The BBC’s presentation of its Editorial Standards includes the following, under the sub-heading “our editorial values”:
“We operate in the public interest – reporting stories of significance to our audiences and holding power to account.” [emphasis in the original]
One source of power which the BBC consistently displays no interest in holding to account is the United Nations. Rather than adopting a critical approach to the that organisation, the BBC chooses instead to quote and promote anything put out by its various departments and agencies, no matter how ridiculous.
As noted here on numerous occasions, the BBC has in particular done remarkably little over the years to contribute to audience understanding of the UN Human Rights Council’s politically motivated bias against Israel.
Despite having reported the establishment of a UNHRC ‘Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel’ in May 2021, when evidence emerged concerning highly problematic statements made by its three members, the BBC was silent:
BBC SILENT ON UNHRC COMMISSION BIAS
The fact that that commission has already produced highly problematic reports – such as those published in June 2022, October 2022 and June 2023 – is not mentioned anywhere in an article which appeared on the BBC News website on March 13th under the headline “UN experts accuse Israel of sexual violence and ‘genocidal acts’ in Gaza”.
Credited to David Gritten, that long BBC report opens by telling readers that:
“UN experts have accused Israel of increasingly using sexual and gender-based violence against Palestinians and carrying out “genocidal acts” through the systematic destruction of maternal and reproductive healthcare facilities.
A report commissioned by the UN Human Rights Council documents alleged violations, including rape, in Gaza and the occupied West Bank since Hamas’s 7 October 2023 attack on Israel triggered the Gaza war.
It also says the destruction of maternity wards in Gaza and embryos at a fertility clinic could indicate a strategy to prevent births among a particular group – one of the legal definitions of genocide.
Israel said it “categorically rejects the unfounded allegations”.”
Gritten has nothing to tell BBC audiences about the record of that commission since its establishment nearly four years ago:
“The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory was established by the UN Human Rights Council in 2021 to investigate all alleged violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.”
Neither does he provide BBC audiences with any information about the two of the three members of that commission whom he quotes in his report:
“The commission’s chair Navi Pillay, a South African former UN human rights chief, said the evidence collected “reveals a deplorable increase in sexual and gender-based violence” that she claimed was being employed by Israel against Palestinians “to terrorise them and perpetuate a system of oppression that undermines their right to self-determination”.”
Readers of course would have found it useful to know that, as noted by UN Watch, Navi Pillay’s record as UN High Commissioner of Human Rights between 2008 and 2014 includes the following:
“In this position, she empaneled four fact-finding missions targeting Israel, more than any other country; oversaw the discredited Goldstone Report, which was later rejected by its primary author; permitted the appointment of the notoriously antisemitic Richard Falk as the Special Rapporteur for the Palestinians; and convened the 2009 Durban II conference, which was boycotted by most democracies, and provided Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a prominent platform to disseminate antisemitic vitriol.”
When the commission she currently heads presented its first report in June 2022, Pillay used her opening remarks to call for boycotting the State of Israel.
Another member of the commission is quoted by Gritten as follows:
“Commission member Chris Sidoti, an Australian human rights lawyer, told the BBC: “Sexual violence is now so widespread that it can only be considered systematic. It’s got beyond the level of random acts by rogue individuals.””
Gritten refrained from informing readers that at the same presentation of the commission’s initial report:
“Commissioner Chris Sidoti attacked those who raised the concern of antisemitism, calling their statements an “outrage,” denigrating the IHRA definition internationally- recognized consensus definition of antisemitism, and accusing pro-Israel NGOs of being agents of the Israeli government […] Rather than engage with Jewish and Israeli groups who expressed concern of antisemitism to try and understand, Sidoti instead belittled them, stating that “accusations of antisemitism are thrown around like rice at a wedding. That legitimizes antisemitism. Trivializes antisemitism. Defiles the memory of the 6 million victims of the Shoah.””
While Gritten does not mention the third member of the commission by name, readers are not informed that statements concerning “the Jewish lobby” made by Miloon Kothari three years ago were condemned as antisemitic by, among others, the US Ambassador to the UNHRC, the US Ambassador to the UN, the US Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism, the UK Ambassador to the UN in Geneva, a Canadian ambassador, and an EU commissioner.
Such context would undoubtedly have helped BBC audiences to put into perspective the commission’s allegations (some of which are analysed here) that Gritten portrays as being based on information from, among others, unidentified “civil society and women’s rights organisations”. Likewise, it would have been helpful to readers had they been told that, as reported by the BBC at the time, the same UN commission had already made similar allegations in June 2024.
The day after its initial publication, Gritten’s report was amended to include comment from a representative of an NGO.
“The UN experts determined there were “reasonable grounds to conclude” the allegations were committed, and that “such systematic attacks were intentional”, Fernando Travesi of the International Center for Transitional Justice told the BBC.
He said they reached that conclusion by analysing digital content and hearing victim and witness statements, and he sees no reason to question whether they had sufficient evidence.
But the commission of inquiry applies a different threshold of evidence to a court of law, and to establish criminal liability for genocide the conclusions would need to be confirmed in court “beyond any reasonable doubt”, Mr Travesi said.”
Despite the existence of BBC editorial guidelines concerning contributors’ affiliations requiring the provision of information about their “affiliations, funding and particular viewpoints”, readers were told nothing about that NGO or the contributor himself. The fact that the person commenting on a UN report represents an NGO which receives funding from a number of UN departments – including UNICEF, the United Nations Development Programme, and the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund – was not clarified to readers of this BBC report.
Failing to clarify that the ICJ is also a UN body, Gritten continues with additional ‘genocide’ framing:
“The International Court of Justice is hearing a case bought by South Africa that accuses Israeli forces of committing genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Israel has vehemently denied the allegation.”
He closes his report with what is apparently intended to be context:
“The Israeli military launched a campaign to destroy Hamas in response to an unprecedented cross-border attack on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 were taken hostage.
More than 48,520 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry.
Most of Gaza’s 2.1 million population has also been displaced multiple times. Almost 70% of buildings are estimated to be damaged or destroyed; the healthcare, water, sanitation and hygiene systems have collapsed; and there are shortages of food, fuel, medicine and shelter.”
Notably, while Gritten quotes casualty figures provided by the terrorist organisation that started the war – figures which deliberately do not distinguish between civilians and combatants – he fails to inform his readers that 59 hostages – twenty-four of whom are believed to be alive – are still being held by the same terrorists in the Gaza Strip.
Yet again we see that while the BBC was quick off the mark to promote a UNHRC report published on the same day, it has nothing to tell its audiences about the long record of anti-Israel bias displayed by its authors and the body they represent. That is not “holding power to account” by any stretch of the imagination.
