Sexual abuse of women and exploitation of children by peacekeepers: Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Democratic Republic of Congo By Olivera Simic, LL.M., M.A., gender consultant, Bosnia and Herzegovina |
1. Introduction The United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (hereinafter MONUC) is on going mission while the United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (hereinafter UNMIBH) is terminated almost three years ago. [1] Although scandalized with involvement of peacekeepers in trafficking in women and wide sexual abuse, the UNMIBH is graded by international community with a top mark: successful. [2] After the mission was over, peacekeepers changed locations and countries, in following a war torn societies in need of peace. Still, the crimes perpetuated by peacekeepers against those in need, particularly women and children, did not change. Moreover, it looks like they exacerbated. No doubt, the topic of sexual exploitation has always been “sexy” topic which attracts journalists but also readers around the globe. [3] Moreover, if sexual abuse could be related in any way with the United Nations (hereinafter the UN) and its personnel, that is even more “interesting”. However, media seems to be not very interested in, for example, economic opportunities mission could bring for local people such as possibility of their employment within the UN system. Indeed, curiosity to highlight positive outcomes that mission might bring to the host country rather then only failures is rarely of any one interest, except of the UN. In addition, the more shocking a title and story the greater is a sense of outrage and disappointment in overall UN system by a common public. People are always disturbed when someone is sexually abused but why particularly when it comes to peacekeepers? Is it about the prefix UN in front of them? Is it because they should be “saviors” of the “vulnerable” population not their abusers? Or we like to confirm what we know well: not everything nor everyone is “perfect” as the UN always likes to leave impression on the worldwide population. In the following essay I will try to explore what has been done so far in the UN system, in particular UNMIBH and MONUC, to address the alarming and growing problem of sexual abuse of women and exploitation of children by peacekeepers while on their missions. I attempt to observe if there were any improvements since 1995 when the UN peacekeeping mission came to Bosnia and Herzegovina and allegations on their involvement in sexual abuse and trafficking in women began to surface. How did UNMIBH respond to these allegations? What mechanisms for protection and prosecution were then and are now in place, if any? Has MONUC learnt a lesson from UNMIBH? Or Boys will be Boys no matter what steps are taken to prevent such occurrences. 2. UNMIBH and MONUC: past and current mission DRC and five regional states signed the Lusaka Ceasefire agreement in July 1999. To maintain liaison with the parties and carry out other tasks, the Security Council (hereinafter SC) set up MONUC on 30 November 1999, incorporating personnel authorized in its earlier resolutions. On 24 February 2000, the SC expended its size and mandate. [4] After that time the SC extended its mandate several times. The current mandate is mostly provided by Resolution 1493, dated 28 July 2003, whereby the SC, acting under the Chapter VII of the UN Charter, authorized the increase of MONUCs military strength to 10,800. [5] However, although war was declared over, hostilities persist to this day. Set up in 1995, UNMIBH exercised wide range of functions particularly regarded police reform and law enforcement activities. Both of the missions, UNMIBH and MONUC have had quite similar mandates: disarmaments, demining, human rights, elections, reform of security forces and reestablishing the rule of law. After seven years, following the successful conclusion of its mandate, [6] UNMIBH was terminated on 31 December 2002. Although they might be regarded as successful for some activities in their missions they both failed in the same: maintaining discipline and conduct of peacekeepers. And misconduct primarily affects (affected in the case of UNMIBH) women population as well as children in both countries. DRC is country of almost 55 million of people while Bosnia and Herzegovina is 13 times smaller with around 4 million of inhabitants. However, in terms of casualties they both lost almost equal percentage of their population due to war. [7] We do not have gender-segregated data so we do not know how many women lost their lives in those conflicts. What we do know is that almost 75% of Congolese refugees and international displaced persons (IDPs) comprise women and children. [8] Almost the same percentage of women refugees and IDPs was in Bosnia and Herzegovina which confirms world statistical data which says that almost 80% of all refugees and IDPs embrace children and women. [9] Still, this statistic does not say anything about percentage of women as it assumes that “women and children” are one homogeneous group of people. But, we know they are not. 3. Peacekeeping missions: fertile soil for sexual abuse? What could be regard as a common feature to both missions is that they have triggered shocking reports on sexual abuse and rape. Although cases of sexual abuse and violence, which has become almost universal