By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 11 — In the UN Security Council on February 11 there was a debate about sanctions which included sanctioned countries, including Eritrea. Their speech, which Inner City Press put online here, asked why if the Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group has no evidence of support to al Shabaab, the sanctions remain in place?
After the speeches, including by Libya, whose Ambassador Dabbashi cited a lack of communication, Iran and the Central African Republic, complaining about travel by the sanctioned, Inner City Press asked Venezuela’s Ambassador Rafael Ramirez, who as Council President presided on February 11, what happens now with the critiques: will the Panels and Groups of Experts have to answer? He said a text has been proposed.
Inner City Press also asked Ramirez about this on February 2. Video here. As transcribed by InnerCityPro.com:
Matthew Lee, Inner City Press. On behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, we are hoping you will do question and answer stakeouts after Security Council consultations. On the methods of work on the debate on the 11th – on Eritrea – you’re the chair of that committee. They say they should not be under sanctions because they’re not doing what they’re accused of doing. Now, in your national capacity, or as chair, what do you think of their argument?
Amb Ramirez: Thank you. Before anything else, I hope as president of the Security Council to interact with the press, because each time we come out of a meeting of the Security Council , there’s a healthy practice, we’ve always done it that way so we’ll do what’s possible without taking too much time.
With regard to Eritrea, I can’t put forward any national position on this, but it is specifically one of the points we wish to introduce on the debate on how we work.
The sanctions debates and committees, we as chair of the Somalia Eritrea committee and also the Darfur committee, we’ve promoted the idea that the countries under sanctions should speak to the Security Council members and be heard, and that including the countries of the region, they should have an opportunity to say how the sanctions are affecting individual countries and the region as a whole.
Eritrea is one of the most relevant examples in terms of these sanctions. We raised in the Security Council the idea that there should be a political goal, the sanctions committee should have a political goal, and they should move and evolve as the situation changes. In the horn of Africa the situation is changing on an accelerating basis. Somalia, Eritrea, they are affected by the advance of terrorist groups, al Shabaab and the war in Yemen, al Qaeda, which are destabilizing factors throughout the region. So they cannot, the sanctions committees cannot remain on the same track. They must evolve in line with the changing political situation in the region. Of course, we, and I believe nobody would like to see their own country under sanctions, or see any country under sanctions.
The sanctions committees are more definitive in nature than any tribunal on the planet. There are sanctions imposed and nobody can do anything about it. But we need to discuss this. We need to see if there’s any meaning to it, how we can help to ensure the peaceful solution of conflicts. Thank you for your question.”
We’ll be there, on February 11, to cover it. Will it be more participatory than usual? We’ll see. On January 29, the UN Spokesman threw Inner City Press out of the UN Press Briefing Room then on February 1 made this threat, here.
Back on October 29, 2015 when the UN Special Rapporteur on Eritrea Sheila B. Keetharut and the Chairperson of the Commission of Inquiry on Eritrea Mike Smith held a press conference at the UN, Inner City Press asked them about the human rights impacts of sanctions on Eritrea, and about human trafficking. Video here.
Keetharut said the sanctions are “specific” and do not have an impact. The basis of the statement was unclear. Smith said they were good questions but that he could not speak to sanctions. Who does?
Well, the UN’s Rapporteur on Iran Ahmed Shaheed does, this week telling Inner City Press how exclusion from SWIFT makes it impossible for Iranian’s to buy cancer medicine.
On October 26 when Idriss Jazairy, Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights held a UN press conference, Inner City Press asked him about sanctions on Sudan and Eritrea, his proposal for a registry, and about the use of SWIFT to in essence impose sanctions. Tweeted photo here.
Idriss Jazairy declined to comment on Eritrea, saying Security Council sanctions are being his jurisdiction. He was critical of unilateral measures on Sudan, which he said he will visit in November. He likened his registry proposal to that in place for conventional arms.
On SWIFT, he said he its use makes it impossible, for example, for cancer patients in Iran to get medicine. Earlier on October 26, the past president of UNCA, now the UN Censorship Alliance, bragged about UN Rapporteur Ahdmed Shaheed’s “preview” of his presentation on Iran, which Reuters later channeled without saying where Shaheed spoke. Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access asked the OHCHR spokesperson, who said he didn’t know. We’ll have more on this.
On October 20 when the UN Special Rapporteur on torture Juan E. Méndez held a press conference, Inner City Press asked him for his view of the only partial release of the US Senate’s report on CIA torture, about Guantanamo Bay and whether he thought President Barack Obama’s visit to a prison might make his long-pending request to visit US prisons move faster. Video here.
Source: http://www.innercitypress.com/sanctions2erilibrancar021116.html
[Google]
