With
UN
Dodging on Ban's Sri Lanka Accountability Panel, Won't Confirm Receipt
of Request about Disappeared Journalist
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
March 8 -- On issues ranging from press freedom to
accountability
for war crimes, the UN under Secretary General Ban
Ki-moon can barely communicate, dodging questions by saying “we
have no comment on that” or “we cannot confirm that” or “it
is up to the Panel” -- which reports to Ban Ki-moon.
Earlier
this year,
Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky told Inner City Press that the UN
system had not received any petition about disappeared journalist
Prageeth Eknelygoda. Even after UN resident coordinator in Colombo
Neil Buhne told the press he had received and transmitted the
petition, Nesirky again said that no petition had been received.
On
March 7, five
prominent press freedom organization have faxed directly to Ban's
office, formally asking for UN involvement in the case. On March 8
Inner City Press asked
Nesirky about it:
Inner
City
Press: the Committee to Protect Journalists, Reporters Without
Borders, and IFJ said, among two other groups, have said that they
have written a letter to the Secretary-General about this case of
Prageeth [Eknelygoda], a journalist in Sri Lanka that disappeared
about a year ago — their letter actually quotes you, from this
briefing on 18 February, but they are saying the UN should get
involved in finding out what happened to this journalist; they are
saying that the letter was given to Neil Buhne and they said no
replacement has been named. I guess I wanted to know, can you, you
know, they are pretty, I would think they would know how to deliver
the letter; has this letter been received and is the UN and actually
as it’s been asked now for some time by the wife of the journalist,
going to get involved in looking into this matter, and who will
replace Mr. Buhne?
Spokesperson:
Well, I am sure that international non-governmental organizations
with the strong track records as the ones you have mentioned know how
to deliver a letter. The United Nations also knows how to receive a
letter. And it may or may not be that that letter has been received
yet; I am going to check. As for the need to intercede, I understand
that this is something that is being actively looked at by colleagues
in the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. But this is
not something that I think we would have further details on at the
moment. As for the replacement, as and when a replacement is named,
I am sure that we will say. I don’t have anything on that at the
moment.
Since
CPJ had
publicized the filing of the letter with Ban, one might have expected
Nesirky's Office to have been able to confirm receipt, and to have
some response. But the previously day, March 7, Nesirky refused to
answer if Ban's Panel on Sri Lanka had met with the country's
Attorney General on February 23, or if its report will be public.
UN's Ban and Silva, Kohona looks on, ICC not shown (c)
MLee
From the UN's
March 7 transcript:
Inner
City
Press: I want to ask on this Sri Lanka question that I e-mailed
you over the weekend. There is a report in Sri Lanka quoting UN
sources, saying that after a meeting between the Attorney General of
Sri Lanka and Mr. Ban and other officials, there was another meeting
with, in fact, the Secretary-General’s Panel. That, I just want
you to either confirm or deny that, and also that the deadline has
been extended for two or three weeks. Is that true and if so, why
was it extended and will, in fact, the Panel travel to Sri Lanka or
not?
Spokesperson:
Well on the first, as you also saw, the reporting over the weekend
suggested that there was a secret meeting with the Secretary-General,
and you know as well as I do, because you were there, that that is
simply not the case. You were there taking pictures, so the
reporting may be a little bit shaky. It is, of course, for the Panel
to comment on any meetings that they may or may not have had. And I
don’t have anything for you on that. With regard to when the Panel
will submit its report, it is scheduled to be, as we have already
said, this month. It is for the Panel to decide when that will take
place.
Inner
City
Press: Who speaks for the Panel, just in the sense of were they
in town? The reporting… I understand… I guess you are denying
that, that report from Sri Lanka, but were the three members in…?
Spokesperson:
Matthew, I said…
Inner
City
Press: You are saying it’s shaky?
Spokesperson:
I said it is for the Panel to comment on whether a meeting may or
may not have taken place.
Inner
City
Press: Isn’t it the Secretary-General’s Panel?
Spokesperson:
The Panel needs to do its work independently, and then be able to
report to the Secretary-General. And that report, as you know, is in
the making, and as soon as it is ready to be presented to the
Secretary-General, it will be.
