UNCA's Giampaolo Pioli Said "Take Out" Sri Lanka Conflict of Interest Story, "Nothing is False" But "I'll Sue You"

By Matthew Russell Lee, part of a series

UNITED NATIONS, November 19 -- Press access and answers to questions at the UN have been in decline since at least 2011. Now in 2014 the new Free UN Coalition for Access is combating the trend, which can only be done by naming names and providing specifics, now including audio. And so this series.

  In today's audio clip, Giampaolo Pioli as President of the United Nations Correspondents Association said of a Press story about him, "take it out" -- that is, remove the entire story from the Internet -- because it is false or, he then says, "basically false."

  But Pioli first complained that he still found online (audio) facts of which he admitted "nothing is false" -- that before unilaterally deciding to screen a Sri Lankan government film denying war crimes he had rented one of his Manhattan apartments to Palitha Kohona, Sri Lanka's Ambassador to the UN.

  What was reported wasn't false, but Pioli ordered "take it out" and off the Internet. That is censorship. One question is, why is Pioli now seeking to return as head of UNCA, which he turned into the UN Censorship Alliance?

  The same clip has Pioli's then Vice President, himself a censor, here, deriding Inner City Press as a blogger someone "using" UNCA. In fact, after seeing how it could be used for censorship, Inner City Press quit UNCA and co-founded the new Free UN Coalition for Access.

   On September 6, 2011 without consulting with other UNCA board members Pioli used the UN's Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium and UNCA's now-debased logo to host a war crimes denial film by Sri Lanka's government. Inner City Press reported on the event, here. 

  Numerous "emergency" UNCA meetings followed, including about Inner City Press' coverage of Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row to head UN Peacekeeping despite his role during the Rwanda genocide of 1994; there was an amateurish statement drafted by Pioli about ethics. 

  Then Pioli, supported by Agence France Presse, said that no dissent, no matter how short, could to appended to the statement. Audio clip here. AFP even said, send it out yourself - seemingly an invitation to write about the issue, which happened and led to threats to oust Inner City Press from the UN, which Voice of America requested saying it had the support of AFP andReuters, which then tried a cover-up, here.

(There was was an even more free press unfriendly "apology" drafted by Pioli, as well as his UNCA stirring up death threats which have been ongoing -- but that's another story.) 

   The day of Pioli's UNCA screening -- without UNCA board approval or even notice -- of Sri Lanka's war crimes denial, attempts at outright censorship began.

  Pioli had a financial relationship with Sri Lanka's ambassador Palitha Kohona, renting Kohona one of Pioli's Manhattan apartments. Inner City Press was told if it persisted in reporting this, Pioli would get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. Inner City Press offered to run a response by Pioli, of any length, but the demand was that the article be removed from the Internet in its entirety: pure censorship. This is UNCA's past and seemingly future; watch for the next installment in this series.

Pioli & Ban Ki-moon, Sri Lanka war crimes denial not shown. UN Photo/Mark Garten

  Here is an audio clip in which Pioli while he was president of UNCA told Inner City Press that it should not report what a UN Assistant Secretary General said in a public place. Audio here. 

  Pioli would go on to order that an article about his own conflict of interest regarding Sri Lanka be taken down from the Internet or he would get the Press thrown out of the UN.

   So Pioli wants to ride again. After seeking the ouster of the investigative Press from the UN -- promising to bring it about, and demanding the removal of articles from the Internet -- he seeks to re-assume UNCA's presidency, endorsed by his two-year figurehead fill-in, Pamela Falk.  He is endorsing a slate of media that supported the ouster of the investigative Press, one of which then sought to censor even that, click here.

  To show how far the UN has fallen, consider that Pioli in September 2011 wrote and proposed this statement for UNCA's Executive Committee to issue:

"GiamPioli [at] aol.com; dear Colleagues, I propose to consider for a vote this statement  but I am more than happy to discuss  again

   UNCA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE"

  That is Giampaoli Pioli, the once and future president of the UN's Censorship Alliance. The above draft, by Pioli, was at the request of Agence France Presse, after an inquiry by the French mission to the UN. AFP's reporter wrote: "I am writing to you to request some kind of action by UNCA over a story published by Inner City Press on Friday which has caused serious damage to AFP. Inner City Press published a story about the new head of UN peacekeeping" -- that would be, Herve Ladsous. We will have more on this.

  Neither in 2011 and 2012 nor since has Pioli asked any critical questions at the UN, or pushed for greater access for journalists - quite the opposite. Herented one of his apartments to the ambassador of a country he later let screen a war crimes denial film in the UN under the sponsorship of UNCA, without even checking with other Executive Committee members much less recusing himself. 

  After Inner City Press reported on this, as later revealed by a Freedom of Information Act request to US state media Voice of America, "the lawyer's at our UNCA president's newspaper are preparing their libel lawsuit" against Inner City Press, click here for that. No lawsuit was ever filed, and how could it be? Pioli DID rent one of his apartment to the ambassador whose war crimes denial film he later screened. It was simply pressure to censor the coverage. Later it showed up in Italian, here.

  Pioli hosts UN officials and those whose votes he wants at a Long Island mansion he rents out, for tens of thousands of dollars a month, during the summer. He makes campaign contributions to politicians he is supposed to be covering. Small but telling, in the UN Press Briefing Room he gave a gift to the UN Deputy Spokesperson. This is the past and future UNCA.

  And how would this further decayed UNCA advocate even to maintain media access at the UN?

  In September 2014 during the General Assembly debate week, Ban's chief of peacekeeping blocked a Press camera (Vine here), and the French mission ordered all non-French journalists to leave a briefing by President Francois Hollande in the UN Press Briefing Room.

   The new Free UN Coalition for Access actively opposed both of these, as well as restrictions on getting to the General Assembly stakeout and on taking photographs from the General Assembly photographers booth. After making the latter complaint to UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric on October 17, Dujarric's office two hours later promoted a meeting ostensibly to discuss "access problems," by UNCA a/k/a UN's Censorship Alliance.

  Now the UNCA "minutes" and partial list of grievances have been provided to FUNCA. They are laughable. The ejection of non-French journalists from the UN Briefing Room is not mentioned, nor the physical blocking of filming.

  Instead, UNCA under figurehead Pamela Falk and sidekick complains that there is too much news during the General Assembly -- they want fewer side events -- and apparently too many journalists at the UN: they want a private wi-fi password leaving the current open wi-fi only for "guests and others."

   The current and seemingly future vice president of UNCA came to the UN Security Council stakeout to inform FUNCA, apparently officially, that the recent for less news is only from one Board member, naming her. But the minutes are the minutes, and the UN Censorship Alliance's function is what it is: anathema to press freedom.

  Tellingly, one of the UNCA proposals is for a booklet co-signed by Ban Ki-moon and UNCA.

  With this bogus list and presumably seeking that booklet, they say that the UN's Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit proposes to meet only with their Executive Committee. This is akin to a fake wrestling match, in which the two sides pretend to fight, for an audience.

  The Free UN Coalition for Access has told MALU, but repeats: if they even aspire to legitimacy, the UN must reach out to all journalists, at the UN and ideally beyond, and not that subset which pay UNCA money. That is a decidedly partial subset: a fake wrestling match. And now it seems it will get even worse. 

  During the October 16 UN General Assembly session to elect five new members to the UN Security Council, the UN's Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit came into the GA photographers' booth and said that only "wire service" photographers could remain.

  But MALU has not offered any definition of "wire service," in this new media age. The new Free UN Coalition for Access has demanded such a definition, most recently of Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric at the October 17 UN noon briefing. Video here. 

 Dujarric, saying he was quoting a Supreme Court justice on another topic, said, What is a wire service? I know one when I see one. 

   This is, as it were, the definition of arbitrary.

 The UN while throwing out media from workspace gives its UN Censorship Alliance a large room, which it then limits to those that pay it money in dues. Here's how it works: a new media at the UN is told, from the pinnacle of the UN's Censorship Alliance, to pay UNCA $90 and UNCA will get the UN to give the media UN office space. 

