On
CAR Rapes, 10
Nations to
Meet Ban, UK
Response,
Press Qs
Pending
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
June 5,
updated with
US,
below --
French
soldiers in
the Central
African
Republic
allegedly
sexually
abused
children, as
exposed in a
UN Office of
the High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights report
leaked to the
French
government by
longtime OHCHR
staffer Anders
Kompass.
On
June 3, at
least 14 UN
member states
met about it,
as Inner City
Press
exclusively
reports, and
some will meet
with UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon on
June 5.
Inner City
Press asked
Ban's
spokesman
Stephane Dujarric
why this
meeting was
not listed on
Ban's public
schedule,
while a
similar
meeting the
day previous
about a topic
less
problematic
for the UN WAS
listed.
Dujarric said
he'd look into
it and into
providing the
Press
requested
read-out, and
would try to
provide
answers to
these
questions,
posed by Inner
City Press, h/t
GAP:
Under
the protocols
in place for
documenting
and reporting
sex abuse
among soldiers
deployed under
a resolution
of the UN
Security
Council, when
reports
involve the
armed forces
of a member
state and
information
has been
provided to
two different
UN entities:
What would the
proper
reporting
channels be?
What
information
could be
transmitted?
What
approvals
would have to
be secured?
How
much time
would elapse
before
permission was
secured to
transmit all
available
evidence to a
law
enforcement
arm with
jurisdiction
to address the
allegations?
Inner City
Press asked
what UN staff
should do,
while the
still UNnamed
Panel does its
work. Report
through proper
channels, he
said. But look
at what Zeid
and Ladsous,
it seems, did.
The UN did not
give the
report to the
host country
authorities in
CAR. And
according to UN
documents
-- on May 29
released in
more detail by
Code Blue
naming Ladsous
directly, here
-- UN
Peacekeeping
chief Herve
Ladsous then
urged that the
whistleblower
Kompass be
forced to
resign.
The
documents also
implicate a
number of
other UN
officials, and
French
government
inaction, see
below. After
Press
questioning
turned to UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon, what
he knew and
when he knew
it, Ban on
June 3
announced an
intention to
set up an
"independent"
Panel. Inner
City Press
asked if it
will report
only to Ban --
yes. This is a
problem.
Video
here.
Also on
June 5, Inner
City Press
asked the UK
Mission for
"for a UK
Mission
comment on Ban
Ki-moon's June
3 announcement
he will name
an panel to
looking into
the UN's
inaction on
evidence of
child sexual
abuse in the
Central
African
Republic by
French
peacekeepers
in the
Sangaris
force,
particularly
that a group
of more than a
dozen UN
member states
working on
this, set to
meet Ban on
today, does
not seem to
include the
UK.
Given the UK's
/ Hague's
statements
about sexual
violence in
conflict, why
is the UK not
involved in
this reform
attempt? What
is the UK
itself doing
on this issue?
What does the
UK think the
terms of
reference of
this Panel
should be? To
whom should it
report?
Also, what is
the UK's
comment on the
USG of DPKO
being listed
in the UNDT
ruling as
having asked
for the
resignation of
“whistleblower”
Kompass, see
Para 9 of this.
Want to
include a UK
mission
comment /
response,
thanks."
In
response - for
which we're
grateful -
this is what
arrived, from
a UK Mission
spokesperson:
"We welcome
the
Secretary-General’s
announcement
of an External
Independent
Review to look
into the
handling of
these
allegations.
These are
serious
allegations
and it is
important that
there is a
clear account
of how the UN
responded to
information of
this kind. We
look forward
to further
details of the
review in due
course."
Inner
City Press
questions
remain pending
at another UN
Mission. And
past 6 pm on
Friday June 5,
this
statement:
"Statement by
Ambassador
Samantha
Power, U.S.
Permanent
Representative
to the United
Nations, on
the Secretary
General’s
Announcement
of an External
Independent
Review of
Allegations of
Sexual Abuse
in the Central
African
Republic, June
5, 2015
Since horrific
allegations
came to light
that
international
soldiers may
have abused
children in
the Central
African
Republic, the
United States
has been
calling for a
full and
impartial
investigation
into these
disturbing
reports as
well as into
the manner in
which they
were handled.
