Inner City Press: Investigative Reporting from the United Nations

UNESCO on Free Press in S. Sudan, Bokova on Press Ouster from UNHQ?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 21 -- In the UN's continued withholding of news and answers about South Sudan, the reports of the UN's own knowledge of abuses are now being withheld from its own impacted national staff. So Inner City Press has published below multiple leaked documents from inside UNMISS.

Amid or because of this reporting on what the UN knows but doesn't say, on February 19 at the demand of UN Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach, Inner City Press was thrown out of the UN. Audio here. Its UN Pass has been confiscated and its files seized. Questions sent to Gallach and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric have not been answered.

In South Sudan, UNESCO has today "welcomed the establishment of an autonomous Media Regulatory Authority in South Sudan, to oversee the media industry in terms of regulation, media development and issuance of broadcasting licenses. This is expected to contribute to a vibrant, independent and pluralistic media in South Sudan, by curbing the increased rate of incidents affecting journalists, end impunity on crimes against journalists as well as create an enabling environment for the media to operate in."

Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access it co-founded have repeatedly asked the UN about attacks on journalists in South Sudan (and also in UN Headquarters), often without response.

(Here is an email to Gallach that was never answered:

"On February 27 [2015], Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access asked Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the case of journalist Mushfiqul Fazal and JustNewsBD.com. Video here. While vague assurances were offered, there was no clear guidance that countries (or others) cannot seek to get journalists dis-accredited from the UN (which has happened before, leading to the formation of FUNCA, see below). Nor has the Spokesperson's Office responded on the new issue of Internet censorship and danger to the journalist's family. Hence this e-mail, and request for your action on the case of Mushfiqul Fazal and JustNewsBD.com.

We understand that you only began earlier this month, but you should be aware that your predecessor Peter Launsky communicated regularly with FUNCA on press freedom issues. Due to actions taken by the UN Correspondents Association's Executive Committee in 2012, including UNCA secretly meeting with UN officials and seeking to expel investigative media (see documents obtained under the US Freedom of Information Act here and here and here and here), I and another elected board member quit and co-founded FUNCA.

FUNCA stands for the defense of journalists, and for fair treatment of all journalists. We do not believe the UN should partner with a group that has sought to get journalists expelled from the UN; we are opposed to first quesitons at press conferences or stake-outs being set aside for such a group. We are for a more than one-party system. We are for fair treatment.

Unlike what UNCA has recently said, we are opposed to the UN being able to search the lockers or other belongings of the journalists who cover it; Luiz is particularly opposed to the idea of using UN identification card swipe information to track the movement of journalists, against which he says assurances were given when the swipe system was implemented.

On all of that you will hear more from us. But for right now, we are writing to ask you to take action on this case of a UN accredited journalist having his media blocked in his home country, and that you make clear that states or others cannot lobby your DPI to try to get journalists asked critical questions expelled, or threaten them in any way.

We will appreciate your written response, thank you."

This email was received but never answered; no contact until the order on February 19 to clear out in two hours. There is no UN appeals process, and Gallach never asked Inner City Press for its side of the story before ordering it out.

So the UN's treatment of the independent press inside UN Headquarters does not meet the standards UNESCO is welcoming in South Sudan.

UNESCO chief Irina Bokova, who wants to succeed Ban Ki-moon as Secretary General, will be in UNHQ in New York on Monday, February 21. Inner City Press, its resident correspondents badge torn off by UN Security, apparently will not.

But what does UNESCO's Bokova think of the Press being thrown out of the UN on two hours notice for a principled disagreement on journalists' rights to cover events inside the UN Press Briefing Room? The question has been publicly asked, here, and publicly seconded. Watch this site.

In South Sudan beyond the UN's shameful failure to search for weapons and then to protect in its Malakal "Protection of Civilians" camp, and attempt to cover up the SPLA's shooting and looting in the camp, now the problems have spread to or re-appeared in Wau.

On UNMISS' failure to search for weapons, entirely ignored or covered up at the UN Security Council on February 19, here is a first-hand account exclusively provided to Inner City Press:

"“Peacekeepers were given info 2 days ago as was info passed out raising concerns. IDPs (Shilluk and Nuer elders raised this direct with UNMISS at the time of being aware of info. UN sat on it until first incident erupted. That came about as Padiang dinka 'IDP' walked passed UN contracted gate guards (Warrior Security I think) with significant volume of ammunition for weapons and was stopped by Shilluk IDPs. Fight broke out, Padiang dinka killed and ammunition given to UN.

According to the information obtained from the camp, this problem started day before yesterday when UNMISS Protection Security Officers received sufficient security report that Dinka Internally Displaced Persons staying in Malakal UNMISS Protection Camp received illegal weapons smuggled from main town center into IDPs camp by their tribe security agents controlling the town since first week of July 2015 when SPLA- IO withdrew tactically from Malakal town. UNMISS protection soldiers wanted to conduct the search for illegal weapons smuggled inside the protection camp but Dinka Internally Displaced Persons refused to allow UNMISS Security to conduct the search for weapons then the attack happened last night at 8:00pm.”

Here is another internal email exclusively leaked to and published by Inner City Press, with names redacted for obvious reasons:

"From FAO Wau
From Wau: Subject: Serious Security Situation in Wau
Dear XXX

I hereby wish inform you about a serious security situation we are currently experiencing in Wau since yesterday evening.

Indeed security has been recently shaky in Wau and vicinity, but yesterday it worsened to the extent that many of our staff members had to seek for a refuge at night at the UNMISS compound.

Since this morning, all the vehicles are grounded at the office, as no driver could move and there is no authorization for any vehicle to move out of the UNMISS compound.