     Today's UN Censorship Alliance is unlikely to get any meaningful media access problem addressed -- members its Executive Committee have, in fact, caused or colluded in many of the decreases in access. They drafted a rule with MALU to eliminate journalist workspace at the Security Council stakeout; they withheld audio tapes and transcripts of a Ban "interview" with them, even from their own members.

   During last month's General Debate, journalists weren't even been able to go to the General Assembly stakeout without an escort from MALU -- an escort that often did not come on time, or come at all.

  There was, as well, substantive censorship. Most recently of October 16, media photographing the UN General Assembly vote for new Security Council members were ordered NOT to photograph the tables of the voters. Inner City Press for FUNCA resisted, and discussed this issue along with the elections (and Cambodia) on Huffington Post Live's "World Brief" on October 17, here.

On September 27 while Inner City Press filmed from within the GA stakeout area, UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous came over and blocked -- or Banned -- the filming, demanding to know what it was for. Vine here. Then Ladsous canceled the scheduled public Q&A stakeout on Mali.

  While the new Free UN Coalition for Access challenged this censorship, on September 27 at the stakeout and following up the next week, the old UNCA has done nothing about it. In fact, UNCA big wigs have been happy to takeprivate briefings from Ladsous and others, as access at the UN for less "insider" correspondents has continued to decline.

  The Free UN Coalition for Access targeted these censorship practices in aSeptember 29 flier, online, in the UN including on the "open" bulletin board it got the UN to install (the flier was torn down, one can only imagine by whom, but has gone back up.)

   Now, in a typical UN charade, the very UNCA which oversaw this decrease in access belatedly says it is concerned and conducts UN-promoted meetings that are akin to faux, scripted wrestling matches with fake punches. This is the UNCA that played softball soccer with Ban, promoting and allowing him a photo op.

  Many of these promotions are signed by UNCA figurehead Pamela Falk of CBS, nowhere seen during noon briefing fights about media access. Meanwhile the UN Spokesperson's office is promoting a for-pay event for UNCA, by taping a flier for it on its counter. This is the UN's Censorship Alliance.

  The Free UN Coalition for Access has told the UN, again on October 16, that it must address and reverse its blocking of press access, and that if it needs input it must hold a meeting open to all journalists who cover the UN, not just its chosen UNCA -- the UN's Censorship Alliance -- which has become akin to a company-created and supported union. 

   Ban's spokesperson's office declined to criticize the September 27 censorship, nor Ladsous' spokesman subsequently asking another media to confirm that it would not air an on the record interview with Ladsous' deputy Edmond Mulet about the UN bringing cholera to Haiti. Video here.

  In fact Ban's Spokesman played a part in, at least defending, a French-only briefing in the UN Press Briefing Room.

On September 23, the entourage of French President Francois Hollanderepeatedly but unsuccessfully ordered the UN accredited Press to leave theUN's Press Briefing Room.  Video here.

  On September 25 when the Free UN Coalition for Access asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, who peaked out from the VIP / Green Room behind the Press Briefing Room, about the incident, he said sometimes countries try to reserve the Room.

   Asked if other countries had done so during this General Assembly, Dujarric said yes.

   Inner City Press then asked Dujarric which other countries, beyond his native France:

“based on your answer at today's noon briefing, please state which countries during this UNGA have used the UN Press Briefing Room for briefing not open to all UN correspondents, other than France at 11 am on September 23. Also, what was your role on September 23 around 11 am in the room behind the Press Briefing Room podium?”

 This has been Dujarric's response:

Subject: please state which countries..
From: Stephane Dujarric [at] un.org
Date: Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 1:06 PM
To: Inner City Press
Cc: funca

I don't have the information on the first point for you. On the second, I'm not sure that I understand it except that I was just looking into the room. I tend to be a curious person.

Stephane Dujarric (Mr.)
Spokesman for the Secretary-General
United Nations Headquarters

   FUNCA is left wondering: ARE there any other countries? The question has been asked again by FUNCA, elsewhere. And it has been on HuffPost Live, here. Watch this site.

