Showing posts with label Rupert Colville. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rupert Colville. Show all posts

Friday, October 6, 2017

As Cameroon Shoots Kids, ICP Asked Why UN Human Rights Silent, Now Zeid Welcomes Biya


By Matthew Russell Lee, PhotovideoQ&A


UNITED NATIONS, October 6 – When Cameroon's President for the past 30-plus years Paul Biya came to meet Antonio Guterres on September 22, before he went back to the Hotel Inter-Continental in Geneva, he was accompanied by his state media and... Inner City Press. Biya, still in Geneva, has directed his forced to use water cannons in Buea, as they shoot to kill in North-West and South-West Cameroon. On October 5 Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript here: and below, how it was that the UN's supposed High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein had said nothing. Video here. Sixteen hours later Zeid's spokesman Rupert Colville, who previously refused to even acknowledge receipt of Inner City Press' written request for comment about Paul Biya's cutting of the Internet much less comment on it, belatedly issued a statement -- welcoming Paul Biya's cynical condemnation a full five days previously of "all" - his own - violence. This is a new low. Here is Zeid's / Colville's statement: 

"We would like to reiterate the concern voiced by UN Secretary-General António Guterres about the violence in South-West and North-West Cameroon on 1 October, amid demonstrations by people from the country’s Anglophone community.
According to government figures, at least 10 people were killed on Sunday and credible sources indicated that some of these deaths resulted from excessive use of force by the security forces. We call on the Government of Cameroon to establish prompt, effective, imparital [sic] and independent investigations to ensure accountability.   Cameroon’s Anglophone regions have seen multiple strikes and demonstrations over the past year as resentment and tensions have built at what English-speakers see as discrimination against them in favour of the majority French-speaking population. In response, the Government deployed additional security and defence forces.  We urge the authorities to ensure that the security forces exercise restraint and take measures to prevent the use of force when policing demonstrations. People should be allowed to exercise their right to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression, including through having uninterrupted access to the internet. We call on all people to pursue peaceful means to make themselves heard. Over the past few months, public and private property has been damaged, and at least two homemade bombs are reported to have been planted in public places. There have also been arson attacks on a number of schools. We urge the Government and Anglophone groups to engage in a meaningful political dialogue so that the grievances of the Anglophone population, which date back decades, can be fully addressed. In that respect, we welcome the comments by President Paul Biya on Sunday in which he condemned all forms of violence, irrespective of the perpetrators, and called for dialogue as the only way to find a durable solution." Wow. Here was what Inner City Press asked the UN, in person, sixteen hours earlier:
Inner City Press: I've been wanting to ask you about Cameroon.  In fact, I've asked you some stuff in writing, but I want to ask you now in person.  Since your last statement…  I mean, there…  there…  I've asked you how many people the UN thinks have been killed in Cameroon, because Amnesty International said 17 some days ago.  People in the country are saying it's well over 100 now, their bodies being discovered.  So, I just…  one, I wanted to know, what is the role of the UN there in getting to the bottom of that?  How does it square with this…  people there are saying the idea that calling for dialogue with a President who seems to still be in Geneva when people are still actively being killed is a strange message from the UN.  So I wanted to know…  and where is Mr. [Francois Lounceny] Fall?  You said he'd be going this week.  It's now Thursday.  Where is he?  Spokesman:  He will travel as soon as it is appropriate and as soon as travel can be arranged.  There is a need, as in any situation, for a need for dialogue.  I have no specific information where the President of Cameroon may be, but there are…  there is a need for dialogue between the authorities and between the leaders of the Anglophone community.  I think the Secretary-General is extremely concerned about the increased tensions we've seen in the northwest and the southwest parts of the country.  He's been clear in condemning the violence that we've seen.  And we are…  as we've said in the past, we're ready to support any efforts by the parties for constructive engagement. I don't have…  We don't…  we're not in a position to, as far as I know, right now from here, to estimate the number of casualties.  We've seen the press reports, which are, as we've said, very worrying, but I have no…  we have no…  I…  at least I have no independent information from here. Inner City Press: There are not only reports but proof that both the internet and social networks have been cut off again, which was a bit issue earlier this year.  And I didn't see that in any UN statement.  And also, often it's…  sometimes human rights issues are not raised from here, but they're raised by the High Commissioner.  I haven't seen any statement by him.  So, people are saying they've seen him comment, for example, once there were, you know, mean tweets against CICIG [International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala] and he commented on that.  I'm not asking you to respond to him, but is this idea of this kind of division of labour, has something been dropped here? because it's a…  100 people killed and the internet…  young people are having their feet shot by soldiers so they can't protest… [cross talk] Spokesman:  "As I said, we've seen the press reports, which are extremely alarming.  The…  for the High Commissioner, I think he may have spoken out, but I think, again, that's a question you need to ask…  to address to his office.  There is a basic need to keep the internet flowing anywhere.  Access to information is critical for everyone, and that…  I think it's important that people have access to the internet." Also on October 5, Inner City Press asked UK Ambassador Matthew Rycroft, who earlier this year told Inner City Press the UK did not view the situation in Cameroon as a threat to international peace and security but would continue to monitor it, if the threshold has been reached and the UK will ask for a UN Security Council meeting. Periscope video here. He said no one has asked and the UK continues to weigh thpro and con of putting it on the Council's agenda (along with Myanmar, Guinea Bissau, Haiti, Colombia and others). Earlier Inner City Press asked Francois Delattre, the UN Ambassador of France and President of the UN Security Council for October, why he has not yet convened a Security Council meeting amid the killings of civilians and cutting off of social networks in Cameroon. Periscope video here. Delattre said the French Foreign Ministry's spokesperson has spoken earlier in the day, again calling for dialogue. We'll have more on this. Guterres' spokespeople have three times refused Inner City Press' request for the UN's estimate of how many people have been killed by Paul Biya's forces since Guterres offered him praise on September 22. Now, the US State Department through its spokesperson Heather Nauert has said, "The United States is deeply concerned about violence and the loss of human life in protests that have taken place in the Northwest and Southwest regions of Cameroon since October 1.  The Cameroonian government’s use of force to restrict free expression and peaceful assembly, and violence by protestors, are unacceptable.  We urge the Government of Cameroon to respect human rights and freedom of expression, including access to the internet.  We call on all sides to exercise restraint from further violence, and engage in dialogue for a peaceful, durable resolution." Tellingly, the Secretary General of the Francophonie Michaëlle Jean has while expressing "concern" said that "Violence should never be a means of expressing grievances." So Biya, who is killing, is doing so to express grievances? Or "pour se fair entendre"? We'll have more on this. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein said nothing. Nothing, from a man who issued a statement about critical tweets directed at a UN official. His New York representative, as Inner City Press reported at the time, was not (invited to be?) present at Guterres' now infamous grip and grin meet with Biya on September 22, 2017. What has been the role of the totally untransparent UN Department of Political Affairs, under Jeffrey Feltman? Today's UN system is hypocritical, and failing. In Mamfe and elsewhere, Republique du Cameroun forces are reportedly shooting people in the feet and legs to prevent their peaceful protest, while Guterres tells Anglophones to take advantage of this "opportunity" and be sure to stay with the LRC Constitution. Tell that to, as only one of many examples, Benjamin Amin, a young tech-savvy Anglophone who returned from studies in India only to be shot and killed by Biya's forces in Kumba on October 1. Inner City Press on the morning of October 3 again asked Guterres top three spokespeople, "what is the UN's estimate of the number of civilians killed since September 27? And what is the UN's awareness of the Cameroon government's restrictions on the media and other attempts to restrict freedom of association, speech and belief? Where does the UN understand President Paul Biya to be, and his role in these restrictions? On deadline." Lead spokesman Dujarric replied, "On Cameroon, we have nothing to add to what I said at today’s briefing" - which, beyond the previous night's canned statement, below, was: "the issue of Special Rapporteurs is one that the Secretary-General… that's outside of the authority of the Secretary-General.  I think we've had a number of diplomatic contacts at various levels with the Cameroonian authorities.  We've expressed our concern at the ongoing situation, especially at the violence and at the loss of life that we've seen.  We've seen that the authorities have called for dialogue, and we encourage those leaders in the anglophone community to seize that opportunity." Who is seizing whom? Previously with the UN silent for more than a day after Inner City Press submitted written questions to it on Cameroon  - its High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid spoke on Catalonia but not Cameroon - Amnesty International issued a statement that "the reported unlawful killing of several people in the Anglophone regions by the security forces coupled with the blocks on Facebook and WhatsApp represent an extremely worrying escalation of the government’s on-going campaign to silence any form of dissent in the West and South-West regions of Cameroon." At the UN's October 2 noon briefing, lead UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric wasn't there; his deputy Farhan Haq had nothing at the top, vaguely alluded to statements, no answer. Haq emailed Inner City Press: "On Cameroon, we are awaiting a statement, which should come out shortly; maybe not by noon, though." By 10 pm, still nothing. Finally at 10:30 pm, 29 hours after Inner City Press asked the UN how many civilians it acknowledged Biya has killed, the UN issues this with no estimate: "Further to his statement of 28 September, the Secretary-General remains deeply concerned about the situation in Cameroon and strongly condemns the acts of violence reported in the South-West and North-West regions of the country on 1 October, including reported loss of life. He calls on the Cameroonian authorities to investigate these incidents and urges political leaders on both sides to appeal to their followers to refrain from any further acts of violence, and to unequivocally condemn all actions that undermine the peace, stability and unity of the country. The Secretary-General takes note of the calls by the authorities for dialogue and encourages representatives of the Anglophone community to seize the opportunity in their quest for solutions to the community’s grievances, within the framework of the Cameroonian constitution. The Secretary-General reiterates the support of the United Nations for such efforts, through the United Nations Regional Office for Central Africa (UNOCA)." Pathetic. Or to be more charitable, too little too late. Meanwhile the UN's Resident Coordinator in Cameroon was robo-tweeting pablum about World Non-Violence Day, and France's Ambassador Gilles Thibault was expressing support to Yaounde (for flora and fauna). Inner City Press asked the UN Resident Coordinator Allegra Baiocchi for her response - none yet - noted the similarity to the UN's silence in Myanmar and emailed the UN's top three spokespeople: " In light of the government crackdown on communications and unarmed civilians in North-West and South-West Cameroon, after the UN's readout of September 22 and subsequent statement of concern, this is a request for the UN's already belated response to the government's killing. How many people does the UN acknowledge have been killed? What is the UN, both the country team and the wider UN, doing?" The lead spokesman provided this interim response: "We will try but may not have answers until tomorrow." Inner City Press has asked that any and all information be emailed to it as soon as available. More than 12 hours later, from the UN, nothing. Watch this site. According to the UN read-out, the September 22 conversation was entirely positive and did not mention Biya's abuse of Anglophones, or human rights in any way. Now on October 1 Biya's forces have opened fire from Buea to Ikiliwindi, Mamfe to Nkwen, Ndu to Nguti. Still, grainy footage has been sent to Inner City Press of Ambazonia independence celebrations in Bamenda despite the orders against freedom of association and movement, and ultimately freedom of speech and of belief. Biya has again undermined the Internet and rights to communicate in Southern Cameroons, to which Inner City Press after asking the UN  four days in a row until exclusion now turns. Here is a letter sent not only to Inner City Press, but to the UN Office of the Spokesperson: "I am writing from Southern Cameroons. I am pleading you should use your high office to stop the genocide that President Biya wants to exercise on the English speaking Cameroonians. a lot of people have lost their lives already and yet the President of Cameroons is seriously planning to shed more blood.  The truth is clear, the people of southern Cameroons (English speaking ) was a country  of its own that legally voted to joint La Republic of Cameroon. But now La Republic of Cameroon are treating these people as if they colonize them or conquered them in a war. sir use your conscience, it could have been your family going through what we are going through. Where is human rights in the 21st Century where people of a particular nation turns to treat their fellow brothers and sisters as slaves and the whole world is reacting as if there is nothing happening Does it mean that if tomorrow if I'm in one top position in the world that has to deal with the society i will give deaf ears to a situation that has to do with millions of lives ? what is wrong with the world today? where is human right? there is no justice at all? is it that human lives no longer matters? Please kindly react to stop the genocide that is about to happen in 48 hours." No response from the UN. Here is another letter: "Dear Matthew Russell Lee, Inner City Press: Accept my greetings and that of those who can't write to you. I am writing to you from Buea, Southern Cameroons. Am reacting to your articles on September 28 concerning the crisis in Southern Cameroons. The approach of the UN concerning the Southern Cameroons and it people, proves time and again that the UN must be very corrupt, and have turned it back against in commitment to protect human rights freedoms, and states sovereignty. How can the Secretary General be talking of his to consolidate peace and the Territorial integrity of Cameroon, when knows very well that, the UN holds no legal treaty that binds the British Southern Cameroons with LA Republique DU Cameroun? I hereby want to inform you that, I, as well as an overwhelming majority have chosen to separate from la Republique DU Cameroun because of what we have gone through in 56 of forced union. If the government of la République du Cameroun, considered us Southern Cameroonians as a people with the same rights as Francophones, if the government wanted to make peace and resolve this problem from it core, I think the repression taking place now won't have been. While you published on the Cameroon crises yesterday, the government of la Republique DU Cameroun became violently repressive and attacked and beating people