| Tamil Guardian 15 November 2012 |
|
| | |
|
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon receives a copy of a report on the actions of the United Nations in Sri Lanka on Wednesday morning. Picture courtesy of Inner City Press. |
A report detailing the “grave failure of the United Nations” in Sri Lanka has been officially handed over to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, on Wednesday morning and released publicly later in the evening.
The full report can be downloaded here.
In a statement, the UN Secretary General said,
"I am determined that the United Nations draws the appropriate lessons and does its utmost to earn the confidence of the world's people, especially those caught in conflict who look to the organisation for help,"
He went on to say that the report had been released publically as,
"transparency and accountability are critical to the legitimacy and credibility of the United Nations".
However sections of the report had attempted to have been blacked out. The blacked out portions of the report could still be accessed and have been reproduced further below. See here.
Extracts from the report
(On February 7th 2009)
Some UN staff in Colombo expressed to the UNCT leadership their dismay thatthe UN was placing primary emphasis on LTTE responsibility when the facts suggested otherwise, and urged a more public stance.
(On March 9th 2009)
However, the briefing did not explicitly address Government responsibility for the situation or for shelling. The COG had prepared a casualty sheet which showed that a large majority of the civilian casualties recorded by the UN had reportedly been caused by Government fire, but the UN did not present this data. And when describing the lack of food and medicines, the briefing did not explain that the most immediate causes for the severe shortfall had been Government obstruction to the delivery of assistance, including its artillery shelling.
(On March 13th 2009, regarding a statement to be released)
...and the RC all wrote to the OHCHR leadership urging that the statement be changed to exclude specific reference to the number of casualties and possible crimes and violations of international law by the Government
Throughout the final stages, the UN issued many public statements and reports accusing the LTTE of committing human rights and international humanitarian law violations, and mentioning thousands of civilians killed. But, with the above exception, the UN almost completely omitted to explicitly mention Government responsibility for violations of international law.
However, despite UN advocacy and its relative withholding of criticism,access to IDPs in camps outside the Wanni remained strictly limited by the Government and the UN never obtained the kind of humanitarian pause that would have allowed civilians to be moved to safety.
(On camps)
The UNCT had used its 9 March briefing and subsequent documents to inform the diplomatic corps of UN efforts to be present at screening locations, butdid not mention the reports of people disappearing from other screening locations to which the UN had no access… The UN chose to support the camps.
(Further extracts)
The reaction of the UN system as a whole to the Government’s withdrawal of security assurances represented a serious failure.
But the UN did not confront the Government directly with the fact that obstructing assistance was counter to its responsibilities under international law.
The UN repeatedly condemned the LTTE for serious international human rights and humanitarian law violations but largely avoided mention of the Government’s responsibility.
Senior UN officials said this was because information could not be verified. In fact, information had been verified to a good standard; indeed UN statements on LTTE violations, including the killing of civilians and holding civilians hostage, were based on information verified in the same manner.
Numerous UN communications said that civilians were being killed in artillery shelling, but they failed to mention that reports most often indicated the shelling in question was from Government forces. The UN condemned the use of heavy weapons in general, and some officials appeared to believe thatbecause such weapons were almost exclusively used by the Government that this was a sufficient means of raising Government responsibility.
The Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, who also has an international human rights and humanitarian law mandate, raised concern with the Government and the Secretary-General over the situation but favoured quiet diplomacy and told the Government he would “not speak out.”
Much of the information used in the film (Channel 4's 'Sri Lanka's Killing Fields') was obtained from, or had already been accessible to, the UN for some time previously.
Nevertheless, the Panel’s report concludes that events in Sri Lanka mark a grave failure of the UN to adequately respond to early warnings and to the evolving situation during the final stages of the conflict and its aftermath, to the detriment of hundreds of thousands of civilians and in contradiction with the principles and responsibilities of the UN.
It is nevertheless clear that there can be no lasting peace and stability without dealing with the most serious past violations and without a political response to the aspirations of Sri Lanka’s communities. The UN cannot fulfil its post-conflict and development responsibilities in Sri Lanka without addressing these fundamental concerns; and the UN should continue to support implementation of the recommendations of the Panel of Experts on Accountability.
An attempt to censor
However sections of the report had attempted to have been blacked out.
The blacked out portions of the report could still be accessed. Sections that had attempted to have been blacked have been reproduced below.
See all the blacked out sections in full here.
On page 15, the blacked out section says,
"Several participants noted the limited support from Member States at the Human Rights Council and suggested the UN advocate instead for a domestic mechanism, although it was recognized that past domestic mechanisms in Sri Lanka had not led to genuine accountability. One participant said that “[i]t was important to maintain pressure on the Government with respect to recovery, reconciliation and returns and not to undermine this focus through unwavering calls for accountability ...” "
On page 68, the blacked out section quoting the then Under Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs John Holmes says,
""The references to possible war crimes will be controversial … I am not sure going into this dimension is helpful, as opposed to more indirect references to the need for accountability, in this conflict as elsewhere.”"
The blacked out section on page 96 states,
"Discussing whether or not the Secretary General should establish an international Commission of Experts, many participants were reticent to do so without the support of the Government and at a time when Member States were also not supportive. At the same time, participants also acknowledged that a Government-led mechanism was unlikely to seriously address past violations. The Secretary-General said that “the Government should be given the political space to develop a domestic mechanism” and that only if this did not occur within a limited time frame would the UN look at alternatives."
The executive summary of the report was removed, with the BBC reporting that it had “set out the panel’s conclusion in stark terms”. They went on to say the executive summary highlighted that,
"the UN struggled to exert influence on the government which, with the effective acquiescence of a post 9/11 world order, was determined to defeat militarily an organisation designated as terrorist".
The executive summary allegedly went on to state that
“many senior U.N. staff simply did not perceive the prevention of killing of civilians as their responsibility and agency and department heads at UNHQ were not instructing them otherwise".
Reaction
Speaking to the BBC UN worker Benjamin Dixit said in an interview,
"I believe we should have gone further north, not evacuate south, and basically abandon the civilian population with no protection or witness. As a humanitarian worker, questions were running through my mind 'what is this all about? Isn't this what we signed up to do?'"
We’re here to protect and witness these things. And then having to drive out of there, past these people wearing a helmet, wearing a flak jacket and all the protection that we had because we’re international... was... I’ve never been so ashamed of the colour of my skin..."
Mathanansurendran Suthaharan, a Tamil journalist who fled from the war zone, said,
“I kept sending messages, photos of civilian casualties, reports of hospitals bombings, to my contacts in Tamil media. And I requested they spread the word and tell the world to intervene and stop the war.
They (the UN) did help the people in the camps by supplying food and other essential items, but that’s not very helpful because we were kept there as prisoners of the government. It’s almost like someone visiting a prison and supplying sweets to the prisoners.
It wouldn’t save our lives and they didn’t guarantee any protection for us."
See extracts of both interviews in a BBC report below.
See more reaction from BBC Newsnight, including an interview with Sri Lanka Campaign Chair and former senior UN official Edward Mortimer here.
Also see more BBC coverage, including a heated interview with Sri Lankan MP Rajiva Wijesinha and former UN official Gordon Weiss in BBC Newshour radio interviews here andhere.
Australian Tamil Congress spokesperson Dr Sam Pari said,
"Such reports will only hold any weight if the UN acts to ensure that it redeems itself from its colossal failure in protecting the Tamil people."
Human Rights Watch's UN director, Philippe Bolopion said,
“The UN’s attempt to appease the Sri Lankan government while it was committing mass atrocities against its own population proved to be a deadly mistake,”
“The UN’s failure to learn from Rwanda shows that a mere report won’t solve these deep-seated problems unless there is the necessary political will and commitment to implement the report’s recommendations.”
See our post: HRW criticises UN's 'deadly mistake' (14 November 2012)
Scottish journalist Isabel Hilton said,
"If the words “never again” are to be more than an inscription on the gravestones of new victims, the UN must pursue this shameful episode to its roots."
See our post: 'UN has not learned from failures in Rwanda' (15 November 2012)
Head of Amnesty International’s UN New York office, Jose Luis Diaz, commented on the report, stating,
“The report is also a wake-up call for UN member states that have not pushed hard enough for an independent international investigation into alleged war crimes committed by both Sri Lankan government’s lack of will to protect civilians or account for very serious violations. There is no evidence that has changed”
See our post:'Wake-up call for member states' - Amnesty International (15 November 2012)
Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird also released a statement on the 15th of November, stating,
“Sadly, the Sri Lankan government continues to fail victims and survivors alike. The measures it has taken to date simply do not go far enough, as this report clearly lays out.
“Canada also notes the Secretary General’s comments and will work with the international community to ensure mistakes made in Sri Lanka are not repeated.”
See our post: Canada welcomes UN report (15 November 2012)
See reaction from Sri Lanka's Ambassador to the UN in our post:
Kohona dismisses reports of intimidation as ‘absolute nonsense’ (15 November 2012)
Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe, who is also Sri Lanka’s envoy to the UN Human Rights Council also responded. See our post:
No, no, no! (14 November 2012) |
|
|
|
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten