After #UNSC Meets on Mali and Burkina Faso, Spain's Roman Oyarzun Marchesi Provides Summary, Two Inner City Press Questions

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 5 -- Spain holds the Presidency of the UN Security Council for October; Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access asked its Permanent Representative Roman Oyarzun Marchesi to when possible provide summaries of closed door consultations and take questions.  On October 6, two summaries were provided and Inner City Press asked two questions. Here is the fast transcription of InnerCityPro.com:

Spain's PR: Today we had consultations on Mali and Burkina Faso. SRSG Hamdi has briefed the Council on the situation in Mali. He has emphasized that, despite some positive developments, the situation is still fragile and the international community has to monitor the situation very closely. SRSG Hamdi reiterated that MINUSMA will continue to support the parties in the implementation of their agreement, and in this regard, the Security Council discussed the priorities of MINUSMA in the next three months.

First, guarantee security. Second, support the implementation of the peace agreement so we’ll enable MINUSMA to act as secretariat of the commite de survie, and thirdly, show the peace dividends through quick impact projects. The members of the Security Council reiterated their support to SRSG Hamdi and to MINUSMA and stressed the urgent need to start implementing the peace and reconciliation agreement, and that the ceasefire must be fully respected.

On Burkina Faso, Mr. Chambas has briefed the Council this morning through digital conference from the camp, on his last visit to BF from the 15th, the day the crisis started, all the way to 26th of September. The SC has been following very closely the crisis in Burkina Faso. Indeed, the Secretary General for political affairs, Mr. Feltman, briefed the Council on the coup and the factors that triggered it, under Any Other Business on September 17. The SC has issued 3 press statements since the beginning of the crisis, two condemning the unconstitutional and forceful seizure of power, and one welcoming the reinstatement of President Kafando and the peaceful resolution of the conflict.

In today’s briefing to the Council, Mr. Chambas stressed the importance of holding elections as soon as possible and the need for the international community to support and to keep the pressure until they are held.

Members of the SC welcomed the peaceful resolution of the conflict and commended the restraint of the army and the people of Burkina Faso. The members of the Security Council reiterated their support for the efforts of Mr. Chambas, as well as those of ECOWAS.

Inner City Press: Mr. Hamdi said something about deploying drones.

A: It wasn’t discussed.

Inner City Press: On Burkina Faso, there’s a question of whether supporters of the president should take part, is Mr. Chambas involved in those discussions?

A: What was clear is elections should take place, the sooner the better. We have a transition in front of us, and that should take place.

 On October 5 about the pending Libya resolution, the still non-existent UN envoy to Burundi and why there's no Western Sahara briefing on the Program of Work, as there has been in previous Octobers.

  Roman Oyarzun Marchesi acknowledged there have been “some difficulties” on the part of some members. We are trying to retune, the EU pushing forward, given authorization under Chapter 7 but only on the high seas. We hope it can be adopted soon. On Burundi, his Political Coordinator noted that it is up to the Secretary General. And on Western Sahara, Roman Oyarzun Marchesi noted that such consultations should involve envoy Christopher Ross but he is going to the region, the timing is up to him.

  Inner City Press on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, and in Spanish, asked  Roman Oyarzun Marchesi to hold as many Q&A stakeouts as he can, after Council consultations. (He said as Council president one must speak more cautiously than when in national capacity.) The old UNCA, by contrast, asked only in English; its sidekick used the question it seemed to get meetings on Yemen and Somalia canceled in favor of a fundraising luncheon.

    On the airstrikes on the MSF hospital in Kunduz in Afghanistan, Roman Oyarzun Marchesi said that US President Barack Obama has called for an investigation into the facts. (MSF has said that is not enough). On the new draft resolution on Syria, Roman Oyarzun Marchesi said it “ will have the normal process of consultations with members in the Security Council.” We'll be following all this: watch this site.
   

On Burkina Faso, UN's Chambas Met Diendere, Sall on the Way

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 17 -- As political leaders in Burkina Faso were put under military detention on September 16, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon held a carefully controlled press conference, his first one at the UN in 2015, and did not take a single question about Africa, much less Burkina Faso.

  On September 17, after a closed door meeting of the UN Security Council about the coup in Burkina Faso, UN Under Secretary General for Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman rushed out, stopping to speak to the press on the steps.

