On Haiti,
UN Does
If-Asked on
Release of
Martelly Cronies,
Withholds
Report
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, April
22 -- When
cronies of
Michel
Martelly in
Haiti were
quickly
released on
serious
charges, the
UN in Haiti
said nothing.
So on April 21
at the UN noon
briefing (transcript
here)
Inner City
Press asked UN
Spokesman Stephane
Dujarric about
it:
Inner
City Press:
Since the UN
has a mission
in Haiti...
there was a
report that
close
affiliates of
current
president,
holdover
President
[Michel]
Martelly were
charged with
various
crimes.
And then
recently, on
Friday, two of
those accused
were very
swiftly
released and
cleared.
One’s name is
Woodly
Ethéart.
The other is
Renel
Nelfort.
Many have
raised
questions
about the rule
of law aspect
of releasing
friends of the
President
after very
serious
charges,
including
kidnapping,
money-laundering,
etc. So
I’m wondering,
MINUSTAH
(United
Nations
Stabilization
Mission in
Haiti), does
it have any
response to
this?
Spokesman Dujarric:
Sure.
They’ve taken
note of the
accelerated
procedure by
which the two
defendants
that you
mentioned were
acquitted of
very serious
charges,
including
kidnapping for
ransom, drug
trafficking,
money-laundering
and organized
crime, just to
name a
few. We
further note
yesterday’s
filing for an
appeal with
Haiti’s
Supreme Court
by the
Minister of
Justice and
Public
Security
against the
fact that the
lower court
took the
decision of
releasing the
two
defendants.
The decision’s
been
appealed.
And the UN
stands by the
Haitian
judicial
authorities to
swiftly and
effectively
use the powers
and functions
conferred upon
them under
Haitian law to
exercise
judicial
oversight in
this matter
and ensure the
delivery of
justice.
That's an "if
asked" -- the
UN only says
it if it is
asked.
MINUSTAH, as
noted, refuses
to answer
Inner City
Press'
questions
after its
reporting on
cholera, or at
the demand of
UN
Peacekeeping
chief Herve
Ladsous (UN
missions not
under his
control, in
Iraq, Libya
and
Afghanistan,
all answer
Inner City
Press'
questions.)
But why would
the UN wait
like this?
Well, first
the UN didn't
even summarize
its report on
Ladsous'
"peacekeepers"
shooting at
unarmed
protesters
against
Martelly in
Haiti. Then,
after Inner
City Press
asked a half
dozen times, a
short summary
was given,
saying that no
one was hurt.
Inner City
Press asked,
why is this
report on
excessive force
not being released?
The UN's
response was
that it is an
"internal"
report.
Really? We'll
have more on
this.
When UN
Peacekeepers
are
determined, by
the UN itself,
to have shot
at civilians
by using
inappropriate
force, what
accountability
is there?
None, with
Herve Ladsous
atop UN
Peacekeeping.
But even the
supposed
reporting in
the incidents
is
inconsistent -
and
misrepresented.
Inner
City Press:
While you were
away or last
week, the
summary was
released of
the incidents
in Gao.
And I wanted
to know, since
Mr. Ladsous
did not answer
this question,
does the
report contain
a review of
the deal that
was struck
between the UN
mission and
the MNLA in
Tabancourt
that gave rise
to the protest
in which three
civilians were
killed?
And I also
wanted to
bring to your
attention that
during the
stakeout by
Mr. Ladsous on
Thursday, the
microphone was
grabbed by Mr.
Ladsous'
spokesman to
avoid just
this
question.
Since you
previously
said it
wouldn't
happen, I
wanted to know
what you think
of it.
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric:
I think on the
issue of the
summary, what
was released
is
released.
I have nothing
to add to the
summary.
My
understanding
is that Mr.
Ladsous'
spokesman
pointed to
another
journalist to
answer the
question, and
that's the way
it happened.
Inner City
Press:
He grabbed the
microphone.
Spokesman
Dujarric:
Go ahead.
Inner
City Press: I
just wanted to
make you aware
of that.
But I'm saying
is that the
summary of the
report was
released, but
it seems like
the underlying
incident that
gave rise to
the protest
wasn't
answered about
in any
way.
What does the
UN
understand…?
Spokesman:
The report
looked at, at
the incident,
which is a
very violent
confrontation.
And I think
we've made our
recommendations
clear, and I
think the
investigation
was done
rather
swiftly.
Inner City
Press:
And is the
Haiti report
about shooting
at civilians
going to be
similarly
summarized?
And if not,
why not?
Spokesman:
The Haiti
report is
currently… has
now been
finalized.
[The
Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations]
and [the
Department of
Field Support]
have been in
contact with
the relevant
police-contributing
country
concerned,
which has
decided to
repatriate the
unit
commander.
In addition,
three officers
have been
placed on
modified,
nonoperational
duty pending
the final
result of the
inquiry.
So I will… I
hope to have
more on that
for you.
But Dujarric
only referred
to
repatriation,
not to any
disclosure, as
in Mali, of
"excessive or
unauthorized
force" under
Ladsous. Why
not?
On Mali, after
Ladsous'
MINUSMA like
France, for
which Ladsous
was a diplomat
including
during the
1994 Rwanda
genocide,
urging the
escape of Hutu
genocidaires
into Eastern
Congo, reached
side deals
with the MNLA
rebels about
Tabankort,
there was a
protest in
Gao.
UN Police
ultimately
under Ladsous'
command shot
and killed
three
civilians. In
this case,
because the
Malian
government
wanted an
investigation
of the killing
of protesters
which
supported its
positition,
the UN did an
investigation
and at least
released a
summary.
(Ladsous
refused to
answer Inner
City Press'
questions
including
about the
roots of the
protest, his
mission's deal
with the MNLA
in Tabankort.)
But in Haiti,
where Ladsous'
peacekeeping
mission was
filmed
shooting at
protesters who
oppose Michel
Martelly, the
report has not
even been
summarized.
MINUSTAH chief
Sandra Honore
told Inner
City Press the
report is
finished and
"with DPKO" -
that is
Ladsous. But
no summary is
being
released.
Ladsous
refused Inner
City Press'
question about
this, and
scribes
ignored that
these are two
incidents of
shooting
unarmed
civilians, in
two countries,
under Ladsous.
Who is
responsible?
Vine
here.
These
questions took
place at the
UN Security
Council
stakeout, but
Reuters
and Agence
France Presse
did not
mention it,
only blaming
Rwanda. Both
previously
tried to
censor Inner
City Press
coverage of
Ladsous and
French
colonialism,
to the extent
of moving to
ask the UN to
throw Inner
City Press
out.
Which
approach is
journalism?
AFP
wasn't even AT
this stakeout
- Ladous
sought to
avoid
questions by
repeating his
talking points
in French, but
no AFP. Then
Reuters told
UNTV to give
it the
microphone, to
ask about
Rwanda.
Ladsous
leered. Then a
retired
Reuters
reporter was
pointed at by
Ladsous'
spokesman Nick
Birnback, who
then grabbed
the UNTV
microphone to
take it away
from Inner
City Press.
, 
