For Abuse in DR Congo, South Africa Charges 93 Troops, UN Says Nothing: Zero Truthfulness

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 12 -- With the UN in the midst of deploying a controversial "intervention brigade" in the Eastern Congo, South African Defense Minister Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula has announced that 94 of its troops in the Congo have been charged with improprieties and that four have been "discharged" for sexual exploitation or abuse.

While any discipline is better than none, Inner City Press on June 12 asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey, "If someone is found guilty of sexual exploitation or abuse while on a UN peacekeeping mission, is it enough to discharge them from the army, or is some type of punishment expected, and how does this impact their service in the Intervention Brigade?"

Del Buey replied, "Well, Matthew, I will suggest you ask the Department of Peacekeeping Operations. We’ve received the reports and DPKO is looking into this right now. So, I suggest you ask DPKO a bit later on this afternoon."

DPKO chief Herve Ladsous has already repeatedly refused to answer Press questions about sexual abuse in the Congo, including 135 rapes in Minova by his partners in the Congolese Army. See compilation video here, and most recent (May 29) here. Forget the claimed "zero tolerance" -- it appears to be, "zero truthfulness."

  Since May 29, DPKO has not provided the requested update on actions taken on the 135 Minova rapes. DPKO's spokesman was bopping around the UN cafeteria mid-afternoon on June 12; still, no answer has been provided, on Minova or the new South African MONUSCO announcement, which Del Buey said DPKO is "looking into right now." Looking into what? Watch this site.

On Minova Rapes, Assurances Claimed by UN & Ladsous Are 3 Low Level Arrests

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 11 -- Eleven days after the UN claimed to have received assurances from the Congolese government that those who committed 126 rapes in Minova in November 2012 were being held to account, it has been reported that only three low level military personnel have been arrested.

  This is Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's claimed “Zero Tolerance” policy? Or his “Human Rights Due Diligence Policy” which is supposed to be implemented by Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping?

  Ladsous refused to answer Inner City Press' questions about the mass rapes in Minova by his partners in the Congolese Army on November 27, December 7 andDecember 18.

  On March 5, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon himself about it, leading to a rambling answer about the UN doing its utmost.

  Two days later Ladsous' DPKO summoned its scribes and spoon-fed a misleading half-answer, that an ultimatum had been given. When Inner City Press asked, the UN would not name the two battalions which had supposedly been given the ultimatum.

  But later the deadline was specified: April 1. Ban's spokesman Eduardo Del Buey said it was a midnight deadline, but then refused to say what “assurances” were given to make the deadline go away.

  Now the Guardian has reported that only three have been arrested, all low level. Ladsous2013. Watch this site.

On Haiti, Ban Called Cholera Claims “Not Receivable,” Spox Won't Receive Questions

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 5 -- When the UN held its noon briefing on Friday, Inner City Press told Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey that it would ask a question about Haiti after one about Sudan.Video here, from Minute 23:33.

  When Ban tersely denied claims for the UN bringing cholera to Haiti, Inner City Press repeatedly asked for the legal basis for dismissal. 

  Del Buey and lead spokesman Martin Nesirky refused to provide the basis, but at least they allowed the question to be asked.

But on April 5 the UN went further. After saying he would look into Inner City Press' Sudan question, Del Buey turned to another reporter and said “last question.” Video here, from Minute 24:18.

  Inner City Press asked what the timing problem was, that the Haiti question could not be asked.

  Del Buey said, we've spent a lot of time here.

  Well. Two days before, by holding his briefing at the same time as US Ambassador Susan Rice took questions by the Security Council, Del Buey escaped with only two questions asked, a six minute briefing.

  Friday's was less than half an hour, much of it taken up by Nesirky calling in from Madrid to promote a forthcoming YouTube video featuring Ban Ki-moon (and the courageous Pakistani schoolgirl Malala).

  So the UN doesn't have half an hour, after bringing cholera to Haiti and killing at least 5000 people? Or how about sexual abuse?

  The victim of a mock rape by UN Peacekeepers from Uruguay has applied to enter to US, one hope in order to sue or otherwise hold the UN accountable. His lawyers Jayne Fleming and Robert Rubin have filed an application for humanitarian parole for him with the US Department of Homeland Security.

  What does the UN think of this? Seems like it might be a spokesperson's job to take, and maybe even answer, this question. But not in Ban Ki-moon's UN, apparently. If Ban can say the claims of having killed 5000 people in Haiti are “not receivable,” why receive a question? Watch this site.

UN Tells ICP of 3 Substantiated Sex Abuse Cases, 30 Pending from 2012, Zero on From Where

By Matthew Russell Lee, 1 in a Series

UNITED NATIONS, February 20 – The UN found three “substantiated” cases of sexual exploitation or abuse by its personnel in 2012, having reached conclusions on 16 of the 60 complaints for that year, the UN told Inner City Press late Tuesday.

  But the UN did not, as Inner City Press request, provide any answer about repatriation, much less to what countries and about prosecution and conviction, despite the claim of a “zero tolerance” policy by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous.

  At the UN noon briefing of February 19, Inner City Pressasked Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky, based on a UN committee meeting at which it was the only reporter, “in 2012 there were 60 allegations of sexual abuse.... what’s happened on the 60? Is there somewhere we can get, hopefully today, on the 60 allegations, how many people were repatriated; if possible, to what countries, just something more on what happened on these 60 cases in 2012?”