 Feltman said that UN envoy Chambas met earlier with General Diendéré, and that Senegal's Macky Sall would be there on September 18. Inner City Press recorded and uploaded this on-the-fly audio, here.

  US Ambassador Susan Rice issued a statement that concluded, "The United States will continue to work with our partners, including the Economic Community of West African States, the African Union, and the United Nations, to bring about a peaceful resolution. We will review our foreign assistance to Burkina Faso in light of evolving events."

  Earlier on September 17, the Inter-Parliamentary Unionput this out:

"The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) has condemned the overthrow of the transitional government in Burkina Faso and the derailing of the transition to democratic rule. The Organization is urging a rapid and peaceful resumption of the democratic process that should conclude with free and fair presidential and legislative elections next month.

“The military should not meddle in the political process. It should instead ensure the interim government and parliament are safeguarded and elections go ahead as planned in October,” says IPU Secretary General Martin Chungong. “The Burkinabé people rightfully demand democratic rule and it is their will that should be respected above all.”

"The Organization is also calling for the immediate release of acting President Michel Kafando, Prime Minister Isaac Zida and two cabinet ministers and for all parties to refrain from violence.

"The West African country has been in a period of transition since a popular uprising against constitutional changes led to the dissolution of parliament and the demise of then President Blaise Compaoré."

  Demise?

  The UN Security Council, after consulting, issued a unanimous 15-member Press Statement, here:

"The members of the Security Council condemned in the strongest terms today’s forceful detention of the President Michel Kafando and Prime Minister Isaac Zida of Burkina Faso, as well as a number of Ministers, and demanded that they be released safely and immediately. The members of the Security Council stressed that their detention by elements of the Régiment de sécurité présidentielle is a flagrant violation of the Constitution and the Transitional Charter of Burkina Faso. The members of the Security Council urged all actors in Burkina Faso to refrain from any violence.

"The members of the Security Council expressed their strong support to the transitional authorities of Burkina Faso and urged all actors to comply with the transitional calendar, notably the holding of free, fair and credible elections, scheduled for 11 October 2015. They urged all actors to respect the legitimate aspiration of the people of Burkina Faso for a peaceful transition.

"The members of the Security Council expressed their strong support for the efforts of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for West Africa, Mohamed Ibn Chambas, as well those of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the African Union and other international partners to support the transition in Burkina Faso."

  The US released this statement:

"The United States is deeply concerned about the unfolding events in Burkina Faso.  We call for the immediate release of President Kafando, Prime Minister Zida, and all other officials being held.

"The United States strongly condemns any attempt to seize power through extra-constitutional means or resolve internal political disagreements using force.

"We call for an immediate end to violence, urge the military personnel involved to return to their primary mission, and reaffirm our steadfast support for the civilian transitional government to continue its work of preparing for free, fair, and credible elections on October 11."

  After 5 pm, Ban's office sent this out - "outraged" --

"The Secretary-General is outraged by reports of the detention of President Michel Kafando and Prime Minister Yacouba Isaac Zida of Burkina Faso, as well as a number of Ministers of State, by the Régiment de Sécurité Présidentielle today in Ouagadougou. The Secretary-General calls for their immediate release. This incident is a flagrant violation of Burkina Faso's Constitution and Transitional Charter.

"The United Nations stands firmly behind the transitional authorities and President Kafando. The Secretary-General notes the strong support of the people of Burkina Faso for a peaceful transition and urges compliance with the transitional calendar, including the upcoming elections.

"His Special Representative for West Africa, Mohamed Ibn Chambas, is presently in Ouagadougou and working closely with the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the African Union and other international partners to support and safeguard the transition in Burkina Faso."

 We'll see. 

Back on July 7 when the head of the UN Office for West Africa (UNOWA) Mohammed Ibn Chambas briefed the UN Security Council on he noted that in Burkina Faso "our concerns increased following [the] recent incident on 29 June when elements of the Presidential Security Regiment (RSP) reportedly attempted to arrest Prime Minister Zida upon his return from a foreign trip. Several gun shots were heard in the Regiment's camp that evening."

  In the past, Chambas has come to the Security Council stakeout to take questions after briefing the Council. Not this time. When the President of the Council for July Gerard van Bohemen of New Zealand emerged and said the Council urged Chambas to continue his work including in Burkina Faso, Inner City Press asked what Chambas' plan is in light of the attempt to arrest the Prime Minister.

