Kenya's
Security Law
Threatens Free
Press, US
Says, FUNCA's
Experience
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
December 19, more
here -- On
Kenya's new
counter-terrorism
law, the US
State
Department's
Spokesperson
on December 19
said:
"The
U.S.
Government is
firmly
committed to
supporting
Kenya's
efforts to
defeat
al-Shabaab and
to ensure
security of
all of its
citizens.
We are
disappointed,
however, by
the very
limited time
allowed for
debate and
consultation
on the 2014
Security Laws
(Amendment)
Bill prior to
its passage
and enactment
into
law. We
are also
concerned
about several
provisions in
the
legislation,
including
those that
appear to
limit freedom
of assembly
and media, and
access to
asylum for
refugees.
As a key
partner in the
global effort
to counter
terrorism, we
expect the
Kenyan
Government to
ensure that
its
counter-terrorism
efforts live
up to Kenya’s
international
commitments
and its own
constitution.
Protecting
Kenya’s
constitution
and upholding
human rights,
democracy, and
international
obligations
are among the
most effective
ways to
bolster
security.
"The U.S.
Government is
also seeking
further
information
about the
December 16
announcement
by the Kenyan
NGO Board to
deregister
hundreds of
NGOs for
failing to
file their
audited
reports and
another 15 for
suspected
links to
terrorism.
The 15 NGOs
have not been
identified.
A strong civil
society is
vital to
democracy,
security, and
prosperity.
We urge the
Government of
Kenya to
ensure the
regulation of
NGOs is
transparent,
fair, and
grounded in
clear criteria
that do not
limit free
expression,
association,
or assembly."
Back on
December 9,
with the
International
Criminal
Court's
Assembly of
State Parties
meeting in the
UN, four
non-governmental
organizations
held
a press
conference
and took
questions.
Inner City
Press asked
then about one
of the Court's
biggest
failures: the
continued mass
rape and
impunity in
Sudan long
after
President Omar
al Bashir was
indicted for
genocide by
the ICC.
Since UN
Peacekeeping
chief Herve
Ladsous
met with ICC
indictee
Bashir without
ever
explaining
why, and
has since
played a role
in the
covering up of
attacks in
Darfur
including some
200 rapes in
Tabit, Inner
City Press
asked the four
NGOs what they
thought about
this, and the
rapes.
But it was
only the rapes
which drew an
answer any of
the panelists,
and then only
from one
panelist, who
said WIGJ her
NGO is
conducting its
own inquiry
into the rapes
in Tabit
(Inner City
Press asked to
be kept
informed.)
Amnesty and
FIDH did not
answer the
Darfur or
Ladsous
questions. In
fairness
perhaps this
is because
these
questions
where lumped
in with three
other medias'
questions --
because the
NGOs, or the
moderator from
the Coalition
for the ICC,
set aside the
first question
for the old UN
Correspondents
Association,
whose outgoing
head proceeded
to ask four
questions,
taking up half
the question
time (it is
unclear if any
story would
come from
those four
questions).
This
is today's
UNCA: the UN's
Censorship
Alliance.
And
this is the
UN: as of 10
pm, the 1:30
pm press
conference
video was not
on the UN's
website.
On Sudan: ten
days after
after the UN
issued a
statement on
its internal
investigation
into charges
it covered-up
attacks in
Darfur, its
UNAMID mission
there under
Herve Ladsous
on November 9
issued a
statement that
"village
community
leaders
reiterated to
UNAMID that
they coexist
peacefully
with local
military
authorities in
the area" and
that no
evidence of
rape was
found.
On
December 4,
Inner City
Press asked
Ladsous, Why
did UNAMID not
say on
November 9
that it was
surrounded by
soldiers? Video here, and
embedded
below.
As is his
habit, Ladsous
did not answer
on December 4,
even with his
UN
Peacekeeping
under fire for
cover ups. It
is a pattern
with Ladsous.
He refused
Press
questions for
months about
rapes in
Eastern Congo
in Minova by
DRC Army units
his UN
Peacekeeping
supports: video compilation here; Vine
here.
On the morning
of December 4
Ladsous
claimed to the
Security
Council that
UNAMID's
findings were
"inconclusive"
due to army
presence. But
his UNAMID's
press release
whitewashed
the situation
in Tabit and
did not
mention the
army presence.
The
covering-up
continues,
with no
credibility,
as Ladsous did
on the Minova
raped by DR
Congo Army
units his UN
Peacekeeping
supports.
On
November 25, a
wide range of
groups in
Darfur
petitioned the
UN Security
Council about
UNAMID's
malfeasance.
Inner City
Press that
morning
obtained the
letter (h/t)
and put
it online in
full here,
and below.
While
UN
Spokesperson
Stephane
Dujarric, when
Inner City
Press asked at
noon, said he
had not seen
the letter, by
6 pm when
Inner City
Press asked
November's
Security
Council
president
about the
letter, he
confirmed
receipt.
Quinlan said
he had
circulated the
letter to the
other 14
Council
members -- as
of 3 pm, one
of them had
not yet
received it --
and that he
expects the
issues to be
considered
when the
Security
Council takes
up UNAMID
"next week,
under Chad's
presidency."