  Nesirky replied, “Let me speak with my colleagues in DPKO [Department of Peacekeeping Operations] to see what’s available from our peacekeeping operations team.”

  Five pm deadline passed, without response. Then after 9 pm New York time, the following came in, which we publish in full, less than six hours after it was provided:

Subject: Your question on sexual exploitation and abuse allegations against UN peacekeepers
From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:49 PM
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com

On the issue of sexual exploitation and abuse, DPKO and DFS report that in 2012, a total of 60 allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse were reported, down from 74 allegations reported in 2011. Of the 60 allegations reported in 2012, close to half involved the most egregious forms of sexual exploitation and abuse, namely sexual activities with minors or non-consensual sexual acts. Twenty-five (25) allegations involved civilian personnel, 19 involved military personnel, 9 involved police personnel, six were non-UN, and 1 was unknown. Of these, the status of investigations is as follows as of 1 February 2013: 30 are pending, 13 are unsubstantiated, and 3 are substantiated.

In line with its zero tolerance policy, UN Peacekeeping is determined to continue its efforts to strengthen accountability for prevention, enforcement and response including criminal accountability where warranted - and in accordance with national laws. Victim assistance must also remain a priority.

  While appreciating the response, we note that the numbers do not add up. 

  But even with half of the complaints still “pending” as of February 1, 2013, it is striking that for the three “substantiated” complaints, the UN does not as requested answer on repatriation, and to which countries.

  The reference to “in accordance with national laws” would seem to mean that that UN disclaims responsibility for prosecution. (Of course, the UN could decline to give immunity to troops from countries which won't prosecute in substantiated cases of sexual exploitation or abuse.)

  But what prevents the UN from providing more information at least about the substantiated cases?

  Already we have shown that Ban Ki-moon's “Human Rights Due Diligence Policy,” as (not) applied by Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous to 126 rapes in Minova by the Congolese Army which Ladsous' DPKO supports, is not what it claims to be.

  This may explain Ladsous' open refusal, for example on November 27, December 7 and December 19, 2012, to answer Inner City Press' questions about the rapes and the policy. 

  To avoid Inner City Press questions about rape, Ladsous left the Security Council stakeout and gave private briefings, not about rape, to the UN bureau chiefs of thewire service Reuters, Voice of America and Agence France Presse (AFP), on a board of which he used to serve.

  After complaints by the Free UN Coalition for Access, on February 6 Ladsous did finally take a question from Inner City Press and said that the UN knows the identity of most of the rapists.

  But after Inner City Press followed up, in writing then in person, the answer was that the UN will do nothing until the Congolese investigation is completed: a rape grace period.

  How meaningful or meaningless is Ban's claimed “Zero Tolerance” Policy? One wag dubbed it the "Zero Truthfulness Policy." Watch this site - and this series.  

New DRC Army Rapes of IDPs While Ladsous Stonewalls Minova's 126 Rapes

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 19 -- While UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous has stonewalled about the 126 rapes in Minova by the Congolese Army, which the UN supports, new rapes have been committed on a hill outside the Mugunga III camp, a hill controlled by the Congolese Army.

  Ladsous has refused Press questions about the Minova rapes on November 27, December 7 and December 18 -- when he had his spokesman seize the UNTV microphone so the question couldn't be asked, video here. Ladsous has not done a stakeout since.

   On January 19, Inner City Press asked both Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky and top UN humanitarian Valerie Amos about these rapes, and about how Ladsous is (not) implementing Ban's supposed Human Rights Due Diligence Policy of not working with army units which engage in rape of other abuse.

   Amos insisted that the UN has a zero tolerance policy -- since Ladsous has been in change, some call it a "zero truthfulness" policy -- but she did not provide any of the previously promised details about Minova.

   Here is the UN's transcription of what Inner City Press asked Nesirky, followed by the MONUSCO answer added to the transcript, never e-mailed to Inner City Press but perhaps read over the squawk to those sitting in their offices (or waiting to be spoon-fed by Ladsous, as in the November 27 video here):

Inner City Press: ...Between 3 December and 5 January, there were numerous rapes around Muguna III Camp. It’s noted that around that camp [inaudible] took place, 27 of them in just a single day. There is no M23. In fact, that hill is controlled by the Congolese Army soldiers. So, related to this Minova question, what’s the UN response to its partners, at lease in part, controlling the hill in which 27 rapes took place in a day? What’s the United Nations going to do about this MSF report? And I wanted to ask, back on Minova, I appreciated what was sent to me two days ago. But it didn’t address this idea of the UN human rights due diligence policy. It basically said the Congolese are investigating and 11 people have been arrested. I wanted to know how many of these 11 were for rape, for 126 rapes. And also, in both of these cases, DPKO’s [Department of Peacekeeping Operations] stated policy of not working with Army units which have committed rape. How do they apply? In this case of Minova long after the event took place?

Spokesperson: On the last part, I don’t have anything to add. Simply to say that an investigation is under way and therefore we need to wait to find out what the result of that is. With regard to the report from MSF, we are obviously aware of it and we’ve asked the mission to brief us on that particular matter. But I don’t have anything at the moment. Should that change, and I would anticipate that it will, then obviously I will let you know.

[The Spokesperson later said the mission, MONUSCO, had advised that it is aware of the reports. As mandated, the mission will investigate these incidents.]

   Again this last was added to the transcript, never e-mailed to Inner City Press but perhaps read over the squawk to those sitting in their offices -- or waiting to be spoon-fed by Ladsous, as in the November 27 video here. We'll have more on this.