Inner City Press Asks ILO's Guy Rider and AIESEC About UNpaid Interns, Banned Staff Union

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 1 -- Amid mounting questions about the UN using only unpaid interns, favoring the most affluent, Inner City Press on February 1 asked the International Labor Organization's Guy Rider and AIESEC's Ana Saldarriaga about it, video here.

  Rider diplomatically said that ILO, unlike the UN Secretariat, does pay its interns and that he thinks this is important. He said he is “aware of controversies that have taken place elsewhere” -- that is, in the building in which this press conference took place. Inner City Press also asked him about the breaking of the NY UN Staff Union under Ban Ki-moon. He said he enjoys a “lively relationship” with ILO's union, and that having a union is a fundamental right.

   Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric tried to cut off the answer there, but then Saldarriaga agreed that paying interns is key. She said, as young people we need working experience, we need to have the opportunities. Young people need to have a stipend to live. 
On January 29, Inner City Press asked Ahmad Alhendawi, Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth, about the issue.Video here.

Alhendawi told Inner City Press there is a dialogue, there is an openness; he said he is not an expert in human resources issues but directs groups of intern to the right people to speak to in the UN system. It seems that, like with getting a UN Freedom of Information Act, Ban Ki-moon will not do it; it should be asked of (candidates to be) the next Secretary General.

  Inner City Press also asked Alhendawi about how the new Security Council resolution on youth is impacting the UN's Syria and (non-existent?) Yemen talks. In Geneva now, for example, how many youth did de Mistura invite? Alhendawi said it's a new resolution but will have an impact. We'll continue to cover this.

Back on November 10, 2015, a group of interns tried to raise the issue inside the UN. But UN Security first told them they could not display their (small) signs, then tried to prevent photographing and filming of the muted protest by the Press. 

On November 13, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about why it has been told not to film, why the interns' (small) signs had been prohibited and about the substance of the protest, that unpaid internships mean only the most affluent can intern with the UN. Video here and embedded below.

  UN deputy spokesperson Haq first tried to say photographing had not been hindered. Inner City Press replied, We “were told not to take any, I was there.”

  Then the UN's Haq said the UN Security officers had said not to photograph them, that they had not given consent.

  Inner City Press pointed out that by this logic, covering a protest could be stopped by Security officers standing in front of it. In any event, even just outside the UN it is entirely legal to film police officers. Does the UN say that its Security Officers, even while they are breaking up or dispersing a protest, can't be filmed? Apparently so.

  Pressed on the substance of the protest, Haq said that it is entirely up to the General Assembly; there was no sense that Ban Ki-moon is even asking the GA for any change.

  The November 10 protest in rainy New York was preceded by one in Brussels, “standing up for those who cannot afford working for free;” in Geneva on this theme shoes were lined up on the street.

This comes at a time when Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's UN is moving to give raises to its Under Secretaries General such as Herve Ladsous, who linked peacekeepers' raping to their lack of “R&R” and “distraction.”

Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access(FUNCA) have previously asked the UN about this issue and covered it:

Inner City Press on September 4 again asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about it, video here, transcript here:

Inner City Press: I have been meaning to just follow up on this.  The letter that was written to the Secretary-General by unpaid UN interns in New York and Geneva, seemed like it was responded to by USG [Under-Secretary-General Yukio] Takasu.  It's not clear — I guess I wanted to ask you.  Is the Secretariat saying that it's an administrative instruction some time back that precludes them from paying interns from the developing world, so that the pool can become more diverse?  Or are they really saying that the GA has definitively made it impossible?  Is there any consideration in asking the GA to address the issue?

Spokesperson Dujarric:  It's a valid of question.  I haven't seen the letter.  I need to take a look at it.  Nobody has shared it with me.  Nobody tells me anything here.  You know, I think on the issue of interns, it is also — I think it's also important to remember that the UN has a global presence, not in every country in the world, but almost every country in the world, and we do take interns locally, so I think there's also… obviously there's a greater mass of interns at our Headquarters station, but we do take interns… most UN offices take interns in different places, which doesn't include the need to travel.  Let me look in the letter and I'll get back to you.

Inner City Press:  Can you get data on that?

Spokesman:  Probably not, because I don't think it exists.  

  Really.

Back on August 11, Inner City Press asked Dujarric, video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: I'm sure you've seen this story about the New Zealand intern at the UN in Geneva living in a tent.  I want to ask sort of a more fundamental question, which is that what would the UN say to those who say that by having so many entirely unpaid internship, it basically, it… it limits this possible career step of learning to only the most affluent people…?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I think it's a very valid point.  The debate around the payment of interns is one that's been going on for some time.  We are not in a position to pay our interns.  It's too bad in a way, because I think it does limit the opportunity to those who are able to pay their own way and house themselves.  Unless the General Assembly changes those rules, there is no change in sight.  What's important is that any internship be used as a learning opportunity for the intern and not be used as, you know, as free labour or as a substitute for work done by staff.

Inner City Press:  Okay. Is that something that the Secretary-General has ever raised to the GA [General Assembly] or…?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I'm not aware of that.

    Back in May 2013 an internship in the UN was auctioned off, ultimately for $26,000, in a process extensively covered and questionedby Inner City Press. The UN said it was embarrassed by the auction or the "optics," and resisted Inner City Press' questions about the sale.

After Inner City Press asked several times about it, the description of the internship being auctioned was "amended," as the UN spokesman put it, to read:

"Take advantage of this exclusive opportunity for a 6-week internship in NYC working for Bruce Knotts, Chair of the UN-NGO Committee on Human Rights. You will gain inside knowledge of just how the UN really operates and have tremendous opportunities to make invaluable connections. This truly is the ultimate internship opportunity for any college or graduate student looking to get their foot in the door!"

The auction, on CharityBuzz.com, said it was to benefit the RFK Young Leaders. Press inquiries to that entity and its parent, the RFK Center, did not yield any answers. But today, at least, we have a detailed answers about how such internships or grounds-passes work, from the Director of the UN Department of Public Information's Outreach Division, Maher Nasser.

  Inner City Press, along with another DPI question to which it is still awaiting the answer -- why was UNTV shut off while Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat was giving a speech on Monday morning -- asked Nasser, "I heard when you told DPI-NGO orientation that it makes the UN look bad, and that the UN is not obligated to let the person ('m. alam') who purchased the internship into the building. Is that the case? And you could keep me informed on this, when the purchased internship is to begin and what the UN / DPI does?"

  To his credit, Nasser provided Inner City Press with the most detailed UN response to date on the auctioned internship:

Subject: Question re the auctioned internship, thanks
From: Maher Nasser [at] un.org
Date: Mon, May 20, 2013 at 2:38 PM
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com

Hi Matthew, On the internship issue, as you know from the relevant website, this was for an internship with an NGO, not an internship at the UN. The optics of it and use of the UN's image implied otherwise, which is why I flagged it in the orientation with newly associated NGOs as something that hurts the UN and is not acceptable.

Every NGO associated with DPI is entitled to only six yearly passes, two of which are for youth representatives. The names to whom the passes are issued are provided by the president/head of each NGO. By providing the names, the NGO certifies that these names represent the NGO concerned. Up till now, we have had no reason not to grant a pass to people designated as representing an NGO. An old system of temporary passes issued throughout the year was discontinued by DPI several years ago.

With reference to the six names provided, and as I said above, this has not happened in the past, if we find out that someone had to pay or buy a slot on that list, we would take it up with the concerned NGO and depending on the feedback, not endorse that name for a pass.

In view of the case of the auctioned internship, we are preparing language to be added to the forms to be completed by DPI associated NGOs to avoid such possibilities in the future.

  So at a minimum, the "m. alam" on whose behalf $26,000 was bid for this internship might not be endorsed for a pass to actually enter the UN. Would they get a refund? And what do the UN-NGO Committee on Human Rights and the RFK Center have to say? Watch this site.

Footnote: While we await another division of DPI's promised answer to the Free UN Coalition for Access about how and why UNTV shut off during Saeb Erakat's speech, we note complaints received about the press corps move-back to the Secretariat building, particularly among broadcasters about special charges, special deals, special inquiries. The DPI official in question is aware of several of these complaints; watch this site.

On Trans Pacific Partnership, Inner City Press Asks UN's Tauli-Corpuz & De Zayas of Lawsuits, John Ashe Scandal

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 26 -- When UN Special Rapporteurs Victoria Tauli-Corpuz and Alfred De Zayas held a press conference at the UN on October 26, Inner City Press asked them about the Trans Pacific Partnership, specifically the ability of corporations to sue countries for undermining their profits with regulations. Tweeted photo here.

   Victoria Tauli-Corpuz said litigation has begun, and will be made easier by what she called the US' online summary of provisions of the TPP. Inner City Press asked Alfred De Zayas if the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice that he seeks requires a referral from the General Assembly or can otherwise be triggered. He said the ILO could request the opinion, or WHO (which he also said should seek an opinion on Philip Morris' litigation against Uruguay and Australia.)

