woman has completed six months of employment.There is no limit to the maximum number of accumulated overtime hours and no prohibition on excessive or compulsory overtime for workers in the public sector. No specific regulations govern overtime or overtime pay for private-sector workers.Occupational Safety and Health: Although the government sets some occupational health and safety (OSH) standards, they do not have the force of law. The law does not provide workers the right to remove themselves from a hazardous workplace without jeopardizing their employment.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement:The Department of Human Resources and Labor effectively enforced OSH standards in the public sector. Enforcement was lax in the private sector, but no violations of labor regulations were reported. The law allows the department the right to inspect a workplace without prior notification. Authorities may charge an employer with a criminal offense if found to be in violation of the labor law or the provisions of an employment contract. Penalties were commensurate with those for similar violations and were regularly applied. The number of inspectors was insufficient to monitor compliance fully.With the decline of the phosphate industry, enforcement of workplace health and safety requirements continued to be lax.Informal Sector: Most workers were employed in the informal sector in subsistence agriculture, fishing, and copra gathering. Laws and regulations on working conditions apply to the informal sector but were not enforced. Violations were reportedly common, but no inspections of the informal sector occurred.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Cote d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											Netherlands											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Bahamas											The Gambia											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																												Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies																																																																																				f. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																						c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																				Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption and Lack of Transparency in Government																																																	Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																																																	Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination with Respect to Employment and Occupation																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs																								Nauru
- Nauru National Day Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the United States of America, I wish to extend my congratulations to the Republic of Nauru as you celebrate the 55th anniversary of your independence.As a proud partner of Nauru, the United States appreciates our long-standing relationship that is underpinned by shared history, values, and people-to-people ties. We are confident that by working together we can confront the significant challenges facing the global community, including the climate crisis, security, and economic prosperity. In recognition of the growing global interconnectivity, we are confident that, working together, the United States and Nauru can help create a more secure and prosperous future for our countries.
- Building Economic Inclusion via the Blue Economy Program Office of the SpokespersonThe U.S. Department of State and Taiwan, under the auspices of the American Institute in Taiwan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representation Office in the United States, are proud to partner with the Grameen Foundation to launch the Building Economic Inclusion via the Blue Economy (BELUU) program, a three-year effort to enhance women’s ability to thrive via a more connected business environment, demonstrating the benefits of inclusive development, women’s economic empowerment, and democratic values that foster participation from all. The program will focus on the power of the blue and green economies to increase the market participation of women entrepreneurs in the island nations of Palau, Nauru, Tuvalu, and the Republic of Marshall Islands.BELUU will work with women-led civil society organizations to address barriers women islanders experience with respect to market engagement and disruptions in the economy.  In response to worsening climate impacts, including cyclones, drought, and sea-level rise, as well as the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on women and girls, BELUU will prioritize advancing equity through outreach to and consultation with individuals from rural areas, ethnic minority communities, and LGBTQI+ communities.Under the auspices of the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States (TECRO), BELUU is co-funded by the United States and Taiwan and is expected to reach more than 56,000 women and youth entrepreneurs and community members. The United States is committed to partnering with AIT and TECRO to enhance all women’s meaningful participation in the global economy.