characteristic in peacekeeping context [10] , were present (and in case of MONUC are still on going) in both missions, the nature of abuse between these two missions is different. For example, while trafficking in women boomed with shipping ten of thousands predominantly male peacekeepers in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1995 [11] , in DRC there are no cases (at least not transparent and publicly known) of involvement of peacekeepers in transnational crime of trafficking in women. DRC is rather source country for women and children trafficked for sexual exploitation, forced labor and soldiering. [12] However, “lack of information does not mean absence of trafficking in women and children in Congo.” [13] Hence, even if transnational crime of trafficking might not exist currently it could become problem and DRC should be prepared to punish those who might be involved in future trafficking networks. Since Penal Code in DRC “does not have specific provision against Trafficking in Women and Children”, [14] it should not wait to criminalize trafficking in humans after it becomes overloaded with cases or when it lose such necessity what exactly happened in Bosnia and Herzegovina. [15] In both missions peacekeepers use imbalance of power and have had sex with minors or adults for bizarre amount of money or in exchange for food or other goods. Cases of rape by peacekeepers in Bosnia and Herzegovina were not transparent and particularly known while in DRC they are wide spread. Sharp distinction in welfare between host population and peacekeepers drives opportunity to exercise power and authority over vulnerable population. However, in Bosnia and Herzegovina despite few cases where peacekeepers were sexually abused local minors, the main target were foreign women, victims of trafficking. This is another distinction between MONUC where sexual abuse involves peacekeepers and local girls/women/children while UNMBIH peacekeepers were mainly involved in sexual abuse of alien women. Brothels in Bosnia and Herzegovina were established close to military bases with predominantly women from Romania, Ukraine and Moldova. Having had limited freedom of movement and lots of spare time might be a reason for turning to the nearest brothels and night bars crowded with foreign women. Nonetheless, even the cases, which were actually rumors of a sexual abuse of Bosnia and Herzegovina minors, had as a spot places those just outside the fence of military bases. The stories that had been circling among local population were about local girls mainly from high schools performing oral sex for 5-10 euros in the front of military bases even (some said) through a fence wire. [16] It is difficult to confirm that girls had performed sex for survival in Bosnia and Herzegovina or some other reasons were behind it. However, it is well known that women who were performing sex activities with peacekeepers, with exception of trafficked women [17] , were driven by poverty and lack of alternative ways to secure basic human needs for them and their family. Although there are no existing cases of transnational trafficking in DRC, some cases of internal trafficking have been recognized as such. Young local boys act as pimps for MONUC personnel, procurring girls for prostitution. Congo boys earn on average 1US$ for each girl or they end up not being paid at all. These young boys are predominantly minors age 8-18, former child soldiers from whom very few attend the school. [18] The majority of identified female victims were poor village children between 12 and 16 years of age. [19] Finally, I have noticed that Pakistani peacekeepers are one of the nationalities involved in serious allegations in Bosnia and Herzegovina in trafficking (purchasing) of women, in DRC in obstructing efforts to investigate sexual abuse but also in other recent peacekeeping operations (hereinafter PKOs). It would be valuable to do more serious research on possible assumption that some nationalities tend to be more involved in sexual abuse of women than others. That could be valuable in terms of “keeping an eye” on potential “trouble makers” but also to work with them more regarding preventive measures. 4. Women status in Bosnia and Herzegovina and DRC Status of women before PKO arrive in a host country should be analyzed and taken into account. Paul Higate as one of explanations for bad attitude towards Congolese women by peacekeepers see in already established imbalance and inequality of gender in DRC itself. In other words, if women are not respected by their “own men” how and why would you expect them to be respected by male foreign peacekeepers? Also, Higate is addressing the issue of racism by saying that “male peacekeepers find Congolese women different from white, educated women back to their home countries”. [20] While Bosnia and Herzegovina and Congolese women both live in patriarchal society situation with Congolese women is much different. Bosnia and Herzegovina women before war enjoyed relatively good status and were able to exercise their social and economic rights. Also, women had a high level of literacy, were well educated and employed before war. On the contrary, Congolese women were treated as a “second class citizens” [21] even before war. Moreover, “the law as well social norms defined the role of women and girls as subordinated to men.” [22] The Family Code in DRC