In
Sri Lanka
Mahinda
Rajapaksa
Probed For
Roughing Up
Press UNlike
UN's Ongoing
Impunity
By Matthew
Russell Lee, 30/7
CJR, 19/6
Video
UNITED NATIONS
GATE, August 15 – UN Peacekeeper
chief Jean-Pierre Lacroix has
been multiply informed that
the Sri Lanka government
vetting of peacekeepers the UN
has relied on has not been
complied with, regarding at
least 49 soldiers now
"serving" the UN in Lebanon.
Inner City Press was sent a
copy of the letters, and
published them - then asked UN
Spokesman Stephane Dujarric
for the UN's response. [See
latest July 21 response,
below.] On
July 30 Guterres'
sleazy basis
for roughing
up and banning
Inner City
Press for 27
days and
counting was reported
in the Columbia
Journalist
Review. Now in
Sri Lanka, the
chickens may be
coming home
Mahinda Rajapaksa
with whom the
UN partnered - even as now
under Antonio
Guterres there
is no accountability in the
UN.
In Sri
Lanka the
Criminal
Investigations
Department
(CID) is set
to question
Rajapaksa on
the abduction
of journalist
Keith Noyahr. They
will visit
Rajapaksa's
home
on August 17
to record the
statement. (At
the UN, after
Inner City
Press was
roughed up
by UN Lieutenant
Ronald E.
Dobbins and
five unnamed,
it was Inner City
Press which
was interrogated and
still "reviewed"
-this is the
ghoulish UN of
Guterres and
his UK USG
Alison
Smale.)
Last
year six Army
officers were
arrested in
the case over
the abduction
and assault of
journalist
Keith Noyhar
but were later
granted bail.
(At the UN,
nothing has
been done to
Dobbins, and
still no
names.) Noyahr
was abducted
in May 2008
and was
severely
assaulted
before being
set free. The
former
Associate
Editor of The
Nation
newspaper fled
the country
with his
family
following the
incident
fearing for
his life." That,
it seems, is
what Guterres' UN
is trying.
Guterres'
spokesman Stephane
Dujarric in an article
published July
30 by the
Columbia
Journalism
Review was quoted
that " Lee
Periscoped
while
shouting, 'Fuck
you!'
repeatedly.
(Lee says he
was
complaining
that Dujarrac
had given the
Al Jazeera
crew a private
interview, and
excluded him.)
'He
creates an
atmosphere of
incivility
within our
working
environment,'
Dujarrac says."
This is a lie.
Inner City
Press on June 19
when Dujarric
gave a "private
briefing" to Al
Jazeera about
Nikki Haley
and Mike
Pompeo
announcing the
US pull out
from the UN
Human Right
Council said
in the hall
that is was a
"sleazefest."
After closing
the door of
the focus booth
it has been
confined to work in
for two years
by
Dujarric, and long
after the Al
Jazeera trio
including
James Bayes
and Whitney
Hurst were
done, said on
Periscope, F-You. Periscope
video - still
online
during this 27
day "investigation" -
here.
So
Dujarric is a
censor,
justifying the
beating up and
banning of a
journalist for
something he
broadcast in
a soundproof
booth to his
audience. This
is disgusting, all
the more so
because as
Inner City
Press has reported,
Dujarric told
an
interlocutor
on June 20,
before the two
beat-downs of
Inner City Press,
that things
would be worse
for it. Guterres and
Dujarric and
it seems Smale
are.. thugs. Disgusting.
On Sri
Lanka,
the CJR
article quotes
Inner City
Press: "The UN
pulled its
officers out
of the north
there before a
2008 ethnic
cleansing of
the Tamil
people, and
then
underreported
the genocide.
Forty or fifty
thousand
people dead.
The Sri Lankan
government was
shooting
missiles at
hospitals. Ban
Ki-moon
admitted it." All
true. All
Dujarric said, at noon on
April 6, is that he would
check to see that the letter
has been received. More than
72 hours later, he had not
provided even that
confirmation. On July 17,
after Lacroix' and Dujarric's
boss Antonio Guterres had
twice ousted and now banned
Inner City Press from the UN
for two weeks and counting, Fox
News story here,
GAP blogs I
and II,
Independent
here, arrogant
July 20 no
answer here. Independent here,
arrogant
July 20 no
answer
here, Inner
City Press in writing asked
Dujarric and his deputy Farhan
Haq, "please provide an update
on the (second tier of)
vetting of Sri Lanka troops
whose deployment was
reportedly deployed.
Relatedly, confirm or deny
that the Indian army unit
based in Uri that was struck
and struck Kashmir is no
longer being deployed
to MONUSCO, and the UN's
reasoning." The noon briefing
Inner City Press was banned
from had few questions, none
like this, further showing the
decline of Guterres'
spokesmen's full access
colloquy partner, here;
three days later Haq had not
provided any written answer.
(But, while Guterres refused
to answer on his ban of Inner
City Press after saying
"bonnes vacances" to Lacroix,
the latter remained chatting
with UK Ambassador Karen
Pierce on 44th Street,
pointedly not responding to a
statement about sexual
exploitation and abuse by the
peacekeepers he is responsible
for, video here.
On July 21, Inner City Press
raised the lack of answers,
and asked where Guterres is
going for weeks: "July 21-1:
where will the UN Secretary
General be from July 23
through August 3? How much is
it costing the public? USG
Smale, also now on three week
vacation, has claimed that the
SG's spokesmen are answering
Inner City Press' email
questions. First, for example,
none of the four questions
submitted yesterday morning,
24 hours ago, has been
answered. Second, even if
these e-mailed questions were
all being answered it does not
make up for denying Inner City
Press the right not only to
attend the noon briefing and
other press conferences, but
the stakeouts at the Security
Council and elsewhere, such as
the Budget Committee meeting
stakeout I was physically
ousted from on July 3. It's 18
days of outright censorship,
and counting." Six hours
later, only a response on Sri
Lanka, four days after that
question was asked. Here it
is: "Regarding your question
on Sri Lankan troops, we can
say the following: The
Secretariat (DPKO-DFS and
OHCHR) is working with the
Government of Sri Lanka and
all stakeholders, in
particular the national Human
Rights Commission, to
facilitate the establishment
of a domestic screening
process that complies with the
requirements of the Policy on
Human Rights Screening of
United Nations Personnel. In
this regard, DPKO met with Sri
Lankan stakeholders in Colombo
last month. Compliance with
the policy requirements is
necessary before the UN can
receive any further
deployments or rotations from
Sri Lanka. It is important
that all necessary procedures
and institutional arrangements
are in place so that the
domestic screening process can
meet these requirements.
National stakeholders are
working on finalizing and
formally approving their
standard operating procedures
in line with these
requirements, and we are
supporting them in
this." The UN under
Guterres is failing. On May
16, Inner City Press asked
Dujarric's deputy Farhan Haq
and there was something of an
answer. Video here;
UN transcript here:
Inner City Press: there
has been a long, outstanding
issue raised to DPKO about Sri
Lankans that were sent
unvetted by the Government to
Lebanon and another commander
that was sent to one of the
missions in Africa. Does
DPKO have an answer on that
yet? Deputy Spokesman:
"regarding the question of the
Sri Lankans, as of the past
week, the Human Rights
Commission of Sri Lanka was
conducting an additional tier
of vetting for 49 Sri Lankan
officers who have been already
deployed to the UN Mission in
Lebanon, UNIFIL. The
Human Rights Commission of Sri
Lanka is undertaking their
vetting and the vetting of the
remaining 101 military
personnel of the unit who are
scheduled to be
deployed. We are working
together with the Government
of Sri Lanka to ensure that
the screening arrangements
with the Human Rights
Commission of Sri Lanka comply
with UN policy.
Compliance with these
arrangements will be required
before the UN can receive any
further deployments or
rotations from Sri Lanka." But
the chair of the HRCSL has
questioned what the UN meant
or means by "additional tier."
On May 22, Inner City Press
asked Guterres' spokesman
Dujarric, UN transcript here:
Inner City Press: on Sri
Lanka, on these… those who
were deployed without being
vetted, it was said, I think
it was last week, that somehow
an additional tier of… of
vetting is going to be done by
the Human Rights Commission of
Sri Lanka. They've said
— this is a direct quote by
the Chairperson — that they
don't know what the UN means
by an additional tier since
there was… had been no vetting
whatsoever to begin with, and
so they're… it's unclear to
them…
Spokesman: Let me look
into it." Hours later,
nothing. Earlier in the
process, Dujarric stonewalled
on human rights and corruption
issues by withholding
confirmation for three days,
despite written questions each
day from Inner City Press,
while continuing restrictions
on the Press. On April 12,
Inner City Press asked yet
another, in person at the noon
briefing. And hours after
that, this written answer came
from the UN Office of the
Spokesperson - Do Not Reply,
presumably from Dujarric given
the first person pronoun: "I
can confirm that DPKO has
received this letter. The
Secretariat is committed to
ensuring that all personnel
serving with the UN meet the
highest standards of conduct,
competence and integrity,
including respect for and
commitment to human rights.