We are in contact with the FSCO, although no information has been circulated so far. With regards, XXXX”"

In Malakal, while the UN publicly blamed violence on ethnic youth, internally it knew the SPLA was shooting and attacking IDPs, burning and looting in the UN Malakal camp.

Inner City Press exlusively published a leaked email proving this, then at the February 18 UN noon briefing asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric about this, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you, on Malakal, I’d saw that press release by UNMISS. But I’ve also seen an e-mail inside the UN saying that the SPLA (Sudan People’s Liberation Army) entered the camp, shot and attacked IDP’s (internally displaced persons), that… that groups have been separated by ethnicity or tribe inside the camp and that there was looting of tents by the SPLA. So I’m wondering… I’m asking you, why wouldn’t the UN report… would characterize as ethnic violence something that actually involves the Government of the country entering a supposed protection of civilian camp?

Spokesman: "I don’t have… you, obviously, have more operational details and are on more e-mail lists than I am, which is useful for you, not useful for me. It is clear, from what I’ve just read out, that the Mission reminds all the parties and the Government to respect the sanctity of the camp. And I think that speaks for itself."

But it's gotten worse, both on the ground in Malakal and within the UN. UNMISS belatedly put out a press release on five dead (and counting) in the PoC site, but did not mention the SLPA, instead

"The United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) strongly condemns the violence that erupted last night between Shilluk and Dinka youths in its Protection of Civilians site in Malakal... Violence involving the use of small arms, machetes and other weapons broke out between youths from both communities in the late evening on 17 February. According to preliminary reports, there have been 5 fatalities among the Internally Displaced Persons’ (IDP) community and approximately 30 injured."

But internally, as exclusively provided to Inner City Press by whistleblowers (and pilfered by some other media without credit), the UN said to the UN Security Management Team (SMT) in Juba:

"Dear SMT Members,

SPLA troops numbering 50- 100 have entered the UNMISS POC Sector 1 and 2 in Malakal reportedly attacking IDPs, shooting sporadically, burning tents and looting properties. IDPs continue to flee into the former POC area and have now occupied and filled up former POCs 1, 2, 3, 4. Casualty figures are yet to be updated.

Sporadic shooting is continuing. Crisis Management Team is in session."

So the UN knows the SPLA is shooting and attacking IDPs, burning and looting - but blames it on ethnic youth.

On February 11, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Dujarric, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: On South Sudan, yesterday I'd asked you about Maridi, and today I want to ask you about Mundri. Seems like, basically, there are offences in at least these two places, maybe more, by the SPLA against the SPLA-IO. And I'm just wondering, were you able to get any… did you hear anything back?

Spokesman: Again, you should also take a look at the website from the Joint Verification Mechanism. They are responsible for monitoring the implementation of the ceasefire. So, their updates, I understand, are going up daily. As soon as we get updates from the field, we share them with you.

But this website is rarely updated. What IS the UN's job?

On February 10, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Dujarric about Maridi, still no answer. Nor, from a week ago, about chemical weapons:

UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous hits new lows daily. On February 3 at a briefing in Juba largely triggered by leaks, UNMISS was asked about the use of chemical weapons in Mundri.

From the transcript:

"Answer: Please refer to the JMEC Monitoring and Verification Teams – I cannot comment."

But Inner City Press is told by South Sudan sources that "fighting started early am the other morning around Katigiri and proceeded WNW towards Mundri. Chemical agents were clearly within SPLA ammunition (mortar rounds, recoil-less rifles), the medics know the issue will be squashed."

So Inner City Press in New York asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about the deference in Juba to JMEC. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: in South Sudan, there are now people saying that chemical weapons were used in a place called Mundri. And I wanted to know, I know that UNMISS (United Nations Mission in South Sudan) has started holding briefings there. There's a question by a, quote, unidentified journalist about the chemical weapons, and the answer was, “Simply refer to the JMAC (Joint Mission Analysis Centre) monitoring and verification teams.” And I wanted to know, how is it that the UN has a near-billion-dollar peacekeeping mission there but can't speak about an issue as important as chemical weapons? And what is the state of the UN's knowledge on the reported use of chemical weapons by the Government side in Mundri?

Deputy Spokesman Haq: Well, I mean, the basic point is that, at this stage, we don't have a confirmation of the use of chemical weapons. If we do, we would report that. It's a matter of serious concern. We have a peacekeeping mission on the ground. If it can confirm these reports, it will.

Inner City Press: So the answer there given only to refer to JMAC actually meant the UN is trying to confirm it, and if it can, it will.

Deputy Spokesman: If we have any solid information to confirm this, of course, we would follow up on that.

So what the UN said in Juba is belatedly cleaned up by UNHQ. But they also refuse to answer basic questions in NY, here.

We'll have more on this.

UN's South Sudan Report, Sept 2015, Leaked to Inner City Press by Matthew Russell Lee

The full document we have put online here. A quote:

In March 2014, a labelling error was discovered whilst transporting containers loaded with duty equipment for the UN Ghanaian peacekeepers in Unity State which brought strained relations to even a lower point. The error was exploited to galvanise hostility towards the UN in favour of the government by falsely presenting the UN as supplying weaponry to the opposition. It took elaborate interventions, investigations
and communications to clear the false impression that this created.

[ICP note: the same type of "labeling" or "clerical" error occure this months with weapons headed to MONUSCO. This is what UN Peacekeeping has become under Herve Ladous, who linked peacekeepers' rapes to "R&R, here.]

We'll have more on this.

Follow @innercitypress Follow @FUNCA_info

Share |

These reports are usually also available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis.

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.