Archive photo. MONUSCO Police officers raise awareness of students against sexual abuse and exploitation. Photo MONUSCO
Since 2003, the secretary General of the United Nations has lunched the zero tolerance policy through his bulletin (ST/SGB/2003/13 of 9 October 2003) in which he defines sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) and blows the whistle to stop this scourge that constitutes a serious case of misconduct. Since then, offices (Conduct and Discipline Teams) have been created in each Peacekeeping Mission to handle allegations of SEA, prevent it and support victims.
Nowadays, with the exploding of many cases of SEA and other sexual offences in many organizations, companies and other business, we can now confirm that the UN was leader in taking strong measures to fight this phenomenon amongst its personnel.
With the arrival of the new SG, Mr. Antonio Guterres in 2017, the zero tolerance policy on SEA has taken a new turn that needs to be applauded. The combat against SEA now involves mostly the host community and put the victim at the center of UN attention, in addition to addressing the issue within the Organization’personnel.
While all efforts are concentrated on the prevention and case handling as well as victim support, the alleged perpetrator is unfortunately presented as the culprit. The latter is at first place almost considered as guilty before any investigation. A civilian staff in that case is immediately suspended from active duty with salary eventually suspended pending the outcome of the investigation.
Whatever is done will never prevent the professional entourage of the alleged perpetrator to be aware of that administrative leave that may last. Therefore, with the confidentiality on the case at stake and often broken, the alleged perpetrator appears as a victim of the system. People we met in that situation felt this, as very unfair. They have the impression of being sanctioned prior to any investigation.
In that vein, what does the presumption of innocence means for the UN justice system? Which reparation can the staff member benefit from, if after investigation he/she is not found guilty? Unfortunately, the staff member will only get the retained salary if the case is not substantiated. But the damage on the reputation and the psychosocial destruction can never be repaired.
What, if a staff member wants to get some leave days and arrange a scenario where he/she is accused of SEA allegation in order to get an administrative leave with/without pay? Just imagine this dishonest staff may get many month at home at the expense of the Organizations and then come back and collect his money quietly.
Later on, he/she may sue the organization for all the damages and may win the case. This may be a serious loss for the organization. This is my whistle blow, to prevent such a case scenario that may cause serious prejudice to the UN in the current context of financial desert the Organization is facing.
The UN is on top of the organizations promoting justice in the world and should never been accused of not doing inside its own body what he says. There is no excuse for SEA, but we should not forget the sacrifice done by many very good peacekeepers to promote an environment with peace and security. The UN cares for victims, and should not victimize some of its personnel only to show that the Organization is taking the SEA matter seriously.
Even the money this personnel receives can never suffice to repair the broken personality and life. While fighting SEA, the presumption of innocence should continue to be considered as key point in the UN Justice system as everywhere in the world. Nobody should never give opportunity to anybody to challenge the UN on this concept of presumption of innocence.