Member States that provide
personnel to UN peacekeeping
operations have the
responsibility to certify that
all these personnel have not
been involved, by act or
omission, in violations of
international humanitarian law
or human rights law, and have
not been repatriated on
disciplinary grounds from a UN
operation. In the case of Sri
Lanka where there are specific
human rights concerns, we put
in place additional screening
measures in 2016 to help
ensure that deployed personnel
meet our standards. Prior to
their deployment to UNIFIL,
the Permanent Mission of Sri
Lanka provided an attestation
certifying that the contingent
had not been involved in any
violations. However, in
February 2018, we learned that
the Sri Lankan Human Rights
Commission - which the
Government of Sri Lanka had
agreed it would undertake
human rights screening of all
Sri Lankan personnel - had not
yet completed the screening
when the rotation of the unit
in UNIFIL started. UN
Peacekeeping immediately
raised this with the Sri
Lankan authorities and the
deployment was stopped. DPKO
has requested that the Sri
Lankan government immediately
prioritize the completion of
the screening for the 49
officers already deployed to
UNIFIL. If concerns arise
regarding the 49 personnel
already deployed to UNIFIL,
DPKO may request that they be
repatriated and replaced at
the Government’s cost.
Meanwhile, we’ve asked the
Government of Sri Lanka to
formalize the screening
arrangements with the Sri
Lankan Human Rights
Commission. Compliance with
these arrangements will be
required before the UN can
receive any further
deployments or rotations from
Sri Lanka. The Government is
cooperating with us in this
regard." So the Government
violated the procedure, after
other substantive violations,
but the UN says it is
cooperating? We'll have more
on this. Here is the text of
the letter sent to Lacroix, to
the UN in Geneva and to Inner
City Press:
TO JEAN-PIERRE
LACROIX,
UNDER SECRETARY GENERAL FOR UN
PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS,
NEW YORK.
OHCHR, Geneva
Inner City Press
6 April 2018
Dear Mr. Lacroix,
SRI LANKAN ARMY’S FLOUTING OF
VETTING AGREEMENT FOR UN
PEACEKEEPERS
We write to draw your
attention to allegations that
the Sri Lankan Army has
deployed UN peacekeepers in
violation of the vetting
agreement it reached with the
National Human Rights
Commission, as well as their
obligation to conduct their
own due diligence process to
ensure that those who may
constitute a risk to
peacekeeping are not sent out.
The failure to abide by these
commitments constitutes a
mockery of the whole process.
Below are also a few remedial
steps we think should be taken
now.
The complaint regarding the
vetting comes from no less
than the country’s National
Human Rights Commission
(HRCSL), a body appointed by
the Government itself. You can
see this complaint in a
Sinhala letter from the HRCSL
to the President of Sri Lanka
in his capacity as commander
in chief on the HRCSL website.
The gist of it has been
reported in English by exiled
Sri Lankan journalists. It
says that the HRCSL and the
Sri Lankan Army signed an
agreement in 2016 for the
HRCSL to vet Sri Lanka’s
peacekeepers but the Army
deployed 49 of them to Lebanon
on 18 February 2018 before
this process was complete and
they had handed over all the
information on them requested
by the HRCSL. Indeed, some of
the information requested by
the HRCSL is said to be still
pending.
Ultimately the responsibility
lies with your department for
the vetting process in terms
of the Secretary General’s
‘Zero Tolerance” policy on
Sexual Exploitation and Abuse
(SEA) as well as his new
policy statement which he
announced in 2017 “Special
Measures for Protection from
Sexual Exploitation and
Abuse: A New Approach”,
which has clearly failed
spectacularly again in Sri
Lanka. According to the
UN, it seeks to ensure that
only “individuals with the
highest standards of
integrity, competence and
efficiency” are hired – this
has not been the record with
regard to Sri Lanka. You will
note that to date there has
been no criminal
accountability for the 134 Sri
Lankan peacekeepers sent home
from Haiti in connection with
systematic child sexual
exploitation from 2004-7,
which was confirmed by an OIOS
investigation.
Furthermore, if your
department allows peacekeepers
from any country to deploy
before the vetting process in
place is complete, then you
are complicit in undermining
the vetting process.
We, therefore, call on DPKO:
1. To
confirm whether (a) the 49
peacekeepers from Sri Lanka
were indeed deployed on 18
February 2018 without being
vetted and (b) explain how
this was possible and (c) what
you will do to prevent this
reoccurring.
2. To
confirm that the deployment
constitutes a violation of the
Memorandum of Understanding
between Troop Contributing
Countries and DPKO in respect
of vetting.
3. To
inform us whether the HRCSL
raised objections about
contingent commander Lt. Col
Hewage’s deployment before we
raised this issue with you in
our letter of 14th February.
We understand (from the HRCSL
letter online) that they had
the PHP forms for the 204
Lebanon-bound soldiers from 21
December 2017 so should have
been able to identify the
problems regarding the
contingent commander that we
ourselves identified from a
quick online search once his
name was made public.
Specifically, were concerns
raised by the HRCSL before the
18 February 2018 deployment of
the 49 men? Their letter
suggests they didn’t know the
men were about to be deployed,
despite the issue being raised
by us and being published
officially on the army’s
website.
4. To
make public the vetting/due
diligence criteria used by the
HRCSL/OHCHR to screen
soldiers. This should not be a
secret.
5. To
conduct a retrospective
vetting of all other Sri
Lankan peacekeepers currently
deployed – other than the 200
that went to Mali who were
vetted by OHCHR in
Geneva. We know Sri
Lankan peacekeepers are
currently deployed in many
other countries and it’s
probable they haven’t been
properly vetted for their
human rights record."
So what will the UN do?
On the morning of April 6,
Secretary General Antonio
Guterres' spokesman Stephane
Dujarric who evicted
Inner City Press from the UN
Press Briefing Room where the
UN
Correspondents Association
was meeting blithely said,
just go to UNCA. Well, no -
Sri Lanka history here.
Back in February 2018 Lacroix
was informed of the troubling
past history in 2008 in Sri
Lanka of a commander that
country is seeking to deploy
to the UN in Lebanon as early
as February 18, Rathnappuli
Wasantha
Kumara Hewage,
Inner
City Press was informed and
exclusively reported on
February 14, and got confirmed
from the UN on February 15.
Now on February 19, UN deputy
spokesman Farhan Haq said that
following questions, the
deployment of Hewage has been
suspended. Video here;
transcript: "We were asked
last week about a Sri Lankan
officer who was scheduled to
deploy to the UN Interim Force
in Lebanon, UNIFIL. I
can confirm that the officer’s
deployment is on hold pending
a review of the matter.
A decision regarding
deployment of this officer
will be made once the review
is complete. We are in
communication with the
Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka
regarding the officer’s
background and Sri Lanka is
cooperating fully with our
inquiries. The United Nations
takes reports of potential
human rights violations very
seriously. As a matter
of policy, we are committed to
ensuring that all personnel
serving with the UN meet the
highest standards of
efficiency, competence and
integrity, including respect
for and commitment to human
rights." But why not canceled,
given his record? We'll have
more on this.
When Lacroix held
a rare press conference on
January 24, Inner City Press
asked him how
the UN is
vetting
“peacekeepers”
from Cameroon,
as that
country's army
is burning
down whole
villages in
the Anglophone
zones. Lacroix
insisted that
vetting is
intensive.
Inner City
Press asked
about what
sources tell
it, that the
ostensibly
vetting of
troops from
Sri Lanka,
after the
bloodbath on
the beach
there,
consists of
one OHCHR
staffer in
Geneva.
Lacroix said
he wasn't sure
on that. Video
here.
After the press
conference Inner City Press
was contacted, and ultimately
copied on a letter to Lacroix,
below. On February 15, Inner
City Press asked UN Spokesman
Stephane Dujarric, UN
transcript here: Inner City
Press: there's been a letter
sent by… by a number of Tamil
Sri Lankan groups to Mr.
[Jean-Pierre] Lacroix about
the… the impending… I guess,
some type of a commander in
UNIFIL [United Nations Interim
Force in Lebanon], Mr.
[Rathnappuli Wasantha Kumara]
Hewage. And they've
documented to him — he's
supposed to deploy on Sunday —
that, in fact, he was present
during 2008 in Kilinochchi,
2009 in PTK. These were,
you know, highly controversial
military actions. So,
their complaint is that, in
the past, Office of Human
Rights of the UN would vet
people, and now that doesn't
appear to be the case anymore
just by… Have you seen
that letter? Spokesman:
We've… DPKO [Department of
Peacekeeping Operations] has,
indeed, received the letter
you mentioned. They are
looking into the case of the
gentleman that you mentioned
with… who's scheduled be
deployed to Lebanon. As
a matter of policy, we're
committed to ensuring that all
personnel serving with the UN
meet the highest standards of
efficiency, competence and
integrity, including respect
for and commitment to human
rights. In accordance
with existing policy, the UN
should neither select nor
deploy for service any
individual who has been
involved in violations of
international human rights or
humanitarian law. In
reviewing the background of
personnel to be deployed, we
consider available information
from within and outside of the
UN system, thus, will review
carefully the information that
has been provided to us.
Member States that provide UN
personnel to peacekeeping
operations also have the
responsibility to certify that
the personnel they nominate
have not been involved, by act
or omission, in violations of
international humanitarian or
human rights law or have been
repatriated on disciplinary
grounds from any UN
operation. In cases
where we have concerns
regarding the human rights
record of specific
troop-contributing countries,
we put in place additional
measures to ensure that the
personnel deployed is in line
with the UN human rights
screening policy. Inner City
Press: one follow-up, because
I remember Mr. Lacroix
specifically commented on this
when he did his press
conference. Seems like
these… these… these groups are
saying that, in the past, the
UN review these in Geneva, and
now they're relying on Sri
Lanka's own human rights
commission, and they say the
last people were deployed…
Spokesman: I think from
what I understood of what I
just said, we review both what
the Government tells us and
external and internal
sources." We'll see. Here was
the letter, c/o Debbie Berman,
Copy to OHCHR, Geneva and
InnerCityPress:
Dear Mr. Lacroix,
STOP DEPLOYMEMNT OF UN
PEACEKEEPER WITH FRONTLINE
COMBAT EXPERIENCE IN SRI
LANKA’S 2009 WAR - This is to
request you to stop the
planned deployment to Lebanon
on Sunday 18 February 2018 of
a Sri Lankan contingent
commander with frontline
combat command
experience in the final phase
of the civil war in 2008-9. We
believe that under the UN’s
current vetting criteria, this
commander should have been
screened out of all UN
peacekeeping duties. We note
that the Human Rights
Commission of Sri Lanka has
been asked to vet UN
peacekeepers from Sri Lanka
but consider that ultimately
the responsibility lies with
your department, as according
to the UN, it seeks to ensure
that only “individuals with
the highest standards of
integrity, competence and
efficiency” are hired. The Sri
Lankan Army says Lt. Col.
Rathnappuli Wasantha Kumara
Hewage is due to head the 12th
Force Protection Company (FPC)
for the United Nations Interim
Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) An
online search of Lt. Col.
Hewage reveals he was involved
in the assault on Kilinochchi
town in Northern Sri Lanka on
22 December 2008 and located
in PTK in late February 2009."
Inner
City Press accompanied and
covered Ban Ki-moon's trip to
Sri Lanka in 2009, and
subsequent acceptance of
Shavendra Silva as a senior UN
Peacekeeping adviser. After
Inner City Press published how
Palitha Kohona got his former
landlord to sponsor, on behalf
of the UN
Correspondents Association,
a screening of the government's
genocide denial film "Lies
Agreed To," Inner City Press was
threatened with ouster from the
UN, which occurred, and Inner
City Press is still restricted
to minders under the Department
of Public Information run by
British Alison Smale. Meanwhile
as noted in the letter, the UN
does less and less human rights
vetting. We'll have more on
this.
While at least
four countries
have issued
travel
warnings in
the wake of
Bangladesh's
arrest and
crackdown on
the resulting
protests, the
UN on February
8 hid from the
issue, and
from the need
to better vet
the security
forces the UN
is accepting
from
Bangladesh in
light of the
crackdown.
Inner City
Press asked,
video here,
UN transcript
here:
Inner City
Press: on
Bangladesh.
I mean, you
had said… the
arrest took
place some
time ago, and
various
countries have
put out
already travel
warnings, so
I'm wondering,
at a minimum…
the UN with
its country
team there,
have they
taken note of
what's taking
place in the
street? Deputy
Spokesman:
I've told you
what I've got
on that for
now. Inner
City Press:
given that
there's live
fire, you say…
very recently,
DPKO
[Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations]
put out a
statement
thanking
Bangladesh for
its
peacekeepers,
and I'm sure
they've done
great work,
but there have
been repeated
issues of
abuses by the
security
forces, or
seeming
abuses,
killing of
civilians, use
of live fire
on
protesters.
Can you
describe what
vetting goes
on, and… and
the recent
spate of… of
these thank
you, messages
put out by
DPKO, are they
in any
relation to…
to… to the
vetting
process that's
going on or
issues that
have arisen in
various
delegations,
contingents of
peacekeepers?
Deputy
Spokesman
Farhan
Haq: All
peacekeepers
are vetted to
make sure that
they have not
engaged in any
practices that
involve the
violation of
human
rights.
And we go
through that
on a
country-by-country
basis. Inner
City Press:
And so have
there been any
Bangladesh
peacekeepers
blocked in the
last five
years, given
the events in
the country in
which units by
name have
taken place in
crackdowns on
their own
civilians?
Deputy
Spokesman:
We raise all
concerns with
any particular
members of
incoming
peacekeeping
troops with
the
troop-contributing
country to
make sure that
no one is
deployed who
does not meet
our
standards."
What standards
are those? In
other news,
with Maldives'
President
declaring a
state of
emergency, on
February 5
Inner City
Press
asked the
spokesman for
UN Secretary
General
Antonio
Guterres
Stephane
Dujarric about
it at noon on
February 5,
before the US
then spoke,
below.
Under Guterres
and his
outgoing head
of Political
Affairs
Jeffrey
Feltman, both
headed to Korea,
it took the UN
a full 18
hours to come
out with two
paragraphs on
February 6,
below. On
February 8, UN
Assistant
Secretary
General for
Political
Affairs
Miroslav Jenca
was to brief
the UN
Security
Council about
the Maldives
under "Any
Other
Business." But
Jenca did not
speak to the
Press on the
way in or out
of the
Council. Past
2 pm when
Kuwait's
Ambassador,
the President
of the
Security
Council for
February, gave
a summary of
the day's
meetings,
Maldives
wasn't on it.
Inner City
Press asked,
loudly, but no
answer; later
it was
explained that
since AOB
topics are not
listed in the
UN Journal,
the President
feels he
cannot speak
to it. It
would be up to
the
Secretariat.
But under
Antonio
Guterres, the
UN Secretariat
says and
disclosed less
and less. If a
briefing on a
crackdown
happens but no
one was speak
about it, does
it make a
sound? Some
ask, why is
Guterres not
sending some
sort of envoy
or mediator?
It can't be
that he feels
he needs total
consent: he
sent Nigeria's
former
president
Obasanjo to
Kenya, where
both sides
said they
never met with
him. So why
the different
approach to
the Maldives?
We'll have
more on this.
The UN's
statement from
earlier on
February 6:
"The
Secretary-General
is seriously
concerned
about the
unfolding
situation in
the Maldives,
in particular
the
declaration of
a state of
emergency and
the entry of
security
forces into
the Supreme
Court
premises. The
Secretary-General
urges the
Government of
the Maldives
to uphold the
constitution
and rule of
law, lift the
state of
emergency as
soon as
possible, and
take all
measures to
ensure the
safety and
security of
the people in
the country,
including
members of the
judiciary."
From the UN transcript:
Inner City
Press: it
seems like
President
Abdulla Yameen
[Abdul Gayoom]
has not
complied with
releasing the
opponents.
In fact, he's
issued a state
of
emergency.
I'm wondering,
is there… is
DPI… is DPA
(Department of
Political
Affairs)
actually
involved, or
is it just… is
it issuing
statements
from New York,
or is it
trying to
speak with him
and engage
and…?
Spokesman:
I think we're
very concerned
with the
ongoing
developments
in the
Maldives,
including what
we've seen in
the last 24
hours.
We're
following it
very
closely.
And I would…
you know, the
Secretary-General
would, again,
call on the
Government to
respect the
court ruling
and for
restraint to
be
exercised.
