On Somalia As US Drone Strike Said To Kill 150, Inner City Press Asks, UN Silent

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 8 -- Even where the today's UN has peacekeeping missions, it has become irrelevant. On March 8 Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here,UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: On Somalia, I'm sure you've seen the reports, the US said it conducted a major drone strike on, they said, Al Shabaab targets.  They say they killed 150 people.  It seems like the UN has a mission there. The Special Representative, does he have any comment on this?  What does he think of--

Spokesman:  I haven't seen… I don't they have confirmation of the attack, but we'll check with the Mission.

  Six hours later and counting, nothing.

When UK Foreign Secretary Phillip Hammond came to the UN to chair a meeting on Somalia, then out to the stakeout to take questions, one assumed they would include Somalia.

 But no.

 Hammond's spokesman, standing up in not wearing a poppy, picked four questions: the first from the BBC, repeating David Cameron's comments about the European Union; the next about Iraq and Syria; the third about when British "holidaymakers" may return to Egypt, and the fourth about Vienna, Syria and ISIS. 

 Before the third and fourth, Inner City Press said, "Question on Somalia?" And as Hammond walked off, Inner City Press asked more loudly, "Somaliland?" Nothing.

 That was it. This on a day when the Security Council is to belatedly meet about Burundi, on which the UK has cited threats of genocide. After Hammond's non-Somalia questions and answers, the media stakeout was nearly empty when the UK Presidency adopted a Presidential Statement on DR Congo, without even reading it out. What does this say about the place of Africa?

  Back on June 3 when the UN's (now outgoing) envoy in Somalia Nicholas Kay took questions via Twitter, Inner City Press asked him what the UN is doing to preserve the ability to send remittances to Somalia, as well as questions about Burundian "peacekeepers" and Somaliland. 

 Kay answered the remittance question: "@innercitypress Raising our voice to sound alarm on impact if  Somali remittances stop. Urging search for solutions. #UNSomTwoYears."

  Inner City Press notes the cut-offs of remittances not only by Barclays Bank in the UK and Merchants Bank of California and new First American Bank in the US, but also Westpac, which is a member of the UN Global Compact. Should it be?

 On the Somaliland question, while Kay to his credit has answered informally, the request for an #OnTheRecord statement was not responded to at this time.  (Kay will be in New York next week, including at IPI.)

 A question that he did not respond to, but others did, was this: "What's the impact of situation in Burundi on continuation of country's 'peacekeepers' in AMISOM?"

  There are photographs of Burundian "peacekeepers" returned to shoot live fire at protesters, and another being referred for a D-1 post in Herve Ladsous's mission in Mali, MINUSMA. We'll have more on this.

  Inner City Press received this communication / request, and published it here:

"I follow your investigative work and applaud the questions you pose to UN officials. I am writing to you because I would like you to follow-up with the UN, specifically UNSOM, on the press release that was issued by my family on the tragic and targeted killing of my uncle, MP Yusuf Dirir. Below you will find a copy of the same press release that was forwarded to Mr.Nicholas Kay. We have not received a response and as you can imagine, we are frustrated by UNSOM and the UN's silence on this issue."

  This didn't fit in a tweet, but it should be answered. Watch this site.

Back on May 9 when the UN's outgoing humanitarian coordinator for Somalia Philippe Lazzarini held a press conference at the UN in New York, Inner City Press asked him about the impact of money transfer and remittance being cut off, about the future of the Dadaab refugee camp in Kenya -- and about Puntland and Somaliland, where people fleeing Yemen are landing. Video here.

  Lazzarini said that remittances have been cut from the UK, US, Australia and more recently Kenya; the latter country might reinstate some of the money transfer companies, he said. Returns to Somalia from Dadaab should be voluntary.  

  In response to Inner City Press' question about the involvement of some parts of the UN, and of the International Organization for Migration in screening refugees including for “counter-terrorism,” Lazzarini said that the government of Somalia is concerned about returnees who might have joined certain groups while in Yemen. Can you say, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula? There is more transparency needed, however, particularly from IOM.

  Lazzarini has previously answered Inner City Press about Somaliland's airspace. On May 8 when Inner City Press asked about the UN's dealings with Somaliland and Puntland, he said it is a big topic, but concretely the deadly attack on UNICEF in Puntland means one can no longer say Puntland more safe than, say, Mogadishu. But what about Somaliland? We will have more on this.

  Lazzarini is headed next to Lebanon; we'll continue to cover his and the UN's work there, and wish him luck.

In Somalia, Merka Massacre Admitted by AU, Inner City Press Asked UK & UNSC About It

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 23 -- Now that the African Union has acknowledged that Ugandan troops in AMISOM executed civilians at a wedding in Merka in late July, what will the UN Security Council which authorized AMISOM, and UN Peacekeeping which supports it, do?

 On July 28 when the UN Security Council adopted a Somalia resolution days after allegations of reprisal killings by AMISOM in Marka, Inner City Press asked UK Ambassador Matthew Rycroft:

Inner City Press: On Somalia, there are a lot of Al Shabaab attacks, there have also been some recent allegations of a reprisal attack by AMISOM. And the UN said they asked the African Union. But given the increasing support in relation with the UN, what should be done to help the African Union forces don’t commit abuses while fighting Al Shabaab?