(On
November 26,
the UK Mission
to the UN"s
Arran Skinner
told Inner
City Press, "I
can confirm
that we
received the
letter
indirectly. In
terms of
contents, on
alleged rape
cases, the
Security
Council issued
a press
statement
calling for a
full
investigation.
The UK
initiated the
call for a
press
statement and
so agree that
this issue
needs to be
looked at."
Another
Security
Council
mission has
yet to confirm
receipt or
comment, but
it's
expected.)
On Ban
Ki-moon's
report into
UNAMID
under-reporting
attacks on
civilians and
even
peacekeepers,
Inner City
Press asked
and Quinlan
repeated it
should be
taken up soon,
the question
is finding the
right,
credible (or
disinterested)
briefer. Watch
this site for
that. Here is
the letter:
11/25/2014
Dear Gary
Quinlan,
Australia's
Permanent
Representative
to the United
Nations,President
of the United
Nations
Security
Council,
November 2014
United Nations
New York, NY
c. Ban
Ki-moon, UN
Secretary-General
Valerie Amos,
Under-Secretary-General
for the UN
Office for the
Coordination
of
Humanitarian
Affairs
Hervé Ladsous,
Under-Secretary-General
of the UN
Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations
United Nations
Dear
Ambassador
Quinlan,
As Darfuris in
the diaspora,
we have
watched with
great sorrow
and growing
anger the
plight of our
people in this
ravaged region
of Sudan.
Darfur at one
time commanded
considerable
attention in
the United
Nations, but
no longer.
The
international
community in
general has
drifted into
an acceptance
that somehow
the UN/African
Union Mission
in Darfur
(UNAMID) is an
adequate means
of protecting
millions of
vulnerable
civilians. It
is clearly
not, and the
recent mass
sexual assault
on women and
girls in
Tabit, North
Darfur, makes
this all too
clear.
But the
disgraceful
"investigation"
by UNAMID of
events in
Tabit should
be the
occasion for
our
remembering
that this is,
in fact, a
UN-authorized
mission; it
has UN Chapter
7 authority;
it is deployed
with a Status
of Forces
Agreement
(SOFA)
negotiated by
the UN and
African Union
(February
2008), even as
the agreement
is now simply
a travesty,
violated at
will by the
Khartoum
regime. It is
not, however,
simply the
failing of
UNAMID and the
African Union
that must be
reckoned with.
It is the
Security
Council, the
Secretariat,
and UN
Department of
Peacekeeping
Affairs (UN
DPKO) that
must accept
responsibility
for a failing
mission; and
it is UN DPKO
that must do
most to
explain what
it will do in
light of this
failure.
It is in this
context that
we demand that
the following
questions be
addressed
forthrightly
and
expeditiously:
[1] UNAMID,
even if
augmented and
re-directed
along the
lines recently
suggested by
Secretary Ban
Ki-moon,
cannot provide
adequate
security for
the people of
Darfur. We
demand that
plans be made
immediately
for an UN
force that can
adequately
take on the
"responsibility
to protect"
civilians at
risk, per the
September 2005
UN World
Summit Outcome
Document (§38,
§39).
[2] We demand
that the
Security
Council and UN
DPKO confront
the Khartoum
regime over
its countless
flagrant
violations of
the SOFA.
[3] We demand
that UN DPKO
undertake a
full review of
UNAMID's
performance to
date. The
context here
should be the
fact that more
than 2 million
Darfuris have
been newly
displaced
since UNAMID
took up its
mandate in
January 2008;
we would
remind you of
how closely
violence and
displacement
have
correlated
over the past
decade of
conflict.
Moreover,
insecurity has
increased
steadily for
more than two
years—this on
top of the
insecurity
that prevailed
so widely in
earlie years.
[4] We demand
that UN DPKO,
in
consultation
with the
Security
Council and
the
Secretariat,
formulate
plans to
provide
adequate
protection to
the civilian
population of
Darfur. This
must include
contingency
plans for a
very rapid
acceleration
of what is
already
unacceptable
insecurity for
civilians and
humanitarians.
[5] We demand
in particular
that UN DPKO
ensure that
UNAMID is
prepared to
provide
adequate
protection to
the people of
Tabit,
especially
girls and
women, from
retaliation by
Khartoum for
having had the
misfortune of
making clear
to the world
just how
brutal this
regime is.
[6] We further
demand that UN
DPKO instruct
UNAMID to
provide all
necessary
protection to
humanitarian
efforts to
reach Tabit.
Many residents
have been
badly
traumatized
and injured.
[7] We also
demand
accountability
from those who
are
responsible
for the
failures that
led to the
brutal crimes
at Tabit, and
so many others
over so many
years.
Accountability
must extend to
the leadership
of UNAMID and
the African
Union Peace
and Security
Council, as
well as to the
UN DPKO. As
part of this
assigning of
responsibility,
there must be
a full and
competent
investigation,
authorized by
the Security
Council of how
this atrocity
crime was
essentially
white-washed
by all
parties, most
notably
UNAMID. But we
must emphasize
as well that
we are deeply
troubled by
the silence of
UN DPKO.
[8] We demand
that UNAMID be
guided by the
"rules of
engagement"
for UNAMID in
Darfur that
have been
previously
negotiated. UN
DPKO must
ensure that
these "rules
of engagement"
are widely
understood and
dictate the
actions taken
by UNAMID
personnel.
