In South Sudan, India Tells Press Two Peacekeepers Killed, One in Critical Condition, Call for Accountability

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 19 -- From South Sudan, the Indian mission at the UN in New York has been informed that two of its peacekeepers in Akobo were killed, and an additional peacekeeper is in critical condition.

  The UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations has said nothing yet. But India's Permanent Representative Asoke Mukerji reminded Inner City Press that on the day he presented his credentials and began at the UN, five Indian peacekeepers were killed in South Sudan.

  In this instance, there were 40 peacekeepers in the base in Akobo -- and civilians, on which Inner City Press aims to report more. Some 1500 youths, said to be of the Lou Nuer tribe supportive of ousted Vice President Riek Machar, "fired indiscriminately" at the UN base.

  Mukerji called for the prosecutions of those who kill peacekeepers. He separately reminded Inner City Press of the ruling of the previous UN Legal Counsel Patricia O'Brien that with the Force Intervention Brigade on the Democratic Republic of the Congo - and now with peacekeepers in Mali shooting at civilians and co-housing with France's Serval force -- UN peacekeepers are becoming combatants, parties to armed conflict.

  Murkerji said that troop contributing countries should be told this. This would seem to be the job of the chief of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous (who says he "has a policy" ofnot answering Press questions) and of the President of the Security Council.

  This month that is France's Gerard Araud, who left a December 19 Peacekeeping seminar before the moment of silence, tweeted by Inner City Press, for the Indian peacekeepers. Most recently he refused to answer specific questions about intermingling with Serval making UN peacekeepers combatants, calling it micro-management and chiding the question.

We are endeavoring to find out more about the killings in South Sudan, and for accountability. So far, without any assistance or transparency from Ladsous' UN Peacekeeping. Watch this site.

   

On Haiti, NYT and Blooomberg View Let Ban Ki-moon Off Hook, UN Cholera Screening by Ladsous Falsely Claimed, Not Corrected

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 13 -- After the Haiti cholera lawsuit was filed October 9 in US federal court in New York City, there's been another flurry of editorial calling for "the UN" or "the world body" to take responsibility. 

 While welcome, several including that of the New York Times miss the point, or the target.

The NYT editorial reports that "the United Nations’ response — as it has been the last three years — was to claim immunity from litigation." 

  But it nowhere mentions the name or even title of the individual who is responsible for this decision: Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

In most things, it is the Permanent Five members of the Security Council who run the UN. Notably, any one of them could have blocked Ban Ki-moon from becoming Secretary General.

But when Inner City Press this week asked French Permanent Representative Gerard Araud about the lawsuit, he said it was entirely up to Ban Ki-moon.

And then 19 members of the US Congress wrote to the State Department, then US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice demanding accountability for the cholera brought to Haiti, and there was no response, Inner City Press asked the US Mission to the UN about it. 

  The US response was, it's up to the Secretariat of Ban Ki-moon. (The view of Rice's successor Samantha Power on this, if different, is not yet known. Inner City Press got aresponse from Power on accountability, but only with regard to Syria, here.)

  Ban's spokespeople, when pressed, tried to say that the decision to deem the legal claims "not receivable" was made by Ban's then top lawyer Patricia O'Brien. 

  But she has left the UN, as least as an employee: she now represents Ireland at the UN in Geneva. In any event, this is not the type of issue that saying "on advice of counsel" is sufficient.

It was and is Ban Ki-moon's decision, one of the worst in his tenure so far. (Notably he also failed to call even for a ceasefire as 40,000 civilians were killed in Sri Lanka in 2009, then accepted a perpetrator as a UN adviser and tried to withhold an internal UN report until Inner City Press obtained and published it last week, here.)

  So why does the "Paper of Record" leave the decision-maker out of the picture? Bloomberg View, which also doesn't use Ban's name, at least notes that "the secretary-general’s office replied that the complaint was “not receivable” because it would require “a review of political and policy matters."

