UN Gets Paid for Vaccinating, But Doesn't Pay Victims in Haiti of Cholera

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 7 -- After bringing cholera to Haiti, the UN has refused to help the families of those killed by the cholera. Now the UN belatedly has a rule to get reimbursed by Troop Contributing Countries if it vaccinates their soldiers (here at Para 61) - but still no compensation for the victims. Inner City Press on July 7 asked UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric:

Inner City Press: Two very quick questions.  One has to do with contingent on equipment and this new guidance that's put out by the Secretariat about vaccinations noted by PassBlue.  They've noted that, and I'm looking at it now, that the UN now tells countries to vaccinate their peacekeepers if they come from a high-risk area, and if they don't vaccinate, the UN will do it and charge them.  Can you say, this seems to be a response to what occurred in Haiti?  And what would you say to those who say, if you're going to get into the UN receiving compensation for vaccinating peacekeepers, what about compensation for people that were made sick by the previous failure to have this policy?

Spokesman Dujarric:  Well, I don't think we're getting compensation for vaccinating peacekeepers.  I think what's important is that we keep improving our policies to keep people safe.

Inner City Press:  Right, but the sentence says, "The UN will deduct any expenses for vaccinations"…

Spokesman Dujarric:  That's not compensation.  That's just covering of costs.

Inner City Press:  Right.  It seems like a small amount of money, so…

Spokesman Dujarric:  Right, but… I… I… we agree to disagree.

  Meanwhile outgoing UN envoy on cholera Medrano did an "interview" with the UN's own UN News Centrewithout mentioning that the UN brought the disease to Haiti; the UN on July 6 "reported" about cholera without mentioning Haiti, here.

When UN Peacekeepers are determined, by the UN itself, to have killed three civilians in Mali by using excessive force, what accountability is there?  None - and UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous on April 2 refused to answer questions about his own responsibility. Video here.Vine here.  

 On June 23, Inner City Press asked Mali's foreign minister to confirm that the UN is going to pay compensation to the families of those its peacekeepers killed in Gao. He told Inner City Press to "ask the UN."

  And so Inner City Press did ask, at the June 23 noon briefing:

Inner City Press: This is something that the Malian Foreign Minister said to ask you.  So, I want to say that in advance before asking you.  And it has to do with whether… I asked him whether the UN is in fact going to pay monetary compensation to civilians that were killed by peacekeepers in Gao in that report that was issued some time ago.  And he said:  You should ask the UN.  So, I'm asking you.  Is the…

Spokesman:  Okay.  I will… let me check on what we'd announced at the time, and I'll get back to you.  [He later added that a compensation fund had been set up by the Department of Field Support.]

 The bracketed material, Dujarric's Office added to the transcript, after emailing Inner City Press this:

"Regarding your question on compensation for casualties in Gao, Mali, we would like to recall that a compensation fund has been set up by the Department of Field Support."

  Inner City Press has been told - NOT by the Spokesperson's Office -- that the UN is calculating how much to pay each family in Mali. But why has the UN paid NOTHING to the families of those killed by the cholera the UN brought to Haiti? Inner City Press asked the UN's Mali envoy Mongi Hamdi, who gamely tried to distinguish the two cases, focusing on the UN exonerating itself in Haiti. We'll have more on this.

  On June 11, the day after an attack against Malian military posts in the south of the country that killed one soldier and injured two, MINUSMA issued a statement which the Free UN Coalition for Access translates here:

  “MINUSMA firmly condemns the cowardly terrorist attack  against posts of the Malian military and security forces in Misseni / Kadiolo, in the south of Mali. The attack early on the morning of June 10 killed one soldier and injured two, as well as causing physical damage. MINUSMA offers its condolence to the Government and Armed Forces of Mali as well as to the soldier's family. The Mission wishes a fast recovery for the two wounded soldiers. MINUSMA again underlines the urgency of advancing the peace process to ensure that the Government and the stakeholders can combine their efforts and act in unity to put an end to the terrorism which threatens Mali and its people.”

  That the attack happened in southern and not northern Mali may be a bad omen.

After his May 16 press conference in Bamako, Ladsoussaid the UN's report about its killings in Gao will never be released; follow up question here. During the press conference, tellingly, Ladsous berated Malians for not sufficiently thanking... France and its Force Serval. Audio here, Minute 27:52.  

  Ladsous said, referring to criticism of him and his mission by Mali's president and others at the signing ceremony the day before, "Did I hear a single word of thanks for France and its Operation Serval? No." (Translation by Free UN Coalition for Access.)

   In this use of his UN post to serve France, for which he was a (most undiplomatic) diplomat for decades, this is similar to Ladsous' much worse intervention into the process of the UN Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights in trying to get fired OHCHR whistleblower Anders Kompass, who exposed reports of French Sangaris Force soldiers raping children.

  This appears in the UN Dispute Tribunal rulingreinstating Kompass, at Paragraph 9. It was not contested by OHCHR.  Ladsous, breaking with his striking refusal to answer Press questions, told Inner City Press, "I deny that." Video here.

 But Ladsous has not explained or answered what he is denying: getting involved in l'affaire Kompass at all, or just the wording? Ladsous was not asked this question in Bamako. 

 On May 18, Inner City Press asked the UN's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq who Ladsous was speaking for:

Inner City Press: Mr. [Hervé] Ladsous of DPKO held a press conference in Bamako over the weekend.  There was some criticism, by actually the President of Mali, of the mission.  But, I wanted to ask specifically, in his press conference, he said that he sort of chided, he said:  Was there even a word of thanks for its operation in Sangaris?  No.  Isn't that curious?  And I wanted to know, in what capacity was he saying that?  Is the UN?  Does the UN have a position on Malians not being sufficiently grateful to France or was he speaking in some other capacity?

Deputy Spokesman:  I don't have any real comment.  I would just refer you to the text of his statements.  And if you have anything further, you can ask our colleagues in peacekeeping.

  Later on May 18, a well placed African Permanent Representative said "Ladsous should resign."

 On May 10, two UN Peacekeepers were wounded in Mopti in Mali, see below.

 Now Ladsous is under fire for appearing in a UN Dispute Tribunal ruling as urging the firing of the whistleblower who exposed rapes by French soldiers in the Central African Republic. Ladsous denied it - to Inner City Press - but the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights did not dispute it. Accountability?

 On May 10 "around 1 pm, the forces of MINUSMA on patrols hit a mine or an improvised explosive device 25 kilometers from Tenenkou, in the region of Mopti,” MISUMSA said in a statement.

  “Two blue helmets were seriously injured by the explosion and their evacuation to the MINUSMA hospital in Timbuktu was underway, MINUSMA said.

   “The head of MINUSMA Mongi Hamdi strongly the attack against the peacekeepers and emphasized that MINUSMA remains more determined than ever to implement its mandate in support of Mali and its people.”

 On May 8, the UN announced what the Press already knew, that Mbaranga Gasarabwe, a Rwandan national, is moving from the Department of Safety and Security in New York to become Hamdi's deputy in Mali. We wish her well.

Tellingly, Ladsous refused an invitation to attend a "protection of civilians" high level event in Rwanda in May, click here for that scoop.

 Back on April 27 the MINUSMA mission issued a statement that the Platforme group attacked the town of Manaka, loosely translated by Inner City Press below. But how does UN Peacekeeping killing civilians, then its boss refusing to answer or even take questions about it, impact the UN's credibility?

 Here is our loose translation of the MINUSMA press release of April 27:

SRSG Mongi Hamdi called for the armed groups to immediately cease hostilities and return to their positions. “This resurgence of tension puts in jeopardy all efforts to restore durable peace in Mali,” Hamdi said. MINUSMA said that on Monday near noon the mission learned of an attack launched by the MAA-Platform and GATIA groups on the town of Menaka, held by elements of the Coordination of Movement of Azawad (CMA). MINUSMA said it deployed helicopters to evaluate the situation.

Hamdi went to Nouakchott on April 26 to meet the representatives of the CMA, who reaffirmed their adherence to the peace process under way, and confirmed their intention to initial the agreement.

“Two months of intense negotiations involving all of the parties with a view to put an end to the Malian crisis could be threatened. These actions are a grave violation of the ceasefire accords reiterated in the declaration of February 19, 2105,” Hamdi said in his statement.

Hamdi also cited the UN Security Council's statement of February 6 which threatened the imposition of targeted sanctions on anyone who returned to hostilities and violated the ceasefire.

“I therefore appeal for calm and reason for the benefit of all Malians. The only solution to this crisis is through the route of dialogue. I remain convinced that all the parties will show wisdom and reason and sign this historic peace agreement,” Hamdi said.

  Here's what Inner City Press asked the UN about Darfur on April 27:

Inner City Press: on Darfur, I saw the clarification put out by UNAMID [African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur], but the Government of Sudan is saying that the UNAMID peacekeepers killed seven civilians, and I wonder, what… beyond just UNAMID putting out a press release, some of which in the past have been press releases that the UN has ultimately walked away from, is there an intention to do the type of report that was done in Mali when people were killed or in Haiti when people… when people were shot at?