And we… I do
expect a more
formal
statement on
this shortly."
A the UN,
shortly means
18 hours.
How far will
today's UN go
to placate
some
countries,
while ignoring
others and restricting
the Press? On
January 26 UN
"global
communications"
chief Alison
Smale flew to
Charleston,
South Carolina
for a photo op
and UNTV video
with China's
Xiamen
Airlines for
having
painting the
UN's "SDGs"
logo on the
side of an
airplane. This
without having
answered Press
questions
about her
Department of
Public
Information's
malfeasance
with resources
allocated by
the General
Assembly for Kiswahili
and about the
lack under her
"leadership"
of any content
neutral UN
media access
rules.
Afterward,
when Inner
City Press
asked for the
mp4 video
of her South
Carolina
junket - Inner
City Press is
informed that
the plane she
celebrated
could not in
fact fly - it
was told to
"Ask UN
Webcast,"
which is under
Smale. They
were asked -
and have not
given the
video. Nor has
Smale offered
any response
to a detailed
petition
two weeks ago,
while
re-tweeting
her former
employer the
NYT and
current boss
Antonio
Guterres. But
who is making
who look bad?
And how can a
former NYT
editor have no
content
neutral media
access rules,
and no
answers? As
she restricts
Inner City Press from its
UN reporting on
Cameroon,
Myanmar,
Kenya,
Yemen
and elsewhere?
We'll
have more on
this. While
any country
would try to
get the UN to
promote its
airline, if
the UN would
do it, Smale
is the UN
official who
responsible
for Inner City
Press being
restricted and
evicted as it
reports on the
UN bribery
scandal of
Patrick Ho and
China Energy
Fund
Committee.
Smale hasn't
even deigned
to answer
petitions in
this regard,
in September
(she said she
recognized the
need for the
"courtesy" of
a response,
never given)
and in
January --
too busy
flying to
South Carolina
to promote an
airline:
Today's
UN of Antonio Guterres, who
just met
with ICC indictee Omar al
Bashir, and his Deputy Amina
J. Mohammed who has refused
Press questions
on her rosewood signatures
and now the refoulement of 47
people to Cameroon from "her"
Nigeria, has become a place of
corruption and censorship. On
January 30 as Inner City Press
sought to complete its
reporting for the day on
Guterres' Bashir meeting and
Mohammed's Cameroon no-answer,
it had a problem. It was
invited to the month's UN
Security Council president's
end of presidency reception,
6:30 to 8:30 - but with its
accreditation reduced by
censorship, it could not get
back into the UN after 7 pm,
to the already delayed UN
video. It ran to at least
enter the reception - but the
elevator led to a jammed
packed third floor, diplomats
lined up to shake the outgoing
UNSC president's hand. Inner
City Press turn to turn tail
back to the UN, passing on its
way favored, pro-UN
correspondents under no such
restriction. Periscope here.
Inner City Press has written
about this to the head of the
UN Department of Public
Information Alison
Smale, in Sepember
2017 - no answer but a new threat - and this
month, when Smale's DPI
it handing out full access
passes to no-show state media.
No answer at all: pure
censorship, for corruption.
Smale's DPI diverted funds
allocated for Kiswahili,
her staff say, now saying they
are targeted for retaliation.
This is today's UN. Amid UN
bribery scandals, failures in
countries from Cameroon to
Yemen and declining
transparency, today's UN does
not even pretend to have
content neutral rules about
which media get full access
and which are confined to
minders or escorts to cover
the General Assembly.
Inner City Press,
which while it pursue the
story of Macau-based
businessman Ng Lap Seng's
bribery of President of the
General Assembly John Ashe was
evicted by the UN Department
of Public Information from its
office, is STILL confined to
minders as it pursues the new
UN bribery scandal, of Patrick
Ho and Cheikh Gadio
allegedly bribing President of
the General Assembly Sam
Kutesa, and Chad's Idriss
Deby, for CEFC China Energy.
Last week Inner
City Press asked UN DPI where
it is on the list to be
restored to (its) office, and
regain full office - and was
told it is not even on the
list, there is no public list,
the UN can exclude,
permanently, whomever it
wants. This is censorship.
***
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
Past
(and future?) UN Office: S-303, UN, NY 10017 USA
For now: Box 20047,
Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
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
2006-2018 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
for
|