  Of course, it's hard to an "office" responsible. And this Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary General, through associate spokesperson Farhan Haq, last week told Inner City Press that as a lesson learned from Haiti, UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous now screens peacekeepers for cholera.

  Inner City Press knew this to be false, and said it. When it asked the next day -- no correction was offered in 24 hours -- Haq acknowledge that no screening is being done, blaming WHO. But publications like Caribbean Journal still have online uncorrected stories like this: "UN: Lesson Learned From Haiti Is to 'Screen Peacekeepers For Cholera.'"

  That story even links to the UN's transcript of its October 11 noon briefing, where Haq told Inner City Press, "part of our lessons learned from this has been to screen peacekeepers for cholera."

  The UN never added a correction to that -- no screening is taking place -- nor apparently has it sought to tell the Caribbean Journal and others to stop spreading the "good" (but false) news.

  This UN will only improve, if then, if those responsible are named and asked to be accountable. The structure of the UN makes anonymity and impunity more likely than elsewhere. To counter this, and open the UN, the Free UN Coalition for Access has begun, despite UN threats. Watch this site.

   

Despite Drones & UN as Combatant, DR Congo Is But a Footnote For September in UN Security Council, Australian Presidency

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 4 -- The UN has taken an unprecedented turn in the Eastern Congo, deploying attack helicopters and, under Herve Ladsous, drones, turning its troops into combatants, parties to an armed conflict.

  But in the UN Security Council provisional program of work distributed Wednesday by the incoming Australian presidency, "DRC" is only a footnote.

  On Wednesday afternoon Inner City Press asked Australia's Permanent Representative Gary Quinlan why that is, if there shouldn't be more oversight of what Quinland called the MONUSCO mission's "forward leaning" approach.

  Inner City Press asked about the Council's last MONUSCO press statement on the issue of combatants (see here, and here for France's refusal to answer), and if MONUSCO should be attacking the M23 group in areas assigned to it in the Kampala deal under which it withdrew from Goma.

Quinlan responded that "we may want to suggest it go on agenda, once the diplomatic process is sorted in next couple days." UN envoy Mary Robinson is there -- click here for Inner City Press' exclusive interview with Rwanda's Permanent Representative Eugene-Richard Gasana -- among with envoys from the EU, African Union and Russ Feingold of the US. But what about Ladsous' drones?

  Quinlan said, "this question of do people become combatants, the issue is legally unresolved. You might address it, Matthew, to DPKO and at the Legal Office." 

  Inner City Press did ask Patricia O'Brien of the Legal Office, and she made it clear the Intervention Brigade, and perhaps all of MONUSCO, are parties to the armed conflict.But apparently Ladsous is arguing differently, and having the UN Secretariat stonewall for him. Watch this site.

   

On Haiti Cholera, UN Envoy Sandra Honore Defers to UN Legal Division, Patricia O'Brien Still Around

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 28 -- When the UN's new envoy to Haiti Sandra Honore came to take questions on Wednesday, there was an obvious one to be asked. 

  Inner City Press asked her about the UN's dismissal of claims it brought cholera to Haiti and whether this undermined the UN's credibility in the country (and elsewhere). Video here, from Minute 0:33.

  Sandra Honore was prepared, rattled off statistics about the country's three year need for $443 million, 47% of which has been pledged, but then added that she was not in the position to add more, that the issue is being dealt with in the Legal Division at UN Headquarters and that it is not the practice of the UN to discuss in public such claims.

Yes, this undermines the UN's credibility. The UN preaches about accountability, and transparency. Then when accused of bringing in a disease, negligently, which has killed over 8,000 people, the UN said it cannot discuss the claims in public.

  Since the Office of Legal Affairs has already dismissed the claims, to say they are being dealt with there might imply the UN knows it is going to be sued. What will new OLA chief from Portugal do? What will he say? 

  Sources in OLA tell Inner City Press he is taking on many staff from his predecessor Patricia O'Brien. There's talk of a less than transparent extension for Ms. O'Brien, who most thought had left, and some last minute deals. We'll have more on this.

  Inner City Press also asked Sandra Honore about the delay, after she was nominated, in being accepted as UN Envoy by the Martelly government. In responding Sandra Honore took the high road, saying she began on July 15 and has been working hard.

  In terms of process, there may be hard work in UN Headquarters but the audio quality and volume of questions asked at the UN Security Council, even with a boom microphone, was sub-standard, not only for Inner City Press but for the other journalist who asked questions. 

 The Free UN Coalition for Access, @FUNCA_info, has asked the question "why" to the UN official in charge, Stephane Dujarric, to UN TV and to Team People, the low-bidding UN contractor. So far, no response. Ah, accountability. Watch this site.

   

On Haiti Cholera, Washington Post Belatedly Notes Ban Ki-moon's UNresponsiveness, Ladsous & USUN Too: New Lawyer?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 16 -- The lawlessness and lack of responsiveness of the UN on its responsibility for bringing cholera into Haiti has been noticed by the Washington Post. They call Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson's letter to the editor "something closer to a non-response," in that it evaded the issue of responsibility.

  But inside the UN, Inner City Press has asked Ban's spokespeople repeatedly about the cholera. After sitting on claims for more than a year, Ban's UN ruled the claims were "not receivable."

  Then when Inner City Press asked for a more detailed legal argument, Ban's last top lawyer Patricia O'Brien said there was just "nothing more to say."

  Inner City Press has asked the US Mission to the UN, too, since Ban listens so much to them. But even after 19 members of Congress wrote to Ban about the issue, the US Mission has not follow up on the issue of accountability.

  During new Ambassador Samantha Power's Twitter town hall on August 15, as Inner City Press noted, she glaringly did not respond to the tweets about the UN's role in bringing cholera to Haiti. Some supporters of the think that to ignore this is best. They are wrong: it makes the UN unable to credible preach about rule of law and accountability.

Ban's chief of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, with his own history in Haiti as on Rwanda, has simply refused to taken this and other questions from the Press, compilation video here. Ban has a new chief lawyer from Portugal, Miguel de Serpa Soares. Can he be credible without addressing this issue?

  On August 16 it was announced that Ban will hold a "press encounter" in the briefing room on Monday, August 19. While some fear this means he will not take questions -- i.e., hold the type of press conference that at one point was promised to take place every month -- it seems clear that he should address cholera in Haiti on Monday. Watch this site.

   

Ex-UN Official Guehenno Says Successor Ladsous Must "Come Clean" on Haiti Cholera, Inner City Press Asks

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 7 -- With the UN of Ban Ki-moon and Herve Ladsous still denying all claims that Ladsous' UN Peacekeeping brought cholera to Haiti and killed 8,000 people, on August 7 after Inner City Press again asked Ban's spokesperson about it, Ladsous' predecessor Jean-Marie Guehenno tweeted this:

"Peacekeepers have done a lot for Haiti, but UN needs to come clean on cholera crisis."

  This is a former chief of UN Peacekeeping. So where is Herve Ladsous on this? He's out of headquarters, after refusing Press questions then spoon-feeding spin to a friendly scribe. August 7 video here.

  On Haiti, here's Inner City Press' question from the August 7 UN noon briefing:

Inner City Press: on Haiti first. There is a report that I am sure that you have seen, it came out of the Law School and the Medical School at Yale yesterday regarding the cholera in Haiti, it’s a medical and legal analysis that there should have been the claims process and saying that the UN needs to rehabilitate --

Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: What’s the question?

Inner City Press: My question is: what’s your response to this study, and also, whether the new Head of the Office of Legal Affairs, whether there is any indication that, you know, like Nicolas Michel in the past, but unlike Ms. O’Brien, whether he will take questions on legal topics such as these? Why the claim was was dismissed and what the legal implications are?

