DRC
Report, Vague
on Rwanda,
UNacted on by
Ladsous, Rape
to Desecration
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, July
22 -- It was
in June, last
month, that
Inner City
Press
exclusively
put
online the
Democratic
Republic of
the Congo
sanctions
Group of
Experts report.
Since then,
the UN
Department of
Peacekeeping
Operations has
refused to
answer whether
they provide
support to the
DRC Army units
named in the
report engaged
in rape,
looting,
support
of the FDLR
and
recruitment of
child soldiers
(about
which Inner
City Press asked UN
envoy Leila
Zerrougui
earlier on
Monday, here.)
Now
Monday
afternoon, the
UN Security
Council will
hold a closed
door
meeting on the
report. It is
understood
that Rwanda
will point out
that while the
report alleges
Rwanda Defense
Force support
for or
communications
with the M23
rebels, no RDF
personnel are
named.
Rwanda's
Mission
to the UN
tells Inner
City Press
that they have
asked not
only DPKO
chief Herve
Ladsous -- who
admitted in
consultations
that
his
allegations
were based on
rumors -- but
also the Group
of Expert
for enough
information to
investigate,
but none has
been provided.
Meanwhile,
DPKO
has the
numbers of the
FARDC units,
and names of
commanders.
Does it still
support them,
as it does the
41st and 391
Battalions
implicated in
the 135 rapes
at Minova in
November?
After
Ladsous
decided to
continue
supporting the
391st
Battalion,
after
only two
arrests for
135 rapes and
a dozen
"suspensions,"
the
391st
Battalion has
now shown up
desecrating
corpses.
At
Monday's noon
briefing Inner
City Press
asked Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesperson
Martin Nesirky
if this does
not at last
trigger Ban's
Human Rights
Due Diligence
Policy and the
cut off of
support to the
391st
Battalion.
Nesirky
said,
twice, that it
is under
investigation.
But that
process was
allowed to
take months
under Ladsous
on the Minova
rapes, and no
support was
suspended. The
Policy,
as articulated
by outgoing
Legal
Counsel
Patricia
O'Brien, is
not being
followed. It
involves an
assessment of
risk,
CLEARLY
triggered now.
Ladsous has
made a joke
of the policy:
now what?
Watch this
site.
, 
