As Ban Ki-Moon Meets Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka, Shavendra Silva There, Where's Report?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 24 -- When UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon met with Sri Lanka president Mahinda Rajapaksa on Tuesday at 6 pm, another Sri Lankan official came into the meeting room. 

  It was Shavendra Silva, a military figure whose Army unit was depicted engaged in war crimes in the UN's own report on Sri Lanka.

Ban previously accepted Silva on his Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations, telling Inner City Press it was a decision of member states.

  But was Ban told that Silva would be coming up with Minister Peiris and Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona? First photo here.

Inner City Press was up for the photo-op. Silva came into the room, started walking toward the middle of the table where Mahinda Rajapaksa signed Ban's UN book. But then Silva retreated to the back, and then walked out of the room.Second photo here; third photo here. 

Walk-out photo here.

Did Silva re-enter after the photographers were ordered out? Inner City Press remained on the 38th floor, with others, for Ban's meeting with Evo Morales of Bolivia. When the Sri Lanka meeting ended, two other UN officials came out: Political Affairs chief Jeffrey Feltman, and human rights official Ivan Simonovic.

But where was the UN report on its inaction in 2009, which Ban has had since August? Will it be released? Or play hide and seek like Silva? Watch this site.

Then this read-out:

Readout of the Secretary-General’s meeting with H.E. Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa, President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka

The Secretary-General met today with H.E. Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa, President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. They exchanged views on the post-conflict situation in Sri Lanka and the country’s cooperation with the United Nations. The Secretary-General noted the Government’s latest efforts to conduct the provincial elections and to implement the recommendations of its Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. The Secretary-General also addressed the remaining challenges in reconciliation and emphasized the need for a more holistic approach.

New York, 24 September 2013

   

On Sri Lanka, Stealth Solicitation of Submissions by UN Ban Panel Unexplained

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 20 -- The lack of rigor of the Panel of Experts on war crimes in Sri Lanka appointed by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is exemplified by the “soft launch” of their call for the submission of evidence.

Days ago, Inner City Press was forwarded a copy of what seemed to be a UN Panel notice that evidence could be e-mailed until December 15. But the notice came from the comments section of a Sri Lankan website. An Internet search on the morning of October 20 found the notice on only one other website.

So at the UN noon briefing on October 20 Inner City Press asked for confirmation that this obscure notice did in fact originate from Ban Ki-moon's Panel. Ban's acting Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq read a prepared statement that yes, it was the Panel's notice. He refused to explain where it has been posted, and why it had been so quiet.

This takes place as major human rights groups have declined to participate in the Sri Lankan government's own “Lessons Learnt” panel, and Sri Lankan minister of external affairs G.L. Peiris in turn calls the human rights groups “colonialist.” Meanwhile, new pictures portraying identifiable Sri Lankan military officers leading bound prisoners, and corpses on the ground, have emerged.

If this and other evidence is submitted to Ban Ki-moon's stealth panel, what will they do with it? If a Panel meets in secret, and even downplays its own solicitation of submissions, what is the sound of one hand clapping? Watch this site.

From one of only two notices on the Internet, reprinted as a public service:

UN Expert Panel call for evidence on alleged violations in Sri-Lanka

On 22 June 2010, the UN Secretary-General established a Panel of Experts to advise him on the issue of accountability with regard to alleged violations of international human rights and humanitarian law during the final stages of the conflict in Sri Lanka. The members of the Panel are Marzuki Darusman, Steven Ratner and Yasmin Sooka. The Panel officially began its work on 16 September 2010.

The Panel will look into the modalities, applicable international standards and comparative experie nce with regard to accountability processes, taking into consideration the nature and scope of any alleged violations in Sri Lanka. The Panel advises the Secretary-General and is not an investigative or fact-finding body.

Anyone wishing to make submissions in respect of the above may do so as follows:

1. Organizations and individuals may make one written submission not exceeding ten pages, and must include the contact details for the author(s) of the submission.

2. The Panel will receive submissions until 15 December 2010.

3. Submissions may be sent to: panelofexpertsregistry@un.org.

4. Submissions made to the Panel of Experts will be treated as confidential.

Further information may be solicited from the Panel s Secretariat at the following address:
panelofexpertsregistry@un.org.

As Ban Meets Sri Lanka Rajajaksa, UN War Crimes Panel Not Mentioned, Summary Delayed

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 24 -- When Mahinda Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka met with the UN's Ban Ki-moon on Friday morning, Ban did not raise the slow starting UN panel of experts on war crimes in the country.

Five hours after the meeting, the UN issued a terse summary of what was discussed. It mentions only Rajapaksa's own “Lessons Learnt” panel, and not the UN's.

Inner City Press, covering the meeting on Sudan later on Friday with a “free range” UN pass, noted Sir Lanka's Minister of External Affairs G.L. Peiris seated on the North Lawn's second floor, reading.

In his previous trip inside the UN, Peiris refused to take any questions from the Press. In Washington, he walked out of a session at the National Press Club when he thought tough questions might be asked.