Deputy Spokesman Frahan haq:  On that, I actually expect that we will have a statement from the Spokesman for the Secretary-General responding to the latest events in Darfur.  So, I'll wait until… until we get that.

Inner City Press:  But, is the protocol if a Member State alleges that UN peacekeepers have killed civilians to do such a report, or is there no such protocol?

Deputy Spokesman:  Like I said… first of all, I… as you know, you're aware of the press release from UNAMID, which is their clarification of the situation, and then beyond that, we do expect to have a statement attributable to the Spokesperson.

  But when the statement came it did not even mention the government's allegations. Khartoum's credibility may be low - but what about Ladsous'? We'll have more on this.

   

On Haiti Cholera, UN Won't Confirm to Inner City Press that US Attended Court Hearing For It, Pressing Impunity

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 23, with a song -- On the UN having brought cholera to Haiti, the UN Secretariat of Ban Ki-moon would not even "appear" at the court hearing, nor confirm that it or even the United States government on its behalf would attend. Video here.

   Even as U.S. Attorney Ellen Blain argued to U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken that the UN "is absolutely immune absent an express waiver,” UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq told Inner City Press he wasn't sure the US would attend. Video here. One awaited more from state media Voice of America.

 Agence France Presse reported that "If Oetken allows the UN to be sued in New York, it could open the flood gates to a slew of other private parties suing the UN all over the world," presumably attributable to Blain.

  Bloomberg News reported that "a group of Haitians and Haitian-Americans earlier this month sued the UN and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon for negligence" - but the cases were filed long before this month, and UN Peacekeeping's Edmond Mulet was also personally named.

  Reuters reported that "attempts to serve the United Nations with the lawsuit have been rebuffed" -- but in the second case filed in Brooklyn the lawyers for the plaintiffs, of which there are one thousand more this month, say they served legal papers on Secretary General Ban Ki-moon as he entered the Asia Society.

 Inner City Press on October 22 asked Ban's Deputy Spokesperson Haq  if Ban received the papers, and if the UN would be appearing in court. Haq said "I don't feel a need to get into that," video here. When Pressed, he said the UN will not be appearing in court, apparently in either case. 

 Earlier in the October 22 UN noon briefing, a question about UN fundraising for Haiti gave Haq the opportunity to say how much from his perspective is being done, with the World Bank's Kim Yong Kim and Pedro Medrano. But what about accountability?

  On October 24, a telling charade of how the UN works, or doesn't, is now set to take place inside the UN. UNCA, the UN's Censorship Alliance, will faux host those suing Ban Ki-moon, after themselves promoting, protecting and having provided photo ops to Ban Ki-moon, and seeking to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN.

  One continues to wonders why those involved in this event and broadcasters' film didn't go to the UN's Press Briefing Room, sponsored by a member state like St. Vincents which spoke on the issue, as covered here by Inner City Press. The St. Vincent's speaker is reachable online here. That way it would include all journalists at the UN, not just that subset which pays money to UNCA. Also, that way it would be in UNTV webcast, viewable around the world including in Haiti. Instead, this way it is privatized to censors. We'll have more on this.

  At the time UNCA announced this event, only to those who pay it money, there will also be a Security Council meeting about Ukraine, including cluster bomb used by the government. We'll have more on this, too.

  As Inner City Press was the first to ask about at the UN and report on, US Federal Judge J. Paul Oetken has scheduled oral arguments for October 23 in Federal Court in Manhattan on the first case against the UN, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and UN Peacekeeping's Edmond Mulet, whose recently on the record claims about cholera the UN has since asked not be aired, see below.

  In the second case against Ban Ki-moon and the UN, filed in Federal Court in Brooklyn, more than 1,100 more plaintiffs have just been added, bringing the total in that case to 2,600. The lawyers in the second case affirm that Ban Ki-moon was served the court papers as he entered the Asia Society on Park Avenue in Manhattan -- the UN, which long evaded service by the lawyers in the first case, denies service in the second -- and now the UN has taken to publicly contradicting itself, then trying to censor.

 After Edmond Mulet was quoted -- told France 24 in an on-the-record interview -- that the Nepali peacekeepers were screened for cholera before the UN sent them to Haiti, Inner City Press on October 10 first asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq, who had previously made this claim, if it is in fact true. October 10 video here.

  Haq on October 10 didn't directly deny it - but MINUSTAH spokesman Vincenzo Pugliese when asked about it by Jonathan Katzdirectly denied Mulet's claim of screening. 

  Then on October 13 Inner City Press asked Haq about this direct divergence in UN statements, between Mulet and MINUSTAH's Pugliese. To this, Haq said that given pending litigation he did not want to "prejudice" the case by saying anything. Video here and embedded below. 