Amb Rycroft: "So the very clear message from this resolution is first of all that AMISOM does need to get stronger in its robust response to some attacks. But it does need to do so in a way that has absolute clarity about command and control. And we’re looking to see that improve through the mission statement in this resolution.

"And in terms of allegation of any inappropriate behaviour by any members of AMISOM, or the other UN peacekeeping operations, all of those allegations need to be followed up rapidly and robustly, and we are putting in place through this resolution and through the work that the African Union has done, measures that will allow the African Union to get a tighter grip on these sorts of allegations."

  But what does this "grip" mean? What implications does this have under the UN's supposed Human Rights Due Diligence Policy?

  Now  AU envoy and AMISOM head Sidokou has admitted the killings of civilians had taken place. “We have established that, on that occasion, seven civilians died following an incident involving our troops,” Sidokou said in a statement issued in Kenya.

  The UNSC resolution itself, while "welcoming the AU's investigation of allegations of sexual violence allegedly perpetrated by some AMISOM troops," expresses "its disappointment that the AU did not receive full cooperation from all AMISOM troop contributing countries in carrying out its investigation, and calling on the AU and troop contributing countries to ensure that allegations are properly investigated and appropriate follow-up action is taken."

 We'll see.

Back on May 8 when the UN's outgoing humanitarian coordinator for Somalia Philippe Lazzarini held a press conference, Inner City Press asked him about the impact of money transfer and remittance being cut off, about the future of the Dadaab refugee camp in Kenya -- and about Puntland and Somaliland, where people fleeing Yemen are landing.Video here.

  Lazzarini said that remittances have been cut from the UK, US, Australia and more recently Kenya; the latter country might reinstate some of the money transfer companies, he said. Returns to Somalia from Dadaab should be voluntary.  

  In response to Inner City Press' question about the involvement of some parts of the UN, and of the International Organization for Migration in screening refugees including for “counter-terrorism,” Lazzarini said that the government of Somalia is concerned about returnees who might have joined certain groups while in Yemen. Can you say, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula? There is more transparency needed, however, particularly from IOM.

  Lazzarini has previously answered Inner City Press about Somaliland's airspace. On May 8 when Inner City Press asked about the UN's dealings with Somaliland and Puntland, he said it is a big topic, but concretely the deadly attack on UNICEF in Puntland means one can no longer say Puntland more safe than, say, Mogadishu. But what about Somaliland? We will have more on this.

  Lazzarini is headed next to Lebanon; we'll continue to cover his and the UN's work there, and wish him luck.

   

On Somalia, ICP Asks UK Ambassador Matthew Rycroft of Abuses in Marka, He Says UN Security Council Resolution Will Help

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 28 -- When the UN Security Council adopted a Somalia resolution days after allegations of reprisal killings by AMISOM in Marka, Inner City Press on July 28 asked UK Ambassador Matthew Rycroft:

Inner City Press: On Somalia, there are a lot of Al Shabaab attacks, there have also been some recent allegations of a reprisal attack by AMISOM. And the UN said they asked the African Union. But given the increasing support in relation with the UN, what should be done to help the African Union forces don’t commit abuses while fighting Al Shabaab?

Amb Rycroft: "So the very clear message from this resolution is first of all that AMISOM does need to get stronger in its robust response to some attacks. But it does need to do so in a way that has absolute clarity about command and control. And we’re looking to see that improve through the mission statement in this resolution.

"And in terms of allegation of any inappropriate behaviour by any members of AMISOM, or the other UN peacekeeping operations, all of those allegations need to be followed up rapidly and robustly, and we are putting in place through this resolution and through the work that the African Union has done, measures that will allow the African Union to get a tighter grip on these sorts of allegations."

  The resolution itself, while "welcoming the AU's investigation of allegations of sexual violence allegedly perpetrated by some AMISOM troops," expresses "its disappointment that the AU did not receive full cooperation from all AMISOM troop contributing countries in carrying out its investigation, and calling on the AU and troop contributing countries to ensure that allegations are properly investigated and appropriate follow-up action is taken."

 We'll see.

Back on May 8 when the UN's outgoing humanitarian coordinator for Somalia Philippe Lazzarini held a press conference, Inner City Press asked him about the impact of money transfer and remittance being cut off, about the future of the Dadaab refugee camp in Kenya -- and about Puntland and Somaliland, where people fleeing Yemen are landing.Video here.

  Lazzarini said that remittances have been cut from the UK, US, Australia and more recently Kenya; the latter country might reinstate some of the money transfer companies, he said. Returns to Somalia from Dadaab should be voluntary.  

  In response to Inner City Press' question about the involvement of some parts of the UN, and of the International Organization for Migration in screening refugees including for “counter-terrorism,” Lazzarini said that the government of Somalia is concerned about returnees who might have joined certain groups while in Yemen. Can you say, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula? There is more transparency needed, however, particularly from IOM.

  Lazzarini has previously answered Inner City Press about Somaliland's airspace. On May 8 when Inner City Press asked about the UN's dealings with Somaliland and Puntland, he said it is a big topic, but concretely the deadly attack on UNICEF in Puntland means one can no longer say Puntland more safe than, say, Mogadishu. But what about Somaliland? We will have more on this.

