After
UN Accepted
Nepalese
Arrested for
Torture, Ban
Waives
Immunity
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
January 10 --
It
was confirmed
to Inner City
Press on
January 7, by
UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman
Martin
Nesirky, that
a Nepalese
"expert on
mission" in
the UN Mission
in South Sudan
was arrested
in London, for
torture.
Since
then, Inner
City Press
asked Nesirky,
"does the
Nepalese
Colonel from
UNMISS have
immunity? Has
the Secretary
General been
asked to waive
immunity?"
Inner City
Press cited
the relevant
UN provision:
"SECTION
23. Privileges
and immunities
are granted to
experts in the
interests of
the United
Nations and
not for the
personal
benefit of the
individuals
themselves.
The
Secretary-General
shall have the
right and the
duty to waive
the immunity
of any expert
in any case
where, in his
opinion, the
immunity would
impede the
course of
justice and it
can be waived
without
prejudice to
the interests
of the United
Nations."
The UN replied
to Inner City
Press:
From:
UN
Spokesperson -
Do Not Reply
[at] un.org
Date: Wed, Jan
9, 2013 at
3:47 PM
Subject: Your
question on
the Nepalese
Colonel
To: Matthew
Russell Lee
[at]
innercitypress.com
The Nepalese
Colonel is an
expert on
mission
serving with
the United
Nations
Mission in
South Sudan
(UNMISS).
Although
experts on
Mission are
entitled to
the privileges
and immunities
under Article
VI and VII of
the 1946
Convention on
the Privileges
and Immunities
of the United
Nations, in
light of the
facts of this
case, the
Secretary-General
has determined
that the
Colonel does
not enjoy
immunity from
legal process
in respect of
the alleged
acts, which do
not relate to
the
performance of
his official
functions as
an expert on
mission, and
indeed are
alleged to
have taken
place long
before he
joined UNMISS.
The
Secretary-General
has also
waived the
Colonel's
immunity from
personal
arrest and
detention.
But
why didn't the
UN Department
of
Peacekeeping
Operations vet
this torturer
before
deployment to
South
Sudan?
Inner
City Press
has
asked how can
it be that the
UN Department
of
Peacekeeping
Operations
does not vet
those it sends
to countries
like South
Sudan, but
rather leaves
it up to the
Troop
Contributing
Country, which
obviously
would not
agree that it
own soldiers
were war
criminals?
Nesirky
replied
that the
person at
issue -- he
has been named
as Colonel
Kumar Lama --
was an "expert
on mission" in
UNMISS, and
the DPKO
expected Nepal
to vet him.
Inner
City Press
asked if there
is any class
of
peacekeeping
personnel
which the UN
itself vets.
The question
was not
immediately
answered.
Instead,
reference was
made to a
forthcoming or
"being rolled
out" policy on
vetting.
Where
is the policy?
Inner City
Press asked if
this new
policy would
apply to the
Congolese
soldiers in
Minova during
the 126 rapes
in late
November,
about which
DPKO chief
Herve Ladsous
has three
times
on
camera
refused to
answer Press
questions.
Nesirky
replied
with "three
words," or two
words: vetting
UN personnel.
So although
Ladsous' DPKO
supports and
works with
units of the
Congolese army
which it will
not specify,
this new
vetting policy
will not apply
to them, even
if they
committed mass
rape in
Minova.
Ladsous'
DPKO
and its
missions are
getting weaker
and weaker.
Recently UN
whistleblowers
complained to
Inner City
Press that the
mission in
Darfur,
UNAMID, gave
the Sudanese
government
veto rights
over its Civil
Protection
Strategy.
"It
went to the
Country Team
then to the
Sudanese
government in
September," a
source told
Inner City
Press. "And
nothing since.
There is no
leadership
from
headquarters."
The "strategy"
has not been
heard from
since.
Inner
City Press
asked on
January 7; as
of January 10
there has been
no answer.
Watch this
site.
Share |
, 