requires women to obey their husbands who are recognized as heads of households. This is not to say that this is the reason for women to prostitute themselves but I think that previous social status and role of women might be important. Low self esteem of women, high levels of sexual violence during the conflict coupled with a widespread domestic violence and social and law norm that subordinate women to men could lead to “a degree of local acceptance of violent and/or exploitative behavior against women and girls”. [23] Also, we must keep in mind that DRC was a colony of “white men” for more that 60 years [24] and therefore “white men” could be still seen as a “superior” race that should be obeyed. Furthermore, particularly after the war, the burden of survival and securing the survival of the family fall profoundly on Congolese women. Hence, survival sex might create “a context in which abusive sexual relationships are more accepted, and in which many men-whether civilian or combatant-regard sex as a “service” [on which he has “natural” right that comes from his “natural” needs for performing sex whenever he feels need to do so] easy to get with the use of pressure.” [25] This could explain the attitude of victims who “were on the whole not aware of having been exploited or victimized, unless the act involved violence such as rape.” [26] Yet, even in the cases of rape by accepting the money from the perpetrator, many women “settled” cases in this way and may even think that they cooperated with abuser by the fact they accepted the money. After this act women might feel guilty and find they do not have any reason to report case of abuse. By giving money or goods in exchange peacekeepers cover up exploitation and rape. It is being done on purpose to show “mutual consent” and willingness of both sides in the case women speak up and try to prove case of unconsentual sex. Along with stigma, and fear a major factor is also high illiteracy rate among girls which does not make them capable of reading name tags on uniforms of peacekeepers. In this regard, it will be very difficult to expect women to report incidents of sexual abuse and particularly to identify perpetrators. A combination of fear and stigma from her immediate community as well as illiteracy and absence of awareness that she is a victim of serious crime makes the situation very complex. Therefore, the civil society must play an important role as it did in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina. They should make raising awareness campaigns, open SOS hotlines and try to provide alternatives for women. For Bosnia and Herzegovina women non governmental organizations (NGOs) played enormous role and helped hundreds of women who were trapped in brothels around the country by constant public campaigns, public discussions and statements and as a result of their open attempts to help women very often exposed themselves to life threatening situations. However, I would say that peacekeepers have looked upon women as inferior race in any case. Although it might be true that they are particularly violent towards black women, in Bosnia and Herzegovina they were involved in sexual abuse and trafficking of women from the former Soviet Union who are all white. In Bosnia and Herzegovina we did not have black victims of trafficking. Therefore, I believe that real source of violence is masculinity, in particular military ones, and the attitude it brings toward women in general. As one senior male peacekeeper suggested “subordinate status [of women] was linked to their gender and…following from this, men could exercise certain sexual rights over them, particularly when they had to share the same accommodation.” [27] Truly, Congolese women share “the same accommodation” since they share the same country as a common place for living with peacekeepers. If peacekeepers share opinion of their senior staff then their level of hostility towards women should not surprise us. In addition, since peacekeepers are military men they are trained to dehumanize the “other” in order to be able to go into battle without emotional involvement. In the case of rape and sexual exploitation, foreign women are treated by peacekeepers as “others”. They are not looked upon as human beings with equal values and needs who deserve absolute respect of universal human rights. Prejudices and stereotypes about women of different color, race, social and educational status might be something to consider of importance to be addresses with peacekeepers before their arrival in a host country. How else is it possible to explain that a man who does not have a record of rape or any other crime in his country of origin and maybe never even thought of raping “his woman” will do all kinds of sexual abuse and exploitation (hereinafter SEA) and humiliate women in “other” countries? In addition, according to the study done by the UN Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW) it has been found that “the incidents of rape…fall significantly with just a token female presence…men behave better when in the presence of women from their own culture.” [28] This might explain difference in a treatment and respect of men towards their “own” and “other” women. As Jack Paul Clain [29] said in the documentary “Boys will be boys” “those people [referring to women victims of trafficking by peacekeepers in Bosnia and Herzegovina] will tell you anything” accusing them of lying and making false statements. The attitude of devaluation and disrespect some peacekeepers have towards foreign females when they arrive on a mission might be a cause for future potential abuses. 