By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
November 27 --
The UN is
scheduled to
publicly
release a
report about
human rights
and torture in
Burundi
on November
28. So far
this week, it
has restricted
pre-distribution
of the report
to media that
can afford to
have a
Swiss-based
correspondent.
Why?
The November
24
announcement
said only the
"UNOG-based
press corp"
will get
embargoed
copies of
this:
"BURUNDI:
Allegations of
torture and
ill-treatment
by law
enforcement
officials and
prison
officers;
sub-standard
conditions of
detention; no
independent
body to
monitor places
of
detention;
high numbers
in custody and
pre-trial
detention;
political
violence; the
Truth and
Reconciliation
Commission."
Inner City
Press on
behalf of the
Free UN
Coalition for
Access
immediately
challenged
this
restricted
distribution.
First
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman in
New York, and
now the UN in
Geneva have
refused to
lift the
restriction,
without
substantive
explanation.
On November
27, Inner City
Press and
FUNCA asked:
"Now on the
eve of the
press
conference,
reiterating
the request
below, that
embargoed
copies not be
needlessly
restricted
only to
"UNOG-based"
press... But
the media that
have reporters
based in UNOG
are larger,
more corporate
media. So that
particular
embargoed
report should
be released to
all UN system
accredited
media, not
only those
with reporters
based at UNOG.
The Free UN
Coalition for
Access says
that should go
the other way,
too --
embargoed UN
reports should
not be
restricted to
NY / UNHQ
based media
either."
On November
27, the UN in
Geneva via Liz
Throssell
Media Officer
for the UN
Treaty Bodies,
replied:
"Dear Matthew,
The six-hour
time
difference is
very much in
your favour,
and unlike the
journalists
here you will
have an entire
working day to
report on the
Committee
against
Torture's
'Concluding
Observations'
on the eight
countries they
have been
reviewing this
session. These
will be posted
online at
around 8:00
a.m. New York
Time -- you
will be able
to find
whichever ones
that interest
you by
scrolling down
through the
countries
listed here."
But this
is not
responsive. As
Inner City
Press and
FUNCA have
replied, "the
request is
that you not
arbitrarily
limit
embargoed
copies only to
your
'UNOG-based
press corps.'
They will be
able to
publish
stories at the
embargo time,
while despite
your message,
others will
not."
The UN's
Throssell
replied again:
"Dear Matthew,
The story is a
Geneva
dateline. The
Treaty Bodies
meet in Geneva
and hold their
press
conferences
here, hence
when we are
able to give
embargoed
copies, often
at short
notice, it is
standard
practice that
it should be
to journalists
based here.
The concluding
observations
will be
available on
our website
from around
8am your time.
It is also
important to
note that the
committee's
session was
not about one
country but
eight, and
that the
interests of
the UNOG press
corps are
similarly not
limited to one
country.
You speak of
the larger
more corporate
media in the
UNOG Press
Corps, but, as
Stephane
[Dujarric, Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman]
pointed out,
there is a
large number
of freelancers
here, working
for a variety
of English
language and
other language
media."
Note
that the UN,
at least in
New York, has
stated that it
does not
accredit
freelancers.
Inner City
Press and
FUNCA replied
in an hour's
time:
"You
write 'it is
standard
practice that
it should be
to journalists
based here'
but please be
aware: for UN
reports
released in
Nairobi
embargoed
copies are
offered to
reporters
outside of
Kenya and
outside of
Africa. So
is this
“standard
practice”
Geneva (and
New York)
specific? The
Free
UN Coalition
for Access is
opposed to
this “standard
practice,”
which is
inconsistently
applied even
in the UN
system. We are
very much
aware that
reports beyond
the US (and
Ukraine) are
being
released. In
light of the
above, can you
please state
how many
Burundi based
media
organizations
are
represented in
the UNOG-based
press corp to
which you are
limited
distribution
of the
embargoed
(Burundi)
report?"
But Ms.
Throssell and
the NY based
spokesperson
she copied did
not answer; both
gone from the
office. No
answer on
Burundi (or
anything
else.)
Again:
Why limited
pre-distribution
of this report
to the media
which can
afford to have
a
Switzerland-based
correspondent,
or
"freelancer"?
What is wrong
with the UN?
And what will
be the effect,
like with the
murky
"gray lady"
system at
the UN in New
York, be of
this
pre-spinning?
Click here for
Inner City
Press and
FUNCA's
coverage of
the opaque
race to head
the UN
Department of
Public
Information, here.
The UN must do
better.
Back on November
5 when UN
envoy Parfait
Onanga-Anyanga
briefed the UN
Security
Council by
video, he
cited the
belated
release from
jail of rights
defender Pierre
Claver
Mbonimpa.
But little was
said of why
the government
jailed him:
for inquiring
into the UN's
own leaked
memo about the
ruling CNDD
party arming
its youth
wing,
including in
camps across
the border in
the DR Congo.