  Lazzarini is headed next to Lebanon; we'll continue to cover his and the UN's work there, and wish him luck.

   

Kenya's Security Law Threatens Free Press, US Says, Here's Experience of Free UN Coalition for Access

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 19, more here -- On Kenya's new counter-terrorism law, the US State Department's Spokesperson on December 19 said:

"The U.S. Government is firmly committed to supporting Kenya's efforts to defeat al-Shabaab and to ensure security of all of its citizens.  We are disappointed, however, by the very limited time allowed for debate and consultation on the 2014 Security Laws (Amendment) Bill prior to its passage and enactment into law.  We are also concerned about several provisions in the legislation, including those that appear to limit freedom of assembly and media, and access to asylum for refugees.  As a key partner in the global effort to counter terrorism, we expect the Kenyan Government to ensure that its counter-terrorism efforts live up to Kenya’s international commitments and its own constitution.  Protecting Kenya’s constitution and upholding human rights, democracy, and international obligations are among the most effective ways to bolster security.

"The U.S. Government is also seeking further information about the December 16 announcement by the Kenyan NGO Board to deregister hundreds of NGOs for failing to file their audited reports and another 15 for suspected links to terrorism.  The 15 NGOs have not been identified.  A strong civil society is vital to democracy, security, and prosperity.  We urge the Government of Kenya to ensure the regulation of NGOs is transparent, fair, and grounded in clear criteria that do not limit free expression, association, or assembly."

  Back on December 9, with the International Criminal Court's Assembly of State Parties meeting in the UN, four non-governmental organizations held a press conference and took questions. 

   Inner City Press asked then about one of the Court's biggest failures: the continued mass rape and impunity in Sudan long after President Omar al Bashir was indicted for genocide by the ICC.

  Since UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous met with ICC indictee Bashir without ever explaining why, and has since played a role in the covering up of attacks in Darfur including some 200 rapes in Tabit, Inner City Press asked the four NGOs what they thought about this, and the rapes.

  But it was only the rapes which drew an answer any of the panelists, and then only from one panelist, who said WIGJ her NGO is conducting its own inquiry into the rapes in Tabit (Inner City Press asked to be kept informed.)

  Amnesty and FIDH did not answer the Darfur or Ladsous questions. In fairness perhaps this is because these questions where lumped in with three other medias' questions -- because the NGOs, or the moderator from the Coalition for the ICC, set aside the first question for the old UN Correspondents Association, whose outgoing head proceeded to ask four questions, taking up half the question time (it is unclear if any story would come from those four questions). 

This is today's UNCA: the UN's Censorship Alliance.

 And this is the UN: as of 10 pm, the 1:30 pm press conference video was not on the UN's website.

  On Sudan: ten days after after the UN issued a statement on its internal investigation into charges it covered-up attacks in Darfur, its UNAMID mission there under Herve Ladsous on November 9 issued a statement that "village community leaders reiterated to UNAMID that they coexist peacefully with local military authorities in the area" and that no evidence of rape was found.

 On December 4, Inner City Press asked Ladsous, Why did UNAMID not say on November 9 that it was surrounded by soldiers? Video here,and embedded below.

  As is his habit, Ladsous did not answer on December 4, even with his UN Peacekeeping under fire for cover ups. It is a pattern with Ladsous. He refused Press questions for months about rapes in Eastern Congo in Minova by DRC Army units his UN Peacekeeping supports: video compilation here; Vine here.

  On the morning of December 4 Ladsous claimed to the Security Council that UNAMID's findings were "inconclusive" due to army presence. But his UNAMID's press release whitewashed the situation in Tabit and did not mention the army presence. The covering-up continues, with no credibility, as Ladsous did on the Minova raped by DR Congo Army units his UN Peacekeeping supports.

 On November 25, a wide range of groups in Darfur petitioned the UN Security Council about UNAMID's malfeasance. Inner City Press that morning obtained the letter (h/t) and put it online in full here, and below.

 While UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric, when Inner City Press asked at noon, said he had not seen the letter, by 6 pm when Inner City Press asked November's Security Council president about the letter, he confirmed receipt.

  Quinlan said he had circulated the letter to the other 14 Council members -- as of 3 pm, one of them had not yet received it -- and that he expects the issues to be considered when the Security Council takes up UNAMID "next week, under Chad's presidency." 

 (On November 26, the UK Mission to the UN"s Arran Skinner told Inner City Press, "I can confirm that we received the letter indirectly. In terms of contents, on alleged rape cases, the Security Council issued a press statement calling for a full investigation. The UK initiated the call for a press statement and so agree that this issue needs to be looked at." Another Security Council mission has yet to confirm receipt or comment, but it's expected.)

  On Ban Ki-moon's report into UNAMID under-reporting attacks on civilians and even peacekeepers, Inner City Press asked and Quinlan repeated it should be taken up soon, the question is finding the right, credible (or disinterested) briefer. Watch this site for that. Here is the letter:

11/25/2014

Dear Gary Quinlan, Australia's Permanent Representative to the United Nations,President of the United Nations Security Council, November 2014

United Nations

New York, NY

c. Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General
Valerie Amos, Under-Secretary-General for the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
Hervé Ladsous, Under-Secretary-General of the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations United Nations

Dear Ambassador Quinlan,

As Darfuris in the diaspora, we have watched with great sorrow and growing anger the plight of our people in this ravaged region of Sudan. Darfur at one time commanded considerable attention in the United Nations, but no longer. 

The international community in general has drifted into an acceptance that somehow the UN/African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) is an adequate means of protecting millions of vulnerable civilians. It is clearly not, and the recent mass sexual assault on women and girls in Tabit, North Darfur, makes this all too clear.

But the disgraceful "investigation" by UNAMID of events in Tabit should be the occasion for our remembering that this is, in fact, a UN-authorized mission; it has UN Chapter 7 authority; it is deployed with a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) negotiated by the UN and African Union (February 2008), even as the agreement is now simply a travesty, violated at will by the Khartoum regime. It is not, however, simply the failing of UNAMID and the African Union that must be reckoned with. It is the Security Council, the Secretariat, and UN Department of Peacekeeping Affairs (UN DPKO) that must accept responsibility for a failing mission; and it is UN DPKO that must do most to explain what it will do in light of this failure.

It is in this context that we demand that the following questions be addressed forthrightly and expeditiously:

[1] UNAMID, even if augmented and re-directed along the lines recently suggested by Secretary Ban Ki-moon, cannot provide adequate security for the people of Darfur. We demand that plans be made immediately for an UN force that can adequately take on the "responsibility to protect" civilians at risk, per the September 2005 UN World Summit Outcome Document (§38, §39).

[2] We demand that the Security Council and UN DPKO confront the Khartoum regime over its countless flagrant violations of the SOFA.

[3] We demand that UN DPKO undertake a full review of UNAMID's performance to date. The context here should be the fact that more than 2 million Darfuris have been newly displaced since UNAMID took up its mandate in January 2008; we would remind you of how closely violence and displacement have correlated over the past decade of conflict. Moreover, insecurity has increased steadily for more than two years—this on top of the insecurity that prevailed so widely in earlie years.

[4] We demand that UN DPKO, in consultation with the Security Council and the Secretariat, formulate plans to provide adequate protection to the civilian population of Darfur. This must include contingency plans for a very rapid acceleration of what is already unacceptable insecurity for civilians and humanitarians.

[5] We demand in particular that UN DPKO ensure that UNAMID is prepared to provide adequate protection to the people of Tabit, especially girls and women, from retaliation by Khartoum for having had the misfortune of making clear to the world just how brutal this regime is.

[6] We further demand that UN DPKO instruct UNAMID to provide all necessary protection to humanitarian efforts to reach Tabit. Many residents have been badly traumatized and injured.

[7] We also demand accountability from those who are responsible for the failures that led to the brutal crimes at Tabit, and so many others over so many years. Accountability must extend to the leadership of UNAMID and the African Union Peace and Security Council, as well as to the UN DPKO. As part of this assigning of responsibility, there must be a full and competent investigation, authorized by the Security Council of how this atrocity crime was essentially white-washed by all parties, most notably UNAMID. But we must emphasize as well that we are deeply troubled by the silence of UN DPKO.

[8] We demand that UNAMID be guided by the "rules of engagement" for UNAMID in Darfur that have been previously negotiated. UN DPKO must ensure that these "rules of engagement" are widely understood and dictate the actions taken by UNAMID personnel.

[9] We demand that UN DPKO assess the possibility that insecurity is now so great that there will be an exodus of international NGOs providing critical relief aid to Darfuris. Many INGOs have expressed their deep concern for the safety of their workers in Darfur, more than 95 percent of whom are Sudanese nationals. The safety of these workers must not be discounted because they are African and Khartoum permits no news coverage of Darfur and no human rights reporting presence.

Would relief workers similarly threatened in other parts of the world be regarded in the same light as Sudanese relief workers?

[10] We demand that UN DPKO communicate with the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in order to ascertain when a continued humanitarian presence by the UN might become impossible for security reasons.

[11] We demand that UN DPKO assess the implications for future UN peacekeeping missions if

UNAMID is allowed to continue to fail so conspicuously. The events at Tabit and the performance of UNAMID investigators bring this question into high relief.

[12] Most generally, we demand that UN DPKO speak forthrightly about its understanding of the limitations and weaknesses of present peacekeeping in Darfur and the provision of civilian security.

We remain troubled by the comments of the Under-Secretary General for DPKO when in spring 2012 he declared that security "conditions on the ground" had improved sufficiently that UNAMID could begin to draw down its forces (a figure of 4,000 personnel was promulgated at the time). This ghastly error in judgment was never acknowledged, even as by July of 2012 we saw a tremendous upsurge in violence, especially in North Darfur. How can we trust statements from UN DPKO when egregious errors are not acknowledged?

[13] We demand that the United Nations collectively develop an effective response to the gross deficiencies of UNAMID in protecting civilians and humanitarians. UN DPKO in particular must develop benchmarks for assessing UNAMID's performance and formulate emergency contingency plans in the event of a massive and precipitous withdrawal of humanitarian personnel.