5. What has been done so far to address the issues of SEA in peacekeeping missions? It seems that West Africa “had to happen” to move things on in terms of bringing new policies. Bosnia and Herzegovina scandals of involvement of peacekeepers in sexual abuse were not “good enough” to put the policies on SEA in their much needed place. Only after the disgrace which came with UNHCR/SC UK report [30] , the UN decided it was a time to do something. Although, sexual exploitation and abuse were always prohibited by the UN Staff Rules and Regulations it seems that very few of the UN staff have been taken this prohibition seriously. Also, the Policy Planning Unit of Department of Peacekeeping Operations (hereinafter DPKO) has issued the Ten Rules-Code of Conduct for Blue Helmets which promulgate expected behavior of every military person taking part in a peacekeeping mission in its paragraph 4 prohibits “immoral acts of sexual, physical or psychological abuse or exploitation of the local population or United Nations staff, especially women and children.” [31] Beside these general rules which apply to all military peacekeepers wherever they are on the mission, there are also country-specific codes of conduct developed if a mission has some specific concerns to address. In-country codes of conduct are designed to draw attention to particular problems which have been acknowledged during the mission and are perceived by the mission as highly important to be addressed. MONUCs Code of Conduct has being developed and pronounced in April 2003 and it “strictly prohibits…any act of sexual abuse and/or exploitation of members of local community, including children.” [32] Still, these rules had to be reinforced and repeated once more by administrative instructions of Secretary General in bulletin on “Special measures for protection from sexual exploitation and sexual abuse” [33] released in October 2003, almost a year after the Bosnia and Herzegovina mission was over. Also DPKO issued the Compilation of Guidance and Directives on Disciplinary Issues of Personnel Serving in United Nations Peacekeeping and Other Field Missions [34] in 2002 with an aim to reinforce disciplinary procedures. In 2004 the Office of Internal Oversight Services launched an investigation into allegations and published a report on 7 January 2005 which identified 72 allegations of SEA by MONUC peacekeepers. [35] Other measures have also been undertaken to eliminate SEA such as the establishment of non-fraternization policy, comprehensive training and awareness-raising and the installation of a curfew for military contingents. [36] Only 3 years after MONUC had been established, gender issues started to receive attention and action has been taken. Peacekeepers in Bosnia and Herzegovina might have had an “excuse” since SC Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (hereinafter SC Resolution 1325) had passed in October 2000, however the precedent for mainstreaming gender into peacekeeping operations had already been established in 1995 in The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. Also, throughout 1990s, the language of the UN began to include promoting gender balance in all professional posts and adoption of a strategy called “gender mainstreaming”. However, UNMIBH beside attempts to work on gender balance did not really work on gender mainstreaming nor did it have a Gender Unit within its mission. We can say that formal inclusion of gender perspectives into peacekeeping operations is therefore an emerging phenomenon. In this regard, prior to adoption of SC Resolution 1325, gender units were established only in two peacekeeping missions. [37] Although MONUC was deployed in 1999, it was only in 2002 that the Gender Unit was set up. In addition, the Code of Conduct Officer was established as a new mechanism for fighting cases on SEA. What certainly did not happen in UNMIBH and was in MONUC is training on gender issues. In MONUC training is done in cooperation with civil society, using both men and women in its delivering. So far, this training has had successful results. [38] One of the UNMIBH tasks was also to closely monitor allegations of local police involvement, and to ensure that the local police internal investigations have been properly conducted. But one might ask who had “closely monitored allegations” of international police and UN personnel involved in sex abuse and trafficking? Local police were monitored by international police and international police monitored themselves? Moreover those international police officers who were brave enough to speak up about crimes of their fellow officers have been removed from their jobs. [39] Therefore, if allegations or evidence existed about UNMIBH civilian or civilian police involvement, the mission would conduct its own internal investigation and, “if necessary, take appropriate measures”. [40] Yet, appropriate measures are not defined. The case is the same with MONUC. If a MONUC staff member violates the Code of Conduct the sanction violating these rules would include: “summary dismissal and repatriation if applicable.” [41] The language of sanctions is too weak and too loose and it seems too much freedom has been allowed to contributing countries for undertaking disciplinary action if necessary. Victims are sure that action is necessary but does anyone ask them? In addition, the member states enjoy absolute autonomy in responding in the ways they consider appropriate. [42] What if a member state’s notion of “appropriate” does not overlap with the wider idea of prosecution and justice but rather with narrow political interests? In majority of cases, “appropriate” means absolute impunity. Power dynamics and lack of political will by contributing member states to prosecute its citizens do not allow impartiality and justice to take place. Only between 1999 and 2001, UNMIBH took action to protect the human rights of trafficked persons, particularly through the support of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) program of victim protection [43] and creation of anti-trafficking law enforcement units. Six UN policemen in Bosnia and Herzegovina were sent home in 2000 for involvement in prostitution and trafficking of women and therefore “exceeding the mandate” of IPTF. [44] In July 2001, UNMIBH spokesman said that twenty-four officers had been fired for offenses ranging from bribery to sexual impropriety. [45] In November 2002, UNIMBH gave a statement on the involvement of eleven police officers who were found to have violated codes of professional conduct when frequenting night clubs, and for using sexual services in these establishments. These eleven cases of removal of provisional authorization are the result of the relentless efforts of the IPTF STOP teams in their fight against human trafficking in Bosnia and Herzegovina. [46] However, none of the repatriated police officers have been prosecuted by their country of origin after repatriation from mission. Their immunity was interpreted as absolute impunity for the crimes they committed in the country where the mission was taking place. Fortunately, the situation is progressing, and in the case of DRC member states, more action is taking place with regard to prosecution of their nationals. However, this is not enough, and we have to make sure that “the protection of some member states reputation [does not] take precedence over issues such as gender”. [47] 6. What else could be done? I would say that we are just at the beginning of the “gender road” and there is still a lot to be done on the path to achieving gender equality. Although gender units have started to be set up in the last few years they still lack support from the UN in both budget and human resources. There is also a lack of political will within the UN system to fully support work and activities of gender units. In addition, problem of SEA is complex and we should look at its root causes when trying to develop and implement new strategies. Also, I do believe that our attention should be equally divided between perpetrator and victim as without simultaneously working with both of them I am afraid the problem will not be solved. Therefore, I would suggest following to be done in the future: 1. Develop programs which will target peacekeepers, but which will also address women victims of sexual abuse as well as children. Civil society organisations of the host country should be given the task to raise awareness before peacekeepers come to the country, and to continue the campaigns after their arrival. They should inform the population, in particular women, what might happen with their arrival, especially with regard to SEA. The UN should cooperate closely with civil society and work together to combat SEA. They have to build up confidence within the host country’s population and develop cooperation to combat SEA. 2. Since it is much easier to control the UN military personnel (as they live in military bases) than civilian personnel, the UN should develop controlling mechanisms which will be able to follow more closely the UN civilian’s life. Civilians live in apartments in cities, they have more freedom of movement and as such it is easier from them to get involved in criminal activities without fear of discovery. Some of them have even had sex slaves living with them in their residences without being discovered for a long time, and some of these cases will never be discovered. 3. Local NGOs as well as UN missions should open SOS hotlines where they will be able to receive anonymous telephone calls, both from victims but also from peacekeepers who know that their colleagues are involved in SEA. People who work in SOS hotlines should be trained and gender-sensitive. SOS hotlines should be confidential and anonymous so there is no fear that someone will be removed from their position as a result of blowing the whistle. 4.An ombudsman position or body should be established outside the UN machinery, which then could receive complaints from civilian population as well as peacekeepers. Such body should (hopefully) also be impartial and composed of people with strong human rights backgrounds. 