Footnote: as noted the old UN Correspondents Association, which is given privileged status and set-aside first questions nearly always used for softballs, has done nothing in recent years to improve or even defend press access. In fact, members of UNCA's Executive Committee have tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN, and there have been no reforms since. It's become the UN's Censorship Alliance. They provide Ban Ki-moon with photo ops playing soccer with them. This is today's UN - and FUNCA is fighting to hold the UN to its stated principles.

   

After UN Spokesperson Overrides Russia Q&A on Ukraine, As Didn't Israel, Tells FUNCA "It's All About You." Well, No: Need a Policy

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 27 -- What is the UN policy on postponing in deference to particular countries' speakers the noon briefings by the UN Spokesperson's Office? To whom does that Office answer?

  On March 27 after the UN General Assembly voted on a Ukraine resolution and Russian ambassador Vitaly Churkin prepared to speak at the GA stakeout, Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access tweeted at the UN Spokesperson that the noon briefing should be briefly delayed.

  This was not without precedent at all -- on October 1, 2013 the Spokesperson's Office delayed the noon briefing during the entirety of a speech by Israel.

  After asking Churkin about Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's meeting in Ukraine with the leader of the Svoboda Party -- Churkin said it was disturbing as Svoboda has been characterized as racist -- and without any response from the Spokesperson's Office, Inner City Press ran to the briefing room, camera still uncovered, audio recorder still running, hoping to find the briefing not yet started or at least still going.

  Arriving there at 12:10 pm, the briefing was already over. Inner City Press went and told deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq, "I wish you'd delayed it" to allow coverage of both Churkin's stakeout and the noon briefing.

  Haq replied that there had been seven to eight people in the briefing room, so he began. Actually, as the UN video shows, it was nearly empty and Haq joked, "Full house, I see" - click here to view.)

  But when his Office delayed the briefing for Israel in October, there were more people waiting, including Inner City Press. So, for FUNCA, Haq was asked what the policy is.

  Haq said, "Matthew, you want a policy where it's all about you." Audio here.

  Well, the UN and Ban's Spokesperson's Office should have a policy, both so journalists can know if and when to run, and so that countries are treated equally, whatever Ban or his spokespeople thinks of them, or whatever they are saying about Ban.

   A week ago when new / old UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric phoned in a briefing from Moscow on his eleventh day on the job, the questions Haq chose for him all pointed in one direction, the type of favoritism growing ever worse at the UN.

   Dujarric's deputy Farhan Haq, who ended his truncated eight minutes of Q&A on the "rest of the world" by chiding Inner City Press for asking too many questions -- actually, only South Sudan and a UN Staff Union protest against Ban Ki-moon's mobility plan -- selected for Dujarric only one type of question.

  In fact, the questions were repetitive, trying to get a statement from Ban even if only spokesperson-mediated that the Crimea referendum was illegal. Haq called on a series of executive committee members of the old UN Correspondents Association, which previously lobbied Dujarric to try to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. Several of these, it has been noted there is no record of them writing or reporting about Ukraine. But this is how the UN works, or doesn't work, now.

   Earlier on March 20, the US announced a series of new sanctions including against Bank Rossiya. Inner City Press thought this should be asked to Dujarric in Moscow, if Ban or Putin or Lavrov had raised it. But none of those called on by Haq even asked the question.  We'll have more on this.

  Last week, Dujarric did not provide a Press requested read-out of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's meeting earlier in the week with Estonia's foreign minister, who was captured on leaked audio recounting that the same snipers may well have shot both police and protesters in Ukraine. No read-out?

  Adding to unanswered questions still not answered by March 27 ranging from Thailand to Terje Roed-Larsen, before 8 am on March 14 Inner City Press asked Dujarric:

  Please state if the Secretary General / Secretariat views the "invitation" from Thailand for the SG to become involved as valid, given questions raised about it in Thailand, see, http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/399785/surapong-seeks-to-quell-un-plan-revolt

In the most recent Situation Report on CAR (as of March 12) it is said

"Targeted violence against minority groups continues countrywide, including in Bangui. Over 20,000 people are besieged and threatened by armed militias in 18 different locations. The majority of them are calling for humanitarian assistance leaving these enclaves for safer areas in or outside the country."

Please confirm that the referred-to "minority groups" are Muslims, and if so please explain why the UN would not identify them as such.