These are matters of the deepest concern to us; to date, there are far too few answers from UN about why the Darfur genocide continues more than a decade after it began. We demand clear evidence that the people of Darfur will not be further abandoned.

Sincerely,

Darfur People's Association of New York

Darfur People's Association of Maryland

Fur Cultural Revival

Darfur People's Association of Houston

Darfur People's Association of Dallas

Darfur People's Association of Illinois

Darfur Human Rights - USA

Massalit Sons' Association - USA

Darfur Rehabilitation Project

Sudanese Revolutionary Front

Sudanese Opposition Forces- USA

Broad National Front

Justice & Equality Movement - Sudan

Sudan Liberation Movement - MM

Sudan Liberation Movement - Wahid

SPLM-N

Umma Party

Girifna

Sudanese Marginalized Forum - USA

Sudanese National Democratic Forum - California

National Sudanese Alliance - Philadelphia

Peace & Democracy Center - New Jersey

Democratic Alliance, USA

Federal Democratic Alliance

Sudanese Front for Change

Kush Liberation Movement

Democratic Unionist Party

Activists without Borders

Sudanese Congress Party

Darfur People's Association of Boston

Darfur People's Association of Indiana

Darfur People's Association of Utah

Darfur People's Association of Nebraska

Darfur People's Association of Seattle

Darfur Son's Union of Greater Washington DC

Darfur People's Association of Iowa

Darfur People's Association of Arizona

Darfur Women Action Group

Darfur Association of the United States

Darfur Self-reliance Organization - San Francisco, California

 Inner City Press on November 21 asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric to explain UNAMID's November 9 press release in the context of the internal memorandum, put online here, that UNAMID knew Sudanese security was filming the interviews, had even put together a "committee" of Thabit residents to speak to UNAMID. Video here.

  Dujarric said he wouldn't start now to comment on leaks. There are other leaks implicating UN Peacekeeping's Herve Ladsous. Is not commenting, like Ladsous has refused to answer Press questions, the right approach for the UN?

 Inner City Press on November 19 asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric what the UN would do in the wake of its (cover up) November 9 press release, and about bombing in North Darfur three days earlier.

 On November 20, UN Associate Spokesperson Vannina Maestracci was in charge of the UN noon briefing, and read out a statement that UNAMID is trying to verify the reports of bombing on November 16.  One has to wonder, are they mishandling this like the rape reports in Thabit?

  So Inner City Press asked, what is actually being done to get into Thabit, after the cover-up press release? Inner City Press asked about UNAMID's acting head Abiodun Bashua's reference to "rumors" of rape in Thabit - is that the UN's position? And why hasn't UNAMID accessed the site(s) of the November 16 bombings, four full days later?

 On November 21, Dujarric returned with an answer, that UNAMID had in this case done out and had found "craters." But apparently UNAMID drew no conclusions from that.

  Inner City Press at the November 17 UN noon briefing asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq about Sudanese forces having filmed UNAMID's interviews and to confirm the new blockage.

 Haq did not comment on UNAMID letting its interviews about rape be filmed by Sudanese authorities; he confirmed the blockage and said to expect a comment from Ban.

  And two hours later it came:

"The Secretary-General is deeply troubled about persistent allegations of mass rape in Thabit, North Darfur. The African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) visited Thabit on 9 November. However, the heavy presence of military and police in Thabit made a conclusive investigation difficult.  UNAMID has since then attempted to gain further access to shed light on what happened.

"The Secretary-General is concerned that after intense consultations with the Government in Khartoum and with local authorities in Darfur, UNAMID was yesterday denied access to Thabit. Only a full investigation by UNAMID will help shed light over these serious allegations. The Secretary-General therefore urges the Government of Sudan to grant UNAMID unfettered access, without further delay, to Thabit and its population so that these reports can be verified."

   Ban does not mention that his and Herve Ladsous' mission had this to say, on November 9: "Village community leaders reiterated to UNAMID that they coexist peacefully with local military authorities in the area. None of those interviewed confirmed that any incident of rape took place in Thabit on the day of that media report. The team neither found any evidence nor received any information regarding the media allegations during the period in question.”

  Who is going to take action, on whom, about that? Inner City Press and the new Free UN Coalition for Access are asking.

  On November 13, Inner City Press again asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq what had been done in the last 48 hours.Video here. 

 Haq was unable to describe any investigation done without Sudanese military presence; instead, he said that the Force Commander of UNAMID, already charged with cover-ups, spoke with Herve Ladsous, who refused to answer Press questions about 130 rapes by the DR Army in Minova. Video here.

  How to have confidence in this investigation?

 On November 11, Inner City Press again asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about it:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask again about the allegations of rape in North Darfur.  Radio Dabanga there has not only questioned, you know, the UNAMID [African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur] press statement but has interviewed both victims and has quoted a local community leader in Tabit, basically threatening people that if they spoke on the rapes to UNAMID, they would face the consequences.  So I wanted to know, now at this remove… yesterday the President of the Council spoke about it, at this remove, what is UNAMID going to do to get to the bottom of it?  And also, the reporting to Ms. Aicha Elbasry’s allegations, who would brief the Security Council on that?  He said yesterday, the President of the Council, that they are looking to take it up and are looking for the right briefers.  Does the Secretariat have in mind either the author of the report or who would be the appropriate briefer?  Thanks.

Deputy Spokesman:  As the Council President informed you, they'll be looking at briefers, so we'll work that out with them.  Regarding your initial question, yes, we've been in touch with the UN-African Union Mission, UNAMID, who have informed us that security personnel were in fact present during UNAMID's mission to Tabit.  The African Union-UN Mission in Darfur will continue to look into the rape allegations in the area of Tabit, North Darfur.  As reported to the Security Council yesterday, the findings of the UNAMID team, which was granted access to Tabit on 9 November, are inconclusive and need further investigation.  UNAMID remains committed to this and it will revert with any additional findings that might shed light on these allegations.

Inner City Press:  [Inaudible] I just wanted to ask you again if there's been any reflection again on that line where it says residents… and I'm going to paraphrase it, residents said that they get along fine with the military.  Just seemed the line was such a clunker, basically, it was totally inconsistent with other reports…

Deputy Spokesman:  I'm not going to second-guess how my colleagues write press releases.  Different press releases are written by different people at different times.

Inner City Press:  Who wrote this one?

Deputy Spokesman:  Someone from the Mission.  The point is: you're writing, trying to get all the information out as best you can in the circumstances you have.  What I have been able to say right now is that we are aware that security personnel was present during UNAMID's mission there. 

  We'll have more on this. Later on November 11 Inner City Press asked International Criminal Court prosecutor Fatou Bensouda if she had seen the whole UN report on allegations of cover-ups by UNAMID, or only a summary. She said only the summary, and only the day before. We'll have more on this too.

  On November 10,  Inner City Press asked UN Security Council president for November Gary Quinlan of Australia about the UNAMID press release, and if and when the Security Council will act on the "cover-up" report, including requesting the full report from the Secretariat, which to date has provided only a summary. Video here. From the Australian transcript:

Inner City Press: Sure, thanks a lot. I wanted to ask on Darfur. Thanks for what you said about what Ms Bangura said. There’s a press release put out by UNAMID that has this line in it: “Village community leaders reiterated to UNAMID that they co-exist peacefully with local military authorities in the area.” The press release doesn’t mention at all the military presence. So I wanted to ask you, one, if you could comment, what do you make of this press release by UNAMID? And two, does the report by the Secretary-General on allegations of covers up by UNAMID of attacks on civilians and on peacekeepers, where does it stand? He said that the, the Spokesperson said that an executive summary of the report went to the Council. Is the Council going to have a meeting on it? Are you going to have a full report?  And are you satisfied with UNAMID’s press release on these allegations of rape?

AMBASSADOR QUINLAN: Matthew, on the second part of the question. Members of the Council are very concerned on this whole question of UNAMID and UNAMID reporting, but also what UNAMID is doing. And one of the big issues there is the denial of access and restrictions that are imposed largely by the Government of Sudan, with whom UNAMID has a formal arrangement on access. But also, of course, by armed opposition groups and that is inherently more difficult sometimes to get the access that’s needed.

That report has not yet been discussed by the Council. I expect that it will be over the next couple of weeks. A number of members of the Council are extremely interested in it. We want to be sure that we’ve lined up the briefers from the Secretariat to have a proper discussion of that report.

Secondly, in relation to the UNAMID press release, I think the key is that they’ve indicated that they had access but it was the first time since November 4, when they’d been seeking access. And they had proactively been seeking access to be able to undertake investigations. That’s a long period to have access denied, by the way, in a circumstance like rape. You really do need, as Ms Bangura reminded us, to have access straight away, for obvious reasons. So that’s one point I’d make. The second point is UNAMID has made it extremely clear in its press release that it will conduct further follow-up actions, including possible further investigations and patrols and that they will do that in cooperation with the Government of Sudan and other parties. We have confidence that that will happen. SRSG Bangura is making this a top priority for her and so is the Secretariat itself and we were reassured about that this morning by ASG Mulet. So I think that’s basically it. 

  We'll continue to follow this -- but how can a peacekeeping mission already accused of covering up for the Sudanese government say, today, that "village community leaders reiterated to UNAMID that they coexist peacefully with local military authorities in the area"? To some, this is shocking - and indicative of problems in today's UN Peacekeeping.

Inner City Press on November 7 asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the challenges to the UN's statement it couldn't and didn't access the site of mass rapes in Tabit in Darfur. Video here; transcript:

