Inner City Press Asks UN Official Takasu and UN Controller How They Missed Ashe's "Circus-Like" Corruption, Who Pays PGA's Guards' Flights

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 15 -- As the scandal unveiled in thecorruption charges against former UN General Assembly President John Ashe, Francis Lorenzo of South South News and others continues to expand, the compromised position of the UN Correspondents Association has come to the fore. The limited inquiry Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has requested from the Office of Internal Oversight Services will not get at this - nor at this:

 Ban accepted an award, the "South-South Award for Women's and Children's Health," from none other than Francis Lorenzo, who paid UNCA, his colleague Vivian Wang who took photos with Mrs. Ban at an "UNCA Ball," and Antigua and Barbuda's then Prime Minister Baldwin Spencer, here.

 On October 15, Inner City Press asked UN Under Secretary General for Management Yukio Takasu and the UN's Controller why the UN's audit is so limited, and how they missed such circus-like corruption while claiming their narrow bookkeeping is in order. Video here.

  As shown in the video, Takasu emphasized there is only so far the UN can look. But, Inner City Press asked, who paid for the plane tickets of Ashe's close protection? We'll have more on this.

 On October 15, Inner City Press asked Ban's Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq if Ban will return the award. From the transcript:

Inner City Press: The question I wanted to ask is, yesterday I was asking Stéphane [Dujarric] about some photographs that exist with the Secretary-General with some of the people named and even charged in the John Ashe case.  And he’d said a lot of people take photographs; things happen.  I wanted to ask you specifically about an award the Secretary-General received from, I guess, it’s called the South-South Award on Women and Children, and the photograph is a staged one… is, you know, a formal one, no photo-bombing, no selfie, of Mr. Frank Lorenzo, then-Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda, Baldwin Spencer, Vivian Wang, who’s named in the papers as well.  And I just wonder what, in retrospect… this is not something that will be captured by the OIOS [Office of Internal Oversight Services] audit that was mentioned, because none of… those two groups are not involved in this, and yet Mr. Lorenzo is; the Prime Minister of Antigua who’s pretty much through the… that paper seems to have been receiving funds.  Does an award like this get returned?  How does the UN system analyse what happened in this instance, and what are the repercussions?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Well, we are analysing what’s happened by doing an audit of the various actions.  So that is, like Stéphane has made clear, our initial step in the matter, and we’ll see where that leads.  If it leads to any particular course of action or any recommendations for where we’re to go next, we would follow it at that point.  But we’ve taken the initial step, and we’re just waiting to see what the results of that will be.

Inner City Press: There are other awards, but this is one in which the two groups Sun Kian Ip and Global Sustainability Foundation are not involved in any way, and yet one of the charged individuals is giving this award.  So would there… is there an expansion of this OIOS request?  Or how does this get looked at?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  First, we will see how this particular audit goes and we’ll see whether there’s any need for an expansion that the point.  But first we’re doing the initial step, and we’ll take that to its conclusion.

  Note: Lorenzo has been arrested; Baldwin is throughout the charge sheet and Vivian Wang was the money woman. But since this award was through IOSSC and SS-SCSD, Ban's limited inquiry will not get at it. We'll have more on this.


Spencer, Wang, Ban and Lorenzo, copy URL for source/ credit

   While UNCA does not represent all journalists accredited to cover the UN -- Inner City Press for example quit the group in 2012 with another Executive Committee member and co-founded the new Free UN Coalition for Access -- the UN gives it a privileged position, a large clubhouse on the third floor of the UN and, automatically, the first question at press conferences.

  But is that appropriate, given that UNCA received money from South South News, “NGO 1” in the filing against Ashe? Not only did UNCA receive money from South South News: it gave the group an “UNCA award” at a ceremony at the high-ceilinged Cipriani's restaurant on December 15, 2011.

  Inner City Press, which did not quit UNCA in fully ripened disgust in 2012, was present in December 2011 and witnessed, when Secretary General Ban Ki-moon came into Cipriani's, him being shepherded into a side room for photographs with Asian men in business suits who Inner City Press did not then recognize -- but now does.

 UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, when Inner City Press asked on October 13 about what it had seen, said perhaps Inner City Press had "condoned" it. Video here. But Inner City Press quit UNCA afterfinding conflicts of interest in it, and being "ordered" to not report on this.  From the October 13 transcript:

Inner City Press: I want to ask inevitably about the revelations about Mr. [John] Ashe and Frank Lorenzo and others.  And just as you… as the lead Spokesman, a person that travels around with the Secretary-General, how… what would you say to the photos that exist of the Secretary-General with David Ng, who was since indicted, and Frank Lorenzo and, particularly, in instances where it appears that groups that receive contributions from the two and then put them in a room to have photographs with the Secretary-General?  Is this something that… how does the Secretary-General view this in retrospect, and what's going to be done in the future?