  The France 24 report noted that "shortly after the interview, Mulet’s press officer asked FRANCE 24 not to air the recording." On October 14 France 24's Jessica Le Masurier read out the specifics of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations' spokesman's email asking France 24 to confirm that the Haiti portion of the interview would not be aired. Video here and embedded below.

  Inner City Press asked Haq if this attempt at censorship is appropriate, if it is now UN practice. Haq said that his Peacekeeping colleagues thought Mulet about "be more secure" if he re-did the interview at some later date after being prepared. Haq encouraged France 24 to give Mulet this do-over.

  On behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access which has opposed this type of selective or privatized UN communication, particularly by UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, Inner City Press asked that Mulet now do a real press conference for all correspondents, to answer questions.

  Haq laughed and said all France 24 was asking for was an interview. But that's not the only request.

  In fact, it was the big-wigs of the UN's Censorship Alliance who sought to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, initially at the behalf of UN Peacekeeping's Ladsous and the Sri Lankan government, and have not reformed since. Here is current UNCA president's on the record "presentation" to Inner City Press and FUNCA, audio here, andhere, and here. They market themselves as a cheap way to get into the UN -- as they marketed or sold themselves to the Sri Lankan government. Why aren't those trying to achieve change at the UN more circumspect? Apparently the UN causes this (bad) reaction.

  The Free UN Coalition for Access has identified and is opposing a range of censorship at and by the UN. Sample Vine here.

  Haq on October 13 insisted this was not censorship, only that UN Peacekeeping (who's communications chief under Herve Ladsous is Nick Birnback) has understood the interview with Mulet to be about Mali and the Central African Republic and then offered Mulet on Haiti after he had been "prepared."

  But, Inner City Press pointed out, Mulet was the head of MINUSTAH when cholera entered Haiti - isn't that preparation enough?

  Haq said Inner City Press since it has been in journalist should understand what being prepared for an interview is. Video here.

  Frankly, it sounds perilously close to being coached. 

  Haq went on to claim that the France 24 reporter afterward indicated awareness or even agreement that the interview was supposed to be limited to Mali and CAR. We'll await some correction of this: peacekeeping, as a topic, obviously includes the UN peacekeeping mission in Haiti which Mulet headed. We'll have more on this.

  The UN still has not answered Inner City Press' repeated question whether the UN will be sending any representative to the October 23 oral argument in Federal court on the topic. This is impunity.

  On October 9, Ban Ki-moon gave a speech at the World Bank about water and cholera in Haiti, without mentioning the question of how cholera was brought to Haiti, much less the litigation against himself.

  So at the October 9 UN noon briefing Inner City Press asked Ban's Associate Spokesperson Vannina Maestracci if Ban's statement that his "heart ached at the losses that so many thousands of people have had to suffer and die" was a reference to the UN bringing cholera to Haiti.Video here.

  Maestracci responded about the UN trying to raise money for sanitation in Haiti. Inner City Press waited to re-phrase what it had asked, about accountability. Maestracci said "I can see that you really don't care about my answer, you just want to ask another question."

  But it was the same question, about accountability and the rule of law. And neither it nor the factual question of whether the UN will sent anyone to the October 23 court hearing has been answered. 

 On October 8, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric if the UN, which has dodged service of the legal papers, will at least appear in court. Video here. Dujarric said the UN's legal position remains unchanged. Maestracci repeated this on October 9. One might assume it means the UN will ignore the court hearing. But that would be an assumption.

  Also on October 8, and also on UN impunity, Inner City Press asked spokesman Dujarric about a detailed report of rapes in Haiti by UN peacekeepers, for which the UN also refused to waive immunity. Dujarric said he hadn't heard of it, but would be happy to look for it -- it is here. We'll see. 

  Back on August 28, the plaintiffs in the Haiti cholera case against the UN, Ban and Mulet filed their sur-reply, which Inner City Press put online here.

 On September 17, the Institute for Justice & Democracy in Haiti held a conference call about the status and background of the case. IJDH's executive director Brian Concannon said that cholera was introduced to Haiti in October 2010 by UN peacekeepers.

   Concannon said the UN waited 15 months then called the claims "not receivable" -- the same phrase the UN used as to whistleblowers in a belated answer it sent to Inner City Press during the IJDH call, click here for that.

  He described serving the legal papers on Ban Ki-moon and Edmond Mulet, the head of the MINUSTAH mission (and, also on September 17, briefing the Security Council about peacekeepers giving over their weapons, vehicles and even uniforms to the Jabhat al Nusra rebels in the Golan Heights).