5. The immunity of peacekeepers should be narrowed and not cover serious violations of human rights, regardless of whether they happen during the mandate of peacekeeping or not. No one should be immune from murder, rape or sexual abuse. These activities (!) are certainly not “necessary for the independent exercise of their functions.” [48] 6. Member states must, both more states and in more individual cases, start waiving the immunity of their citizens if they commit serious crimes while taking part in a peacekeeping mission. Their political interests and reputation must be “sacrificed” in the name of accountability and justice. The Secretary General also has to start waiving the immunity of peacekeepers in order to enable local courts to exercise their jurisdiction. I am convinced that if we start waiving immunity in each case that has legal grounds for immunity to be waived, we would have fewer cases of crimes taking place by peacekeepers during peacekeeping missions. 7. Transparency must exist in all cases. More specifically, peacekeepers should be named, and the cases themselves should receive high publicity and coverage. Follow-up on proceedings in peacekeepers’ home countries, and subsequent reporting back to the local population on what actions have been taken to address the crimes committed are crucial. 8. Reparation to victims of SEA must involve individual peacekeepers (!) and a high financial compensation benchmark should be established. Since money is their main motivator (if not the only one) to join peacekeeping missions we should seriously consider establishing financial punishment. The amount should be significant and be paid directly from the individual peacekeeper’s account. This should take place in addition to the peacekeeper’s dismissal from the operation, his repatriation, and subsequent appearance before a court in his home country, or alternatively in the mission country’s local court in the cases where immunity is waived by the Secretary General. Money paid as a punitive measure by the peacekeeper should go directly to the victim. 9. Trainings on gender and SEA undertaken by civil society organizations, with trainers of both sexes, should utilise lessons learnt from UMNIC in developing training for all subsequent missions, and these changes in training should be implemented as soon as possible. 10. We need to put more emphasis the on the cultural context of host country in relation to the peacekeeper’s country of origin. Peacekeepers should be trained not to be only gender-sensitive but also culturally-sensitive. They should also receive training on prejudices, racism and stereotypes. 11. I do agree that peacekeepers should have some short courses (maybe on culture of host country) or sport activities. Their cultural life must be enriched while on mission and not become a case of wasting time. 12. More women should be present in investigation teams in cases of SEA. 13. Civil society and government with support of UN mission should provide alternatives to vulnerable women and develop vocational trainings in their combating prostitution and sexual abuse. 14. Gender training should be broken down into several separate issues which will deal specifically with, for example, children’s rights and abuse of children, women’s rights and abuse of women while also highlighting sanctions that will take place in cases of violation. Workshops and discussion groups with small number of men should be developed. Men might be more open and honest in smaller groups. I do not believe that in one training session you can cover all issues. Also, some issues do not necessarily need (maybe it is not possible due to time restriction) to be covered during an induction course, but such issues can be addressed later during the mission. This can be done by using audio-visual materials (e.g. movies). This can ensure as much as possible that an interactive discussion takes place. 15. Identify future trainers since we do not have enough staff to deliver the gender training required. The trainers must also include men who are more gender sensitive and understand the issues involved. They might at the beginning, for example, be modestly financially awarded for their willingness to be involved in training for trainers. This is particularly important because of language barriers. Therefore, until we convince member states to provide pre-deployment gender training, peacekeepers from different nationalities involved in the training can be of help. 16. Push for pre-deployment gender training. Since language is barrier and not everyone can be trained in the country of mission, it should be considered an obligation by the member states to organise pre-deployment gender training. 17. Bring in local civil society organisations to run training sessions, or bring in experts working outside of the UN to run the sessions who have experience in gender issues. 18. Decrease the age of experience for employment with UN civilian police for women. Women who have 8 years or more of experience have much more difficulty in leaving their families to go and work abroad. It is crucial to give opportunities to younger women, eager to learn and prove themselves. They are more willing to travel and do not usually have as many family obligations. 19. Training sessions should be culturally adjusted, both pre-deployment or in-mission. It is not the same to talk about gender to a guy from Norway and from Pakistan. Training should be designed from the prospective of their home country as well as their host country. Peacekeepers should know what they should expect to see in the mission country before they depart. 