On
UN's Murky
Repatriation
to S. Africa
from Darfur,
ICP Asks Why
DFS Is Paying
By Matthew
Russell Lee,
Exclusive Series
UNITED
NATIONS,
February 25 --
UN
Peacekeeping
under Herve
Ladsous was
willing to use
Congolese
troops in
Central
African
Republic who
ended up
engaging in
child rape and
other abuses.
Then they were
given ample
time to
repatriate or
leave the
country; some
twenty are
still there.
But
there are
other
inconsistencies
in Ladsous'
peacekeeping,
for example in
Darfur. There,
Ladsous more
forcefully
demanded the
repatriation
of South
Africa's
troops -- not
for sexual
abuse, but for
“tactical”
issues. Inner
City Press
exclusively
learned of
this and how
last week,
just before
the UN threw
Inner City
Press out on
February 19,
and declared
it Banned from
all UN
premises on
February 22. Petition
here.
Here,
exclusively,
is the
outrage.
Unlike with
“his”
Congolese
rapists in
CAR, Ladsous
so wanted the
South African
troops to
leave Darfur
that the UN
Department of
Field Support
is paying for
their
repatriation,
unlike in
cases of
other, poorer
countries.
This is
the lack of
oversight of
UN
Peacekeeping,
that money can
be used this
way. Is is the
same lack of
oversight
which allows
Ladsous to
cover up
rapes, from
Darfur to CAR,
then to openly
refuse to
answer Inner
City Press
questions
about the
cover ups. But
this one
involves
money, public
money.
On
February 25
after filing a
legal letter
with the UN to
not touch its
office and
papers, Inner
City Press
entered and
asked UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric, UN transcript:
Inner City
Press: In
Darfur, the…
South Africa
has said that
it's re… you
know, pulling
its entire
force back, 1
April, and
what I wanted
to ask is
whether… I've
heard and
published that
it's due to
something
called a
tactical
violation by
the South
African
battalion.
And I've also
heard that DFS
[Department of
Field Support]
is, unlike in
other
repatriation
cases, stands
to pay for the
entire
repatriation
to South
Africa.
Can you, one,
state why
they're being
repatriated,
and two, why
DFS would pay
for it?
Spokesman:
I do confirm
that they are
being
repatriated.
I will get you
some… I have
some detail… I
thought I had
some details
here, but
we'll see what
I can get you
right after
the briefing.
Inner City
Press: I
guess my
question is,
given this…
although this
doesn't appear
to be a case
of sexual
abuse
repatriation,
does Ban
Ki-moon's
stated
commitment to
transparency
and
repatriations
cover
repatriations
like
this?
And I want to
insist to know
who's paying,
and if the UN
is paying, why
it's paying.
Spokesman:
I will get
some… I will
get more
detail…
We'll
stay on this.
Amid a litany
of rape
charges
against UN
Peacekeeping
under Herve
Ladsous, Inner
City Press
exclusively
obtained and
on February 12
published UN
emails showing
another round
of sexual
abuse of
minors in
Ouaka
prefecture in
the Central
African
Republic by UN
Peacekeepers
from the
Democratic
Republic of
the Congo. Click
here to view.
While
the story
continues, we
note that
Reuters UN
bureau first
triest to
undermine the
story, then
stole it
without credit
- and on
February 18
tried to
undermine
Inner City
Press
live-streaming
Periscope
video from the
UN Security
Council
stakeout.
Welcome to the
UN Censorship
Alliance.
After
Inner City
Press on
February 15
asked about
the email its
had published
- and Reuters'
UN bureau
chief Louis
Charbonneau,
notably, tried
to dismiss
and then stole
the story
- on February
16 UN Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq in
the noon
briefing read
out a
statement
confirming
nearly all of
the email
Inner City
Press had
published:
that there
were four new
victims,
minors, troops
from DR Congo.
But Haq
did not say
that two of
the victims
had children
from the
statutory
rape. So Inner
City Press
asked Haq to
confirm that,
and asked who
would pay: the
UN or the DRC
soldiers? Haq
said there are
meetings in
Ban's office
to respond to
just such
issues, after
December's
Deschamps
report. Video
here.
And then
Reuters, even
while its
editor Dan
Grebler said
the first
theft was
being looked
into, just
retyped and
stole it
again, this
time by its UN
correspondent
Michelle
Nichols, here.
It was
this same
Nichols who,
at the UN
Security
Council
stakeout on
February 18
while Inner
City Press was
live-streaming
after asking
about a draft
statement on
Palestine, cut
in loudly with
"I see you
Periscoping!"
And? So what?
UN missions
and the UN
itself are
broadcasting
inside the UN
on Periscope.
Why would one
media try to
censor others?
So
Inner City
Press raised
the issue of
theft of
exclusives
(and lack of
objectivity,
at least at
the UN) to
Reuters
itself. For
now, we've
received this,
cc-ed also not
only to the
(repeat)
offender but
also to
Reuters'
genial seeming
Brian Moss and
Clive McKeef:
"Thank you for
bringing this
matter to my
attention. The
appropriate
Reuters staff
will look into
it and get
back to you as
soon as
feasible.
Regards,
Dan Grebler
Desk Editor,
Americas Desk"
But but
February 18,
still no
response. It's
not that
complicated.
Or was the
Reuters
correspondent's
"intervention"
the response?
We'll have
more on this
too.
The
underlying
emails, dated
February 11,
2016, describe
at least four
underage
victims, two
of whom were
impregnated by
the rapist UN
peacekeepers
-- "in the
locality
Ngakobo in the
Ouaka
prefecture."
On
February 15,
after emailing
questions for
two days to UN
spokespeople
in CAR and New
York, Inner
City Press at
the UN's noon
briefing asked
UN Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq
about the
rapes, and the
email it
published on
February 12.
Haq answered,
dodging on
part of the
email but not
denying it. Video here.
Then
Associated
Press asked,
what about
these new
allegations? Video here. Haq
answered - and
from that, AP
wrote its own
derivative and
belated story
-- without
credit, and
without any
mention of the
critique of
the UN in the
emails. This
is how it
works, or
doesn't.
This too
- Reuters UN
"bureau chief"
on Monday
evening first
reflexively
came to the
UN's defense
saying that
"Alleged
Central
African
Republic rapes
UN spox talked
about today
are same ones
UN CAR said
Feb 4 it was
probing,"
citing (what
else) a
Reuters story
of February 4
-- about a
Human Rights
Watch report
about rapes in
Bambari. But read
the February
11 emails
Inner City
Press
exclusively
published,
here:
“Herewith
sharing with
you a report I
have just
received from
UNICEF
indicating
four minor
girls aged
between 16 and
17 years were
victims of
sexual
exploitation
and abuse
allegedly
committed by
members of the
DRC battalion
in the
locality
Ngakobo in the
Ouaka
prefecture.”
Up the
email chain,
Mercedes
Gervilla in UN
headquarters
writes that
“it would seem
that many
among the
troops
concerned,
including
Commanding
officers were
well aware of
the abuse to
which these
children were
being
subjected. I
also regret to
inform you
that in
addition to
these new 4
cases, there
will likely be
two
more...”.
[We'll have
more on this.]
And there is a
history: this
same Reuters
UN Bureau
Chief Lou
Charbonneau,
when
challenged,
wrote to
Stephane
Dujarric, UN
Spokesman,
trying to get
Inner City
Press thrown
out of the UN,
here.
When
this was
exposed,
Charbonneau
cited Reuters
to get his
email to the
UN taken out
of Google's
search, saying
he never meant
for it to be
public and it
was somehow
copyrighted. (See his filing
here, made
public by
EFF's
ChillingEffects.org).
That's
censorship...
by Reuters.
This
this case,
after being
shown this
reflexive
defense of the
UN was wrong,
Reuters simply
re-wrote the
story and
stole it, with
no credit.
And now
we must go
back:
Charbonneau
announced a
policy of not
crediting
Inner City
Press, see
here.
This was
raised at the
time to
Reuters,
including to
Stephen J.
Adler. What
kind of
company is
this?
(Inner
City Press
previously
asked the
decaying UN
Correspondents
Association, while
it tried to
censor Press
coverage of
its boss,
to promulgate
a best
practice for
media at the
UN to credit
others'
exclusives; it
never
happened. AP
at the UN
speaks for
this UNCA, and
apparently it
for AP.)
Having been
told by
sources of
more rapes by
peacekeepers
in the Central
African
Republic,
Inner City
Press on
January 26 reported
them and on
January 27
asked the UN's
spokesperson
Stephane
Dujarric to
confirm them -
but he
wouldn't. UN transcript
here. Video here.
So what
is the
protocol of UN
Peacekeeping
under Herve
Ladsous, who
linked the
rapes to
"R&R," here? How many more do
they know
about?
The UN report
on rapes
in the Central
African
Republic,
released on
December 17,
found that UN
Peacekeeping's
Under
Secretary
General Herve
Ladsous
“illustrate[s]
the UN's
failure to
respond to
allegations of
serious human
rights
violations in
the meaningful
way.”
Ladsous
has yet to
take any
questions
about the
report...
When
the Panel's
three members
held their
December press
conference,
Inner City
Press asked
about Ladsous'
failure to vet
and his
linking of
rapes to
“R&R.” Video here. Marie
Deschamps said
pointedly she
wouldn't
comment on
Ladsous'
remarks;
Yasmin Sooka
said these are
crimes for
punishment,
not
recreation.
As the
last question,
Inner City
Press asked
what it had
wanted to ask
Ban, and tried
to ask
Dujarric: what
does this say
about Ban's
management? Video of Q&A here. Didn't
Ban's chief of
staff
Malcorra,
criticized in
the report, do
it for Ban?
Didn't the
“senior
official” who
ostensibly let
the rape
information
die on the
vine in the
38th floor
work in an
atmosphere
created by
Ban's nine
years? We will
pursue this.
, 
