On
Sri
Lanka, As Pillay Supports UN Report, Ban Merely Says It's Out There
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
May 31 -- Even after UN High Commissioner on Human Rights
Navi Pillay said in Geneva she supports that an international
mechanism on Sri Lanka be established, as Secretary General Ban
Ki-moon's Panel of Experts recommended to him, Ban has not supported
the recommendation.
Inner
City Press
on Tuesday asked Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky if Ban agrees with
what Pillay said, and if he has any comment on the video depicting
extrajudicial executions by Sri Lankan soldiers.
Ban's
spokesman
said that “in the first instance it is the responsibility of
sovereign states to conduct a credible investigation,” and that the
Panel's
recommendations are “there are all to see.” But does Ban
support them? Nesirky said, “There should either be consent from
the SL authorities or a mandate from an intergovernmental body.”
Even
regarding the
video, Ban's spokesman said “we are certainly aware of it,” and
that it underscores the need for a “national” accountability
mechanism. But Ban's own Panel concluded that the Rajapaksas' Lessons
Learnt & Reconciliation Commission is deeply flawed.
Pillay & Ban previously in Geneva, Sri Lanka Report not shown
There
is as yet no
action even on the one thing Ban said he would do, review the UN's
own actions on Sri Lanka, presumably including with regard to the
so-called White Flag killings of surrenderees.
Ban
Ki-moon, having
just returned for the weekend from a trip including Nigeria and
Deauville, now leaves again on from June 1 to 3 to Italy. And so it
goes.
* * *
On
Sri
Lanka,
Ban
Claims
UN
Couldn't
Assess
Casualties,
Leak
Shows
UN Did
By
Matthew
Russell
Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
April
27
--
On
Sri
Lanka,
UN “staff were not in the
position to assess” the number of casualties in 2009, Secretary
General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky told the Press on
April 27, as they had to withdraw because the Government said
security could not be guaranteed.
But
as
Inner
City
Press
reported
and
published
on
March 27, 2009, a detailed UN
document it obtained reported that the "minimum number of
documented civilian casualties since 20 January 2009, as of 7 March
2009 in the conflict area of Mullaitivu Region [is] 9,924 casualties
including 2,683 deaths and 7,241 injuries.”
Click
here
for the
leaked document, and here
for Inner City Press' report
which
exclusively published it.
Ban's
UN
refused
to
confirm
its
own
Office
for
the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs casualty figures. It now appears, including based on
statements by staff who have since left the UN, that Ban's UN
consciously decided to withhold and once leaked deny the casualty
information it WAS in the position to compile.
Nesirky
on
April
27,
when
Inner
City
Press
followed
up on questions
it
put to Ban the
previous day, said that this topic and others will now be reviewed
by
the UN, by Ban and his senior advisers.
Inner
City
Press
asked
Nesirky
if
Ban's
chief
of
staff Vijay Nambiar, who was involved
in the White Flag killings which appear in the UN report at Paragraph
171, will be one of the senior advisers involved in the review.
“There
are
many
senior
advisers,”
Nesirky
said,
adding
that
the review “will look
at the full range of topics contained” in the report.
The
question
remains:
should
a
senior
adviser
like
Nambiar
be allowed to play any
role in the review of an incident he was involved in? The answer
should have been, and should be, no -- but hasn't been.
Inner
City
Press
asked
if
this
review
will
be
made public. Nesirky would not say, but
acknowledged that there is a public interest in it. With 40,000
civilians reportedly killed, yes there is a public interest.
Amazingly,
after
Ban
said
he
“is
advised”
that
the
report's recommendations can
only be investigated if the Rajapaksa government consents or members
states vote for it in an intergovernmental forum, Ban when he
reported on Sri Lanka to the UN Security Council on April 26 did not
even ask them to schedule a vote on the recommendation for an
investigation of war crimes. We'll have more on this.
From
the
Panel
of
Experts
report:
The
"White
Flag"
incident
170.
Various
reports
have
alleged
that
the
political
leadership
of
the
LTTE
and
their
dependents were executed when they surrendered to the
SLA. In the very final days of the war, the head of the LTTE
political wing, Nadesan, and the head of the Tiger Peace Secretariat
Pulidevan, were in regular communication with various interlocutors
to negotiate surrender. They were reportedly with a group of around
300 civilians. The LTTE political leadership was initially reluctant
to agree to an unconditional surrender, but as the SLA closed in on
the group in their final hideout, Nadesan and Pulidevan, and possibly
Colonel Ramesh, were prepared to surrender unconditionally. This
intention was communicated to officials of the United Nations and of
the Governments of Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States,
as well as to representatives of the ICRC and others. It was also
conveyed through intermediaries to Mahinda, Gotabaya and Basil
Rajapaksa, former Foreign Secretary Palitha Kohona and senior
officers in the SLA.
171.
Both
President
Rajapaksa
and
Defence
Secretary
Basil
Rajapaksa
[sic?] provided assurances
that their surrender would be accepted. These
were conveyed by intermediaries to the LTTE leaders, who were advised
to raise a white flag and walk slowly towards the army, following a
particular route indicated by Basil Rajapaksa.[sic?]
Requests by the LTTE
for a third party to be present at the point of surrender were not
granted. Around 6.30 a.m. on 18 May 2009. Nadesan and Pulidevan left
their hide-out to walk towards the area held by the 58th Division,
accompanied by a large group, including their families. Colonel
Ramesh followed behind them, with another group. Shortly afterwards,
the BBC and other television stations reported that Nadesan and
Pulidevan had been shot dead. Subsequently, the Government gave
several different accounts of the incident. While there is little
information on the circumstances of their death, the Panel believes
that the LTTE leadership intended to surrender.
On
the
morning
of
April
21,
Inner
City
Press
asked
Ban's
top
two spokesmen
to "please
state
the
role
of
Mr.
Nambiar
in
reviewing
the
report."
No
response
has yet
been received, more than 60 hours later.
We will have more on this. Watch this site.
Click
here
for an Inner City Press YouTube channel video, mostly UN Headquarters
footage, about civilian
deaths
in Sri Lanka.
Click here for Inner City
Press' March 27 UN debate
Click here for Inner City
Press March 12 UN (and AIG
bailout) debate
Click here for Inner City
Press' Feb .26 UN debate
Click
here
for Feb.
12
debate
on
Sri
Lanka http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/17772?in=11:33&out=32:56
Click here for Inner City Press' Jan.
16, 2009 debate about Gaza
Click here for Inner City Press'
review-of-2008 UN Top Ten debate
Click here for Inner
City Press' December 24 debate on UN budget, Niger
Click here from Inner City Press'
December 12 debate on UN double standards
Click here for Inner
City Press' November 25 debate on Somalia, politics
and this October 17 debate, on
Security Council and Obama and the UN.
* * *
These
reports are
usually also available through Google
News and on Lexis-Nexis.
Click here
for a Reuters
AlertNet piece by this correspondent
about Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army. Click
here
for an earlier Reuters AlertNet piece about the Somali
National
Reconciliation Congress, and the UN's $200,000 contribution from an
undefined trust fund. Video
Analysis
here
Feedback: Editorial
[at] innercitypress.com
UN
Office:
S-453A,
UN,
NY
10017
USA
Tel:
212-963-1439
Reporter's
mobile
(and
weekends):
718-716-3540
Other,
earlier
Inner
City
Press
are
listed
here,
and
some are available
in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright
2006-08
Inner
City
Press,
Inc.
To
request
reprint
or
other
permission,
e-contact
Editorial
[at]
innercitypress.com
-
|