Spokesman:  First of all, a photo of the Secretary-General with any individual should in no way be interpreted as a sponsorship or agreement.  It's just a photo.  The Secretary-General is very much a public figure, attends a lot of public events where there are a lot of people.  Sometimes people come up to him and ask to have their photo taken.  And it's done within the… within, obviously, the security constraints that need to be had.  I think whether it's the Secretary-General of the United Nations or anyone in leadership position, you will find when you travel with them that a lot of people want to have their photo taken with them.  Inasmuch as that is… we try to control that, sometimes it's difficult to do so.  I think the Secretary-General is as shocked as anyone in this building at the charges that were levelled at these two individuals.  And he's very disappointed at the accusations towards the United Nations.

Inner City Press:  obviously, to business interests having an actual kind of formal handshaking one, I guess I'll just say that that is worth something to them.  That's why they…

Spokesman:  I'm not… I'm not debating that point… [cross talk]  I'm just saying that having a picture of the Secretary-General with any individual should in no way be seen as a sponsorship, approval, making them BFF's or anything.

Inner City Press:  I guess I just want to be more specific.  If an event… and there's one that actually, as it turns out, I witnessed in Cipriani.  If the Secretary-General enters a large space and is then taken to a smaller space for such photographs, what's the basis for that, as opposed to people with selfies?  I mean, I understand what you're saying…

Spokesman:  I think, you know, if you were there, then maybe you condoned the event as well.  The issue is the Secretary-General attends a lot of events.  Sometimes there is a VIP reception.  None of it should be construed as anything as the Secretary-General having his picture taken with anyone.

Inner City Press: it's been a number of days now; I'm assuming that, if not you, OLA [Office of Legal Affairs], someone has read through this long FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation] affidavit.  And I want to just ask you again, because in it, it says that, after the… the… the official UN document about the Macau centre was procured, there was a separate payment to Mr. Ashe, separate communications with a UN official number one, who reissued the document as a… amended… revised for technical reasons, with the name of the company in it.  And it seems to me, even before you waiting for an OIOS [Office of Internal Oversight Services] investigation, the scope of which wouldn't touch that, who in the UN is actually… how does it work, first of all?  Who… which part of the UN amends documents after they're released?  Is it DGACM [Department for General Assembly and Conference Management]…?

Spokesman:  Listen, I'm not going to talk about the specifics of the case.  But it is clear that if the President of one of the legislative bodies in this Organization which controls the agenda, or a sponsoring country for resolution, asks the Secretary-General to amend a text, we serve as the Secretariat.  It's not… it's… it doesn't entail sponsoring of what's inside that text. 

  While Inner City Press' answer to the spokesman's "if you were there, then maybe you condoned the event as well," is that Inner City Press quit UNCA
 after finding conflicts of interest in it, and being "ordered" to not report on this, we'll have more on this.


On October 13, Inner City Press asked this follow up:

Inner City Press: I just want to directly ask you about the idea that it's sort of people struggling to get photos with the UN officials.  There was a… there was a peacekeeping day concert that was… for which solicitation of… you know, sponsorship was sought by a group called World Harmony Alliance, and it had nothing… the group has nothing to do with peacekeeping, but they paid for day.  They… they… in fact, the funder complained that he didn't get the promised photograph with Ban Ki-moon, but I wonder, what was… what's the UN's understanding when they take outside financial sponsorship for such a day?  I mean, former UN official [Ibrahim] Gambari was seen with the same group taking photographs on the fourth floor in the Millennium Hotel.  What's it all about?  What’s happening?

Spokesman:  What former officials do in hotels is really not of my purview.

Inner City Press:  Sure.  What about UN peacekeeping?

Spokesman:  I would take a look at that actual programme, but I would expect every part of the UN to do due diligence when it partners with an outside organization.  And just…  I'll leave it at that.

   On October 12, Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq, video here, transcript here:

Inner City Press: in light of these charges against John Ashe, Frank Lorenzo, and others, it's emerging that the Secretary-General, if not met, had staged photo opportunities with a number of the individuals charged.  And I wanted to know, in looking at this, do you have some kind of a comment on how these occurred, particularly in instances where they may have been arranged by a third party, been arranged by an organization that invited Ban Ki-moon and then received funds from South-South News or others and then put the two together on photograph?  Was that appropriate?  And what would be your response to… to OIOS [Office of Internal Oversight Services] looking at that or otherwise?

