Omar Mateen Was With G4S, In UN Global Compact, ICP Asks, Monitoring

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 14 -- The killer in Orlando, Omar Mateen, worked since 2007 at private military contractor G4S. A co-worker there is quoted that it was “quite apparent that the guy had anger issues and was very unstable” -- but G4S kept him on.
    G4S is a member of the UN Global Compact, and when Inner City Press asked the UN why this mercenary firm was a member, the response was the business is “not illegal.” How about, irresponsible?
   On June 14, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: the shootings in Orlando, the… the shooter, or Omar Mateen, was an employee of this G4S, which is a security or private military contractor.  And it's come up before in this room, because somehow it's a member of the Global Compact, even though there are many controversies surrounding its actions.  It was said… The Wall Street Journal quoted one of his co-workers as saying he had anger issues and was very unstable.  I'm just wondering if there are any… what's the procedure for the UN Global Compact, number one, allowing in a company that's basically a mercenary or private military contractor, but, two, when it becomes clear that they're providing automatic weapons to somebody who is described as having…?

Spokesman Dujarric:  Okay.  I think we're jumping to conclusions here.  First of all, I know our colleagues at Global Compact are as saddened and heart-broken as we are all about what happened in Florida.  Whenever concerns are raised about a company, such as the one you mentioned, contacts are had, and they are having… there are being… they are monitoring the investigation at this point, and they will monitor and decide whether or not appropriate action should be taken with G4S' place in the Global Compact.

Inner City Press:  And is there any… just relatedly, on the Global Compact, are there any Ng Lap Seng-affiliated or funded companies that remain… at one time, the World Harmony Foundation was in…?

Spokesman:  Not that I'm aware of, but that's a question you need to ask them.  
The UN Global Compact allows companies to claim affiliation with the United Nations as long as their practices are not illegal -- and even then, the Global Compact put on its board of directors a South Korean businessman convicted of fraud with the SK Group, Chey Tae-won.
  On March 15, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Martin Nesirky if Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has any problem with his Global Compact allowing the company G4S to join, despite it being a private military contractors which has even “supplied security technology to seven Israeli prisons and two remand prisons located in Israel and on the occupied West Bank.”
   Nesirky's response was to say that Ban has confidence in long time Global Compact director Georg Kell.
  But G4S reportedly faced prosecution for the death of an Angolan deportee in the UK - click here for that.
Subsequently, Kell's and the Compact's spokesman Matthias Stausberg sent Inner City Press a previously put out response to criticism of the Compact by the UN's own Joint Inspection Unit. Inner City Press replied:

At the noon briefing I asked about the Global Compact accepting private military contractor G4S into the Compact, despite protests about its involvement in, for example, prisons in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. This is what I am requesting a Secretariat response on, for example this link.

Please advise, thank in advance.

  Stausberg asked for more time to respond -- therefore this couldn't be included in the initial story -- and subsequently on this point wrote to Inner City Press that “the provision of private security services is not an illegal activity. We therefore saw no reason to deny G4S participation in the UN Global Compact.”
  In fairness, Stausberg's full response, praising and defending G4S, is set forth below. While he raises a question about the term “mercenaries,” we note that private military contractors, and even forms of mercenaries, are not illegal either.
  Here is the question: should the only standard applied by and to the UN Global Compact be whether an activity is “legal”? Manufacturing weapons is legal, as is the production of pornography.
Would the UN Global Compact allow pornographers and weapons merchants to join? Apparently yes. 
  In any event, as to G4S, note that

Scotland Yard is considering bringing a corporate manslaughter charge [under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007] against the world's largest private security firm over the death of an Angolan deportee.

Detectives investigating the death of Jimmy Mubenga, who collapsed while being deported on a commercial flight from Heathrow, have interviewed whistleblowers from G4S, the company hired by the government to deport foreign nationals.

They are considering whether the company could be held responsible for his death under rarely used legislation that came into force three years ago.

