Removing
Silva
as UN Adviser
Addressed Feb
17, Pakistan
PR Tells ICP;
No Thanks to
Ban Ki-moon
By
Matthew
Russell Lee,
Exclusive
UNITED
NATIONS,
February 16 --
For three
weeks Inner
City Press has
asked
the UN how it
could accept
as a UN
"Senior
Adviser on
Peacekeeping
Operations" of
General Shavendra
Silva, whose
Division 58 is
repeatedly
named in
connection
with war
crimes in
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
Panel of
Experts
report.
Ban's
lead
spokesman
Martin Nesirky
has said Ban
can do
nothing, and
that Inner
City Press
should "ask
the Asia
group."
On
February 13,
Bangladesh's
Permanent
Representative
Abulkalam
Abdul Momen
exclusively
told Inner
City Press
that "we were
surprised they
sent a
controversial
participant...
it's not
fair."
Adding that
Silva
"individually
is not
acceptable,"
Abulkalam
Abdul
Momen told
Inner City
Press, "I,
India and
Pakistan, we
have
requested Sri
Lanka to fix
it up."
On
February 14,
Inner City
Press asked
Ban's deputy
spokesman
Eduardo Del
Buey about
this, and was
again told
that Ban can
do and has
done nothing
on
this.
Outside
the UN
General
Assembly
meeting about
Syria on
February 15,
the statement
of
Bangladesh's
Momen was
multiply
confirmed to
Inner City
Press.
Pakistan's
Permanent
Representative
Abdullah
Hussain Haroon
told Inner
City Press,
"certainly we
would like to
see something
beneficial
happen, I
think we are
addressing the
problem
tomorrow."
This
appears to
be a meeting
smaller than
the Asia group
as a whole, as
another Asia
group member
told Inner
City Press
that "it
should be Sri
Lanka
that fixes it,
then the group
will affirm
it."
(Inside the
GA, Haroon
delivered one
of the more
nuanced
speeches, that
while some of
Russia's
amendments
should have
been accepted,
Pakistan voted
yes. Sri Lanka
abstained.)
Prior
to this
development,
the Sri Lankan
Mission's
action was to
sent a letter
of
complaint to
Inner City
Press, sending
a copy to
Ban's
spokesman as
well as to
some in the UN
press corps.
Inner City
Press in less
than 24 hours
published
and responded
to the letter,
citing only
some of the
many
references to
Silva's
Division 58 in
the report.
Then,
after UN
High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights Navi
Pillay told
Inner City
Press
on February 13
she had
expressed her
"concern"
about Silva
to Ban, the
Sri Lankan
mission issued
a statement --
not to Inner
City Press --
calling the
concerns
"unethical,"
and got it
reported.
Earlier
on
February 16,
Inner City
Press observed
Silva on the
UN North Lawn
Building's
second floor,
and asked him
what he was
doing there.
He
said he had a
meeting.
Accompanied by
what could
only be a
bodyguard
-- the
individual
stood back,
looking in all
directions --
Silva met
with a slight
man, on chairs
by the men's
room on the
North Lawn's
second floor.
It
is hard to
identify any
other Deputy
Permanent
Representative
in the UN
system
who has a
bodyguard.
Will Silva
even remain as
Deputy
Permanent
Representative?
We'll see.
Ban shakes
with Silva,
Kohona back to
camera (c)
MRLee
Footnote:
a problem is
that the "fix"
offered by Sri
Lanka to
certain member
states,
according to
these states,
is to switch
Silva for
Permanent
Representative
Palitha
Kohona, who is
ALSO named in
Ban's Panel of
Experts report
in connection
with the
so-called
White Flag
killings of
people seeking
to surrender.
Watch this
site.
From
the
UN's February
15 noon
briefing
transcript:
Inner
City
Press: A week
ago, sitting
where you are,
Mr.
[Hervé]
Ladsous
had said that
on the
appointment of
this Shavendra
Silva, the Sri
Lankan general
to be a senior
adviser on
peacekeeping,
there was
going to be
further
consideration.
Martin said
he’d ask him
to see
what he meant;
he also told
me to ask the
Asian group,
which I have,
and the
Bangladesh
Permanent
Representative
has said that
he and two
other TCCs
[troop-contributing
countries]
from Asia have
told Sri
Lanka to,
quote “fix
it”; that Mr.
Silva is not
acceptable.
So,
I wanted to
know, is this
what Mr.
Ladsous was
referring to
and is
the
Secretariat
playing no
role
whatsoever in
seeking to fix
having
an alleged war
criminal
provide advice
to Ban Ki-moon
on
peacekeeping?
Deputy
Spokesperson:
Well, I think
Mr. Ladsous,
and Martin and
the
Secretary-General
have been very
clear on this,
it was a
Member State
decision. If
Member States
are taking
actions, it is
up to them to
take whatever
actions they
see fit. But
we are not
going to
comment
on that
because it is
a Member State
decision.
Question:
So, just to be
clear, if this
does get
fixed, the
Secretary-General
played no role
whatsoever in
blocking an
alleged war
criminal from
advising him
despite the
advice of his
own Human
Rights
Commissioner,
Navi Pillay,
just to quote
you?
Deputy
Spokesperson:
Matthew, our
position has
been made very
clear this is
a Member State
decision; it
is for the
Member States
to decide.
, 
