On South Sudan, After Ladsous Criticized Press, UN Admits Newspaper Seized, But Says It Was "Quickly Returned"

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 26 -- A week after UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous told the Security Council of "unacceptable vilification of the UN by some... media articles," Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq:

Inner City Press: In South Sudan, there’s been another incident in which the Juba Monitor newspaper has been seized, the full press run has been seized by the Government national security forces of Salva Kiir. I wanted to know if UNMISS is aware of that and what they think of it?

Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq: I don’t have any reaction from UNMISS on that.

After the March 18 Security Council meeting, while neither Ladsous nor the UN's envoy to South Sudan Hilde Johnson came to answer questions, the president of the Security Council for March, Sylvie Lucas of Luxembourg, did.
  
  Inner City Press asked her about Ladsous' line, and if the UN and Security Council were now in the business of critiquing articles in countries with peacekeeping missions.

   Lucas, who has held more stakeouts this month by far that recent presidencies, replied by citing a protest sign depicting Hilde Johnson and a revolver. Inner City Press has seen a picture of the sign - but it is well within the bounds of protected First Amendment speech and protest in the US.  Is the UN, or Ladsous and Johnson, promoting a lower standard?

  On March 26, Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson's office forwarded a response from UNMISS, acknowledging that the Juba Monitor was seized but saying it was quickly returned:

Subject: Your question on the Juba Monitor
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 8:14 AM
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com

Regarding your Monday noon briefing question about the Juba Monitor, we have received the following information from the UN Mission in South Sudan: UNMISS is aware that copies of the Juba Monitor were seized by security authorities in Juba on Monday. The Mission has received reports that the copies of the newspaper were returned a few hours later. The Mission reiterates the importance of freedom of expression, enshrined within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that is essential for empowering individuals and building free and democratic societies.

  Back on March 19, Inner City Press had asked Secretary General Ban's deputy spokesperson Haq:

Inner City Press: On South Sudan, yesterday in the Security Council, Under-Secretary [Hervé] Ladsous said that — quote — there’s been an unacceptable vilification of the UN, and he mentioned media articles. And afterwards, the President of the Council said that in consultations, a protest sign that depicts Hilde Johnson with a revolver, clearly a spoof, but a protest sign was raised. And I wanted to know, how do these two, especially Mr. Ladsous’ comment, how does this mean that the UN is taking issues with articles published in South Sudan by South Sudanese media raising questions, for example, about the trucking of weapons to Bentiu. This seemed to be basically the UN… is the kind of thing that Governments say and then the UN criticizes them for… critiquing the media or critiquing the right to protest. How can you explain this disparity or discrepancy?

Deputy Spokesman: I can explain it by saying, first of all, that it’s clear that we respect the freedom of the press and freedom of expression. They are certainly entitled to express their views and their opinions, including in South Sudan. What we’ve tried to do is put out the facts concerning the work of the Mission, including the question of the ammunition in our investigation. And what we want to avoid is any misrepresentation that puts the UN Mission or our workers on the ground at harm. We have a mission to do. We’re trying to protect, as you know, tens of thousands of innocent people, and we don’t want people to spread false allegations that essentially incorrectly depict us as taking one side or another. We have not done so. We will not do so. And we want it to be very clear. So, we’re trying to get the facts out and the accurate facts out. But yes, of course, we always stand for freedom of expression and freedom of the media.

Inner City Press: But I guess you mean, for example… and I’ve seen this sign where it has Hilde Johnson and an enormous revolver, it’s clearly a spoof sign and it’s sort of in the nature of the kind of protest that take place here. And I’m just wondering, has the UN written letters to the editor to publications in South Sudan about the articles that Mr. Ladsous was referring to. I understand getting the facts out, but this seemed to be very much taking issues with a particular sign and a particular article. And I just wonder, where do you go with that?

Deputy Spokesman: For us, as was the case when Mr. Ladsous spoke to the Security Council yesterday, the important thing is getting the accurate facts out and to prevent any confusion about the Mission and its role. That’s what we’re trying to do. Of course, we know that there are different media outlets with different viewpoints, but we want to ensure accuracy, particularly when that accuracy directly affects the safety of our people on the ground.