We thus
welcome the
Secretary
General’s
recent
announcement
of the
establishment
of an External
Independent
Review to
examine the UN
system’s
response to
the
allegations.
The Secretary
General’s
establishment
of this review
is an
opportunity
for the UN to
learn how it
and member
states can
best safeguard
the dignity
and welfare of
vulnerable
people; ensure
swift action
to make
certain
potential
abuses are
investigated
and halted;
protect those
who expose
abuses; and
provide
appropriate
privacy and
other
protection for
witnesses who
come forward
with
allegations of
abuse. There
are many
questions that
need to be
answered, and
we view this
as an
important
opportunity
for member
states – and
the people of
the Central
African
Republic – to
learn what
went wrong at
every point in
this process.
Alongside this
independent
review, it is
essential that
all countries
whose soldiers
are alleged to
have been
involved in
such abuses
fully,
urgently, and
transparently
investigate
all claims to
ensure that
justice is
served. Any
individual
found to have
committed such
heinous abuses
must be held
accountable.
The United
States looks
forward to
reviewing the
outcome of the
Panel’s
findings in a
timely manner
and working
with all
parties to
prevent sexual
exploitation
and abuse. "
Good.
But doesn't
the
retaliation
and lack of
whistleblower
protections
trigger US
funding cuts?
We'll have
more on this.
On June
4, Inner City
Press asked
Ban's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric about
the Panel, and
the 14 (or 15)
nations, video
here
Inner City
Press: I
wanted to ask
about this
Central
African
Republic
sexual abuse
allegations
panel.
One, I
understand
that a group
of some 14 or
now 15 States
is asking to
meet with the
Secretary-General,
I guess,
before he
leaves about
the panel,
about to whom
the panel will
report.
Is he going to
do it?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
I believe the
Secretary-General
will very
likely… either
the
Secretary-General
or the Deputy
Secretary-General
will meet
them, and we
will hear what
they have to
say.
Inner City
Press:
Okay.
And the second
question is, I
wanted to ask
you why the
OIOS [Office
of Internal
Oversight
Services]
investigation
of Mr.
[Anders]
Kompass for
having
released the
report on the
alleged sexual
abuse will
continue.
And some
people are
saying the…
and that this
panel will
have…
apparently, in
what you read
yesterday,
there was no
discussion of
investigating
whether this
constituted
retaliation
against him,
et
cetera.
And since the
Ethics Office
would be in
charge of
making a
determination,
but the
document shows
that the
Ethics Office
was involved
at a much
earlier stage
in looking at
Mr.
Kompass.
What's the
relation
between the
two and how
does the OIOS…
what's the
purpose now of
the OIOS
investigation?
Spokesman:
I think that
the OIOS
investigation
will continue
its
course.
The
administrative
tribunal has
also been
involved.
That will
continue its
regular
course.
The exact
scope and
terms of
reference of
the
independent
external
review we
announced
yesterday is
still being
determined.
And as soon as
I can share
that with you,
I will.
If there [is]
any
information,
you know,
unearthed by
the OIOS work
that is
relevant to
the panel, it
will be shared
with the
external
review.
Inner City
Press: And if
you can, the…
in terms… you
say… the terms
of reference
and the
membership of
the panel is
still being
determined.
I mean this
with all due
respect, but
since the
documents…
questions are
raised, not
about…
questions are
raised about
actions of the
Chief of
Staff, Susana
Malcorra,
Ethics Office,
OIOS. Do
these
individuals
have an
involvement in
writing the
terms of
reference or
choosing the
panel?
Spokesman:
It is…
ultimately,
it's the
Secretary-General's
decision.
On June 3 a
meeting was
convened to
seek answers
and
improvement on
the UN's
response, by
Guatemala and
Norway, with
attendees from
all UN
Regional
Groups, see
below. Inner
City Press has
spoken with
several
members;
Norway will be
requesting a
meeting late
this wek for
the group with
Ban Ki-moon,
on topics
ranging from
to whom the
Panel will
report to its
Terms of
Reference to
the actions of
OIOS and the
Ethics Office.
From
the Western
European and
other Group,
WEOG, beyond
Norway those
involved are
Australia,
Canada,Denmark,
Finland and
Switzerland.
To many it is
surprising
that a UN
member state
organizing
campaign about
actually
opposing
sexual abuse
by
peacekeepers
does not
include the
United States.
Is it
stand-offishness?
Or a desire
not to
publicly
criticize the
UN? This is
about child
rape...
As Inner
City Press
analyzed
below, there
is a history
of UN panels
being used to
cover up.
Now Code Blue
has these
three
recommendations:
"First, this
must be a
truly external
and
independent
inquiry.
No member of
existing UN
staff should
be appointed
to investigate
nor to act as
the
investigators’
secretariat.
"Second, it
must be
understood
that top
members of the
Secretary-General’s
own staff will
have to be
subject to
investigation.
This must go
right up to
the level of
Under-Secretaries
General. No
one can be
excluded,
whether the
Director of
the Ethics
Office or the
USG of the
Office of
Internal
Oversight
Services or
the
Secretary-General’s
own Chef de
Cabinet. It
would appear
that all of
them and more
acted
inappropriately
in response to
the dreadful
events in CAR.
"Third, the
reference in
the
Secretary-General’s
announcement
of a review to
‘the broad
range of
systemic
issues’ is
crucial to the
inquiry. What
happened in
the Central
African
Republic was
an atrocity,
but the fact
that the UN
stood silent
for nearly a
year after its
own discovery
of widespread
peacekeeper
sexual abuse
(even if by
non-UN troops)
is itself a
bitter
commentary on
the
Secretary-General’s
declared
policy of
‘zero
tolerance’."
Inner
City Press
would add,
past UN staff
and offiicals
as well.
Consider these
past panels,
as put
together and
at the end
analyzed by
Inner City
Press and the
Free
UN Coalition
for Access:
On 22
September
2003,
Secretary-General
Kofi Annan
appointed Mr.
Martti
Ahtisaari,
former
President of
Finland, to
chair an
Independent
Panel on the
Safety and
Security of UN
Personnel in
Iraq.
The priority
of the
Independent
Panel’s
investigation
of the
“oil-for-food”
programme was
to “get after”
allegations of
corruption and
misconduct
within the
United Nations
itself and,
more broadly,
the question
of the
maladministration
of the
“oil-for-food”
programme,
stated Paul A.
Volcker,
Chairman of
the
Independent
Panel, in a
press
conference at
UNHQ.
The UN
Commission of
Inquiry,
appointed by
Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon at
the request of
the Pakistani
Government,
reached no
conclusion as
to the
organizers and
sponsors
behind the
attack in
which a
15-year-old
suicide bomber
blew up Ms.
Bhutto’s
vehicle in the
city of
Rawalpindi on
27 December
2007.
The
three-member
panel, which
was headed by
Chilean
Ambassador to
UN Heraldo
Muñoz and
included
Marzuki
Darusman,
former
attorney-general
of Indonesia,
and Peter
Fitzgerald, a
veteran
official of
the Irish
National
Police, urged
the Government
to undertake
police reform
in view of its
“deeply flawed
performance
and conduct.”
Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon
established
the Panel of
Inquiry on the
31 May 2010
Flotilla
Incident on 2
August 2010.
The Panel
received and
reviewed
reports of the
detailed
national
investigations
conducted by
both Turkey
and Israel.
On 22 June
2010, the
Secretary-General
announced the
appointment of
a Panel of
Experts to
advise him on
the
implementation
of the joint
commitment
included in
the statement
issued by the
President of
Sri Lanka and
the
Secretary-General
at the
conclusion of
the
Secretary-General's
visit to Sri
Lanka on 23
March 2009.
Meanwhile
UN staff
advocates have
written to
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon, his
chief of staff
and Ladsous,
among others,
demanding
resignations.
On June 2
Inner City
Press asked UN
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric, who
Banned any
Inner City
Press question
to Ladsous on
May 29, what
Ban Ki-moon
DID, once he
learned in
March about
the rapes. Video here and embedded below.
Dujarric
said he had
nothing to add
to his
previous
answers. Huh?
Inner
City Press
asked
Dujarric, in
light of OHCHR
Zeid using a
private email
address for UN
business, what
the UN's
record
retention
policy is.
Dujarric said
the policy
must be
available
somewhere. To
this has the
UN descended.
Dujarric said
the
investigation
by Lapointe's
OIOS,
discredited in
the leaked
emails, will
"lead where it
will lead."
But Lapointe
has told OIOS
invstigators
to not go
beyond what
they are asked
to look at --
in this case,
only the
whistleblower.
This is called
a cover up.
When Hillary
Clinton used
the UN
Security
Council
stakeout
to belatedly
answer
questions
about her own
use of private
email while US
Secretary of
State, it was
described as
an accident of
scheduling, or
attempt to use
the UNSC
backdrop to
convey
gravitas. But
the echo now
with Prince
Zeid also
using private
email for
presumably
public
business
raises similar
questions.
Anders
Kompass was
asked to send
his side of
the story --
to a private
email address,
but wisely
declined.
Beyond the
treatment of
Kompass
himself, the
documents show
pressure
brought to
bear on
lower-level
staff to make
and thereby
launder the
high
officials'
desire for an
investigation
of Kompass.
Most
directly, it
is asked, what
UN staff
member will
now report
fraud or
misconduct,
knowing that
OIOS and the
Ethics Office
will then
discuss the
accusations
with their
boss? This is
a question
Inner City
Press on
May 29 asked
UN Spokesman
Staphen
Dujarric, who
Banned
Inner City
Press from
putting a
single
question to
Ladsous - the
question has
yet to be
answered.
UN staff
advocates have
written
directly to
Ban Ki-moon
and his
deputy,
Ladsous and
Atul Khare and
others,
demanding
resignations.
They are
offended by
the exposure
of lack of
independence
at the UN
Office of
Internal
Oversight
Services and
UN Ethics
Office, and
question
whether the US
should cut off
funding under
the 2014 U.S.
Consolidated
Appropriation
Act, section
7048(a)(1)(B).
After reading
those leaked
documents, how
exactly can
the U.S.
Secretary of
State (or
anybody else)
certify that
the UN's
whistle-blower
policy fulfils
the Act's
requirements?
Is there any
"independent
adjudicative
body" in this
chain?
Evidently the
Ethics Office
and OIOS are
not."
The
staff notice
Ban's
appearance at
another
softball
soccer game,
among those
who are
supposed to
hold him and
the UN
accountable.
The call for
Ladsous to
resign out be
fired has
spread from
the African
Group to Latin
America and
GRULAC.
On May 30,
OHCHR for
Prince Zeid
issued a
statement
beginning, "In
the wake of
the
revelations of
alleged
serious sexual
abuse of
children."
But
Zeid was told
of the
allegations
long before
their
"revelation"
via leaks. And
tellingly, he
continued to
mistakenly
think and say
the rapes were
in Mali and
not CAR.
Likewise,
both UN
Peacekeeping's
Herve Ladsous
-- listed as
urging the
whistleblower
to resign,
which he
denies while
refusing to
take questions
on -- and
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon both
knew of the
alleged child
rapes by "the
Spring," but
did nothing.
This
requires an
investigation,
and not by the
UN's Office of
Internal
Oversight
Services,
shown to not
be
independent,
told to meet
Zeid and the
UN Ethics
Office by
Ban's chief of
staff Susan
Malcorra.
Inner
City Press
reported on
some of the
documents and
went to
Ladsous' rare
press
conference on
May 29
(International
Day of UN
Peacekeepers)
in order to
ask some
questions. Video here.
But
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric,
choosing who
could ask
questions,
refused to
call on Inner
City Press,
even for
Ladsous to
say, as he did
under
Dujarric's
predecessor
Martin
Nesirky, "I
don't respond
to you,
Mister."