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, regarding that, as you're aware, the Office of Internal Oversight Services will do an audit.  They've been requested to do that, and so we'll be able to see whether there was any effect from either the relationship with these various groups, these two groups, the Sun Kian Ip Group and the Global Sustainability Foundation, and any of the monies received.  So, we'll await what they have to say about any of this.

Inner City Press:  But, given that Mr. Frank Lorenzo has been charged and he's now out on $2 million bail, he was head of South-South News, which spread $12 million, according to the documents, throughout the UN system.  So, what was, how, what was the criteria used to choose these two NGOs and not either South-South News or International Organization for South-South Cooperation or South South Steering Committee on Sustainable Development?  It seems like it's a very limited inquiry and…

Deputy Spokesman:  It's not really an inquiry.  It's an audit, and this is initial step.  If OIOS feels like there is something… there's a direction which they need to go as a result of these initial results, they're certainly free to do that, but we needed to get the ball rolling and have an initial step forward so that we can look into what exactly is the impact of the monies and the relationship with these groups.


John Ashe at UNCA with former president, after and before Pioli
click photo for source / credit

  Back in December 2011, shepherding Ban for this (compensated) photo op with dubious businessmen was Giampaolo Pioli, then as now the president of UNCA. South South News interviewed Pioli that night, bragging of the UNCA award it got / paid for, screenshot from video here.

    (For context it must be noted too that Pioli rented one of his Manhattan apartments to Palitha Kohona then granted Kohona's request as Sri Lanka's Ambassador to screen his government's war crimes denial film “Lies Agreed To” in the UN's Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium: this precipitated Inner City Press quitting UNCA, in full disclosure.)

   How can UNCA be given first questions to ask about a scandal involving South South News, from which UNCA took more then to which it gave an award? And what are the other implications?

  (In terms of Mr. Ng's desire for photo ops, Inner City Press is informed that he separately wanted a photo with US President Obama, and paid six figures to a middleman - who disappeared with the money. UNCA on the other hand, one wag noted, delivered Ban Ki-moon for photos at Cipriani's.)

  UNCA, it should be noted, has been and is open to business interested beyond Mr. Ng and South South News. Another UNCA awards ceremony was sponsored by a company called “Acoona;” the Italian oil company ENI pays the group money.

But UNCA's South South News connection, given what has been disclosed and charged this week, should at a minimum and as a first step disqualify UNCA from first questions from the UN, and from the continuation of its role.

 Consider: if it gave rise to criminal charges that South South News paid Ashe to get a GA document for Ng to show off in Macau, who about South South News paying UNCA, and UNCA delivering Ban for a photo op with Ng, that Ng could use for related purposes? We'll have more on this.

Wider, and going forward in this series, limiting UN investigation to OIOS - whose director of investigations Stefanovic has resigned, Inner City Press hereby exclusively reported on October 9 - looking at only two NGOs is laughable. The scandal is expanding: there is a pattern here, pattern and practice. Watch this site.

On Afghan Scandals, UNDP Promises Audit by End of Year, Others Not Provided

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 10, more here – Following up on Inner City Press exclusive publication of UN Development Program audits of its Law and Order Trust Fund Afghanistan, including double payments and other irregularities, whistleblowers this past summer exclusively provided Inner City Press with yet more damning documents. 

   On August 15, UNDP belatedly specified that "there is an ongoing investigation related to issues raised in documents published by Inner City Press" - but again uses this as a rationale for the lack of response not only by UNDP but also the UNAMA mission and UN Department of Safety and Security.

  On fifty five days later, despite two more requests from Inner City Press, UNDP has nothing on any results of its investigation. It has provided its response to the October 6 release by the US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction -- which says (other) audits will be released by the end of the year.

  When will any of these audits, including one promised in early September about Rwanda ghost consultancies, be released? 

  Inner City Press asked at the October 10 noon briefing, then in writing: "this is a request for UNDP's response to SIGAR's allegations -- and for the results of the probes UNDP answered on August 15 then in early September, about Afghanistan and Rwanda."

  The latter two have yet to be answered, other than "let me check and I will get back to you." On SIGAR, UNDP says "we will make publicly available an audit of our oversight of the monitoring agent before the end of this year." (The rest should go here.)

  On Rwanda ghost consultancies, UNDP told Inner City Press on September 3, "The results of the investigation will be available once it is complete." It has not been made available; nor has any update yet been provided. 

   As to what the documents and "issues raised" regarding Afghanistan are, see for now here, here, here and here, exclusively provided to Inner City Press by now-former UNDP staff. There are more documents, one more of which was published today, here.

In it, the same Colonel Bashary who threatened he would not tolerate these accusation turns up on the list of double payments. 

  This publication follows four days in which UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, formerly UNDP's spokesman, had not said whether an audit cited as a justification for not answering is the troubling audit completed in February 2014. 

  After Inner City Press asked again on August 15, UNDP's Dylan Lowthian provided this response, which we publish in full:

The 'Security Gap Project' (SGAP) which you have previously referred to was established to enhance security for all United Nations personnel working in Afghanistan. SGAP supported the Government to develop dedicated protection services to the United Nations to enable reconstruction, development and humanitarian activities to be carried out.

SGAP closed at the end of 2013. An audit of the project was carried out by Grant Thornton beginning in October 2013 and was completed in January 2014. Upon completion, the audit was issued in February 2014 and in-keeping with our commitment to transparency and accountability, was subsequently published on the UNDP global website, where it is publicly available to download. Audits are an essential part of our control mechanisms. They are conducted in order to identify both strengths and weaknesses in our programs as a way to increase our overall performance.

There is no second audit of the SGAP project.

As outlined by the Deputy Spokesperson at the briefing on Friday 8 August, there is an ongoing investigation related to issues raised in documents published by Inner City Press. In order to avoid jeopardizing the investigation process, the details of investigations are kept confidential and very limited information is made available to offices outside the UNDP Independent Office of Audit and Investigation, until the process of gathering relevant evidence and fact-finding has been completed. Should the matter be substantiated, the evidence gathered by the Office of Audit and Investigation will form the basis of remedial action.

  We'll have more on this. For now, Inner City Press is informed that now "the heat is on at the Kabul office" -- this is called a cover-up, and retaliation against (the wrong) whistleblowers.

 The UNDP Independent Office of Audit and Investigation COMPLETED an audit of this Closing the Security Gap on February 12, 2014, Report Number 1251, here.

  That report noted "incomplete recording of expenditure incurred in 2012. Salaries were not charged to the Project for the first
five months of 2012; lack of appropriate audit evidence on fuel charges amounting to $60,715 and rent expenses of $13,589; overstatement of indirect program support costs by $21,737."

   First, it was and is unacceptable for this UN to say it will not respond to troubling documents because it is conducting its own audit or "investigation," with no completion date named and no commitment to make it public. The new Free UN Coalition for Access is opposing and seeking to reverse this UN descent into obfuscation and stonewalling.

  Inner City Press asked Dujarric on August 11:

Inner City Press: last week there was some back and forth about the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) programmes in Afghanistan that resulted in Farhan [Haq] on Friday saying that an audit is ongoing, and while the audit is ongoing, there will be no comment.  At least that’s how I interpreted it.  But, I’ve looked into it and it turns out that there was an audit that was completed of this very program called “Closing the Security Gap” project, finished in February of this year by Grant Thorton.  It made a lot of negative findings, but… it wasn’t clear to me, since UNDP never directly answered the questions, is this audit that’s being cited the old audit?  Is there a new audit?  If there’s a new audit of the same programme, how much was paid for the former audit?  And can you explain how it’s appropriate for the Secretariat to not answer questions about DSS [Department of Safety and Security] and UNAMA [United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan] by referring to a UNDP audit that may already be completed?

Spokesman Dujarric:   My short answer is, show me what you have, what you’re referring to and I’m happy to look into it because I’m a little confused by the number of audits myself.

  Inner City Press immediately emailed the audit to Dujarric, along with these three questions:

1) is this the audit Farhan / UNDP were referring to at Friday's noon briefing and justifying not answering questions about DSS and UNAMA?

2) if a second audit of the Closing the Security Gap Project is underway, why? And, either way, how much was paid for the Grant Thorton Audit?

3) This is a requests for the Secretariat to respond to the references to DSS and UNAMA in the documents Farhan was responding to on Friday.

  There was no answer. Inner City Press asked Dujarric again on August 13:

Inner City Press: I’d asked you on Monday about this UNDP audit that was cited as a reason they were not answering a questions about [Department of Safety and Security] and UNAMA [United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan].  Have you been able to find out from them whether this February 2014 audit was the one that they’re citing now or is there a new audit?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I haven’t had a chance to actually follow-up but I will. 

 Two day later, nothing. So Inner City Press asked yet again.

 Before publishing any of the documents, Inner City Press posed questions to five UNDP spokespeople. But none even confirmed receipt -- including Abdel-Rahman Ghandour, the spokesperson who belatedly responded to Inner City Press' previous LOTFA exclusives.

 What changed, other than Inner City Press' subsequent reporting on UNDP Administrator Helen Clark's layoff campaign, and these new troubling questions?

 The questions were sent on August 5 to the following, without response for 72 hours: lead spokesperson Dheepa Pandian (out of the office from August 1 to 18), Mila Rosenthal and Helen Clark's personal spokesperson Christina Lo Nigro.

  After Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq to reply about the UN Secretariat's own role, Haq on August 8 read a statement from UNDP -- there will be no answer pending a UNDP audit. Video here.

   This is pure stonewalling. And can Ban Ki-moon's UN Secretariat's Department of Safety and Security and UNAMA Mission hide behind a UNDP investigation that may never be public? 

   After Haq refused another Inner City Press question, after the UNTV cameras turned off, Haq told Inner City Press that UNDP refused to answer the August 5 questions, below, due to "your people skills." Inner City Press deals perfectly well with numerous diplomats at the UN and many others -- but UNDP and some UN officials don't like hard questions and think they can simply stonewall, in the UN's Zone of Impunity.

   Seventy two hours in, while the UN Secretariat of Ban Ki-moon said it wouldn't answer about the role of its own Department of Safety and Security and UNAMA mission while UNDP answers, August 6 and 7 video here -- UNDP had provided no answer at all.

   This despite UNDP Administrator Helen Clark having been subject to formal governmental requests about related UNDP irregularities in Afghanistan in May. Is this any way to run for UN Secretary General?

  The fourth document, exclusively published here, makes even more clear why Bann Ki-moon's Secretariat must respond. The document describes double payments then introduces one "Colonel Bashary," who threatens not to talk about corruption, "I will not tolerate these accusations." Click here to view.

  In Afghanistan as Inner City Press exclusively dug into, UN Security official Louis Maxwell was killed, presumptively by Afghan Forces -- and the UN has obtained zero accountability for this killed staff member. Inner City Press has put questions about Louis Maxwell toDeputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson, who to his credit responded, and to current Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura, here.

Now: why would the UN be telling a whistle-blower to "just let it be," then refusing to answer? 

  The third document, exclusively published here, concerns "'Ghost Staffing' at the UN Protective Force," about which the UN Department of Safety and Security said, "Just let it be for now." Click here to view.

    On August 5, Inner City Press exclusively published this one, linking it to the LOTFA scandal: an official "was again advised that it may be illegal for salaried police officials to take cash payments to augment their salaries" but the adviser was told it was "no longer my priority under LOTFA and that I was no longer to address these issues with DPII or DSS."

  This and the other documents indicate that little was fixed, that UNDP goes after whistleblowers, and does not follow up even when for example it is involved in visa fraud. 

   Inner City Press on morning of August 5 asked no fewer than four spokespeople at UNDP, including the personal spokesperson for UNDP Administrator (and UNSG candidate) Helen Clark for their response to the below. 

 There had been no answers. Inner City Press exclusively published the second document, here: about payments by UNAMA / UNDSS to fully salaried Afghan forces. Click here.

  Both UNAMA and UNDSS are run by Ban Ki-moon's Secretariat, so Ban's spokespeople must answer. UNDP's Helen Clark herself has refused official inquiry about these irregularities. So on August 6 Inner City Press asked UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq:

Inner City Press: The payments by UNDSS (Department of Safety and Security) and UNAMA (United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan) in Afghanistan to members of the Ministry of Interior and other Afghan forces that are already under full salary by the Government. Various documents have come out that show an internal UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) whistle blower seeking to raise these issues within UNDP because, I guess, because as the country team, or whatever. But the documents list, they name UNDSS, they name UNAMA, and basically the person was told, “Don’t raise this anymore.” So, I was anticipating you to say “Ask UNDP”. And I have more than 24 hours ago. I don’t have any answer from them. But I want to ask you, because the documents are not just about UNDP, but about DSS and UNAMA, is it… what are the rules? Is it UN’s, DPKO’s (Department of Peacekeeping Operations), DPA’s (Department of Political Affairs) and DSS’s understanding that Afghan forces shouldn’t receive out double payments. If this information came to light, I think it did, what was done about it? That’s my question to you. I don’t know if you get an answer today. Is it possible?

Deputy Spokesman Haq: As I’m sure you’ve anticipated, and indeed you said you anticipated, yes, I’m aware that UN Development Programme is in touch with you on this. They’ve informed you that they will get back to you. And so, we will first have to wait for what their reply is. First ask them.

