By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, January 22 -- Questions were belatedly taken on January 22 about the mass rapes in Minova by the DR Congo Army, after which UN Peacekeeping continued providing support to the rapist units.
Scott Campbell, who was thrown out or "PNG-ed" by the Kabila government, appeared on a panel entitled " “Human rights at work in peace operations” (co-organized by the Permanent Mission of Switzerland and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights)."
Inner City Press went and asked Campbell, now that he is out of the DRC, seemingly for good -- there was some laughter -- to explain Minova and the UN's stated Human Rights Due Diligence Policy.
Campbell replied that the Policy doesn't provide for immediate suspension of aid, but a series of steps. He said that because of communications from the UN, a trial was held. He said that, personally, he thought the results of the trial "mediocre."
Let's review: for 200 rapes, there were only two convictions. So apparently to keep getting UN military support (Campbell mentioned attack helicopters), all a country would have to do was hold a show trial, a fixed trial - any trial is enough.
About bringing cholera to Haiti the UN has refused to accept court papers or appear in court. Inner City Press asked the panel if that doesn't undercut the UN's standing, make it hypocritical for it to preach Rule of Law (like the UN's Herve Ladsous speaking about freedom of the press, see below).
The respondent, Giuseppe Calandruccio, said the UN will have no comment on litigation but that yes, it impacted MINUSTAH's relations with Haitians. You don't say. He said the UN is trying to work on water and sanitation. Fine - but what about reparations and relief for those families who lost their breadwinner? Isn't that a part of human rights? Not for the UN, apparently. At least not UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous.
These two panelists and others will appear on January 23 before a closed Security Council meeting. Will there be other answers then? How is it acceptable that the head of UN Peacekeeping openly refuses Press questions?
These two panelists and others will appear on January 23 before a closed Security Council meeting. Will there be other answers then? How is it acceptable that the head of UN Peacekeeping openly refuses Press questions?
Earlier on January 12, Ladsous made a speech about freedom of the press in the Democratic Republic of the Congo Thursday to the US Security Council, and made excuses for not acting to “neutralize” the Hutu FDLR rebels as the UN did the largely Tutsi M23.
Then Ladsous came to the Security Council stakeout, ostensibly to take questions.
Inner City Press asked, “On the neutralization of the FDLR, what is the hold up?”
Ladsous said "I don't respond to your questions, Mister." Video hereand embedded below.
Then Ladsous turned and gave the question to Reuters. When that back and forth was over, Inner City Press asked if any of the countries in the UN's Force Intervention Brigade are well than willing to attack the FDLR, as senior diplomats at the UN have told Inner City Press.
Ladsous refused to answer this question, and gestured that Ban Ki-moon's envoy to the DRC Martin Kobler, standing behind Ladsous at the stakeout, shouldn't answer it either. Reuters took or was given another question, distancing the FDLR from genocide.
Finally Inner City Press asked both men what if anything UN Peacekeeping has done as the Kabila government has frozen the accounts of the Panzi hospital for rape victims. Ladsous waved this off -- for months he waved off Press questions about mass rape in Minova by his partners in the Congolese Army, video here -- and walked away with this spokesman.
(One can only imagine the advise this “communications professional” is giving Ladsous. Perhaps he can help Ladsous address his history with Hutu groups as evidence in this memo. These are Press questions.)
Kobler to his credit told Inner City Press he would come back and answer, and he did, albeit only some, and off camera. That will be another story. Because the story here is, how can a person in charge of UN Peacekeeping be allowed to refuse particular media's questions in this way? While, in classic UN fashion, giving a speech about freedom of the press, elsewhere? The weakness of current UN leadership comes to mind.
But as many ask, WHY does Ladsous refuse to answer Inner City Press? While he has refused to answer that, too, it began when Inner City Press reported that Ladsous was not even France's first choice for the position - Jerome Bonnafont was.
Tellingly, an Agence France Presse member of the Executive Committee of the so-called UN Correspondents Association complainedabout this Inner City Press story, and soon the Executive Committee of UNCA, under then and now president Giampaolo Pioli, made more complaint about that story, and another about Sri Lanka, demanding it be removed from the Internet.
Inner City Press quit UNCA and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access, which demands that all UN Under Secretaries General answer questions. UNCA, for course, has said nothing about Ladsous' refusal. It is the UN's Censorship Alliance. More on this -- including video -- to follow.
