In South Sudan, UNMISS Knew of Weapons in Malakal Camp, Did Nothing

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive series

UNITED NATIONS, February 19 -- In the UN's continued withholding of news and answers about South Sudan, the reports of the UN's own knowledge of abuses are now being withheld from its own impacted national staff.  So Inner City Press has published below from inside UNMISS.

  Beyond the UN's shameful failure to search for weapons and then to protect in its Malakal "Protection of Civilians" camp, and attempt to cover up the SPLA's shooting and looting in the camp, now the problems have spread to or re-appeared in Wau.

 On UNMISS' failure to search for weapons, entirely ignored or covered up at the UN Security Council on February 19, here is a first-hand account exclusively provided to Inner City Press:

"“Peacekeepers were given info 2 days ago as was info passed out raising concerns. IDPs (Shilluk and Nuer elders raised this direct with UNMISS at the time of being aware of info. UN sat on it until first incident erupted. That came about as Padiang dinka 'IDP' walked passed UN contracted gate guards (Warrior Security I think) with significant volume of ammunition for weapons and was stopped by Shilluk IDPs. Fight broke out, Padiang dinka killed and ammunition given to UN.

According to the information  obtained from the camp, this problem started day before yesterday when UNMISS Protection Security Officers received sufficient security report that Dinka Internally Displaced Persons staying in Malakal UNMISS Protection Camp received illegal weapons smuggled from main town center into IDPs camp by their tribe security agents controlling the town since first week of July 2015 when SPLA- IO withdrew tactically from Malakal town. UNMISS protection soldiers wanted to conduct the search for illegal weapons smuggled inside the protection camp but Dinka Internally Displaced Persons refused to allow UNMISS Security to conduct the search for weapons then the attack happened last night at 8:00pm.”

 Here is another internal email exclusively leaked to and published by Inner City Press, with names redacted for obvious reasons:

"From FAO Wau
From Wau: Subject: Serious Security Situation in Wau
Dear XXX

I hereby wish inform you about a serious security situation we are currently experiencing in Wau since yesterday evening.

Indeed security has been recently shaky in Wau and vicinity, but yesterday it worsened to the extent that many of our staff members had to seek for a refuge at night at the UNMISS compound.

Since this morning, all the vehicles are grounded at the office, as no driver could move and there is no authorization for any vehicle to move out of the UNMISS compound.

We are in contact with the FSCO, although no information has been circulated so far. With regards, XXXX”"

 In Malakal, while the UN publicly blamed violence on ethnic youth, internally it knew the SPLA was shooting and attacking IDPs, burning and looting in the UN Malakal camp.

Inner City Press exlusively published a leaked email proving this, then at the February 18 UN noon briefing asked UNspokesman Stephane Dujarric about this, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press:  I wanted to ask you, on Malakal, I’d saw that press release by UNMISS.  But I’ve also seen an e-mail inside the UN saying that the SPLA (Sudan People’s Liberation Army) entered the camp, shot and attacked IDP’s (internally displaced persons), that… that groups have been separated by ethnicity or tribe inside the camp and that there was looting of tents by the SPLA.  So I’m wondering… I’m asking you, why wouldn’t the UN report… would characterize as ethnic violence something that actually involves the Government of the country entering a supposed protection of civilian camp?

Spokesman:  I don’t have… you, obviously, have more operational details and are on more e-mail lists than I am, which is useful for you, not useful for me.  It is clear, from what I’ve just read out, that the Mission reminds all the parties and the Government to respect the sanctity of the camp.  And I think that speaks for itself.

  On February 17, Inner City Press' sources told it of violence in the UN's Malakal "Protection of Civilians" site, and after inquiry @InnerCityPress tweeted, "On #SouthSudan, ICP asked UN of SPLA besieging PoC site in #Malakal, no comment. Now it's worse: silence, @VOAnews bogus Qs."

  (The last was a reference to US-government Voice of America's questions to the UN; the same VOA "saw" Liberians in Burundi.)

  But it's gotten worse, both on the ground in Malakal and within the UN.  UNMISS belatedly put out a press release on five dead (and counting) in the PoC site, but did not mention the SLPA, instead

"The United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) strongly condemns the violence  that erupted last night  between Shilluk and Dinka youths in its Protection of Civilians site in Malakal... Violence involving the use of small arms, machetes and other weapons broke out between youths from both communities in the late evening on 17 February. According to preliminary reports, there have been 5 fatalities among the Internally Displaced Persons’ (IDP) community and approximately 30 injured."

  But internally, as exclusively provided to Inner City Press by whistleblowers (and pilfered by some other media without credit), the UN said to the UN Security Management Team (SMT) in Juba:

"Dear SMT Members,

SPLA troops numbering 50- 100 have entered the UNMISS POC Sector 1 and 2 in Malakal reportedly attacking IDPs, shooting sporadically, burning tents and looting properties. IDPs continue to flee into the former POC area and have now occupied and filled up former POCs 1, 2, 3, 4.  Casualty figures are yet to be updated.

 Sporadic shooting is continuing. Crisis Management Team is in session."

 So the UN knows the SPLA is shooting and attacking IDPs, burning and looting - but blames it on ethnic youth.

On February 11, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Dujarric, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: On South Sudan,  yesterday I'd asked you about Maridi, and today I want to ask you about Mundri.  Seems like, basically, there are offences in at least these two places, maybe more, by the SPLA against the SPLA-IO.  And I'm just wondering, were you able to get any… did you hear anything back?

Spokesman:  Again, you should also take a look at the website from the Joint Verification Mechanism.  They are responsible for monitoring the implementation of the ceasefire.  So, their updates, I understand, are going up daily.  As soon as we get updates from the field, we share them with you.

 But this website is rarely updated. What IS the UN's job?

 On February 10, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Dujarric about Maridi, still no answer. Nor, from a week ago, about chemical weapons:

  UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous hits new lows daily. On February 3 at a briefing in Juba largely triggered by leaks, UNMISS was asked about the use of chemical weapons in Mundri.

From the transcript:

"Answer: Please refer to the JMEC Monitoring and Verification Teams – I cannot comment."

 But Inner City Press is told by South Sudan sources that "fighting started early am the other morning around Katigiri and proceeded WNW towards Mundri.  Chemical agents were clearly within SPLA ammunition (mortar rounds, recoil-less rifles), the medics know the issue will be squashed."

  So Inner City Press in New York asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about the deference in Juba to JMEC. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: in South Sudan, there are now people saying that chemical weapons were used in a place called Mundri.  And I wanted to know, I know that UNMISS (United Nations Mission in South Sudan) has started holding briefings there.  There's a question by a, quote, unidentified journalist about the chemical weapons, and the answer was, “Simply refer to the JMAC (Joint Mission Analysis Centre) monitoring and verification teams.”  And I wanted to know, how is it that the UN has a near-billion-dollar peacekeeping mission there but can't speak about an issue as important as chemical weapons?  And what is the state of the UN's knowledge on the reported use of chemical weapons by the Government side in Mundri?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Well, I mean, the basic point is that, at this stage, we don't have a confirmation of the use of chemical weapons.  If we do, we would report that.  It's a matter of serious concern.  We have a peacekeeping mission on the ground.  If it can confirm these reports, it will.

Inner City Press:  So the answer there given only to refer to JMAC actually meant the UN is trying to confirm it, and if it can, it will.

Deputy Spokesman:  If we have any solid information to confirm this, of course, we would follow up on that. 

   So what the UN said in Juba is belatedly cleaned up by UNHQ. But they also refuse to answer basic questions in NY, here.

  Previously, after Inner City Press published, the UN did a partial read-out at its noon briefing. But it left questions unanswered. Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press:  the Yambio readout.  I have one just sort of factual question.  In that… can you confirm that the NGO compound that people have fled to is the A-D-R-A, or ADRA, compound?  And is it that the UN base in Yambio isn't large enough or set up to be the type of protection for civilians’ facility that's done elsewhere in the country?

Deputy Spokesman:  I wouldn't speculate on why civilians choose to go to one place or another.  The… remember, they are the ones who are estimated to have sought protection at the NGO compound.  I don't have the identification of that particular compound there.

  Here's the UN narrative Inner City Press published:

"at around 1040 am heavy fighting broke out in Yambio Town, details are unclear at this moment; according to earlier reports the SPLA Commandos at around 0530 am launched an operation against the Arrow Boys arm under the SSLM located in the Birisi area of Yambio township, the group in turn entered Yambio town and launched attack against the SPLA causing citizens to flee in panic.  Once the heavy shooting started a number of civilians around (40) forced their way into the UNMISS camp as vehicles were being processed at the main gate. They have since moved to the ADRA compound.

The Rwanbatt have now taken control of the main entrance and the citizens whom entered the compound have now moved to the adjoining ADRA compound. Alert status “WHITE” has been declared for Yambio town until further notice.

Point of note; the Arrow Boys under the SSLM are currently in peace negotiations with the government."

 Then, this UNMISS update:

"After shooting occurred in the early hours of the morning around 0530 hours; at 0830 hours the SPLA Commandos lunched operations against the Arrow Boys located in the areas of Birisi, Gangura, Yambio stadium, and the general areas of the Power Station and surrounding communities north east of UNMISS compound. A number of locals have taken refuge in the ADRA compound."

 For all the UN bragging it's ADRA doing the sheltering. From further inside UNMISS, from Inner City Press' sources:

"The Commandos attacked the arrow boys with whom they signed the peace agreement early this morning, and they engaged in battle at Uze river, the commandos have proceeded to Birisi, now the arrow boys have broken the bridge keeping the commando stranded in Birisi.  There was some random shooting in town and heading towards Uze again. One prominent civil servant has been shot dead and his driver.  All the youth and communities in Yambio have raised arms in any form to fight.

"The clashes began around 5 o’clock Thursday morning, according to a source. Gunfire has continued on and off until now, sources said. Casualties were reported though there are no concrete figures yet.

"Yambio market is reportedly empty with civilians seeking shelter in their homes or near the United Nations base in the town, a source said. That source said some people are afraid to reach the UN base because shooting has been heard in the area of the base.  The fighting took place mainly on the southern side of the town near the prison, according to sources. That area is near a frontline between the government-controlled Yambio town and Gangura Payam which is held by the South Sudan National Liberation Movement.

"The SSNLM is a militia led by ex-SPLA commanders from Western Equatoria. The SSNLM signed a preliminary peace agreement with the government in November, but the deal has yet to be finalized. Time for war."

So the UN knows this - but what do they say? Inner City Press obtained and on January 21 published this:

"On 19 January 2016 at about 21:22hrs in Juba, an UNMISS integrated patrol team was conducting operations when they were stopped by an SPLA vehicle containing eleven (11) armed soldiers.  The SPLA soldiers cordoned the convoy at gunpoint denying them permission to continue the patrol. After ten minutes of negotiation another three (3) SPLA vehicles arrived at the scene with about 30 armed soldiers. After 30 minutes the SPLA agreed to allow the UN patrol to return to UN House compound in convoy escorted by six (6) SPLA vehicles with about sixty (60) armed SPLA soldiers. During the negotiation SPLA soldiers reportedly advised that UNMISS should stop conducting night patrols without SPLA clearance otherwise there will be a consequences."

 So one side in South Sudan's civil war - in this case, Paul Malong's - orders the UN to stop patrolling at night, so it can do what it will. And the UN says nothing -- even when asked.

 At the January 20 noon briefing, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: On South Sudan, I wanted to ask you to confirm that UNMISS (United Nations Mission in South Sudan) — yesterday in Juba an UNMISS patrol was stopped by several dozen SPLA (Sudan People’s Liberation Army) military people and I've seen a UN document that says that the SPLA told UNMISS to stop conducting night patrols without SPLA clearance; otherwise, there will be consequences.  Given the debate on the protection of civilians, will you confirm that this took place and what is the UN's response to the SPLA's request?

Deputy Spokesman:  No, I don't have any confirmation of that.  If we have any details from UNMISS down the line we will share that but, no, I don't.

  Inner City Press said, quite audibly, It's an UNMISS documents, but the UN did not transcribe it.

Back on January 11, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the withheld situation reports, video here, transcript here.

  Even if that were true, what about civilians?

   Inner City Press published an internal UN Situation Report.

Back on December 9, the day after the UN belatedly confirmed ceasefire violations in South Sudan, only after Inner City Press published proof of the UN's knowledge and asked about it, then the UN Peacekeeping mission in the country shifted to either intentionally mis-reporting government actions in Yambio, or showing ineptitude in its response.

   Again receiving leaked UNMISS Situation Reports, Inner City Press found this paragraph:

"On 7 December 2015 around 20:00 hrs, heavy exchange of gunshots occurred in the area of Hai Kuba, Ikpiro in Yambio in Western Equatoria State. The shooting lasted approximately twenty to thirty minutes. Reportedly, the shooting started when the local authorities attempted to arrest three (3) local youths suspects."

But Inner City Press' sources said the arrests were political, of former Yambio Commissioner Angelo Bakote and 3 young men. So on December 9 Inner City Press asked, of protection, transcript here. Back on December 8 Inner City Press asked, video here, transcript here. 

For weeks amid fighting in South Sudan, Inner City Press has asked the UN why it refuses to report even what it knows. Even as Inner City Press has obtained, asked about and published emails showing the UN's knowledge of fighting, the UN spokesperson has repeated, Ask UNMISS.

   Inner City Press asked why UN Peacekeeping, led by Herve Ladsous, does not report on fighting of which it is aware, and how “no UN interest is involved” is consistent with the UN's protection of civilians mandate or claims.

   Dujarric wouldn't even attempt an answer to this policy question (which Ladsous refuses, like other Press questions, to answer). Dujarric repeated, as if it were an answer, that he has not seen the email.

  So Inner City Press published it, here:

"From: Enoch Penney Laryea @un.org

Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 9:15 AM

To: SANTUR Abdulahi; Simon Agnew [WFP]; Christoffel Du Toit; Safari Djumapili [OCHA]; Ruiz, Domingo (FAOSS); Carlyne Romulus [at UNMAS] Sorin GIFEI [WFP], Shane Yates [UNCHR]; Abdikadir Tulicha; Sylvain Denairies; UNMISS-FHQ-J2;  John McCue (IOM); Gatluak Gatluak [and others at UNICEF], IMF

Subject: FW: Fighting in Busere - Western Bahr El Ghazal State

"Info received indicate that on 01 Dec 2015 at about 05:00 hours (LT) fighting erupted between SPLA and SPLA/IO at FIRKA and BUSERE (20 km South of Wau town). The fighting subsided around 10:00 hours. Military pickups and ambulances were observed transporting casualties along the airport road at high speed towards the military barracks. SPLA soldiers in the town were seen to be on high alert and on stand by mode.

"Comments: Reportedly the SPLA/IO group attacked SPLA at the affected area. When SPLA soldiers were sent to reinforce their colleagues they were also ambushed by the rebels leading to further casualties on the part of SPLA.

"Fighting is still ongoing as of 02 Dec 2015.

"No UN interest is involved at this time."

Again, why doesn't Ladsous' DPKO report this, and how is this “no UN interest is involved at this time” consistent with the UN's protection of civilians mandate or claims? We'll have more on this.

Inner City Press obtained the UN Security Situation Report for November 29, and finds in this internal report, exclusively published here:

"On 28 November 2015 at around 22:45 hrs, in Yambio town near Tourist Hotel along the main road, a UN Agency national staff member was reportedly involved in a traffic accident. UN Security responded to the scene of the incident and found another civilian vehicle turned over with the driver apparently dead inside the vehicle whilst the UN agency staff member sustained visible injuries in his head. The local police on the spot attempted to arrest the UN staff member involved in the accident, however,
after negotiation UN Security transported him to UN clinic for the medical treatment."

 Can you say, impunity?

From September 29, 2015: An internal UN document leaked to Inner City Press, which is exclusively publishing it today, shows the high degree of dysfunction in the country, and in the UN.

UN's South Sudan Report, Sept 2015, Leaked to Inner City Press byMatthew Russell Lee

  The full document we have put online here. A quote:

In March 2014, a labelling error was discovered whilst transporting containers loaded with duty equipment for the UN Ghanaian peacekeepers in Unity State which brought strained relations to even a lower point. The error was exploited to galvanise hostility towards the UN in favour of the government by falsely presenting the UN as supplying weaponry to the opposition. It took elaborate interventions, investigations
and communications to clear the false impression that this created.

[ICP note: the same type of "labeling" or "clerical" error occure this months with weapons headed to MONUSCO. This is what UN Peacekeeping has become under Herve Ladous, who linked peacekeepers' rapes to "R&R, here.]

We'll have more on this.

On New UN Congolese Rapes on CAR, Inner CIty Press Asks UN Spox to Confirm Its Exclusive Report, He Won't

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive follow-up

UNITED NATIONS, January 27 -- The UN report on rapes in the Central African Republic, released on December 17, found that UN Peacekeeping's Under Secretary General Herve Ladsous “illustrate[s] the UN's failure to respond to allegations of serious human rights violations in the meaningful way.”

 Ladsous has yet to take any questions about the report -- this as Inner City Press exclusively hears from sources of yet more sexual abuse cases in CAR, involving DR Congo AND Republic of Congo, and changes of abuses will in detention.

 On January 27, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about these new charges, transcript here:

Inner City Press: on CAR, I've heard there's a new round of sexual abuse allegations found by the Mission involving soldiers from the Republic of Congo and DRC [Democratic Republic of the Congo].  Is that the case?  And what's the… why… if you haven't yet announced it, why haven't you?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I don't have anything to share with you at this point on this.

Inner City Press:  What's the protocol for the Mission going public when it becomes aware?  Because I've heard of this from pretty…

Spokesman Dujarric:  This Mission has been extremely proactive in sharing publicly allegations.  So, when we're ready to do so, we will.

 We'll see.

 On January 26, a new proposal on the systemic problem of UN peacekeeper sexual abuse was made by Code Blue: to take the UN’s "oversight of every aspect of peacekeeper sexual exploitation and abuse out of the hands of the UN Secretariat and place it under an external, independent management board," as Stephen Lewis put it.

  Inner City Press asked Lewis' co-founder Paula Donovan about retaliation against whistleblowers, and about Ladsous having on camera linked the rapes to "R&R," here.  Donovan replied that the board would decide how to have eyes and ears on the ground; she called the linking of rapes to recreation "appalling." It's the type of thing an oversight board would act on, she said.

 Following up about the UN merely handing a victim of sexual abuse in one of its camps in South Sudan the contact information of the alleged abuses, Inner City Press asked if that would be coverd by the proposal. Donovan said it would or should cover every single instance where any part of the UN system was implicated in alleged sexual abuse.

  Inner City Press then went to the day's UN noon briefing and asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the proposal, and when Ban's response to the Deschamps report will be out. Video here.

On January 5, Ladsous mission in CAR issued a press release about yet more allegation of sexual abuse of minors by its peacekeepers, below.

 On January 18, Inner City Press managed to ask UN Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson about the report -- the UN Deputy Spokesperson appeared intent on not allowing the question, but Eliasson to his credit took it. Video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: The UK Ambassador mentioned sexual abuse.

DSG: Yes.

Inner City Press: He did. And so I wanted to know…

DSG: I did also.

Inner City Press: So, since that report came out about the Central African Republic, what has the Secretariat or the 38th floor done to ensure that in the future if a UN staffer becomes aware of child rape, that it goes to the right people?

DSG Eliasson: This is very serious. As you know, the Special Representative in Central African Republic resigned, was asked to resign. One of the others who were named by the Deschamps group, panel, was considered to have abused authority has left the United Nations, retired.  And we have a group set up right now, led by the Chef de Cabinet - Edmond Mulet - that is going to work very, very quickly on following up the recommendations of the panel. Mr. Mulet and his group will report to the Secretary-General by the end of this month.

We will look into both issues of individual responsibility, but also primarily on the systemic problems. This reminded me of my reaction to the Sri Lanka tragedy back in 2009. The panel came to the conclusion that it was systemic failure, so we drew the [conclusion] to that – we need to have a systemic response. That was the origin of Human Rights Up Front.  This time also the Deschamps report talks about, almost in the same language – systemic reactions. I also expect, or we also expect, Member States again to draw the conclusions from this.  In so many cases we have passed on to the Member States very damning reports, but very little sometimes has been done by Troop Contributing or Police Contributing countries. So we need to have nation states following up these [inaudible].

  We will have more, too, on DSG Eliasson's reference to the UN's failure in Sri Lanka. At the January 19 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq if Mulet's report at the end of January will be made public. Video here.  We'll see.

Earlier in the month,  Inner City Press asked the Permanent Representative of New Zealand and of Uruguay, President of the Security Council for January, about the report(s). Video here.

Ambassador Gerard van Bohemen of New Zealand expressed concern. Ambassador Rosselli of Uruguay said in his national capacity that allegations should be dealt with has his country had, apparently a reference to Haiti. It appears the Security Council will take up this matter.

  Earlier at the January 5 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric if now Ladsous, in the Security Council right then on CAR, would belatedly answer questions, since the firing / scapegoating of former mission chief Babacar Gaye clearly didn't end the rapes. From the transcript:

 I wanted to ask but CAR, since you have this new report.  One, I guess I’d like to… since Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous is briefing the Security Council today about CAR and has yet to answer any questions on the CAR sexual abuse allegations report… I guess it’s a timely request… can he do a stakeout, take questions on it?  Because it seems like Babacar Gaye was fired, but the problems go on.  So this is a request.  It seems like a reasonable one

 But as noted (and Vined, here), Ladsous did not answer.

 Back in December, once the report came out from under embargo at the noon briefing Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric what Secretary General Ban Ki-moon will do about the findings against Ladsous, and that he escaped the “abuse of authority” moniker only because “the mandate of the Panel is to assess whether an abuse of authority has occurred in connection with the Allegations.”

 Since the abusers Ladsous let into MINUSCA were not the French troops who are accused of rape -- these troops are not in MINUSCA -- Ladsous' malfeasance is not “in connection” with the Allegations. But is it acceptable?

  Dujarric seems unfamiliar with the report; he implied that the third person found to have abused authority was the Ethics Officer, when it was a lower level official in CAR. Inner City Press asked what this all says about Ban Ki-moon's management, along with the John Ashe / Ng Lap Seng and Bernardino Leon scandal, a question Dujarric did not allow Inner City Press to asked Ban himself on December 16. “Those are your words,” Dujarric replied. Yes, they are.

  When the Panel's three members held their press conference, Inner City Press asked about Ladsous' failure to vet and his linking of rapes to “R&R.” Video here.  Marie Deschamps said pointedly she wouldn't comment on Ladsous' remarks; Yasmin Sooka said these are crimes for punishment, not recreation.

  As the last question, Inner City Press asked what it had wanted to ask Ban, and tried to ask Dujarric: what does this say about Ban's management? Video of Q&A here. Didn't Ban's chief of staff Malcorra, criticized in the report, do it for Ban? Didn't the “senior official” who ostensibly let the rape information die on the vine in the 38th floor work in an atmosphere created by Ban's nine years? We will pursue this.

And this: if OIOS' Lapointe was wrong, isn't James Finness, who continues the OIOS campaign? While the UK has spoken, where is France, given Sangaris and Ladsous?

  As to Ladsous, the finding was made even though the three authors of the report do not mention, and apparently have not yet seen, the notes from Ladsous' October 1, 2015 meeting about the CAR mission withBurundi's Vice President, in which Ladsous said he is “pragmatic” on human rights, in Burundi and by extension elsewhere, nor Ladsous' September 11, 2015 on-camera comments linking the rapes to “R&R,”video here.

  But Ladsous still as of December 17 holds the senior UN position into which France, which has chosen the last four heads of UN Peacekeeping, put him in September 2011. How much longer?

By contrast, the former head of OIOS Carman Lapointe, of whom the panel finds an abuse of authority, is conveniently gone, as is Babacar Gaye, who worked for Ladsous at the CAR mission.

  Perhaps it was easier for the panel to make the formal finding against people who had already left the UN by the time the report was released.

  One wonders: if responses like Ladsous' legalistic (and largely false) November 2 letter were received so long ago  by the panel, why did they withhold the report all the way until December 17, the day AFTER Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's rare (and last of the year) press conference?

  High Commission Zeid, of whom it is said he was slammed in the report, in fact gets the same treatment -- critical, but no formal abuse of authority -- as Ladsous, who is airbrushed out and conditions access to information and answers about Peacekeeping on positive / false coverage.

 The same finding is made with regard to former Chief of Staff Susana Malcorra. Will the critical language hurt what chance she has, as a non Eastern European, to try to follow Ban Ki-moon as Secretary General?

 More generally, how does all this criticism reflect on the tenure of Ban Ki-moon? The report does not mention the concurrent scandalsregarding UN Secretariat documents purchased by now indicted Ng Lap Seng through former President of the General Assembly John Ashe, nor Ban Libya envoy taking instruction and a cushy job with the UAE while representing Ban on and in Libya.

  In December 2015, Ban allowed those who cover him, at least the UN Correspondents Association, to sell seats with him for $6,000. And it is these same who have airbrushed out Ladsous and others.

  The Panelists -- Marie Deschamps, Hassan Jallow and Yasmin Sooka -- leave unnamed a senior officer in Ban Ki-moon's office (finding that he misspoke when he said he had informed Deputy Jan Eliasson), without saying if the officer remains in the same position. We'll have more on this.

UN's Ban Ki-moon Wants “Decisive Action” in Syria -- Airstrikes -- Amid UN Decay in Peacekeeping and Privatization

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 24 -- When UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon made his General Assembly speech, the elephant in the room was the airstrikes on Syria that began two days before. Should UN Security Council approval have been sought?

  As he has increasingly done, Ban called for “decisive action” -- that is, airstrikes. While Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric has repeatedly told Inner City Press that Ban does not favor more arms flowing into Syria, he has not directly criticized the US move to arm and train Syrian rebels.

  In terms of UN Peacekeeping, Ban in his speech said he is setting up a review. Inner City Press has heard from source that Louise Arbour is slated to head it -- with many grumbling about it, including previous colleagues at the International Crisis Group. Is she the right one to review the failures of UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous?

  Most recently those failures include ordering peacekeepers to surrender to the Al Nusra Front in the Golan Heights -- so more for “decisive action” -- and not implementing Ban's supposed Human Rights Due Diligence Policy, by including the DR Congo Army, a UN listed child soldier recruiter, in the mission in Central African Republic, after never suspending UN support for DRC Army units which committed 130 rapes in Minova in November 2012.

  Ladsous refuses Press questions on all of this, video compilation here, UK coverage here. What would Arbour - or another - do about that?

  Ban touted his own “Rights Up Front” plan, without mention it was meant to make up for his failures on Sri Lanka in 2009 and since.

  Ban cited his Climate Summit, at which coal mining funders Bank of America and Barclays were celebrated. While corporations use his UN for blue-washing, yesterday the French delegation tried to privatize the UN's Press Briefing Room, ordering all non-French journalists to leave. Inner City Press for the new Free UN Coalition for Access refused this privatization, video here, and will continue to work to make the UN live up to the principles it was supposedly founded for. Watch this site.

   

Amid Coup Bid in Juba, No UNMISS Twitter, Lebanon Shooting UNaddressed Like Mali: UNsocial Media

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 16 -- With crises in at least three UN Peacekeeping missions, in South Sudan, Lebanon and Mali, breaking out over the weekend, the UN's lack of responsiveness and even presence on social media came to the fore.

  Amid heavy gunfire in Juba and a reported attempted coup against Salva Kiir, the UN mission UNMISS not even having a Twitter account became all the more indefensible. Is Riek Machar in the UN compound? Who knows. 

  When last seen in UN headquarters in New York, UN envoy to South Sudan Hilde Johnson answered Inner City Press question about a tweet by a UN staffer in South Sudan by, essentially, saying the staffer was told not to do it again. But shouldn't UNMISS itself have an account? What is DPKO's policy?