Please state what if anything the UN system has done on Navi Pillay's January 20 statement that France's actions in CAR left Muslim communities vulnerable to attack.

The questions about dollar a year envoys, Nigeria, UN Global Compact member and money laundering / corruption probe, service of Haiti cholera case papers and UN Media Alert and others have not been responded to in any way - please explain.

  Here is the totality of Dujarric's office answers to the CAR question:

On the Central African Republic, officials throughout the UN system have identified specific minorities who have been targeted in specific incidents, and you will have seen the many statements and press releases concerning violence against Muslims.

  Tellingly, the question about UN Peacekeeping run by Herve Ladsous was not even mentioned in this cursory response, nor does the paragraph on CAR show any actual follow up to Navi Pillay's statement about France putting Muslims at risk. 

  These were the other questions asked by Inner City Press at 8 am on March 13:

-While still requesting response with regard to Mr. Roed-Larsen, Mr. Joseph V. Reed et al, here is a more systematic question:

Has the SG yet prepared the guidelines required by Resolution 67/255? Following the GA's decision on $1/year contracts in April 2013, how many individuals currently have $1/year contracts, and who are they?

To assist your answer:

A/RES/67/255, 73rd plenary meeting 12 April 2013 e, excerpt

...63. Stresses that one-dollar-a-year contracts should be granted only under exceptional circumstances and be limited to high-level appointments, and requests the Secretary-General to prepare guidelines regarding the use of these contracts, along the same lines of those established for when-actually-employed appointments, and to report thereon, in the context of his next overview report, to the General Assembly at the main part of its sixty-ninth session;

Third: What is the UN's (or UNMISS') response to South Sudan's information minister Michael Makuei saying “When you go and interview a rebel who ran away from here and you come and play that interview on government territory, and you know that man is not friendly -- this is not the meaning of journalism. You interview him outside and publish it, whatever you do, outside, but when you come and disseminate this poisonous information inside South Sudan, it is an offense.”

What is UNMISS' (or the UN's) response to that, and to Wau University students petition for the UN to leave Bahr al Ghazal. To assist your answering:

“Winnie Babihuga, the world body’s representative in Western Bahr el Ghazal state welcomed the student’s petition and promised to forward it to its headquarters in New York.”

Has the petition yet arrived? This is an ongoing request to be informed if and when it does.

  Even rushing to hold a ten minute briefing, the Spokesperson's Office hasn't answered questions posed TWO WEEKS AGO.

   Dujarric began on March 10 with questions raised two weeks ago (and before) about censorship and his replacement atop the News & Media Division and UN Accreditation UNanswered.

  Tellingly, some in the press briefing room applauded before Dujarric even said a word. He read a statement for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about "The Ukraine."

  In the question and answer session, four of the first five questioners Dujarric called on were among the 15 executive committee members of theUnited Nations Correspondents Association, with which Dujarric has some history.

  Inner City Press asked if Ban Ki-moon had the Haiti cholera court papers taped to his residence door on January 20 -- no answer -- and for UN response to Channel 4's new video showing abuse by the military of Sri Lanka, from which the UN accepts peacekeepers and even Shavendra Silva as an adviser. (Dujarric said he hasn't seen the video; it is online here: warning, graphic).

  On the case against the UN for bringing cholera to Haiti, Inner City Press asked Dujarric to confirm that the court papers were taped to the door of Ban's residence on January. Dujarric declined to confirm - or deny - this.Video on Haiti (and Sri Lanka) here.

  As it did days ago, Inner City Press asked for the status of selecting Dujarric's replacement as head of the News and Media Division, in charge of UN media accreditation. No answer has been given about this status. This is of concern.

 A flier the Free UN Coalition for Access posted on this topic, on the "non-UNCA" bulletin board it advocated for, was torn down on March 7. At a second briefing, by the CTBTO, on March 10 Dujarric called first on UNCA, then on others. 

  When Inner City Press thanked CTBTO's Zerbo on behalf of FUNCA - the point is, there cannot be only one organization given UNCA's track record of attempted censorship and even more now with Dujarric's history with them -- Dujarric tried to move on (back to UNCA) before the related question on France's nuclear tests in the Pacific was answered. 

  It is a new era, requiring a new approach.

  Two years ago Dujarric was re-introduced to UN journalist as the chief of the News & Media Division, in a reception in what the UN called "UNCA Square." And then the censorship attempts began.

  A journalist for Iranian TV, found to have a rubber gun which was a prop in an independent film he was working on, had his UN accreditation revoked, permanently. Dujarric was in charge of Media Accreditation, and Inner City Press asked him for a justification of this "one strike and you're out policy." No answer was ever provided by Dujarric.

  Also in his Media Accreditation role, Dujarric chastised Inner City Press for daring to go stand outside and try to cover a meeting of Ban's Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations, which included controversial Sri Lankan military figure Shavendra Silva. After the Sri Lankan government directed a complaint letter to the aforementioned UNCA, Inner City Press was told it could not cover the meetings.

Inner City Press, then on the board of UNCA, was not notified when the organization's then president agreed to screen a Sri Lankan government film denying war crimes. After it published an article noting that the UNCA president had in the past rented one of his apartments to Palitha Kohona, Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative to the UN, demands were made that Inner City Press remove the article from the Internet.

UNCA took to sending copies of correspondence to Dujarric, about articles Inner City Press had written about officials and diplomats of Dujarric's native France. Finally, UNCA first vice president Louis Charbonneau of Reuters sent a complaint against Inner City Press to Dujarric, calling it "for the record."

More recently, Charbonneau has gotten one of his complaints to Dujarric banned from Google's Search, using a filing under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act -- straight up censorship. What does Dujarric say?

In fact, Dujarric solicited complaints against Inner City Press from otherbig-media UNCA board members, through a private, including through non-UN email address. Freedom of Information Act responses show thatUNCA board members met with "the UN" to request that Inner City Press be thrown out. Once Inner City Press published some of these, Dujarric on June 29, 2012 asked to meet Inner City Press.

  Dujarric told Inner City Press not to refer to Ban Ki-moon as "Wan Ki-moon" and not to refer to Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row atop UN Peacekeeping, as The Drone despite Ladsous proposing the UN's first use of drones and refusing to answer Press questions about it. 

  This and a specious criticism for having signed Nobel Peace Prize Winner Tawakul Karman of Yemen into the UN, where she dared speak on the UN microphone after a Security Council meeting on Yemen, were linked by Dujarric to re-accreditation he controlled.

  Criticism of stories, coverage and even tweets is fine -- but when done by an official in charge of accreditation, and even tied to accreditation, we call it what it is: censorship.

Disgusted, Inner City Press and another long time correspondent from Brazil founded the Free UN Coalition for Access as an alternative to the insider UNCA, which did not for example offer any defense to the cameraman thrown out for the rubber gun. (Reuters' Charbonneau, in fact, wrote a story playing up the Iranian angle.)

  But Dujarric became the interlocutor for FUNCA. He said only UNCA was needed. After convening a meeting between FUNCA and UNCA, at which Inner City Press openly said "this is on the record" and UNCA president Pamela Falk of CBS said, "He's going to write about this," Dujarric sent Inner City Press a letter which claimed the meeting was off the record and said FUNCA was not a DPI interlocutor for reform.

  So on March 20, it was a UNCA executive committee top heavy circus, here were their election results, compared to votes for that position in December 2011, those called on in the short March 20 Q&A in bold:

Dec '13 Dec '11

Prez: * 78 [85] Pamela Falk, CBS News TV and Radio

1st VP * 74 [79] Kahraman Haliscelik, TRT Turkish Radio & TV

2d VP * 48 71 Masood Haider, Dawn, Pakistan

* 48 [71] Sylviane Zehil, L’Orient Le Jour

3d VP * 55 [62] Erol Avdovic, Webpublicapress

38 Ali Barada, An-Nahar/France 24

Trez * 81 [71] Bouchra Benyoussef, Maghreb Arab Press

Sect * 79 [81] Seana Magee, Kyodo News

Members at Large:

* 57 1. Nabil Abi Saab , Alhurra TV (US BBG)