So
Inner City
Press
objected, on
behalf of the
new Free UN
Coalition for
Access (the
old UNCA has
become part of
the problem)
and asked
questions, video here, transcript
here.
The
documents also
call into
serious
question the
claims of
"independence"
from the
office of Ban
Ki-moon of the
Office of
Internal
Oversight
Services and
the UN Ethics
Office.
Consider this:
OIOS head
Carman
Lapointe, writing
to James
Finness (still
in charge of
the
"investigation"
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric
continues to
use as an
excuse to not
answer
question),
noted that at
the UN staff
retreat in
March "I
received an
urgent email
from the CdC
[Ban's Chef de
Cabinet Susana
Malcorra] to
meet with
Zeid, Flavia
and Joan."
So OIOS
is not
independent -
it can to
told, by Ban's
chief of
staff, to meet
with
collaborate
with the
Ethics Office
as well as
OHCHR's Zeid
and Pansieri.
Inner
City Press
previously
reported on
and asked
Dujarric about
OIOS' flawed
process and a
high profile
recusal, see
below.
As
noted, Inner
City Press
reported on
some of the
documents and
went to
Ladsous' rare
press
conference on
May 29
(International
Day of UN
Peacekeepers)
in order to
ask some
questions.
But
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric,
choosing who
could ask
questions,
refused to
call on Inner
City Press,
even for
Ladsous to
say, as he did
under
Dujarric's
predecessor
Martin
Nesirky, "I
don't respond
to you,
Mister."
So why did
Nesirky allow
Press
questions to
Ladsous, and
Dujarric
didn't?
Dujarric set
the first
question aside
for "UNCA" --
but called on
an individual
who was not
elected to
their board,
who lost the
election; her
question was a
vague softball
offering
Ladsous a
chance to
comment on
Central
African
Republic. He
said, it was
one nation,
not under blue
helmet.
But
Ladsous'
MINUSCA
mission knew
of the sexual
abuse since at
latest August
5, 2014. Inner
City Press
said, "Follow
up on CAR?"
Dujarric
called on
Reuters, which
previously
wrote to him
trying to get
Inner City
Press thrown
out of the UN
(then filed to
get his leaked
complaint
blocked or
Banned from
Google's
Search, here.)
Reuters did
not even aske
about the CAR
sexual abuse.
What
emerged is
that both
Ladsous --
and,
troublingly,
Ban Ki-moon --
were formally
informed of
the sexual
abuse of
children in
CAR "in the
spring."
What date? And
what did they
do?
Dujarric said,
"last
question;" as
Ladsous left
the room Inner
City Press
asked Ladsous
about him
speaking about
the
whistleblower
Kompass with
OHCHR's Zeid,
also a subject
of the new
documents --
no answer.
Inner
City Press
objected to
Dujarric, who
has fielded or
dodged a dozen
Inner City
Press
questions
about the CAR
rapes and
Ladsous' role,
not even being
allowed to ask
a question.
Dujarric said,
"Noted." Video
here.
And
what? Again,
Dujarric's
predecessor
Nesirky, and
his deputy Del
Buey, allowed
Inner City
Press to put
questions to
Ladsous. What
if the
difference?
We'll have
more on this.
On July 30,
2014,
Ambassador
Nicolas
Niemtchinow,
Permanent
Representative
of France to
the UN in
Geneva wrote
to
Kompass that
action was
being taken.
But then,
nothing.
On
August 5, 2014
the Human
Rights Officer
in CAR of
OHCHR wrote to
Renner Onana
of the
already-then
UN mission
MINUSCA;
DPKO's SRSG
Babacar Gaye
was
referenced.
So when did
Gaye or
MINUSCA tell
DPKO chief
Ladsous?
Tellingly,
even the UN's
cover up was
delayed by
High
Commissioner
Prince Zeid
thinking he
heard of
French troops'
sexual abuse
in MINUSMA
(Mali) and not
MINUSCA (CAR).
Zeid
asked his
predecessor
Navi Pillay if
she met with
French
representatives
about rapes in
Mali -- the
answer was no
-- then much
later asked
her if she'd
met with the
French about
CAR (the
answer was
yes.)
It was
Zeid's Deputy
Flavia
Pansieri who
conveyed
Ladsous'
directive to
Kompass to
resign. Zeid
in his
statement
makes much of
Pansieri
meeting with a
Swedish
diplomat in
the street, in
casual
clothes, after
Sweden raised
l'affaire
Kompass at a
dinner in
honor of Ban
Ki-moon's
Deputy Jan
Eliasson. THe
UN's move now
seems to be to
try to lay all
blame on
Pansieri,
whose term was
expiring
anyway. We'll
have more on
this.
"On 12 March
2015 meeting
with the
Deputy High
Commissioner I
was informed
that the High
Commissioner
requested my
resignation
for the way I
dealt with the
reports of
paedophilia in
the Central
African
Republic. I
was told that
the High
Commissioner
had been asked
for my
resignation by
Mr. Ladsous,
Under
Secretary-General
for the
Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations in
New York,
during a visit
of the High
Commissioner
to New York."
Absent from
the UN Fifth
(Budget)
Committee's
May 18 meeting
was not only
embattled
Peacekeeping
chief
Ladsous,, but
also OIOS'
Carman
Lapointe.
In
her stead for
OIOS was
Michael
Stefanovic,
who told the
Fifth
Committee that
he has recused
himself from
the
investigation
and has
written to
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon as to
why.
This is highly
irregular. If
the recusal
was made on a
personal
connection
between
Stefanovic and
the
whistleblower
Anders
Kompass,
Stefanovic
would have
recused
himself from
the earlier
investigation
- but he
didn't. If it
were such a
recusal, he
would have
written to
Lapointe, and
not to the
S-G.
For now we add
this -- if
OIOS Director
Stefanovic has
a conflict of
interest, how
can the UN be
asking others
to rely on an
OIOS
investigation?
Inner City
Press has
asked a
Permanent
Member of the
Security
Council -- not
France -- if
an OIOS
investigation
would be
sufficient,
and has been
told "No."
Now
we have this,
from the Fifth
Committee's
May 20
meeting:
Lapointe,
summoned to
the meeting
via her
Byun-kun Min,
was asked
-When
did OIOS/ID
start the
investigation
into Anders
Kompass?
-Why
did Mr.
Stefanovic
recuse himself
from the
Kompass
investigation?
-In
view of Mr.
Stefanovic
recusing
himself, did
Ms. Lapointe
see any
impediments
for the scope
of the
investigation,
especially as
it appeared to
implicate an
ASG or USG in
misconduct?
Note - this is
a reference to
UN
Peacekeeping
USG Ladsous.
Multiple
sources tell
Inner City
Press Lapointe
replied that
Stefanovic
told only the
Secretary
General, not
her, that he
recused
himself, and
that the
Deputy
Director of
OIOS in Vienna
is now
"overseeing"
the
investigation.
So
those now on
the case are
James Finniss,
Kanja and
Margaret
Gichanga --
who has been
asking to
interview WIPO
whistleblower
Miranda Brown,
who worked
alongside
Kompass for a
time. We'll
have more on
this. It is a
new low for
the UN.
Back
on May 18,
Inner City
Press, staking
out the Budget
Committee
meeting, spoke
with Ban's
chief of staff
Susana
Malcorra when
she left the
meeting. Here
is a
transcript,
followed by an
exclusive
summary of
what happened
inside the
closed
meeting.
Inner
City Press:
How did it go
in there? Are
their
questions
answered?
CdC
Malcorra: Well
I hope, yes.
Some of them
still have
questions that
will be
answered by my
colleague. I
think I’ve
made a point
of what it is
that we’re
discussing
here. This
investigation
is a UN
investigation.
It was led by
the UN in the
field when
they had
allegations
handed to
them. It was
the human
rights cell in
the mission
that led this
investigation.
It looks like
we were
absent, but it
was us...