Neither he nor Rajapaksa have scheduled any press availability at the UN, unlike, only on Friday, the Presidents of Bolivia, Cyprus and Nigeria, to all of whom Inner City Press asked questions.

While Ban met with Nigeria's Goodluck Jonathan before he met with Rajapaksa, the UN's summary of the Nigeria meeting was issued hours before the Sri Lanka one. Does this reflect greater checking with or push back by Sri Lanka? Or, some ask, ineptitude in the UN's Sri Lanka team?

Its last read out about Sri Lanka came out at 10 p.m. When Inner City Press asked if it had been checked with the government, spokesman Martin Nesirky said no, there had just been a technical snafu. But how come a snafu on Friday as to Sri Lanka, and not Nigeria? And what about the answers promised long ago by Ban's spokesman Nesirky about Ban's personal relationship with Rajapaksa, including prior to becoming Secretary General? Watch this site.

As Sri Lanka Says No Visas, UN Says No Need to Visit or Talk to Witnesses

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/sri7bantor062410.html

UNITED NATIONS, June 24 -- The government of Sri Lanka has said it will deny visas to members of the UN panel of experts to advise Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on alleged war crimes in the final stage of that country's civil war. Inner City Press asked Mr. Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky for Ban's response to being thus rebuffed. Video here, from Minute 19:42.

“It's not a question of speaking to witness,” Nesirky said, emphasizing twice that it is “not an investigation, not an inquiry, not a probe.” The obvious question is, why not? More than a year after thousands of civilians were killed, the UN is only now convening three individuals to advise Ban on what he might do.

Inner City Press is told that the panel will have staff, to be based in New York. Meanwhile in Sri Lanka, the government is said to be setting up some protests to be held in front of the UN in Colombo. If Sudan were to do this, the UN would denounce it. But here?

Russia has chimed in, as it did during the conflict, calling the slaughter entirely an “internal matter.” As one wag put it, “They should know.”

Footnotes: The "no visas" announcement was made by External Affairs minister GL Peiris, who twice rebuffed the Press while in the US lobbying against the UN panel. Then, Hillary Clinton stood by Peiris. And now?

The Sri Lankan Mission to the UN put out the foreign ministry's statement, a day late and in an unwieldy format. The Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona is still apparently not back in New York. Sri Lanka has thumbed its nose at GSP Plus as well. What will happen with the IMF? Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/sri7bantor062410.html

In DC, Peiris of Sri Lanka Shows Not Ready for Prime Time, Hillary Clinton to Hear War Crimes Defense

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/sri3peiris052710.html

UNITED NATIONS, May 27 -- Now that Sri Lanka Minister of External Affairs Gamini Lakshman Peiris has turned tail and run out of the National Press Club without speaking or offering any explanation, the world can see what Inner City Press has diagnosed since the Peiris visit began over last weekend: he is not ready for prime time.

At the UN, rather than hold an open press conference as the foreign ministers of such countries as Georgia and Iran and Indonesia do, the Sri Lankan Mission to the UN invited specific individual journalists, many of whom had never written about Sri Lanka, to meet and even wine and dine with Peiris.

Inner City Press sent a request to the Mission to pose questions to Peiris, about reports of war crimes by the Rajapaksa government he represents. A Mission staffer said the decisions were being made by the Deputy Permanent Representative, who since arriving in New York from Canada had sent Inner City Press a series of amateurism letters meant to intimidate, often minutes before the UN's daily press conference.

Since this DPR has refused to answer any of the factual questions sent to him, Inner City Press re-directed its request to interview Peiris to Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona, who did not reply. One reporter leaving the Waldorf Astoria hotel on Sunday night after meeting with Peiris and Kohona described Peiris as making a war crimes defense. But why not make it publicly?

The next day, after Peiris, Kohona and entourage met with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his chief of staff Vijay Nambiar -- a meeting Inner City Press was banned from photographing -- Inner City Press asked the exiting Peiris to describe the meeting. He refused.

Now, down in Washington, Peiris appears at the National Press Club at 10, supposed to speak - but walked out. Neither the ministry nor the NPC could explain. We can; not ready for prime time.

Footnote: Kohona himself is named, by Nambiar in a 13 minute filmed interview, as having given assurances that surrendering LTTE leaders, if they waved the white flag, would be treated like normal prisoners of war. They were, in fact, killed, making Kohona and Nambiar persons of interest in any investigation of war crimes in Sri Lanka. How long either Nambiar or Kohona will now stay in their post remains to be seen. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/sri3peiris052710.html

On Sri Lanka, UN Did Not Recuse Nambiar, UK Supports Ban Panel, Peiris Waits

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/sri1panel052610.html

UNITED NATIONS, May 26 -- As questions mount about the role in crimes of war in Sri Lanka of both Vijay Nambiar, the chef de cabinet of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, and Sri Lankan diplomat Palitha Kohona, the UN on Wednesday said that in setting up the long promised UN group of experts, "it’s not as if it’s simply the Chef de Cabinet. And it’s not something that involves directly -- the setting up of that panel clearly does not directly involve the Sri Lankan Mission itself."