their homes, taking seizing money and smart phones, and taking them to jail. As am writing to you now, six people were shot yesterday in the town of Ekona, and a grandmother was killed by the military in her home. 14 years old kids are being arrested and detained in jails under very cruel conditions. Since the beginning of this crises since November last year, 112 people have been killed by the military of la Republique DU Cameroun. The la République du Cameroun's government have been using terrorism blackmail the peaceful protests. I hereby call on the Secretary General to read the the UN charter on human right and freedoms, and the right for self governance." Biya's renewed attacks on the Internet have ranged from Bamenda to Kumbo and Kumba, but are being circumvented by VPNs. Meanwhile Inner City Press is receiving video of protests in front of the Inter-Continental Hotel in Geneva where Biya is staying. Guterres praised Biya, then belatedly called on him to dialogue: while Biya is not even in the country. His landing in Geneva: "VP-CAL used by #PaulBiya, President of Cameroon (Boeing 777) on 2017/09/26 at 08:56:46." We ran this sample letter to Inner City Press: " woke up this morning and discovered Internet Services in Cameroon have somehow been limited. I am suspected the regime of Paul Biya have tampered with the internet service and Facebook, Twitter,  WhatsApp, VPNs, Vcontact  aren't working. I am sure many other social media have been cut off as well.
There have been plans to celebrate the symbolic independence of this region 'the Former British Southern Cameroons' on the 1st of October 2017. That is on Sunday and the region have been heavily militarized by the Biya regime, Homes of people invaded, beaten , some killed, many kidnapped and with this shutdown to major social media to  which it is where most of these crimes are exposed, many have been fearing a total Genocide that can be perpetrated on the people of that region. There were rumors that, the internet will be shutdown come 30th September. The Minister of Communications made a public communique two days ago to say, the internet won't be shutdown but I guess it was just a ploy as through some websites are working, major social medias ( Facebook, Whatsapp, Twitter) have been cut off. Please, make the world know what is happening in this region. This is a sly move to blackout to the world what atrocities the Biya's regime is/will be perpetrating in these regions."  In Fiango, Biya's security forces have killed, reportedly Enogene Basile, following their September 28 killings in Ekona. Watch this site. Inner City Press on September 26, 27 and 28 asked Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric about these glaring omissions. The first time, Dujarric alluded to "private" diplomacy. Then on September 27 when Inner City Press asked ask, video here, Dujarric said that UN envoy Francois Fall will be going to Cameroon "next week." On September 28, Inner City Press asked Dujarric deputy Farhan Haq if this would be before or after October 1, and Haq said he didn't know. Hours later, Dujarric's office put out a statement of concern below, which many see as too little, too late, with its emphasis on territorial integrity. On September 29, Inner City Press asked Dujarric not only about the UN's surveillance of the Press, on which he refused to answer referring to the question to the UN Department of Public Information whose chief Alison Smale has refused to answer basic questions for a month (now keeping a close eye on Catalonia, if not blatant crackdowns in Cameroon), but also if Guterres' concern is at threats to those in Anglophone Cameroon to stay indoors or be treated as "terrorists," for citing UN General Assembly Resolution 1608. Video here. Dujarric replied that he doesn't have "granularity" about what's being done and said. But he put this out: "The Secretary-General is deeply concerned about the situation in Cameroon, including with regard to the recent security incidents in Bamenda and in Douala, and mounting tensions in the South-West and North-West regions related to planned events on 1 October. The Secretary-General has encouraged the Cameroonian authorities to continue their efforts to address the grievances of the Anglophone community. He urges the authorities to promote measures of national reconciliation aimed at finding a durable solution to the crisis, including by addressing its root causes. The Secretary-General supports upholding the unity and territorial integrity of Cameroon and urges all parties to refrain from acts that could lead to an escalation of tension and violence. The Secretary-General believes that genuine and inclusive dialogue between the Government and the communities in the South-West and North-West regions is the best way to preserve the unity and stability of the country.  The Secretary-General stands ready to support these efforts, including through the United Nations Regional Office for Central Africa (UNOCA). " We'll see. On September 26, Dujarric replied that Guterres would say there is a time for public diplomacy, and a time for private diplomacy. Video here. Some wonder, how many people have to die, or what kind of people, for it to be time for UN "public" diplomacy? Earlier on September 22 Inner City Press interviewed Southern Cameroonians out on 47th Street, then asked Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric about people killed that very day. UN transcript here and below. The crackdown is also financial: Biya's Minister of Finance has threatened the National Frincne Credit Bank in Bamenda with loss of its license for taking part in the "Ghost Town" expression of desire for independence, or in the first instance a referendum. See letter here. This politicization should trigger action by the "decision making phere" [sic] written about by Biya's state media, the kind of media that the UN and now its new head of Public Information favor over independent press. From the September 22 UN transcript: Inner City Press:  there’s a protest right now of Southern Cameroonians on 47th Street, but more importantly, there’s one in Southern Cameroon where five people have been killed today, as Paul Biya gave his speech, so I’m wondering…  I know the Deputy Secretary-General had some interest in the issue.  There’s Mr. [Francois Lonseny] Fall.  Are they aware of these protests? Spokesman:  "We’ve seen the reports I think we would definitely… we would call on the authorities to show restraint and ensure that people have the right to demonstrate freely." But on the UN's 27th floor, it was all smiles. And much later the UN put this read-out on its website: "The Secretary-General met today with H.E. Mr. Paul Biya, President of the Republic of Cameroon. The Secretary-General appreciated Cameroon’s hospitality towards the refugees.
They discussed the latest political developments in the country, as well as regional issues, including Boko Haram and the situation in the Central African Republic. The Secretary commended Cameroon for its efforts to combat Boko Haram, and reiterated the readiness of the United Nations to support the Government in all areas." No mention of the Anglophone areas, much less the day's killings. This is a new low, even for today's UN. UN Department of Political Affairs chief Jeffrey Feltman had left the floor with the Australian delegation; it was unclear if any UN Human Rights official was present. One of Biya's handlers even signed the UN visitors book in advance for him. When Guterres greeted his next visitor he did so in French then apologized, the last meeting was in French. Back September 19. Guterres ended with two photo ops. The first was Paraguay's President Horacio Manuel Cartes Jara, who spent a long time writing in the UN's visitors' book, followed by a short meeting. Alamy photos here. Next and last was Uzbekistan's President Shavkat Mirziyoyev. Guterres said pointedly, just the signature. But something was lost in translation: he still started writing. Alamy photos here. Then the Press was ushered out. Already on the way in before the Paraguay photo op, the Media Entrance on 47th Street was locked. The questions about double standards of media access, including retaliatory restrictions still in place on the investigative Press 
while no-show, no-question state media like Egypt's Akhbar al Yom have full access have yet to be answered by the official now responsible, Alison Smale. According to a photographer allowed into the smaller "G-200" room, Smale was there to greet "her" Prime Minister, Theresa May. 

Monday, March 6, 2017

On Cameroon, With UN Spokesman Silent, ICP Asks UN Human Rights Office of Anglophones' Plight



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 6 – Amid the ongoing abuse of Anglophones in Cameroon, the Internet being turned off for 50 day in their regions, Inner City Press having no response from the holdover spokesman of the UN Secretary General on March 5 asked Rupert Colville, the spokesperson for UN High Commission for Human Rights Prince Zeid of Jordan, questions including this: "What is the UN system, including the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), doing about abuses against the Anglophone community in Cameroon, in the Northwest and Southwest regions where the Internet has been cut for 49 days and counting?"

  Past noon the following day, March 6, still no response from Colville or the OHCHR. Is this acceptable?
While UN Security Council members visiting Niger, 188th out of 188 on the UN Development Index, is certainly welcome, it is noteworthy has is not being addressed or even publicly mentioned on this trip.
  Beyond the omission, which some called shameful, of the plight of Anglophones in Cameroon -- the Internet has been turned off in their regions -- the common denominator of France's historical power relations with, say, Chad and Niger was omitted even from reporting from inside the Council's bubble.
  It was complained to the Free UN Coalition for Access that the UN didn't even inform the News Agency of Nigeria that it could go on the trip (but did inform, for example, Voice of America). Might NAN have been more critical of aspects of the trip? How will this omission be addressed?
  And while a Security Council member has responded to Inner City Press that the issue was raised in meetings, given that VOA, invited and on the trip, did not even mention it, one wonders when, where and with what seriousness it was raised. We hope to have more on that.
   Inner City Press in the past was informed of such trips, and went on some, for example to Chad where then French Ambassador Jean Maurice Ripert dissembled about President Deby's non-appearance, then confronted Inner City Press about its reporting, in the airport in Kigali, Rwanda. Now, following a retaliatory eviction and continuing restriction at the UN by Department of Public Information chief Cristina Gallach and spokesman Stephane Dujarric for seeking to cover the Ng Lap Seng / John Ashe UN bribery case in the UN Press Briefing Room on January 29, 2016, Inner City Press is no longer informed or invited. DPI under Gallach churns out assemblages of canned quotes and tweets as "stories," as from within the bubble. We'll have more on this.

  On a previous Security Council trip that included Sudan, Council members spoke to the Press about standing up to the Sudanese government about abuses. So what happened in Cameroon?

Saturday, June 6, 2015

On Central African Republic Rapes, OHCHR Tells Inner City Press Kompass Will Be Extended, Why Not Miranda Brown?


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, June 6 -- French soldiers in the Central African Republic allegedly sexually abused children, as exposed in a UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights report given to the French government by longtime OHCHR staffer Anders Kompass. 
  Kompass was urged to resign -- according to a UN Dispute Tribunal ruling reinstating him, by French head of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, who has since tersely denied it -- and Miranda Brown who worked with him did in fact have her UN service ended.  
   Miranda Brown has written to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon:
"I am a key witness in the Office of Internal Oversight Service (OIOS) investigation into the disclosure by Mr Anders Kompass, Director at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), of the MINUSCA report Sexual Abuse on Children by International Armed Forces in the M’Poko IDP camp in Bangui, Central African Republic to the French authorities.
Despite my appeals to the High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, my employment at OHCHR was terminated on 21 May 2015, one day before I was scheduled to provide testimony as a key witness in the OIOS investigation. Please see attached OIOS’ repeated requests to interview me. As a result of my termination, I now have no functional immunity and given this and the punitive termination of my employment, I am scared of testifying in the investigation.

I was the Acting Director of the Africa Branch at OHCHR in early August 2014 during the period shortly after the MINUSCA report came to OHCHR’s attention in Geneva. Mr Kompass was my direct supervisor at the time. Emails document my involvement and I was the key contact between OHCHR and MINUSCA during the period immediately following the disclosure.
My testimony to the OIOS investigation would have supported Mr Kompass’ decision to disclose the MINUSCA report to the French Government and would have shed light on many  elements relating to the disclosure. As such, my testimony would also have been very embarrassing and potentially problematic for High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and others in the UN leadership, who have publicly denounced Mr Kompass for wrongdoing and placing victims, investigators and witnesses at risk. 
The stated reason for the termination of my employment at OHCHR is that there is no position available for me at OHCHR headquarters in Geneva, where half of the roughly one thousand OHCHR staff work. This explanation is implausible, deeply suspicious, bears all the hallmarks of retaliation, and is, at best, an abject failure to protect a key witness and, at worst, constitutes possible witness tampering. I have requested an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the termination of my employment at OHCHR.
I understand there may have been a second disclosure of the MINUSCA report to the French authorities by a female staff member at OHCHR, and that because of my prior history as a whistleblower at World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), suspicions may have fallen on me as the source of the second disclosure. This is false. While I agree with Mr Kompass’ decision to disclose the report to the French authorities and enjoy good relations with the French Permanent Mission in Geneva, I have had no contact with the French Government on the MINUSCA report. The French Government would be able to confirm this. I believe that I know the female OHCHR staff member who made the second disclosure to the French Permanent Mission in Geneva. I do not expect her identity will be revealed as she would then herself become at risk of reprisal.
Secretary General, if you would like my testimony in the OIOS investigation and for this investigation to have any credibility at all, you will need to immediately reinstate me in a P5 level position in Geneva, if necessary in another UN organisation or entity. I shall be willing to testify in this investigation or another inquiry if one is launched, once my functional immunity is restored, my job is safe and I no longer fear retaliation.
I am sure you will agree that the Member States of the United Nations expect the investigation into Mr Kompass’ disclosure of the MINUSCA report to the French authoritiesand any subsequent inquiry into these matters to be thorough, fair, transparent and impartial. 
This will not be the case without my testimony, however inconvenient this might prove to some in the UN leadership."
   What will Ban do, now that he has belatedly said he will appoint an “independent” Panel?
  Meanwhile, amid reports that OHCHR would not extend Kompass' contract, Inner City Press asked OHCHR spokesperson Rupert Colville to “confirm or deny this decision to not extend this fixed term contract.”
   Colville has, in fact, denied, writing to Inner City Press that
“It is not true. Like all the rest of us, Anders's contract has an end date (which is indeed some time in July). The High Commissioner will request that it be extended (the final decision for someone at Anders's very senior D2 level is in fact made in New York not Geneva). However, when someone's contract ends while they are under investigation, an extension is automatically granted anyway.”
   The answer is appreciate. But why didn't that policy apply to Miranda Brown? Watch this site.
 On June 3, after Secretary General Ban Ki-moon announced an intention to name an independent panel at least 14 UN member statesmet about its terms of reference and to whom beyond Ban it should report, as Inner City Press exclusively details below.
  Now Inner City Press reports on the June 5 meeting between four of those states -- minus South Africa - which met on June 5 with Ban Ki-moon and more than a half dozen other officials, including Deputy Eliasson, DFS' Atule Khare, Herve Ladsous' fill-in and others.
  The states -- the UN identified them as Australia, Guatemala, Japan  and Finland, though the last was Norway -- went in with a series of positions and questions, including:
"We are concerned by the damage that these incidents, and their follow-up, have done to the UN’s reputation and credibility in an area where the UN is expected to uphold the highest standards and values.

