By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 1 -- With scandals in the Philippines brewing about the skimming of UN salary payments to peacekeeping troops and a $5 million payment from the UN gone missing, the UN in New York on Monday told Inner City Press is it a local Filipino matter.
Then the UN's resident coordinator in the Philippines Jacqueline Badcock on Tuesday was quoted that the issue was "not something the UN deals with locally but at the level of the UN headquarters" and that she was "following up the matter with the UN headquarters."
It seemed clear that “UN headquarters” should then have an answer. But on Tuesday in New York when Inner City Press asked deputy UN spokesman Farhan Haq about Ms. Badcock's buck passing, he insisted that Monday's written answer is “the line” and remains the case: it is purely a Filipino matter.
So was Ms. Badcock lying? Or will we be hearing more from the UN?
On Monday, Inner City Press submitted a written question to the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations in New York:
“a news magazine in Phillipines uncovered a UN-related scam by the Philippines military:
'The magazine has also reported on a practice by the military of skimming a certain percentage off the salaries being paid by the United Nations to Filipino soldiers sent on peacekeeping missions to other countries. Officials in 2006 defended the practice, saying that it was meant to recover the expenses incurred by the military in sending these troops to peacekeeping missions.'
Question: Do DPKO, Alain Le Roy and the UN think that the practice by the Phillipines military of skimming a certain percentage off the salaries paid by the UN to its solders is appropriate, yes or no?
The answer came not from DPKO but from Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Office of the Spokesperson Martin Nesirky:
Regarding your questions to DPKO, we have the following to say:
On your question about Filipino troops: This is a national matter. The UN reimburses governments, not soldiers, and we rely on the Member States to disburse the funds in accordance with their national norms and standards.
This seemed a strange answer, in light of the scandals being discussed in the Filipino House, where "$5 million from the United Nations remains unaccounted for, according to former government auditor Heidi Mendoza who testified yesterday before the House committee on justice."
So rather than immediately write an article with this UN answer, Inner City Press asked a follow up at the UN's February 1 noon briefing, citing a Filipino article reporting that
“MANILA, Philippines—The United Nations office in Makati City on Tuesday said it was taking up the alleged UN fund misuse issue with the agency's headquarters in New York City. UN resident coordinator Jacqueline Badcock on Tuesday told the INQUIRER the issue was 'not something the UN deals with locally but at the level of the UN headquarters.' Badcock said she was following up the matter with the UN headquarters.'”
But deputy spokesman Farhan Haq insisted that yesterday's answer is “still the line,” that it is a local matter.
So in another example of UN buck passing, the local office “on the ground” says the scandal has been referred to UN Headquarters, then UN Headquarters denies it, and refers back to the local office. Which is it?
Footnote: another example took place this week when on January 31, Inner City Press was told by Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky that “we are not aware” of the receipt of a petition about a disappeared journalist in Sri Lanka, Prageeth, about which Inner City Press had been asking for a week.
Then the UN in Colombo told the local press the letter had already been received. On February 1, Haq said the letter had “now” been received. But did the Spokesperson's Office even check before its January 31 denial?
Or did the UN in Colombo, headed by Neil Buhne, not tell headquarters about the petition's receipt? It was reported on January 24, but denied in UN Headquarters on January 31. It take a week for the UN to tell the truth? And how long now on the Philippines? Watch this site.
