UNITED NATIONS, April 12 -- How should the next UN Secretary General be selected, to improve the Organization?
On April 11, Inner City Press asked the spokesperson for President of the General Assembly Mogens Lykketoft if Lykketoft will ensure that financial disclosure questions are or can be asked, and who chose the “civil society” questions. The affable spokesperson told Inner City Press to ask Lykketoft, and that the list would be provided after the briefing. Video here.
But it was not. Even who chose the people who chose the question was unclear: some in the UN who work with civil society, presumably meaning from the Department of Public Information which we must note is the most criticized UN department in the so-called John Ashe case audit the full text of which Inner City Press exclusively put online on April 6, here.
DPI has shown a willingness to retaliate, so we are reporting this as diplomatically as possible: once a spokesperson has said on camera that a list will be given, it probably should be. At minimum, the excuse for not providing it should not be, it would be misunderstood. Isn't it the job of the UN Department of Public Information to provide and if necessary explain information, rather than withhold it?
That said, Inner City Press will be covering the "informal dialogues." First up on April 12 is Montenegro's foreign minister Igor Luksic. Beyond some bank bailout controversies, the fact that Montenegro has participated in peacekeeping in Somalia and Afghanistan, with the UN in Liberia and, it was debated, with the European Union in the Central African Republic gives rise to questions.
What would Luksic do about the scandal of rapes in UN peacekeeping, in the Central African Republic and elsewhere? Merely mouthing "zero tolerance" is clearly not enough. What does Luksic think of a current head of UN Peacekeeping who links the rapes to "R&R"? To the critical Press being physically ousted from, then restricted within, the UN? Relatedly, what would he do, in light of the John Ashe case and audit, to ensure that the UN is no longer for sale? Watch this site.
At the end of the April 11 noon briefing Inner City Press was told that the list of who chose the civil society questions will be put online on April 12, after the “interviews” of candidates has already begun. We'll be there - or as close to there as DPI allows. Watch this site.
(Inner City Press also asked Lykketoft's spokesperson if, in fact, DPI has at least belatedly complied with the John Ashe audit's Recommendation 5. The spokesperson said he will check. We're waiting.)
On April 8, Inner City Press asked the spokesman for outgoing Secretary General Ban Ki-moon what are the rules governing current UN system officials running for NextSG, in terms of their use of UN time, resources and staff. From the UN transcript:
Inner City Press: I wanted to know what the UN's rules are given that there are now two candidates that are currently employed by the UN system, Irina Bokova of UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization], Helen Clark of UNDP [United Nations Development Programme]. I wanted to know, what rules apply as to how they devote their time, how resources of the agencies and of other staff in the agencies are devoted to helping their campaign.
Spokesman Dujarric: Obviously, for UNESCO, that is something for the UNESCO governing body to decide. As far as UNDP, obviously, we would expect that and our understanding is that this will have no impact on her… on Ms. Clark's leadership of UNDP and that, obviously, that no staff resources would be used for that.
Inner City Press: No, and I mean, I… I guess I mean it with all due respect, but inevitably, she's going to be spending time devoted to this. So, the question is, like, how much time should she…? It's an obvious…
Spokesman: No, no, I'm saying it's a… I'm not debating the obviousness of the question. That's what I have to say at this point.
On April 4, New Zealand announced for Helen Clark. But nowhere in it did New Zealand's announcemeone find financial disclosure, nor a vision statement.
And with Clark's UNDP embroiled in the the corruption scandal unveiled by the indictment of John Ashe, none of the correspondents NZUN invited for the launch even asked about that. And while anyone with a passing knowledge of UNDP knows Clark has a problem with staff relations, to put it mildly, no one asked about that either.
UNITED NATIONS, March 12-- While many try to insulate today's UN from the open corruption of the recent past of President of the General Assembly John Ashe, there is continuity to this UN scandal.
Inner City Press in October 2015 repeatedly raised that Ashe's chief of staff Paulette A. Bethel of the Bahamas was and is current PGA Mogens Lykketoft's “Special Adviser, Coordination and Engagement,” at the senior D2 level.
Now as high UN officials including Cristina Gallach, who was with now indicted Frank Lorenzo at the South South Awards, try to oust Inner City Press completely from the UN premises or at least restrict its access, Inner City Press on March 11 reported and asking about this:
By having her position with Lykketoft, Paulette Bethel continues to have immunity. Ban Ki-moon has not waived it, despite the portrait painted of her the John Ashe indictment. She “knows where the bodies are buried,” as the phrase has it.
And perhaps for that reason, Inner City Press is multiply informed that Bethel is lobbying for a continued immunity job with the NEXT President of the General Assembly, whether from Cyprus or Fiji.
