As
Kyrgyzstan
Bans Kiljunen, UN Ban Has No Comment, Sri Lanka Report
Echoes
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
May 26 -- The UN's relationship with reports on ethnic
violence and war crimes under Secretary General Ban Ki-moon gets more
and more convoluted.
On
Thursday, Kyrgyzstan's parliament voted to
ban from the country Kimmo Kiljunen, the Finnish author of an
independent report on last year's ethnic violence from entering the
country, saying his findings were a threat to national security.
Inner
City Press
asked Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky if Ban or the UN had any comment
on Kiljunen being barred from entering Kyrgyzstan. Nesirky began by
emphasizing that despite “logistic” support, Kiljunen's was not
a UN report. He then said the report could be useful.
If
the UN thinks
the report could be useful, Inner City Press asked, why no Ban
Ki-moon reacting to its author being banned from the country?
Nesirky
said
again, there would be no comment.
After the violence in Kyrgyzstan, Ban action not shown
To
some,
this is similar to Ban's reaction to date to the Sri Lanka war
crimes report that, under pressure, he commissioned from a Panel of
Experts. While a recommendation was that Ban initiate an
investigative mechanism, Ban immediately said that he cannot or will
not do this without a vote by the General Assembly, Security Council
or Human Rights Council.
It
has been pointed
out that the investigations are possible without such votes, for
example in the case of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Mapping
Report. Nesirky told Inner City Press he would respond to this
comparison, but has not.
It
emerged this
week that Ban has not even transmitted the Sri Lanka report to the UN
in Geneva.
Now,
on another
report -- albeit one further removed from the UN -- Ban has no
comment on the report's author being banned from the country.
From
the
UN's May 26 transcript:
Inner
City
Press: on Kyrgyzstan, this Kimmo Kiljunen.
Spokesperson
Martin
Nesirky: Kiljunen, Kiljunen, yeah.
Inner
City
Press: okay, however said, he is now being blocked from the
country. The Parliament has voted to bar him because of his report
on the violence that was in Kyrgyzstan. Given the UN’s role, you
know, and stated… he said that the UN sort of supports his report. Is
that true and do you have any comment?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well, first of all, you know, let’s be clear that it was
not a UN report. Some technical, logistical advice was provided to
Mr. Kiljunen and those who put together the report. It’s an
important step in the right direction. Again, talking about the need
for accountability for actions that took place and crimes that were
evidently committed last year in Kyrgyzstan.
Inner
City
Press: but does the UN, if you are thinking it’s a useful
thing, what about this, the country now seeking to bar the author of
the report. Is that --
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well, that’s really a matter for the Kyrgyz authorities
and Mr. Kiljunen. I don’t have any comment on that.
* * *
UN
Sri
Lanka
Report Not Transmitted to Geneva, Ban Waits for What?
By
Matthew
Russell
Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
May
24 -- Not only has UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon
not
asked for any Security Council, General Assembly or Human Rights
Council action on the UN Panel of Experts report on war crimes in Sri
Lanka -- he hasn't even transmitted
it to Geneva, his spokesman
acknowledged to Inner City Press on
Tuesday:
Inner
City
Press:
This is just a factual question that somebody has raised. That
report of the Panel of Experts on Sri Lanka… I mean, rather,
has the Secretary-General transmitted this report in some sort of a
type of a formal fashion to either the High Commissioner on Human
Rights or to the Human Rights Council in the run-up to its June
session?
Spokesperson
Martin
Nesirky:
As you know, we have said that the Secretary-General
is studying the recommendations in the report that was submitted to
him. That’s the first thing. The second is that he is also
awaiting a response from the Sri Lankan authorities, an official
response. In the meantime, he has already said that he will take up
the recommendation that was made with regard to looking at what there
is to learn internally about the UN’s response to what happened in
Sri Lanka. And that mechanism of whatever form it takes will be
going ahead in due course. With regard to the specific points you’ve
made, the report is publicly available, in its entirety. It was
published as you know, and is available for Member States and for the
different parts of the UN system to see.
Ban portrayed in Sri Lanka with Basil Rajapaksa & gun
Inner
City
Press:
I don’t know why the UN works that way, but there
seems to be some expectation of a formal transmittal from New York to
Geneva, and I just wanted to know… I mean, maybe I am wrong, but
has that… has that taken place or will it be taking place?