  IJDH Legal Fellow Shannon Jonsson described how the UN failed to provide any out of court process to consider claims, in violation of two treaties (and the UN's Status of Forces Agreement.)

  Finally, IJDH Staff Attorney Beatrice Lindstrom described broader advocacy , in Congress and among UN member states, to get justice for those harmed by the UN's introduction of cholera to Haiti. She quoted Martin Luther King that the arc of history is long but bends toward justice. There will be an upcoming demonstration at the UN's logistics base in Haiti. We'll have more on this. 

   The US' 15-page letter cited in support of UN immunity the case of Cynthia Brzak, regarding sexual harassment by UNHCR's Ruud Lubber, and a letter to US Ambassador Samantha Power from the UN's counsel Miguel de Serpa Soares, which Inner City Press is putting online, here.  The US letter to the court is here.

  Beyond supporting Secretary General Ban Ki-moon dodging the service of legal papers -- on which Ban's spokespeople have themselves dodged and more -- the US letter cited the UN - Haiti program on cholera on which the UN's Pedro Medrano has still to take Press questions.

  The US letter says, "The General Convention and the SOFA provide that any dispute between a state party and the UN shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice, see General Convention, art. VIII, § 30; SOFA art. VIII, § 58; and the SOFA provides that any dispute between MINUTSAH [sic] and the Government of Haiti shall be submitted to arbitration, see SOFA art. VIII, § 57."

  So much for "we the peoples."

  The sur-reply filed August 28 states that "under the doctrine of unclean hands, the request for immunity should be refused.  The Government fails to present any response to this argument."

   Back on May 15, opposition to the US' first iteration of its position was filed, with amicus support from a bevy of law professors, an ex judge of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and former UN human rights rapporteur on torture Manfred Nowak.

  Nowak said, "the UN needs to understand that immunity cannot mean impunity. If it refuses to provide people alleging harm with a path to justice, courts will refuse to uphold its immunity.”

   But then as now, the UN under  Ban Ki-moon wouldn't even bring its envoy on cholera Pedro Medrano forward for questioning. Inner City Press has asked, for example on April 21:

Inner City Press: … seemed to quote Mr. Medrano as predicting in advance that this panel he would be on with the Government may provide assistance, but he said, like, the word “compensation” won’t be used. So I wanted to know, is that a UN position? Is it his prediction of that the Government doesn’t want the word “compensation” used? And is there some way that we can have by video or otherwise, a kind of, some kind of presentation by Mr. Medrano?

Spokesman Stephane Dujarric: Sure, on Haiti, over the weekend, the terms of reference on this high level committee on cholera, which would be a UN and Government of Haiti committee, have been officially agreed on. And the aim is really for the joint effort of to fight cholera between the UN and the Government of Haiti. The Committee aims at further improving the coordination response to the epidemic and obviously we expect to have an official announcement in the next couple of days. But this is a very important… the establishment of this committee is a very important one in terms of our efforts, and most importantly the Government of Haiti’s efforts, to address not only cholera but also the associated water and sanitation issues....

Inner City Press: Just on Medrano, I will like to say again if you could do a briefing in this room it would help.

Spokesman Dujarric: I hear you.

  But did he? There has still been no briefing. Members of the US Congress have written to State Department diplomats about this case in the past. Based on this letter, will they do so again?

   As the first US answer was released, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was partying with in-house scribes, most of whom never pursued this most outrageous case of UN impunity, or even asked if Ban Ki-moon like a scoff law was hiding from the process server.

 Now on July 8, these same scribes are offering symbiosis, bread andcircuses, or pretzels and beer, in the large room Ban's UN gives them, usually sitting empty even as the News Agency of Nigeria was evicted due to lack of space. This is today's UN.

  Inner City Press, having twice asked asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokespeople to confirm Ban has been served with legal papers,on February 28 asked about Gallon's report:

Inner City Press: on Haiti, there is a recent report just out by Gustavo Gallón, who is the UN independent expert on human rights in Haiti, and he says, as a direct quote, that full compensation for the damage suffered by the Haitian people by the introduction of cholera to the island should be paid as quickly as possible. So, I understand that he is an independent expert and doesn’t work for the Secretariat; at the same time, it’s a respected position and a mandate formed by the Human Rights Council, so I wanted to know what in the face of this sort of either intra-UN or intra-UN system critique, what is the response of the United Nations?

Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: Well, simply, that you answered the question yourself. The Human Rights Council-appointed special rapporteurs and other special advisers of various kinds are independent and they are not appointed by the Secretary-General and I don’t have anything further to say on that.

Inner City Press: But does the UN system expect, for example, countries when when they are subject to these type recommendations or criticism by an independent experts of the Human Rights Council to respond in some way to them to say: we agree or disagree, or that is why we disagree?

Spokesperson Nesirky: That’s for each individual Member State to decide.

Ah, leadership. Meanwhile, while the UN has refused to answer if Ban was served the court papers, beyond this song, Inner City Press will now publish the sad litany of attempts to serve what could be described as a scoff law:

On December 19, 2013, at approximately 3:11 PM, a paralegal for Plaintiffs’ counsel contacted OLA by telephone and spoke to a woman who identified herself as “Mae” (who, upon information and belief, is Mae Arkoncel, Assistant to the UN Legal Counsel). Mae confirmed that OLA had received the faxed documents from Plaintiffs’ counsel and stated that the UN was currently 'reviewing the documents'...

Service of process by delivery to Defendant Ban personally through the use of a private process server... was attempted again on January 20, 2014, at approximately 10:05 AM, at Defendant Ban’s residence located at [redacted by ICP]. A security guard informed the server that Defendant Ban was not present, and refused to open the door or accept service.

8. Service of process by delivery to Defendant Ban personally through the use of a private process server... was perfected on January 20, 2014, at approximately 2:00 PM, at Defendant’s Ban residence located at [redacted by ICP]. A male who identified himself as 'security' answered the door and informed the server that he would not accept service and that Defendant Ban was not present. The server affixed the process to the front door with masking tape and informed the security guard that he was doing so with the intention that the documents would be forwarded to Defendant Ban. The server then mailed another copy of the process to Defendant Ban at the same address.

That's called "nail-and-mail," and it's what's used with a fugitive or scoff law. Is that what this UN has become? It's the basis of this lyric, can't serve the papers up in the townhouse, song here. Watch this site.

   

On Haiti Cholera, Opposition to US Supporting UN Impunity, UNclean Hands

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 28, with a song -- On the UN having brought cholera to Haiti, the US government on July 7 filed another letter supporting the UN's immunity -- or in this case, impunity. 

  Now on August 28, the plaintiffs have filed their sur-reply, which Inner City Press is putting online here.

   The US' 15-page letter cited in support of UN immunity the case of Cynthia Brzak, regarding sexual harassment by UNHCR's Ruud Lubber, and a letter to US Ambassador Samantha Power from the UN's counsel Miguel de Serpa Soares, which Inner City Press is putting online, here.  TheUS letter to the court is here.

  Beyond supporting Secretary General Ban Ki-moon dodging the service of legal papers -- on which Ban's spokespeople have themselves dodged and more -- the US letter cited the UN - Haiti program on cholera on which theUN's Pedro Medrano has still to take Press questions.

  The US letter says, "The General Convention and the SOFA provide that any dispute between a state party and the UN shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice, see General Convention, art. VIII, § 30; SOFA art. VIII, § 58; and the SOFA provides that any dispute between MINUTSAH [sic] and the Government of Haiti shall be submitted to arbitration, see SOFA art. VIII, § 57."

  So much for "we the peoples."

  The sur-reply filed August 28 states that "under the doctrine of unclear hands, the request for immunity should be refused.  The Government fails to present any response to this argument."

   Back on May 15, opposition to the US' first iteration of its position was filed, with amicus support from a bevy of law professors, an ex judge of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and former UN human rights rapporteur on torture Manfred Nowak.

  Nowak said, "the UN needs to understand that immunity cannot mean impunity. If it refuses to provide people alleging harm with a path to justice, courts will refuse to uphold its immunity.”

   But then as now, the UN under  Ban Ki-moon wouldn't even bring its envoy on cholera Pedro Medrano forward for questioning. Inner City Press has asked, for example on April 21:

Inner City Press: … seemed to quote Mr. Medrano as predicting in advance that this panel he would be on with the Government may provide assistance, but he said, like, the word “compensation” won’t be used. So I wanted to know, is that a UN position? Is it his prediction of that the Government doesn’t want the word “compensation” used? And is there some way that we can have by video or otherwise, a kind of, some kind of presentation by Mr. Medrano?

Spokesman Stephane Dujarric: Sure, on Haiti, over the weekend, the terms of reference on this high level committee on cholera, which would be a UN and Government of Haiti committee, have been officially agreed on. And the aim is really for the joint effort of to fight cholera between the UN and the Government of Haiti. The Committee aims at further improving the coordination response to the epidemic and obviously we expect to have an official announcement in the next couple of days. But this is a very important… the establishment of this committee is a very important one in terms of our efforts, and most importantly the Government of Haiti’s efforts, to address not only cholera but also the associated water and sanitation issues....

Inner City Press: Just on Medrano, I will like to say again if you could do a briefing in this room it would help.

