(2017-09) The UN's Liability for Civilian Harms: Lessons from Cholera in Haiti

Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti (IJDH) • 2017 • 6 pages

Summary — Journal article by IJDH attorneys Beatrice Lindstrom and Sienna Merope-Synge analyzing the gap between the UN's legal obligations to compensate civilians harmed by peacekeeping and its practice in the Haiti cholera case.

View Document View Original Source

Key Findings

The cholera epidemic traced to a UN peacekeeping base killed at least 9,600 people and sickened over 800,000 in seven years, at its height infecting one person every minute. The UN dismissed claims filed by 5,000 victims as not receivable and has never established the standing claims commission mandated by some 32 agreements it signed. Only 3 percent of the 400 million dollars needed for the New Approach had been raised, and the UN increasingly abandoned individual compensation, once floated at about 10,000 dollars per family, in favor of community projects. The authors argue the gap between the UN's liability on paper and its practice violates victims' right to a remedy and undermines the UN's rule-of-law credibility.

Full Description

Published in the International Bar Association's Human Rights Law Committee News in September 2017, this article by IJDH attorneys Beatrice Lindstrom and Sienna Merope-Synge examines the UN's liability for civilian harms through the Haiti cholera case. It recounts how cholera erupted in October 2010 after a UN base recklessly discharged waste from newly arrived Nepalese peacekeepers into a tributary of Haiti's largest river, killing at least 9,600 people and sickening over 800,000 over seven years. The authors detail the UN's obligations under the Convention on Privileges and Immunities and Status of Forces Agreements, its dismissal of claims filed by 5,000 victims as not receivable, the US federal court litigation upholding UN immunity, and Special Rapporteur Philip Alston's criticism of the UN position. They analyze the December 2016 apology and 400 million dollar New Approach, arguing that its framing as moral rather than legal duty has left the plan only 3 percent funded, sidelined individual compensation in favor of community projects, and undermined victims' right to a remedy and the UN's rule-of-law credibility.

Topics

Geography

Time Coverage

2010-10 — 2017-09

Keywords

United Nations, cholera, liability, immunity, peacekeeping, right to a remedy, compensation, New Approach, CPIUN, rule of law, Philip Alston

Entities

Beatrice Lindstrom, Sienna Merope-Synge, Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti (IJDH), Bureau des Avocats Internationaux (BAI), United Nations, MINUSTAH, Philip Alston, Ban Ki-moon, Antonio Guterres, Bruce Rashkow, International Bar Association, US District Court Southern District of New York, UNMIK

Notes

IJDH-affiliated journal article in the IBA Human Rights Law Committee News, September 2017; English original (catalog title in French); ayitistats wave B