* 57 2. Talal Al-Haj ,Al-Arabiya News channel

22 3. George Baumgarten , Jewish Newspapers, Nation Media

* 50 4. Sherwin Bryce-Pease, South African Broadcasting (SABC)

* 51 5. Zhenqiu Gu, Xinhua News Agency

* 69 6. Melissa Kent, CBC/Radio Canada

* 56 7. Evelyn Leopold, Huffington Post Contributor

49 8. J. Tuyet Nguyen, German Press Agency DPA

* 67 9. Michelle Nichols, Reuters

41 10. Edwin Nwanchukwu, News Agency of Nigeria

27 11. Cia Pak, Scannews

*54 12. Valeria Robecco, ANSA

* 54 13. Sangwon Yoon , Bloomberg

  Some of the elected are new and their positions on UNCA Executive Committee members trying to get other (investigative) media thrown out of the UN, and the need to preclude this and UNCA leaders' anonymous social media trolling, are not yet known. (Some not elected were among the better / more diverse candidates.)

  There have been no reforms since, quite the opposite. Dujarric, who earlier refused a New York Civil Liberties Union request that the UN provide due process to journalists, continued the Kafka-esque atmosphere in March 2013 when Reuters and Agence France-Presse filed stealth complaints leading with how Inner City Press asked a question to Herve Ladsous. 

  When Dujarric's Accreditation Unit led a raid on Inner City Press' office, photos from which quickly appeared on BuzzFeed, Dujarric denied any role in giving out the photos. But the published photos are identical to the ones his unit took that day.

  Since the letter with the false "off the record" claim, the raid and photos and attempt to censor tweets, there has been very little contact (though there was an attempt to essentially ban FUNCA, another limitation on freedom of association, speech and press). FUNCA has continued, working with UN-focused journalists not only in New York but as far afield as Somaliland and Colombia.

  Now Stephane "The Censor" Dujarric is the spokesperson. Can he use this position to pursue the censorship he's sought for the past two years? FUNCA opposes it, and says these questions must be answered. Watch this site.

   

After French Mission Asserts Diplomatic Impunity, Araud Shouts of Romain Serman NYPD Record On Which His Mission Declined to Comment

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 14 -- When does diplomatic immunity become diplomatic impunity? 

  Last week Inner City Press compared the high profile case of Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade who was indicted in connection with allegedly underpaying a domestic worker with an earlier case of a French diplomat Romain Serman who was taken into police custody while attempting to buy cocaine, according to NYPD records.

  Inner City Press had asked the French mission to comment on the NYPD record and Serman's case but was told only that it was a "hostile act" if the records, also including leaked documents showing France's domination of the UN with regard to former colonies in Africa, remained online. Inner City Press rejected that French censorship bid.

  On January 13, after the comparison to the Indian diplomat, things escalated. Both on his way into the Security Council and again on his way out, French Ambassador Gerard Araud stopped to shout at Inner City Press about the story. 

  When Inner City Press began pointing out that his Mission had been asked for comment but had only responded with the "hostile act" threat, Araud shouted over the point, and made another threat, to sue.

Click here for video / audio by UNTV taken at the stakeout. And embedded below: "flag shot" with UNTV ambient audio.

  Perhaps Araud or the French Mission to the UN do not understand press freedom as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. This is what investigative journalism is: ferreting out such documents, seeking comment on that, analyzing and comparing them, publishing.

  The French mission should have commented, if it disputed the document or thought it should be amplified with some explanation -- for example, that citing diplomatic immunity made the arrest, but not this record, go away: 

"for attempting to purchase cocaine and marijuana from a known drug dealer...106th Street and Park Ave...claimed to be a diplomat from the country of France and displayed a ID which proved such. When...Miranda rights he refused to cooperate...was taken into custody"

  That is the story: that for attempting to buy cocaine, for which many are in prison in the US and New York State, a French diplomat not only was not treated similarly, but was allowed to leave the country and then return, now, as French consul in San Francisco. 

  That is the comparison to the Indian case, in which it is said that Ms. Khobragade is on a "watch list" and would be arrested if she tried to re-enter the US where her two children, 4 and 7, live.