  Inner City Press also asked Victoria Tauli-Corpuz about the indictment of previous President of the General Assembly John Ashe, as it had discussed Ashe's performance with her on indigenous issues while he was in office. She said his indictment calls into question the outcome document and show a need for more oversight. We'll have more on this.

Back on September 27 when Peru's President Ollanta Humala Tasso held a UN stakeout to present his country's climate change Intended Nationally Determined Contribution document to UNFCCC chief Figueres, Inner City Press asked Humala about the impact on the INDC of the pending Trans Pacific Partnership, particularly corporate suing of government provision. Video here.

  Humala said TPP is 90% finished, and that Peru is committed to the environment. But what about corporations suing regulations that “hinder” them? This wasn't answered. 

 And the next day, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon when on a podium with Humala and French President Hollande told the Press that Humala regretted not being there. But he WAS there. Respect.

  Back on June 29 alongside the UN's “high level meeting on climate change," Inner City Press asked Janos Pasztor and Amina Mohammed of the UN about the critique by Brazil, South Africa, India and China (BASIC) that the developed world is not moving toward $100 billion a year in climate finance by 2020. Also, Inner City Press asked the Cardinal on the panel, what does the Pope think of it?

  Pasztor said the key is credible measuring of financing, and that Ban Ki-moon has spoken to the G-7. The Cardinal said the Pope's two principles are solidarity and subsidiarity. The SDG connection will become clear when the UN uploads the briefing video. 

  But -- this press conference at least was substantive. Two hours later, the UN presented Robert Redford, solo, taking questions ranging from his movies to Obama and called it climate change. The UN Correspondents Assocation, which didn't even have a question for Ban on climate change earlier in the day, was given the first question to Redford; it was sloppily asked and is almost sure not to be written up. No one asked, or was permitted to ask, about fracking or the Trans Pacific Partnership. And so it goes at the UN.

  Back on June 18 when the UN gave a climate change briefing by UNDP's Cassie Flynn, and Jo Scheuer, on June 18 Inner City Press asked about the under-funding of the Least Development Countries Fund, and if South Korea is backsliding in its Intended Nationally Determined Contributions. Video here.

  The answers, on film, were to promote other funding vehicles, and to say that South Korea has still yet to file its INDC.

Back on June 4 the UN's Assistant Secretary-General on Climate Change Janos Pasztor held a press conference and Inner City Press asked him about unspent funds at the Clean Development Mechanism in Bonn, and about reported backsliding by South Korea on its Intended Nationally Determined Contributions on greenhouse gas reduction.

  Pasztor said that the CDM is still needed; he said country have committed not to backslide. Video here. 

Back on May 5, Inner City Press asked him about criticism of the Green Climate Fund, including at the recent Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. Video here and embedded below.

  Specifically, why will the "Green" Climate Fund provide financial for coal-powered plants? Pasztor replied that some felt that an exclusion for coal would have been divisive. On statements at the PFII that the UN is helping to "monetize" nature, Pasztor replied that most states feel differently. But what about the indigenous?
  
  Pasztor in his opening statement had praised the UN Pension Fund for now investing in "green equities" and "green bonds." Since the UN has responded to Press questions about irregularities alleged at the Pension Fund by emphasizing how separate and independent it is, Inner City Press asked Pazstor if the UN Secretariat had brought about this Pension Fund decision.

 Pazstor replied that the Pension Fund answers to the Secretary General and that "she" - Carolyn Boykin, presumably - had made this decision. We'll have more on this, after noting Pasztor by no means the least responsive UN official...

 When last September 21 the People's Climate March assembled at Manhattan's Columbus Circle, there were anti-corporate puppets in front of the Trump International Hotel and Tower, speeches by coal miners and from the Marshall Islands.

   Many called on the UN to do better. But UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon joined the march mid-way, at Radio City Musical Hall with New York Mayor Bill de Blasio. Senator Chuck Schumer was on hand, walking by a Bronx contingent chanting how Fresh Direct has broken its promises.

  Inner City Press' 90 second video of the march is here.

  The UN's or "BKM" (Ban Ki-moon) Climate Summit will feature Cargill and Walmart, Credit Agricole and Bank of America. The last of these is the first, in terms of funding mountain top coal removal. These are the contradiction. Inner City Press tweeted photos on@InnerCityPress. More to follow.

