On
S.
Kordofan
Report,
Security
Council May
Meet, Ban
Ki-moon's
Office Defends
Airbrushing
of UN Inaction
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
August 15 --
With even the
UN's
watered-down
Southern
Kordofan
report
alleging war
crimes there,
Inner City
Press on
Monday
asked UN
Security
Council
president
Hardeep Singh
Puri about the
Press
Statement on
the topic
which "died an
untimely death
on
Friday."
"I
am
reluctant to
use language
as colorful as
you do," Puri
said. He
acknowledged
that
disagreement
on the press
statement,
saying that
one side --
the US --
proposed a
statement that
reflected only
its
view, but
predicted that
it could be
"resurrected"
in light
of unfolding
developments.
Video here,
from Minute
7:55.
The
now finalized
UN report is
clearly one
such
development.
Inner City
Press asked,
since UN High
Commissioner
on Human Right
Navi Pillay is
coming to
briefing the
Council this
week about
Syria, if she
will be asked
to
explain the
report, which
was edited to
delete
references in
the
initial draft
to inaction by
UN
peacekeepers.
The initial report, put
online by
Inner City
Press, stated
for example
that
"29.
On
8 June, an
UNMIS
independent
contractor
(IC) was
pulled out of
a
vehicle by SAF
in front of
the UNMIS
Kadugli Sector
IV Compound in
the presence
of several
witnesses, while
UN
peacekeepers
could
not intervene.
He was taken
around the
corner of the
compound
and gunshots
were heard.
Later he was
discovered
dead by UNMIS
personnel and
IDPs. Several
sources
confirmed that
the victim was
an
active SPLM
member."
(Emphasis
added.)
When
the edited
version
was released,
this paragraph
appeared with
the key phrase
"while UN
peacekeepers
could not
intervene"
entirely
removed, as if
the Egyptian
UN
peacekeepers
had not been
there:
"17.
On
8 June, an
UNMIS
individual
contractor
(IC) was
pulled out of
a
vehicle by SAF
in front of
the UNMIS
Kadugli Sector
IV compound in
the presence
of several
witnesses. He
was taken away
from the
vicinity of
the compound
and gunshots
were heard.
Later he was
discovered
dead by UNMIS
personnel and
IDPs. Several
sources
confirmed that
the victim was
an active SPLM
member."
There
are other
difference
between the
original and
edited
reports. But
how does the
UN justify
airbrushing
out the
presence of
its inactive
peacekeepers?
On
August 15 at
the UN noon
briefing Inner
City Press
asked Ban
Ki-moon's
acting
deputy
spokesman
Farhan Haq:
Inner
City
Press: in at
least one
instance,
there was a
description of
an
UNMIS
independent
contractor
pulled out of
a vehicle and
presumably
shot and
killed. And in
the initial
draft, it says
UN
peacekeepers
were present
and did not
intervene. And
in the final
draft, the
presence of UN
peacekeepers
is entirely
erased from
the report. On
this edit in
particular,
what was the
process that
took place in
moving to this
final report
in which the
peacekeepers
are sort of
airbrushed
out?
Acting
Deputy
Spokesperson
Farhan Haq:
First of all,
there are
actually
very few
differences in
substance
between the
final version
and the
draft version,
which was an
internal draft
which was
still
undergoing
revision. The
basic point is
that the
published
report was
shortened
and was
brought in
line
qualitatively
with UN
standards.
What
happened is
that we did
have to err on
the side of
caution to
remove
unsubstantiated
elements from
the report. At
the same time,
the
basic thing is
that the
report was
brought in
line with the
standards
of the Office
of the High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights for
public
reporting,
including the
use of
appropriate
human rights
language. And
the Office of
the High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights went to
great lengths
to try to
cross-check
the substance
of the report.
For
example, when
allegations
were based on
one witness
account, this
was
made clear.
Inner
City
Press: This
particular
change, it’s
only six
words... is it
not a
substantial
change to drop
out the
presence of
the
peacekeepers?
Did they find
that the
peacekeepers
weren’t
present
on 8 June?
Ban &
Pillay &
Deputy Kang,
Kordofan
report edits
not shown
Acting
Deputy
Spokesperson
Haq: Again,
the basic
point was to
remove
unsubstantiated
elements.
Also, of
course, the
report was
carefully
reviewed by
legal and
other experts.
Inner
City
Press: Is it
possible to
get an answer,
you’ve listed
various
reasons that
certain things
could come
out, this
particular
removal
of the
presence of
peacekeepers
when somebody
was killed --
Acting
Deputy
Spokesperson
Haq: I
wouldn’t
comment on any
particular
change of
wording. My
basic point to
you is that
this is the
process
that it went
through.
Otherwise, of
course, we
wouldn’t… in
general, we
don’t comment
on the
difference
between an
internal
draft and the
final draft.
This is the
final draft
that has gone
through the
editing
process and
the process of
legal vetting
that all
reports have
to go through.
Inner
City
Press: Does
DPKO
[Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations]
have
some kind
of--was it
allowed to
edit this line
out? That’s
really
where my
question goes,
since it is
reporting on
the UN’s own
presence and
inaction while
a death
occurred, it
seems strange
to
have one of
the editors be
one of the
parties
presumably
being
reported on.
Acting
Deputy
Spokesperson:
Again, the
entire point
was for the
Office of
the High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights to put
the language
in line
with its
standards. And
that is what
it has done
through this
particular
process.
But
what are
the
standards --
deletion of
criticism of
inaction by UN
peacekeepers?
We'll say on
this -- watch
this site.
, 