Inner
City
Press: And will it be public, is my last one… Will that report
be actually released given the…?
Spokesperson:
Again, that’s for the Panel to decide, in consultation with the
Secretary-General. Okay, other questions? Please?
Inner
City Press
keeps being bombarded with assurances that Ban's halting half inquiry
into Sri Lanka will somehow all work out. But how? Watch this site.
* * *
On
Sri
Lanka,
UN Denies “Secret” Meeting, Won't Say If
Report Public
By
Matthew
Russell
Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
March
7 -- The UN's evasiveness
on
the meetings, travel and
report of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Panel on Sri Lanka
continued on March 7, with Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky telling
Inner City Press that it is up to the Panel to speak for itself, even
to decide if its report should be public.
Nesirky
called
“shaky” reporting that has suggested a secret February 23
meeting, telling Inner City Press “you know, you were there taking
pictures, that was not the case.”
Inner
City Press
asked, were the members of Ban's panel in town, in New York? Even
this Nesirky would not answer, saying it is up to the Panel to say.
But where is the Panel?
Then
Nesirky said
that deadline is “this month.” Inner City Press asked, will it be
public?
That
will be up to
the panel, Nesirky said, in consultation with the Secretary General.
Inner
City Press
covered a surprise meeting on February 23 between Ban and Sri Lankan
officials including the Attorney General and ex-general Shavendra
Silva, responsible for what UN officials called the “bloodbath on
the beach” in May 2009.
At
the time, Inner
City Press repeatedly asked Nesirky what relation that meeting had
with the work of Ban's panel and Sri Lanka's Lessons Learnt &
Reconciliation Commission. Nesirky would not relate them in any way.
On
March 6, the Sri
Lanka
Sunday Times reported that the Sri Lankan delegation on
February 23, after the meeting exclusively reported by Inner City
Press, met with Ban's panel, and that the panel's deadline was
extended two or three weeks. Immediately upon seeing the article,
Inner City Press sent questions by e-mail to Nesirky and his deputy
Farhan Haq on the morning of March 6:
A
UN
source
is quoted in the Sri Lanka Sunday Times that after the
meeting between Messrs. Ban, Nambiar, Haysum, et al and Sri Lanka's
Attorney General and External Affairs minister on February 23 which
you have told me was about reconstruction and rehabilitation,
1)
the
two
Sri Lanka official met with Mr. Ban's Panel -- true or false?
If true, why kept secret, and does this replace the trip to Sri Lanka
Ban has repeatedly said is allowed by Mahinda Rajapaksa's
flexibility?
2)
the
deadline
for the Panel, set for March 1, has been extended “two
to three weeks” - true or false? If true, why was this not
announced, and extended for what purpose?
Yes
or no: will the report be made public?
Please
provide a complete list of attendees of the Ban meeting, and of the
reported meeting afterward with Mr. Ban's Panel.
Nesirky
and his
deputy Farhan Haq never answered or even confirmed receipt of these
questions. More than 24 hours after submitting the questions, at the
March 7 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Nesirky to answer
them, to respond to the Sunday Leader story, and to state if Ban's
Panel will travel to Sri Lanka (as Ban has repeatedly claimed).
Nesirky
called the
Sunday Leader's reporting “shaky” in suggesting a secret meeting,
emphasizing to Inner City Press “you know, you were there taking
pictures, that was not the case.”
Sri Lanka officials, Ban, Nambiar et al - Ban's left not ID-ed (c) MRLee
Inner
City Press
asked, were the members of Ban's panel in New York? Even this Nesirky
would not answer, saying it is up to the Panel to say. But where
is the Panel?
Nesirky
said that
deadline is “this month.” Inner City Press asked, will it be
public?
That
will be up to
the panel, Nesirky said, in consultation with the Secretary General.
We'll see.
Meanwhile,
former
Sri Lanka UN ambassador HMGS Palihakkara, a member of Mahinda
Rajapaksa's LLRC, was in New York at the same time, sources say, as
part of Ban's advisory group on disarmament. So an LLRC member was in
New York at the time -- were the members of Ban's panel? Watch this
site.
And
watch the
end of this
debate, about Sri Lanka.
* * *
