Showing posts with label burma. Show all posts
Showing posts with label burma. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

At ASEAN, UN's Ban Ki-moon Is Vague on Citizenship for Rohingya and Press Freedom in Myanmar, While Journalist Aung Naing Is Dead


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 12 -- After UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon at the ASEAN summit in Myanmar vaguely brought up the right of the Rohingyas to citizenship and even more vaguely freedom of the press, at the UN's noon briefing on November 12 Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq:

Inner City Press: I notice that the Secretary-General in his press conference there was asked about the Rohingya, and it was a lengthy answer, but the one thing I didn’t understand is he seemed to say that it’s entirely up to the Government who’s eligible for citizenship, but if they’re eligible, they should be treated equally with others.  I wanted to know:  Does the UN have any view?  What if the Government said all Rohingya are not eligible?  Or is the condition on eligibility being not identifying yourself as a Rohingya.  Is that acceptable?  What does it mean?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  What he actually said, of course he said, “I’m urging the human rights and human dignity of people in Rakhine should be respected.”  He went on to say, “Whoever is eligible to be given citizenship, I think they should be given citizenship equal to Myanmar people, without any discrimination.”  Then for those people who may not meet the criteria, it is important that their human rights and human dignity must be fully protected.  And by the way, he did add he’ll be meeting with President Thein Sein tomorrow, and he’ll take up the issue with him.  If there’s anything further from the readout of that meeting we’ll share it at that point.

Inner City Press:  On Myanmar. I notice… I guess it was an inaudible question about freedom of expression but recently a journalist Aung Naing was killed while in military custody and it’s given rise to a lot of commentary from press freedom groups.  Is the Secretary-General aware of that case?  What does he think it means for the current status of freedom of the press in Myanmar?

Deputy Spokesman:  He is informed and as you know what he did say is that as the political reform process continues, he said, “I have been asking the leaders to fully guarantee the freedom of expression, the freedom of assembly, is the basic principle of human rights enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations.”  So he will continue to try and push for guarantees of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly in the country.  

  The press freedom question was also on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, since Ban's UN Censorship Alliance, UNCA, plays soccer with him rather than asking about silence on dead journalists.
 Also on the sidelines of ASEAN Ban brought up his "Rights Up Front" initiative without mentioning, at least in the read-outs, anything about its origins. In Sri Lanka in 2009, Ban's UN withheld information on the killing of civilians, and worse.
  Vijay Nambiar, Ban's envoy on Myanmar, has stopped short of calling for citizenship for the Rohingya, instead saying if they are kept stateless, at least they should be treated "with respect." With respect to what?
  In his UN - ASEAN speech, Ban congratulated Thein Sein and said, "Discrimination against minorities and vulnerable groups, and violence against women, are serious challenges in the region.  The UN stands ready to work with ASEAN and its Member States to strengthen national capacity to protect human rights, provide justice and promote accountability."
  Accountability -- when the UN is refusing any remedy for having brought cholera to Haiti, to the point of evading service of court papers.
  On Sri Lanka at UN headquarters in New York the disinterest and delegation continue. On November 11 an event was held about "War Crimes Records."  Inner City Press attended and asked about war crimes in Sri Lanka. Video here.
 Stating, as set forth below, that the UN itself withheld evidence of war crimes in Sri Lanka in 2009, Inner City Press asked the panel for their thoughts on how the Human Rights Council panel will be able to prepare the report they are mandated to do, with the government refusing to give visas and trying to intimidate potential witnesses.
  The moderator said this was perhaps not the place to get answers on Sri Lanka. Why not? And UN Prevention of Genocide official Adama Dieng did respond, saying it is possible to produce information in real time.

 Patrick J. Treanor added that the command and control of a country, here the Rajapaksas and such figures as Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Shavendra Silva and Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona (see below), can be done from outside.  There, was that so hard?

  As reported by Inner City Press:
After claiming of Sri Lanka that "we don't count bodies," the UN has now involuntarily admitted that the "minimum number of documented civilian casualties since 20 January 2009, as of 7 March 2009 in the conflict area of Mullaitivu Region [is] 9,924 casualties including 2,683 deaths and 7,241 injuries," in a leaked document of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs obtained by Inner City Press
  OCHA's top official John Holmes, as well as spokespeople for UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, have repeatedly denied that the UN has such casualty figures.  Now it appears that unlike in other conflicts from Darfur to Gaza, the UN withheld the Sri Lanka figures, in effect protecting the Sri Lankan government from criticism.
   On February 17, 2009, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Michele Montas for the UN's estimate of civilian deaths, and whether it was higher or lower than 1200. Ms Montas replied that "we are trying to save people, not count bodies." Video here, from Minute 22:48.
   On March 17, 2009, Inner City Press cited the just-obtained internal OCHA casualty figure of 9,924 including 2,683 deaths to the Ambassador of a European country active with OCHA, asking if Holmes had disclosed this number in the two "classified" briefings on Sri Lanka the Ambassador had mentioned. "Everyone knows the figures are controversial," the Ambassador said, insisting that he not be identified by name or country. "You won't hear these figures from OCHA." But internally, they are in writing.
Jump forward to November 3, 2014: Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman about Sri Lanka's allegations about "blank human rights complaint forms." There was no substantive answer; four days later, it was Prince Zeid from Geneva who spoke out.
   And now the Sri Lankan government has predictably shot back, blaming Zeid's statement for what they were already doing: banning the human rights investigators.
Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva Ravinatha Aryasinha has written to Zeid, "This type of action on your part would regrettably constrain constructive engagement which the Government of Sri Lanka has consistently sought to pursue." Right.
  In UN headquarters this is pattern used by the United Nations Correspondents Association under Giampaolo Pioli. 
  When Inner City Press reported as context for Pioli's unilateral decision grant an "UNCA" screening for Sri Lanka's war crimes denial film "Lies Agreed To" that Pioli had rented one of his Manhattan apartments to Aryashinha's counterpart in New York Palitha Kohona, Pioli said take the story off the Internet or he would get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN.
  When Inner City Press complained about this attempt at censorship, by a group that was ostensibly supposed to defend journalists and freedom of the press, these complaints including sent in writing to the private owners of Pioli's listed employers QUOTIDIANO NAZIONALE/LA NAZIONE/Il Resto del Carlino / IL GIORNO, Poligrafici Editoriale S.p.A. via Stefania Dal Rio, and to Voice of America -- 
this was used as the excuse to, yes, try to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN.  Here is Voice of America's letter, for which it said it had the support of AFP and Reuters, which then moved to censor its own anti-Press complaint to the UN, here.
  Writing to QUOTIDIANO NAZIONALE/LA NAZIONE/Il Resto del Carlino / IL GIORNO, Poligrafici Editoriale S.p.A. was said, by Voice of America, to have these companies "preparing a libel lawsuit" -- never filed. It was only meant to silence and censor. And now Pioli reappears, annointed by two year figure head Pamela Falk, to take the helm again at UNCA, become not the UN Correspondents Association but rather the UN's Censorship Alliance.
   In 2009 it was Secretary General Ban Ki-moon who went on the Rajapaksas' victory tour of the bloodbath on the beach. Some of Inner City Press' coverage is here.
 In 2011 Sri Lanka's denial of war crimes, “Lies Agreed To,” wasscreened inside the UN, hosted by the then-president of UNCA, become the UN's Censorship Alliance.
On November 3, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about a new development, transcript here:
Inner City Press: In Sri Lanka, a newspaper has reported that the Government is searching people down for having “blank human right complaints forms” to the inquiry of the Human Rights Council in Geneva. And since, obviously, there are people who are now charged with this and on the run, I wanted to know: Can you state from this podium or sometime today, are there even… do such forms even exist? Is there a blank form for this inquiry? And if so--
Spokesman Dujarric: I don't know. You may want to refer that question to the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights here.
Inner City Press: Okay. Even if it were to exist, should people be hunted down for having these forms?
Spokesman Dujarric: Obviously, I can't tell you… I don't know of the existence of these forms or whether there is a police action against it. Obviously, it's important that people have the right to cooperate, should they wish, with any UN human rights investigation
The article is easy to find; it is in The Island, which got leaked one of Ban Ki-moon's wan reports on Sri Lanka. But eight hours later, nothing. 
 In the interim, the previous president of UNCA Giampaolo Pioli, who when Inner City Press reported on his screening of Rajapaksa's war crimes denial film and the fact that Pioli previously rented one of his apartments to Palitha Kohona, still Sri Lanka's Ambassador, tried to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, made a new move.
  Pioli is positioning himself to again head UNCA, posting his name as the only candidate, endorsed by Pamela Falk of CBS who filled in for his for two years. UNCA has not been reformed in any way since its kangaroo proceeding against Inner City Press resulted in death threats.
  Inner City Press submitted requests under the US Freedom of Information Act to Voice of America, whose Margaret Basheer wrote at the time that the newspaper of UNCA's president -- Pioli -- was preparing to sue Inner City Press for libel for the entirely true report that Pioli rented real estate to Kohona -- pictured below with Pioli and Shavendra Silva.