[9] We demand
that UN DPKO
assess the
possibility
that
insecurity is
now so great
that there
will be an
exodus of
international
NGOs providing
critical
relief aid to
Darfuris. Many
INGOs have
expressed
their deep
concern for
the safety of
their workers
in Darfur,
more than 95
percent of
whom are
Sudanese
nationals. The
safety of
these workers
must not be
discounted
because they
are African
and Khartoum
permits no
news coverage
of Darfur and
no human
rights
reporting
presence.
Would relief
workers
similarly
threatened in
other parts of
the world be
regarded in
the same light
as Sudanese
relief
workers?
[10] We demand
that UN DPKO
communicate
with the UN
Office for the
Coordination
of
Humanitarian
Affairs (OCHA)
in order to
ascertain when
a continued
humanitarian
presence by
the UN might
become
impossible for
security
reasons.
[11] We demand
that UN DPKO
assess the
implications
for future UN
peacekeeping
missions if
UNAMID is
allowed to
continue to
fail so
conspicuously.
The events at
Tabit and the
performance of
UNAMID
investigators
bring this
question into
high relief.
[12] Most
generally, we
demand that UN
DPKO speak
forthrightly
about its
understanding
of the
limitations
and weaknesses
of present
peacekeeping
in Darfur and
the provision
of civilian
security.
We remain
troubled by
the comments
of the
Under-Secretary
General for
DPKO when in
spring 2012 he
declared that
security
"conditions on
the ground"
had improved
sufficiently
that UNAMID
could begin to
draw down its
forces (a
figure of
4,000
personnel was
promulgated at
the time).
This ghastly
error in
judgment was
never
acknowledged,
even as by
July of 2012
we saw a
tremendous
upsurge in
violence,
especially in
North Darfur.
How can we
trust
statements
from UN DPKO
when egregious
errors are not
acknowledged?
[13] We demand
that the
United Nations
collectively
develop an
effective
response to
the gross
deficiencies
of UNAMID in
protecting
civilians and
humanitarians.
UN DPKO in
particular
must develop
benchmarks for
assessing
UNAMID's
performance
and formulate
emergency
contingency
plans in the
event of a
massive and
precipitous
withdrawal of
humanitarian
personnel.
These are
matters of the
deepest
concern to us;
to date, there
are far too
few answers
from UN about
why the Darfur
genocide
continues more
than a decade
after it
began. We
demand clear
evidence that
the people of
Darfur will
not be further
abandoned.
Sincerely,
Darfur
People's
Association of
New York
Darfur
People's
Association of
Maryland
Fur Cultural
Revival
Darfur
People's
Association of
Houston
Darfur
People's
Association of
Dallas
Darfur
People's
Association of
Illinois
Darfur Human
Rights - USA
Massalit Sons'
Association -
USA
Darfur
Rehabilitation
Project
Sudanese
Revolutionary
Front
Sudanese
Opposition
Forces- USA
Broad National
Front
Justice &
Equality
Movement -
Sudan
Sudan
Liberation
Movement - MM
Sudan
Liberation
Movement -
Wahid
SPLM-N
Umma Party
Girifna
Sudanese
Marginalized
Forum - USA
Sudanese
National
Democratic
Forum -
California
National
Sudanese
Alliance -
Philadelphia
Peace &
Democracy
Center - New
Jersey
Democratic
Alliance, USA
Federal
Democratic
Alliance
Sudanese Front
for Change
Kush
Liberation
Movement
Democratic
Unionist Party
Activists
without
Borders
Sudanese
Congress Party
Darfur
People's
Association of
Boston
Darfur
People's
Association of
Indiana
Darfur
People's
Association of
Utah
Darfur
People's
Association of
Nebraska
Darfur
People's
Association of
Seattle
Darfur Son's
Union of
Greater
Washington DC
Darfur
People's
Association of
Iowa
Darfur
People's
Association of
Arizona
Darfur Women
Action Group
Darfur
Association of
the United
States
Darfur
Self-reliance
Organization -
San Francisco,
California
Inner
City Press on
November 21
asked UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric to
explain
UNAMID's
November 9
press release
in the context
of the
internal
memorandum,
put online here,
that UNAMID
knew Sudanese
security was
filming the
interviews,
had even put
together a
"committee" of
Thabit
residents to
speak to
UNAMID. Video
here.
Dujarric said
he wouldn't
start now to
comment on
leaks. There
are other leaks
implicating UN
Peacekeeping's
Herve Ladsous.
Is not
commenting,
like
Ladsous has
refused to
answer Press
questions,
the right
approach for
the UN?
Inner
City Press on
November 19
asked UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric what
the UN would
do in the wake
of its (cover
up) November 9
press release,
and about
bombing in
North Darfur
three days
earlier.
On
November 20,
UN Associate
Spokesperson
Vannina
Maestracci was
in charge of
the UN noon
briefing, and
read out a
statement that
UNAMID is
trying to
verify the
reports of
bombing on
November
16. One
has to wonder,
are they
mishandling
this like the
rape reports
in Thabit?
So Inner City
Press asked,
what is
actually being
done to get
into Thabit,
after the
cover-up press
release? Inner
City Press
asked about
UNAMID's
acting head
Abiodun
Bashua's
reference to
"rumors" of
rape in Thabit
- is that the
UN's position?