20. Distribution of condoms during the mission and at the same time prohibiting sexual intercourse sends a confusing message. Under this confused state of affairs, it is impossible to address the issue of safe sex, or to analyse to what extent peacekeepers use condoms for sexual activities, or to even inform them why is may be important to use them in a particular country. 21. The UN must take responsibility for children who were sexually abused, as well as for women. They must take part in the rehabilitation process of the victim and particularly for “peace babies” who are a result of peacekeepers’ sexual abuse. 22. More financial and human resources must be dedicated to activities related to mainstreaming gender. 23. Decreasing the number of military personnel in peacekeeping operations and increasing the number of civilian personnel and other staff. Having ‘military boys’ maintaining peace has not proved successful so far, so it is time to start considering changing the strategy for the effective keeping of peace in a country. 24. If there are more cases of SEA committed by some nationalities, more work should be done with those particular groups of peacekeepers in identifying why this might be the case. This would help for designing better strategy in combating and prevention of SEA in overall peacekeeping missions. 7. Concluding remarks Too much attention has recently been focused on SEA cases in DRC, and the danger is that this exclusive focus results in potential cases of SEA in other missions being ignored. Spotlight on MONUC could be misused for better cover up of the same abuses which as a result could be going unnoticed. Also, if we already know that it is almost inevitable that with the arrival of thousands of predominantly male peacekeepers into a country, the sex industry will boom, it is high time to put all our efforts on prevention measures which will target both: local women and peacekeepers. However, it is a positive development that for the first time more emphasis is being placed on sanctions that will follow misconduct of peacekeepers. In addition, there is now much more publicity on sanctions imposed by member states on their citizens who were repatriated to their home countries for misbehavior. Despite all obstacles on the way to justice, it seems that things are moving in the right direction and that slowly, hopefully, impunity will be translated into accountability and prosecution. This is certainly a big positive step forward in comparison with the UNMIBH. About the author: Olivera Simic, Bosnia and Herzegovina, LLM and MA, holds LLM degree in International Human Rights Law (Essex University, UK, 2003) and MA in Gender and Peacebuilding (University for Peace, Costa Rica, 2005). Currently, she works as Gender Expert and Consultant for different agencies. For almost decade she has been working on women and children human rights as related to these topics. She worked as legal fellow in Human Rights Watch, one of the biggest NGOs in the USA as well as in UNICEF office in Bosnia and Herzegovina where she was leading projects related to trafficking in children and gender based violence. Contact: oljasimic@yubc.net [1] UNMIBH was terminated on 31 December 2002. [2] See: < http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unmibh>, accessed 28 August 2005 [3] The author used secondary sources, primarely articles, news and very few scholar papers that was possible to find on Internet in order to made this research. Other written materials, such as hard copy journals or articles that might consider this topic were not accessible to the author at the time this article was made. [4] MONUC For more see:< http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/monuc>, accessed 9 March 2005 [5] MONUC’s Mandate & Resolutions. For more see:< http://www.monuc.org/MandateEn.aspx>, accessed 11 March 2005 [6] UNMIBH, Supra, no. 1
[7]
DRC has lost 7, 3% and Bosnia and Herzegovina 7,5% of population. In DRC, about 3.8 million people have died in the conflict, according to the International Rescue Committee, making it the most deadly since World War II. For more see: CNN “UN accuses force of sex abuse”, [8] P Higate, “Gender and Peacekeeping, case studies: The Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sierra Leone” Institute for Security Studies (ISS) Monograph Series, no. 91, March 2004 p. 10
[9]
UNHCR: The world of Refugee Women. For more see: [10] Ibid. p. 6 [11] M Rees, “Market, Migration and Forced Prostitution” Humanitarian Practice Newsletter 14 June 1999 in P Higate, Supra, n. 8 p. 21 [12] Country Narrative DRC (Tier2 Watch List) For more see:< http://gvnet.com/humantrafficking/Congo-2.htm>, accessed 11 March 2005
[13]
N Masamba Sita, “Trafficking in women and children: Situation and some trends in African countries” [14] Ibid. p. 4 [15] Only in 2002 we adopted specific provision in our Criminal Code which deals with the crime of transnational trafficking although problem has existed in the country since 1995. [16] These were rummors among local population which the author belongs to. It is very hard, almost impossible to find any written prove of such behavior since authorities in peackeeping missions did not want this information to go out in public. Therefore, author received lot of data through informal conversation with local people as well as with some of peacekeepers who were on the mission at the time being. [17] Victims of trafficking are forced by their pimps on sex slavering. They do not earn money, are life threatened and tortured all the time.