  Meanwhile the mission in Lebanon, UNIFIL, has a Spokesperson's twitter account - but amid the shooting and calms for calm, the account has had nothing since December 3, and it only follows three other accounts, all UN, one in Libya: UNsocial.

  In Mali, MINUSMA has an account and has in the past replied with answers to the Free UN Coalition for Access. But yesterday there was no response, nor from Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokespeople, to basic questions about the background to the deaths of two UN peacekeepers in Kidal.

The car bombing in Kidal of the Banque Malienne de Solidarite has left not only casualties but a number of unanswered questions in its wake.

  Reported are the deaths of two UN peacekeepers from Senegal, Ousmane Fall and Cheikh Tidiane Sarr -- rest in peace -- and the serious wounding, according to Mali's government, of three more UN peacekeepers and two Malian soldiers, all evacuated to Gao for treatment.

   The question arose, why were UN peacekeepers guarding this bank facility, which some say has also become a military facility?  Inner City Press has asked, both Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokespeople in New York and, online, the UN Mission in Mali MINUSMA. Posed to the Spokespeople:

Regarding the car bombing in Kidal and the Secretary General statement (including calling the target a "bank"), please say whether the building was being used, in whole or part, as a military installation. (This is a major event and there is no noon briefing on Monday.)

Also, separately, please explain the fact that the UN Peacekeepers were guarding this building, and the comparative role of the Malian army, police and other armed forces.

Given what USG Ladsous said Friday about the Malian police and the death of a protester in Kidal, please state whether the UN continues to provide support to this unit of the Malian police and if so, how this complies with the stated Human Rights Due Diligence Policy and how that policy will be implemented in the aftermath of the November shootings in Kidal.

  Still having no response, we note that Maliactu, whose censorship by the Malian government both Ban's spokesperson on December 12 and French Ambassador Gerard Araud on December 13 said they had not heard of, has reported that Mali's soldiers were not supposed to guard the bank, but were inside.

  This raises serious questions, including about the accountability of MINUSMA and UN Peacekeeping. 

  The Kidal car bomb came a day after UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous acknowledged that the Malian police in Kidal shot protesters in last November after UN peacekeepers and French Serval forces told the crowd to disperse. Last weekend one of those shot died.

  Inner City Press on December asked UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous about the incident, and also how France obtained a non-public Letter of Assist payment from the UN for airfield services in northern Mali,how much it is for and why it is not more transparent.

  Ladsous replied that "I make it a policy not to respond to you, Mister," but then provided something of an answer to the first but not second, financial, question. Video here, from Minute 15:45. Inner City PressYouTube here and embedded below.

  He said, "I will respond on Kidal, because indeed that was a very unfelicitous occurrence. Our UN Police and Serval, the French troops, ordered the crowd to disperse. It appears Malian police did shoot, and yes, three civilians were injured, one of whom died over the weekend."

  In many countries, if an unarmed civilian is shot and killed by police the officer is suspended and charges are brought or put before a grand jury or other tribunal. What is happening here?

  Ladsous said, "We are looking further into the matter. Of course we have to say if indeed it is established beyond any doubt that the Malian police did shoot, that is not a way to behave, this is absolutely unacceptable."

  But to whom must it be established beyond a doubt? In the case of the 135 rapes in Minova by the 391st and 41st Battalions of the Congolese Army, the UN has continued to provide material support to those two units for the eleventh months before any trial started.

  Ladsous did not say anything in response to Inner City Press' question about how France got the Letter of Assist, how much it is for and why it is not more public. 

 The history of Ladsous and the policy he adopted in May 2012 of not answering any of Inner City Press' questions, including about the Minova rapes except once at the International Peace Institute across First Avenue from the UN, is long; since there was on December 13 at least this plausible interim answer on the Kidal shootings to report, we still leave it here for now. (Longer form here, on Beacon Reader.)

  But even on this there are questions of policy -- to use Ladsous' word -- which should obviously be answered or responded to. Does Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's stated Human Rights Due Diligence Policy apply to this case of Malian police shooting at unarmed protesters? 

  Is the UN's MINUSMA mission still working with these Malian police? If so, does that make the UN peacekeepers combatants?

   These questions should be answered. Watch this site.

   

Why Ban Ki-moon Thanked Qatar for Freeing of Peacekeepers Is Left UNexplained, "Others" Left UNnamed

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 13 -- On Sunday when the release of UN Peacekeepers by the Yarmouk Martys Brigade was credited to Qatar "and others" by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the obvious question raised was and is what are Qatar's relations with the kidnappers and the kidnapping?

On Monday May 13, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky just that: why was Qatar in particular thanked, and is it Ban's understanding that Qatar has some special connection with the Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade? Video here, from Minute 13:43.

  Nesirky replied by twice re-reading the statement, emphasizing that not only Qatar but unnamed "others" were thanked. Some wondered: Saudi Arabia? And why the others were left unnamed, but Qatar wanted or got credit?

  More generally, Inner City Press asked, isn't it a contradiction to say that Ban doesn't want countries arming the rebels in Syria, then thanking one of the arms and funding providers, Qatar, for its connection with the rebels who kidnapped UN peacekeepers?

  Nesirky said what was important was the release. Yes. But since this same group previously kidnapped 21 UN peacekeepers, have they this time made a commitment, if only to Qatar, not to do it again?

  Other wonder if the situation can't be described as one involving ransom: if a group that Qatar funds can thereby be convinced to release hostages, isn't that a ransom?

  Tellingly, when ostensibly independent Agence France Presse got around to typing up Ban's thanks to Qatar, it did not ask the obvious question either. Instead, with a UN dateline, and as is typical using anonymous diplomatic -- read, French -- sources, AFP reported

"'This time the rebels felt under pressure and took more convincing to free the soldiers,' said a UN diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity. 'Qatar's role was important.'"

