By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
January 6 --
Back on June
22, 2013,
Inner City
Press first
reported
complaints
about Somalia
UN Mine Action
Service boss
David
Bax,
including his
work alongside
US-based
Bancroft
Global
Development.
After that,
the UN said
Bax was being
investigated
by UNOPS, the
UN Office of Project
Services, and
that it would
have nothing
to say until
that
investigation
was completed.
On
November 4,
2013, Inner
City Press
asked Anton
Katz, Chair of
the UN
"Working Group
on the use of
mercenaries as
a means of
impeding the
exercise of
the right of
peoples to
self-determination"
about the
Group's report
on Somalia -
and if he had
met David Bax.
(He had, in
Cape Town.)
The report
states for
example that
"The
Working
Group was
informed by
UNMAS that to
avoid this
problem, their
agreement with
Bancroft
requires that
when
conducting EOD
and
counter-IED
operations,
Bancroft
employees must
remain a
minimum of 500
metres behind
any front
line. This
type of rule
might serve as
an appropriate
safeguard in
other
contracts as
well... The
Working Group
notes that at
least one
employee of
Bancroft
pleaded, and
was found,
guilty in a
South African
court of,
inter alia,
recruiting
persons for
mercenary
activities in
Côte d’Ivoire
and providing
logistical
support for
the venture
[See High
Court of South
Africa
(Transvaal
Provincial
Division),
case number
A2850/03 of 2
and 20 May
2005 (ZAGPHC
248).]"
Why
are the UN,
AMISOM and
UNMAS working
with Bancroft
Global
Development?
What do they
do together?
Inner City
Press has been
informed by
whistleblowers
beyond Somalia
that Bax has
been part of
the process by
which genetic
and DNA
information
from IED
bombings have
been
transferred to
US
intelligence.
After
Inner City
Press first
reported this
-- and others
have tried to
rehabilitate
Bax -- the UN
repeated that
UNOPS is
investigating,
and that it
would have
nothing to say
in the
interim.
Now on January
6, after Inner
City Press
asked several
times over the
holiday, UN
spokesperson
Farhan Haq
read out at
the noon
briefing that
UNOPS finished
its
investigation
of Bax and
found "no
misconduct." Really?
So, is it OK
for the UN to
share genetic
information
with US
intelligence?
Were Bax'
action on the
day of the
attack on the
compound, and
the way he ran
"his camp,"
acceptably to
the UN? What
is the message?
As
with January
Security
Council
president,
Inner City
Press offered
thanks to Katz
for the
briefing for
the new Free
UN Coalition
for Access,
which will
continue to
push for
increased
transparency
from the UN on
cases like
that of Bax.
Given what has
been made
public by
whistleblowers,
to merely say
"no
misconduct" is
not enough.
Watch this
site.
, 