  Now what will the UN and Global Compact do? Watch this site.
Stausberg wrote:

Subject: Press Q at noon re Global Compact accepting private military contractor G4S into the Compact
From: Matthias Stausberg [at] un.org
To: Matthew Lee [at] InnerCityPress.org
Cc: Kristen Coco [at] un.org, Farhan Haq [at] un.org, Martin Nesirky [at] un.org, Ursula Wynhoven [at] un.org

Hi Matthew, here are some answers for you:

Since you use the term "mercenary", can you please clarify (and provide sources) which current G4S activities you believe would qualify under commonly accepted definitions of the term mercenary (e.g., as in the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries)?

2. The provision of private security services is not an illegal activity. We therefore saw no reason to deny G4S participation in the UN Global Compact.

3. Regarding the specific provision of security technology to various clients in Israel and the Occupied Territories, please note the recent announcement by G4S that it will cease providing certain services and technologies through its Israeli subsidiary. (http://english.themarker.com/danish-company-halts-equipment-supply-to-west-bank-in-wake-of-public-protest-1.349239)

4. Please note also that G4S is a signatory to the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers (ICoC), which was launched in November 2010 as a voluntary initiative to improve industry standards and ensuring respect for human rights and humanitarian law by private security service providers. While the ICoC is not intended to replace national regulation and state control, it marks a critical effort to clarify the role of non-state actors in this arena.

Final note: even regarding the announcement of getting out of the West Bank, note that G4S' predecessor Group 4 Falck made a similar claim in 2002 which was subsequently disproved. But the question raised is not limited to G4S but to whether the only standard applied by and to the UN Global Compact should be whether an activity is “legal”? Under Ban Ki-moon, the UN descended into taking sponsorship money for its slavery memorial from Macau based businessman Ng Lap Seng, then evicting the Press which reported on it. Watch this site.

 Click here for an Inner City Press YouTube channel vide

After Riot in Australia's Manus Island Detention Facility, US Tells Inner City Press It Wants Papua New Guinea to Probe; Sri Lanka Echo

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 21 -- Australia's already controversial policy of diverting asylum seekers to Papua New Guinea was further thrust in the spotlight this week amid a riot and the killing of an Iranian asylum seeker identified as Reza Barati in Australia's facility on Manus Island, PNG.

  The UK-based private military contractor G4S is in charge of security in the facility; its personnel were reportedly involved in the killing. Having not seen any comment from the US government, Inner City Press on February 21 asked State Department deputy spokesperson Marie Harf about it.

  Harf said "We hope that the Papua New Guinea authorities will undertake a full investigation of the incident." Australia has now said it will investigate G4S. But what about the underlying policy? Inner City Press has asked the UN Secretariat too, and they have been strikingly silent.

  While Australia co-sponsors the Syria "humanitarian resolution" in the UN Security Council, it's worth noting that beyond its draconian immigration policies, Australia is already on record that it will NOT support the Sri Lanka resolution the US -- despite lobbying -- UK, India and others are working on for the UN Human Rights Council in March. Whither Australia?

Here's from the US State Department's February 21 transcript, also on the Democratic Republic of the Congo on which we hope to have more:

MODERATOR: Up next, Marie, we have Matthew Russell Lee from Inner City Press. Operator, can you please open Matthew’s line? And Matthew, go ahead.

Inner City Press: Thanks a lot... There were these riots – Australia doesn’t let people that are seeking asylum land, and has been sending them to Papua New Guinea, and there was a riot and an Iranian asylum seeker was killed. And a lot of people have commented on it, but I wonder, is the U.S., either about this one incident or generally about Australia’s policy of not allowing asylum seekers to land and then sort of outsourcing to Papua New Guinea – and I thought I saw that Ambassador Russel was over there, but I wondered if you had anything on this.

MS. HARF: I did have something on this on Wednesday. Let me see if I have something here. Just give me one second. Again, I’m kind of putting a book together in a very strange way. Yes, I did see this. This – okay, here, I do have something. So we are aware of reports at the Manus Island Immigration Detention Center in Papua New Guinea. This is what you’re referring to, right?

Inner City Press: Yes, it is.

MS. HARF: We hope that the Papua New Guinea authorities will undertake a full investigation of the incident. I think for probably more details on that, the Australian and Papua New Guinea governments have more of the details, and I’d refer you there. And we think these are matters best addressed by the governments of these countries. But in general, we do encourage all countries to work with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees to find durable solutions for refugees and asylum seekers and to uphold their obligations under a couple conventions – the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.

Inner City Press: Okay, that’s great. And if you don’t mind, just one more quick – in DRC, there was a crackdown on this opposition leader Vital Kamerhe in Bukavu. There was, like, shooting at his supporters. I’m thinking of Russ Feingold, I don’t know if that’s in your book, your spread out book over there, if you --

MS. HARF: My sort of bobbled together book here in Jerusalem. It’s not. I’m sorry. I haven’t seen that, but let me see if I can get you something on that.

Inner City Press: Okay, thanks.

MS. HARF: Thank you so much.

  Watch this site.

   

Somalia Sanctions Violated by US, France, UK & Even UN, UNMAS' David Bax & Ladsous Redux

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 23 -- The UN's Somalia sanctions report, in portions scarcely reported by Western wire services, notes violations by France, the US, the UK and the UN itself. 

   Can the UN violate its own sanctions? It does: see Reportat Page 333, Paragraph 88 and below.

  The UK among other things brought in weapons for its private security provider, G4S Security Services. 

   Now the UK's Nicholas Kay is in charge of the UN's Somalia mission; while responsive, he has declined to answerabout UN Mine Action Service chief David Bax providing information to US intelligence, telling Inner City Press this is a "question for New York" - where UNMAS and theDepartment of Peacekeeping Operations under Frenchman Herve Ladsous do not answer.

  As to France, the recent report says that "according to civil aviation records, the Government of France operated three military cargo flights to Somalia in October 2012, and one in February 2013, plus two military helicopter flights in August and December 2012 from Djibouti to Hargeisa. On 24 October 2012, the Monitoring Group witnessed at Mogadishu airport a large quantity of cargo, including large wooden boxes, being offloaded by unidentified French personnel, with the assistance of AMISOM military personnel, from a French military Transall registered 61-ZA.

  "The Monitoring Group is unaware of any notification by France to the Committee concerning military flights to Somalia, except the one approved by the Committee in December 2012. On 17 April 2013, the Monitoring Group sent a letter to the Government of France requesting clarification and additional information. In a letter dated 30 April 2013, the French Government confirmed to the Committee that such flights were conducted in order to transport support and assistance to Somali security sector institutions."

  As to the United States, and as may relate to Bax and UNMAS, the report states that "between 14 September 2010 and 30 March 2013, the Monitoring Group counted 236 flights to Somalia operated by Prescott Support Co. and RAM Air Services, mostly originating from Djibouti and bound for Bosaso and Galkayo, and sometimes Mogadishu.. These two U.S.-based private air companies operate flights to Somalia on behalf of the U.S. Government in support of Somali security sector institutions.

  "On one occasion, the Monitoring Group received uncorroborated information about the boarding at Galkayo airport of a handcuffed and blindfolded passenger, accompanied by several other individuals. However, the United States Government has not replied to date to the Monitoring Group’s request for additional information, including the passenger list, flight plan and cargo manifest, concerning that flight."

  And yet the UN (and US) demand compliance by others.

  As to the UN, the report states flatly that since January 2012, since January 2012, the UN "has provided Somali security forces with vehicles,and police and communication equipment, in technical violation of the arms embargo on Somalia." Now what? Watch this site.

   

After UN Stonewalls ICP on Use of Private Military Contractor Saracen, GPF Adds DynCorp & G4S

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 10, updated thrice -- Might a new report on the UN's use of private military contractors shake it out of denial?

  The UN's use of PMCs or even mercenaries became a subject of contention back in April, when the Department of Peacekeeping Operations declined to confirm to Inner City Press its use of the PMC Saracen Uganda, part owned by a relative of Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni.

  After several rounds of questions and stonewalling, Inner City Press simply published the contract information:

August 2010 SARACEN UGANDA LTD UGA CON/MON/10-085

Provision of Unarmed Security Services at Entebbe and Kampala
1-Aug-10 to 31-Jul-11 $170,685 MONUSCO

September 2010 SARACEN UGANDA LTD UGA
Security services $132,935 11KIN-200211 MONUSCO

July 2011 SARACEN UGANDA LTD UGA
Security services $144,648 12KIN-200059 MONUSCO

  Only after Inner City Press published this did DPKO's spokesman belatedly admit (and spin) it, writing to Inner City Press that:

"I have a response on the parts of your questions related to MONUSCO. On private security more generally, I am still following up. Question: Is MONUSCO using the services of SARACEN, a Ugandan private security company?

"MONUSCO contracts private unarmed security companies to assist in access control procedures in all of its compounds. Saracen is contracted by MONUSCO for these purposes at its base in Entebbe, Uganda."

  Inner City Press noted that while DPKO did not provide that actual contract information which Inner City Press published, this information says Saracen is under UN contract in Kampala as well. Inner City Press then awaited the response on "private security more generally."

But soon thereafter DPKO chief Herve Ladsous said publicly he would not answer any more Inner City Pressquestions due to critical coverage. And DPKO has in fact provided no information on this since.

Now comes a detailed report from Global Policy Forum, which recounts not only Saracen and MONUSCO, but the use of DynCorp by UNOPS and UNDP. (Click here for Inner City Press' so-far eight-part series on UN and UNDP corruption in Afghanistan). 

  GPF also cited G4S, which the UN Global Compact has allowed to join, telling Inner City Press its operations are "legal."

One hopes the GPF study will cause the UN to reform, or at least or relately that Ladsous, who has proved resistant to criticism and questions for example about his proposal that DPKO should use drones, will at least read it. 

UN General Assembly Fails to Oversee Ban Ki-Moondoggle & Mercenary Deals

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 16 -- General Assembly President Joseph Deiss has staked a claim for global governance by the UN, which he calls the “G-192” to distinguish it from the G-20 club of large and rich nations.

But in his term so far, he allowed the already marginal General Assembly to be circumvented even by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, on matters ranging from the budget to the UN's relations with corporations.

Earlier this month in the GA's budget committee, a complaint was lodged that by adding money and time to the UN Capital Master Plan, in this case $100 million in US Tax Equalization Funds, Ban Ki-moon had violated a General Assembly resolution requiring that the GA be told and approval any such change in scope to the CMP.

Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman about the criticism to what is now being called the “Ban Ki-moondoggle” and was told to ask CMP chief Michael Adlerstein. But Adlerstein when asked said to ask the member states.

On March 16, Inner City Press asked Deiss and GA spokesman Jean Victor Nkolo if Deiss agrees with the Group of 77 that Ban violated a GA resolution in changing the budget and time table of the CMP without GA input.

That's up to the committee, Nkolo said. What then is the role of the President of the GA when the GA roles is being ignored?

Similarly, Inner City Press asked Nkolo about a UN Joint Inspection Unit report this year that the General Assembly should assert oversight power on the UN Global Compact, an initiative started by Kofi Annan that under Ban Ki-moon has put a convicted fraudster, from South Korea, on its board of directors, and most recently granted UNGC membership to a private military contractor, G4S, under fire for involvement in Israeli run prisons in the Occupid Palestinian Territories.

Nkolo said the Global Compact is a unit of the Secretariat -- exactly what the UN JIU was criticizing and asking the GA to change -- and that he would see what committee deals with the UN Global Compact. No GA commitee does: that's just the point that the JIU should be changed.

Meanwhile, neither Ban's spokesman nor the Global Compact has yet answered Inner City Press' questions about the mercenary firm G4S's membership in the UNGC, 24 hours after the questions were posed.

Finally on March 16, Inner City Press asked Nkolo if Deiss believes that meeting of the committee on revitalization of the GA, at which greater media access was called for, should remain closed to the public. Inner City Press went into the committee's meeting this week and quoted and analyzed a few statements by Japan and Peru in Twitter posts.

Then US Deputy Permanent Representative Rosemary DiCarlo came up and said that the meeting was closed to the press. A GA staffer later confirmed this. Deiss has said he is for openness. We'll see.