Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un2ethics011908.html
UNITED NATIONS, January 19 -- The UN's Ethics Office, after four months of review, has rebuffed yet another staff member seeking protection against retaliation. In the matter of Mathieu Koumoin, who complained of diversion of funds from Africa to European companies by the UN Development Program / Global Environment Program, UN Ethics Officer Robert Benson on January 15 declined to offer protection. Click here for Benson's "confidential" letter, provided by UN sources. Benson further limits his Office's jurisdiction, stating that while cases in funds and programs like UNDP "could" be referred to his central Ethics Office if the alleged retaliation was by senior officials of the fund or program, only those senior official could make the referral. But why would a wrongdoer consent to outside investigation?
UNDP's Administrator Kemal Dervis, who in August 2007 refused to allow Benson to review the case of a whistleblower about UNDP's suspended North Korea program, has since defended UNDP's decision to give new contractor to a vendor, Corimec, which was suspended from business with the UN Secretariat due to bribery, click here for that story,and here for its follow-up. In this light, for Benson to count on those accused to consent to his jurisdiction is laughable. As one source put it, at this rate Benson should just close down his Office and return to Canada. "Not ready for prime time," said a source, anonymous for fear of retaliation against which Benson offers no protection at all...
Back in September 2007, prior to the purported clarification of the UN's ethics systems, Benson tried to avoid dealing with Koumoin's claims, writing as supporting his non-action that Koumoin had availed himself "of all the relevant recourse mechanisms in relation to the issues that you now raise to the Ethics Office." Click here for that Inner City Press story.
On October 16, UNDP's Dervis in a rare Q&A dodged questions about Koumoin, answering opaquely about needing to "harmonize" the system while leaving UNDP independent, because it is "in the field" (as supposedly the rest of the UN is not). He did imply that there should be some appellate role for the UN Ethics Office, without spelling it out. Video here, from Minute 54:14.
At a December 3 press conference, Benson made much of a so-called safety valve in the new fragmented ethic rules in which the director of a fund or program could voluntarily refer a matter to Benson's office. Inner City Press asked Benson if in cases where an agency's head or deputy head is the alleged retaliator, he or she should refer the case to the central Ethics Office, as a form of recusal. They "could," Benson said. "Should?" Inner City Press asked again, on the theory that even an Ethics Officer stripped of much of his jurisdiction can still provide guidance. "Could," Benson repeated. And now he makes it clear -- unless the accused volunteers for outside review, there will be none.
News analysis: While the UN Ethics Office's Robert Benson is by all accounts and encounters so far both genial and polite -- a nice guy, as baseball manager Leo Durocher's phrase has it -- his public decisions and statements so date have left the problems of retaliation and impunity in the UN unsolved. The answer is not asking those he rebuffs to stay quiet, but may require an ultimatum from the laid-back Mr. Benson: confirm the powers the post had when it was accepted, or find a new Ethics Officer, a new Office, a new day.
