Should the UN enjoy immunity for crimes committed by its personnel?

The magnitude of the UN’s crimes is only negligible because of the lack of accountability.

At least the Biden-Harris administration has a consistent position. Consistently on the side of Islamic terrorists.

In an official document filed in a US court, the United Nations, with the support of the US Department of Justice, argues that UNRWA employees involved in the October 7 massacre are immune from legal action, Israeli broadcaster Channel 12 News reported Saturday night.

According to the document, UNRWA staff involved in the massacre are protected from prosecution thanks to their immunity.

“Since the UN has not waived immunity in this case, its subsidiary, UNRWA, continues to enjoy absolute immunity from prosecution and the lawsuit must be dismissed,” the UN’s response said.

UNRWA is a UN agency dedicated to serving the Arab Muslim invaders of Israel who call themselves “Palestinians.” In Gaza, UNRWA provides much of the social infrastructure on behalf of Hamas. UNRWA employs Hamas and other terrorists, and its leaders have been quite open about it. UNRWA employees included some of the October 7 perpetrators.

Oct. 7 is not even the first time that UN personnel committed atrocities or abuses with the active knowledge and tolerance of the UN hierarchy. Haiti comes to mind, for example.

An Associated Press investigation into U.N. missions over the past 12 years found nearly 2,000 allegations of sexual abuse and exploitation by peacekeepers and other personnel around the world — indicating that the crisis is much larger than previously known. More than 300 of the allegations involved children, AP found, but only a fraction of the alleged perpetrators were in prison.

The magnitude of the UN’s crimes is only dwarfed by its lack of accountability. If governments have no immunity for crimes committed by their personnel, why should the UN?

Article posted with permission from Daniel Greenfield