  In response, van Bohemen said he couldn't speak to Chambas' plans - fair enough - and also said that on last week's draft Burundi press statement, it was decided that the previous week's Presidential Statement -- before the June 29 elections -- was strong enough. Periscope video here, at least for 24 hours.

Burundi is on the Security Council's agenda for July 9, so we'll have more on that. But perhaps not on the UN in Burkina Faso. Chambas never returned to take questions, of which there are many.

  On the Srebrenica draft resolution, twice postponed on July 7, van Bohemen confirm that it now set for 10 am on July 8. We'll be there.

Back on November 17, 2014, the Security Council in a French-drafted Press Statement "welcomed the appointment of Mr. Michel Kafando as the civilian President of the Transition."

 That's the same Michel Kafando who was the Blaise Compare's Ambassador to the UN during the country's last turn on the Security Council. Inner City Press has asked Kafando questions, UN now-archived video here.  Some ask, Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

 On November 13 when the International Monetary Fund held its biweekly embargoed media briefing on November 13, Inner City Press asked about Burkina Faso: "does the IMF have any comment or response to the change of government, any impacts on IMF programs or forecasts for the country or its neighbors?"

  IMF deputy spokesperson William Murray replied that "in terms of Burkina Faso there were some issues with a mission recently but now the situation is evolving. As soon as an internationally recognized transitional government is in place, we look forward to resuming discussions with the authorities."

Citing "signals for donor engagement," Murray said the IMF "anticipates the transitional government  is likely to want to continue a program engagement of some sort. Depending on the authorities' wishes and the commitments they are willing to undertake, options might be a one year program under the Rapid Credit Facility or continuation of the current ECF supported program."

  And there you have it.

From the IMF's subsequently released transcript:

IMF's William Murray: I have a question, again from Matthew Lee, on Burkina Faso. On Burkina Faso, does the IMF have any comment or response to the change of government and any impacts on IMF programs or forecasts for the country or its neighbors. Let me -- I'm going to have to dive into my brief here, Matthew. In terms of Burkina Faso, you know there are some issues there with the mission recently, but now the situation is evolving and we are following developments in Burkina Faso closely. As soon as internationally recognized transitional government is in place, we look forward to resuming our discussions with the authorities. Burkina Faso has a long track record of strong performance with programs supported by the IMF. Since the current program provides a signal for broader donor engagement, we anticipate that the transition government is likely to want to continue a program engagement of some sort. Depending upon the authorities' wishes, and the commitments that they are willing to undertake, options might be a one year program supported by the rapid credit facility or possibly continuation of the current ECF supported program. Program implementation capacity will also be an important consideration. That's our latest update on Burkina.

All right, I think we can wrap this up. Is there any other questions we can? Okay, great

 At the UN on November 4, with the military claiming control of Burkina Faso, after days of silence from the UN Security Council, the Security Council got a briefing on the topic from UN Political Affairs chief Jeff Feltman.

  Afterward Inner City Press asked Quinlan if there had been any discussion of the spread of what some call the African Spring, noting for example that a statute of Joseph Kabila was toppled in Beni in Eastern Congo, even as Kabila asks UN Peacekeeping for military support.

  Quinlan said there has been some discussion of the regional aspect, but not in detail. Inner City Press asked if France had acknowledged in the Council's consultations having helped Burkina Faso's 27 year ruler -- who came to power on the back, so to speak, of Thomas Sankara -- escape the country.

  Quinlan said he hadn't heard of the allegation that France help Compaore get away. Well, here it is: president Francois Hollande told reporters in Quebec City that "we did it... to avoid drama and other convulsions."

   The UN never criticized Blaise Compaore's 27 year rule or his bid to extend it; in the DR Congo, UN Peacekeeping unself-consciously offers military support to Joseph Kabila.  But how will the UN Security Council react, if at all, to military rule in Burkina Faso?

* * *

   For days the UN's Secretary General Ban Ki-moon had been vaguely calling for calm. On October 31 at noon Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric:

Inner City Press: the UN seems to in peace processes work pretty closely with Burkina Faso.  So I wonder when, if you can maybe say, when the President began to talk about changing term limits and going beyond his current 27 years of rule, did anyone in the UN system say, maybe it's a bad idea, maybe it's time… maybe your Government is too strong, maybe it's time for somebody else?  Or was it hands off?  What was the view of that?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I think it's… first of all, I doubt that there were any consultations by the President and the UN on what his decisions were, what the parliament's decision was going to be, you know, so I think we're trying to imagine conversations that were not had.

Inner City Press: What I'm saying is, the UN has actively asked the Burkina authorities to play a role in a variety of regional conflicts; it seems like there are kind of discussions, and also by making that request, they're saying that this 27-year person is a…

Spokesman:  I think, you know, Burkina Faso has a role to play in the regional… in keeping regional peace.  I think every country in any region has that role to play.

Inner City Press:  What's Mr. Chambas doing there?

Spokesman:  He was sent by the Secretary-General.  He'll be meeting with key stakeholders.  He arrived this morning.  Obviously, the situation is changing at a very rapid clip, and he will be talking with key stakeholders.  

   Ah, the UN.

  Why did the US - and the UN Secretariat -- support his 27 year rule, while criticizing others?

 Twenty seven years ago, Thomas Sankara was overthrown and killed in a coup led by Blaise Compaore.

  It was under Sankara that the country's name change from "Upper Volta" to Burkina Faso, land of the upright. History records two meetings of Sankara and France's Francois Mitterand. At the Vittel conference, Mitterand stared stony-faced ahead as Sankara spoke of seeking foreign relations with countries beyond France.

  And later, after South African apartheid leader Pieter Botha had visited France, Sankara criticized Mitterand to his face in Ouagadougou, after Mitterand drove through the streets waving at the crowd. Soon the Compaore coup would kill Sankara, and France and Boigny would congratulate Compaore. The rest is history.

  What would Thomas Sankara say? On this day, and going forward, we must ask. Watch this site.

   

On Burkina Faso, US Concerned by Exclusion of Blaise Compaore Supporters, UN Silent

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 14 -- There was a time when on Burkina Faso UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the UN Security Council were churning out statements, congratulating Michel Kafando for becoming interim leader after Blaise Compaore left.

  Now that the electoral code has been changed to ban Compaore supporters, or those who supported lifting term limits so he could run, the UN has yet to speak. Instead, on April 14 it was the US State Department:

"The United States is concerned by the National Transitional Council’s April 7 passage of certain changes to Burkina Faso’s electoral code that exclude candidates in the upcoming elections who had voiced support for a constitutional revision to amend presidential term limits in late 2014.  The changes to the code would seem to be inconsistent with the democratic principles of freedom of expression, freedom of association, and free, fair, and peaceful elections.  We urge the transitional government, civil society, and other actors who were instrumental in defending these democratic principles to use a coordinated, consensual, and inclusive approach in conducting the elections."

  So now will the UN Secretariat / Department of Political Affairs belatedly comment on the Burkina Faso electoral code changes, now that the US has?

Back on November 4, 2014, with the military claiming control of Burkina Faso, after days of silence from the UN Security Council, on November 4 the Security Council will get a briefing on the topic from UN envoy to West Africa Mohammed ibn Chambas, Inner City Press has learned.

Update of 5:55 pm - in front of the UN Security Council just before 6 pm, Inner City Press was told that the connection with Chambas was just too bad, and that Under Secretary General Jeff Feltman will do the Burkina Faso briefing.

Update of 7:05 pm - while Australia's Gary Quinlan said at his 12:30 pm briefing that the Burkina Faso briefing is "at my request," it was a member of the French delegation which shepherded the Department of Political Affairs into the Council, which some at the stakeout noted. 

   The UN never criticized Blaise Compaore's 27 year rule or his bid to extend it; in the DR Congo, UN Peacekeeping unself-consciously offers military support to Joseph Kabila.  But how will the UN Security Council react, if at all, to military rule in Burkina Faso?

   The US State Department Spokesperson on the evening of October 31, Halloween, said:

"The United States is concerned about the unfolding events in Burkina Faso.  We regret the violence and the loss of life in Burkina Faso and call on all parties to avoid further violence.  We reiterate our call for all parties to follow the constitutionally mandated process for the transfer of power and holding of democratic elections following the resignation of former President Blaise Compaore.  We condemn any attempts by the military or other parties to take advantage of the situation for unconstitutional gain and call on all parties to respect the people’s support for the democratic process."

 Minutes later the US State Department issued a travel alert on "the risks of travel to or residing in Burkina Faso and recommends U.S. citizens defer all non-essential travel.  This Travel Alert will expire on January 29, 2015. On October 31, Burkina Faso’s President Compaore resigned.  The status of a transitional government remains unclear.  There are incidents of looting throughout the capital city of Ouagadougou, Bobo-Dioulasso, and other parts of the country."

   For days the UN's Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has been vaguely calling for calm. On October 31 at noon Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric:

Inner City Press: the UN seems to in peace processes work pretty closely with Burkina Faso.  So I wonder when, if you can maybe say, when the President began to talk about changing term limits and going beyond his current 27 years of rule, did anyone in the UN system say, maybe it's a bad idea, maybe it's time… maybe your Government is too strong, maybe it's time for somebody else?  Or was it hands off?  What was the view of that?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I think it's… first of all, I doubt that there were any consultations by the President and the UN on what his decisions were, what the parliament's decision was going to be, you know, so I think we're trying to imagine conversations that were not had.

Inner City Press: What I'm saying is, the UN has actively asked the Burkina authorities to play a role in a variety of regional conflicts; it seems like there are kind of discussions, and also by making that request, they're saying that this 27-year person is a…

Spokesman:  I think, you know, Burkina Faso has a role to play in the regional… in keeping regional peace.  I think every country in any region has that role to play.

Inner City Press:  What's Mr. Chambas doing there?

Spokesman:  He was sent by the Secretary-General.  He'll be meeting with key stakeholders.  He arrived this morning.  Obviously, the situation is changing at a very rapid clip, and he will be talking with key stakeholders.  

   Ah, the UN.

  Why did the US - and the UN Secretariat -- support his 27 year rule, while criticizing others?

 Twenty seven years ago, Thomas Sankara was overthrown and killed in a coup led by Blaise Compaore.

  It was under Sankara that the country's name change from "Upper Volta" to Burkina Faso, land of the upright. History records two meetings of Sankara and France's Francois Mitterand. At the Vittel conference, Mitterand stared stony-faced ahead as Sankara spoke of seeking foreign relations with countries beyond France.

  And later, after South African apartheid leader Pieter Botha had visited France, Sankara criticized Mitterand to his face in Ouagadougou, after Mitterand drove through the streets waving at the crowd. Soon the Compaore coup would kill Sankara, and France and Boigny would congratulate Compaore. The rest is history.

 And new colonies, too: France has laid claim to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, controlling the Security Council's pen and most recent trip there, down to which media could go on the "UN" plane.

  France for over sixteen years has controlled UN Peacekeeping, now through Herve Ladsous, twice spurned, who refuses to answer or even take Press questions.

  What would Thomas Sankara say? On this day, and going forward, we must ask. Watch this site.

   

After Gambia Coup Bid, UN Jeff Feltman's Quiet Trip, UNdisclosed, FUNCA Asks Why

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 4 – Going back to late December, the UN has said the coup attempt in Gambia was important to it, even as it was mis-reported. Now it seems the UN does not want to be reported at all.

  On February 4, having seen mention in the African press, Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujaric:

Inner City Press: Can you confirm that Mr. [Jeffrey] Feltman is going to Gambia on a follow-up to Mr. [Mohammed ibn] Chambas' visit?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I do believe he is in Gambia, and we will get more details.

Inner City Press:  And is there some reason that his schedule is not public? I mean, this was reported in the press there.  It seems when he goes places, he's representing the Secretary-General.

Spokesman:  I think we try to share his schedules.  Sometimes things fall through the cracks.  But, we try to be as open and transparent as we can

Inner City Press / FUNCA: Can you ask [the Department of Political Affairs] to put it online?

Spokesman:  Thousands of [Department of Political Affairs] staffers are probably watching this briefing.

Inner City Press:  I’m sure.

  Not only are Feltman's schedules not made public, as now formally requested by the Free UN Coalition for Access - just after this exchange, Ban Ki-moon held a lunch with scribes the Q&A of which has not been released. Click here for that.

The Gambia coup attempt was discussed for a second time in the UN Security Council on January 8, but discrepancies emerged.

On December 31, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said that he “encourages the establishment of a transparent investigation into the events of 30 December, in compliance with due process and respect for the rule of law.”