Inner City Press: How long --

Deputy Spokesman: No, no. It’s no use trying to get the two of us talk at cross purposes with each other. UNDP will get back to you.

  That UNDP "is in touch with you" was and is not true: there has been no response at all. The statement UNDP "will get to you" remains unfulfilled. This is today's UN system -- even when UN system staff unions wrote to Ban Ki-moon about Helen Clark, and Inner City Press repeated asked about the letter, there has been no response.

  Here is what Inner City Press asked on August 5, no answer:

This is an Inner City Press Press request on deadline for UNDP's comment / response to the following narrative provided to us by UNDP whistleblowers:

UNDP purchased $100,000 in fuel for a special police unit and it was discovered that some or all of the fuel was stolen by the police. The project manager - chief technical adviser for the project refused to purchase another allocation of fuel due to this reported corruption. Refusing to purchase this additional fuel caused problems between the project manager - chief technical adviser and the chief of UN security in Afghanistan.

This followed with reports that several vehicles purchased by this same UNDP project and given to this same special police unit were not being used for the unit but had instead been given as political gifts or other reasons to other offices of the Afghan government. After giving these vehicles to higher ranking officials the Colonel of this special police unit was promoted to General.

The project manager - chief technical adviser reported this and nothing happened. As part of the review which discovered this the corruption of payments made by the UN security office in Afghanistan to the special police unit was also discovered and reported.

 This is also a request for UNDP response / comment on another issue, of visa overstay, also on deadline:

UNDP's staff from Afghanistan have not returned to their duty station after being granted visas to attend/participate in the recent UN Games in the USA. UNDP supported the official/G4 visas for all of these Afghan nationals and now they have remained behind in the USA... How can the organization justify sending a dozen people half-way around the world to compete in 'UN Games'? How many of them were given business class tickets since the travel exceeds the 9 hour standard? Is this a proper use of public monies? How can an office so critical to the development of Afghanistan in this time of change see it as beneficial for a dozen of their staff to go on a paid junket to the USA?

1. Lailuma Shirzad (procurement) - overstay in USA.

2. Abdul Hamid Karimi (procurement) - presumably in UK

3. Idrees Sherzai (HR) - went to US, but crossed the border and is now in Canada

4. Shahkhalid Yousafzai - went to US, but crossed the border and is now in Canada

This is on deadline. This is also a request for UNDP's response to thestaff survey and the critique(s) of the restructuring / layoffs. 

  On the visas we can for now add: There are 3 more from ELECT Project and 3 to 4 from Information Communications and Technology Unit whom whistleblowers say have also overstayed their visas. We plan to have more. Watch this site.

   

In Rwanda, As 5 Arrests for UNDP "Ghost Consultancies," Another Audit Like In Afghanistan: Will Results Ever Be Disclosed?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 2, more here – Following up on Inner City Press exclusive publication of UN Development Program audits of its Law and Order Trust Fund Afghanistan, including double payments and other irregularities, whistleblowers exclusively provided Inner City Press with yet more damning documents. 

  Fully ten days after Inner City Press asked UNDP's spokespeople about them, on August 15 they provided aresponse -- that they are being investigated. In the 18 days since, nothing.

  Now there is a case, or cases, about "ghost consultancies" in Rwanda. The Rwandan News Agency reported on the arrest of

“five people in connection with creating ghost consultancy projects and stealing over Rwf580 million from the UNDP - Rwanda. Police Spokesperson, Assistant Commissioner of Police Damas Gatare identified the suspects as Evelyne Ben Dadale, the Programme Associate in UNDP; Viviane Masabo, an employment of REMA; and entrepreneurs Liliane Kente, Jeremie Rucamukibatsi and Michael Kabutura. 'The five were arrested on August 29 and are accused of creating ghost consultancy projects and forging the signature of the Director General of Rwanda Environment Management Authority (REMA), which they used to secure a total of Rwf580, 270, 483 from UNDP between 2011 and August 2014,' ACP Gatare said. UNDP finances various environmental projects through REMA.”

  Inner City Press has asked for details about the projects UNDP funds through REMA; we continue to await that information.

“The consultancy was allegedly conducted by Biogas Rec Limited owned by Rucamukibatsi, Envirotech Consult limited jointly owned by Kente and Kabutura and Rwanda Bamboo society of one Johnson Nkusi, who was already in detention over other criminal acts. The created ghost consultancy include the 'Assessment Impact from Community Conservation around Volcanoes National Park' allegedly done in March 2012 and cost over Rwf38.4 million; public environment experience review worth Rwf37.2 million supposedly carried out in December 2013 and 'study on environmental and livelihood impact of fertilizers in Rwanda' allegedly carried out in April this year and took over Rwf29.3 million. 'These are consultancy projects that either never existed or had been canceled by the management of REMA,' he added.”