The review must be conducted in an expeditious manner and the results must be fully transparent.

It is crucial that the review looks at the whole chain of events, including the senior management’s decisions leading to disciplinary action against Mr. Anders Kompass. This has cast doubt about the credibility of the UN’s human rights commitments in field missions and about the integrity of its whistleblower policy.
It is crucial to remove any doubts that the UN is fully committed to preventing sexual exploitation and abuse and to ensure effective investigation of any such allegations in field missions. In addition, accountability for perpetrators, and protection and assistance to victims, must be ensured.

Questions: What will be the scope of the Independent External Review (CAR only? The UN’s handling of the investigation, SEA more broadly?)

To what extent has the Human Rights Up Front approach been applied?

Will the review look at institutional reforms to better address cases of SEA, including timely reporting and action in cases of abuse?
Will the review look at the protection of whistleblowers? What is the status regarding the pending case against Mr. Anders Kompass – in light of doubts that have been raised about this process?"
  In fact, Inner City Press is informed that OHCHR and Zeid personally are poised to not renew Kompass' fixed term contract, set to expire on July 8, 2015, and to give the required one month notice by June 8. 
  Inner City Press in response to the UN read-out on the evening of June 5 formally asked the UN Spokesman: "I have heard that UN OHCHR has decided not to extend Anders Kompass' fixed term contract, which is set to expire on July 8, 2015. I understand that under UN rules, he must be given one month's notice and will thus need to receive notification by no later than Monday June 8, 2015.

"Given the allegations of retaliation (and the UNDT ruling), please confirm or deny this decision to not extend this fixed term contract."
  This retaliation, despite US Mission attempts to protect the UN, could result in funding cuts or at least damaging hearings. But as with Ladsous, high UN officials are allowed to operate out of control in their fiefdoms.
  In response to the above, Inner City Press can exclusively report these UN responses:
The Office of the High Commisioner for Human Rights is sending a team to the Central African Republic.

Regarding the External Independent Review, it was assured that it will be done by someone completely outside the UN, also excluding the UN’s own investigative capacity. It was still not decided who would lead the panel, but it would consist of at least one woman and one African. It would examine the specific case of allegations in the Central African Republic, but also look at the broad range of systemic issues being raised.

Regarding the time-frame and further ToR’s of the Review, this would be discussed after the meeting and be determined shortly.

Regarding the case of Anders Kompass, it was pointed out that the separate investigation was ongoing, and the outcome must be awaited before further comments.
  But if Zeid intends to not extend Kompas' fixed term contract, that part of it is moot. And Ban is heading off on another long trip. Watch this site.
  An emerging and damaging question for the UN is who knew what, when. Inner City Press asked when Ban knew of the alleged child rapes -- "March" is now the answer.
  There was a retreat of all senior UN officials in Turin, Italy on March 18-19, 2015. This was days after Kompass says he was told the French Under Secretary General for Peacekeeping Operations Herve Ladsous wanted him to resign. (Ladsous now denies this, see below.)
  In Turin, Ban's chief of staff Susan Malcorra put together the ostensibly independent Ethics Office and Office of Internal Oversight Services, calling into further question the UN's claimed whistleblower protections.
  If Ban's chief of staff knew of the alleged child rapes, it is difficult to believe Ban didn't know. But what did he do?
 Which of the other high UN officials present in Turin learned there or before about the alleged child rapes, by then already covered up for months? There is a photo of the participants.

UN in Turin, March 19, 2015 UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe ICP: Who knew?
 These include some who want to run to replace Ban, or for other high positions. We will have more on this.
  The UN did not give the report to the host country authorities in CAR. And according to UN documents -- on May 29 released in more detail by Code Blue naming Ladsous directly, here -- UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous then urged that the whistleblower Kompass be forced to resign.

  The documents also implicate a number of other UN officials, and French government inaction, see below. After Press questioning turned to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, what he knew and when he knew it, Ban on June 3 announced an intention to set up an "independent" Panel. Inner City Press asked if it will report only to Ban -- yes. This is a problem.  Video here.

   On June 3 a meeting was convened to seek answers and improvement on the UN's response, by Guatemala and Norway, with attendees from all UN Regional Groups, see below. Inner City Press has spoken with several members; Norway will be requesting a meeting for the group with Ban Ki-moon, on topics ranging from to whom the Panel will report to its Terms of Reference to the actions of OIOS and the Ethics Office.

 As Inner City Press analyzed below, there is a history of UN panels being used to cover up.

Now Code Blue has these three recommendations:

"First, this must be a truly external and independent inquiry.  No member of existing UN staff should be appointed to investigate nor to act as the investigators’ secretariat.

"Second, it must be understood that top members of the Secretary-General’s own staff will have to be subject to investigation. This must go right up to the level of Under-Secretaries General. No one can be excluded, whether the Director of the Ethics Office or the USG of the Office of Internal Oversight Services or the Secretary-General’s own Chef de Cabinet. It would appear that all of them and more acted inappropriately in response to the dreadful events in CAR.

"Third, the reference in the Secretary-General’s announcement of a review to ‘the broad range of systemic issues’ is crucial to the inquiry. What happened in the Central African Republic was an atrocity, but the fact that the UN stood silent for nearly a year after its own discovery of widespread peacekeeper sexual abuse (even if by non-UN troops) is itself a bitter commentary on the Secretary-General’s declared policy of ‘zero tolerance’."

  Inner City Press would add, past UN staff and offiicals as well. Consider these past panels, as put together and at the end analyzed by Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access:

The "Ahtissari Panel" (2003) --

On 22 September 2003, Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Mr. Martti Ahtisaari, former President of Finland, to chair an Independent Panel on the Safety and Security of UN Personnel in Iraq.

