By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 14 – Two years ago, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon claimed that 99% of his officials had made public disclosure of their finances.
As Inner City Press showed, it wasn't true then. And it is not true now.
As of February 14, 2013, the most recent data set of disclosures on the UN website was of 2010 finances, disclosed in 2011. In this data set, for example, Ban's main political adviser Jeffrey Feltman is not even listed.
Ban's chief of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous has refused to make even minimal disclosure, stating, "in accordance with General Assembly Resolution A/RES/60/238, I have chosen to maintain the confidentiality of the information disclosed in my financial disclosure statement.”
Ban's big claim is that he would lead by example, and his top officials would make public disclosure. One would think Ban could condition giving a top post on making disclosure.
But in the case of Ladsous at DPKO, for example, France made the decision of who got the post. And France put in a non-discloser.
Likewise, Ban's envoy to the Congo, Roger Meece, has refused to disclose. How can the UN preach for example mining disclosure to the Kabila government if Meece won't diclose? Neither does ASG Franz Baumann.
Why wouldn't OCHA chief Valerie Amos disclose? Or Achim Steiner of UNEP?
By contrast, Ladsous' deputy Edmond Mulet did make at least basic disclosure, of equity funds with Templeton and Franklin, and outside service as “Advisory Board Member, Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum, Social Science Research Council, New York.”
That's how easy it is. So why wouldn't Ladsous do it? After months of refusing all Press questions, on February 6 he finally partially answered one. It was appreciated: but then stonewalling continued on the follow-ups.
Also still listed in the most recent UN financial disclosure data set but not reporting is Amat Al Alim Alsoswa, a former minister of strongman Ali Saleh in Yemen who, we can now report, is trying to take over the Deputy position to Navi Pillay at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva.
Pillay discloses; why should a deputy be selected who not only served a dictator, but refuses to disclose?
Kevin Kennedy, listed in his former position as deputy in Haiti, declined to disclose. Thursday he was given a tour near the Security Council, in his new post as acting chief of UN Security. Why not disclose?
Now gone Haiti mission chief Mariano Fernandez did disclose. Ban nominated a candidate Honore from Trinidad and Tobago, who got blocked. (Click here for that Inner City Press exclusive.) Will Ban's new nominee commit to disclose?
Some forms, like that of UNDP's Helen Clark, don't appear to work. Click here. This is Ban's transparency?
Footnotes: On February 7, Ban doled lunch and quotes to 13 members of the Executive Committee of the UN Correspondents Association, an organization which spent most of its meeting in 2012 trying to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN (initially for reporting involving Sri Lanka and, who else, Herve Ladsous).
Documents obtained under the US Freedom of Information Act show Voice of America, saying it had the support ofReuters' bureau chief Louis Charbonneau and Agence France Presse's Tim Witcher, asking the UN's Stephane Dujarric to "review" the accreditation of Inner City Press.
This gave rise to a request from the NY Civil Liberties Union for disclosure of the UN's due process rules, which has still not happened.
In 2013, they or most of them have been engaged intearing down free speech flyers, mocking an alleged victim of sexual harassment, using two counterfeit social media accounts.
Why does Ban meet and "partner" with this UNCA, as his main or only interlocutor on press issues? Why has neither side released a transcript or recording to other journalists at the UN, including those who have launched the new alternative Free UN Coalition for Access? Ah, transparency.