Inner City Press: there are witnesses in Darfur who actually say that the UNAMID investigators, rather than being stopped outside Tabit went inside and interviewed four people and after that they were spoken to by Sudanese military intelligence.  And so these are credible people that have been reporting on Darfur for some time and see the reports being issued by UNAMID although as a reaction to the quote “cover up report” as not being accurate.  And I wanted to know, can you check with them to be sure that the UNAMID investigators didn't in fact enter Tabit Tuesday at 5 am and whether they were spoken to by Sudanese intelligence and decided to say that they hadn't been able to enter the town?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I'm not going to judge the credibility or lack of credibility of people who have been reporting on Darfur.  I mean, they report.  What I can tell you is the Mission clearly stands by its reporting.  They've sent us a bit more detail, said the verification patrol comprising of military police and civilian personnel on Tuesday, 4 November, that it was sent on Tuesday, 4 November, from Shangil Tobaya to Tabit to 14:50 hours,  I assume local time.  The patrol was denied access at the outskirts of the town at a Sudanese military checkpoint.  Attempts to negotiate access to Tabit were unfruitful and the team returned to the base in Shangil Tobaya.  We've repeated… the Mission's leadership has repeated its call to the Government to grant the UN, to grant UNAMID unfettered access to the whole of Darfur and obviously especially in areas where we're trying to investigate horrendous reports of mass rape.  So that's a longer, a long way of saying that the Mission stands by its reporting. 

   But if UNAMID and UN Peacekeeping was just outed for under-reporting attacks, how it is now automatically credible? On November 6, Inner City Press asked Dujarric about similar cover-ups in Central African Republic, exposed by an Amnesty International report about that country. 

From the UN's transcript:

Inner City Press: I'm sure the Secretary-General has seen the Amnesty International's report today about the peacekeeping mission in Central African Republic.  They basically, I mean, they say a number of things.  Maybe you have some kind of response to it.  But, I wanted to especially ask you about the reporting aspect of it they describe a number of killings and attacks that have taken place in Dekoa, Bambari and elsewhere in [the Central African Republic] about, which, at least being here every day, I've heard nothing from this podium.  So, I wanted to know both substantively what's the response of UN peacekeeping to not protecting civilians and in terms of communications and transparency the response to what appears to be an underreporting similar to that analogous to that in Darfur?

Spokesman Dujarric:  Sure.  Obviously, a big part of the Missions' mandate is the protection of civilians.  The Mission, its peacekeeping forces, its formed police units, are doing that to the best of their ability.  Obviously, it's a very challenging situation.  It's a challenging terrain in which they work.  And there is, obviously… one could always use more troops and more police.  I'm not sure they're up to their mandated force as of yet.  As far as reporting goes, you know we report from here whatever we receive from the Mission.

Inner City Press: Because of the Darfur thing, I wanted to ask:  Their report is very detailed.  The report, it says names of places, number of people killed.  Maybe, first of all, does the Mission send it to [the Department of Peacekeeping Operations] in New York and they're supposed to give it to your office?  At what point has this information in the Amnesty report, has it reached New York before or is it a surprise to UN?

Spokesman:  I can only speak to what I receive from the Mission

Back on October 29, Inner City Press asked if the full Darfur report will be released, at least to the Security Council, and about under-reporting of attacks in the Central African Republic. Video here.

  Dujarric said that even before the summary was given to the Security Council members -- so that is apparently all that has been given to them -- UN missions were told to be sure to report attacks. He said he reads out what the missions sent him.

  So has the UN mission in CAR, MINUSCA, simply not send in reports about killings in Bambari and elsewhere? We'll see.

Despite a request from Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access the UN will not release the report. Back on October 29, Inner City Press asked, given that even the sanitized statement says information on attacks was withheld from the media and UN Headquarters - at its request? - who is responsible? Video here.

On Somalia, After Another Al Shabaab Attack, UN Security Council Hears From Nick Kay Then Asks For Funds for Army

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 11 -- After another Al Shabaab attack in Mogadishu, the UN Security Council got a briefing on July 11 from its envoy Nicholas Kay, then issued the following statement:

Press Statement on Somalia

On 11 July the Security Council received a briefing from the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr Nicholas Kay, on the security situation in Mogadishu.

The members of the Security Council condemned in the strongest terms the recent Al Shabaab attacks in Mogadishu against Villa Somalia, Parliament and members of Parliament in the last week. The members of the Security Council expressed their condolences to the families of the victims and wished a speedy recovery to those injured.

The members of the Security Council paid tribute to both AMISOM and the Somali National Security Forces for their effective response to the attack against Villa Somalia. The members of the Security Council underlined the urgent need to support the Somali National Security Forces, in order for it to be able to assume full responsibility for security in Mogadishu and beyond.  In that context members of the Security Council encouraged Member States to make uncaveated contributions to the United Nations Trust Fund to provide support to the Somali National Army, as authorized in resolution 2124.

The members of the Security Council reaffirmed that terrorism in all its forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security, and that any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable regardless of their motivation, wherever and whenever and by whomsoever committed.

The members of the Security Council reiterated their determination to combat all forms of terrorism, in accordance with their responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations.

The members of the Security Council underlined the need to bring perpetrators, organizers, financiers and sponsors of these reprehensible acts of terrorism to justice and urged all States, in accordance with their obligations under international law and relevant Security Council resolutions, to cooperate actively with the Somali authorities in this regard.

The members of the Security Council reminded States that they must ensure that measures taken to combat terrorism comply with all their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law.

The members of the Security Council reiterated their resolve to continue to stand by the people and Government of Somalia, in the face of deplorable terrorist attacks, as they seek to establish peace and prosperity across their country.

