3 ms·
Because mistakes happen and usually go when it's a horrible situation. If they got sued for every little thing, nothing would be done when it came to humanitari
by bsullivan01 13y ago
Because mistakes happen and usually go when it's a horrible situation. If they got sued for every little thing, nothing would be done when it came to humanitarian help. UN should offer some sort of settlement but not to create a precedent.
Imagine if you went to help a family during a tornado and they sued you because you hurt someone's arm by pulling them or accidentally broke a family heirloom.
- andreasvc 13y agoBut that's a blanket argument, it could apply to any organization that offers help. It is unclear to me why it would be in the interest of anyone but the UN for the UN to have immunity.
- pgeorgi 13y agoWhich is why in some countries giving aid actually _does_ grant you legally immunity against claims over mistakes or accidents that happened while doing so. That includes first aid by laymen at the roadside and of course extends to international organisations. But in those cases, any attempt to cover up problems would likely reduce the protection (because it's not in good faith anymore)
- sspiff 13y agoThe UN has immunity as an organization. You could still sue the individuals who covered it up or ordered to cover it up.
- raverbashing 13y agoYes Then what happens: no UN to save anything.
- mseebach 13y agoThere is a difference between mistakes happening and then being culpably negligent. If the UN lied about having tested peacekeepers free of cholera, and they then went on to cause an outbreak, then it's not at all comparable to knocking over a vase while saving someones life.
- sspiff 13y agoThe individuals who covered it up are not immune to lawsuits, it's only the UN as an organization that is immune.