  The night before the People's Climate March, the UN buildings on First Avenue lit up with photos and footage of trees and fish and written messages. It is called "illUmiNations." Inner City Press video here.

   Inner City Press late on September 19, after covering the Ukraine,Iraq, Ebola and Iran nuclear meetings inside the UN, went out and found a sort of trial run for the screening taking place on First Avenue, alreadylined with NYPD cement blocks. Photo here.

   Looking back at the UN's press release for the upcoming "VIP Press Screening" -- hard to know how they could exclude non-VIPs from it, or why they would want to -- there were laudatory quotes about UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, and: 

Obscura Digital has staged similar large-scale architectural mapping projection events on the Sydney Opera House, the Guggenheim Museum, and the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque. For examples of previous work, please visit the following link http://wdrv.it/1tx7Emd.

 In that video compilation, well worth watching, there are also corporate projects for Coca-Cola and YouTube owned by Google, with history at the UN. 

  A message Inner City Press photographed on September 19, here,  was "In nature's economy, the currency is not money but life." Is this true of Coca-Cola?

   There are questions about the UN's UNcritical approach to corporations and corporate "partnerships."

   In the run up to the UN's September 23 Climate Summit, the UN put out a media advisory promoting the participation of 14 corporations ranging from Saudi Aramco through Cargill, McDonald's and Walmart to Bank of America and Credit Agricole. 

  Inner City Press on September 16 asked Summit promoter Robert Orr how these 14 were selected for listing in the media advisory, and if the UN had reviewed their wider record. For example, the recent court decision involving Cargill and child slavery in Cote d'Ivoire, or Saudi Aramco not allowing employees in Saudi Arabia to protest.

   Orr mentioned a luncheon during the summit about carbon pricing and the UN Global Compact, a branch of the UN which repeatedly says it does not enforce substantive standards, only encourages reporting and dialogue.  Well, Saudi Aramco did not respond to the complaint about “employees allegedly dismissed after being detained for participation in civil rights protests in Saudi Arabia.”

   And what of the environment? Bank of America has been the number one funder of mountain-top removal coal mining, but Ban Ki-moon made it chairman the chief of his Sustainable Energy for All initiative.

  On behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, Inner City Press asked that those making commitments, like the 14 corporations named, hold question and answer sessions during the summit. We'll see.

   

After Herfkens Exposed Taking Dutch & UN Money, On Bachelet & ILO Panel

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 27 -- For an Organization that preaches accountability, the UN system displays little of it. Three years after Eveline Herfkens of The Netherlands was exposed for violating UN system rules by accepting a substantial UN salary as well as $7,000 a month from her government -- allegedly as an entertainment budget -- and she was forced to step down, she had reappeared on the UN Advisory Group on social protection chaired by Michele Bachelet, convened by the International Labor Organization.

At a UN press conference Thursday, Inner City Press asked if Ms. Herfkens' past had been ignored in giving her this new UN system post. Ms. Herfkens was in attendance, in the front row, but did not answer. The ILO's Juan Somavia said yes, there was a "controversy," but Herfkens' "experience" was deemed to trump it. This answer, and the question, were omitted from the UN's purported summary of the press conference, click here to view.

So high officials in the UN can violate the rules but be quietly recycled back into UN system "advisory" jobs based on their experience.

This is only one example. After the deadly bombing of the UN compound in the Canal Hotel in Baghdad in 2003, then Secretary General Kofi Annan's spokesman said that Ramiro Lopes da Silva would be required to resign but could "return to his 'D-2' (Director) post in World Food Programme," emphasizing that "his future assignments will not include any responsibilities for security matters."

Two weeks ago, WFP staff contacted Inner City Press to complain that despite this history, Ramiro Lopes da Silva had been put in charge of WFP security by chief Josette Sheeran. On October 17 Inner City Press sought an explanation from four WFP official, including spokesman Greg Barrow and Ms. Sheeran herself:

"please respond to criticism of having put Ramiro Lopes da Silva in charge of security for WFP, given his role in Iraq in connection with the Canal Hotel bombing."

Only after a week had passed, and Inner City Press has published a first story, did WFP respond, through its spokesman Greg Barrow:

In response to your questions: DED Ramiro Lopes da Silva is one of WFP's most experienced senior managers, and we have the utmost confidence in him.

This did not in anyway respond to Ramiro Lopes da Silva's role in Iraq in connection with the Canal Hotel bombing, much less Kofi Annan's spokesman Fred Eckhard's statement that Ramiro Lopes da Silva's "future assignments will not include any responsibilities for security matters."

