UN
Says
Investigation
of Tear Gas
Used at UC
Davis
Appropriate:
OWS Autumn
Amid Bank
Blindness?
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
November 22 --
As the Occupy
Wall Street
movement has
grown,
the United
Nations has
generally
dodged
questions
about
authorities'
responses to
it.
Inner
City Press
asked
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
spokespeople
about the
October
1 arrests on
the Brooklyn
Bridge, the
wounding of
Scott Olsen at
Occupty
Oakland
and the mass
arrest of
protesters
sitting-in on
Williams and
Pine Streets
to block the
New York Stock
Exchange, each
time without
substantive UN
response.
But
on November 22
when Inner
City Press
asked
spokesman
Martin Nesirky
about the tear
gassing of
students at
University of
California-Davis,
he responded
that the UN is
"aware of the
footage" and
that "an
investigation
seems to be an
appropriate
step." Video
here, from
Minute 4:27.
One
could read too
much into
this. The UN
is otherwise
tonedeaf to
issues being
raised
by Occupy Wall
Street, for
example
putting the chairman of
Bank of
America on its
High Level
Group on
sustainable
energy,
despite
protests on
lower Broadway
and elsewhere
of Bank of
America's role
as
Number One
funder of
mountain top
removal coal
mining.
On
November 22,
Nesirky noted
that the UN is
"also aware"
of the UC
Chancellor
speaking to
students and
faculty.
Still, it is
noteworthy
and stands in
contrast to
recent UN
responses.
(c) UN Photo
Ban Ki-moon in
flack jacket,
tear gas used
on #OWS not
shown
From
the UN's
November 17
transcript:
Inner
City
Press: Earlier
this morning
right here in
New York there
was a
peaceful
protest at
Wall Street.
People did a
sit-in, the
corner of
Pine and
William
Street, and I
personally
observed
people being
roughed up and
arrested. Was
this, in the
UN’s view is
that a
peaceful
protest, is
there any,
does the same
standard you
are
articulating
here about the
right to
peaceful
protest and
leaders
listening,
does it apply
to events
taking place
here in
Manhattan?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
There are a
couple of
things here.
The right to
peaceful
protest is
universal, the
notion that
people should
be able to
articulate
their views in
a peaceful
fashion is
something that
applies
everywhere, or
should. In
addition, the
rule of law is
an
important
principle,
too. And as
you well know,
aspects of
what has
been happening
in Lower
Manhattan are
before the
courts and,
therefore, it
would not be
proper to
comment
further on
that
particular
aspect of it.
Okay, other
questions?
This
was
followed-up on
November 18:
Question:
in New York
yesterday when
there were
demonstrations
— thousands
and thousands
of people
demonstrating
— I mean, at
least 400 to
500
have been
arrested all
over the
United States,
and not only
in New
York in
particular;
people have
been beaten.
Do you have
anything to
say about this
at all, on the
part of the
United
Nations,
because you
are quick to
say something
about Egypt
and Sudan and
places like
that? What
about the
United States?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Well, I have
answered
similar
questions on
that from
Matthew a
number of
times already.
Correspondent:
Matthew has
been asking,
yes,
absolutely.
Spokesperson:
So I mean the
answer is that
peaceful
protest is a
universal
right
and people
have that
right to
protest
peacefully.
And rule of
law is
an equally
important
principle as
well. What I
would also say
is
that the
Secretary-General
has said
repeatedly —
and not just
focusing on
the Arab
Spring — that
people are
frustrated. I
mean
he’s said
that, as I
mentioned in
his message on
the
International
Day of
Tolerance,
that all this
flux that is
taking place
around the
world and all
this churning
creates
enormous
anxiety. And,
for
example, in
his letter to
the G-20
leaders, he
said that the
gathering
force of
public protest
is a popular
expression of
an
obvious fact
that growing
economic
uncertainty,
market
volatility and
mounting
inequality
have reached a
point of
crisis. And he
was
appealing to
leaders to
show
leadership in
dealing with
these
multiple
crises. Public
protests that
are peaceful
are a
universally
accepted
right. And
rule of law is
also an
important
principle.
Okay, other
questions?
Yes?
Inner
City
Press: I have
questions
onSudan,
Somalia and
Sri Lanka. But
I
want to ask
one follow-up
on that, just
to make… to
understand
what… when you
say, you know,
peaceful
protest is
allowed but
the
rule of law is
equally
important.
Yesterday,
what took
place is
people did a
sit-in; they
sat down
peacefully at
[inaudible]
various
corners around
the New York
Stock
Exchange,
trying to
express their
outrage at
bailouts and
various things
and, you know,
many people
witnessed and
there is film
of it. They
were violently
arrested,
including the
use of batons
and blood
streaming down
the face. So
is
a sit-in,
which is
disruptive but
doesn’t use
violence, is
that the
type of
non-violent
protest that
is allowed,
and is the use
of batons
and in the
case of the
eviction, a
sound canon,
things like
this, who
in the UN is
sort of
monitoring?
Your deputy
seems to have
said well
if they are
doing it they
must need to
do it. He said
that once. He
has also said,
you know,
well, I will
leave it at
that one. He
basically said
the use of
police
projectiles in
Oakland must
have
been justified
because the
authorities
did it, which
is not the
approach used
elsewhere. So
how do you
bring these
principles you
have
enunciated
down to what
is actually
taking place,
including the
critical
injury of a
protester in
Oakland?
Spokesperson:
Well, I think
you are
conflating a
number of
things here,
but just
to answer the
point, rule of
law is
extremely
important and
it will
depend in any
setting on
what are the
laws that
apply. And it
is not
for me or for
others to
interfere in
what
legislation is
in place,
what court
orders may be
in place in
any given
setting. Just
to
reiterate that
the peaceful
protest is a
right; rule of
law is
equally
important. And
that’s where
we are.
Then
the November
22 comment.
Watch this
site.
, 