And why hasn't
UNAMID
accessed the
site(s) of the
November 16
bombings, four
full days
later?
On
November 21,
Dujarric
returned with
an answer,
that UNAMID
had in this
case done out
and had found
"craters." But
apparently
UNAMID drew no
conclusions
from that.
Inner City
Press at the
November 17 UN
noon briefing
asked Ban's
deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq
about Sudanese
forces having
filmed
UNAMID's
interviews and
to confirm the
new blockage.
Haq
did not
comment on
UNAMID letting
its interviews
about rape be
filmed by
Sudanese
authorities;
he confirmed
the blockage
and said to
expect a
comment from
Ban.
And two hours
later it came:
"The
Secretary-General
is deeply
troubled about
persistent
allegations of
mass rape in
Thabit, North
Darfur. The
African
Union-United
Nations Hybrid
Operation in
Darfur
(UNAMID)
visited Thabit
on 9 November.
However, the
heavy presence
of military
and police in
Thabit made a
conclusive
investigation
difficult.
UNAMID has
since then
attempted to
gain further
access to shed
light on what
happened.
"The
Secretary-General
is concerned
that after
intense
consultations
with the
Government in
Khartoum and
with local
authorities in
Darfur, UNAMID
was yesterday
denied access
to Thabit.
Only a full
investigation
by UNAMID will
help shed
light over
these serious
allegations.
The
Secretary-General
therefore
urges the
Government of
Sudan to grant
UNAMID
unfettered
access,
without
further delay,
to Thabit and
its population
so that these
reports can be
verified."
Ban does not
mention that
his and Herve
Ladsous'
mission had
this to say,
on November 9:
"Village
community
leaders
reiterated to
UNAMID that
they coexist
peacefully
with local
military
authorities in
the area. None
of those
interviewed
confirmed that
any incident
of rape took
place in
Thabit on the
day of that
media report.
The team
neither found
any evidence
nor received
any
information
regarding the
media
allegations
during the
period in
question.”
Who is going
to take
action, on
whom, about
that? Inner
City Press and
the new Free
UN Coalition
for Access are
asking.
On November
13, Inner City
Press again
asked UN
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq
what had been
done in the
last 48 hours.
Video
here.
Haq
was unable to
describe any
investigation
done without
Sudanese
military
presence;
instead, he
said that the
Force
Commander of
UNAMID,
already
charged with
cover-ups,
spoke with
Herve Ladsous,
who refused to
answer Press
questions
about 130
rapes by the
DR Army in
Minova. Video
here.
How to have
confidence in
this
investigation?
On
November 11,
Inner City
Press again
asked UN
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq
about it:
Inner
City Press: I
wanted to ask
again about
the
allegations of
rape in North
Darfur.
Radio Dabanga
there has not
only
questioned,
you know, the
UNAMID
[African
Union-United
Nations Hybrid
Operation in
Darfur] press
statement but
has
interviewed
both victims
and has quoted
a local
community
leader in
Tabit,
basically
threatening
people that if
they spoke on
the rapes to
UNAMID, they
would face the
consequences.
So I wanted to
know, now at
this remove…
yesterday the
President of
the Council
spoke about
it, at this
remove, what
is UNAMID
going to do to
get to the
bottom of
it? And
also, the
reporting to
Ms. Aicha
Elbasry’s
allegations,
who would
brief the
Security
Council on
that? He
said
yesterday, the
President of
the Council,
that they are
looking to
take it up and
are looking
for the right
briefers.
Does the
Secretariat
have in mind
either the
author of the
report or who
would be the
appropriate
briefer?
Thanks.
Deputy
Spokesman:
As the Council
President
informed you,
they'll be
looking at
briefers, so
we'll work
that out with
them.
Regarding your
initial
question, yes,
we've been in
touch with the
UN-African
Union Mission,
UNAMID, who
have informed
us that
security
personnel were
in fact
present during
UNAMID's
mission to
Tabit.
The African
Union-UN
Mission in
Darfur will
continue to
look into the
rape
allegations in
the area of
Tabit, North
Darfur.
As reported to
the Security
Council
yesterday, the
findings of
the UNAMID
team, which
was granted
access to
Tabit on 9
November, are
inconclusive
and need
further
investigation.
UNAMID remains
committed to
this and it
will revert
with any
additional
findings that
might shed
light on these
allegations.
Inner City
Press:
[Inaudible] I
just wanted to
ask you again
if there's
been any
reflection
again on that
line where it
says
residents… and
I'm going to
paraphrase it,
residents said
that they get
along fine
with the
military.
Just seemed
the line was
such a
clunker,
basically, it
was totally
inconsistent
with other
reports…
Deputy
Spokesman:
I'm not going
to
second-guess
how my
colleagues
write press
releases.
Different
press releases
are written by
different
people at
different
times.
Inner City
Press:
Who wrote this
one?
Deputy
Spokesman:
Someone from
the
Mission.
The point is:
you're
writing,
trying to get
all the
information
out as best
you can in the
circumstances
you
have.
What I have
been able to
say right now
is that we are
aware that
security
personnel was
present during
UNAMID's
mission there.
We'll have
more on this.