Inner City Press wrote back to Barrow, and wrote directly to Ramiro Lopes da Silva

"I have asked WFP without much substantive response the question below, now having found your contact information in fairness and hoping for a response I ask you: please respond to criticism of having put Ramiro Lopes da Silva in charge of security for WFP, given his role in Iraq in connection with the Canal Hotel bombing. Please respond - on deadline."

Ramiro Lopes da Silva not having responded, Inner City Press asked the spokesman of Ban Ki-moon, who has inissted that UN system staff security is important to him, whether he gave Ramiro Lopes da Silva a waiver from the action of Kofi Annan after the Canal Hotel bombing, or if there was simply no UN system follow through. Spokesman Martin Nesirky said on October 25 that he would answer. But two days later he has not. Watch this site.

Footnote: Herfkens' fall was in early 2008, before the global financial blow out later that year. On Thursday Inner City Press asked Michelle Bachelet about the place of privatization and, in essence, Wall Street in social protection plans. She said that the Report is for "all countries," but did not squarely address the privatization question. To be continued.

At UN, Censorship Alleged by Staff Union, Job Action Planned at ILO, Ban Flies Away

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 8 -- With UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon lurching from one trip to another, with barely time to take a few questions from the Press much less the staff between trips to China and now South Korea, labor problems have cropped out throughout the UN system. “Industrial action” has been threatened; censorship is being alleged.

Back on October 25, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky about the UN Staff Union's charge that for the first time in years, Ban was refusing to transmit their report on staff relations to the General Assembly. Nesirky rather than explaining this break with precedent referred Inner City Press to a letter Ban's Deputy.

But since in the UN's budget committee, the Staff Union has reiterated its complaint, that Ban “has effectively censored the views of the staff.”

A major critique in the Staff Union report is about the UN's internal justice system. On that, Inner City Press asked Nesirky on November 4

Inner City Press: there was a presentation by the Appeals Tribunal of the various cases and they made some statements of the internal justice system of the UN. And Judge Mark Painter in his presentation made what people are seeing as a pretty strong critique of lack of resources. They said we need help having paperwork processed. If staffing doesn’t substantially improve, we will not be able to continue to progress in the future. Not to mention the issue of judicial independence. So, I am wondering what does the Secretariat think of this cry for help from its Appeals Tribunal and what is it going to do about it?

Spokesperson: Let me find out. Yeah.

Four days later, nothing. Meanwhile, at the International Labor Organization a “global job action” is brewing, to begin on November 10.

The ILO's Staff Union says the ILO has violated their free association rights, including “censoring the Union's communications” -- ironic, as the UN system moves to have a Special Rapporteur on freedom of association. Watch this site.

From the UN's October 25 transcript:

Inner City Press: this is something that has been sort of brewing, but it seems to have reached a head. If I am not wrong, for almost 20 years now, every year there has been a report to the General Assembly of the Staff Union, called, “Views of the staff of the United Nations Secretariat”, produced by the Staff Union here; and the Secretary-General’s Office is supposed to transmit it to the General Assembly. Apparently, there has been a decision, whether it is by Ms. [Catherine] Pollard, Ms. [Angela] Kane or the Secretariat generally, to this year refuse to transmit it and to seek in its place to transmit a much more positive report of the SMCC, Staff Management Coordinating Committee. So the Staff Union says it’s illegal and wrong and also violates… seems to be controlling what is basically criticism of the Secretariat’s performance. What’s the rationale for not putting it out?

Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: Well, given your sources, Matthew, then I am sure you’ve also got a copy of the response to this from the Deputy Secretary-General, which is fairly explicit, fairly detailed and pushes back on all the points made by the Staff Union, and I don’t have anything to add to that.

Inner City Press: But still, why in the past… it’s been done in the past… I guess I am just wondering, it seems like…

Spokesperson: Matthew, I think you probably heard the last bit I said. I don’t have anything further to add to what the Deputy Secretary-General said in the response, which I am sure that you have also seen.

Inner City Press: They said that the Secretariat is now seeking…

Spokesperson: I am not sure that you quite heard what I said. Try a different question.

Inner City Press: Okay. It’s a different question on this, that the Secretariat now has an intention to ask Member States in General Assembly to change the provision that would require the submission of these reports. Is that something that the Secretariat currently intends to do?

Spokesperson: Again, the Deputy Secretary-General has spelled out quite clearly what the provisions are and what the Secretariat was prepared to do in accordance with the provisions that are there. Okay?

Not really okay. Watch this site.