By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/undt2shaaban022310.html
UNITED NATIONS, February 23 -- The UN's new justice system is already frayed and exposed, as Secretary General Ban Ki-moon reflexively appeals from orders urging him to review the actions of his Under Secretary General Shaaban Shaaban.
Three weeks ago, Inner City Press reported on and asked about a UN Dispute Tribunal decision which slammed Shaaban Shaaban and questioned whether he should be ordered to pay $20,000 damages personally. When asked, Mr. Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky said that Ban would appeal. When Inner City Press asked "appeal what" and "appeal on what basis," Nesirky said that needn't be answered.
Now, Judge Adams has issued a second order, after Shaaban Shaaban refused to appear at his February 3 hearing. Adams writes that "the interests of the Secretary-General as chief executive officer of the Organization plainly conflicted with those of Mr Shaaban. It seems to me self-evident that it was inappropriate for a lawyer from the Office of Legal Affairs to advise Mr Shaaban about what he ought to do in order to avoid the step that triggered the Secretary-General's duty."
And so at the February 23 noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Mr. Nesirky:
Inner City Press: in this case it is the Shaaban Shaaban case, Abboud v. Secretary-General. I understand yesterday, earlier you’d said an earlier ruling was going to be appealed. Maybe you could say if it’s been appealed, but yesterday Judge Adams ruled saying that the respondent, i.e. the Secretary-General, is to appoint an official of at least the rank of Under-Secretary-General other than Mr. Shaaban to consider afresh the complaints of the applicant. And what I am wondering is that, is this something that the Secretary-General is going to do, even pending appeal of I guess the findings against Mr. Shaaban. This seems like… This is the judge yesterday has asked and he talked about “as a matter of courtesy”. Is this also going to be appealed, so that no one other than Mr. Shaaban will consider the applicant’s case?
Spokesperson: I don’t know the answer to that, but I am sure I can find out. All right, other questions? No?
[The Spokesperson later reiterated that the Organization has determined that an appeal of the Abboud judgment would be appropriate and would be filed.]
When one reads Adams' second decision, which Inner City Press is putting online here, it is difficult not to conclude that Ban Ki-moon is undermining the justice system he claimed was an improvement. We will contineu to follow this case.
And see, www.innercitypress.com/undt2shaaban022310.html
