Once again I would like to congratulate the MoFA for yet another appeal to the UNSG to take action on the Monitoring Group for its biased and unwarranted work ethics with an intent to criminalize Eritrea and its citizens. In a letter dated January 27, 2012, the MoFA has once again appealed to the UNSG "for the establishment of an independent, impartial and credible Monitoring Group to replace the current body" At this point I don't know if the UNSG or UNSC has ever responded to the several previous letters that the MoFA sent but my guess is that the Council, as wella as the Secreary General, may have deiced to ignore them due to a heavy dose of influence from Susan Rice. Regardless, Eritrea's repeated appeal needs to be supported by other sector of its population, i.e., its Diaspora community around the world. After all, the MoFA specifically highlighted on it recent letter to the UNSG that the Monitoring Group has indeed "gone to extreme lengths to wage a crusade" not only against Eritrea but also against the "respectable and law-abiding members of the Eritrean community in the Diaspora."
So if this is the case, why aren't we in the Diaspora take a similar proactive action like the GoE is doing? While the GoE has been bombarding the UNSC with letters documenting all of the Monitoring Group's unwarranted actions beyond its work of scope, I don't see any reason why we should also bombard the UNSG, UNSC Chairperson and its Council members with letters, phone calls and faxes saying that we are not going to tolerate the Monitoring Group's intention to criminalize Eritrea as well as its citizens in the Diaspora, and thus the UNSC should consider Eritrea's appeal seriously.
H.E. Mr. Ban Ki-moon
Secretary General of the United Nations
New York, N.Y.
Dear Mr. Secretary General,
This Ietter is a sequel to my letters to the UN Security Council of 6
September 2011; of 5 December 2011; and of 4 January this year, that
convey the express requests of my Government for the establishment of
an independent, impartial and credible Monitaring Group to replace the
current body. The January 4 Ietter to the UN Security Council ( copy
attached) further underlines the need to clarify, in a comprehensive
and non-ambiguous manner, the ground rules ofits operations.
Excellency,
My Government has been compelled to table this rather unusual request
for the following reasons:
1. As extensively demonstrated in our response to its Report of 18
July 2011, the Monitaring Group has displayed an unwarranted
propensity to criminalize and delegitimize the Government of Eritrea
and the People's Front for Justice and Democracy. I do not wish to
waste Your Excellency's time by repeating in this Ietter the
overwhelming evidences and instances in the Report that corroborate
this unacceptable conduct. The fact is the members of the Monitaring
Group have gone to extreme lengths to wage a crusade against the
Government of Eritrea, the People's Front for Democracy and Justice
(PFDJ), respectable and law-abiding members of the Eritrean community
in the Diaspora as weil as foreign fiiends of Eritrea including some
Honorary Councils. As Y our Excellency will agree with me, this
mindset is not compatible with their mandate and cannot be shrugged
off lightly.
2. The Monitoring Group has ventured, on several occasions, to probe
on sensitive areas and issues that fall outside its mandate. In its
November 2011 report, for instance, it announces that "it is in the
process of deepening its knowledge of the Eritrean military
intelligence services with a view to better understanding training and
procurement activities that may represent violations of the arms
embargo". As we underlined in our Ietter of 4 January 2012 to the UN
Security Council, this conduct clearly constitutes, albeit the flimsy
caveat, an infringement of Eritrea's sovereignty and is fraught with
dangerous consequences to its national security for obvious reasons.
This instance again accentuates the Monitoring Group's Iack of
professionalism, poor judgment as weil as disrespect of the
sovereignty and institutions of the country.
3. There are credible indications which illustrate that the Monitoring
Group has been taking its cue from, and working closely with, powers
and countries that harbour hostile and bellicose agendas against
Eritrea. Indeed, important members of the UN Security Council have
underscored the need for the Monitoring Group to " ... never be
influenced by political considerations outside its mandate ... to
closely guard its independence and professionalism in the work it does
to assist the Security Council with the implementation of those
measures and ... to execute its responsibilities and mandate with
professionalism, impartiality and objectivity. The Monitoring Group
should never be influenced by political considerations outside its
mandate. It is important for the Monitoring Group to closely guard its
independence and professionalism in the work it does to assist the
Security Council with the implementation of those measures. Equally,
we call upon members of the Security Council to desist from any
temptation to use the Monitoring Group for political ends".
4. The Monitoring Group's methodology of evidence collection and
validation is another dimension of its work that provokes serious
questions and which has corroded our confidence in its capacity to
discharge its functions with integrity and impartiality. Almost in all
instances, the Monitoring Group admits that it has relied on "foreign
law enforcement agencies"; active Eritrean Govemment contacts";
"former govemment military or diplomatic officials. i.e. defectors";
and even "Eritrean individuals directly involved in people smuggling
operations" for its information and presumptive conclusions. As we
emphasized in our previous communications, we believe that the
Monitoring Group's ground rules of information collection and
verification should be robust and of such a standard to ensure that
truth does not become a casualty of political manipulation which
unfortunately has been the case so far with its various reports.
5. The Monitoring Group have almost routinely failed to rectify
obvious errors that they had made in their premature official
pronouncements and publications that indict Eritrea wrongly. As it may
be recalled, the Monitoring Group had falsely asserted that Eritrea
had deployed 2000 troops in 2006 when its mandate was then restricted
to Somalia. In spite of Eritrea' s repeated requests to the Monitoring
Group to acknowledge the errors it had made, the Monitoring Group
refused to set the record straight and take the appropriate remedial
action. The pattern continues without meaningful correction to-date.
6. To-date, the Monitoring Group's Reports have never been conveyed to
Eritrea formally and timely compromising its right and ability to
respond to offenses of which it is accused of promptly and adequately.
This may constitute a procedural flaw that cannot be attributed to the
Monitoring Group alone. But we wish to take the occasion to seek
remedial action.
7. W e would also like to point out that a balanced composition of the
Monitoring Group that draws its members from countries outside the
narrow circle of those who have adversarial relationships with Eritrea
will enhance its neutrality and credibility.
Let me conclude by expressing our profound hope that Your Excellency
will address our requests adequately in the interests of justice and
fairness.