And
this
investigation
could, at
least prima
facie, there
were places
clear enough
to further
investigate by
the member
state. And as
such, the
information
was provided
to a member
state. On a
separate
front, is how
the
information is
provided. And
we cannot
accept the
irresponsibility
of the names
of the
victims, the
witnesses and
the
investigators
shared with
the member
states ...
it’s
inacceptable.
It may look
like a
bureaucratic
approach. It’s
not a
bureaucratic
approach...
Inner
City Press:
What about not
telling
Central
African
Republic
authorities?
CdC
Malcora: They
are discussing
that now.
After the
meeting ended,
and Inner City
Press spoke
with numerous
attendees - a
common refrain
was that the
UN leadership
is "in denial"
- we have
pieced
together this
summary of the
meeting, and
the totally
insufficient
answer on UN
Peacekeeping
chief Ladsous'
role, a lack
of recognition
of his UNAMID
mission's
previous cover
up of rapes in
Tabit in
Darfur, which
the US and UK
and other say
they care
about, and
lack of follow
up on
whistleblowers.
Attendees'
summary of Ban
Ki-moon chief
of staff
Malcorra:
"Malcorra
said she had
no idea the
session would
go into the
specifics of
CAR, she
thought it was
to touch upon
general Sexual
Abuse and
Exploitation
policy
(several
attendees were
dubious and
angry about
this
approach.)
Malcorra said
that in the
case of
misconduct by
UN staff the
procedures
were in place.
In this case,
even when it
was not UN
peacekeepers
the human
rights cell in
Bangui was
there and they
were the ones
that initiated
the
investigation.
It is thanks
to the UN that
allegations
were
substantiated
and it was
enough to
decide to
proceed with a
further
investigation.
The wrongdoing
of the UN
staffer Anders
Kompass was to
have shared
the
information
without it
being redacted
putting the
victims,
witnesses and
investigators
lives in
danger. She
repeated many
times this was
a serious
breach and
that she
disagreed with
anyone that
didn’t view
this conduct
wrong.
According to
Malcorra the
UN
investigation
lasted three
months which
allowed them
to
substantiate
the
allegations.
When that
finding was
final it went
to the two
lines of
command: The
head of
mission in CAR
and the
OHCHR.
But, several
asked, why
didn't either
of these tell
the CAR
authorities?
Malcorra
said she would
have preferred
this case
hadn't
surfaced in
the media and
that it is
regrettable
member states
have had to
learn matters
from the
press. But
that, Malcorra
said, member
states have to
be aware that
the press
manipulates
everything.
Several states
talked about
the UN image
and
credibility to
which Malcorra
said she was
very sad with
those comments
because if not
for the UN
these troops
could have
gotten away
with these
disturbing
acts. She also
said this was
a clear case
of damned if
you do damned
if you don’t.
But what about
the cover up?
What about
Ladsous?
Malcorra said
that “no other
element had
been taken
into account”
for Kompass'
firing. But
member states
were aware of
Paragraph 9 of
the UN Dispute
Tribunal
ruling
reinstating
Kompass. As
noted, one
Permanent
Representatives
(and several
other
diplomats)
told Inner
City Press
that Ladsous
should resign.
Tellingly, the
sources say,
Malcorra
claimed didn’t
recall any
UNAMID coverup
allegations.
Tabit?
Malcorra
didn’t even
address the
Otis report on
whistleblowers
- which Inner
City Press has
been asking
Ban's
spokesman
about,
repeatedly --
but assured
member states
that due
protections
are in place
and that an
adequate
policy exists.
Malcorra said
she looks
forward to
working
further on the
UN convention
in paragraph
57 of the SG
report on SEA
and agrees
that there are
systemic
flaws, and
therefore
there will be
a review of
all the
processes.
According to
sources in the
meeting --
Inner City
Press asked
and was told
to inquiry
with member
states --
the
Legal Counsel
and head of
OLA qualified
as excellent
the
cooperation
with the
French
Authorities
and that the
lifting of
immunity so
far hasn’t
been necessary
because at
this stage its
very general
requests of
information
that the UN
promptly has
given to the
French
authorities.
For the sake
of efficiency
hasn’t gone
through the
lifting of
immunity
process but if
a trial or
judge becomes
involved they
will do it
quickly at a
later stage.