Spokesman Dujarric: I hear you.

  But did he? There has still been no briefing. Members of the US Congress have written to State Department diplomats about this case in the past. Based on this letter, will they do so again?

   As the first US answer was released, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was partying with in-house scribes, most of whom never pursued this most outrageous case of UN impunity, or even asked if Ban Ki-moon like a scoff law was hiding from the process server.

 Now on July 8, these same scribes are offering symbiosis, bread and circuses, or pretzels and beer, in the large room Ban's UN gives them, usually sitting empty even as the News Agency of Nigeria was evicted due to lack of space. This is today's UN.

  Inner City Press, having twice asked asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokespeople to confirm Ban has been served with legal papers, on February 28 asked about Gallon's report:

Inner City Press: on Haiti, there is a recent report just out by Gustavo Gallón, who is the UN independent expert on human rights in Haiti, and he says, as a direct quote, that full compensation for the damage suffered by the Haitian people by the introduction of cholera to the island should be paid as quickly as possible. So, I understand that he is an independent expert and doesn’t work for the Secretariat; at the same time, it’s a respected position and a mandate formed by the Human Rights Council, so I wanted to know what in the face of this sort of either intra-UN or intra-UN system critique, what is the response of the United Nations?

Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: Well, simply, that you answered the question yourself. The Human Rights Council-appointed special rapporteurs and other special advisers of various kinds are independent and they are not appointed by the Secretary-General and I don’t have anything further to say on that.

Inner City Press: But does the UN system expect, for example, countries when when they are subject to these type recommendations or criticism by an independent experts of the Human Rights Council to respond in some way to them to say: we agree or disagree, or that is why we disagree?

Spokesperson Nesirky: That’s for each individual Member State to decide.

Ah, leadership. Meanwhile, while the UN has refused to answer if Ban was served the court papers, beyond thissong, Inner City Press will now publish the sad litany of attempts to serve what could be described as a scoff law:

On December 19, 2013, at approximately 3:11 PM, a paralegal for Plaintiffs’ counsel contacted OLA by telephone and spoke to a woman who identified herself as “Mae” (who, upon information and belief, is Mae Arkoncel, Assistant to the UN Legal Counsel). Mae confirmed that OLA had received the faxed documents from Plaintiffs’ counsel and stated that the UN was currently 'reviewing the documents'...

Service of process by delivery to Defendant Ban personally through the use of a private process server... was attempted again on January 20, 2014, at approximately 10:05 AM, at Defendant Ban’s residence located at [redacted by ICP]. A security guard informed the server that Defendant Ban was not present, and refused to open the door or accept service.

8. Service of process by delivery to Defendant Ban personally through the use of a private process server... was perfected on January 20, 2014, at approximately 2:00 PM, at Defendant’s Ban residence located at [redacted by ICP]. A male who identified himself as 'security' answered the door and informed the server that he would not accept service and that Defendant Ban was not present. The server affixed the process to the front door with masking tape and informed the security guard that he was doing so with the intention that the documents would be forwarded to Defendant Ban. The server then mailed another copy of the process to Defendant Ban at the same address.

That's called "nail-and-mail," and it's what's used with a fugitive or scoff law. Is that what this UN has become? It's the basis of this lyric, can't serve the papers up in the townhouse, song here. Watch this site.

   

On Haiti Cholera, US Filing Supports UN Impunity, As Ban Ki-moon Dodges Legal Papers

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 8, with a song -- On the UNhaving brought cholera to Haiti, the US government on July 7 filed another letter supporting the UN's immunity -- or in this case, impunity. 

   The US' 15-page letter cites in support of UN immunity the case of Cynthia Brzak, regarding sexual harassment by UNHCR's Ruud Lubber, and a letter to US Ambassador Samantha Power from the UN's counsel Miguel de Serpa Soares, which Inner City Press is putting online, here.  TheUS letter to the court is here.

  Beyond supporting Secretary General Ban Ki-moon dodging the service of legal papers -- on which Ban's spokespeople have themselves dodged and more -- the US letter cited the UN - Haiti program on cholera on which the UN's Pedro Medrano has yet to take Press questions.

  The US letter says, "The General Convention and the SOFA provide that any dispute between a state party and the UN shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice, see General Convention, art. VIII, § 30; SOFA art. VIII, § 58; and the SOFA provides that any dispute between MINUTSAH [sic] and the Government of Haiti shall be submitted to arbitration, see SOFA art. VIII, § 57."

  So much for "we the peoples."

   Back on May 15, opposition to the US' first iteration of its position was filed, with amicus support from a bevy of law professors, an ex judge of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and former UN human rights rapporteur on torture Manfred Nowak.