- Investing in the Future of the Pacific: U.S. Assistance Continues to Address WWII-era Explosive Hazards Bureau of Political-Military AffairsOffice of Weapons Removal and AbatementEthan RinksSeventy-seven years after the end of World War II, Pacific Island nations still face the daunting challenge of post-war impacts: unexploded ordnance (UXO) and abandoned munitions littered throughout the vast expanse of the region.  At the height of WWII from 1941 to 1945, military forces from the United States, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand clashed in a series of battles across the Pacific Islands.  Large stocks of munitions predominantly from the United States and Japan were shipped to various islands to support ongoing military operations.  Unused and abandoned munitions as well as other explosive items that failed to detonate were left scattered across islands and atolls, buried in the sand, or submerged in surrounding lagoons.  At the conclusion of WWII, a large amount of UXO remained, posing a significant threat to local communities.  After more than seven decades, the presence of WWII ordnance continues to affect nine Pacific Island nations: Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, the Marshall Islands, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu. The United States has been at the forefront of unexploded ordnance remediation efforts, alongside allies and partners like Australia, Japan, and New Zealand, through its conventional weapons destruction program.  Progress to date has been significant, but there is much more to do.  The United States is a Pacific nation—geographically, economically, historically, and culturally—and remains invested in supporting a prosperous Pacific.  Identifying and destroying explosive hazards is critical to sustaining that success by making land safe for our Pacific Island allies and partners to grow their economies through sustainable development. In countries where land is scarce, clearing unexploded ordnance can have an outsized impact.  WWII-era bombs being prepared for destruction by Palau Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams. (Photo Norwegian People’s Aid photo) In Palau, the United States supports UXO clearance through the National UXO Safety Office.  The United States has committed more than $5.4 million to create a national UXO survey plan, conduct clearance operations, and build the capacity of the Government of Palau to identify and destroy UXO.  Since 2020, the United States has funded the return of more than 80 acres of land back to local populations and destroyed 2,294 UXO with U.S. implementing partner Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA).  Royal Solomon Islands Police Force Explosive Ordnance Disposal personnel lift a WWII-era bomb prior to destruction. (Golden West Humanitarian Foundation photo)In Solomon Islands, the United States has provided more than $6.8 million since 2009 to establish an explosive ordnance disposal  team with the Royal Solomon Islands Police Force and build national capacity to identify and destroy Explosive Remnants of War.  This included training 13 engineers who have conducted over 1,200 EOD callouts and destroyed more than 29,746 items of UXO with implementing partner Golden West Humanitarian Foundation since 2009.  The United States is ramping up its efforts in Solomon Islands as Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman discussed with Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare during her August visit to Honiara.    A U.S.-funded team in Marshall Islands utilizes a mobile bomb cutting system. This process cuts UXO to expose explosive filler for a safe burn out of the explosives, leaving the remaining materials explosive-free. (Golden West Humanitarian Foundation photo)The United States has invested more than $2 million in the Republic of Marshall Islands for UXO technical survey and explosive ordnance disposal operations on 12 islands spread across five atolls.  This includes critical cooperation through the Marshall Islands’ Historic Preservation Office to identify and catalogue U.S. and Japan-origin ordnance.  United States funding to the Golden West Humanitarian Foundation has helped find and destroy over 140 air-dropped bombs, mortars, sea mines, and other explosive hazards that threatened local communities.  The United States is working with Republic of Marshall Islands to expand cooperation and further advance UXO remediation throughout the island nation.  The United States has also supported short-term deployments by PM/WRA’s Quick Reaction Force to address UXO contamination throughout the Pacific. (Golden West Humanitarian Foundation photo)The United States’ Quick Reaction Force has also been critical to the safety and security of UXO threats in the Pacific.  It is a team of civilian explosive ordnance disposal technical experts that serve as first responders to unexpected UXO-related emergencies across the globe, including munitions depot explosions, ammunition depots at risk of imminent explosion, and Explosive Remnants of War that pose significant threats to civilians.  The Quick Reaction Force has addressed UXO requirements throughout the Pacific in the Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Tuvalu. The United States’ work over the past decade with Pacific Island partners to remediate WWII-era explosive hazards is foundational for a prosperous Pacific, and the United States will continue building on these partnerships to enhance host nation capacities that address UXO, and support survey and clearance, so that Pacific partners may advance development priorities on land free from UXO. The United States, through its conventional weapons destruction program, has funded work in the Pacific since 2009.  Since 1993, it has provided more than $4.7 billion in assistance to over 100 countries – making the United States the world’s single largest financial supporter of conventional weapons destruction.  For more information, check out our annual report, To Walk the Earth in Safety, and follow us on Twitter @StateDeptPM. About the Author: Ethan Rinks is the Program Manager for the East Asia and Pacific portfolio in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Office of Weapons Removal and Abatement at the U.S. Department of State.