Elder Gerrit W. Gong of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles was received by the President of the Republic of Costa Rica, Rodrigo Chaves Robles, on Friday, November 18, at the Presidential Palace of Costa Rica.
Chaves announced that he made the decision to retire as a World Bank official and return to Costa Rica because he considered that if he had requested a leave of absence, there could be a conflict of interest due to the conversations he had to have with that organization as part of his ministerial management. However, in August 2021, when the results of an investigation into allegations of sexual harassment against Chaves were made public, it was reported that it could be the reason for his resignation from the World Bank. The World Bank's administrative tribunal noted that an internal investigation found that from 2008 to 2013, Chaves made unwelcome comments about physical appearance, repeated sexual innuendo and unwelcome sexual advances toward multiple bank employees. Those details were repeated by the bank's human resources department in a letter to Chaves, but it decided to sanction him for misconduct rather than sexual harassment. Chaves denied all accusations of sexual harassment.
Chaves’s campaign is under investigation by electoral authorities for allegedly running an illegal parallel financing structure. He also has been dogged by a sexual harassment scandal that drove him out of the World Bank.
While working at the bank, he was accused of sexual harassment by multiple women, was eventually demoted and then resigned. He has denied the accusations.
The World Bank’s administrative tribunal last year criticized the way the case was initially handled internally.
The tribunal noted that an internal investigation found that from 2008 to 2013 Chaves leered at, made unwelcome comments about physical appearance, repeated sexual innuendo and unwelcome sexual advances toward multiple bank employees. Those details were repeated by the bank’s human resources department in a letter to Chaves, but it decided to sanction him for misconduct rather than sexual harassment.
“The facts of the present case indicate that [Chaves’s] conduct was sexual in nature and that he knew or should have known that his conduct was unwelcome,” the tribunal wrote. The tribunal also noted that in the proceedings, the bank’s current vice-president for human resources said in testimony “that the undisputed facts legally amount to sexual harassment”.
On the one hand, terrible for Costa Rica to have such a leader. On the other, LDS leaders need to meet with world leaders, even sketchy ones. I don’t think this reflects poorly on Elder Gong at all.
"He disturbs the laws of his country, he forces himself upon women, and he puts men to death without trial.” ~Otanes on the monarch, Herodotus Histories 3.80.
On the one hand, terrible for Costa Rica to have such a leader. On the other, LDS leaders need to meet with world leaders, even sketchy ones. I don’t think this reflects poorly on Elder Gong at all.
I take that on board, but should they, the Lord's mouthpieces, be cynical when dealing with world leaders? eg. Was it right for Pres. Kimball to say that Pinochet was "one of the great leaders of Latin America"? (https://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?re ... ci_3661420) It was great for missionary work, but considering all the human rights abuses, is this what a Prophet be doing? Or is it just pragmatism? Or maybe Pres. Kimball thought that the state of the economy was a moral issue, therefore Pinochet was in fact a force for (overall) good. Maybe this is a separate thread, sorry for the threadjacking.
Chaves made unwelcome comments about physical appearance, repeated sexual innuendo and unwelcome sexual advances toward multiple bank employees.
Let's face it, if Church leaders refused to meet with world leaders who have such allegations against them they'd meet with exactly nobody. If Church leaders refused to meet with anyone who had such allegations against them, they'd meet with hardly anyone.
There's some D&C scripture saying whenever some man gets power he starts to use it unrighteously.
But the point hits home well. We should never tolerate these abuses. How do we navigate our world?
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
I take that on board, but should they, the Lord's mouthpieces, be cynical when dealing with world leaders? eg. Was it right for Pres. Kimball to say that Pinochet was "one of the great leaders of Latin America"? (https://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?re ... ci_3661420) It was great for missionary work, but considering all the human rights abuses, is this what a Prophet be doing? Or is it just pragmatism? Or maybe Pres. Kimball thought that the state of the economy was a moral issue, therefore Pinochet was in fact a force for (overall) good. Maybe this is a separate thread, sorry for the threadjacking.
No, I don't think it was right. These things should be taken on a case by case basis and should be assessed within their proper context. If you ask me whether President Kimball was right to praise Pinochet, I have no problem saying it was not.
"He disturbs the laws of his country, he forces himself upon women, and he puts men to death without trial.” ~Otanes on the monarch, Herodotus Histories 3.80.