  But Ladsous went beyond just trying to tell the UN's story -- in fact, if he'd wanted to do that, he would have done a question and answer stakeout.

  Rather, Ladsous denounced unnamed articles as vilification.

 On March 18 South Sudan's Permanent Representative Francis Deng, himself a former UN official, said that the government plans to "contain hostile publicity." So now if the Kiir government shuts down a newspaper, or beats protesters for holding "bad" signs, are the UN and its Security Council, or Ladsous and Johnson, complicit?

  Already, Ladsous refuses to answer Press questions on topics ranging from the introduction of cholera in Haiti torapes by the UN's partners in the Congolese Army in Minova, video here.

  Now when the UN speaks on unacceptable media articles, what does it mean? Salva Kiir's information minister said that to broadcast interviews with rebels into South Sudan would be illegal. The UN had no comment

  A Kiir adviser admitted his government gives "advise" to journalists on what and what not to write -- just as Inner City Press has been told, in connection with UN Accreditation, how to write about Ladsous. This is called censorship.

  Now Ladsous explicitly joins the censors. Some say it's Ladsous who should be censured -- if, that is, the UN believes in free press.

  Though it was UN Peacekeeping own admitted "error" that gave rise to articles, Ladsous now blames the government for not agreeing to a joint investigation. He said, "We offered to the Government to conduct a joint investigation, to prove our good faith and provide full transparency. Unfortunately, the offer was declined."

  Back on March 6, the UN issued a rare admission of error, saying that contrary to policy weapons were moved by road, not air, in South Sudan for the Ghana peacekeepers recently arrived from Cote d'Ivoire.

The UN issued this:

Juba, 6 March 2014: It is the policy of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) that during the crisis in South Sudan all arms and ammunition for peacekeeping contingents are flown into respective areas of deployment and not taken by road. This is an important security measure.

In connection with the transport of cargo of general goods belonging to the Ghanaian battalion on its way to Bentiu, several containers were wrongly labelled and inadvertently contained weapons and ammunition. This is regrettable. The Ghanaian troops are part of the surge of UNMISS troops to assist South Sudan and the goods were en route to Bentiu, passing through Rumbek.

UN Headquarters intends to dispatch a high level investigation team to look into this matter on an urgent basis, in cooperation with the Government of South Sudan.

Pressed for more details, spokesperson Martin Nesirky declined. One wondered, if the UN can in essence apologize so quickly for weapons transport in South Sudan, why not for the 8,000 people killed by the cholera introduced into Haiti?

Then Inner City Press was sent links to the photos of the (UN) trucks, and of the weapons. Click here and here; h/t. 

 Perhaps it's that the UN was caught red-handed, so to speak. So now what? Watch this site.

   

On Press Freedom, CPJ Criticizes South Sudan, Light on Sri Lanka, Mali & UN, DMCA Censorship by Reuters at UN Ignored?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 12, update -- When the Committee to Protect Journalists put its "Attacks on the Press" report online, under the heading Africa there were pages on Tanzania and Swaziland, for example, but none on South Sudan or Mali.

  CPJ's Joel Simon began the February 12 "launch" press conference by explaining why it was held at the United Nations (he cited countries trying to use the UN to control the Internet). Inner City Press when called on asked if CPJ thinks the UN Peacekeeping missions in South Sudan and Mali do enough to combat crackdowns on the press there, for example the Salva Kiir government seizing a complete issue of the Juba Monitor, and theats against MaliActu.

  Mohamed Keita of CPJ responded that South Sudan is "not free," adding that investigative reporting is particularly risky, contrary to what Kiir's foreign minister said recently in London.

  On Mali, Keita stated that things were better in 2013 than 2012; he said during the election CPJ reached out to the MINUSMA mission and they were responsive (to threats that never materialized). But what about the threats against MaliActu, for reporting on corruption? This has not been answered.

  Nor when Inner City Press asked about Sri Lanka, for example the murder of journalist Mel Gunasekera, was an answer given. Joel Simon had said Asia expert Bob Dietz had not come because the podium had only three places; he promised to revert with an answer on Sri Lanka on which unlike China he said he was not prepared.