 It was pure intimidation and big media abuse, an attempt to censor. Inner City Press raised the death threats from Sri Lanka to Pioli's private held newspaper in Italy -- which allows Pioli to, for example, make campaign contributions to politicians he is supposedly covering -- resulting in yet more threats of litigation, attempts to intimidate and censor. There are more more documents obtained under FOIA, and audio clips, most not yet published.
Since then, Inner City Press quit UNCA and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access. But Ban Ki-moon's UN continues to prop up its UN Censorship Alliance, giving it a big room for free to hold screenings in, setting aside all first questions for it, using it to pretend to be doing a good job on press freedom and such issues as Sri Lanka war crimes. We'll have more on this.

 
  

Sunday, August 10, 2014

In Myanmar, US Secretary of State Kerry Did Not Use the Word "Rohingya," Just as UN Did Not In June, Admitting Burmese Authorities Said Not To


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 10 -- US Secretary of State has been in Myanmar the past few days but it seems in his many transcribed statements, including a two-question press conference, he did not say the word "Rohingya" once.

   This is particularly notable because the UN has admitted they were told by the Burmese government not to say the word. Why didn't Kerry say it?  To be fair, he twice mentioned Rakhine State in his press conference. But what group is it being targeted there?  

   Back on June 17 in New York, the UN's humanitarian deputy Kyung-wha Kang gave an opening statement to correspondents that did not use the word "Rohingya."

   Inner City Press asked Kang about Myanmar authorities bragging about UNICEF apologizing for using the term "Rohingya."  Inner City Press reported it on June 7, and on June 9 asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, transcript below.
 On June 17, Kang told Inner City Press that the government asked her not to use the word "Rohingya" in public -- and she agreed and did not use the word. Video here.
  Inner City Press asked Kang how this was consistent with the claim that the UN is pushing Myanmar authorities on the Rohingya -- or Rakhine? -- issue. Kang said there is a division of responsibilities, that the human rights site of the UN speaks differently that the humanitarian side. And what about "Good Offices" envoy Nambiar?
  Inner City Press asked about UNICEF's $87,000 a month rent to a landlord linked to the former military junta -- no comment except that rent is high in Rakhine -- and of the plight of Karen refugees in Thailand. We may have more on this.
From the UN's June 9 transcript:
Inner City Press: It’s been a long weekend so I have a few questions, how ever you want to do it. I wanted to ask you, now that you say Ms. Kang is going to Myanmar, local media there reports that UNICEF having used the word Rohingya, then apologized for it and committed not to use it any further. This is reported there with local authorities saying the UN will no longer use this word. And I wanted to know, is this... UN policy?
Spokesman Rohingya: I don’t know. I don’t know. You should ask UNICEF, but I’ll check on my end, but I don’t know.
Question: Yes, is there a UN policy [to not use the word “Rohingya”]
Spokesman Dujarric: I don’t know.
  So he doesn't know if there's a UN policy against even using the name of the Rohingya group? Nine hours and counting after the June 9 briefing, there was no answer from him. UNresponsive.
   This comes as UNICEF pays $87,000 a month to rent its office, and pay it to a landlord with links to the Than Shwe military junta.
  UNICEF has tried to explain away these $87,000 monthly payments. But to agree to censor the very name of the Rohinga minority?
  The local report says, "The head of the United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund (Unicef) in Myanmar, Bertrand Bainval, personally apologised for the use of the term ''Rohingya' at a June 4 press conference on Unicef’s plan to help children Myanmar’s second poorest sate, according to Rakhine State officials."
  Some human rights industry profilers on June 6 immediately praised Secretary General Ban Ki-moon tapping Jordan's Prince Zeid to replace Navi Pillay as High Commissioner on Human Rights by saying that "as a Muslim," Zeid will acting on the Rohingya issue. How about UNICEF reportly agreeing to not even use the word Rohingya?
  Back on May 23, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, to put the question to Ban's “Good Office” envoy to Myanmar Vijay Nambiar. 
  Are these Good Offices? And what is Nambiar's and the UN's response to a new report documenting the UN's troubling role during the final stage of Sri Lanka's conflict in 2009?
$ 87,000 per month... Standard due diligence on the owner and her family concluded that none of the international sanctions in place until recently had been levied against the landlady or her immediate family and no criminal charges were extant. Although allegations against a member of her family who was once a member of the previous military regime surfaced, the official had since left public office and was not subject to any criminal charges or international sanctions.”
  Is that the UN's standard -- member of previous military regime is fine to pay $87,000 a month to, as long as no current criminal charges? 
  And what now of the report UNICEF agreed not to use the word Rohingya?
This is what Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman, on May 23:
Inner City Press: on Myanmar,I wanted to ask it here, because there’s a good offices mandate of the Secretariat. UNICEF has acknowledged that it’s paying $87,000 a month in rent to a former member of the military Government of Myanmar. And, although they say that they did a sanctions check and found… they acknowledge that the person was a member of the junta, they say that it’s okay. And I wanted to know, is this sort of, UN-wide, does the UN in terms of looking at its business relationships and the payments of those types of money — is just not being on the sanctions list enough? Or is there some higher standard?
Spokesman Dujarric: Let me look at what UNICEF has said and if I have anything, I’ll get back to you.
Inner City Press: And maybe ask Mr. [Vijay] Nambiar. That was my thought.
Spokesman: Would be happy to.
Inner City Press: And about the Sri Lanka report, as well.
Spokesman: Yes.
  But these, like Inner City Press' repeated questions about the new report on Sri Lanka, by a member of Ban's only Panel of Experts, have gone unanswered.
  The issue of rent and war crimes has arisen before at the UN in connection with Sri Lanka. In 2011 the president of the UN Correspondents Association agreed with Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona to screen a government film denying war crimes in the Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium. 
  This was agreed to without asking other UNCA executive committee members like Inner City Press -- which since quit UNCA and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access -- and without disclosure or recusal. Inner City Press reported a previous financial relationship -- rent -- between Kohona and the UNCA president. The subsequent attempts to censor Inner City Press are sketched here and have continued since,sometimes comically. But this is not fUNny. This is the UN. Watch this site.

 
  

Friday, July 4, 2014

ICP Asks UN of Myanmar and Mandalay, Nambiar Returns With Concern & Praise of Government


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 4 -- Amid more attacks on Muslims in Myanmar, Inner City Press on July 3 asked the UN Spokesman:

Inner City Press: In Myanmar, there has been a curfew declared in Mandalay after violence between Buddhists and Muslims, and I wondered, one, whether Mr. [Vijay] Nambiar and his good offices have any comment on this, and two, whether the UN country team there is in any way affected by the curfew? What is its knowledge? Do they think the Government’s reaction is appropriate?

Spokesman Dujarric: I have not seen anything from Mr. Nambiar’s office. I haven’t seen those reports, so I will look into those.

  While often Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson's office does not return with an answer, even to correct a misleading statment, or even inserts the transcript an answer different than the erroneous one given, in this case on July 4 the UN provided, and Inner City Press tweeted and publishes in full:

From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply[at] un.org
Date: Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:50 PM
Subject: On Myanmar.
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] innercitypress.com
Cc: Stephane Dujarric  Farhan Haq

From Special Adviser Vijay Nambiar:

"Special Adviser Vijay Nambiar is deeply concerned by the reported loss of life and public disorder resulting from the latest flare-up of communal tension in Mandalay caused by the deliberate rumour-mongering and incitement of tension among communities that have lived together peacefully so far.  While expressing sorrow at the deaths in the latest wave of violence, he noted the prompt and effective initial response of the authorities to prevent a deterioration of the situation and protect civilians.
The Special Adviser called on religious and community leaders to help the authorities restore calm in Mandalay and avert any spread of tension to other parts of the country. Those responsible for the violence should be brought to justice. He urged the inhabitants of Mandalay as well as the people of Myanmar generally not be provoked or manipulated by vested interests but to promote harmony, mutual respect and peaceful coexistence between all communities in the country."

On the curfew in Mandalay:

There are two UN offices in Mandalay, and UN staff members are observing the curfew, which has had a negligible impact on their work
   When Inner City Press first published these answers, there was reader feedback recalling Nambiar's role in Sri Lanka. On those two countries, Inner City Press on June 20 asked the US State Department's Ambassador Luis CdeBaca of the US Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons,click here for State Department transcript:
OPERATOR: All right. We did have one final question from Matthew Russell Lee at Inner City Press. Please go ahead.

INNER CITY PRESS: Sure. Thanks a lot, and thanks for taking the question. I was looking at Myanmar – Burma – and also at Sri Lanka. And in both cases, it seems to say – the report seems to say that that government is either, in the case of Burma, directly involved in trafficking in coercion; or in the case of Sri Lanka, suspected of complicity in it. So in those two cases, I wondered as the U.S. sort of re-engages with Myanmar or Burma, how does this issue get raised and how is it going to be resolved? And the same in the case of Sri Lanka where there’s this human rights inquiry. Is this – what can be done in terms of actual government complicity in trafficking?

AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: Well, it’s interesting. Let me start with Burma. We – this is one of the first things that we re-engaged on. I was in Burma within I think about three weeks or a month after Secretary Clinton took her first historic trip there, and when I met with Aung San Suu Kyi, one of the things that was very interesting to me was that she recommended to me that I needed to talk to her jailor. And I asked her, “What do you mean?” And she said, “The guy from the secret police who was assigned to me to be my warden all of these years would bring me articles on human trafficking off of the Internet, and we would talk into the night about how we would work together to help end human trafficking and slavery for our people if things ever changed.” A lot of people forget that she spent her Nobel Prize money while she was in prison. She sent it World Vision, an NGO, to provide food and shelter for about 200 Burmese trafficking victims in Thailand. The first place that she went after she was able to travel was to the shrimp-packing sheds in Thailand where so many Burmese are affected by this crime.

So it was interesting to see not only her, but then eventually what came true is the new head of the anti-trafficking unit – the central body against trafficking in persons for the Burmese Government in the new era – is the very person who she recommended to me that we should work with. He’s written a book on trafficking; he’s gone to other parts of the region. I think there’s a real desire on the part of the Burmese Government to engage and to bring on some of these modern approaches.

And to that end, they even passed a law abolishing the 1907 Villages and Towns Act, which is what gave them the legal ability to enslave their own people. So the notion of giving that up as part of the process of opening up to the outside world. I think that, as with every country, there’s a long way to go, and we’ll continue to work with them. We have an established and formal dialogue with them that was agreed to by both presidents during President Obama’s visit a year and a half ago, and it’s something that I’ve been to Burma for that dialogue and will be, I think, going again in the fall for the second round of that. So we’re – in that situation, I think that we’ve got a formal way to work with them.

Sri Lanka on the other hand, I think that that’s a bit of a work in progress. We don’t see – first of all, we’re not digging out of the years of exclusion from the international community that we had seen with the Burmese Government, but we’ve got this notion of three years in a row the trafficking statute that they have, which is a pretty good one – it prohibits all forms of trafficking, which not every SAARC country, not every country in the region has laws that prevent forced labor as well as sex trafficking – and yet three years in a row without any convictions, no services really for male trafficking victims, sex trafficking victims punished, and the folks who come home from overseas, no real way to screen for or help them the way that other source countries like the Indonesians and the Filipinos have.

So I think that there’s a long way to go, but they have this inter-ministerial structure that they have now adopted, and I think that for us both here in Washington and at the Embassy in Colombo it provides us some interlocutors who we hope that we’ll be able to work with going forward.

QUESTION: Just one follow-up on Burma. Do you see this issue of the Rohingyas, is it – does it make them susceptible to trafficking, this kind of stateless status? And how – do you have more – do you see this – do you see it through the light of trafficking, or is it a separate issue?

AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: Well, I think that we see with any displaced and vulnerable communities that are suffering from social exclusion, and I think that the plight of the Rohingyas has pretty been – has been pretty well documented. That is the type of population in which we often see in this type of situation.

Now, I mean, obviously, we remain concerned about all of the humanitarian issues that are around the Rohingya and other vulnerable ethnic and religious communities. We actually shed some – a little bit of light on this both in the Burma narrative but also, frankly, in the Thai narrative as we’re looking at the exploitation and even alleged sale of Rohingya refugees once they get to their destinations as they’re moving for all these different reasons.

INNER CITY PRESS: Thanks.
Here is the report on Thailand:
There continued to be reports that corrupt Thai civilian and military officials profited from the smuggling of Rohingya asylum seekers from Burma and Bangladesh (who transit through Thailand in order to reach Malaysia or Indonesia) and were complicit in their sale into forced labor on fishing vessels. Thai navy and marine officials allegedly diverted to Thailand boats carrying Rohingya asylum seekers en route to Malaysia and facilitated the transfer of some migrants to smugglers and brokers who sold some Rohingya into forced labor on fishing vessels.”
   Will Thailand try to sue the US State Department? Here's from the Department's report on Sri Lanka:
The Sri Lankan government made very limited law enforcement efforts to address human trafficking. Sri Lanka prohibits all forms of both sex and labor trafficking through Article 360(c) of its penal code, although the law also covers non-trafficking offenses, such as selling children. The law prescribes punishments of up to 20 years’ imprisonment. These penalties are sufficiently stringent and commensurate with those prescribed for other serious offenses, such as rape. The government investigated 20 new cases of trafficking in 2013, compared to 44 in 2012. Authorities prosecuted one case under Article 360(c), an increase from zero cases in 2012 and 2011, though it was a case of baby-selling. Authorities also prosecuted ten potential sex trafficking cases under Sri Lanka’s procurement statute, which prescribes lesser penalties than Article 360(c). As in 2012 and 2011, Sri Lankan courts did not convict any traffickers under Article 360(c) in 2013, though one court convicted three defendants under Article 360(c) for baby-selling. Authorities also convicted 12 traffickers under the procurement statute; all but one of them received a suspended sentence. The government’s reliance on procurement charges, and the absence of prosecutions under the trafficking statute, resulted from an inability or unwillingness on the part of police to thoroughly investigate potential human trafficking cases for elements of force, fraud, or coercion.”
That's by no means the only crimes, and war crime, the Sri Lankan government is unwilling to investigate. Watch this site.

 
  

Friday, June 20, 2014

Myanmar & Sri Lanka Governments Complicit in Human Trafficking, New US State Department Report Says


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 20 -- Government officials are involved and complicit in human trafficking, according to the US State Department, in countries like Myanmar (Burma) and Sri Lanka. Secretary of State John Kerry, releasing the US Trafficking in Persons report on June 20, said it is a reminder “of what happens in many dark places, in need of light.”

Inner City Press on June 19 asked Ambassador Luis CdeBaca of the US Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons about both countries.

CdeBaca noted that Sri Lanka did not make a single conviction in 2013 for human trafficking. He began by praising “new era Burma” with a story of Aung San Suu Ki directing him to her jailer who cared about the issue. Inner City Press asked about the Rohingya, the Muslim group whose name the UN dares not say in public, and CdeBaca quickly directed Inner City Press to the report on Thailand:

There continued to be reports that corrupt Thai civilian and military officials profited from the smuggling of Rohingya asylum seekers from Burma and Bangladesh (who transit through Thailand in order to reach Malaysia or Indonesia) and were complicit in their sale into forced labor on fishing vessels. Thai navy and marine officials allegedly diverted to Thailand boats carrying Rohingya asylum seekers en route to Malaysia and facilitated the transfer of some migrants to smugglers and brokers who sold some Rohingya into forced labor on fishing vessels.”

   Will Thailand try to sue the US State Department? Here's from the Department's report on Sri Lanka:

The Sri Lankan government made very limited law enforcement efforts to address human trafficking. Sri Lanka prohibits all forms of both sex and labor trafficking through Article 360(c) of its penal code, although the law also covers non-trafficking offenses, such as selling children. The law prescribes punishments of up to 20 years’ imprisonment. These penalties are sufficiently stringent and commensurate with those prescribed for other serious offenses, such as rape. The government investigated 20 new cases of trafficking in 2013, compared to 44 in 2012. Authorities prosecuted one case under Article 360(c), an increase from zero cases in 2012 and 2011, though it was a case of baby-selling. Authorities also prosecuted ten potential sex trafficking cases under Sri Lanka’s procurement statute, which prescribes lesser penalties than Article 360(c). As in 2012 and 2011, Sri Lankan courts did not convict any traffickers under Article 360(c) in 2013, though one court convicted three defendants under Article 360(c) for baby-selling. Authorities also convicted 12 traffickers under the procurement statute; all but one of them received a suspended sentence. The government’s reliance on procurement charges, and the absence of prosecutions under the trafficking statute, resulted from an inability or unwillingness on the part of police to thoroughly investigate potential human trafficking cases for elements of force, fraud, or coercion.”

That's by no means the only crimes, and war crime, the Sri Lankan government is unwilling to investigate. Watch this site.

 
  

Tuesday, June 17, 2014

In Myanmar, UN's Kang Admits Didn't Say "Rohingya" Publicly, High Rents in Rakhine, Nambiar Silent


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, June 17 -- Back from Myanmar, the UN's humanitarian deputy Kyung-wha Kang gave an opening statement to correspondents that did not use the word "Rohingya."
   Inner City Press asked Kang about Myanmar authorities bragging about UNICEF apologizing for using the term "Rohingya."  Inner City Press reported it on June 7, and on June 9 asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, transcript below.
 On June 17, Kang told Inner City Press that the government asked her not to use the word "Rohingya" in public -- and she agreed and did not use the word.
  Inner City Press asked Kang how this was consistent with the claim that the UN is pushing Myanmar authorities on the Rohingya -- or Rakhine? -- issue. Kang said there is a division of responsibilities, that the human rights site of the UN speaks differently that the humanitarian side. And what about "Good Offices" envoy Nambiar?
  Inner City Press asked about UNICEF's $87,000 a month rent to a landlord linked to the former military junta -- no comment except that rent is high in Rakhine -- and of the plight of Karen refugees in Thailand. We may have more on this.
From the UN's June 9 transcript:
Inner City Press: It’s been a long weekend so I have a few questions, how ever you want to do it. I wanted to ask you, now that you say Ms. Kang is going to Myanmar, local media there reports that UNICEF having used the word Rohingya, then apologized for it and committed not to use it any further. This is reported there with local authorities saying the UN will no longer use this word. And I wanted to know, is this... UN policy?
Spokesman Rohingya: I don’t know. I don’t know. You should ask UNICEF, but I’ll check on my end, but I don’t know.
Question: Yes, is there a UN policy [to not use the word “Rohingya”]
Spokesman Dujarric: I don’t know.
  So he doesn't know if there's a UN policy against even using the name of the Rohingya group? Nine hours and counting after the June 9 briefing, there was no answer from him. UNresponsive.
   This comes as UNICEF pays $87,000 a month to rent its office, and pay it to a landlord with links to the Than Shwe military junta.
  UNICEF has tried to explain away these $87,000 monthly payments. But to agree to censor the very name of the Rohinga minority?
  The local report says, "The head of the United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund (Unicef) in Myanmar, Bertrand Bainval, personally apologised for the use of the term ''Rohingya' at a June 4 press conference on Unicef’s plan to help children Myanmar’s second poorest sate, according to Rakhine State officials."
  Some human rights industry profilers on June 6 immediately praised Secretary General Ban Ki-moon tapping Jordan's Prince Zeid to replace Navi Pillay as High Commissioner on Human Rights by saying that "as a Muslim," Zeid will acting on the Rohingya issue. How about UNICEF reportly agreeing to not even use the word Rohingya?
  Back on May 23, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, to put the question to Ban's “Good Office” envoy to Myanmar Vijay Nambiar. 
  Are these Good Offices? And what is Nambiar's and the UN's response to a new report documenting the UN's troubling role during the final stage of Sri Lanka's conflict in 2009?
$ 87,000 per month... Standard due diligence on the owner and her family concluded that none of the international sanctions in place until recently had been levied against the landlady or her immediate family and no criminal charges were extant. Although allegations against a member of her family who was once a member of the previous military regime surfaced, the official had since left public office and was not subject to any criminal charges or international sanctions.”
  Is that the UN's standard -- member of previous military regime is fine to pay $87,000 a month to, as long as no current criminal charges? 
  And what now of the report UNICEF agreed not to use the word Rohingya?
This is what Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman, on May 23:
Inner City Press: on Myanmar,I wanted to ask it here, because there’s a good offices mandate of the Secretariat. UNICEF has acknowledged that it’s paying $87,000 a month in rent to a former member of the military Government of Myanmar. And, although they say that they did a sanctions check and found… they acknowledge that the person was a member of the junta, they say that it’s okay. And I wanted to know, is this sort of, UN-wide, does the UN in terms of looking at its business relationships and the payments of those types of money — is just not being on the sanctions list enough? Or is there some higher standard?
Spokesman Dujarric: Let me look at what UNICEF has said and if I have anything, I’ll get back to you.
Inner City Press: And maybe ask Mr. [Vijay] Nambiar. That was my thought.
Spokesman: Would be happy to.
Inner City Press: And about the Sri Lanka report, as well.
Spokesman: Yes.
  But these, like Inner City Press' repeated questions about the new report on Sri Lanka, by a member of Ban's only Panel of Experts, have gone unanswered.
  The issue of rent and war crimes has arisen before at the UN in connection with Sri Lanka. In 2011 the president of the UN Correspondents Association agreed with Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona to screen a government film denying war crimes in the Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium. 
  This was agreed to without asking other UNCA executive committee members like Inner City Press -- which since quit UNCA and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access -- and without disclosure or recusal. Inner City Press reported a previous financial relationship -- rent -- between Kohona and the UNCA president. The subsequent attempts to censor Inner City Press are sketched here and have continued since,sometimes comically. But this is not fUNny. This is the UN. Watch this site.