  Nowak said, "the UN needs to understand that immunity cannot mean impunity. If it refuses to provide people alleging harm with a path to justice, courts will refuse to uphold its immunity.”

   But then as now, the UN under  Ban Ki-moon wouldn't even bring its envoy on cholera Pedro Medrano forward for questioning. Inner City Press has asked, for example on April 21:

Inner City Press: … seemed to quote Mr. Medrano as predicting in advance that this panel he would be on with the Government may provide assistance, but he said, like, the word “compensation” won’t be used. So I wanted to know, is that a UN position? Is it his prediction of that the Government doesn’t want the word “compensation” used? And is there some way that we can have by video or otherwise, a kind of, some kind of presentation by Mr. Medrano?

Spokesman Stephane Dujarric: Sure, on Haiti, over the weekend, the terms of reference on this high level committee on cholera, which would be a UN and Government of Haiti committee, have been officially agreed on. And the aim is really for the joint effort of to fight cholera between the UN and the Government of Haiti. The Committee aims at further improving the coordination response to the epidemic and obviously we expect to have an official announcement in the next couple of days. But this is a very important… the establishment of this committee is a very important one in terms of our efforts, and most importantly the Government of Haiti’s efforts, to address not only cholera but also the associated water and sanitation issues....

Inner City Press: Just on Medrano, I will like to say again if you could do a briefing in this room it would help.

Spokesman Dujarric: I hear you.

  But did he? There has still been no briefing. Members of the US Congress have written to State Department diplomats about this case in the past. Based on this letter, will they do so again?

   As the first US answer was released, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was partying with in-house scribes, most of whom never pursued this most outrageous case of UN impunity, or even asked if Ban Ki-moon like a scoff law was hiding from the process server.

 Now on July 8, these same scribes are offering symbiosis, bread and circuses, or pretzels and beer, in the large room Ban's UN gives them, usually sitting empty even as the News Agency of Nigeria was evicted due to lack of space. This is today's UN.

  Inner City Press, having twice asked asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokespeople to confirm Ban has been served with legal papers, on February 28 asked about Gallon's report:

Inner City Press: on Haiti, there is a recent report just out by Gustavo Gallón, who is the UN independent expert on human rights in Haiti, and he says, as a direct quote, that full compensation for the damage suffered by the Haitian people by the introduction of cholera to the island should be paid as quickly as possible. So, I understand that he is an independent expert and doesn’t work for the Secretariat; at the same time, it’s a respected position and a mandate formed by the Human Rights Council, so I wanted to know what in the face of this sort of either intra-UN or intra-UN system critique, what is the response of the United Nations?

Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: Well, simply, that you answered the question yourself. The Human Rights Council-appointed special rapporteurs and other special advisers of various kinds are independent and they are not appointed by the Secretary-General and I don’t have anything further to say on that.

Inner City Press: But does the UN system expect, for example, countries when when they are subject to these type recommendations or criticism by an independent experts of the Human Rights Council to respond in some way to them to say: we agree or disagree, or that is why we disagree?

Spokesperson Nesirky: That’s for each individual Member State to decide.

Ah, leadership. Meanwhile, while the UN has refused to answer if Ban was served the court papers, beyond thissong, Inner City Press will now publish the sad litany of attempts to serve what could be described as a scoff law:

On December 19, 2013, at approximately 3:11 PM, a paralegal for Plaintiffs’ counsel contacted OLA by telephone and spoke to a woman who identified herself as “Mae” (who, upon information and belief, is Mae Arkoncel, Assistant to the UN Legal Counsel). Mae confirmed that OLA had received the faxed documents from Plaintiffs’ counsel and stated that the UN was currently 'reviewing the documents'...

Service of process by delivery to Defendant Ban personally through the use of a private process server... was attempted again on January 20, 2014, at approximately 10:05 AM, at Defendant Ban’s residence located at [redacted by ICP]. A security guard informed the server that Defendant Ban was not present, and refused to open the door or accept service.

8. Service of process by delivery to Defendant Ban personally through the use of a private process server... was perfected on January 20, 2014, at approximately 2:00 PM, at Defendant’s Ban residence located at [redacted by ICP]. A male who identified himself as 'security' answered the door and informed the server that he would not accept service and that Defendant Ban was not present. The server affixed the process to the front door with masking tape and informed the security guard that he was doing so with the intention that the documents would be forwarded to Defendant Ban. The server then mailed another copy of the process to Defendant Ban at the same address.

That's called "nail-and-mail," and it's what's used with a fugitive or scoff law. Is that what this UN has become? It's the basis of this lyric, can't serve the papers up in the townhouse, song here. Watch this site.