  What was Qatar's role IN the kidnapping? AFP didn't ask. Instead it runs a quote from a spokesperson for Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping, on whose behalf AFP's Tim Witcher has filed complaints against Inner City Press, first within the UN Correspondents Association (which Inner City Press left, to co-found the Free UN Coalition for Access), then on March 8, 2013 with the UN.

  Witcher claimed that by asking a question, Inner City Press "abused" Ladsous, who is the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping. Once this and Ladsous' role in the Rwanda genocide as France Deputy Permanent Representative at the UN arguing for the escape of the genocidaires into Eastern Congo were noted, Ladsous began refusing to answer any Inner City Press questions, video here.

  Now when peacekeepers are killed, as in the past week in Abyei and Congo, Ladsous does not even like his predecessor Alain Le Roy hold any question and answer stakeout. His spokespeople issue selective information, here, to AFP.

And Ladsous goes gallivanting, spreading France's policies, now in Lebanon. Watch this site.

Exclusive: UN Peacekeeping Leaked Memo Shows Plans To Abolish More Posts Despite Mali Build-Up

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, May 3 -- In the spirit of the May Day protest by UN staff against working conditions and "forced relocations," Inner City Press has obtained and is exclusively publishing a UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations / DFS memo bragging about "abolishing" posts "in line with the reduction of peacekeeping activities in the field."

  This line from the February 12, 2013 DPKO memo rings false, as its chief Herve Ladsous pushing for a mission in former French colony Mali, and for a build up in the Eastern Congo.

  But still DPKO wants to cut jobs, perhaps to replace them with drones like Ladsous proposes with the peacekeepers in Cote d'Ivoire .

  In the memo, DPKO / DFS eschews any review of how it makes the cuts, writing that "since most of the posts where unique in functions and levels it was impossible to use a Comparative Review exercise."

  Of 2012, DPKO / DFS writes of "23 posts abolished in New York and established in UNGSC. 16 staff members affected, six professionals and 10 General Service staff." And still more cuts are slated for July 2013 -- even as Ladsous moves to staff up in Mali.

  As we reported, also exclusively ("obsessively," Ladsous or his spokesman might allege) earlier today, the Department of General Assembly and Conference Management under "Next Steps" urged to "be prepared for any possible UNDT cases (assemble good records)." DPKO / DFS says to "be prepared for any possible UNDT cases." 

  UNDT is the UN Dispute Tribunal. Did DPKO / DFS "assemble good records" to defend its abolition of posts?

  Of most concern to DGACM, according to its memo, was and is "staff being intimidated by a small (?) group of outspoken staff."

  That would the staff members who proposed the "no confidence" resolution as to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's leadership, which passed overwhelmingly.

  Rather than learn any lesson from that vote -- for example, don't in response to a Press question call those who work for you "selfish," as Ban characterized those staff in New York who oppose his mobility proposal -- management blames it on a "small (?) group of outspoken staff."

  And you know, on World Press Freedom Day, the UN doesn't like those who are "outspoken." At the WPFD event, Ladsous' spokesman Kieran Dwyer justified Ladsous' refusal to answer any questions from Inner City Press, here. But we will continue reporting - persistently. Watch this site.

Bachelet on Congo Probes as CSW Teeters on Tradition, Censors Rewarded?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 4 -- When Michele Bachelet gave a UN press conference on Monday, Inner City Press thanked her, on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, and asked a long-pending question. What of UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous' seeming grace period for rapists within the Congolese Army he partners with?

  While Ladsous on February 6 said the UN knows the identity of the majority of the perpetrators of 126 rapes at Minova from November 20-22, so far the UN has not stopped working with anyone. They say they are waiting, still waiting, for the Congolese investigation to be finished.

  Bachelet said that sometimes the UN offers technical assistants for investigations, for example from the American Bar Association. But have they heard? And why would the Congolese authorities report on the guilt of battalions now fighting the M23 (and ACPLS and Mai Mai) rebels?

  It was the opening of the Commission on the Status of Women that brought Bachelet for the press conference. She was asked about the possibility that this year's CSW, like last year's, might end with no outcome document given the insistence of some countries on exemptions for “tradition and culture.”

  She said sometimes mutually agreeable language can be found, that action is most important. She said that of those women not covered by laws against violence, 70% “live in OIC countries” (referring to the Organization for Islamic Cooperation).

  Bachelet was asked by CNN Chile about her political ambitions back home. She declined to answer, saying her focus is on CSW. She has, or had, the cache and credibility to force reform at the UN. Here's hoping.

  Footnote: Before and after Bachelet's press conference, Inner City Press attended CSW events in the UN's North Lawn building. A 1:15 pm event was moderated -- and therefore promoted on Twitter -- by Voice of America's Margaret Besheer, who in 2012 led efforts to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. Still moderating, still joshed at by the UN official in charge of Accreditation: this is the UN's position on censorship and accountability. At a 3 pm “High Level Panel,” the first speaker was Canada, bragging how seriously Canadian men and boys take the issue of violence against women. Next came Egypt; see here, above and what this site.

UN Postpones Trashing FUNCA Fliers, Stonewalls on UNCA's Glassed-In Board

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 25 -- The UN on Friday suspended (or merely "postponed") its plan announced the day previous to tear down this coming weekend the critical fliers of the Free UN Coalition for Access, which challenge anti-press freedom moves by both the UN and its UN Correspondents Association.

   At Friday's noon briefing, Inner City Press on behalf of FUNCA asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's associate spokesman Farhan Haq to explain why fliers would be torn down, while UNCA maintained a glassed-in bulletin board which it has used to denounce other journalists.

   Haq replied that an answer would be forthcoming but so far, even to a formal request amplified on Friday afternoon, no explanation has arrived.

   UNCA, which in 2012 met with UN officials seeking the dis-accreditation of Inner City Press, since the launching of FUNCA last month has been defacing, counterfeiting and tearing down FUNCA's fliers.

   This has been a continuation into 2013 of censorship bids in 2012 when UNCA Executive Committee members demanded the removal of articles and photographs from InnerCityPress.com, concerning topics ranging from France and the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping, Herve Ladsous, to Sri Lanka and conflicts of interest.

   Both have been resisted: no articles were taken down, Inner City Press after fighting back was not dis-accredited, and now the anti free speech plan to purge fliers has been canceled or "postponed."

  Now with UNCA's claimed sole right to post information in the UN press floor, including denunciations of investigative journalism, it is ironic that UNCA President Pamela S. Falk of CBS on January 24 wrote to the UN that it is "creating a monopoly for UNTV that contradicts the spirit of a free press."

  As one FUNCA member remarked, takes one to know one. UNCA tries to have a monopoly, then belatedly argues against press corps losses it acquiesced in and in some cases suggested. (UNCA said it would make its letter "public," but it is not clear what that means.)

  Here is what the UN sent out after FUNCA's protest: "Given that time is needed for journalists to seek permission from BCSS to put up posters / flyers, MALU has postponed its enforcement to remove the posters/flyers from the corridors."

  But after the UN sent this out, a dozen FUNCA fliers were torn down, including right next to the office of UNCA President Pam Falk and UNCA's glassed-in bulletin board. This is the UN Censorship Alliance.

  The torn-down FUNCA fliers detailed UN official Stephane Dujarric's refusal to disclose the UN's policy on due process for reporters.

  Dujarric was asked after he processed a June 20, 2012 request for dis-accreditation by Voice of America, which said it had the support of Reuters and Agence France-Presse and of UNCA, which it said met "with UN officials (very quietly)" to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN.

  Even the "BCSS" policy that was cited in the supposedly postponed threat to tear down fliers does not apply to FUNCA's. The BCSS guideline applies only to flyers defines as "a single page leaflet advertising an event or other activity sponsored by the Permanent Mission(s) and/or the United Nations department(s) and held on the United Nations premises -- Secretariat, DCI, DC2 and UNICEF."

  FUNCA is not a UN department or a country's Permanent Mission, and it is not advertising any event -- as for example UNCA for months advertised its $250 a plate December 2012 dinner dance celebrating Arnold Schwarzenegger. Those fliers did not have any BCSS stamp of approval.

  And so FUNCA has written to the head of the UN Department of Public Information:

We appreciate and will act on this afternoon's follow-up announcement, but it does not resolve the issues we have raised. It is to seek an ongoing and sustainable resolution that this letter / "application" is sent to you, with a copy to the two BCSS email addresses listed in the Policy MALU sent out yesterday.

  What is the legal status of the UNCA glassed-in bulletin board at the entrance to the media floor, on which UNCA in 2012 displayed a lengthy letter of denunciation?

Was that letter, and the other material posted there, approved by BCSS? There is no BCSS stamp on it.

Therefore it appears that no BCSS stamp is or should be required. FUNCA is hereby requesting approval and a bulletin board similar to that of UNCA, on which it will post its fliers with tacks.

In the alternative, the glass and key must be removed from the "UNCA" Bulletin Board, and its name changed to UN Journalists Bulletin Board.

We have asked and continue to ask that the so-called "UNCA Club" be renamed the UN Journalists' Club with equal access for all. Equal does not include UNCA keeping the key, just as it it could not for a UN Journalists Bulletin Board.

We are hereby applying for that, or for approval and a bulletin board for FUNCA announcements about the rights of journalists and free speech at the UN, which will be continuing, as before.

Finally, for now, among the unresolved "space" issues FUNCA objects to the planned lack of booth space over the Security Council and other UN organs, and questions why if this was planned long ago many, including impacted broadcasters, did not learn of it until recently.

   Later on Friday Inner City Press for FUNCA asked the UN Capital Master Plan why there are no plans for booths over the Security Council and other UN organs, and when and after what consultations this decision was made?

   Also, we appreciated your previous answer but don't fully understand it. The "lack of adequate labour due to increased demand for overtime-paying construction repair jobs" -- did the UN consider allocating more money to completing the "Permanent Broadcast Facility in the Conference Building"?

Was any estimate made of how much extra it would cost to finish as previously stated, in February? If not, why not? We ask in light of extra costs as in [other] Skanska change orders....

That negotiation process was not transparent -- it is for transparency that we are committed to continuing to post fliers, as currently or in as now request on an "approved" FUNCA bulletin board or unbranded (no longer UNCA) UN Journalists' bulletin board.

All of the other outstanding questions -- including the UN correspondents' due process question that was put by the NYCLU to the UN on July 5, 2012, are reiterated.

Watch this site.

From the UN's January 25, 2013 transcript:

Inner City Press: last night, the Department of Public Information put out a directive saying that there are no flyers allowed within the UN, regardless of what they say, including substantive comment, and what I am wondering is what is the UN’s position? On the right of free speech? Since these are flyers critical of DPI’s performance, can they take them down, and by what right does the United Nations Correspondents Association have a glassed-in bulletin board on which they have denounced other journalists?  Please explain.

Associate Spokesperson Farhan Haq:  I think this is an issue on which you need to talk it over with the Department of Public Information.

Inner City Press: I have written to Peter Launsky-Tieffenthal, and I don’t have an answer yet.

Associate Spokesperson Haq:  I am sure they will be in touch with you.  Thanks very much.