R

ecently, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon asked Indonesia to stop the planned executions of nine convicted drug-related criminals, but to no avail.

It was the third time he had called on Indonesia to halt the execution plans. Eight of the convicts were eventually executed.

In a press statement, he urged Jakarta to '€œurgently consider declaring a moratorium on capital punishment with a view toward abolition'€.

In so doing, Ban was acting like other global politicians who call for a respect of human dignity without a correct understanding of the matter. There was a very clear misunderstanding implied in Ban'€™s definition of what he called the '€œmost serious crimes'€ in his statement.

His rejection of drug-related offenses as being among these '€œmost serious crimes'€ is a grave inaccuracy. The imposition of death sentences for only the '€œmost serious crimes'€ '€” as the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966 calls it '€” has not been defined to date.

Article 6 (2) of the covenant has made no further stipulation regarding the criteria of such gross criminal acts. The UN Human Rights Council in Geneva has failed to provide any clarifying indication, and the world remains in a debate over the issue.

Without well-defined criteria, any criminal act can fall in this category, including drug-related offenses that have critically hurt society. It is a fact, one hardly denied, that drug use and drug trafficking is destroying Indonesia'€™s future generation. That'€™s why the decision to enforce harsh punishments for drug crimes resonates powerfully in the Indonesian public.

The UN may oppose the death penalty in all circumstances. But to continue to intervene in the Indonesian legal system is something that is hardly respectable coming from the highest international institutions, such as the office of the UN secretary-general.

Ban'€™s critique cemented his hypocrisy on that particular matter, since he didn'€™t have the same condemnation of the death penalty in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and China or a few states in the US.

Thomas Weiss of New York University, an eminent author of several books on the UN, ranks Ban as the least effective secretary-general, tied with formal heads Trgyve Lie and Kurt Waldheim. The eighth since the UN'€™s establishment in 1945, Ban is considered among the two UN top officials in terms of diplomatic failures. As Weiss puts it, the three have tarnished the UN in different ways.

Despite his preference of handling things in private '€” what he calls '€œquiet diplomacy'€, his repetitive appeals on the death penalty in Indonesia demonstrates inconsistency. He is not nurturing private and intense conversation with President Joko '€œJokowi'€ Widodo in discussing his concerns.

Instead, Ban has picked his own fight by humiliating and lecturing the Indonesian government on the issue. Ban'€™s style is not just disrupting the independence and sovereignty of UN member states: He has made interference a tradition of his own making inside and outside the UN office.

If Ban Ki-moon tried but struggled to make an impact in international affairs amid the situation of his own '€œredemption'€, there is not much we can rely upon.

For several reasons, he has failed to show credibility in his leadership, which jeopardizes the effectiveness of the UN system as a whole.

First, he is arbitrarily targeting countries that lack the ability to fire back.

Second, he latches onto the death penalty issue because it'€™s an easy sell to media that allows him to portray himself as a tough UN top official.

Third, the bias of his policy judgement obscures the true reality of the death penalty debate, on which no authoritative intergovernmental consensus on the categories of offenses considered serious crimes punishable by death has formed.

Fourth, Ban shows no confidence in Indonesia'€™s legal system and ignores Indonesia'€™s meaningful contribution to the UN.

Lastly, Ban'€™s actions overshadow the implementation of legal sovereignty among UN members; it can be used to justify reforms of the world body.

For the record, this call was also echoed by President Jokowi during the commemoration of the recent Asian African Conference.
__________________________

He has failed to show credibility in his leadership, which jeopardizes the effectiveness of the UN system as a whole.
______________________

The writer is a policy analyst, based in Geneva. The views expressed are his own.