In fact, Inner City Press is informed, both candidates to succeed Lykketoft as PGA, Cyprus and Fiji, was lobbied to keep Bethel on -- as a D2, with full immunity -- if they win the job, and were promised (the same) votes if they do.
Now, Inner City Press is informed of new (March 11) developments regarding Paulette Bethel's immunity status.
For now, what does this mean? Well -- did Lykketoft make the same corrupt deal? Why WOULD Lykketoft, claiming to be so different from John Ashe, keep Ashe's chief of staff on his team? Even Banned from the UN second floor where Lykketoft's office -- used to campaign for Helle Thorning-Schmidt, as Inner City Press exclusively covered -- we'll have more on this. Here.
On March 11, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric -- who among other things has refused to answer on lending UN Press Briefing Room, in which indictee Frank Lorenzo appeared without being listed in the Media Alert -- about this. Video here UN transcript here:
Inner City Press: I want to return to the indictment of John Ashe, I'd asked you before, but I have more to ask about it, that the previous Chief of Staff of John Ashe, Paulette Bethel, is currently the number three official in Mogens Lykketoft's office. And as Chief of Staff, she's listed throughout the indictment and charge sheet in the John Ashe case. I've also become aware that there's requests being made to potential new PGAs (Presidents of the General Assembly), Cyprus and Fiji, to continue her in the employment as a D-2 UN official. If a person is a UN staff member but works for the PGA's office, one, what is the status of their immunity from prosecution and testifying? And, two, who can waive that immunity? Is it the Secretary-General, as with other UN staff, or is there some special status for a UN staff member who works for the PGA's office?
Spokesman Dujarric: Look, speaking not in relation to the particular case that you mentioned, because her employment and the employment of anybody in the PGA's office is up to the PGA itself, the Secretary-General has the authority to lift the immunity of any UN staff member.
Inner City Press: Does it seem strange to you that someone listed so prominently in the indictment remains on the UN payroll? Can you describe the immunity that that obtains? If, for example, the US Attorney's Office wanted to speak to a Chief of Staff who went to Macau, who was involved in all of these actions…
Spokesman: I'm not going to speak to… I can't speculate…
Inner City Press: D-2, D-2 generally.
Spokesman: I can't speculate to the case. I don't… I'm not privy to anything that the US Attorney may or may not be doing. What is clear is that anyone, as far as I know, under the rank of Assistant Secretary-General, which would include D-2s, such as myself, carries functional immunity. As a matter of principle, immunity is not there to block any criminal investigation. Maggie?
Voice of America: Steph, anything on Mr. de Mistura's smaller conversations
Yes, smaller conversations... There is a history, here.
After being thrown out of the UN on two hours notice by Under Secretary General for DPI Cristina Gallach on February 19, on March 10 back in on a "non resident correspondent" "Green P" pass, Inner City Press was ordered out of the UN at 8 pm, here, as it worked on this story -- here's an Inner City Press story on Bethel and Ban Ki-moon's connection to the scandal -- in the UN Lobby.
UNder this kind of harassment, intimidation and attempted censorship, there is only one approach: publish, publish, publish. If Bethel didn't have the immunity that comes with a UN D-2 post, what might she testify to? Who could waive her immunity?
Beyond the already problematic #NextPGA, how should the next UN Secretary General be selected, to improve the Organization?
At a minimum, transparently. But that's not what's happening so far. On February 26 Inner City Press asked Lykketoft if those who are running -- to date, six official candidates -- will be required or even asked to disclose who is financing their campaigns. Video here.
Lykketoft replied that he feels he has no mandate to require such disclosures. Inner City Press followed up: will Lykketoft, who was describing a process for “interaction” with the candidates beginning April 12, even ask them to make such disclosures, ideally in writing before April 12, or during their appearance?
Lykketoft told Inner City Press, I encourage you to ask them. But while a UNTV stakeout will be set up outside the “interactive” meetings, nothing requires the candidates to take questions. And Inner City Press being present to ask such questions is being opposed and undermined by the UN Department of Public Information under Cristina Gallach -- who got her UN job in a murky way, as Inner City Press reported here -- and by Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric. We'll have more on that, as relates to Next SG.
The frontrunner, many say, is Bulgaria's Irina Bokova, current the head of UNESCO. In fact, in that capacity and on that dime Bokova was scheduled to appearin UN Headquarters on February 22, for an event called “UNESCO Green Citizens: Pathfinders for Change.”
In the run-up, Inner City Press asked on Twitter what Bokova and UNESCO thought of UN Public Information chief Cristina “Maybe She Should Be SG” Gallach having Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, literally. There's been no answer.
Inner City Press, with the paper UNESCO pass, attended the February 22 event. Some discussion, attempting to resolve the situation, will not be reported here. But threats were repeated; Bokova it turns out canceled at the last minute, leaving some correspondents - not this one - disappointed. There was for a moment an open mic, and Inner City Press for one wished for some dark horse candidate to grab the moment, and the mic, and shake things up. It's needed: the UN is in decay.
