Special Rapporteur or Unmitigated Fraud


The UN it is often said is a tool of the 5 powers who control and make up the permanent members of UN security Council. These are China, the US, the UK, France and Russia. And the arrival of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Assembly in Malaysia appears to reinforce that long held suspicion.

The UN has a number of honorific and honorary functionaries many of whom are mere ‘ambassadors’ or unofficial spokespersons or “Special Rapporteurs” who have no persuassive, legal or binding authority to do anything including offering advise or criticise member states. Their functions are tokenistic.

To make the point clearer, past goodwill ambassadors ( a position little below Special Rapporteurs) who have held (unpaid) honorary positions as goodwill ambassadors of the UN or one of its subsidiary organisations include the Swedish pop sensation ABBA, singer Olivia Newton John and other entertainers whose knowledge of world affairs and international relations is about as profound as a Brahmin’s knowledge and expertise on beef.


Maina Kiai is a Kenyan born lawyer appointed for two terms as UN Special Rapporteur for freedom of assembly.  His other ‘impressive’ credentials and achievements include:

a) membership of a defunct body once funded by the CIA the International Council on Human Rights Policy which closed down in 2012,

b) the Africa International Human Rights Law Group which also died an unceremonious death and was absorbed into Global Rights (another US funded initiative for destabilization via the NED); and

c) the Transafrica forum another wholly western funded ineffective stalking horse for destabilization in the African continent.


The following is an extract from the UN Special Rapporteur’s own website on his role and the subject of the freedoms he peddles in Malaysia today:

The rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association are among the most important human rights we possess. Simply put, these rights protect peoples’ ability to come together and work for the common good. They are a vehicle for the exercise of many other civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights, allowing people to express their political opinions, engage in artistic pursuits, engage in religious observances, form and join trade unions, elect leaders to represent their interests and hold them accountable.

There is one problem here. The ‘rights’ of the likes of Maria Chin Abdullah and Bersih in particular who brought him to Malaysia do not involve the common good of anyone other than a minority called Bersih. It involves private rights and a private benefit.

There are no legitimate ‘rights’ to protect where bringing down a properly elected government with Bersih’s tactics outside the ballot box is concerned.

There is nothing cultural about the ‘rights’ Bersih claim to themselves against the rest of the nation that Maina has a mandate to protect advocate. There is no right, power or authority in the Special Rapporteur to chastise a legitimate government for raising concerns about a serious Human Rights violation, a genuine one amounting to genocide by some.

The government of Malaysia has no obligation to accord special rights to these groups like Bersih and individuals like Maria China Abdullah or Ambiga under the constitution. And neither does the UN or its Special Rapporteur.


As to the legitimacy of these ‘rights‘ the following is further an extract from the same UN website which brings into focus the real purpose of this self proclaimed champion of Maria China’s rights vis a vis that of her government:

 “Under international law, the right to freedom of peaceful assembly is not absolute. Assemblies may be subject to certain restrictions, but such measures must be prescribed by law and “necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others”.

Mr. Maina Kiai’s linking the plight of the Rohingya with the “rights” of people like Maria Chin Abdullah and Ambiga and their Bersih’s is evidence of abject ignorance on his part, an insensitivity that belongs with the Hutus of Rwanda or the Mau Mau of his ancestors in Kenya.

Maina’s comments in this regard are obscene and cruel. His comments are what one would have expected of Idi Amin, Mobutu Sese Seko or Emperor Bokassa in an earlier Africa but not of a self proclaimed representative of people’s rights under the auspices of the UN. I say this with extreme prejudice because firstly it is these former African despots of Africa that the west always sought to court to carry out their dirty work in Africa.

What Maina has to say about Malaysia is driven by his local sponsors the anti government coalition (sposnored by the west) and not the principles of democracy or any of the rights that accrue to people under a democratic system he claims to champion.

Maria China Abdullah, Ambiga, the Malaysian Bar and its auxiliaries are the very antithesis of democracy and to fall into their trap is indicative of a vacant and immoral ill informed mindset.


The position of Special Rapporteur is one which is merely tokenistic. It carries no employment with the UN. Decisions, observations or remarks of the Special Rapporteur has no binding, persuasive or legal force or legal authority on Malaysia or even the UN.

He has powers to do nothing but to comment from his independent observations as he purportedly  did in Malaysia recently. But even then he does so as an individual and holds no mandate to preach to any of the member states in which he is invited for any purpose. As to the question of his independence that is evident from his remarks, his lack of balanced information and his track record of working for the same people that support Regime Change.

In Maina’s case he was not invited by the duly elected government of Malaysia. He made no inquiries of them or studied any of the domestic laws or the constitution of the country against his so called mandate and its purposes from his comments. In other words he failed to act independently.


Maina is clearly not informed on the international law or the municipal laws of Malaysia. If he were, he would have restrained his comments to ensure it did not contain the irony, contradictions and an unparlelled insensitivity to the genocide of an unprotected people in the Rohingya of Myanmar.  Nor would he have blundered on the subjects he came to speak about on behalf of an undemocratic opposition as his comments show.

What is disgusting about this Special Rapporteur is his outrageous ignorant and insensitive conditioning of the rightful condemnation of the Rohingya massacres, a condemnation made by Malaysia. He has attempted to link the so called denial of rights to an undemocratic opposition who support the perpetrators of that genocide in Myanmar to critiscisms of the genocides in Myanmar. He seems to think that unless Malaysia recogniseshis clients “rights” of its unruly opposition, its government has no right to speak up about a genocide in Myanmar.

It is precisely this sort of insensitivity and partiality that led to the Rwandan genocide. It is precisely the callousness of ‘Special Rapporteurs” like Maina and his one sided “observations” that has led to the massacres of the Rohingya by Aung San Suu Kyii’s government with relative impunity. It is not something a nation like Malaysia (sans its Chinese led brutes from Chin Peng’s stud farms) ought to sit idly by and do nothing about.

It is clear from the UN’s own website that these so called “rights” Maina comes to defend and champion are not absolute rights.  Neither are the causes of Bersih and its constituent components lawful mandates, or  political oorganisationsoperating within the rules and framework of democracy or the constitution of Malaysia.

As for the idea of proportionality, Bersih has been allowed to function and operate albeit in an unconstitutional and criminal manner without the proportional response any civil government would have tolerated or allowed for so long. They need to be curtailed and crushed like the socio political disease they are.

Maina should return to the confines of his disturbed violent nation of Kenya and perhaps begin there where the ideals and definition of democracy is more consistent with his own ideas and where violence and the use of force and violent demonstrations trumps all. Add to it of course the grease of a few thousand dollars here and there and you get a Maina.

The real power and authority of the Special Rapporteur is thus and best described on the UN’s website:

A Special Rapporteur is an independent expert appointed by the Human Rights Council to examine and report back on a specific human rights theme or country situation. This position is honorary and the expert is not a United Nations staff member, nor paid for his/her work”.

A token by any other name. He is not independent by any stretch of the imagination or the word.

Gopal Raj Kumar

One Response to “Special Rapporteur or Unmitigated Fraud”
  1. IT.SCheiss says:

    It’s typical of these opposition-oriented political NGO types to grasp at straws to bolster their cause.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: