Showing posts with label Monem. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Monem. Show all posts

Thursday, September 28, 2017

In UN Bribery Echo, Bangladesh Abdul Monem Who Fled Returns to UNSC on Rohingya


By Matthew Russell Lee, Videoaudiophoto

UNITED NATIONS, September 28 – How corrupt is the UN? Days after the indictment of UN President of the General Assembly John Ashe and Ng Lap Seng, Bangladesh's then-Ambassador Abdul Monem fled the US. As Inner City Press reported, Monem was involved in the scandal. He not only attended Ng's Macau event in August 2015 - after that, on September 6, 2015, Monem "urgently" emailedFrancis Lorenzo who has pleaded guilty to ask how to insert the Macau "outcome" into a GA resolution. So he fled the US. And yet on September 28, 2017, as photographed by still-restricted Inner City Press, Abdul Monem was back in the UN, in the Security Council no less, for the open meeting on the Rohingya of Myanmar. Do the US authorities know? Does the UN? We'll have more on this. Two months after the UN bribery verdict of six guilty counts against Ng Lap Seng was delivered by the jury on July 27, now Ng's lawyers have filed a motion for a new trial, arguing that government witness Francis Lorenzo committed perjury including about the UN and its office of South South Cooperation, and South South News. See portions of Ng's motion, below. On August 16 Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres for his response to the verdict. He scoffed and walked off. Video here. On September 27 Inner City Press asked Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric about Ng's newest filing, and if even the UN's Yiping Zhou had been held accountable in any way. (The answer is no.). From the UN's transcript: Inner City Press:  there's been a request by Mr. Ng Lap Seng for a new trial in his case.  And, in the filing that he made yesterday, he actually cites… and I wanted to ask… get your response to a specific comment in his filing.  He says that… jumping into it, “all of these actions resulted from pressure that [Francis] Lorenzo and [John] Ashe exerted on Yiping Zhu of the [United Nations] Office of South-South Cooperation in exchange for bribes.”  And that's just a straight statement, summary of the case.  And so I wanted to know, I know that you've said he's not with the UN, but, given how it's now portrayed in the case as… as… as… as a fait accompli, shown definitively, what accountability has there been in the UN system?  Is Mr. Yiping Zhu still receiving his pension?  What attempts were made by the UN to hold him accountable? Spokesman:  First of all, he no longer works here.  Anyone… the UN has cooperated fully and actively with all the host country authorities on this trial.  No UN staff member that I'm aware has been charged with a crime.  We continue and we will continue to cooperate with the authorities as requested. Inner City Press: Does the UN believe that the… the… the activities of Mr. Zhu described in the case were appropriate for UN staff member?  And, secondarily… Spokesman:  I have no way of verifying the veracity of what you've just read to me. Inner City Press:  Has OLA [Office of Legal Affairs], which stated that they were going to seek to be reimbursed for their role in the case, have they taken any steps in that regard since the verdict in July? Spokesman:  "I'm not aware of it.  Okay.  Thank you." Thanks for what? Corruption and censorship? Here's from Ng's memorandum of law: "On direct examination, the government elicited testimony from Lorenzo that he and Ashe had power over Yiping Zhou, who was then the director of the UNOSSC, and that they used that power to cause Yiping Zhou to take the two brand new official actions that the government had
now injected into the case: sending support letters from the UNOSSC, and signing the Pro Bono Agreement with Mr. Ng. (See, e.g., Trial Tr. 764-766.) In particular, Lorenzo testified that
Yiping Zhou (1) drafted a letter for Lorenzo to request support from the UNOSSC in November
2013 (GX339, GX340; Trial Tr. 1217-1227); (2) issued a support letter in January 2014 to Lorenzo identifying Sun Kian Ip Group (“SKIG”) as the company tasked with establishing a conference center in Macau (GX142; GX982; Trial Tr. 666-670); (3) issued another letter to SKIG in June 2014 (GX977; Trial Tr. 1314-1316); (4) issued another letter to the Sun Kian Ip Group Foundation in February 2015 that referred to a long-standing request from John Ashe (GX238; Trial Tr. 1346-1349); and (5) ignored normal partner selection criteria signing the Pro Bono Agreement in December 2014 (GX205, GX995, Trial Tr. 670-676). According to Lorenzo, all of these actions resulted from pressure that he and Ashe exerted on Zhou in exchange for bribes... Lorenzo testified extensively about payments made to Ashe’s wife Dr. Anilla Cherian, who was paid by South-South News (“SSN”) as a consultant between 2011 and 2014. According to Lorenzo, in January 2014, Mr. Ng asked for a list of the staff and consultants working at SSN because he was considering reducing its workforce. (Trial Tr. 1258.) Lorenzo testified that he told Mr. Ng that they “should continue having Anilla because she’s John wife and [they] needed John to continue his support on the expo and the letters that we were needing.” (Id.) The government presented no other evidence to corroborate that testimony—but nevertheless relied on that alleged conversation in its closing to argue that Ng intentionally channeled payments to Dr. Cherian in exchange for favorable treatment from Ashe. (Trial Tr.
3902-03.) Lorenzo also testified that in November 2013, Ashe told him that he wanted SSN to pay for a reception he hosted at the United Nations, and that Lorenzo talked to Yin to ask for the funding. (Trial Tr. 1232.) Lorenzo further testified that Jeff Yin did give him $20,000 in cash for the reception, and that Lorenzo later gave $16,000 of that money to Ashe (and kept the remaining $4000 for himself). (Trial Tr. 1236-37.) Once again, the government presented no other evidence to corroborate that testimony, but relied on that evidence in its closing to establish the alleged bribery scheme. " We'll have more on this, and the UN's unseemly role, now being further exposed.
 The last head of the UN Department of Public Information Cristina Gallach did no due diligence as Ng Lap Seng's fundees like South South News bought events in the UN lobby and even the UN's slavery memorial (UN audit here), then evicted Inner City Press which asked her about her connections with Ng's South South Awards. New head of DPI Alison Smale has done nothing about this: Inner City Press is still restricted. On September 6 Inner City Press having obtained more documents from the prosecution of Ng asked Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the duty to report of UN Security that accompanied John Ashe, Francis Lorenzo and others in a clear corrupt visit to Macau. Dujarric, who has refused 18 of the last 21 written questions from Inner City Press including on UN corruption,refused to say what the duty to report was, or is in today's UN. This stonewalling continued on September 8, even as the same officer appeared in the UN Press Briefing Room guarding outgoing PGA Thomson. Inner City Press asked Dujarric, UN transcript here: Inner City Press:  had asked you, I think, I don't know if it was yesterday or the day before, if you've looked into what the rules are for the… the UN security people that that went with John Ashe to Macau and that… that will presumably keep offering close protection to future PGAs (Presidents of the General Assembly).  If crime is witnessed by the UN, and this… and I'm… as I go through those exhibits, it's pretty clear that the first trip, there was nothing hidden about it.  I'm… I'm not blaming the guard.  I guess what I'm asking you is what are the rules?  What is the protocol for someone assigned by… from UN DSS (Department of Safety and Security) to accompany a UN official if they witness what's, as it turns out, a crime? Spokesman:  "Staff rules are applicable to everyone, and I will leave it at that."  Here is one of the photographs, of UN Security with Ashe, Frances Fuller, Paulette Bethel and Ng Lap Seng, guilty of six counts of UN bribery and money laundering, and others. More on this to follow. The UN is UNreformed. There  event on August 25 in the UN's ECOSOC Chamber - which Inner City Press for 18 months and counting has required a UN "minder" to reach - by a group linked to Carlos Garcia, shown in the Ng trial to have aided money laundering. Today Inner City Press publishes this email from Garcia, to help Ng wire money to Francis Lorenzo through a relative in the Dominican Republic. Here on PatreonAnd here's Garcia at the founding of Guterres' August 25 host. We'll have more on this. How far will the UN go to get positive media coverage, and to punish and hinder, if still not prevent, critical oversight? Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's 2015 to Honduras and El Salvador was given entirely positive coverage by South South News, the $300,000 a month bribery conduit of nowconvicted Macau-based businessman Ng Lap Seng. Click here for that coverage, still online. Now in emails obtained and published by Inner City Press, it is shown that South South News president Francis Lorenzo, who has pleaded guilty, wrote to UN official Yiping Zhou about the coverage: “Dear yiping enclose see the first report of our coverage of the trip of the SG to El Salvador.” Zhou wrote back, “Great job covering the SG's visit. We should do more for the SG, and other heads of UN organs especially also for our  UNDP Administrator Helen Clark. Please find my letter of support” - a letter supporting Ng's now-disgraced, never-built Macau conference Center. So the UN supported Ng's corrupt plan, in response to positive coverage of Ban Ki-moon by Ng's South South News. Zhou was Ban Ki-moon's personal Envoy on South South Cooperation. And like Zhou's letter for Ng's project, Ban wrote a "personal 'Thank You' note" to South South News Afaf Konja "for her coverage of his official visit, calling her a 'champion for South-South Cooperation.'" These names came up repeatedly during the Ng Lap Seng prosecution, begun by then-US Attorney Preet Bharara with the question, Is bribery business as usual at the UN? The answer was and is, Yes. And when Inner City Press pursued the Ng Lap Seng bribery scandal, seeking to cover a meeting of the UN Correspondents Association who took full page ads from Ng' South South News and provided the venue for Ng's photo op with Ban (Cipriani 42nd Street), Inner City Press was evicted from the UN Press Briefing Room, then its long time office in the UN, where it still remains restricted under Ban's successor Antonio Guterres. On August 16, Inner City Press asked Guterres about the Ng guilty verdicts; Guterres declined to answer. The UN still contains corruption, and still punishes and restricts the Press which covers it. Beyond the corruption, it is a conflict of interest to have the same UN Department which views its role as promoting positive coverage of the UN be the one to decide, without rules or free press constraints, which media get full access, and which like Inner City Press are evicted and restricted. The incoming head of the UN Department of Public Information Alison Smale, replacing Cristina Gallach who partied at Ng's South South Awards and did no due diligence on his events and sponsorships in the UN, will have to deal with this. We'll have more on this. On August 17 Inner City Press asked Guterres' deputy spokesman Farhan Haq about trial exhibits it has begun to receive, on Meena Sur and the Global Compact, for first examples. Video here; from the UN transcript here, text below. On August 18, Inner City Press asked Haq about another of the many exhibits, moving closer to home: UN transcript here: Inner City Press: as these exhibits from the Ng Lap Seng trial continue to come in, I wanted to ask you, I was surprised to see it, because it wasn't, at least the days that I went, presented in the trial. There are documents that show that the office, UN Office of South-South Cooperation, wrote a letter supporting the conference centre in Macau, specifically after South-South News covered a Ban Ki-moon trip.  I think they were the only media to cover it, and afterwards, they were congratulated by the Office of South-South Cooperation, and a letter was produced by Mr. Yiping Zhou supporting the conference center. From the document, it appears that the UN system as a whole, whether the Secretary-General knew or not, essentially rewarded positive coverage of this Ban Ki-moon trip with a letter for a conference centre that's now been totally discredited and was not built because it was based on bribery.  And I wanted to know, what is the UN's position on this?  What is… I know Mr. Yiping Zhou has left, but what was the connection between the South-South News travelling with and covering Ban Ki-moon's trip and this letter that was given to the, the Sun Kian Ip Foundation to build a conference centre in Macau?

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, I'm not aware of any connection.

Regarding concerns about South-South News, we've explained to you at the time what our concerns had been about South-South News and its activities.  They are no longer accredited, and the Office of South-South Cooperation, as you know, had undergone different reforms under its new leadership, and I believe they've been in touch with you about that.

Inner City Press: My question really at this point goes to the Secretariat, if you see what I'm saying, because the… the activity of South-South News that UNDP's [United Nations Development Programme] Office of South-South Cooperation was rewarding with this letter was coverage of the Secretary-General's trip.  So was this done with no knowledge by the Secretariat… by the Secretariat?

Deputy Spokesman:  We, we don't, we don't "reward" coverage of trips by Secretaries-General.  I mean, there are many trips.  Many, many outlets cover them.

Deputy Spokesman:  If they were all getting rewarded for them, that would be lots and lots of rewards to hand out. Have a good weekend, everyone.
  From August 17: Inner City Press: now that the Ng Lap Seng verdict has been rendered, Inner City Press has been obtaining the exhibits.  And I wanted to ask you, because, even going back and looking at the audit, several things were not solved.  Number one, there’s now specific emails involving current DGACM (Department of General Assembly and Conference Management) employee Meena Sur to Francis Lorenzo regarding the insertion of the name Sun Kiang Ip Group into a GA (General Assembly) document, that’s referenced in the audit.  Many people say Mr. [Ion] Botnaru retired.  That’s why nothing was ever done.  I guess what I want to know is, what’s been done?  Is there some explanation, again, of a current UN official having worked on the insertion of this company name into a GA document improperly?

Deputy Spokesman:  Regarding the general issue, without getting into the cases of specific individuals, the fact is the Department of Management has followed up on the various conclusions brought in by these reports and has made sure that all actions are properly undertaken.

Inner City Press: There’s another email, which is the Global Compact responded to Francis Lorenzo actually but about Sun Kiang Ip Group joining the Global Compact.  And it said, “We’ll get back to you after review of one or two weeks.”  So, I wanted to know, in terms of the Global Compact, given that Sun Kiang Ip Group is involved in casinos and other businesses, what review on the front end… I know it’s often said, once you join the Global Compact, the only thing that’s required is the filing of reports, not anything substantive.  But what review is done if, in fact, a casino business itself already involves controversy at the time can join?

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, I believe the Global Compact on its own website tells you exactly what its priorities are and what it asks of incoming members, so I would just refer you to that.

Inner City Press:  So how do they join?

Deputy Spokesman:  No, just look at the website. It shows you what it expects from incoming members.  Have a good afternoon, everyone.
  On October 7 Judge Vernon S. Broderick allowed Ng to remain under house arrest, at least pending sentencing. Ng's $4 million 47th Street apartment, across the street from what was the office of his South South News, was called "not large" despite its 3,100 square feet. On August 7, he was allowed to remain out of jail. In the hearing, which Inner City Press attended, it emerged that Ng has had a closed-door masseuse four to ten hours a day, who also cooked for Ng's guards for "Guidepost Solutions LLC," whose Brendan P. Finn acknowledged visitors are not body searched and conversations in Chinese are not understood. Inner City Press rushed north to the UN and at Secretary General Antonio Guterres' spokesman's noon briefing asked for a list of any UN affiliated person has visited or had contact with Ng since his indictment in October 2015. Video here. The spokesman, Stephane Duajrric, said no, apparently without checking. Ng has hired Paul D. Clement for his appeal. It's a nice life if you've got money. More to follow. Inner City Press began asking the UN about the people still at the UN who were shown to have worked for or taking money from Ng, or both. So far the UN has done nothing. For example, the trial exposed the role of Carlos Garcia, former Salvadoran Ambassador and since then a bridge for NGOs, in helping "free" Lorenzo's bribe money from Ng. On August 4, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcripthere: Inner City Press: has to do with the Ng Lap Seng case, believe it or not.  In the case, among the evidence that… that came out leading to the guilty verdict was evidence of former Permanent Representative of El Salvador, Carlos Garcia, assisting Francis Lorenzo in getting ill-gotten gains released from the Dominican Republic.  I've asked you about him before because, since serving as a permanent representative, he seems to be a kind of bridge to NGOs [non-governmental organizations].  He had an NGO called Global Governance for the UNSDGs.  I still see him around 1B squiring people around.  So, my request to you is, given… and, again I don't know if OIOS [Office of Internal Oversight Services] tracked the case or not.  Given what was shown on the screen and put into evidence regarding his assistance in Mr. Francis Lorenzo getting bribe money released, does he have some, he has some kind of a pass.  Is there some kind of emeritus status for diplomats, or how it does it work?

Spokesman:  I'm not aware of any em… emeritus, yeah, emeritus status except for journalists, so I will look into it.  Thank you.
  We'll see - and we'll follow up. For further example, during the trial an email was shown that current UN official Meena Sur emailed back and forth helping on the brochure for Ng's fraudulent UN conference center.  But even today, in the Department of General Assembly and Conference Management organogram, Meena Sur is the chief of the "Documents Management Section." Documents for Ng Lap Seng. There is a history here: for the Dominican Republic mission, that is Francis Lorenzo, Meena Sur was also involved with a shadowy IGO "World Sports Alliance," heavily involved in mining but not sports. See for example this: "The World Sports Alliance (WSA) team briefed President Leonel Fernandez on his 19th September visit to Baruch College of the City University of New York during Hispanic Heritage Month. The World Sports Alliance is a multi-stakeholder partnership launched by XL Generation Foundation, Give Them a Hand Foundation, and the Informal Regional Network of the NGO Section/DESA that uses sports to create local economic development and achieve the Millennium Development Goals. Ambassador Francis Lorenzo of the Mission of the Dominican Republic to the UN facilitated the meeting. Ms. Meena Sur, Programme Officer of the NGO Section/DESA, Mr. Gordon Tapper,
President of Give them a Hand Foundation, as well as Mr. Alain Lemieux, President of
the WSA, attended the President’s speech at the college as Special Guests of thePermanent Mission of the Dominican Republic." More on this soon - who in the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services followed up on any of this? The UN is corrupt - and incompetent. DGACM's UN Journal for August 3 calls that day, a Thursday, "Tuesday." Photo here. We will continue on this. Where is OIOS under Heidi Mendoza? They never followed up on the blatant conflict of interest of DPI chief Gallach, who appears in OIOS' own cover-up audit of the Ng Ashe affair, in evicting Inner City Press, and leaving it still restricted. The UN is corrupt.
UN Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq who has repeatedly dodged questions about the case from Inner City Press was quoted by Reuters that the UN was "a victim of these crimes" and later that "We are exploring the possibility of requesting restitution as a victim to these crimes, including recovering expenses incurred to provide the requested cooperation." On July 31, Inner City Press asked Haq's also holdover boss Stephane Dujarric to explain how this could be, UN transcript here: Inner City Press: last week, as you know, Ng Lap Seng was found guilty in one day on six charges of bribery, foreign corrupt practices act, money-laundering.  And I just want… I really want to understand this.  I've been looking at the idea that the UN will be… is… considers itself a victim of the case and will be requesting restitution as a victim.  And I wanted to understand.  It was said by Farhan [Haq], and I didn't have a chance to ask him about… is this just OLA [Office of Legal Affairs] trying to… in the same way as Haiti cholera, cover itself by saying we're a victim, we bear no responsibility, or is it literally António Guterres' position that the UN should be paid for a process in which its own DGACM [Department of General Assembly and Conference Management] gave a document to the guy?  There are still people here that worked on the proposal… I want to understand…

Spokesman:  I think the overall point is that the UN was used for what it appears for criminal activity by the gentleman who was found guilty.

Inner City Press:  Right, but what about the office South-South Cooperation?  Is there any guilt on the side of the UN side? Mr. Yiping Zhu that left immediately upon the indictment, is… was he victimized?  Did he not understand what he was doing?

Spokesman:  Mr. Yiping Zhu is no longer a staff member of this organization.

Inner City Press:  Right, but doesn't an organization have some responsibility for what its people do?

Spokesman:  I will leave it at that. 
  We won't. Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Haq on July 28 to explain how the UN is the victim, and how it dares say it should be get for corruption. Video 8 from Minute 8:40. Haq said, This is the position of our Legal Council. Now Inner City Press has asked above. Watch this site. The UN even refused to tell the prosecution whom it spoke to for its Task Force Report, which said it has no ethical standards. The UN will ask for money, while paying nothing to the 10,000 people it killed in Haiti? Reuters doesn't even raise that - it has a conflict of interest.  UN official Ion Butnaru put the name of Ng's company Sun Kian Ip Group into a General Assembly resolution long after it was voted on, took a free trip to Macau and an iPad there. Victim? Ng's company South South News bought full page ads in the ball program of the UN Correspondents Association, then went to their ball at Cipriani and got photos with then Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. (Reuters then as now had a seat on UNCA's board, something not disclosed in its coverage of Ng and the UN). A current UN official Meena Sur was shown in the trial to have held on Ng's brochure for his planned Macau conference Center. The UN remains UNreformed. Inner City Press, which has covered the scandal from the beginning and remains restricted by the UN for its coverage, rushed down to the courthouse and asked Ng Lap Seng, as he left by the side door to Worth Street, what he thinks of the UN and those there who took his money and favors, a list well beyond John Ashe and Francis Lorenzo. Periscope video here. He did not answer, understandable. He will be back in court on August 7 for arguments on if his house arrest can continue. Before Ng left, Inner City Press witnessed his lawyers leaving. They told the judge they will appeal. But now that Ng is guilty, will the UN act on those exposed as corrupt, and reverse its censorship?
 Ng Lap Seng's $3 billion UN convention center plan had been assisted by Meena Sur, still working for the UN Department of General Assembly and Conference Management. Inner City Press asked the UN spokesman Farhan Haq, who dodged by saying the UN was waiting for the verdict. But the UN is not on trial, because it has and cited immunity. 
Likewise, high UN official Navid Hanif attended Ng Lap Seng's murky event in Macau in August 2015, and remains at at the UN. Spokesman Haq refused to answer about him, while telling Inner City Press that lower UN staff member Frances Fuller “separated from service” in September 2016, just after Inner City Press asked about her. 
Francis Lorenzo, who took more money from Ng than the now deceased John Ashe, was given a UN.org email address by DGACM despite never being pictured among Ashe's Special Advisers, and never giving up his day job as the Dominican Republic's Deputy Permanent Representative. 
Even on July 26, DGACM's Executive Officer told Inner City Press that the UN still hands such UN credential to anyone whom a President of the General Assembly tells them too. So nothing has been reformed. 
The Department of Public Information under Cristina Gallach took Ng Lap Seng's money for its slavery memorial, and allowed fraudulentevents in the UN lobby. But UN lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric, who allowed the content of Ng's South South News to be included in UNTV archives under his watch, said this was just an issue of “judgment,” not malfeasance. 
The UN Correspondents Association, to whom Dujarric “lent” the UN Press Briefing Room then evicted and still restricts Inner City Press for seeking to cover the event to see if they discussed taking South South News' money and providing a venue for Ng's photo op with Ban Ki-moon, did not have a single member correspondent covering the month-long UN bribery case. Other dubious events were being hosted
And so, while awaiting the jury's verdict on Ng Lap Seng - which may be not guilty given how corrupt the UN and the star witness against him Francis Lorenzo have been shown to be - it is clear that the UN has not reformed and remains corruption and a censor, seven months into the reign of “new” Secretary General Antonio Guterres. It is the UN that should be prosecuted, or invited to leave. Watch this site. 

Legal footnotes: counsel to Ng Lap Seng, Park Jensen Bennett, Partners Tai H Park and Douglas Jensen in New York; and Alexandra Shapiro in New York; Assistant US attorneys Douglas Zolkind, Janis Echenberg and Daniel Richenthal of the US Attorney’s Office, David Last, on detail with the criminal division fraud section's FCPA unit.

Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Exclusive Follow Up: UN Sought $5M from Sun Kian Ip, Ashe Offered ASG Post, Trip Canceled


By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive follow-up
UNITED NATIONS, October 6 -- While some in the UN purport to be surprised by the indictment of 2013-14 President of the General Assembly John Ashe on charges of soliciting bribes from Macao businessmen including the Sun Kian Ip Group's Ng Lap Seng, what is surprising is that it took this long for the laxness not only of Ashe but of the President of the General Assembly office's structure and UN's easy penetration by business interests to lead to this.
   Inner City Press on October 6 asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about Sun Kian Ip and why the UN had sent out a press released by South-South ("NGO 1" in the indictment) as it were a UN entity. Transcript here.
  Inner City Press' continued digging finds that Sun Kian Ip Group and Ng Lap Seng in March 2015 promised $5 million a year for three years to the UN: “Permanent Representative of Bangladesh to the United Nations and President of the High-level Committee on South-South Cooperation Dr. A. K. Abdul Momen, UN Secretary General’s Envoy and Director of the UN Office for South-South Cooperation Mr. Yiping Zhou and Chairman of the Sun Kian Ip Group Mr. Ng Lap Seng signed the agreement.” See here.
  The question to be pursued is obvious: what was THAT money for? Sources exclusively tell Inner City Press that John Ashe, whom Inner City Press saw about the UN during General Debate week, was offered an Assistant Secretary General post, for Partnerships, and that a previously scheduled Ban trip to Shanghai will now not happen. “They're hoping it blows over,” one well placed source told Inenr City Press. But will it?
   At the October 6 noon briefing, UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric expressed faux surprise at the number of journalists in the room. He gave the first question to Reuters, which asked a generic softball question; he said new President of the General Assembly Mogens Lykketoft will answer at 3 pm (Ban is going out of town, to Peru).
  Inner City Press asked Dujarric to confirm or deny that Ashe gave Ban Ki-moon a document about a proposed UN Macau Conference Center. Dujarric said the UN couldn't find it. Long Periscope video here with these questions near the end.
   So Inner City Press asked about another document - a press release by the “South South Awards,” which UN DPI next to Dujarric office sent to UN journalists last week. Isn't that a “non-UN” group? What is its relation with the UN?
  After Dujarric emphasized the PGA's office does not report to Ban, Inner City Press asked if Ban after seven years sees a need to more transparency, as one example, who pays the people in the PGA's office? We'll have more on this.
   During Ashe's tenure, Inner City Press covered his various failures; the example of an indigenous conferenceis below. But it's been similar with other PGAs, who travel around the world with little press coverage or accountability, often cutting deals.
  It's not even a full time job: as Inner City Press first reported and got confirmed, in 2014-15 Sam Kutesa remained Uganda's foreign minister, while PGA. (Kutesa tried to place his chief of staff as head of Africa 1 in the UN Department of Political Affairs, here.)
  More recently, Inner City Press has reported that current PGA Mogens Lykketoft's office has been used to lobby for the candidacy of fellow Dane Helle Thorning-Schmidt to take over the UN's refugee agency UNHCR, despite her own record as Danish PM being criticized by UNHCR.
   There are a number of business groups which use the UN -- one of them was even allowed to sponsor the annual event of Herve Ladsous' UN Peacekeeping -- and get awards, like just last week in an ITU event inside the UN. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is aware, or should be aware, of all of this, but won't even disclose who pays for his trips (Inner City Press and the new Free UN Coalitionfor Access have asked).
  Apparently Ashe excused his wheeling and dealing by referring to “South South Cooperation.” While a laudable concept, Inner City Press was struck last week when Ban Ki-moon's UN Spokesperson's office sent out to journalists the news of a non-UN “South South” group at which Ashe had previously appeared. It's a murky world.
Update: an African diplomat, by the UN Security Council after publication of the above, told Inner City Press Ashe taking bribes to pitch a UN Conference Center was "not suprrising." Another said, "They're ruining the UN's name." Ruining?
  So is UN corruption a surprise? Hardly. Ashe's indictment, however, and where it leads, bear watching.
Ashe Background: On May 23, 2014, hours after the end of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, the buzz at the UN was why and by whose decision the finale of the Forum was taken over by the Crimean Tatar issue.
   Many participants sympathetic to the Tatars' plight nevertheless opined that it was a misuse of the Permanent Forum. They said they had not been consulted and asked, Who decided? The chair.
  Some Forum members said it was good to "get revenge on Russia" for question the modalities of the scheduled World Conference. But several of these said it was still a hijacking of a long-standing issues, the plight of the indigenous, by the "flavor of the month."
  "It's not like the Tatars don't have other defenders," one UNPFII veteran said. For example, there was a UN Security Council Arria formula meeting about the Tatars held, sponsored by Security Council member Lithuania (click here for more recent on that mission).
  Another added, "India just wanted more time, and Bangladesh was angry because of a half-hour screed against them by an advocate whose relative is an insider." 
   "We shouldn't have let the Forum get politicized," said another. But it was done.
  When a constituency lets their issues be taken over in the heat of the moment, it might seem strategic - and might turn out not to be. The issue of injustice to the indigenous is too serious to be a play-thing for the flavor of the month, the Free UN Coalition for Access opines.
  Nearly unanimous, however, was criticism of UN President of the General Assembly John Ashe.
Background: The failure of UN President of the General Assembly John Ashe to “show leadership” in setting up the World Conference on Indigenous People scheduled for September was strongly criticized on May 23.
For more than a week, Inner City Press has been asking indigenous leaders what they expected from PGA Ashe. Only that he implement the “modalities” already agreed to for the Conference, was the answer. One speaker, Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, noted that Ashe's office had tried to blame a member state for blocking things but this wasn't true.
  But at 4 pm on May 23 in the General Assembly, when a statement was read out for Ashe, it said that “no consensus” had been reached, even on Monday's watered-down proposal, and that Ashe would be calling for another meeting next week. 
 There followed speeches of disappointment, not only from indigenous representatives but also countries: beginning with Mexico and Norway, through Denmark and Guatemala's Permanent Representative Rosenthal, heavily indigenous Bolivia, Finland, Australia and New Zealand.
 Nicaragua's deputy Permanent Representative spoke, then Sweden. Kenneth Deer called for full and equal participation. Panama spoke, and a representative of the United States, with obstructed view.
Earlier in the week Inner City Press asked Grand Chief Edward John from Western Canada about the proposed oil sands and tar sands pipelines there. He said the Harper government is expected to gives its approval. Then what?
Footnote: at these indigenous press conferences, the newFree UN Coalition for Access thanked the speakers; the old UN Correspondents Association was generally not there, except an appearance that triggers a response that Morocco is not in the African Union and therefore didn't participate in its programs. UNCA big wigs were trying a scam elsewhere, it emerged. Typical.

 
  

Sunday, August 2, 2015

Post 2015 Text Adopted, Without SIDS or Age or Migrants Rights



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 2 -- After multiple postponements and back-room deals, the Post-2015 development agenda was declared "officially adopted" or agreed to at 6:25 pm on Sunday, with the Group of 77 and China asking for a later "technical change" to included Small Island Developing States.

  The US joined consensus while saying it would later raised issues it left unspecified.

  The Permanent Representative of Benin, who early Saturday morning lashed out at the document and process for selling out the Least Developed Countries, now said he liked the document.

  Sudan for the Arab Group joined consensus; as Inner City Press reported on Saturday, the main Sudanese focus was to ensure that criticism of unilateral sanctions remained in the text (it did).

  Bangladesh's Permanent Representative Monem, to his credit, questioned the omission of migrants from Paragraph 19 (see below). Mexico joined in this criticism. Who speaks for age? Why was Secretary General Ban Ki-moon not present, represented by his chief of staff?

Human rights for migrants and by age were dropped from the "final, final" draft Post-2015 development agenda text released at 2 am on Sunday, to be debated or even gaveled and approved at 11 am Sunday.

  Among many most involved in the process there was an outcry, even after the bland logic for the omission emerged: to stick to "previously agreed language." If that's all that's being done, sticking with the past, why do it?

  Inner City Press, which previously covered the omission of debt sustainability language, got replies from various Permanent Representatives including some who watched Shakespeare in the Park -- New York's Central Park -- on Saturday night.  At the same time, #RacingExtinction projected images of vanishing species onto the Empire State Building, including Cecil the Lion@InnerCityPressPeriscope video here for next 12 hours.

  Some asked, Where is Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary General whom one can imagine bragging about the text when he holds a photo op with US President Barack Obama on August 4? He or his spokesman invited only friendly correspondents to cover that "gaggle," at which these questions will almost certainly not be asked.

  Back on July 31 - August 1, already past the deadline for the Post-2015 development agenda text, Kenyan Ambassador to the UN Macharia Kamau kicked off what was support to be the past session, saying it would take a couple of hours.

   South Africa for G77 began, saying for example that debt sustainability should go back in. The Maldives for AOSIS and Belize for CARICOM also spoke for re-inclusion.

   The European Union followed, calling for the deletion of Paragraph 44 saying the International Monetary Fund should “respect the policy space of each country.”

   Benin upset the apple cart, for the Least Developed Countries, saying that the LDCs were being sold out, through-out the UN system. Ambassador Kamau stayed cool, joking “what would I do without you?” There is not enough laughter at the UN.

  Before the session started, Inner City Press spoke with some who stayed to defend Paragraph 29 against unilateral economic measures -- sanctions -- and others opposed (and others for) Paragraph 33 on foreign occupation. Could this deal be reached? Watch this site.

 
  

Thursday, February 19, 2015

On Bangladesh, ICP Asks UN Why Ban's Jan 30 Letter Lost, No Answer


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 18 -- Amid the violence in Bangladesh,UN official Oscar Fernandez Taranco appeared on the schedule of US Assistant Secretary of State Nisha Biswal on February 11, to meet at 3:45 pm. Inner City Press surmised, since Taranco was previously sent to Dhaka for the UN, that it was about Bangladesh. 
   While Taranco has been Banned from going, it has emerged that Ban Ki-moon sent January 30 letter(s) to the country, even thought the government there says they only got the letter much letter. What explains the delay? On February 18, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Duajrric:
Inner City Press: I asked about Bangladesh yesterday and there was some response.  Now, it's been confirmed by the Government there that they received a letter from the Secretary-General.  They said they received it two days ago, but in other accounts, it was dated 30 January, and the Government there is saying they're asking the UN Resident Representative why it was lost in the mail for two weeks.  But one, can you confirm the letter?  Can you say a little bit what's… what you can, what's in it?  And also is it true that it took two weeks for Ban Ki-moon's letter to reach Sheikh Hasina?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I can check on the letter and see what we can tell you about the letter.  The standard procedure for these letters is, if there was such a letter, is that the letter is transmitted through the Permanent Mission here and then the Permanent Mission transmits it back to capital.

Question:  Right. They quote from the letter that the Secretary-General is thanking Sheikh Hasina for the country's contributions for peacekeeping.  Some people think it puts the UN kind of in a tough spot.  Like, what's the balance between thanking for much-needed peacekeepers and also trying to hold somebody accountable for violence in the streets?

Spokesman:  Well, I think you could do both, but I will look at the letter for you.  
   Nine hours later, no answer. Back on February 17, Inner City Pressasked UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq:
Inner City Press: there was a report that Mr. [Oscar Fernández-]Taranco is going there on a visit, and this was denied by the Permanent Mission here, Ambassador [Abdul] Momen, who said he has not spoken to him.  Can you… is Mr. Taranco seeking to go to the country, and why hasn't he spoken with the Permanent Representative here in New York?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Well, right now on the first question:  There's currently no plan at this point for Mr. Fernández-Taranco to travel back to Bangladesh.  He has been there before.  He has been tasked by the Secretary-General to be in contact with the Government and the opposition and he will continue with those efforts.  But, at this point, like I said, there's no travel to announce.
  Back on February 12, Inner City Press asked UN Department of Political Affairs chief Jeffrey Feltman if Taranco in Washington had been addressing Bangladesh. Feltman genially replied, yes, that among other issues. Even though Taranco, as a product of the UN's so-called Five Year Rule, moved to the Peacebuilding Department, he is still the UNHQ's man on Bangladesh.
 Later at the February 12 noon briefing, UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, saying he was answering Inner City Press' questions from the day before, confirmed that Taranco's meeting with the US State Department's Biswal had addressed Bangladesh. Was that so hard?
On February 11, Inner City Press had asked Dujarric: UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric on February 11 said:

Inner City Press: Mr. Taranco is still involved in this issue.  I notice that he's meeting this afternoon with Nisha Biswal, the US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia.  Is it fair to assume that that's what that meeting is about?  And how would you characterize it?
Spokesman Dujarric:  I think it's not fair to assume anything.  I'll now see if I can actually get you some facts, as opposed to assumptions.
 But seven hours later, there was nothing. Then on February 12, Feltman then Dujarric.
When on February 5 Inner City Press asked the UN, which uses Bangladesh soldiers as peacekeepers, this ensued:
Inner City Press: In Bangladesh, the… things seem to be getting worse.  Former Prime Minister has been charged with arson and… which she says she doesn't do.  The power's been turned off to the opposition party and basically the authorities are using violence on protestors.  So, I'm wondering, what's the response of the Secretary-General?  Is there any [Department of Political Affairs] or other UN involvement in trying to mediate it?  And with senior military officials making statements about what they'll do to civilians, what's the impact on Bangladesh as a peacekeeping contributing country?
Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq:  Well, the political process is separate and apart from the issue of peacekeepers in UN missions, who are under the control ultimately of the mission.  Regarding the situation in Bangladesh, we've made our concerns known.  As you know, officials, including the senior officials from our Department for Political Affairs, have repeatedly visited Bangladesh, trying to meet with the leaders there and make sure that the crisis can be resolved peacefully.  As you know, we continue to have our concerns that that hasn't happened and that there has been violence.  We have continually encouraged and continue to encourage the authorities to allow for peaceful protest and for the right to peaceful assembly.  And beyond that, we'll continue to be in touch with the leaders of the two main parties, trying to make sure that they can resolve their differences.
  So what if anything is the UN doing? Watch this site.

 
  

Tuesday, February 17, 2015

On Bangladesh, Inner City Press Asks UN of Oscar Fernandez Taranco's (Lack of) Travel, Communication


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, February 17 -- Amid the violence in Bangladesh,UN official Oscar Fernandez Taranco appeared on the schedule of US Assistant Secretary of State Nisha Biswal on February 11, to meet at 3:45 pm. Inner City Press surmised, since Taranco was previously sent to Dhaka for the UN, that it was about Bangladesh. And the UN confirmed this, later.
 
  On February 17, Inner City Press asked UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq:
Inner City Press: there was a report that Mr. [Oscar Fernández-]Taranco is going there on a visit, and this was denied by the Permanent Mission here, Ambassador [Abdul] Momen, who said he has not spoken to him.  Can you… is Mr. Taranco seeking to go to the country, and why hasn't he spoken with the Permanent Representative here in New York?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Well, right now on the first question:  There's currently no plan at this point for Mr. Fernández-Taranco to travel back to Bangladesh.  He has been there before.  He has been tasked by the Secretary-General to be in contact with the Government and the opposition and he will continue with those efforts.  But, at this point, like I said, there's no travel to announce.
  Back on February 12, Inner City Press asked UN Department of Political Affairs chief Jeffrey Feltman if Taranco in Washington had been addressing Bangladesh. Feltman genially replied, yes, that among other issues. Even though Taranco, as a product of the UN's so-called Five Year Rule, moved to the Peacebuilding Department, he is still the UNHQ's man on Bangladesh.
 Later at the February 12 noon briefing, UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, saying he was answering Inner City Press' questions from the day before, confirmed that Taranco's meeting with the US State Department's Biswal had addressed Bangladesh. Was that so hard?
On February 11, Inner City Press had asked Dujarric: UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric on February 11 said:

Inner City Press: Mr. Taranco is still involved in this issue.  I notice that he's meeting this afternoon with Nisha Biswal, the US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia.  Is it fair to assume that that's what that meeting is about?  And how would you characterize it?
Spokesman Dujarric:  I think it's not fair to assume anything.  I'll now see if I can actually get you some facts, as opposed to assumptions.
 But seven hours later, there was nothing. Then on February 12, Feltman then Dujarric.
When on February 5 Inner City Press asked the UN, which uses Bangladesh soldiers as peacekeepers, this ensued:
Inner City Press: In Bangladesh, the… things seem to be getting worse.  Former Prime Minister has been charged with arson and… which she says she doesn't do.  The power's been turned off to the opposition party and basically the authorities are using violence on protestors.  So, I'm wondering, what's the response of the Secretary-General?  Is there any [Department of Political Affairs] or other UN involvement in trying to mediate it?  And with senior military officials making statements about what they'll do to civilians, what's the impact on Bangladesh as a peacekeeping contributing country?
Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq:  Well, the political process is separate and apart from the issue of peacekeepers in UN missions, who are under the control ultimately of the mission.  Regarding the situation in Bangladesh, we've made our concerns known.  As you know, officials, including the senior officials from our Department for Political Affairs, have repeatedly visited Bangladesh, trying to meet with the leaders there and make sure that the crisis can be resolved peacefully.  As you know, we continue to have our concerns that that hasn't happened and that there has been violence.  We have continually encouraged and continue to encourage the authorities to allow for peaceful protest and for the right to peaceful assembly.  And beyond that, we'll continue to be in touch with the leaders of the two main parties, trying to make sure that they can resolve their differences.
  So what if anything is the UN doing? Watch this site.

 
  

Thursday, March 14, 2013

As Ban Ki-moon Launches Book with Tom Plate, Kim Sook's Missile Joke, Sri Lanka in the Princeton Club: How the UN Works



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 12 -- The UN's story should be better told. That was the stated goal when the idea for Tom Plate's “Conversations with Ban Ki-moon” was born, in 2010, at Singapore's Mission to the UN.

   Plate had profiled Lee Kuan Yew as his first “Giant of Asia” and let it be known that he saw Ban as a future Giant in his series.

   Fifteen hours of interviewing later, a smallish 236-page book was belatedly launched Tuesday night at the Princeton Club in Manhattan. 

  The crowd included some press, some students from Loyola Marymount where Plate has taught for the last three years, and Permanent Representatives from the UK, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Kazakhstan and South Korea. 

  Ambassador Kim Sook, saying he's known Ban for thirty years, joked that he prefers book launches to missile launches. The word armistice, however, was not used.

  Ban said when he read the first draft of the book, it seemed to him too light hearted, like EZ-Listening music. But, he said, it might work in letting people know how the UN works.

  And how does the UN work? Earlier on Tuesday, Ban met for more than two hours with the Group of 77, mostly about “post-2015 development” but also his delayed plan for mobility, which has been opposed by staff, at least in New York. 

  Ban used the word “selfish” in referring to some of this opposition; this was followed by a Staff Union vote of No Confidence. This was not mentioned Tuesday night. But Ban's Under Secretary General for Management, Yukio Takasu of Japan, was in attendance.

   How does the UN work? Also present was the Ambassador of Sri Lanka, Palitha Kohona. The UN's failure to speak and act while 40,000 civilians were killed in Sri Lanka in 2009 is one of the UN's biggest failures under Ban, among with its unexplained dismissal of claims for bringing cholera into Haiti.

  The anti-Tamil impulse of Sri Lanka's ruling family was in fact raised by Lee Kuan Yew in Plate's first Giant of Asia book.

   But what's been done since? Ban recently accepted what's called a “whitewash” report about Sri Lanka from Japan's Ambassador Nishida, along with Bangadesh's Ambassador Monem, Kohona, the Permanent Representative of Romania and the Deputy Permanent Representative of Nigeria.

   The UN didn't release the report, which Ban went on to praise when asked in Geneva about Sri Lanka. And Ambassador Nishida, when Inner City Press asked for the report, said it would first be given to all member states.

   Kohona on Tuesday in the Princeton Club's lobby told Inner City Press this hand-over took place last week, but not in the UN -- in the Japanese mission. It seems timed to counteract the belated talk of accountability at the Human Rights Council in Geneva. This is how the UN works: Giants of Asia, indeed.

   Hardly mentioned Tuesday night was Africa, where most of the UN's work is. On March 5 Inner City Press asked Ban, at the Security Council stakeout, about inaction on 126 rapes in Minova by the Congolese Army, which the UN supports.

  After the rapes, under Ban's stated Human Rights Due Diligence Policy, the UN support was to have stopped. But it still hasn't.

   Two days later his Department of Peacekeeping Operations, led for the fourth time in a row by a Frenchman -- this is how the UN works -- offered belated spin to friendlier journalists about threatening two unidentified units of the Congolese Army with loss of support if they don't prosecute by an unspecified deadline.

  So has Ban allowed his Human Rights Due Diligence Policy to be less than meaningful, under France's Under Secretary General for Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous?

   Inner City Press' critique of this has given rise to a formal but undisclosed complaint against it, in a Kafka-esque system without rules. The head of the Ban's Department of Public Information was in attendance Tuesday night, and quite polite. 

  But despite requests, including from New York Civil Liberties Union then the new Free UN Coalition for Access, there are still no due process rules for journalists at the UN. We will have more on this, how the UN does not work.

   We will also have more about the book, about mobility, Sri Lanka, Africa, Asia and Haiti. Watch this site.