HRW
Acknowledges
Paying
Witnesses for
Travel, Leaves
Other Qs
UNanswered
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
December 16 --
Amid the
controversies
of Eastern
Congo, the
role taken by
Human Rights
Watch and its
director Ken
Roth has come
to the fore,
by their
choice and as
highlighted,
for example,
by the
Government
of Rwanda.
When
the French
newspaper
Liberation reported
that a HRW
investigator
named Lane was
offering
financial
compensation
for "testimony
against the
M23," many
already
dubious of
HRW's role
fastened on
it.
Inner
City Press
wrote to Roth
and HRW's
press office
including its
UN
spokesman
Philippe
Bolopion with
five questions
- and, to
Bolopion's
credit, got an
answer in less
than two
hours' time.
But
several of the
questions are
left
unanswered.
Inner City
Press asked:
Does HRW have
a staff
member,
investigator
or other
personnel in
the
DRC named Lane
or anything
like it? Did
this
individual or
any other
offer
compensation
of any kind
for testimony?
If so, what
testimony
was collected?
What has been
done with it?
Does Human
Rights Watch,
anywhere, pay
compensation
for testimony?
If so what
safeguards are
in place?
Separately,
since
May 2011 have
senior HRW
staff met with
UN Secretary
General
Ban Ki-moon;
if so, what
dates, and
this is a
request again
to know
the topics.
(This last
followed a May
2011 meeting
between Roth
and
Ban that HRW declined to
summarize,
despite being
a non-profit
and
presumably
accountable
not only to
its funders.)
Bolopion
responded
with this:
"Human Rights
Watch does not
pay witnesses
in exchange
for
information,
in order to
preserve the
integrity of
the interviews
we conduct.
Human Rights
Watch
occasionally
compensates
victims or
witnesses for
incidental
costs they may
incur
when traveling
specifically
in order to
meet with our
researchers.
As in any
other
conflict,
Human Rights
Watch
documents
abuses
committed by
all sides in
the DRC and
therefore
seeks
information
from anyone
with
first-hand
information to
give."
The
question about
HRW's meeting
with Ban has
not been
answered.
Presumably,
the above does
confirm that
"Lane" exists,
and
did pay. How
much was paid,
and to how
many people,
is not
disclosed.
Nor what has
been done with
the
information.
There
are those who
contest that
in Eastern
Congo of late
HRW is
documenting
and trying to
publicize
"abuses
committed by
all
sides." If so,
where has HRW
been on the Congolese
army rapes in
Minova, and
the UN's
refusal to
disclose which
units were
that, and
if the UN work
with them?
Where
has HRW been
on the lack of
transparency
by UN
Peacekeeping
and its
chief Herve
Ladsous, who
rather than
answer about
Minova summoned
favored
journalists
into the
hallway for a
private
briefing,
video
here?
Bolopion
used
to be one such
favored
journalist,
for Le Monde.
His
predecessor
was not in
such a
relation;
others also
note that
under Alison
des
Forges, may
she rest in
peace, HRW's
coverage of
Eastern Congo
was
more balanced.
But
it is what it
is; we
appreciate any
fast answer,
and have
published
it in full.
Rwanda joins
the Security
Council on
January 1, and
it is
hard to
imagine HRW
having the
access it has
had.
HRW may claim
this
as a result of
principle.
Others see it
differently.
But on the
questions
still
unanswered,
and on what
the UN and
Ladsous
ultimately
do in the wake
of the FARDC
mass rapes in
Minova, time
will tell.
Watch this
site.
, 