Later on
November 11
Inner City
Press asked
International
Criminal Court
prosecutor
Fatou Bensouda
if she had
seen the whole
UN report on
allegations of
cover-ups by
UNAMID, or
only a
summary. She
said only the
summary, and
only the day
before. We'll
have more on
this too.
On November
10,
Inner City
Press asked UN
Security
Council
president for
November Gary
Quinlan of
Australia
about the
UNAMID press
release, and
if and when
the Security
Council will
act on the
"cover-up"
report,
including
requesting the
full report
from the
Secretariat,
which to date
has provided
only a
summary. Video
here. From
the Australian
transcript:
Inner
City Press:
Sure, thanks a
lot. I wanted
to ask on
Darfur. Thanks
for what you
said about
what Ms
Bangura said.
There’s a
press release
put out by
UNAMID that
has this line
in it:
“Village
community
leaders
reiterated to
UNAMID that
they co-exist
peacefully
with local
military
authorities in
the area.” The
press release
doesn’t
mention at all
the military
presence. So I
wanted to ask
you, one, if
you could
comment, what
do you make of
this press
release by
UNAMID? And
two, does the
report by the
Secretary-General
on allegations
of covers up
by UNAMID of
attacks on
civilians and
on
peacekeepers,
where does it
stand? He said
that the, the
Spokesperson
said that an
executive
summary of the
report went to
the Council.
Is the Council
going to have
a meeting on
it? Are you
going to have
a full
report?
And are you
satisfied with
UNAMID’s press
release on
these
allegations of
rape?
AMBASSADOR
QUINLAN:
Matthew, on
the second
part of the
question.
Members of the
Council are
very concerned
on this whole
question of
UNAMID and
UNAMID
reporting, but
also what
UNAMID is
doing. And one
of the big
issues there
is the denial
of access and
restrictions
that are
imposed
largely by the
Government of
Sudan, with
whom UNAMID
has a formal
arrangement on
access. But
also, of
course, by
armed
opposition
groups and
that is
inherently
more difficult
sometimes to
get the access
that’s needed.
That
report has not
yet been
discussed by
the Council. I
expect that it
will be over
the next
couple of
weeks. A
number of
members of the
Council are
extremely
interested in
it. We want to
be sure that
we’ve lined up
the briefers
from the
Secretariat to
have a proper
discussion of
that report.
Secondly,
in relation to
the UNAMID
press release,
I think the
key is that
they’ve
indicated that
they had
access but it
was the first
time since
November 4,
when they’d
been seeking
access. And
they had
proactively
been seeking
access to be
able to
undertake
investigations.
That’s a long
period to have
access denied,
by the way, in
a circumstance
like rape. You
really do
need, as Ms
Bangura
reminded us,
to have access
straight away,
for obvious
reasons. So
that’s one
point I’d
make. The
second point
is UNAMID has
made it
extremely
clear in its
press release
that it will
conduct
further
follow-up
actions,
including
possible
further
investigations
and patrols
and that they
will do that
in cooperation
with the
Government of
Sudan and
other parties.
We have
confidence
that that will
happen. SRSG
Bangura is
making this a
top priority
for her and so
is the
Secretariat
itself and we
were reassured
about that
this morning
by ASG Mulet.
So I think
that’s
basically it.
We'll continue
to follow this
-- but how can
a peacekeeping
mission
already
accused of
covering up
for the
Sudanese
government
say, today,
that "village
community
leaders
reiterated to
UNAMID that
they coexist
peacefully
with local
military
authorities in
the area"? To
some, this is
shocking - and
indicative of
problems in
today's UN
Peacekeeping.
Inner
City Press on
November 7
asked UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric about
the challenges
to the UN's
statement it
couldn't and
didn't access
the site of
mass rapes in
Tabit in
Darfur. Video
here; transcript:
Inner
City Press:
there are
witnesses in
Darfur who
actually say
that the
UNAMID
investigators,
rather than
being stopped
outside Tabit
went inside
and
interviewed
four people
and after that
they were
spoken to by
Sudanese
military
intelligence.
And so these
are credible
people that
have been
reporting on
Darfur for
some time and
see the
reports being
issued by
UNAMID
although as a
reaction to
the quote
“cover up
report” as not
being
accurate.
And I wanted
to know, can
you check with
them to be
sure that the
UNAMID
investigators
didn't in fact
enter Tabit
Tuesday at 5
am and whether
they were
spoken to by
Sudanese
intelligence
and decided to
say that they
hadn't been
able to enter
the town?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
I'm not going
to judge the
credibility or
lack of
credibility of
people who
have been
reporting on
Darfur.
I mean, they
report.
What I can
tell you is
the Mission
clearly stands
by its
reporting.
They've sent
us a bit more
detail, said
the
verification
patrol
comprising of
military
police and
civilian
personnel on
Tuesday, 4
November, that
it was sent on
Tuesday, 4
November, from
Shangil Tobaya
to Tabit to
14:50
hours, I
assume local
time.
The patrol was
denied access
at the
outskirts of
the town at a
Sudanese
military
checkpoint.
Attempts to
negotiate
access to
Tabit were
unfruitful and
the team
returned to
the base in
Shangil
Tobaya.
We've
repeated… the
Mission's
leadership has
repeated its
call to the
Government to
grant the UN,
to grant
UNAMID
unfettered
access to the
whole of
Darfur and
obviously
especially in
areas where
we're trying
to investigate
horrendous
reports of
mass
rape. So
that's a
longer, a long
way of saying
that the
Mission stands
by its
reporting.
But if UNAMID
and UN
Peacekeeping
was just outed
for
under-reporting
attacks, how
it is now
automatically
credible? On
November 6,
Inner City
Press asked
Dujarric about
similar
cover-ups in
Central
African
Republic,
exposed by an
Amnesty
International
report about
that country.
From
the UN's
transcript:
Inner
City Press:
I'm sure the
Secretary-General
has seen the
Amnesty
International's
report today
about the
peacekeeping
mission in
Central
African
Republic.
They
basically, I
mean, they say
a number of
things.
Maybe you have
some kind of
response to
it. But,
I wanted to
especially ask
you about the
reporting
aspect of it
they describe
a number of
killings and
attacks that
have taken
place in
Dekoa, Bambari
and elsewhere
in [the
Central
African
Republic]
about, which,
at least being
here every
day, I've
heard nothing
from this
podium.
So, I wanted
to know both
substantively
what's the
response of UN
peacekeeping
to not
protecting
civilians and
in terms of
communications
and
transparency
the response
to what
appears to be
an
underreporting
similar to
that analogous
to that in
Darfur?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
Sure.
Obviously, a
big part of
the Missions'
mandate is the
protection of
civilians.
The Mission,
its
peacekeeping
forces, its
formed police
units, are
doing that to
the best of
their
ability.
Obviously,
it's a very
challenging
situation.
It's a
challenging
terrain in
which they
work.
And there is,
obviously… one
could always
use more
troops and
more
police.
I'm not sure
they're up to
their mandated
force as of
yet. As
far as
reporting
goes, you know
we report from
here whatever
we receive
from the
Mission.
Inner City
Press: Because
of the Darfur
thing, I
wanted to
ask:
Their report
is very
detailed.
The report, it
says names of
places, number
of people
killed.
Maybe, first
of all, does
the Mission
send it to
[the
Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations] in
New York and
they're
supposed to
give it to
your
office?
At what point
has this
information in
the Amnesty
report, has it
reached New
York before or
is it a
surprise to
UN?
Spokesman:
I can only
speak to what
I receive from
the Mission
Back
on October 29,
Inner City
Press asked if
the full
Darfur report
will be
released, at
least to the
Security
Council, and
about
under-reporting
of attacks in
the Central
African
Republic. Video here.
Dujarric said
that even
before the
summary was
given to the
Security
Council
members -- so
that is
apparently all
that has been
given to them
-- UN missions
were told to
be sure to
report
attacks. He
said he reads
out what the
missions sent
him.
So has the UN
mission in
CAR, MINUSCA,
simply not
send in
reports about
killings in
Bambari and
elsewhere? We'll
see.
Despite
a request from
Inner City
Press and the
Free
UN Coalition
for Access
the UN will
not release
the report.
Back on
October 29, Inner
City Press
asked, given
that even the
sanitized
statement says
information on
attacks was
withheld from
the media and
UN
Headquarters -
at its
request? - who
is
responsible? Video here.
Back on
September 12,
eight days
after Inner
City Press
exclusively
reported
that the head
of the Darfur
peacekeeping
mission
Mohamed ibn
Chambas was
being given
the UN Office
in West Africa
post in Dakar,
and asked
about it,
the UN
confirmed the
move.
Inner City
Press has
asked on
September 5,
and did again
on September
12, if this
move didn't
undercut or
pre-judge the
UN's
investigation
into charges
that the
Darfur mission
under Chambas
under-reported
attacks on
civilians.
On September
12, UN
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric
insisted he
didn't want to
"pre-judge"
the
inquiry.
But by giving
the new post,
this has
already been
done. Now this
sanitized
statement,
with the
report still
withheld:
A
review,
initiated by
the
Secretary-General,
was conducted
into recent
allegations
that the
African
Union-United
Nations Hybrid
Operation in
Darfur
(UNAMID)
intentionally
sought to
cover up
crimes against
civilians and
peacekeepers.
The Review
Team examined
all the
material
related to 16
incidents,
which were the
basis of these
allegations.
It also
interviewed
former and
current staff
in UNAMID and
at UN
Headquarters.
The Review
Team did not
find any
evidence to
support these
allegations.
However, it
did find a
tendency to
under-report
unless
absolutely
certain of the
facts. In five
of the cases
examined, the
Mission did
not provide UN
Headquarters
with full
reports on the
circumstances
surrounding
these
incidents,
which involved
possible
wrongdoing by
Government or
pro-Government
forces. The
Review Team
also found
that the
Mission took
an unduly
conservative
approach to
the media,
maintaining
silence when
it could have
developed a
press line,
even in the
absence of all
the facts.
The
Secretary-General
is deeply
troubled by
these
findings. He
recognizes
that UNAMID
faces unique
challenges
owing to its
complex
mandate and
operating
environment.
Nevertheless,
keeping silent
or
under-reporting
on incidents
involving
human rights
violations and
threats or
attacks on UN
peacekeepers
cannot be
condoned under
any
circumstances.
The
Secretary-General
will take all
necessary
steps to
ensure full
and accurate
reporting by
UNAMID. Every
effort will be
made to ensure
that sensitive
information is
systematically
brought to the
attention of
UN
Headquarters
and the
Security
Council in a
timely
fashion.
UNAMID’s media
policy will be
re-examined to
ensure greater
openness and
transparency.
The Mission
will be
expected to
follow up
formally and
report on
Government
investigations
into incidents
where
peacekeepers
have been
killed or
injured.
Ensuring that
the UN speaks
out
consistently
against abuses
and identifies
the
perpetrators
is a key goal
of the
Secretary-General’s
Human Rights
up Front
initiative.
The
Secretary-General
will ensure
that all
missions are
provided with
clear guidance
on the
fulfilment of
their
reporting
obligations,
particularly
with regard to
human rights
and the
protection of
civilians. He
looks forward
to the
upcoming
review of UN
peace
operations as
an opportunity
to
comprehensively
address this
issue, which
is a core
element of his
Human Rights
up Front
initiative.
On August 22,
Inner City
Press asked:
Inner
City Press: in
Darfur, it
seems that Mr.
Mohamed ibn
Chambas went
to Kalma Camp
and met with
residents who
expressed a
variety of
complaints,
but he was
quoted as
saying there
that UNAMID
[African
Union-United
Nations Hybrid
Operation in
Darfur] cannot
stop
Government
forces from
entering camps
for the
displaced, and
it has left
many people
confused
whether, what
is UNAMID’s
role in terms
of protection
of civilians
given these
[inaudible]
entrances in
the camp and
people lying
on the ground?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
I will… we
will check
with the
Mission to
verify the
quotes and see
what actually
they have been
doing.
Two weeks, no
answer. Now
this.
UN
Peacekeeping
and its
mission in
Darfur
continue take
a selective
and lax
approach to
protecting
civilians.
This example
concerns the
UN's evolving
statements on
the Al-Salam
camp.
After
whistleblower
Aicha Elbasri
further
exposed UN
Peacekeeping
under Herve
Ladsous as
covering up
attacks in
Darfur, on
June 17
several
Security
Council
members joined
International
Criminal Court
prosecutor
Fatou Bensouda
in calling for
an
investigation.
On August 7,
Inner City
Press asked
the Joint
Special
Representative
of the African
Union-United
Nations
Mission in
Darfur,
Mohamed Ibn
Chambas, about
the status of
the probe.
Chambas told
Inner City
Press he had
met earlier in
the day with
the
commission,
whose members
will be on
their say to
Darfur.
Inner
City Press
asked if the
report will be
public.
Chambas only
said his staff
will
cooperate.
Apparently it
will be up to
Ban Ki-moon,
or even Herve
Ladsous, to
decide to
release or
withhold the
report.
Back
in Khartoum on
August 11,
Chambas said
this:
"And
on the attack
on Alsalam
camp, let me
state that we
have
information
about this. We
have always
stated that
the
responsibility
for
maintaining
law and order
in Sudan lays
with the
Government.
This is a
sovereign
country, it
has law
enforcement
obligations,
it has its
justice system
and the AU,
the UN is only
here to
facilitate and
ensure that
law and order
and justice
are maintained
and are
enforced
according to
due process of
law. So, we
want to say
that we will
continue to
engage with
the Government
of Sudan in
accordance
with its own
protection of
civilian
mandate and to
ensure that
the activities
on law
enforcement
agencies are
carried out
without
infringement
of the rights
of innocent
civilians
specially
vulnerable
communities in
IDP camps. We
hope that on
the other hand
residents of
IDP camps can
understand and
do understand
that
possession of
weapons,
carrying of
weapons is not
allowed in IDP
camps under
international
humanitarian
law.
"It’s also
imperative,
and it’s a
responsibility
of the leaders
of IDP camps
to ensure that
no one is
using these
camps to keep
weapons or to
hide weapons,
because this
is against
international
humanitarian
law. These are
the issues
involved there
and we as
UNAMID we will
continue to
work with both
sides, with
IDP leaders to
educate them
what is
permissible in
these camps
and what is
not, and at
the same time
working
with
Government to
enforce
legitimately
law and order
but to do that
respecting the
civic and
human rights
of the
citizens and
also
respecting due
process of
law. Thank
you."
Since this
seemed to
defer to
Sudan's Abu
Tira, and even
to blame the
victims, Inner
City Press on
August 13
asked:
Inner
City Press: I
wanted to ask
about Darfur,
Missouri and
Afghanistan.
On Darfur,
photos have
come out of
the Sudanese
uniformed Abu
Tira forces
going through
a refugee camp
or [internally
displaced
persons] camp
in El Salam
and making the
residents lie
on the
ground.
And Mr.
Chambas was
asked about it
and said that
this was
entirely up to
the Sudanese
and it just
seems sort of
strange. I
mean, I know
there is a
Human Rights
component to
these
peacekeeping
missions.
Does the UN,
does UNAMID
[United
Nations Hybrid
Operation in
Darfur] or
does anyone in
the
Secretariat,
are they aware
of these
photographs?
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:
I will check.
Twenty three
hours later,
Dujarric sent
nothing to
Inner City
Press. But
UNAMID issued
a belated
statement,
which seems to
contradict or
attempt to
rehabilitate
Chambas'
dismissive
August 11
comments:
"Following
a security
raid conducted
on Al Salam
IDP camp on 5
August when
individuals
were arrested
for alleged
possession of
illegal drugs,
weapons and
ammunition,
UNAMID
monitored the
trials of
those arrested
during the
operation;
most of whom
have since
been released.
UNAMID has
been engaging
relevant state
authorities on
the conditions
of those still
being
detained.
"Other
security raids
have been
conducted in
Otash and
Dereig camps
and are part
of a wider
campaign by
the South
Darfur
authorities to
address the
high level of
criminality in
the State,
especially
around Nyala.
"The security
raids have
generated
alarm and
anxiety
amongst IDPs
in Kalma camp,
who are
anticipating a
similar
operation at
their camp and
have expressed
their concerns
to UNAMID."
We'll
continue on
this.
Inner City
Press asked UN
deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq if
an independent
investigation
of Ladsous' UN
Peacekeeping
will be done,
and if not,
why not? Video
here.
Haq claimed
that UN
Peacekeeping
is already
acting on
Elbasri's
complaints,
and that it
had been
telling the
press about
it. Inner City
Press asked,
where have
these updates
been provided.
Haq
cited a
read-out given
in March,
largely
generic; then
he said the
requests made
on June 17
would be
studied.
Now
on July 2,
Ban's
spokesman
Dujarric - in
the midst of a
controversy
about a
non-factual
response on
June 27, not
corrected when
asked June 30
and July 1,
about Ladsous'
mission in the
DRC flying
sanctioned
FDLR leaders
around,
released this:
"The
Secretary-General
is concerned
about the
recent serious
allegations
against the
African
Union-United
Nations
Mission in
Darfur
(UNAMID).
These
allegations
cover a wide
range of
issues,
including
inaccurate
reporting of
the facts on
the ground in
Darfur,
specific
instances of
failure to
protect
civilians and
accusations of
mismanagement
of UNAMID.
"UNAMID has
undergone
several
investigations
and reviews
over the last
two years,
which have
sought to
address both
strategic
issues and
specific
incidents
related to the
Mission's
performance.
The
Secretary-General’s
Special Report
of 25 February
2014 provides
an overview of
the strategic
and managerial
challenges
faced by the
Mission and
the work being
done at United
Nations
Headquarters
and in UNAMID
to address
them.
"The
Secretary-General
remains
committed to
improving
UNAMID's
performance
and is
determined to
take all
necessary
steps to
correct any
wrongdoing. He
has instructed
the
Secretariat to
review the
reports of all
investigations
and inquiries
undertaken
since mid-2012
to ensure that
their
recommendations
have been
implemented
and that any
relevant
issues have
been fully
addressed.
This review,
to be
completed
within one
month, will
enable the
Secretary-General
to determine
what has
already been
done and, if
recommendations
are
outstanding,
what
corrective
action needs
to be taken."
On
DRC, Dujarric
said "you can
pick up the
phone" - after
siting next to
Ladsous while
he refused to
answer Press
questions on
DRC.
As recently as
May 29,
Ladsous
refused Press
questions, video here, compilation
here.
Back on April
24 when Darfur
as such was
the topic of
the UN
Security
Council, three
major Darfur
rebel groups
wrote to the
Council to
investigate
"all reports
of the Peace
Keeping
Mission,
including
reports
presented to
the UNSC by
[Under]
Secretary
General for
Peace Keeping
Mr. Ladous and
the
reliability of
the sources he
had relied
on."
But unlike his
abortive
stakeout on
the evening of
April 23 about
South Sudan, video here, Ladsous did not come
out to answer
any questions.
And at the
April 24 UN
noon briefing,
when Inner
City Press
asked
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon deputy
spokesperson
Farhan Haq for
a response to
the request
for an
investigation
of Ladsous and
his reports,
there was
none: not one
modified or
corrected
report was
cited.
Instead, from
the "holy
seat" of
the UN
Correspondents
Association a
long time
scribe
followed up to
say that it is
not all
Ladsous'
fault, and to
cast blame on
the
government.
(This same
dynamic was
repeated at
the June 17
noon
briefing.)
This
reflexively
shifting of
blame from the
UN to the
government,
whose new
Permanent
Representative
spoke in the
Council on
April 24, is
in this case
particularly
absurd: how
can the
government be
responsible
for the UN's
own reports
being
inaccurate?
Those
requesting
this
investigation
of DPKO and
Ladsous are
not the
government of
Omar
al Bashir,
which whom
Ladsous met in
July 2013
without any
readout,
but rebels
Abdel Wahid
Mohamed Ahmed
Nur,
Chairperson,
Sudan
Liberation
Army/Movement
(SLA/M-A/Wahid),
Gibriel
Ibrahim
Mohamed,
Chairperson of
Justice &
Equality
Movement Sudan
(JEM) and
Minni Arko
Minnawi,
Chairperson
Sudan
Liberation
Army/Movement
(SLA/M-MM).
Pending UN
answers, again
we ask: how
can one write
about the
corruption of
a UN
Peacekeeping
mission, at
length,
without naming
the person in
charge? Why
would one
airbrush that
person, in
this case
Herve Ladsous
the UN Under
Secretary for
Peacekeeping
Operations,
out?
We'll
be following
this. Watch
this site.