    UNDP's Dylan Lowthian confirmed receipt of Inner City Press' questions about this, and UNDP's Boaz Paldi then sent Inner City Press this, which we publish in full:

Dear Matthew, Please find bellow our rep once on the Rwanda article. You also asked to for more information on the REMA projects and we are working on that, but that information will come from the Rwanda office and may take additional time to gather.

UNDP confirms that the matter raised in an article dated 1 September 2014 is the subject of an on-going investigation by UNDP’s Office of Audit and Investigations (OAI).

Consistent with UNDP’s zero tolerance for fraud, and in accordance with the organization’s strict Anti-Fraud Policy, a thorough investigation has been initiated, which has included the deployment of a team of investigators to Rwanda.

Investigators conducted ‘on the ground’ investigations with entities of interest, including interviews of UNDP staff and vendors. Hundreds of documents were collected and reviewed, and potentially relevant computer-based evidence was seized.

UNDP is coordinating its work with Rwandan authorities.

Certain administrative actions have also been taken by UNDP to mitigate possible risk. At this stage it is too early to provide additional details of the investigation.

   When you combine Afghanistan now with Rwanda, more systemic questions begin to emerge, on which we will have more. 

On Afghanistan: on August 15, UNDP belatedly specified that "there is an ongoing investigation related to issues raised in documents published by Inner City Press" - but again uses this as a rationale for the lack of response not only by UNDP but also the UNAMA mission and UN Department of Safety and Security.

   As to what the documents and "issues raised" are, see for now here, here, here and here, exclusively provided to Inner City Press by now-former UNDP staff. There are more documents, one more of which was published today, here.

In it, the same Colonel Bashary who threatened he would not tolerate these accusation turns up on the list of double payments. 

  This publication follows four days in which UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, formerly UNDP's spokesman, had not said whether an audit cited as a justification for not answering is the troubling audit completed in February 2014. 

  After Inner City Press asked again on August 15, UNDP's Dylan Lowthian provided a response including that

The 'Security Gap Project' (SGAP) which you have previously referred to was established to enhance security for all United Nations personnel working in Afghanistan. SGAP supported the Government to develop dedicated protection services to the United Nations to enable reconstruction, development and humanitarian activities to be carried out.

SGAP closed at the end of 2013. An audit of the project was carried out by Grant Thornton beginning in October 2013 and was completed in January 2014. Upon completion, the audit was issued in February 2014 and in-keeping with our commitment to transparency and accountability, was subsequently published on the UNDP global website, where it is publicly available to download. Audits are an essential part of our control mechanisms. They are conducted in order to identify both strengths and weaknesses in our programs as a way to increase our overall performance.

There is no second audit of the SGAP project.

As outlined by the Deputy Spokesperson at the briefing on Friday 8 August, there is an ongoing investigation related to issues raised in documents published by Inner City Press. In order to avoid jeopardizing the investigation process, the details of investigations are kept confidential and very limited information is made available to offices outside the UNDP Independent Office of Audit and Investigation, until the process of gathering relevant evidence and fact-finding has been completed. Should the matter be substantiated, the evidence gathered by the Office of Audit and Investigation will form the basis of remedial action.

   Inner City Press is informed that now "the heat is on at the Kabul office" -- this is called a cover-up, and retaliation against (the wrong) whistleblowers.

    And can Ban Ki-moon's UN Secretariat's Department of Safety and Security and UNAMA Mission continue hide behind a UNDP investigation that may never be public? 

   This despite UNDP Administrator Helen Clark having been subject to formal governmental requests about related UNDP irregularities in Afghanistan in May. Is this any way to run for UN Secretary General?

  The fourth document, exclusively published here, makes even more clear why Bann Ki-moon's Secretariat must respond. The document describes double payments then introduces one "Colonel Bashary," who threatens not to talk about corruption, "I will not tolerate these accusations."Click here to view.

  In Afghanistan as Inner City Press exclusively dug into, UN Security official Louis Maxwell was killed, presumptively by Afghan Forces -- and the UN has obtained zero accountability for this killed staff member. Inner City Press has put questions about Louis Maxwell to Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson, who to his credit responded, and to current Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura, here.

Now: why would the UN be telling a whistle-blower to "just let it be," then refusing to answer? 

  The third document, exclusively published here, concerns "'Ghost Staffing' at the UN Protective Force," about which the UN Department of Safety and Security said, "Just let it be for now." Click here to view.