The "Walzer Panel" (2004)

Panel finds senior officials lax in ensuring UN’s safe return to Iraq

The Volcker Panel (2004)

The priority of the Independent Panel’s investigation of the “oil-for-food” programme was to “get after” allegations of corruption and misconduct within the United Nations itself and, more broadly, the question of the maladministration of the “oil-for-food” programme, stated Paul A. Volcker, Chairman of the Independent Panel, in a press conference at UNHQ.

The Munoz Panel (2009)

The UN Commission of Inquiry, appointed by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the request of the Pakistani Government, reached no conclusion as to the organizers and sponsors behind the attack in which a 15-year-old suicide bomber blew up Ms. Bhutto’s vehicle in the city of Rawalpindi on 27 December 2007.  The three-member panel, which was headed by Chilean Ambassador to UN Heraldo Muñoz and included Marzuki Darusman, former attorney-general of Indonesia, and Peter Fitzgerald, a veteran official of the Irish National Police, urged the Government to undertake police reform in view of its “deeply flawed performance and conduct.”

The Palmer Panel (2011)

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon established the Panel of Inquiry on the 31 May 2010 Flotilla Incident on 2 August 2010. The Panel received and reviewed reports of the detailed national investigations conducted by both Turkey and Israel.

The Marzuki Panel (2011)

On 22 June 2010, the Secretary-General announced the appointment of a Panel of Experts to advise him on the implementation of the joint commitment included in the statement issued by the President of Sri Lanka and the Secretary-General at the conclusion of the Secretary-General's visit to Sri Lanka on 23 March 2009.

  What exactly has the UN done about Sri Lanka?

And here is the UN's June 3 announcement, and Inner City Press' immediate questions, here.


 Meanwhile UN staff advocates have written to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, his chief of staff and Ladsous, among others, demanding resignations. On June 2 Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, who Banned any Inner City Press question to Ladsous on May 29, what Ban Ki-moon DID, once he learned in March about the rapes.Video here and embedded below.

 Dujarric said he had nothing to add to his previous answers. Huh?

 Inner City Press asked Dujarric, in light of OHCHR Zeid using a private email address for UN business, what the UN's record retention policy is. Dujarric said the policy must be available somewhere. To this has the UN descended.

  Dujarric said the investigation by Lapointe's OIOS, discredited in the leaked emails, will "lead where it will lead." But Lapointe has told OIOS invstigators to not go beyond what they are asked to look at -- in this case, only the whistleblower. This is called a cover up.


Many are asking why UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid, while emailing with the UN Ethics Office and OIOS, was using a private Gmail address, and not his work account.

 When Hillary Clinton used the UN Security Council stakeout to belatedly answer questions about her own use of private email while US Secretary of State, it was described as an accident of scheduling, or attempt to use the UNSC backdrop to convey gravitas. But the echo now with Prince Zeid also using private email for presumably public business raises similar questions.

  But will the questions be asked, much less answered? Reuters, typically, ran a piece on May 30 repeating Zeid's press release, withlittle analysis of his role, or use of private email, or Herve Ladsous, who has now been emailed staff advocates' call for resignations.

  Anders Kompass was asked to send his side of the story -- to a private email address, but wisely declined.

Beyond the treatment of Kompass himself, the documents show pressure brought to bear on lower-level staff to make and thereby launder the high officials' desire for an investigation of Kompass.

  Most directly, it is asked, what UN staff member will now report fraud or misconduct, knowing that OIOS and the Ethics Office will then discuss the accusations with their boss? This is a question Inner City Press on May 29 asked UN Spokesman Staphen Dujarric, who BannedInner City Press from putting a single question to Ladsous - the question has yet to be answered.

    UN staff advocates have written directly to Ban Ki-moon and his deputy, Ladsous and Atul Khare and others, demanding resignations. They are offended by the exposure of lack of independence at the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services and UN Ethics Office, and question whether the US should cut off funding under the 2014 U.S. Consolidated Appropriation Act, section 7048(a)(1)(B). After reading those leaked documents, how exactly can the U.S. Secretary of State (or anybody else) certify that the UN's whistle-blower policy fulfils the Act's requirements? Is there any "independent adjudicative body" in this chain? Evidently the Ethics Office and OIOS are not."

  The staff notice Ban's appearance at another softball soccer game, among those who are supposed to hold him and the UN accountable. The call for Ladsous to resign out be fired has spread from the African Group to Latin America and GRULAC.

On May 30, OHCHR for Prince Zeid issued a statement beginning, "In the wake of the revelations of alleged serious sexual abuse of children."

  But Zeid was told of the allegations long before their "revelation" via leaks. And tellingly, he continued to mistakenly think and say the rapes were in Mali and not CAR.

 Likewise, both UN Peacekeeping's Herve Ladsous -- listed as urging the whistleblower to resign, which he denies while refusing to take questions on -- and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon both knew of the alleged child rapes by "the Spring," but did nothing.

  This requires an investigation, and not by the UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services, shown to not be independent, told to meet Zeid and the UN Ethics Office by Ban's chief of staff Susan Malcorra.

  Inner City Press reported on some of the documents and went to Ladsous' rare press conference on May 29 (International Day of UN Peacekeepers) in order to ask some questions. Video here.

  But Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, choosing who could ask questions, refused to call on Inner City Press, even for Ladsous to say, as he did under Dujarric's predecessor Martin Nesirky, "I don't respond to you, Mister."

  So Inner City Press objected, on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access (the old UNCA has become part of the problem) and asked questions, video heretranscript here.

  The documents also call into serious question the claims of "independence" from the office of Ban Ki-moon of the Office of Internal Oversight Services and the UN Ethics Office.

  Consider this: OIOS head Carman Lapointe, writing to James Finness (still in charge of the "investigation" spokesman Stephane Dujarric continues to use as an excuse to not answer question), noted that at the UN staff retreat in March "I received an urgent email from the CdC [Ban's Chef de Cabinet Susana Malcorra] to meet with Zeid, Flavia and Joan."

  So OIOS is not independent - it can to told, by Ban's chief of staff, to meet with collaborate with the Ethics Office as well as OHCHR's Zeid and Pansieri.

 Inner City Press previously reported on and asked Dujarric about OIOS' flawed process and a high profile recusal, see below.

  Embarrassingly, Lapointe says for fully 20 minutes they were told the rapes occurred in Mali, not CAR -- the same mistake Zeid made. How can a mere OIOS investigation be accepted? We'll have more on this.

 As noted, Inner City Press reported on some of the documents and went to Ladsous' rare press conference on May 29 (International Day of UN Peacekeepers) in order to ask some questions.