  The Indian case was widely reported and it does not seem that the Indian foreign service or Ms. Khobragade threatened to sue any media for reporting it.

   That is Araud's French Mission's tactic, deployed in lesser ways against others covering the UN who in turn were so cowed, or so needed access to the French Mission, that they resisted any reporting of the French Mission's censorship and conditioning of access on positive coverage.

  Araud's threat to sue notwithstanding, the UN is so lawless that it allows its Media Accreditation unit and process to be open for bids at censorship or outright exclusion. After facing such from some atop the United Nations Correspondents Association (now the UN's Censorship Alliance), not unrelated to ces jeux francais, the new Free UN Coalition for Access asserts journalists' right to due process and, even regarding the French mission and French foreign policy, freedom of the press. Watch this site.

Footnote: ironically the day after Araud's threat, French president Francois Hollande said he would not try to sue, since he has immunity and it would be a double standard. But is France engaged, through Araud, in triple standards? Or is Araud on his own on this one and soon, as he foreshadowed, leaving the UN?

   

At UN, France's Araud Declares "Military End" of M23, Dead Rwandans Added to Statement

By Matthew Russell Lee, With exclusive audio

UNITED NATIONS, October 28 -- After the Security Council met about Eastern Congo at France's request on Monday afternoon, the first announcement came from French Ambassador Gerard Araud.

  He said the M23 has met its "military end." Others noted that while M23 left towns it had controlled, it was not wiped out, a la Sri Lanka (no matter how much it seems France would have liked that.)

   The meeting was called by France on the death of a Tanzanian member of the UN's Force Intervention Brigade or FIB. Inner City Press asked Araud of the UN's role in the military "finishing" of M23.

  Araud, more detailed than in the morning (see below) said that the Tanzanian soldier had his helmet on, but was shot in the neck. 

  Inner City Press understands that in the consultations, the 21 shells into Rwanda from the DRC were raised, leading to the death of two civilians and injuring of ten. Araud told Inner City Press, that is in the press statement. 

    On Friday the UN Security Council expressed concern about renewed hostilities in Eastern Congo, called for "maximum restraint and de-escalation" and for a political solution. Video here.

   Inner City Press asked if the UN Mission MONUSCO was involved in the fighting and was told, by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon spokesperson, no.

  On Sunday UN envoy Martin Kobler announced that a member of MONUSCO's Force Intervention Brigade or "FIB" had been killed -- how that happened without being involved remains UNclear. Then Kobler toured land re-taken by the Congolese Army which the UN supports, even in the face of mass rape.

  On Monday in front of the Security Council, French Permanent Representative Gerard Araud told the Press about the weekend's developments in the Eastern Congo, "What is happening is great. It is the collapse of the rebels... The DRC army is restoring the sovereignty of the country. It is exactly what we were hoping for."  Exclusive audio here.

  How is this consistent with the Security Council's calls, agreed to and actually drafted by France which "hold the pen" for the Council on the DRC, for "restraint" and for a political solution through the Kampala talks?

  Or some now ask, were those calls just lies or a diversion, at least for some that agreed to or issued them?

  When the Security Council traveled recently to Eastern Congo, France was allowed to hand-pick which media could go on the UN plane and cover the trip. These scribes, predictably, are not raising or reporting these questions.

  Inner City Press asked Araud, on Monday, if MONUSCO and its FIB had in fact been involved despite the statements that it was not.

  Araud said that the killed "Tanzanian was part of the Force Intervention Brigade. What I heard was the Intervention Brigade went to Kiwanja after the M23 withdrew, to protect civilians. At a roadblock, from the side of the M23, he was killed." He said Martin Kobler would brief the Council by video Monday afternoon.

  But will Kobler take and at last answer questions? Or has he fully inhabited the character of his boss Herve Ladsous, who refuses Press questions? Video here, UK coverage here.Here is Ladsous' history in the Great Lakes region, for France.

  Here is a question. Araud said, of the weekend's fighting, "It is exactly what we were hoping for. Who is the "we"? The Security Council? UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous? France? Is there any difference between the latter two? Watch this site.