Spokesperson: Well, on the second part of your questions, we just in the past few minutes announced this appointment, so I don’t think you would expect me to pass further judgement on what he may or may not wish to do with regard to speaking to the media, but we will certainly convey your wishes to him. With regard to the first part of your questions, I don’t have anything further to say beyond what we have said in the past. We are obviously aware of this latest report. [More here.]

  Thursday August 8 is a UN holiday. But what will the UN say about its own former head of peacekeeping, a post now devolved to Herve Ladsous who was rejected in favor of Guehenno, then in favor of Alain Le Roy, then a third strike in favor of Jerome Bonnafont -- only to be put in the job by France after Bonnafont bragged about getting it?

  The flaw was that Ladsous has a record, of arguing for the escape of the genocidaires from Rwanda into Eastern Congo. How can he lead an (all African) intervention brigade now in the Congo? Watch this site.

   

Fog of War: UN Conceals Winner of Ladsous' Drone Contract & DRC Army Units It Supports

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 31 -- Some say for the UN to become a party to the armed conflict in Eastern Congo is a mistake.

But the UN is doing just that: on July 30 it set an August 1 deadline after which it will take offensive military actionagainst anyone who doesn't disarm in what it calls the "Security Zone" between Goma and Sake.

  Some characterize this as "protection of civilians," as UK Ambassador to the UN Mark Lyall Grant did, tweeting that the UK "has supported the UN Intervention Brigade, precisely to help stop murderous activities by M23 (and other armed militia)" and that he didn't think "women suffering sexual violence in DRC would see UN Peacekeepers disarming militia as 'UN going to war.'"

  This ignores that, for example, 135 DRC women and girls were raped in Minova in November by two units of the Congolese Army, the 41st and the (US trained) 391st Battalions -- both of which the UN still supports, despite accountability measures that are shockingly limited, and now undisclosed.

  On July 31 Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Martin Nesirky about the 41st Battalion, about which company signed a drones contract with UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, and if the Geneva Conventions apply to the UN. From the UN's transcript:

Inner City Press: There was a MONUSCO [United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo] press conference today in which they described a joint surveillance cells that they had established with the forty-first commando battalion in Sake-Goma, which is the security zone. Since this is one of the two battalions that was implicated in the rapes in Minova, is this support for purposes of the human rights due diligence policy to establish these joint surveillance cells? What’s the current tally of actual arrests or indictments made for those rapes, and is it possible to know which units of the Congolese Army MONUSCO would be providing support to, for purposes of the human rights due diligence policy as part of its newly announced disarmament initiative to begin in 24 hours?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, on the middle question, that’s one for the authorities. On the last part of your question and the first part of your question, for operational reasons with regard to the present circumstances, the Mission is not providing a full list of which units it is operating with and would support. So that’s the first bit. The second is with regard to the broader question you raised a number of times, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations is simply not putting into the public domain that information.

Inner City Press: One follow-up. How could the UN have a policy publicly announced like the human rights due diligence policy, which says they wont support abusive units and then refuse to disclose which units they do support? And when you’re saying it’s up to the Congolese authorities to disclose the arrests, at least as described by Patricia O’Brien, the UN must seek that information in order to make its risk assessment of potentials of abuse arising from its support. Is it an entirely secret policy?

Spokesperson Nesirky: No, no, not at all. Those two parts are not mutually exclusive. It’s for the authorities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to provide information into the public domain on what arrests have or have not been made, who has been charged, who has been prosecuted. That’s self-evidently for the authorities, the Congolese authorities to do. It is not… that does not mean that it’s not possible for them also to provide that information to the peacekeeping mission there. And with regard to the more general point, this policy is about a process. You don’t decide from one day to the other if a unit has been accused of some kind of infractions — that is investigated under that policy and, of course, by the authorities, and that’s a process.

Inner City Press: Thanks a lot, I just wanted to get this out of the way. I wanted to ask two general things.

Spokesperson Nesirky: Just wait a second. I can see other hands in the room. Okay?