Spokesperson:
Well,
as I say, it’s in the public domain. It’s publicly
available and many Member States and others have seen it and I am
sure that they are taking it rather seriously.
Meanwhile
Sri
Lanka has invited countries to come and learn its counter terrorism
techniques, which are described in the UN Report. Watch this site.
Footnote: Ban Ki-moon spokesman Martin Nesirky has
yet to provide any
answer on
why Ban says no investigation of war crimes in Sri Lanka can begun
absent a vote by an inter-governmental body, in light of the UN Mapping
report on the Democratic Republic of Congo.
* * *
At
UN
on
Sri Lanka, Ban's Inaction on Report Contrasted With Rwanda
Mapping
By
Matthew
Russell
Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
May
20 -- When the UN Panel of Experts recommended to
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that he establish an investigative
mechanism for war crimes in Sri Lanka,
Ban
responded that he'd only
do so upon a vote of one of the UN's three “inter-governmental
bodies.”
Ban's
claimed
powerlessness, however, was called into question this week on the
margin of the Human Rights Council vote in the General Assembly.
It
was pointed out that when for example the UN did an investigation of
abuses in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the so-called Mapping
Report with much information about Rwanda, it had not waited for any
vote by the HRC, GA or Security Council.
Ban,
it was said
by contrasted, wants to say he can or will only act on tens of
thousands of civilians' deaths if one of the three bodies makes him.
“Some leadership,” a expert in UN legal practice based in Geneva
told Inner City Press.
At
the UN's May 20
noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky
to respond to this criticism, as well as to a published report in Sri
Lanka that Ban has already negotiated away the Panel of Experts'
recommendations in a closed door meeting with Sri Lankan Permanent
Representative Palitha Kohona.
Nesirky
tried to
limit the questioning by insisting “last question,” then saying
he would revert with information about the mapping report, which had
not happened more than five hours later.
From
the UN's
May
20
transcript:
Spokesperson
Martin
Nesirky:
Matthew, last question.
Inner
City
Press:
Well, I don’t know, I have a couple.
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well,
a last question; you can choose.
Inner
City
Press:
well… There is an article in the Sri Lankan press that
reports, and maybe you will just deny this one, in which case, I hope
to have, to ask you about a protest that was held outside yesterday.
But there is an article in the Sri Lankan press saying that the
Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, and Permanent Representative Palitha
Kohona, have substantively discussed the Panel of Experts report and
the forthcoming, now delayed, LLRC [Lessons Learned and
Reconciliation Commission], and have come to an agreement; that there
is some agreement reached, which recommendations would be implemented
by Sri Lanka, which ones would not be, and that essentially the
matter is finished. I can, I mean, the article, it is in
[inaudible]; and I wonder whether the UN, given that it’s
apparently, its’ summarizing a meeting between the two, is this
accurate or not accurate?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well,
as you know, we’ve been very clear; the report has
been published in its entirety. You can see the recommendations that
there are there, and the Secretary-General stands by the report
that’s been prepared for him by the Panel of Experts. That’s the
first point. The second is that we have repeatedly said in the
run-up to the report being published, and after the report was
published, that the Government of Sri Lanka is welcome to provide its
response, its official response, to the report. And we would welcome
that. We haven't seen it yet.
Inner
City
Press:
This is related to that. Yesterday, in connection with
this Human Rights Council vote today, it was said that the
Secretary-General does have the power to begin his own investigative
mechanism of a sort, and that this was the UN system’s — the
report they did on Rwanda, the mapping report — that this was a
report that was done by the UN system without authorization by any
intergovernmental body. Is that accurate?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well,
as you know, we’ve been quite clear on that. Firstly,
accountability is for the national authority in any given
case. And in this case, it is no different: accountability is for
the Sri Lankan authorities. We’ve also said that, in this report
on accountability that was given to the Secretary-General, it sets
out that the Sri Lankan authorities should indeed be doing this. It
also says that — and the Secretary-General said this in his
statement with the report — that there needs to be, to take it
forward, there needs to be either consent from the national
Government, the national authorities — in other words the Sri
Lankan authorities — or there needs to be a mandate from an
intergovernmental body; and you know what they might be. And that’s
the position.
Inner
City
Press:
So the mapping report, which intergovernmental body
authorized it?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
I
can give you the details on that later.
But
five hours
later and counting, no information had been provided. Watch this
site.