[18]
UN General Assembly, Fifty–ninth session “Investigation by the Office of Internal Oversight Services into allegations of sexual exploitations and abuse in the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo” (5 January 2005) p. 8 para 26 For more [19] Ibid para 25 [20] P Higate, Supra, no. 8. p. 14
[21]
Human Rights Watch (HRW) “The war within the war. Sexual Violence against Women and Girls in Eastern Congo” (New York, Washington, London, Brussels, HRW, 2002) p. 20 For more see: [22] Ibid. [23] Statement of women organizations in DRC. Internal document “Report on mission to the DRC and Austria 24 October - 3 November 2004” p. 3 [24] DRC, Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia Standard 2004 [25] HRW, Supra, n. 21. p. 21 [26] Ibid p. 4 [27] P Higate, Supra, n. 8 p. 14 [28] G J DeGroot, “A Few Good Women: Gender Stereotypes, the Military and Peacekeeping”, in Louise Olsson and Torrun Tryggestad, Women and International Peacekeeping (London, Frank Cass, 2001) p. 37 [29] Jack Paul Clain was the Head of the UNMIBH.
[30]
Sexual violence and exploitation: the experience of refugee children in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea (UNHCR/SC UK, 2002) For full report see:
[31]
S A Corcoran, “Women and Peacekeeping “ The UN Women’s Newsletter Vol. 4 No. 2 Jun-July 2000. For more [32] P Higate, Supra, n. 8 p. 25 [33] ST/SGB/2003/13 See:< http://www.peacewomen.org/un/pkwatch/discipline/SGBonSEA.pdf >, accessed 9 March 2005 [34] For more see:< http://www.peacewomen.org/un/pkwatch/discipline/DPKODirectivescompilation.html >, accessed 13 March 2005 [35] Letter from the Secretary General to the Security Council introducing new measures for UN peacekeepers in DRC to address the allegations of widespread sexual exploitation and abuse (9 February 2005) For more see:<http://www.peacewomen.org/un/pkwatch/discipline/SGletterMONUC05.pdf>, accessed 7 March 2005 [36] Ibid. [37] S Whitworth, Men, Militarism and UN Peacekeeping. A Gender Analysis (London, Lynne Reinner Publishers, 2004) p. 130 [38] P Higate, Supra, n. 8 p. 29 [39] Kathryn Bolkovac, a former IPTF gender officer from the U.S. served in UNMIBH. [40] UNMIBH launches STOP (Special Trafficking Operation Programme), For mote see:< http://www.unmibh.org/stories/view.asp?StoryID=2 >, accessed 8 March 2005 [41] P Higate, Supra, n. 8 p. 25 [42] Ibid p. 24
[43]
IOM provides for the safe return home of trafficked girls and women entrapped in the sex industry in Bosnia and Herzegovina. IOM offers shelter, counseling, medical care, and transportation home for these women. To implement this project, IOM co-operates with IPTF, the OHCHR, local NGOs and many governments. [44] HRW interview with deputy commissioner, IPTF, Sarajevo, 9 April 2001. HRW, supra, n. 12, at. 49 in Human Rights Watch (HRW), “Hopes Betrayed: Trafficking of Women and Girls to Post-Conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina for Forced Prostitution,” November 2002, Vol. 14, No. 9 (D). [45] William Kole and Aida Cerkez-Robinson, “U.N. Police Accused of Involvement in Prostitution in Bosnia,” Associated Press, 26 July 2001.
[46]
K Haupt, UNMIBH, Transcript-Press Conference, 17 October 2002, [47] S Whitworth, Supra, n. 37 p. 120 [48] 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations ( 7310 U.N.T.S. 96)
|
 |