But when Inner City Press earlier asked what steps had been taken toward actually setting up the group of experts that Ban announced back on March 5, the answer was a meeting between Nambiar and Kohona. Asked if there are any UN provision for recusal from setting up a panel to investigate deadly incidents by those involved or witness to the events, the UN spokesman did not describe any safeguards.

Meanwhile, the UK Mission has provided the following read out that Inner City Press requested:

I asked the Ambassador for some feedback on his meeting with the Secretary-General regarding the issue of Sri Lanka which you had mentioned to him when you saw him earlier in the week.

He did raise the issue of Sri Lanka in his discussion with the Secretary General and assured him that the UK Government fully supported his proposals for an accountability process to look into allegations of breaches of international humanitarian law and this included the proposed panel of experts.

Inner City Press had asked Ambassador Lyall Grant if there was any change in position on Sri Lanka as power shifted from Gordon Brown and his Foreign Secretary David Miliband to Cameron, Clegg and Hague. Miliband, now running to replaced Gordon Brown as head of the Labour Party, has Tweeted that the new government should act on the International Crisis Group report. We'll see.

Sri Lanka's Minister of External Affairs G.L. Peiris continues his war crimes defense tour, now in Washington waiting to meet with Hillary Clinton on Friday. Since the Sri Lankan Mission's read out of his meeting with Ban cited US Ambassador Susan Rice as supporting the Rajapaksas' mechanism over any outside one, what Hillary Clinton will say is a matter of some interest.

From the UN's May 26 transcript, video here from Minute 12:40

Inner City Press: yesterday you repeatedly said to me, “check, listen to Al Jazeera” on the question I was asking about what the Secretary-General — what, you know, what he rejected and what Mr. Nambiar, that the allegation that he said he totally rejected. So, I did, I did, it wasn’t easy, but I’ve listened to what Mr. Nambiar said. And I have to say it still gives rise to questions. There are two, and I’ll just, there are two that really come to mind. He acknowledges that he was contacted, he says through UN Headquarters by a Sunday Times correspondent, through the UK Foreign Office and UN Headquarters of the desire to surrender of these LTTE [Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam] leaders. And he says he spoke with the President, the Defence Secretary, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, and Palitha Kohona, who is now the ambassador here, and that they said that they would be treated like normal war criminals. I mean, excuse me, they will be treated like normal prisoners of war – I want to be clear on that. He doesn’t say how this was conveyed back to the people who surrendered. He doesn’t say, and I think it would be important to know who in the UN Headquarters was part of this chain of communication and it’s unclear to me why, given both Mr. Nambiar and Mr. Kohona were the ones discussing the accountability panel that Ban Ki-moon is setting up if they, at least, you know, again without casting aspersion on them, there are factual questions about a possible problem, that Philip Alston is looking into. So, how is it not a conflict of interest to have Mr. Nambiar or Mr. Kohona being the ones to discuss the composition in terms of reference of a panel that is dealing with exactly the incident in which they were involved by Nambiar’s own statement to Al Jazeera? Sorry.

Spokesperson: What do you mean, “sorry”?

Inner City Press: No I’m sorry to put those all together; I just wanted it sort of a package question.

Spokesperson: It’s okay, it’s okay. Firstly, there are a lot of very specific questions that I do not have the answer to. So I can seek those to the best of my ability and the ability of my colleagues. The second is that the panel of experts that’s being put together, this is not simply in the purview of the Chef de Cabinet. Of course, there are other people involved in this, and not least the Secretary-General because it is the Secretary-General’s panel of experts. So it’s not as if it’s simply the Chef de Cabinet. And it’s not something that involves directly — the setting up of that panel clearly does not directly involve the Sri Lankan Mission itself. This is the Secretary-General’s panel of experts.

Inner City Press: Are there any provisions for sort of recusal? In the case of, sort of, at any type of UN inquiry, if — and again, I’m trying to be very careful here, I am not trying to say that — I am just saying that this is an incident that would fall within the purview even of the lessons learned in the reconciliation commission of Sri Lanka, this incident that Alston has asked about in which prisoners who surrendered with white flags ended up dead. If, as Mr. Nambiar — I had never heard of Mr. Kohona being involved and giving the assurances — but if he is, it just seems that there should be some, you see, this is the type of thing that, for example, [Luis Moreno] Ocampo [Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court] has criticized Sudan for — allowing those accused of crimes to be involved in Sudan’s own inquiry. He said that’s laughable. But it seems here, and I don’t want to be, it’s a, there obviously, it’s apples and oranges, but just in terms of involvement in the incident to be looked at, and involvement in setting up the inquiry to do it, I just wonder if you are… comfortable…

Spokesperson: As I’ve said, it’s not as if this is being somehow done in isolation. There are other people involved within the United Nations to establish that panel of experts. But the other questions, I’ve heard them and we’ll see what we can find out.

Watch this site. And see, www.innercitypress.com/sri1panel052610.html