UNITED
NATIONS, June
14 -- Three
days before Sudan's
Omar al Bashir
showed up and
got stuck in
South Africa,
Inner City
Press on June
11 asked the
UN:
Inner
City Press:
You’ve
mentioned that
the Deputy
Secretary-General
was going to
the AU in
Johannesburg.
Has he seen
the reports
that President
Omar al-Bashir
of Sudan has
said that he
will be there
and if… what
does he think
of them?
And will he
meet with
him? And
what does he
think about
the ICC
[International
Criminal
Court]
indictment?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
We’ll have to
see if he’s
actually
there.
Well, he is, and
Judge Hans
Fabricuis now
says he can't
leave until
the court decides
on the ICC
warrant. But
still the UN
has said
nothing.
It
is impossible
not to note
that the
today's UN has
in fact come
out in FAVOR
of immunity,
for example on
the case
against it for
bringing
cholera to
Haiti. The UN
never appeared
in court,
dodging court
papers and say
it was immune
and didn't
even have to
respond. Inner
City Press
also asked
about the
appeal, and Darfur
for which
Bashir is
indicted, on
June 10:
Inner
City Press:
Haiti and
Darfur.
On Haiti, I
just wanted to
see if you
have any
comment on the
appeal that's
been filed in
the Second
Circuit Court
of Appeals on
the cholera
case, and it's
signed —
there's a
brief
submitted by a
number of
former UN
officials, Mr.
[Abdul Karim]
Chowdhury, Ms.
[Kathleen]
Cravero,
Stephen
Lewis.
Given that
these people
worked for the
UN and some in
senior
positions and
that they
believe that
the UN should
somehow move
beyond
impunity or
immunity,
what's your
response?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
I have no
response to
what we've
already — what
we've already
said on the
ongoing cases.
Inner City
Press:
All
right.
And on Darfur,
I listened to
what Mr. Mulet
said, and you
definitely
said about
these IDPs
[internally
displaced
persons], but
he was very
much saying
that they were
going to close
down — the
intention was
to close out
UNAMID in West
Darfur and
even close
team sites in
North and
South
Darfur.
So I wondered,
can you — he
didn't do a
stakeout, so
I'd like to
ask you.
How do you
explain what
some see as a
declining
situation and
130,000
unverified
IDPs, 78,000
verified IDPs,
with basically
the closing
down of the
mission, and
he didn't
mention the
Thabit rapes
either?
Has any effort
or success
been made in
getting
access?
Spokesman:
Unfortunately,
no success has
been made —
excuse me — in
reaching
Thabit.
The request
continues.
But, obviously
— we're now,
literally
months have
gone by, and
one can very
well imagine
that any
evidence that
would have
been of use to
us in
investigating
these rapes
has now
disappeared.
You know, I
don't think
anyone is
talking about
closing down
the
mission.
I mean, there
may be some
structural
adjustments.
He also said
that it is
clear that the
exit strategy
for UNAMID
needs to be
based on a
concrete
improvement of
the situation
on the ground
and, until
that happens,
cooperation
with the
Government of
Sudan based on
mutual trust
needs to be
continued.
So I would
leave it at
that.
So where is the
UN on this?
Nearly
two years ago
back on July
17, 2013 in an
International
Justice Day
event held at
the UN, there
was much talk
of Sudan's
president Omar
al Bashir,
indicted for
genocide by
the
International
Criminal
Court,
visiting but
quickly
leaving
Nigeria.
Despite
the
event being
held inside
the UN, during
the two panel
discussions
there was no
mention of
UN
Peacekeeping
chief Herve
Ladsous having
met with
Bashir earlier
this month.
Why did
Ladsous meet
him? What was
accomplished?
Would Ladsous
do
it again?
There
was no
question and
answer period
for the first
panel, which
included the
Permanent
Representatives
of
Liechtenstein
and Costa
Rica, as well
as UN
anti-genocide
official Mr.
Adama Dieng,
US Ambassador
Stephen J.
Rapp, former
US official
Richard S.
Williamson
(now Co-Chair
of R2P working
group) and
Karen Mosoti,
Head of the
Liaison Office
of the ICC to
the UN.
The
panel went so
long that no
questions were
allowed. One
wonders each
of their
positions on
the UN's
Ladsous
meeting with
Bashir.
But
after the next
and last
panel, Inner
City Press
asked the
first
question,
including: was
Ladsous'
meeting with
Bashir
“strictly
necessary?”
From
the podium,
John Washburn
said that
since there
was “no one
from UN on
this panel,”
he would
answer as a
former UN
official. He
said there
should be a
review of the
issue of
non-essential
contacts.
He
said the UN
should be
clearer about
rules for
conduct of non
essential
contacts,
should define
the
circumstances
in which a
contact can be
deemed to be
essential, and
should “be
transparent.”
An
additional
problem with
Ladsous, as
we've shown,
is that he
refuses to
answer
questions. Click here for video compilation.
And some non-governmental
organizations
such as Human
Rights Watch
so prize their
access to the
UN that they
will not
criticize it,
only member
states.
Tom
Andrews, a
former Maine
Congressman
now heading
United to End
Genocide spoke
passionately
that countries
which invite
Bashir should
be penalized.
But he did not
answer the
question of
the UN's
Ladsous
meeting with
Bashir.
Then a
“half-French”
speaker from
Human Rights
Watch
questioned
that
government's
invitation to
“ministers
from Africa
who meet...
with
dictators,”
musing that
these invited
African states
should be
subject to
economic
sanctions. But
nothing on
Ladsous, the
fourth
Frenchman in a
row to head UN
Peacekeeping.
After
the panel, and
discussion
with a variety
of groups from
Sudan, Inner
City Press was
approached by
NGO
representatives
who would not
speak publicly
about Ladsous.
They said they
had asked the
UN not to let
Ladsous meet
with Bashir,
“but it
happened
anyway, with
these
consequences,”
as one of them
put it.
Maybe
if the groups
spoke more
publicly, and
if Ladsous
were at least
required to
take if not
answer
questions,
things might
improve.
Inner
City Press
also asked
about Sri
Lanka, and the
lack of
accountability.
Scott Edwards,
the director
of Amnesty
International's
Crisis
Prevention and
Response Unit
replied, “when
I think of
atrocity,
nothing sticks
out more than
the obvious
war crimes in
Sri Lanka,
lack of will
for
investigation,”
including by
the
international
community.
Does
that include
the UN? We'll
continue to
cover that.
Watch this
site.
, 
