UNITED NATIONS, April 19, updated -- As the scandal grows about not only the presumptive execution of UN staffer Louis Maxwell by Afghan National forces in October 2009, but also the UN's cover-up, Inner City Press on April 19 delved into the particulars of the UN's supposed "high level Board of Inquiry" into the death of Mr. Maxwell, a U.S. citizen.
After having dodged Inner City Press' questions at the UN noon briefings of April 14 and April 15 by handing out answers to another media, on April 19 the UN took a series of questions and answered some of them by 6 pm. Inner City Press submitted follow up questions which, because of the history here, are set forth below. First, from the April 19 transcript:
Inner City Press: On Afghanistan, in continuing questioning on this death of Louis Maxwell and the other UN staff -- the guest house, you said last week that there was a high-level Board of Inquiry. I wanted to know what, and I had asked, somehow I didn’t… by high level, what’s meant? Are there any outsiders, an independent body? I’ve heard that it’s actually just DFS [Department of Field Support] employees, all of whom report to Susana Malcorra. Can you, if that’s not true, I would like to know. But, what does high-level mean, and will its report be made public or what will happen with its report? Under what mandate was it set up? I searched through various GA [General Assembly] and other documents, and there seems to be three kinds of boards of inquiry, none of which this one falls under. So I just, I guess I wanted to know…
Spokesperson Nesirky: What are the three?
Inner City Press: I have them written down here. Do you…
Spokesperson: We don’t have to go into it right now, but there are three different types…
Inner City Press: I’ll send these to you, but it wasn’t, you said, I think last week, you’d said that you know these are set up. So, I have to admit, maybe to my detriment, I don’t know actually know how they’re set up. But on this one, I would like to know whether it’s all DFS employees and whether it will be made public when it concludes its investigation.
Spokesperson: Three things: one is that the Board of Inquiry’s draft report has been completed, the draft. But that does not mean that it is finalized to go the Secretary-General. That’s the second point. The step after it is finalized would be for it to go the Secretary-General. Whether it’s subsequently made public is something that I can’t answer here and now. I would need to find out. I don’t know the answer to that right now. Clearly, there is a lot of public interest in this, and I’m sure that that would be taken into account. And as for the make-up of the board, who is on the board, I can’t give you names and numbers. What I can tell you is that, my understanding is that it is not exclusively in-house.
This is what I can tell you now -- to my understanding, as far as I know, this is not exclusively a board with in-house members. But the most important thing here is that regardless of the Constitution, the way that it is set up, it has the very clear aim of trying to understand precisely what happened. These are very tragic circumstances, and this was aimed to do an extremely thorough job to find out exactly what happened.
Inner City Press: When this first came up last week, it was said that there is a Board of Inquiry and that it will be done in due course. When was this draft completed, and what are the steps between where it stands now -- the draft? Was it completed over the weekend, or had it already been completed before these questions arose last week, and what steps between now and the Secretary-General getting it?
Spokesperson: When a draft report is completed, then it is clear that it is reviewed. And, then, before it is submitted to the Secretary-General, it is reviewed. That’s a normal, if you like, checks-and-balance kind of procedure that you would have with any report. Other people look at it and then it is finalized to go to the Secretary-General.
Inner City Press: [inaudible] because, like when you say reviewed, I had asked, by who, just because last week we had the experience of the [Heraldo] Muñoz Bhutto panel; they did their report; they didn’t show it to anyone until they gave it to the Secretary-General. So, it was an outside report…
Spokesperson: That’s right.
Inner City Press: In this case, is it Susana Malcorra reviewing it? Is it UNAMA [United Nations Assistance Mission for Afghanistan]? Is it the Afghan national forces? Who reviews it?
Spokesperson: I cannot give details to you on that right now. I am sure I will be able to. I need to establish exactly what hoops I jump through.
The UN later added to its transcript this "note" --
[The Spokesperson later added that it is standard procedure to convene a board of inquiry in cases such as this. This particular board was convened under the authority of the Under-Secretary-General of the Department of Field Support and was comprised of external and internal senior personnel with relevant backgrounds and Afghanistan expertise (security; investigations; agencies, funds and programmes). It was led by a former senior Australian Federal Police Officer.
The procedure for the conclusion of the board of inquiry is as follows: the board finishes and submits the draft report for legal comment. The report is then given back to the board for further action (as required) and/or sign-off. Once the report is signed off on by board members it is considered finalized and it is presented to the convening authority, in this case the Under-Secretary-General for Field Support, for further action as warranted. The actual boards of inquiry are not made public in order to protect the confidentiality of the investigation.]
Receiving this, Inner City Press submitted follow up questions, which are printing here because last week, when Inner City Press asked questions on the record in the noon briefing, Nesirky's Office and his Associate Farhan Haq chose to give the answers to another media.
Here are the new questions, we'll see to whom if anyone the UN Office gives answers:
Hello. Regarding the UN's answers, below, please answer these follow up questions, providing answers as they become available--
1. What is your reference when you say "standard procedure"? Can you please provide the citation for DFS BOIs which examine the death of a UN Security Officer?
2. In the event that the BOI finds the Host Government (Afghanistan) or an agent thereof responsible for the death of Mr Maxwell, will your office make this fact known to the UN Press Corps? Or would the UN consider this "confidential" as well?
3. Prior to Ms Malcorra "convening" the BOI, was the Secretary-General aware of her intention to do so, and did he approve the composition and mandate of this particular BOI?
4. Did this BOI include any staff member or nominee from any department other then DPKO and/or DFS?
5. You say below that the report has been "returned to BOI members." When will the report been/be provided to the Secretary-General?
6. Has or will the report been/be provided to the Host Government (Afghanistan)?
7. Has or will the report been/be provided to the US FBI?
8. News reports indicate that the video was provided to Stern "by the United Nations." Can you confirm or deny this assertion.
9. Did the BOI consider the wider issue of whether or not the initial attack was actually perpetrated by the Taliban, as originally reported by the UN, as opposed to having been perpetrated by another entity?
10. Has or will the report been/be provided to the family of Mr Maxwell.
11. Did the Government of Afghanistan cooperate fully with the BOI?
While as of press time no answers were provided by the UN, Ms. Malcorra herself may have an excuse, auto responding that
"I will be out of the office starting 17/04/2010 and will not return until 27/04/2010."
Note that the head of DPKO Alain Leroy is, one assumes, still on the ten day leave the UN said began on April 9. Others say they saw Leroy squiring Kofi Annan around on April 19. Welcome back, Kofi? Watch this site.