  Though it has been questioned to CPJ before, Simon automatically gave the first question to the United Nations Correspondents Association, which itself has sought to get investigative Press thrown out of the UN. 

 Now we wonder, including on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, what CPJ thinks of the UN bureau chief of Reuters, with essentially a permanent seat on UNCA board, mis-using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to get Google to block access to a leaked anti-Press complaint to the UN from its search. Isn't that censorship? Watch this site.

CPJ's Nina Ognianova criticized Turkey, where a new law allows the blocking of web sites without a court order -- exactly what the Reuters bureau chief has done. CPJ's Sherif Mansour spoke about the Al Jazeera staff detained in Egypt -- on which @FUNCA_info previously tweeted this, particularly with regard to Peter Greste with which it has previously corresponded. All for one and one for all. But sometimes the most insidious threats to press freedom come "from within - and should be confronted. Watch this site.

Update: On Sri Lanka, CPJ did revert, with this:

"@innercitypress We're investigating Mel's case. So far, the murder doesn't appear work-related, as per sources we've talked to."

  Inner City Press asked a follow-up: "Does CPJ think free press issues should be in #UN HRC process in March?" Watch this site.

   

On South Sudan, UN's Ivan Simonovic Says Gudele Killings of Nuer in Juba Being Probed, Censorship Raised; FUNCA Asks, Where's Hilde Johnson on This?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 20 -- When the UN deputy High Commission for Human Rights Ivan Simonovic returned to New York from South Sudan, Inner City Press on January 20 asked him about press freedom and the reported killing of hundreds of Nuer in Gudele in Juba on December 16.

   Simonovic said interviews had been conducted about Gudele; it will be in his forthcoming report and further inquiry may be required into an "incident of that magnitude."

    On the Kiir government's seizure of the whole print run of the Juba Monitor newspaper, which Inner City Press raised on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access (noting that the UNMISS mission has apparently not spoken on it), Simonovic said he raised it to officials including "the vice president." That would be the new, post-Machar vice president.

   Back on December 26, when the UN's envoy to South Sudan Hilde Johnson took press questions, she quoted and praised President Salva Kiir for his pledges on accountability.

  Inner City Press asked Johnson about reports that "young men from the Dinka community, many of them with no military training, were given uniforms and guns from various armories around the capital, including one located at President Kiir's own compound, known as J1."

  Johnson replied that several government armories had been "broken into" and army uniforms and equipment distributed. UN (inaccurate) transcript below.  To some, it was just what a defense lawyer, in this case for Kiir, would say. But in a real trial the question would be, Did you report them stolen at the time?

  In any event, it seems strange for Johnson at this time to be quoting with praise Salva Kiir, and speaking favorably of government control of Bor, which was re-taken by force. Does the government do that elsewhere (other than, for example, Sri Lanka)?

  Inner City Press asked Johnson about threats by Kiir's supporters to re-take Bentiu by force. Johnson said she hopes talks can proceed in tranquility and that option is not pursued. It fell short of saying, as the UN does elsewhere, don't re-take by force.

  One wanted to ask other questions, about the status of Yida camp (the UNHCR person to whom South Sudan OCHA referred Inner City Press is, who knew, out of the office from December 9 to January 9), of the UN base in Yuai from which the UN withdrew peacekeepers and of other UN facilities Inner City Press has asked in writing about, in for example Aweil, and in Kuacjok.

  Johnson was asked at the end of her briefing about reports UNMISS helped and or sheltered armed rebels. Her response, partially cut off by the understandably choppy audio from Juba, seemed limited to non-governmental fighters.

So Inner City Press has asked the UN Spokesperson, adding to the other questions left unanswered now for 120 hours, that while Johnson "spoke of disarming those who enter UNMISS bases... please state if this applied to the 27 SPLA fighters whom UNMISS spokesperson Joe Contreras was quoted by Reuters as saying sought shelter with with UNMISS in Rubkona, across the river from Bentiu, and separately state if UNMISS has sheltered SPLA fighters anywhere else in the past two weeks."

Watch this site.

Update: the UN put out a transcript with various inaccuracies, some intentional, such as leaving in "Reuters," "AP," "UNCA" (UN's Censorship Alliance) and even "Huffington Post contributor" -- but censoring out from the below "Inner City Press" and "Free UN Coalition for Access." They call it censorship, compare to UN video hereat Min 20:39

[This was explicitly by Inner City Press & FUNCA] Question: I wanted to ask you about Bentiu. It’s been said that President Kiir’s forces had said they are going to retake or could have already retaken it. Has it been? Who’s in control in Bentiu and what’s the Mission’s position in terms of any retaking or any reentering by force? And also, I’m sure you saw in The Guardian December 23rd piece, hey said that President Kiir had spoken on accountability but in the middle of that article they said that, quote “young men from the Dinka community many of them with no military training were given uniforms from armories, including one located in President Kiir’s own compound known as J1”. And I wanted to know what do you make of that? Is your Mission in a position to look into this allegation against the President or at least arms within his compound. Do you think it’s possible that some of these atrocities have been committed by the Government or with the Government’s knowledge? In which case, what will your Mission do about it? Thank you.

Hilde Johnson: Well, first in regard to Bentiu, it’s too early to say…[inaudible]…there are two forces present and there might be attempt at retaking the city. However, what we are now hoping for is a political track can be established as soon as possible, which in that case would imply, we hope, that talks would be taking place in tranquility and that these operations would not be pursued. This is too early to say. We are waiting for the outcome of what has happened amongst the IGAD heads of State and their consultations.

As regards to what has unfolded in terms of human rights violations, abuse, and atrocities that seem to have been committed. All of those issues, and all of those allegations and reports, as I said, are being looked into by our human rights division, and they will investigate and verify. I may also add that during the night of 15 to 16 December several of the armories of the forces of the Government, whether Presidential Guard or SPLA, were broken into and a significant number of uniforms and arms were stolen and taken. So that is an important factual piece of information that also needs to be included in any of the investigations going forward. But it is far too early to assess anything in terms of possible perpetrators or indeed responsible actors. We need to see a solid verification and investigation process take place. 

   

In South Sudan, As Salva Kiir Has Critical Newspaper Article Confiscated, UN Silent, FUNCA Not: UN-Free Press

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 18 -- Since Salva Kiir's government on January 16 confiscated the entire press run of the Juba Monitor for daring to suggest an interim government until 2015, what has the UN said?  

   Nothing, it appears. UNMISS chief Hilde Johnson is aligned with Kiir and the SPLA. The mission tweets its good work protecting refugees in its camps, but stays silent on censorship and Kiir-invited Ugandans bragging of re-taking Bor.

  Something is being put "Up Front" here, -- but it's not Rights, at least not the right to freedom of the press.

  That UN missions and agencies and department should have at least basic respect for freedom of the press is a cause of the new Free UN Coalition for Access. Some of these problems trace up to the top of the UN, here, of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations.

      With Uganda bragging today of its role in re-taking Bor in South Sudan, the marginalization and double standards of the UN are ever more in focus.

  For week the Press asked the UN about Ugandan troops' presence in South Sudan, and if the UN as elsewhere at least called for restraint in the re-taking of population centers. 

   The UN dodged the questions, as recently as January 16 saying the Ugandans' presence -- offensive as now confirmed -- was just a bilateral matter between governments, and saying its focus is on protecting civilians in its bases.

  What is the message of Uganda bragging of having helped Salva Kiir retake Bor from rebels loyal to former vice president Riek Machar? What is the UN's role, if any, in the "cessation of hostilities" talks in Addis Ababa? The UN on those wouldn't even call for more inclusion of women, as it has for example on the Syria talks in Switzerland. We'll have more on this.

 In South Sudan, the lack of transparency by UN Peacekeeping does not serve it. On December 30, Department of Peacekeeping Operations chief Herve Ladsous admonished South Sudan to not put in "caveat" on accepting troops from any country.

Though Ladsous didn't name the country -- for reasons that soon became obvious -- and later in the week UN spokesperson Farhan Haq declined to specify any country being considered for South Sudan, later on December 30 at the UN Mission of an African (and troop contributing) country Inner City Press was told Ladsous was trying to push into South Sudan peacekeeping from Morocco. Click here for more on that.