Several member
states were
dubious. The
EU, Inner City
ress is
informed, said
“accountability
starts at the
top.”
Malcorra
left
unanswered why
the host
state, the
CAR, was not
involved. She
is said to
have ignored
the specific
question on
the status of
the OIOS
investigation.
She ignored
the complaints
about
under-reporting
saying that
the trend of
decrease was
very clear and
that the USG
of DFS would
go into
details (what
he did,
genially, was
repeat the
Secretary
General's
report).
An impartial
investigation
was called
for, from both
sides of the
Atlantic and
elsewhere.
There was a
refrain
afterward:
Ladsous should
resign."
A well-placed
African
Permanent
Representative
before the
meeting told
Inner City
Press before
the meeting
that Ladsous
should resign.
But with him
conveniently
absent, would
others be left
holding the
bag, trying to
explain why
he, Ladsous,
appears in the
UN Dispute
Tribunal
ruling as
urging that
the
whistleblower
resign?
Back on May 8,
Inner City
Press asked US
Ambassador
Samantha Power
about both
issues - the
UN's failure
to tell the
CAR
authorities,
and Ladsous'
"surprising"
role, as High
Commissioner
Zeid put it
earlier in the
day. Video
here and
embedded
below. Then
Inner City
Press asked
the UN
Spokesman,
Stephane
Dujarric,
about the
contradiction;
for the first
time, he gave
a timeline.
Here
is the video
of Inner City
Press
questions to
US Ambassador
Power:
It is an
answer that
may move
things
forward.
Ladsous, it
should be
noted, just
this week
snubbed a Joe
Biden-linked
Hemispheric
peacekeeping
conference in
Uruguay,
wasting an
$8,000 first
class plane
ticket and
angering many
troop
contributing
countries. He
refuses to
answer Press
question, for
example on
rapes in
Minova, DRC
and Tabit in
Darfur.
As noted, on
May 8, High
Commissioner
Zeid held a
press
conference,
and twice
refused to
comment on why
Ladsous was
said to have
pressured to
fire or
suspend the
whistleblower.
Inner City
Press has
covered
Ladsous' role
from the
beginning, and
highlighted
his appearance
in Paragraph 9
of the UN
Dispute
Tribunal
ruling
reinstating
Kompass. On
May 7, Ladsous
told Inner
City Press, "I
deny that" -
then refused
to take
questions.
Zeid
was asked, and
first time
said he should
first give his
view of the
pressure to
the
investigator,
not the media.
The
second time,
he said he was
surprised to
read it -- his
Office did not
contest that
part of the
ruling,
effectively
admitting it
-- and that
the head of UN
Peacekeeping
should not
have been
intervening
about a non-UN
force. Video here.
Neither
he nor the
questioners in
the room in
Geneva said
the obvious:
Ladsous is a
longtime
French
diplomat; it
is not rocket
science to
read Paragraph
9 as him
(inappropriately)
still working
for "his"
country.
Zeid
said other
things we'll
report later;
he alluded to
the need for a
Commission of
Inquiry. Some
ask, will
Ladsous quit
before then?
Or after?
Early on May
8, UN system
staff
complained to
Inner City
Press that UN
High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights Prince
Zeid of
Jordan, in a
closed staff
meeting on May
8, tried to
downplay the
scandal, going
so far as to
blame imams in
Bangui for not
playing their
role.
But it was
OHCHR which
didn't even
give the
report of the
rape of CAR
children to
CAR
authorities,
only to the
French.
In places,
Zeid appeared
to try to use
his record ten
years ago on
sexual abuse
to shift the
blame to
imams.
Inner City
Press has
shown a
failure by his
Office to act
on past
leaking, to
Morocco. We'll
have more on
this.
On May 7,
Inner City
Press asked
more questions
about this -
including to
Herve Ladsous
himself.
After a long
closed-door
consultation
meeting of the
Security
Council,
Ladsous
emerged. Inner
City Press
asked him,
based on
Paragraph 9 of
the UNDT
ruling, Why
did you ask
Kompass to
resign?"