Inner City Press: Investigative Reporting from the United Nations

UN Belatedly Re-Confirms Ban Panel Blocked by Sri Lanka, Is Not Asked About Ban's Claims: No More Questions

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 22 -- The UN, after moving to refuse to answer any Press questions about Sri Lanka, has decided to publicly re-confirm that Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Accountability Panel is no longer slated to travel to Sri Lanka.

As Inner City Press repored on January 18, this is contrary to Ban's December 17 praise of President Mahinda Rajapaksa's "flexibility" in allowing the visit, and to Ban's January 14 answer to Inner City Press. But the UN does not want to explain, or even be asked about, these accumulating discrepancies.

On January 18, based on multiple conversation with UN insiders who insisted they not be named because if so they would be fired or further marginalized, Inner City Press reported that

“insiders late on January 17 told Inner City Press that despite Ban's statement, his Panel will now probably NOT visit the Island. Despite Ban's December 17 announcement praising President Mahinda Rajapaksa's 'flexibility,' since then Rajapaksa's government has written to the UN to say not only that the Panel should not come, but that neither the government nor its Lessons Learnt & Reconciliation Panel will speak with the UN Panel of Experts. It is expected now that representatives of the Rajapaksa government will, in New York only, speak with Ban Ki-moon's Office, not his Panel.”

Alongside publishing this news, Inner City Press publicly asked Ban's Spokesman Martin Nesirky about it at the January 18 UN noon briefing:

Inner City Press: ...the Panel does not go to Sri Lanka. That in fact letters have been exchanged and that a letter from Sri Lanka says that there’s no intention to speak to the Panel.

Spokesperson: Well, what I can tell you is that Ms. Bragg’s visit it obviously a humanitarian visit. It is not related to work of the Panel. It is not. And I think that’s quite clear.

Question: What happens now? What will she do with it, as a humanitarian individual?

Spokesperson: She will be talking about humanitarian matters.

Question: Only about the rains, not about what caused the need to return? ... there’s some question about the visas for an accountability purpose, what the relation of this visa would be…

Spokesperson: As I said, the two are not connected. This is clearly a humanitarian matter. Last question.

Apparently Nesirky is trying to carry this out, making that the “last question.”

UN's Ban & Nesirky in 2011: no questions allowed

The next day on January 19, Nesirky twice cut off Inner City Press from asking questions at the UN noon briefing, claiming he would answer questions put to him in writing.

Inner City Press posed a number of Sri Lanka questions about the visas and Ban Ki-moon, none of which Mr. Nesirky answered.

On January 20, Nesirky walked out of the briefing room while Inner City Press was still posing questions about the white flag killings in connection with an article including the role of Ban's chief of staff Vijay Nambiar, who has said he got assurances from Sri Lanka Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona that those with white flags would not be killed.

Nesirky spoke of a reply from Mr. Nambiar, which has yet to be provided.

Finally on January 21, Nesirky told Inner City Press at the noon briefing that “I will take questions from you when you behave in an appropriate manner,” and refused to take any more of questions Inner City Press had prepared, including Sri Lanka and Ban's statements about his Panel. Colloquially, this "sucked," and Inner City Press quickly wrote about it.

Later on January 21, in what is labeled an “exclusive,” FP ran this quote:

“'The Sri Lankan mission had initially indicated they would be amenable to the panel meeting with it to make whatever representations it may wish to make, but it seems now that such a visit has still not been decided,' said a senior U.N. official. 'I am not sure if this is a simple matter of the Sri Lankan side prevaricating. The panel is nevertheless open and keen on any appropriate interaction with the LLC. The Sri Lankans have sought to keep their interaction through the secretariat, specifically the EOSG [the executive office of the secretary general],' the official said. 'We have, however, been asking them and the panel to deal with each other directly and shall continue to do so.'”

This is how Ban's UN, especially but not only Ban's Spokesperson's Office, operates.

A major question still unanswered, but repeatedly asked by Inner City Press publicly in the noon briefings at which Nesirky on January 21 said he will take no more questions from Inner City Press, is why Ban Ki-moon claimed on December 17 that his Panel would go to Sri Lanka.

At that time, Ban went out of his way to praise President Mahinda Rajapaksa's “flexibility.” Nesirky has repeated refused to answer Inner City Press' factual questions about Ban's, his entourage and family's contacts with Sri Lanka and Rajapaksa.

After Ban's January 14 “monthly” press conference, at which Nesirky did not take any questions from Inner City Press, Inner City Press waited at the entrance to the briefing room and asked Ban why his panel wasn't going to Sri Lanka, and minutes later published Ban's answers:

“Mister Secretary General, you said your Panel is going to Sri Lanka,” Inner City Press asked, “what happened?”

Ban Ki-moon replied, “They are now working very seriously on finalizing the dates of visiting Sri Lanka.”

Inner City Press asked about “the government has said they can only talk to the LLRC, that they can't investigate anything.”

Ban Ki-moon replied, “They will be able to... They are now discussing that.”

Now, after Inner City Press publicly asked and wrote about the letters between Sri Lanka and the UN which contradict what Ban has said, and after Nesirky said he will not take any more questions from Inner City Press, a “senior UN official” issues the above-quoted, without any reference to Ban's December 17 (and January 14) claims. Watch this site.

* * *

While UN's Sri Lanka Panel May Not Go, Bragg Won't Convey IDPs Tales

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 18 -- While the trip to Sri Lanka by the UN's panel on accountability is in limbo or, sources tell Inner City Press, about to be canceled, UN humanitarian deputy Catherine Bragg will now travel to Northern Sri Lanka to speak with civil war returnees -- but only about flooding, the UN says.

Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Martin Nesirky for the second day in a row about Catherine Bragg's trip. On January 17 Nesirky told Inner City Press to “ask OCHA,” the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Inner City Press submitted questions to OCHA, which were acknowledged as received, but by the next day's noon briefing no answers had been given.

So when Nesirky on January 18 said Bragg would “advocate on behalf... of returnees,” Inner City Press asked if she will advocate with respect to the alleged war crimes which made them displaced.

No, Nesirky said, Bragg's trip has nothing to do with the Panel of Experts, which UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon announced on December 17 would visit Sri Lanka. Video here, from Minute 45:23.

Insiders late on January 17 told Inner City Press that despite Ban's statement, his Panel will now probably NOT visit the Island. Despite Ban's December 17 announcement praising President Mahinda Rajapaksa's “flexibility,” since then Rajapaksa's government has written to the UN to say not only that the Panel should not come, but that neither the government nor its Lessons Learnt & Reconciliation Panel will speak with the UN Panel of Experts.

It is expected now that representatives of the Rajapaksa government will, in New York only, speak with Ban Ki-moon's Office, not his Panel.

So did Ban Ki-moon misspeak, some now wonder, on December 17, or in what he told the Press on January 14?

Inner City Press is told that Ban's Panel has written three letters seeking visas. At first the Panel was told that it could make “submissions” to the LLRC. Ban's Panel said that it cannot provide testimony, but rather take it, not only from the LLRC but from any and all who are involved in the accountability process.

Later Ban's Panel made further concessions, saying they wouldn't care what it was called, submission or representation, they'd just like to go. Then the sources say the Rajapaksa government still said no.

The current state of play, the insiders say, is that Ban's Panel will probably NOT go to Sri Lanka.

Ms. Bragg will go, but will not pass along anything that displacees say about WHY and BY WHOM they were displaced and worse. Some Organization.

Questions on Sri Lanka that Inner City Press asked UN OCHA on January 17:

when did Ms. Bragg apply for a visa to Sri Lanka, when was it granted and are there any conditions on the visa, regarding where to travel, whom to speak with, etc?

What does OCHA say to the protests in east Batticaloa about allegedly inequitable distribution of aid?

Also, previously asked to Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary General:

Does the UN have any comment on Sri Lanka's government ordering the International Committee of the Red Cross out of Northern Sri Lanka? http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportID=91160

Or, as previously requested, on the new rules requiring NGOs and INGOs to register with the Department of Defense, etc?

Watch this site.

* * *

Ban Says Panel “Finalizing” Sri Lanka Dates, “Will Be Able” to Talk B/y LLRC

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, January 14 -- For the four weeks since UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on December 17 announced his Panel of Experts would visit Sri Lanka and praised the “flexibility” of President Mahinda Rajapaksa, his Spokesperson's office has refused to answer questions about Rajapaksa officials' statements that they were unable of any trip, that Ban's Panel would get only “conditional visas,” not to investigate but only “make representations” to Rajapaksa's Lessons Learnt & Reconciliation Commission.

When Ban held his next monthly press conference on January 14, Inner City Press sought to ask, as it has in writing without a responsible answer, when and under what conditions the Panel might travel, given that it was supposed to issue a report by January 15.

But despite Inner City Press signing up to ask a question, and keeping hand raised throughout Ban's 45 minute press conference, Inner City Press was not called on to ask any question. This was something new.

While other reporters shouted out questions about Ban administration corruption and if Ban will seek a second term -- no comment -- Inner City Press chose not to get into shouting. Rather, Inner City Press waited by the exit of the Dag Hammarskold Library where Ban would pass.

“Mister Secretary General, you said your Panel is going to Sri Lanka,” Inner City Press asked, “what happened?”

Ban Ki-moon replied, “They are now working very seriously on finalizing the dates of visiting Sri Lanka.”

Inner City Press asked about “the government has said they can only talk to the LLRC, that they can't investigate anything.”

Ban Ki-moon replied, “They will be able to... They are now discussing that.”

This again in contradictory to what the Sri Lankan government has said, and even to what Ban's spokespeople have said. Ban's acting Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq, bypassing Inner City Press' outstanding questions, told BBC's Sinhala service that the Panel might only meet the LLRC outside Sri Lanka.

Then, when Inner City Press asked questions on it day after day, Haq said that Ban's Panel's mandate is broader than the LLRC. Haq refused to answer if the Panel or its staff would travel to Sri Lanka.

The Sri Lanka government immediately said that to the contrary, it would only be with the LLRC, that no investigation or other discussion would be possible, and visas would be limited to this effect.

Inner City Press asked Ban Spokesman Nesirky with whom Ban spoke before making his December 17 announcement and praising Mahinda Rajapaksa. Nesirky refused to answer, just as he has refused any answer to the question of Ban's prior relations and meetings with Rajapaksa, and Ban's close family members' dealings and presence in Sri Lanka: all factual questions refused.

UN's Ban and his Panel: who did Ban speak with, who will they speak with?

Nesirky's office on January 14 emailed Inner City Press that the Panel would delay its report into February. (Nesirky's Office's post hoc insertion in the transcript, below, refers to the end of February ).

Then Nesirky refused to allow any question from Inner City Press: the above quoted and recorded answer was only possible by waiting in the entrance of the auditorium.

Ban claimed transparency, but this is not it. Watch this site.

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

Click here for a Reuters AlertNet piece by this correspondent about Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army. Click here for an earlier Reuters AlertNet piece about the Somali National Reconciliation Congress, and the UN's $200,000 contribution from an undefined trust fund. Video Analysis here

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

Inner City Press -- Investigative Reporting From the Inner City to Wall Street to the United Nations