By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, October 14 -- Upon arriving in South Sudan a week ago, the UN Security Council was met by two separate demonstrations.
The reported one was pro-secession, in the run up with the referendum scheduled for January 9. Also in the crowd, noted by more than one journalist but at the time not reported, were signs and chants of “workers rights are human rights.”
The following day the Sudanese media on the UN flight from Juba to Darfur were thrown off the plane. This was first reported by Inner City Press, then by Sudanese publications and others.
From the US early on October 13, Inner City Press directed three questions to the UNMIS spokesman in Khartoum. Twenty four hours later, responses were provided.
But each was a model of evasion, explicitly not providing the basis information requested and in one case simply referring the question back to spokesman for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in New York, Martin Nesirky, to whom it has been re-directed four hours before his October 13 noon briefing.
Here are Inner City Press' three questions among with explanation, and UNMIS spokesman Ashraf Eissa's responses:
“Please provide by email asap what UNMIS put out about the incident with the Sudanese journalist(s) on the tarmac in Juba in the Security Council delegation's plane.”
The basis of this question was a journalist on the trip referring to a canned UNMIS statement put out in writing in the UN Spokesperson's Office in New York. It was no longer there when Inner City Press checked. So Inner City Press asked UNMIS. But after 24 hours, Eissa replied:
“UNMIS has received formal complaints re the incident from the two institutions with which four journalists who traveled with the SC group are affiliated. UNMIS has formally responded to these complaints.”
Why not say what the “formal response” was? Security Council members, including a Permanent Five member whom Inner City Press spoke with about it, saw and then read out the ejection of the Sudanese media. What is UNMIS' response? The Council meets on Thursday morning about its Sudan trip - will it exclude this aspect?
Inner City Press also asked:
“Please provide the response of UNMIS / the UN to the "The Southern Sudanese Drivers and Mechanics Association... cit[ing] UNDP, UNMIS and Kenya Commercial Bank among the organizations that continue to employ foreigners in positions that many unemployed indiginous should hold, rendering local drivers redundant.”
To this, Eissa responded:
“On employment. It is for other organisations to answer, but as far as UNMIS is concerned, All national staff jobs are exclusively for Sudanese nationals.”
While Inner City Press was told, while at Juba airport, that much (but not all) of the protest of the UN was directed UNDP, the UN Development Program, and not only at UNMIS, doesn't UNMIS have some role to speak for the UN system, at least in South Sudan?
For example, the UN system's Humanitarian Coordinator and Resident Representative Georg Charpentier is, he seemed to say in El Fasher, an employee of UNDP. But still he purports to speak for the wider UN system. (Inner City Press has posed these and other questions to UNDP).
Cannot a formal spokesman like Eissa do the same?
UNMIS' stated mandate includes “promoting understanding of the peace process and the role of UNMIS by means of an effective public information campaign, targeted at all sectors of society... promoting the rule of law, including an independent judiciary, and the protection of human rights of all people of Sudan” -- including, presumably, those Sudanese protesting their exclusion from jobs of the UN system, including UNDP.
While the Council and media were in Sudan, UNMIS one-year chief Haile Menkerios did not speak with the press, despite requests made to the UN. Media based in Sudan say Menkerios rarely provides responses to reporters. What about “promoting understanding of the peace process and the role of UNMIS by means of an effective public information campaign" ?
Inner City Press third questions, not related to what it saw first hand in South Sudan, was
“Please describe how Benjamin Mkapa, António Monteiro, Bhojraj Pokharel and their staff are being compensated or having their expenses paid.”
To this factual and financial question, UNMIS' Eissa has responded:
“The SG's Panel is a totally independent panel from UNMIS. It reports directly to the Secretary-General in NY.”
The work of this panel in South Sudan and Abyei until October 15 is breathlessly reported on UNMIS' website, so Eissa's response seems too legalistic. Even though answers promised by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Spokesperson in New York Martin Nesirky back on October 11 have still not been provided, Inner City Press is re-directing this and other questions to Nesirky. Watch this site.