   Back on May 12 in an advance copy of the UN's report on Somalia, to be issued as S/2014/330, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon says he is "concerned about the potential for confrontation between Puntland and 'Somaliland.' I call on both sides to avoid escalating tensions."

   Many note that Somaliland, without the quotation marks Ban puts around it, has been more peaceful than Mogadishu for some time - and that the UN system raised tensions by, for example, handing Somaliland's airspace to Mogadishu. 

  Ban's report also says he remains "concerned about the continued export of Somali charcoal" and encourages "the Security Council Committee on Somalia and Eritrea to list the responsible individuals and entities."

  These advance copies have been known to be changed before "final" release, in a process for which a description, and then proposals for reform, were provided here and thenhere.

 In this advance copy, Ban "strongly recommend[s] to the Council an extension of the mandate of UNSOM for one year to 3 June 2015."

When on April 23 UNSOM envoy Nicholas Kay along with AMISOM head Mahamat Saleh Annadif took questions at the UN, Inner City Press asked them about the new Ugandan guard unit, about the Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group and about Somaliland including its disputed airspace. Video here from Minute 14:23.

  Kay said, "at the moment we're absolutely clear obviously on the international legal position vis-a-vis Somaliland, it's not a recognized state by anyone. But they have a very strong sense of their own statehood and aspirations to independence."

  Kay referred to the Turkey-facilitated talks between Somaliland and the Somali government in Mogadishi, including about airspace. He said that UN funds and programs operate in Somaliland. But UNSOM does not: Somaliland points to the mandate it was given by the Security Council.

  On the Ugandan guard unit, Kay said they will protect the UN but work with AMISOM. But in March, AMISOM spokesperson Ali Aden Houmed was quoted by Voice of America that "we do not have the fact of what these forces are and they are not part of us... UN and Uganda had been conducting 'a secret negotiation.'" Neither Kay nor Mahamat Saleh Annadif addressed this.

  On sanctions, after Kay recounted improvements in reporting and "information" that are underway, Inner City Press asked if the Somali letter requesting the ouster of SEMG coordinator Chopra has been withdrawn. Kay said he has not seen the letter. Well here it is: Inner City Pressexclusively obtained, reported and published it. Has it been withdrawn?

Footnotes: Particularly in light of media freedom issues in Somalia -- and in Somaliland, on which the Free UN Coalition for Access has worked -- we note that the UN on April 23 automatically gave the first question to the UN Correspondents Association, a group which has tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN.

  But the question by UNCA's president included how many Burundi troops are there -- no mention of the UN's own warning about the distribution of weapons by Burundi's government to its youth wing -- and in mistaking the US Institute of Peace, where Kay spoke this week, with the International Peace Institute, most recently reviewed here and here. 

 In April UNCA or the UN's Censorship Alliance has tried toprivatize access to the incoming South Korean presidency of the Security Council in May, positioning itself as middle-man even after FUNCA's inquiry and RSVP find that the statement an event is for UNCA members only, or now only through UNCA, is false. Preaching press freedom from this UN is difficult. Watch this site.

   

Somaliland Redux, of Airspace and Atrocities, As On Somalia Remittances, Will UN Press Barclays?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 18 -- Returning from three days in Somalia, UN humanitarian operations chief John Ging took correspondents' questions on February 18, nearly all of them about Al Shabaab. He replied that the UN must help Somalis to help themselves.

Inner City Press asked Ging about just that: what is the UN going to ensure that remittances from the Somali diaspora are not cut off, as Barclays tried to do last year until stopped by a court case?

Ging replied, "on remittances we are encouraging that all facilities needed" continue, "we don't have the authority or the capacity to decide on these issues [but] we are, on behalf of the Somali people, advocating and seeking to use our influence."

Here's an idea: Barclays has at least in the past trumpeted its respect for human rights with the UN, click here for one example. Is the UN using its (blue washing) influence there? This question goes beyond Ging's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. But coordinating would take it in.

Inner City Press also asked about the on-again, off-again dispute about the air space over Somaliland, in part triggered by the UN system awarding the air space to Mogadishu, which led to suspension of the UN Humanitarian Air Service flights.

Ging replied that on his "last trip there was an agreement brokered in Turkey that found a solution to allow a functioning of the airspace throughout Somalia... the coordinator himself took an UNHAS flight to Hargeisa."

After Ging's briefing had ended, Somaliland-based Free UN Coalition for Access member Mohamoud Ali Walaaleye, who has protested the arrest of journalists there, forwarded these questions:

What is UN's positions regarding the genocide that happened to Somaliland population during Siad Barre's regime, and as Somalia government acknowledged, does UN also do?

Would UN support initiative relative of Somaliland victims slaughtered Jezira beach at Moqadisho intended to uncover their remaining for resting their soil in Somaliland?

We'll have more on this.

Footnote: The first question to Ging was given to the United Nations Correspondents Association, the transcript of whose Q&A session with Ban Ki-moon last week has still not been released. UNCA's president used this perch to ask about a sanctions report not yet public, disputed by the government, on which we will have more. Reuters which bragged about that leaked report has used a bogus Digital Millennium Copyright Act complaint to get a leak of its own anti Press complaint to the UN banned from Google's search. That's why it's the UN Censorship Alliance, and why FUNCA pushes forward.