As US Supports "Right to Privacy in the Internet Age" Resolution in UN's Third Committee, Spying Sanitized?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 25 -- When the "Right to Privacy in the Internet Age" resolution came to the floor in the UN's Third (Human Rights) Committee on November 25, German Ambassador Harald Braun summarized its new elements: the inclusion of metadata, obligations by the private sector, effective remedies for violations and an invitation to the UN Human Rights Council to establish a special procedure on the right to privacy.

 Ambassador Antonio Patriota of co-sponsor Brazil expressed regret on what wasn't in the resolution, for example extra-territorial coverage of communications infrastructure that a country controls, wherever located. 

  While Braun cited US National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, the resolution was adopted by consensus - that is, no country, including the United States, objected.

  International law, if it exists, is incremental.

 Back on July 9, First Look's "The Intercept" revealed that the US NSA and FBI spied on at least five Americans, all Muslims, and used place-holder code names like "Raghead," click here for that. 

   Those spied on included a Republican candidate for the Virginia legislature, Faisal Gill; Hooshang Amirahmadi, an Iranian-American professor; lawyer Asim Ghafoor; Nihad Awad of CAIR; and "Agha Saeed, a former political science professor at California State University who champions Muslim civil liberties and Palestinian rights."

  The United Nations' Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has already said he thinks Snowden "misused" information, as Inner City Press reported here.

  Back on March 14 when the US delegation to the UN Human Rights Committee in Geneva took the floor, it was a full court press. Of the elephant in the room, NSA spying, the speaker from the Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice used a single line: DOJ is "monitoring" a number of private actions. You don't say.

  The head of the US delegation, Mary McLeod, said but did not explain why the US Administration has "no current expectation to become a party to the optional protocol" to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights -- which the US says does not apply to its actions outside of its borders. 

The session closed with a slew of questions: Walter Kalin asked why the US deports people to Haiti even amid the cholera epidemic -- for which, Inner City Press notes, the US has said the UN should be immune. Watch this site. 

UN's Minova Report Omits Roles of Ladsous & DPKO, Cover Up &Privacy Violations

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 9 -- The UN's report into the 135 rapes in Minova is notable for what it doesn't say.

  It doesn't say that the chief of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous refused to answer Press questions about the rapes for four months, going so far as to have the UN Television microphone seized to try to avoid Inner City Press questions about the rapes. Video here and here.

  It doesn't say that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon himself belatedly said, on December 5, 2012 when asked by the Press, that the UN was doing its "utmost" -- four month after that, there have been only two arrests for the 135 rapes.

It doesn't mention the double victimization controversy, in which medical records were demanded and obtained without the women patients' consent.

The omission of even this issue, of which not only Ladsous' Department of Peacekeeping Operations and MONUSCO, but also the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, are aware from the self-congratulatory review of the UN's actions calls the report into question. This UN will never improve, as evidenced by Ban Ki-moon's terse dismissal of claims DPKO brought cholera to Haiti, if it cannot admit and only covers up its negligence and malfeasance.

  The OHCHR, aware of the role of Ladsous in the Great Lakes Region during the Rwanda genocide, should have done a better job in this report.

  While the report does, as Ladsous refused to do for five months, name two of the battalions at issue, it doesn't mention that one was trained by the US, and the other has been linked with the Hutu genocidaires-linked FDLR militia.

  Of the UN's partners in the Congo, the FARDC, it says this: "The FARDC also has a poor human rights record and its soldiers have for years been responsible for many gross human rights violations. Poor discipline of soldiers and officers alike stems in part from the repeated integration of former rebels into the national army without formal training, or vetting mechanisms to ensure accountability. The FARDC lacks basic equipment and logistics, soldiers are poorly and irregularly paid, while allegations of corruption, particularly among senior officers, are rampant."

  But it does not mention that the new Intervention Brigade will operate in support of just this FARDC. What could go wrong? Watch this site.

Footnote: That much of the coverage of the UN's whitewash report also omits these issues has previously been alluded to,partially analyzed and even filmed, but expect more in this regard - because this is another reason this UN does not improve.

On Minova Rapes, ICP's Privacy Question Garners MONUSCO Response: The Roots of #LADSOUS2013

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 3 -- Not only did UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous for four months cover up the 126 rapes in Minova by the Congolese Army, his partners -- the UN also reportedly violated the victims' privacy.

  Click here for new video, Roots of #LADSOUS2013, with six refusals of Press questions, three of them on the Minova rapes.

  By contrast, Ladsous has repeatedly refused to name the two Army battalions which were involved in the rapes. The rapists are given privacy by the UN, but the victims reportedly are not.

  On April 30, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Martin Nesirky about it:

Inner City Press: It has to do again with these rapes in Minova, but it is a different question; actually, quite different. It is reported in the French publication La Croix that in the course of investigating or looking into the rapes, that MONUSCO [United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo] staff encouraged doctors to give files of patients without their consent and then brought them a judiciary letter, tbasically doctors are quoted saying that they gave records that they shouldn’t have given, that were covered by privacy. I wanted to know, although obviously investigation is important and the battalions still haven’t been named, what’s the UN’s response to that? You have two competing goods... but are they aware of this allegation that they violated patient privacy and what do they say about it? Do they intend to do it in the future? Have they learned anything from it?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Let’s check with MONUSCO.

  But three days later, there was no answer. In fact, on May 2 Ladsous' spokesman Kieran Dwyer gave a five minute justification for Ladsous refusing to answer any of Inner City Press' questions, due to what he called "slurs." Video here.

  Yes, Inner City Press has questioned and reported on Ladsous' speeches and memos during the 1994 Rwanda genocide, when Ladsous was Deputy Permanent Representative of France, refuting those who opposed France helping the genocidaires to escape into Eastern Congo. That's not a slur - that's a fact.

  On May 3, Inner City Press asked the question again at the noon briefing, along with asking if new envoy Mary Robinson was looking into any follow-through on the Minova rapes. Inner City Press put the question to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights as well.

On Friday afternoon, the following came in:

Subject: Your question on the DRC
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Fri, May 3, 2013 at 3:39 PM
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com

We have the following from MONUSCO:

"In carrying out their investigations on allegations of human rights violations, including sexual and gender-based violence, UN Human Rights Officers are guided by strict guidelines and basic principles that must be followed at all times. Such principles include 'do no harm', meaning that the safety and best interest of the victim always have to be prioritized, the right of victims to privacy and confidentiality and the informed consent of the victims prior to sharing information with a third party. Psychological and physical consequences of sexual and gender-based violence are also taken into account by UN investigators in the process of preparing and conducting human rights investigations, and thus such investigations are regularly coordinated with various partners with medical and psycho-social expertise.

The UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, MONUSCO, is concerned about some inaccuracies contained in La Croix article, including mention to the fact that, under Congolese law, medical staff is allowed to refuse to disclose information to judicial authorities in the context of a criminal investigation. This is false."

   The two paragraphs -- privacy and compulsory provision of medical information -- are contradictory. Given Ladsous' months' long refusal to answer Press questions about the Minova rapes, it is difficult to know how to assess the Mission under his control's allegation of falsity. But we'll try. Watch this site.