Amid
Move
to Switch From
Criminal
Silva, Ban
Dismisses Predecessor
Criticism
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
Feb 3, updated
Feb
10
-- For a week
UN Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon's
office has
been
questioned
about
accepting
alleged war
criminal
Shavendra
Silva as one
of Ban's
Senior
Advisers on
Peacekeeping
Operations.
While
Ban's
Spokesman
Martin Nesirky
has insisted
that Ban is
powerless to
stop what
several member
states
describe as a
travesty or a
"new low,"
some states
asked by Inner
City Press say they are
pushing Sri
Lanka to pull
Silva back,
even if only
to replace him
with Permanent
Representative
Palitha Kohona,
who also
played a role
in the White
Flag killing
of prospective
surrenderees,
along with
Ban's chief of
staff Vijay
Nambiar.
Acts
of Shavendra
Silva's
battalion in
2009 are
described in
the UN's
own Panel of
Experts report
on Sri Lanka
-- for example
in paragraphs
62,
90-92
and 171,
shelling
hospitals and
the killing
those seeking
to surrender,
in which both
Kohona and
Nambiar played
a role -- and
lawsuits have
been filed
against Silva
for war
crimes. In September 2011,
Inner City
Press asked
Silva about
them, click
here for that
story.
Nesirky
told Inner
City Press to
"ask the Asia
group" about
their vote;
Inner City
Press did,
and found that
there was no
vote, Sri
Lanka
convinced
Saudi Arabia
and Nepal to
stand down.
Nesirky
told Inner
City Press to
look at the
General
Assembly
resolution,
and Inner City
Press has,
finding that
nothing in the
text says that
Ban has to
take whomever
is referred to
him, whatever
their record.
In
fact,
Susana
Malcorra Ban's
head of Field
Support, and
prospectively
his new deputy
replacing Asha
Rose Migiro,
met with
member states
and laid down
criteria like
"senior"
status.
Why
didn't she and
Ban say, don't
nominate
alleged war
criminals?
On
February 3,
after trying
to let the
issue settle
for a bit,
Inner City
Press again
asked Nesirky:
Inner
City
Press: it has
to do with,
again,
Shavendra
Silva, but
also something
new. There has
been an open
letter by
Edward
Mortimer, who
used to be the
Communications
Director for
Kofi Annan,
saying and
stating as a
fact that the
UN
investigating
itself under
Thoraya Obaid
has been
disbanded, did
not proceed. I
wanted you to
confirm if
that’s true.
[Update
of Feb 10:
there was no
answer to this
question so
Inner City
Press asked it
again on Feb
10; spokesman
Nesirky said
that Mr.
Mortimer's
assertion is
false, that
the review
under Obaid is
still ongoing.
Inner City
Press asks
when, after
all this time,
it will be
finished.
We'll see.]
Also,
the
organization
that Mr.
Mortimer is
the chair of,
called the Sri
Lanka
Campaign, has
given a quote
about Silva
saying that
it's very
surprising
that the
Secretary-General
would accept
Mr. Silva
given the
allegations
against him of
war crimes in
a
Secretary-General’s
report that
hasn’t been
acted on.
[Response?]
You said
various things
before. I have
actually
looked at the
GA resolution;
it doesn’t
seem to on its
face say that
the
Secretary-General
has to accept
it. So I want
to ask you
again, given
that former UN
officials are
saying it’s a
black mark for
the UN to have
an alleged war
criminal as an
adviser on
peacekeeping,
what’s the
thinking in
the
Secretariat?
Is there any
attempt being
made to defuse
this, to seek
another
individual
from Sri
Lanka, or are
you simply
saying we have
no power, we
accept it
whatever the
consequences?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Matthew, it is
not a question
of accepting
or not
accepting. It
is a question
of the Member
States
deciding. It
is a question
for the Asia
group among
the Member
States to
decide — and
that was their
decision. And
I suggest that
you take it up
with them.
Inner
City
Press: I have,
and there was
no election in
the Asian
group, and the
reason I think
it’s
legitimate to
ask you is
this is that a
former UN
official is
saying it is
surprising
that Ban
Ki-moon
accepts this,
i.e. he
thinks, having
had experience
in the UN
system, that
clearly the
Secretary-General,
he can make
calls, he can
attempt... I
just wanted to
know, if in
fact there is
a switch,
which may take
place to Mr.
Kohona, is the
Secretary-General
in any way
involved in
that or
entirely
[powerless]?
Spokesperson:
Well, with
great respect
to Edward
Mortimer, whom
I know, he is
not in the
Executive
Office of the
Secretary-General
any more. And
so he cannot
be privy to
what may or
may not take
place there,
at all.
So,
under Ban the
Office of the
Secretary-General
has gotten so
much weaker?
That was the
question, and
this so far is
the answer. We
will have more
on this, and
on the
Campaign.
(c) UN Photo
Mortimer, Sen
& Annan:
acceptingt war
criminal Silva
as "Senior
Adviser" not
shown
Here
are on the
record quote
provided on
this to Inner
City Press by
the director
of the Sri
Lanka Campaign
Fred Carver:
"There
are
very serious
allegations of
war crimes
leveled
against Silva,
allegations
that the
Secretary-General's
expert panel
has
recommended be
investigated -
something that
has not yet
happened.
There are also
incredibly
serious
allegations
leveled
against Sri
Lankan members
of UN
peacekeeping
forces - over
whom Silva
would have
oversight.
This
appointment
therefore does
not speak well
for the UN's
commitment to
investigating
atrocities,
even when the
perpetrators
wear blue
helmets."
And,
after some
back and
forth, by
Edward
Mortimer,
former Annan
communications
director:
“It’s
disgraceful
that someone
against whom
there are
strong and
credible
charges of war
crimes should
serve as
Deputy
Permanent
Representative
of his country
at the UN, and
even more
disgraceful
that the Asian
Group has
elected him to
serve on the
Secretary-General’s
Special
Advisory Group
on
Peacekeeping
Operations –
disgraceful,
and insulting
to the
Secretary-General.
I’m surprised
that he puts
up with it.”
That
is giving Ban
(too much)
benefit of the
doubt, and
still it
raises
questions.
Watch this
site.
, 