  But Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, choosing who could ask questions, refused to call on Inner City Press, even for Ladsous to say, as he did under Dujarric's predecessor Martin Nesirky, "I don't respond to you, Mister."

So why did Nesirky allow Press questions to Ladsous, and Dujarric didn't?

  Dujarric set the first question aside for "UNCA" -- but called on an individual who was not elected to their board, who lost the election; her question was a vague softball offering Ladsous a chance to comment on Central African Republic. He said, it was one nation, not under blue helmet.

  But Ladsous' MINUSCA mission knew of the sexual abuse since at latest August 5, 2014. Inner City Press said, "Follow up on CAR?" Dujarric called on Reuters, which previously wrote to him trying to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN (then filed to get his leaked complaint blocked or Banned from Google's Search, here.) Reuters did not even aske about the CAR sexual abuse.

  What emerged is that both Ladsous -- and, troublingly, Ban Ki-moon -- were formally informed of the sexual abuse of children in CAR "in the spring."  What date? And what did they do?

  Dujarric said, "last question;" as Ladsous left the room Inner City Press asked Ladsous about him speaking about the whistleblower Kompass with OHCHR's Zeid, also a subject of the new documents -- no answer.

  Inner City Press objected to Dujarric, who has fielded or dodged a dozen Inner City Press questions about the CAR rapes and Ladsous' role, not even being allowed to ask a question. Dujarric said, "Noted."Video here.

 And what? Again, Dujarric's predecessor Nesirky, and his deputy Del Buey, allowed Inner City Press to put questions to Ladsous. What if the difference? We'll have more on this.

On July 30, 2014, Ambassador Nicolas Niemtchinow, Permanent Representative of France to the UN in Geneva wrote to
Kompass that action was being taken. But then, nothing.

 On August 5, 2014 the Human Rights Officer in CAR of OHCHR wrote to Renner Onana of the already-then UN mission MINUSCA; DPKO's SRSG Babacar Gaye was referenced.

   So when did Gaye or MINUSCA tell DPKO chief Ladsous?

Tellingly, even the UN's cover up was delayed by High Commissioner Prince Zeid thinking he heard of French troops' sexual abuse in MINUSMA (Mali) and not MINUSCA (CAR).

  Zeid asked his predecessor Navi Pillay if she met with French representatives about rapes in Mali -- the answer was no -- then much later asked her if she'd met with the French about CAR (the answer was yes.)

  It was Zeid's Deputy Flavia Pansieri who conveyed Ladsous' directive to Kompass to resign. Zeid in his statement makes much of Pansieri meeting with a Swedish diplomat in the street, in casual clothes, after Sweden raised l'affaire Kompass at a dinner in honor of Ban Ki-moon's Deputy Jan Eliasson. THe UN's move now seems to be to try to lay all blame on Pansieri, whose term was expiring anyway. We'll have more on this.

   From Kompass' March 29, 2015 narrative, here:

"On 12 March 2015 meeting with the Deputy High Commissioner I was informed that the High Commissioner requested my resignation for the way I dealt with the reports of paedophilia in the Central African Republic. I was told that the High Commissioner had been asked for my resignation by Mr. Ladsous, Under Secretary-General for the Department of Peacekeeping Operations in New York, during a visit of the High Commissioner to New York."

  Ladsous curtly denied this to Inner City Press, video here, then again refused to answer questions -- as he has outright refused to answer Press questions on rapes in the DR Congo and Darfur.

   On May 27, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, here.

  Follow up stories in the New York Times and on AP managed to not mention Ladsous, despite Paragraph 9 of the UN Dispute Tribunal reinstatement order.
.


 Inner City Press, which reported exclusively on that meeting, on May 22 asked UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq about the probe, video here



Absent from the UN Fifth (Budget) Committee's May 18 meeting was not only embattled Peacekeeping chief Ladsous,, but also OIOS' Carman Lapointe.
 In her stead for OIOS was Michael Stefanovic, who told the Fifth Committee that he has recused himself from the investigation and has written to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon as to why. 
  This is highly irregular. If the recusal was made on a personal connection between Stefanovic and the whistleblower Anders Kompass, Stefanovic would have recused himself from the earlier investigation - but he didn't. If it were such a recusal, he would have written to Lapointe, and not to the S-G.
   For now we add this -- if OIOS Director Stefanovic has a conflict of interest, how can the UN be asking others to rely on an OIOS investigation? Inner City Press has asked a Permanent Member of the Security Council -- not France -- if an OIOS investigation would be sufficient, and has been told "No." 
 Now we have this, from the Fifth Committee's May 20 meeting:
Lapointe, summoned to the meeting via her Byun-kun Min, was asked
-When did OIOS/ID start the investigation into Anders Kompass?
-Why did Mr. Stefanovic recuse himself from the Kompass investigation?
-In view of Mr. Stefanovic recusing himself, did Ms. Lapointe see any impediments for the scope of the investigation, especially as it appeared to implicate an ASG or USG in misconduct?
  Note - this is a reference to UN Peacekeeping USG Ladsous.
 Multiple sources tell Inner City Press Lapointe replied that Stefanovic told only the Secretary General, not her, that he recused himself, and that the Deputy Director of OIOS in Vienna is now "overseeing" the investigation.
So those now on the case are James Finniss, Kanja and Margaret Gichanga -- who has been asking to interview WIPO whistleblower Miranda Brown, who worked alongside Kompass for a time. We'll have more on this. It is a new low for the UN.
Back on May 18, Inner City Press, staking out the Budget Committee meeting, spoke with Ban's chief of staff Susana Malcorra when she left the meeting. Here is a transcript, followed by an exclusive summary of what happened inside the closed meeting.
Inner City Press: How did it go in there? Are their questions answered?
CdC Malcorra: Well I hope, yes. Some of them still have questions that will be answered by my colleague. I think I’ve made a point of what it is that we’re discussing here. This investigation is a UN investigation. It was led by the UN in the field when they had allegations handed to them. It was the human rights cell in the mission that led this investigation. It looks like we were absent, but it was us...
And this investigation could, at least prima facie, there were places clear enough to further investigate by the member state. And as such, the information was provided to a member state. On a separate front, is how the information is provided. And we cannot accept the irresponsibility of the names of the victims, the witnesses and the investigators shared with the member states ... it’s inacceptable. It may look like a bureaucratic approach. It’s not a bureaucratic approach...
Inner City Press: What about not telling Central African Republic authorities?
CdC Malcora: They are discussing that now.
   After the meeting ended, and Inner City Press spoke with numerous attendees - a common refrain was that the UN leadership is "in denial" - we have pieced together this summary of the meeting, and the totally insufficient answer on UN Peacekeeping chief Ladsous' role, a lack of recognition of his UNAMID mission's previous cover up of rapes in Tabit in Darfur, which the US and UK and other say they care about, and lack of follow up on whistleblowers.
Attendees' summary of Ban Ki-moon chief of staff Malcorra:
"Malcorra said she had no idea the session would go into the specifics of CAR, she thought it was to touch upon general Sexual Abuse and Exploitation policy (several attendees were dubious and angry about this approach.)
  Malcorra said that in the case of misconduct by UN staff the procedures were in place. In this case, even when it was not UN peacekeepers the human rights cell in Bangui was there and they were the ones that initiated the investigation. It is thanks to the UN that allegations were substantiated and it was enough to decide to proceed with a further investigation.
  The wrongdoing of the UN staffer Anders Kompass was to have shared the information without it being redacted putting the victims, witnesses and investigators lives in danger. She repeated many times this was a serious breach and that she disagreed with anyone that didn’t view this conduct wrong.
   According to Malcorra the UN investigation lasted three months which allowed them to substantiate the allegations.  When that finding was final it went to the two lines of command: The head of mission in CAR and the OHCHR.  But, several asked, why didn't either of these tell the CAR authorities?
Malcorra said she would have preferred this case hadn't surfaced in the media and that it is regrettable member states have had to learn matters from the press. But that, Malcorra said, member states have to be aware that the press manipulates everything. Several states talked about the UN image and credibility to which Malcorra said she was very sad with those comments because if not for the UN these troops could have gotten away with these disturbing acts. She also said this was a clear case of damned if you do damned if you don’t. But what about the cover up? What about Ladsous?
  Malcorra said that “no other element had been taken into account” for Kompass' firing. But member states were aware of Paragraph 9 of the UN Dispute Tribunal ruling reinstating Kompass. As noted, one Permanent Representatives (and several other diplomats) told Inner City Press that Ladsous should resign.
  Tellingly, the sources say, Malcorra claimed didn’t recall any UNAMID coverup allegations. Tabit?
   Malcorra didn’t even address the Otis report on whistleblowers - which Inner City Press has been asking Ban's spokesman about, repeatedly -- but assured member states that due protections are in place and that an adequate policy exists.
  Malcorra said she looks forward to working further on the UN convention in paragraph 57 of the SG report on SEA and agrees that there are systemic flaws, and therefore there will be a review of all the processes.
  According to sources in the meeting -- Inner City Press asked and was told to inquiry with member states -- the  Legal Counsel and head of OLA qualified as excellent the cooperation with the French Authorities and that the lifting of immunity so far hasn’t been necessary because at this stage its very general requests of information that the UN promptly has given to the French authorities. For the sake of efficiency hasn’t gone through the lifting of immunity process but if a trial or judge becomes involved they will do it quickly at a later stage. Several member states were dubious. The EU, Inner City ress is informed, said “accountability starts at the top.”
 Malcorra left unanswered why the host state, the CAR, was not involved. She is said to have ignored the specific question on the status of the OIOS investigation. She ignored the complaints about under-reporting saying that the trend of decrease was very clear and that the USG of DFS would go into details (what he did, genially, was repeat the Secretary General's report).
  An impartial investigation was called for, from both sides of the Atlantic and elsewhere. There was a refrain afterward: Ladsous should resign."
  Herve Ladsous was conveniently out of town, on Mali over that weekend he chided Malians for not sufficiently thanking France for the French Operation Serval. Would he say the say in Bangui, about Operation Sangaris?
  A well-placed African Permanent Representative before the meeting told Inner City Press before the meeting that Ladsous should resign. But with him conveniently absent, would others be left holding the bag, trying to explain why he, Ladsous, appears in the UN Dispute Tribunal ruling as urging that the whistleblower resign?
  Back on May 8, Inner City Press asked US Ambassador Samantha Power about both issues - the UN's failure to tell the CAR authorities, and Ladsous' "surprising" role, as High Commissioner Zeid put it earlier in the day. Video here and embedded below. Then Inner City Press asked the UN Spokesman, Stephane Dujarric, about the contradiction; for the first time, he gave a timeline.
  Here is the video of Inner City Press questions to US Ambassador Power:

  It is an answer that may move things forward. Ladsous, it should be noted, just this week snubbed a Joe Biden-linked Hemispheric peacekeeping conference in Uruguay, wasting an $8,000 first class plane ticket and angering many troop contributing countries. He refuses to answer Press question, for example on rapes in Minova, DRC and Tabit in Darfur.
   As noted, on May 8, High Commissioner Zeid held a press conference, and twice refused to comment on why Ladsous was said to have pressured to fire or suspend the whistleblower.
  Inner City Press has covered Ladsous' role from the beginning, and highlighted his appearance in Paragraph 9 of the UN Dispute Tribunal ruling reinstating Kompass. On May 7, Ladsous told Inner City Press, "I deny that" - then refused to take questions.
 Zeid was asked, and first time said he should first give his view of the pressure to the investigator, not the media.
 The second time, he said he was surprised to read it -- his Office did not contest that part of the ruling, effectively admitting it -- and that the head of UN Peacekeeping should not have been intervening about a non-UN force.  Video here.
 Neither he nor the questioners in the room in Geneva said the obvious: Ladsous is a longtime French diplomat; it is not rocket science to read Paragraph 9 as him (inappropriately) still working for "his" country.

 Zeid said other things we'll report later; he alluded to the need for a Commission of Inquiry. Some ask, will Ladsous quit before then? Or after?
 For more than nine months, no action was taken -- no interviews of victims or alleged perpetrators were done -- other than the UN suspending Kompass for the leak, on which the UN Dispute Tribunal ruling recites that UN Peacekeeping chief Ladsous requested Kompass' resignation. (See Paragraph 9, here.) Ladsous told Inner City Press he denies it - then refused questions.
  Early on May 8, UN system staff complained to Inner City Press that UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid of Jordan, in a closed staff meeting on May 8, tried to downplay the scandal, going so far as to blame imams in Bangui for not playing their role.
  But it was OHCHR which didn't even give the report of the rape of CAR children to CAR authorities, only to the French.
  In places, Zeid appeared to try to use his record ten years ago on sexual abuse to shift the blame to imams.  Inner City Press has shown a failure by his Office to act on past leaking, to Morocco. We'll have more on this.
  On May 7, Inner City Press asked more questions about this - including to Herve Ladsous himself.
  After a long closed-door consultation meeting of the Security Council, Ladsous emerged. Inner City Press asked him, based on Paragraph 9 of the UNDT ruling, Why did you ask Kompass to resign?"
  Ladsous stopped and said, "I deny that." Inner City Press put the handheld video online, here.