    On August 5, Inner City Press exclusively published this one, linking it to the LOTFA scandal: an official "was again advised that it may be illegal for salaried police officials to take cash payments to augment their salaries" but the adviser was told it was "no longer my priority under LOTFA and that I was no longer to address these issues with DPII or DSS."

  This and the other documents indicate that little was fixed, that UNDP goes after whistleblowers, and does not follow up even when for example it is involved in visa fraud. 

   Inner City Press on morning of August 5 asked no fewer than four spokespeople at UNDP, including the personal spokesperson for UNDP Administrator (and UNSG candidate) Helen Clark for their response to the below. 

  Inner City Press exclusively published the seconddocument, here: about payments by UNAMA / UNDSS to fully salaried Afghan forces. Click here.

  Both UNAMA and UNDSS are run by Ban Ki-moon's Secretariat, so Ban's spokespeople must answer. UNDP's Helen Clark herself has refused official inquiry about these irregularities. So on August 6 Inner City Press asked UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq:

Inner City Press: The payments by UNDSS (Department of Safety and Security) and UNAMA (United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan) in Afghanistan to members of the Ministry of Interior and other Afghan forces that are already under full salary by the Government. Various documents have come out that show an internal UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) whistle blower seeking to raise these issues within UNDP because, I guess, because as the country team, or whatever. But the documents list, they name UNDSS, they name UNAMA, and basically the person was told, “Don’t raise this anymore.” So, I was anticipating you to say “Ask UNDP”. And I have more than 24 hours ago. I don’t have any answer from them. But I want to ask you, because the documents are not just about UNDP, but about DSS and UNAMA, is it… what are the rules? Is it UN’s, DPKO’s (Department of Peacekeeping Operations), DPA’s (Department of Political Affairs) and DSS’s understanding that Afghan forces shouldn’t receive out double payments. If this information came to light, I think it did, what was done about it? That’s my question to you. I don’t know if you get an answer today. Is it possible?

Deputy Spokesman Haq: As I’m sure you’ve anticipated, and indeed you said you anticipated, yes, I’m aware that UN Development Programme is in touch with you on this. They’ve informed you that they will get back to you. And so, we will first have to wait for what their reply is. First ask them.

Inner City Press: How long --

Deputy Spokesman: No, no. It’s no use trying to get the two of us talk at cross purposes with each other. UNDP will get back to you.

  That UNDP "is in touch with you" was and is not true: there has been no response at all. The statement UNDP "will get to you" remains unfulfilled. This is today's UN system -- even when UN system staff unions wrote to Ban Ki-moon about Helen Clark, and Inner City Press repeated asked about the letter, there has been no response.

  Here is what Inner City Press asked on August 5, no answer:

This is an Inner City Press Press request on deadline for UNDP's comment / response to the following narrative provided to us by UNDP whistleblowers:

UNDP purchased $100,000 in fuel for a special police unit and it was discovered that some or all of the fuel was stolen by the police. The project manager - chief technical adviser for the project refused to purchase another allocation of fuel due to this reported corruption. Refusing to purchase this additional fuel caused problems between the project manager - chief technical adviser and the chief of UN security in Afghanistan.

This followed with reports that several vehicles purchased by this same UNDP project and given to this same special police unit were not being used for the unit but had instead been given as political gifts or other reasons to other offices of the Afghan government. After giving these vehicles to higher ranking officials the Colonel of this special police unit was promoted to General.

The project manager - chief technical adviser reported this and nothing happened. As part of the review which discovered this the corruption of payments made by the UN security office in Afghanistan to the special police unit was also discovered and reported.

 This is also a request for UNDP response / comment on another issue, of visa overstay, also on deadline:

UNDP's staff from Afghanistan have not returned to their duty station after being granted visas to attend/participate in the recent UN Games in the USA. UNDP supported the official/G4 visas for all of these Afghan nationals and now they have remained behind in the USA... How can the organization justify sending a dozen people half-way around the world to compete in 'UN Games'? How many of them were given business class tickets since the travel exceeds the 9 hour standard? Is this a proper use of public monies? How can an office so critical to the development of Afghanistan in this time of change see it as beneficial for a dozen of their staff to go on a paid junket to the USA?

This is on deadline. This is also a request for UNDP's response to the staff survey and the critique(s) of the restructuring / layoffs. 

  On the visas we can for now add: There are 3 more from ELECT Project and 3 to 4 from Information Communications and Technology Unit whom whistleblowers say have also overstayed their visas. Watch this site.