  After cutting away, when Nesirky returned he limited questions, disallowing one about Mali, and declining to name the beneficiary of a drones contract the UN has already signed:

Inner City Press: I have a question on Mali but I wanted to just finish on DRC. This seems to be something that’s right in the UN’s mandate to answer, whether the Geneva Conventions apply to the operation that the Intervention Brigade or MONUSCO has just announced, i.e., would it be making the Intervention Brigade a party to an armed conflict? And the other question, Hervé Ladsous announced during the Bastille Day in France that the drone contract had been signed. I’ve checked various databases that are publicly available. What’s the company that won? And if it’s not yet public, how could the UN be signing a contract declaring a winner and not have it be public? Is it public and what is the name of the company?

Spokesperson: I will check. I don’t believe it is public, firstly. Secondly, there is a very clear procurement process that’s in place, and with regard to the first part of your question, the mandate that the peacekeeping operation has in the DRC is fully compliant with international humanitarian law.

  Then Nesirky took no more questions on the topic, nor from Inner City Press about Mali or anything else. At a ceremony unveiling a new bike rack for the UN, when Herve Ladsous walked by Inner City Press asked him who won the UN drone contract. He did not answer. Video here. Watch this site.

   

On Haiti Cholera, UN Ignores New Study & Recent Spike in Cases, But Thanks Inner City Press for Asking: UNaccountable

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 29 -- After the UN tersely denied the legal claims of thousands killed by the cholera the UN brought into Haiti, its spokesperson and its chief legal counsel Patricia O'Brien have told Inner City Press they have nothing more to say.

But because of how this conflicts with the rules of law and with accountability, both of which the UN preaches, Inner City Press has kept on asking, on July 26 and again today, July 29, about a new study and a new spike in cholera cases.

From the July 26 UN transcript:

Inner City Press: I’m sure you’ve seen the report put out by the four scientists who did the UN’s initial study of cholera in Haiti, and they’ve now issued a second report. They’re no longer in the employ of the UN. And they say that new evidence shows that it was pretty conclusively that the UN brought cholera to Haiti. So I wanted to know, since the UN has relied on their previous findings so much, what do they say to this new study? I’m hoping that you can say some way that it either relates to or changes in some way or just how should we read it in connection with the UN dismissing the claims on behalf of 5,000 people killed by the cholera.

Deputy Spokesperson Eduardo Del Buey: No, the claims continue to be not receivable. That said, as we have stated consistently since the beginning of the crisis, the Secretary-General and the UN remain fully committed to address the situation of cholera in Haiti. Significant progress has been made, mortality rates are down, we have been distributing all kinds of water purification kits, and we’ve been doing infrastructural work, building latrines, we’ve been distributing vaccines and we are also working very closely with the Haitian authorities to educate the Haitian people on how to avoid the spread of cholera. The Secretary-General continues to press Member States and philanthropic organizations to increase their contributions. The contributions for this year have only reached 23 per cent of the asking. We’re working very assiduously with Member States and philanthropic organizations to ensure that this money is received this year so that we can continue with this work. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.  Have a good weekend.

  That was the UN's line, that the claims of thousands of people killed were "not receivable." It's a model of unaccountability. But it is this UN's line.

On Monday, July 29, Inner City Press asked about a spike in cases:

Inner City Press: The Haitian Government has acknowledged that there’s been a spike in cholera just literally this month, they’ve put out statistics. And so I wanted to ask you this. You’d said on Friday, and I understood that nothing is changed by the new report, by the people that studied cholera before now, saying that the UN did bring it, but given the commitment that you expressed on Friday by the Secretary-General, is the UN going to release numbers? Does it keep track of the actual progress in terms of either decreasing or in this case, it’s been increasing, cholera in the country? What does it say about these new statistics that, despite the calls for funds, etcetera, that the problem seems to be getting worse?

Deputy Spokesperson Del Buey: Well, as storms arrive, obviously, the possibility of contamination of water rises. The UN is working very hard with the resources it has to put together a plan to help combat and eventually eradicate cholera from Haiti. As I said on Friday, I think our appeal has subscribed to 23 per cent, so obviously, we depend on the generosity of Member States and the generosity of philanthropic organizations to provide the funding, so that the UN, through PAHO [Pan American Health Organization], through the World Health Organization and through other organizations, can carry out this very important work. I’ll leave it at that. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.

So each day the UN thanks Inner City Press for asking about Haiti. The questions will continue. And there are lawsuits coming. Watch this site.

   

Exclusive: France's Ambassador Araud Tells Inner City Press 391st is "Best Unit" in DR Congo Army, Being "Reassessed" After Desecration

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, July 24 -- While the Congolese Army was blasting away at Rumagabo on Wednesday, apparently killing civilians including children there, Inner City Press at the UN in New York exclusively asked French Permanent Representative Gerard Araud about the UN's stated Human Rights Due Diligence Policy, quoted below.

  Specifically, Inner City Press asked how it could be that UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to hold the post, continued UN support to the 391st Battalion of the Congolese Army after it was implicated in 135 rapes in Minova in November.

  Now, the same 391st Battalion has been implicated in the desecration of corpses. Has the Policy failed? Or has Ladsous?

  Araud responded citing higher numbers of arrests than even Ladsous has, and saying "even the Americans" are in a tough spot, since the 391st is the "best unit" of the Congolese Army, "which doesn't have many good units." (The 391st Battalion was trained by the US in 2010; Inner City Press requested, obtained a US Mission comment, here.)

  If its "best" units commits mass rape and desecrates corpses, what of the other ones, in Rumagabu for example? Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's outgoing deputy spokesperson Eduardo Del Buey told Inner City Press the UN doesn't know anything about that fighting -- hard to believe.

  Of the Human Rights Due Diligence Policy and the 391st Battalion, Araud exclusively told Inner City Press on Wednesday that "these issues have been raised in the Council, the Secretariat was following it."

  Of the mass rapes in November Araud to his credit endeavored to give a substantive answer, saying, "after Minova twelve officers were suspended, twenty nine soldiers were arrested and two or there indicted." 

  Other have said that only two of the arrests were for the rapes. Inner City Press has repeatedly asked the UN; Ladsous' four spokespeople have left questions unanswered for twenty five days (and one of them tried again to bypass Inner City Press for Ladsous' favorite Agence France Presse again on Wednesday, story here.)

While Ladsous and his spokespeople have never said it, Araud on Wednesday told Inner City Press that "they said the support to the units have been, I guess, drastically reduced... they didn't say totally cut."

  Here as promised is the UN Human Rights Due Diligence Policy as explained by Ban's outgoing chief lawyer Patricia O'Brien at a July 9, 2013 meeting on which Inner City Press exclusively reported:

"First, the UN cannot provide support to non-UN security forces where there are substantial grounds for believing there is a real risk of those forces committing grave violations of international humanitarian, human rights or refugee law. Secondly, where grave violations are committed by non-UN security forces that are receiving support from the UN, the UN must intercede with a view to bringing those violations to an end. And thirdly, if, despite such intercession, the situation persists, the UN must suspend support to the offending forces."

  The policy does not speak of calibrated "reduction" in support. Also, Ladsous clearly miscalculated on the risk, as evidence by the continued abuses committed by the 391st Battalion, up to desecration of corpses.

  Of that, Araud said, "Now after what jsut happen, they are re-assessing." You would think - but given Ladsous' refusal to answer questions, how would you know?

  Araud also tried to spread the blame away from Ladsous, up to Ban Ki-moon himself, telling Inner City Press "the decision is by the SG himself, there are several entities, OLA, DPKO, [Zainab] Bangura and Human Rights, the recommendations are to the S-G, now I guess they re-assessing." Before or after the Congolese Army kills more civilians? Watch this site.