When the
public then
private
meetings of
the Security
Council were
over, Inner
City Press asked
the Council's
president for
November Gary
Quinlan if
the leaked
memo about
CNDD arming
its youth wing
had been
discussed,
what the
Council's
current
understanding
of that is,
and if
possible
sanctions for
political
violence are
being
considered.
Quinlan
replied that
sanctions were
not discussed.
He said that
the Council is
well aware of
the memo and
has discussed
it, but that
today's focus
had been on
the trajectory
going forward
to the 2015
elections.
Even after
Quinlan's
Q&A
stakeout, to
his credit his
second
in as many
days, the
UN
Spokesperson's
office still
didn't have or
give a copy of
what
Onanga-Anyanga
had read to
the Council
three hours
earlier.
On behalf of
the new Free
UN Coalition
for Access,
Inner City
Press
repeatedly
asked for
this, which is
given out much
quicker on
other
countries on
the Council's
agenda.
Finally the
question was
put to UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric
himself --
because it
should be
fixed. It is
not good
enough to say
that the
office of this
particular
envoy -- a
nice guy, we
note in
passing --
undercuts and
is allowed to
undercut the
UN's
transparency -
particularly
after the
leaked memo
and attempts
to cover that
up. We'll have
more on this.
Back
on September
3, Inner
City Press
asked US
Ambassador to
the UN
Samantha Power
about
Mbonimpa, and
relatedly
about the
reports of
Burundi's
ruling party
arming its
youth wing. Video here, and embedded (with
Libya
question)
below, with US Mission
transcript.
Samantha
Power
replied that
she has raised
the
imprisonment
of Mbonimpa
with Burundi's
leadership,
publicly and
privately.
(Inner City
Press
previously
asked
Ambassador
Power about
Burundi at a
Security
Council question
and answer
stakeout
of the type
the new Free
UN Coalition
for Access
urges all
Security
Council
presidencies
to hold after
closed door
consultation
sessions.)
“I
suppose the
situation on
the ground has
not changed
materially,”
Ambassador
Power said,
“since we last
engaged on
this... the
closing of
political
space, the
walking away
from aspects
of the Arusha
Accords.”
During
the recent
African
Leaders Summit
in Washington
she and other
US officials
raised the
issues, she
said. The US
“wants the UN
to maintain a
role on the
ground in the
coming weeks
as we approach
the
elections,”
she said.
Inner City
Press has
reported on
Burundi using
the “persona
non grata”
process to
expel UN
staff.
Ambassador
Power
noted that the
Security
Council has
held more
meetings about
Burundi this
year than in
any other
analogous
period. One
wonders, will
this continue
up to the
election?
After? Watch
this site.
Updated
with US
Mission
transcript:
MODERATOR:
Last question
is Matthew.
QUESTION:
Matthew Lee,
Inner City
Press. Thanks
for the
briefing and,
on behalf of
the Free UN
Coalition for
Access, hoping
for question
and answer
stakeouts
after
consultations
to hear what
happened and
ask you about
it... On
Burundi, I
know that you
visited there,
and I wanted
to know what’s
the status of
the UN looking
into
allegations
that the
ruling party
was arming its
youth wing and
trying to get
the release of
this human
rights
defender,
Mbonimpa, who
is, I believe
still in jail
after several
months.
Thanks.
AMBASSADOR
POWER:On
Burundi, I
personally
raised the
case of the
human rights
defender and
lawyer that
you mentioned
many, many
times publicly
and privately
with the
Burundian
leadership. I
think the – I
suppose the
situation on
the ground has
not changed
materially
since we last
engaged on
this. We still
have real
concerns about
the closing of
political
space, the
walking away
from aspects
of the Arusha
Accords, which
have been the
foundation on
which
Burundi’s
stability and
peace and
reconciliation
have been
predicated.
All of those
concerns
remain, and
they were
raised by
myself and by
other American
officials in
the African
Leaders Summit
when President
Nkurunziza
visited not
long ago.
The only thing
I can say I
guess beyond
that at this
point is that
we are also
deeply
committed to
ensuring that
the UN
maintains a
role – an
important role
on the ground
in Burundi in
the coming
weeks,
particularly
as we approach
the elections,
which are
likely to be a
very tense
time, given
what the
government has
done against
opposition
parties, and
given that,
again, the
circumstances
for civil
society and
the opposition
have grown
much more
difficult in
recent weeks.
We don’t have
reason to
expect that
things are
suddenly going
to open and
that’s going
to create
tension, and I
will note that
the Council, I
think, has met
more on
Burundi in
recent months
than probably
in any other
analogous
period.
So again, this
is something
that I think
we have made
our views as a
council and we
have made our
views
bilaterally
speaking by
national
capacity very
well known to
the Burundi
authorities at
a very
combustible
time. Thank
you,
everybody.