  After telling Inner City Press "I don't answer you Mister," Ladsous dodged about the impact of shifting peacekeepers out of Darfur, where two had just been killed, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Then he mentioned, for South Sudan, "half a regiment" from the MINUSTAH mission in Haiti. UN Video here, from Minute 3:09.

  Now, which country's half-regiment could that be? Questions have been asked, particularly in light of UN Peacekeeping's dubious record in Haiti: the introduction of cholera, multiple cases of sexual abuse or exploitation, nearly always followed by mere repatriation and no update on any discipline meted out, for example in the case of repatriated Sri Lanka peacekeepers.

  The website of the UNMISS mission in South Sudan lists fully 55 countries as contributing peacekeepers (Morocconotably is NOT among them) and some additional countries contributing UN Police, including Zimbabwe.

On January 2 Inner City Press asked UN acting deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq:

Inner City Press: Yes, Farhan. I wanted to ask you two questions about peacekeeping in South Sudan. One is that, it’s reported that India is unhappy with not being consulted in some of the ways their peacekeepers were used and intends to send its own military team to meet with its peacekeepers there. I wanted to know, separately, [Permanent Representative Asoke Kumar] Mukerji has, over the holidays, said that the Force Intervention Brigade may put peacekeepers in danger. What’s your response to that? And also, if you could confirm, I’ve heard that the UN wants to send Moroccan peacekeepers to South Sudan and they’re pushing back. And one of their reasons for pushing back is that Morocco is not a member of the African Union due to the Western Sahara. And I wanted if it’s DPKO’s (Department of Peacekeeping Operations) position that countries don’t have a right to have a sort of principled, political stand on why they wouldn’t take peacekeepers? Or should they take anyone that DPKO sends?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson Haq: Well, first of all, we wouldn’t comment on the specifics of how we’re trying to bring more peacekeepers in. We, as you know, are in touch with a number of Member States trying to build up the forces, as was approved by the Security Council. And when we have details of which countries are coming in, we’ll provide those details at that point. But, I don’t have any specific names to give up until more arrivals come in.

Inner City Press: I ask that only because Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous at the stakeout made a big point of saying, it’s not… when the house is on fire, anyone must be taken. So, I just wanted to know, can you say… is that the UN’s position? That even if there’s a political, principled stated reason not to take them… that wouldn’t… that should be overridden?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: For us, the priority is to get as many peacekeepers in as we can. They’ve been authorized by the Security Council. We’re trying to get the right numbers in order to stop the bloodshed as soon as we possibly can. So, that’s our priority. But, if we have any specific announcements to make about different countries joining in, we’ll make it at that point. But, that’s not ready at this stage.

Inner City Press: And on India?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: I wouldn’t have any comment on that. Is that it? Okay? Pam?

Correspondent: Hi, Farhan. I’d like to just correct the record that was established at this briefing a few weeks ago that the UN Correspondents’ Association has not… does not have any new Samsung TV sets in the room, never has had and has never accepted any donation or loan from the UN for Samsung TVs. Thank you.

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: Yeah, thanks. I’m in receipt of aletter from the United Nations Correspondent’s Association, which says, which does read: “Please be advised that there are no new Samsung TV sets in the UNCA room and have never been. And the UN Correspondents’ Association has not accepted a donation or loan of new Samsung TVs”. Thanks for that update. We’ll try to get any updated guidance about the language that we had earlier received. Yes?

Inner City Press: Because I’m thinking maybe you’ll correct the transcript on the answer that was given to me in writing about the television. If so, do you have any response about the note verbale that was filed by Syria that we previously discussed here?

Acting Deputy Spokesperson: No, there’s no response to that at present. But, yes, if there’s any fresh language on the language that was given to you, we’ll try to correct the record here. Yes, Lou?

Watch this site.

   

UN Quiet on Libya Isolation Law, As On Attacks on Press Where DPKO Has Missions

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 5 -- After the Libyan foreign ministry was surrounded by armed men, today the Libyan parliament is passing the so-called political isolation law banned people with links to the Gaddafi era from any political role.

  Where has the UN, which rushed to put a UN Mission in Libya -- without 200 armed "peacekeepers," after its plan was published and exposed by Inner City Press,  Al Jazeera video here -- been on this? Very quiet. It wanted to go along to get along, as increasingly happens in so many places.

  Earlier this year Inner City Press asked UN envoy Mitri about the proposed political isolation, and his first and main answer was that it was up to the Libyans.

  This from a UN which just on May 2 pretended to be standing up for press freedom. Video here and here.Apparently, that too is just up to governments.

  On May 4, Inner City Press again asked the UN about South Sudan, the detention without charge of the acting editor of the Juba Monitor. No answer. 

  The UN's Department of Peacekeeping Operations under Herve Ladsous, who refuses to answer any Inner City Press questions, runs a big mission in South Sudan. But as elsewhere, it's, go along to get along. And, even in UN Headquarters, partner with trolls who seek to get investigative media thrown out. To this has the UN sunk. Watch this site.

As Chief Killed in Abyei, UN Has Nothing To Say, Ladsous Effect?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 4 -- Even as South Sudan officials in Juba confirmed the killing of chief Kuol Deng Kuol in Abyei, the UN which runs a Peacekeeping mission therewould not.

  Inner City Press heard of the murder on Saturday afternoon, New York time, and at 4:30 pm asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's three top spokespeople to confirm:

that chief Kwol Deng has been killed; that UNISFA has "closed" Abyei town; and any impacts on UNISFA peacekeepers.

Also, in South Sudan, is there any UN reaction to the detention of the acting editor of the Juba Monitor, Michael Koma?

And if the UN has any update on what DPA / Said Djinnit et al are doing regarding the deaths in protests in Guinea.

  But in more than three hours after, no confirmation, no response, nothing. This comes just two days after Department of Peacekeeping Operations spokesperson Kieran Dwyer, while trying to justify Herve Ladsous' refusal to answer any Inner City Press question, claimed that he answers questions.  Video here.

  Well, this is directly in the mandate of a DPKO mission -- and the mission has nothing to say. Something is wrong with DPKO, and now with the UN. Watch this site.

South Sudan Editor Locked Up as UN Peacekeeping Bans Press, Condones Threats

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 4 -- In South Sudan, the acting editor of the Juba Monitor Michael Koma 

has been in detention for days. One question is what has been the response, if any, of the UN since it maintains a large Peacekeeping mission in the country, run by Hilde Johnson of Norway and Herve Ladsous of France?

  Ladsous openly refuses to answer Inner City Press -- that is his approach to media freedom. Hilde Johnson, when in New York, does take Press questions. But when queries are made in the UN's noon briefing, it takes some time for answers to come back, and they are sometimes are not answers to the questions actually asked.

  On May 2, when Inner City Press questioned South Sudanese journalist Oliver Modi about a statement by President Salva Kiir that his ministers should not speak about government corruption, Inner City Press put the same question to UN spokesman Martin Nesirky.

The answer that came back was to a question previously asked, about a threat by Lakes State's governor to "crucify" critical journalists. 

  On this, the UN answered that "UNMISS has informed us that it is not aware of any direct threat against individual journalists in Lakes State. However, general statements of concern have been made and this was raised with the State authorities."

  Without much effect apparently - the acting editor of the Juba Monitor remains locked up without charge.

On May 2, Ladsous' spokesperson Kieran Dwyer justified his boss' refusal to answer questions, then sought to avoid a follow up to false statement he made (for example, that he gives Inner City Press answers to its questions -- actually, these are given first to scribes who never asked the questions, from Ladsous' favorite Agence France Presse, Reuters and even Voice of America). 

  To avoid follow up, Dwyer said let's focus on serious problems in South Sudan. Video here, at end.

   Yes, let's. What is the DPKO of Ladsous, who himself Bans critical journalists, doing in South Sudan?

Also on May 2, the UN put on its "World Press Freedom Day" panel Pamela Falk of CBS, the president of UNCA, an organization which spent most of its meetings in 2012 trying to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN. UNCA & Bloomberg, Voice of America, Reuters, AFP.

 This year under Falk, UNCA "leaders" have descended to anonymous trolling on social media making false accusation of funding by Sri Lankan terrorists, which have led to death threats. The commitment to Press Freedom, of this UN and its UN Censorship Alliance? Dubious at best. Watch this site.