  The call for a transparent investigation was missing from the January 8 briefing by UN official Chambas, who told the Security Council  “I am planning to visit Banjul on 14-15 January and meet with President Jammeh. I will reiterate our firm condemnation of any attempt to seize power by unconstitutional means, and encourage the Gambian authorities to work with the support of international partners, to ensure the credibility of judicial procedures and the respect of human rights.”

  Afterward Inner City Press asked Chambas about the different, and on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access about radio station Taranga FM, shut down during the coup bid and now told to play only music.

   Chambas told Inner City Press he had not heard of the station -- Inner City Press in the hallway urged him to tune it in while he is in Bangui, to see if it is only music -- and spoke of trying to liberalize West Africa. We'll see.

  Before 10 am on December 31, Ban Ki-moon issued a 123 word statement calling for restraint and an investigation of the attempt in the The Gambia, albeit not mentioning the name of the target of the coup, Yahya Jammeh.

  After the Security Council's 45-minute meeting, Inner City Press asked the Council's president who is supposed to do the investigation Ban had called for before the meeting. He responded that UN official Chambas will go to Banjul; Inner City Press later learned and published that this will take place on January 2.

  Reuters however reported that "Following brief talks at the U.N. Security Council, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called for a transparent investigation into the events and also urged restraint."

 This is false. 

   Ban's statement was at 9:37 am; the Security Council meeting didn't start until 10 am, and didn't end until 10:45 am. (At that time, Inner City Press asked Ban's Under Secretary General for Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman for more detail; he replied that since Ban had issued a statement, he had nothing to add -- all too common at the UN, as pointed out and opposed by the Free UN Coalition for Access.)

  Reuters was not present at the UN Security Council stakeout before, during or after the meeting on Gambia (Tweeted photo here), and apparently not in the UN building either. The crediting on the above quoted story is"Reporting by David Lewis and Diadie Ba in Dakar, Lesley Wroughton in Washington, Louis Charbonneau in New York; Writing by David Lewis and Matthew Mpoke Bigg; Editing by Giles Elgood."

  Six journalists listed; one outright falsehood. What does Reuters do in these cases? We've asked management including Stephen J. Adler before, amid censorship, withno real answer. #ReutersFail.

  Since then, African Union commission chief Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma has expressed "preoccupation" and rurged deepening "democracy and the respect for human rights."

  By the time of Ban's 9:37 am December 31 statement, later misrepresented by Reuters, the US had already issueda statement: “The United States is aware of reports of a coup attempt on December 30 in The Gambia. We strongly condemn any attempt to seize power through extra-constitutional means. We regret the loss of life and call on all parties to refrain from further violence.”

    Thirteen hours later when Ban Ki-moon issued his statement, he went a bit further and cited calm and called for an investigation, apparently by Jammeh's government itself:

“The Secretary-General is following closely developments in The Gambia. He reiterates the United Nations principled condemnation of all attempts to seize power through unconstitutional means. Referring to reports that indicate that the situation in Banjul is calm, he calls for all parties to exercise restraint and to refrain from further violence. 

“Noting the seriousness of any attempt to overthrow governments by force, the Secretary-General encourages the establishment of a transparent investigation into the events of 30 December, in compliance with due process and respect for the rule of law. In that regard, he urges the Government of The Gambia, and its security and defense forces to act in full respect for human rights. The United Nations will continue to closely monitor the situation.”

  When the UN Security Council meeting on the topic began at 10:10 am on December 31, there were tumbleweeds at the stakeout in front. Some may denounce The Gambia, but at the UN or at least in its press corp, there is not apparently much interest.

  When the meeting ended, in less than 45 minutes, Inner City Press asked Feltman about it. He said since the SG had issued a statement, he had nothing to add. In 2015, theFree UN Coalition for Access will be pressing for all UN Under Secretaries General to answer questions. 

  Finally, the Security Council's president for December, from Chad, came and summarized the meeting, saying that UN official Chambas, previously the head of UNAMID in Darfur, will file a report. There have been problems with UNAMID's reporting. 

 (Again in terms of micro-news, Inner City Press is exclusively told by sources that Chambas will go to Gambia on Friday, January 2. Since the UNSC President was asked on camera when Chambas would go and only said "soon," call it a coup scooplet.)

  Inner City Press asked the outgoing Security Council president about the December 30 closed door meeting about Sudan throwing out two UN officials, Yvonne Helle and Ali Al-Za'tari. He said he couldn't speak, nothing had been agreed to. Which is why the UN Secretariat should have spoken and taken questions, as FUNCA requestedand will continue to request in 2015. Watch this site.

    

As DRC Targets Panzi Hospital, Silence From UN Like Ladsous Covered Up Minova Rapes

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 1, more here -- In the Democratic Republic of Congo, where the Army committed mass rape in Minova and UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous helped cover it up, now a celebrated rape treatment center is being targeted by the Joseph Kabila government.

  And days into the attack, the UN which runs the large MONUSCO mission under Ladsous is quiet.

  According to the Panzi Foundation, "On December 30, 2014, the Panzi Hospital staff in DRC received word from the Congolese government, through the Directorate General of Taxes, that the Hospital allegedly owed upwards of €500,000 in penalties. Authorities seized €38,000... To address this crisis, the Panzi Foundation USA is raising funds and facilitating direct transfers to fund emergency operations at Panzi Hospital.  A major social media campaign grew from a protest in Bukavu at the offices of the DGI. Supporters are encouraged to take a photo of themselves with the hashtag #IStandWithPanzi or #StandWithPanzi, and post it on social media."

  So where is the UN? From cover ups of the rapes in Minova, Ladsous has continued on to do the same in Sudan. In Darfur, now the gambit it to try to blame this on an underling, to try to save Ladsous.

  But even beyond the December 12 shooting at unarmed demonstrators by Ladsous' "peacekeepers" in Haiti, on which he spoke in the past for the ouster of Aristide, there are cover ups in the DRC Congo on his watch, and by him.

  On the mass rapes in Minova, Ladsous refused for months to answer Press questions, video here.

  Now a report by none other than Human Rights Watch, loath to criticize Ladsous, says in connection with attacks in Beni in the DRC, "UN officials said that the army has resisted its attempts at coordination to protect civilians and has blocked UN troops from carrying out patrols in certain areas."

 Inner City Press on December 16 asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric who these "UN officials" are - and why Ladsous, as he stands accused in Darfur, did not go public with the blockages in real time.

  Dujarric said, among other things, that the Sudan and DRC cases are quite different. Perhaps. But the common denominator is Ladsous. Continuing under-performance in DRC cannot be blamed, as is tried in Darfur, on a lower level staff.

  In Darfur, ten days after after the UN issued a statement on its internal investigation into charges it covered-up attacks, 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.

  While that UNAMID statement remains online and of record, UN Peacekeeping sent Meg Cary to Darfur. On December 9, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric why:

Inner City Press: there is a new AU [African Union]-UN Mission on the ground led by Margaret Carey of DPKO [Department of Peacekeeping Operations] — that it is in Nyala.  And they described its mission as looking into alleged covering up of reports of crimes against civilians in Darfur.  I thought that report had already been done and partially released to the Security Council.  What is the mandate of this Mission?

Spokesman Dujarric:  My understanding is that this is part of the strategic review that will be delivered to the Security Council.

Inner City Press:  Will she be going to Thabit?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I do not know.  But obviously, we have not received any clearance to go to Thabit, as far as I'm aware, as of this morning

  Multiple sources told Inner City Press that the goal was to blame, for the problems in UNAMID, staffer Karen Tchalian, not even the head of UNAMID, much less of UN Peacekeeping.

 Whatever the sins of Tchalian, the problems of UN Peacekeeping are more extensive and are ultimately the fault of its chief, Herve Ladous: the failure to protect civilians in the DR Congo, the outright shooting at demonstrators on December 12 in Haiti. What are those who spun / used their pass-through wire going to do about Ladsous' peacekeepers shooting protesters for democracy in Haiti? 

 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.

  Back on September 12, eight days after Inner City Press exclusively reported that the head of the Darfur peacekeeping mission Mohamed ibn Chambas was being given the UN Office in West Africa post in Dakar, and asked about it, the UN confirmed the move.

  Inner City Press has asked on September 5, and did again on September 12, if this move didn't undercut or pre-judge the UN's investigation into charges that the Darfur mission under Chambas under-reported attacks on civilians. 

And now in January 2015 Chambas heads to Gambia for the UN...