Meanwhile, another seeming candidate Susana Malcorra -- still wonder her views on the ouster, while noting that her successor Edmond Mulet hasn't even answered -- has left, shall we say, eyes behind. We'll have more on this.
Meanwhile a person who worked for Ban from 2014 “to” 2016 has taken to the editorial pages of the New York Times to promote Angela Merkel as the Next SG.
Back in early February, Inner City Press was informed that two candidates, one declared and one not yet, were campaigning at the African Union summit in Addis Ababa: Argentina's Susana Malcorra, and FYROM's and former PGA Srgjan Kerim. What is the position of each of these, for example, on the UN having a Freedom of Information Act?
The UN Spokesperson's Office this week refusing to provide basic information about how it "lends" out the UN Press Briefing Room shows the need for a FOIA. And what changes would the candidates bring to the OSSG, and information availability generally? There will be questionnaires...
Meanwhile a spat has broken out in which Australia indicates it does NOT have to support Helen Clark, agreed to by Tony Abbott, but rather could support Kevin Rudd. Has Helen Clark even declared? If and when she does, will she step down as UNDP Administrator? Watch this site.
On January 18 at an event marking Slovakia's 70th year of membership in the UN, reference was made to the country's candidate(s) for the position: both foreign minister Miroslav Lajcák and, as Inner City Press has previously asked about and reported, Ján Kubiš, currently the UN's envoy to Iraq.
After the event, with speeches by Ban Ki-moon's chief of staff Edmond Mulet, the head of DPI and Professor Stephen Schlesinger, a cynic opined to Inner City Press that despite or because of all the Eastern European Group candidates, maybe Mulet's predecessor Susana Malcorra, now being “seasoned” in Argentina, will return and get the job. We'll have more on this.
On December 15, after President of the General Assembly Mogens Lykketoft as well as US Ambassador Samantha Power co-signed a letterto all states and Observer States to put forward candidates, Lykketoft took questions.
On January 15, Lykketoft's office put online a third nomination letter, that of Montenegro for Igor Luksic, joining FYROM's Srgjan Kerim and Croatia's Pusic. Here.
And when, we ask, might Slovakia put in a nomination for Jan Kubis? And would Czech Republic make a nomination, while its Deputy Prime Minister says "no more refugees"?
Earlier on January 15, Inner City Press asked Lykketoft who is paying for his trips to the United Arab Emirates, Davos and Jordan. Video here.Later Lykketoft's spokesperson replied, "The PGAs trip to Abu Dhabi is being funded by Govt of UAE and the rest of the trip by the Office of the PGA." The answer is appreciated; we'll have more on this.
On Next SG, back on December 15 Inner City Press asked Lykketoft if the General Assembly's “dialogues” with candidates will be open -- yes -- and if he thought a candidate currently heading a UN agency should step down to run. (He did not answer this.)
Lykketoft said so far there are two formal candidates: Croatia's foreign minister Vesna Pusic and former PGA Srgjan Kerim of FYROM. Inner City Press asked, during the press conference, how for example a person like ex-PGA Vuk Jeremic, without the support of his government at present, could run. Lykketoft said that another state could nominate him.
(An aside: if it's true that neither Pusic nor Kerim are on Twitter, what does that say about the place of technology and social media in the current Next SG race?)
Minutes later, on Periscope (speaking of transparency), Inner City Press asked Lykketoft of a nomination from a non-state would even be processed. No, he indicated. So much for “We the Peoples.” And so much, perhaps, for Eastern Europe, if Crimea becomes a litmus test.
On December 11, Inner City Press asked the foreign ministers of both Ukraine and Lithuania, both members of the Eastern European Group, about who should be next SG. Video here.
From the answers, it seems at least these two countries will demand a candidate which would condemn a P5 Security Council member's violation of the UN Charter. Since p5 members have a veto over the SG, maybe the post will move beyond the group. We'll be covering this, watch this site.
FWe note that at the increasingly corrupt UN Correspondents Association, there are no term limits and this year, all six officers are running without opposition, headed by Giampaolo Pioli who previously rented one of his apartments to Sri Lanka's ambassador then screened his war crimes denial film, and now sells seats with Ban Ki-moon for $6,000. Let's hope this process can lead to an SG who can clear the UN up.
On September 22, after the Permanent Representatives of Estonia and Costa Rica announced a high level meeting on the topic on September 26; Estonia's Sven Jürgenson said his priority is the best candidate, not necessarily from the Eastern European group.
Inner City Press asked if this same push for transparency applies to the current murky process of selecting the new High Commissioner for Refugees, of which it is said Ban Ki-moon alone choose (Danish UNGA President Mogens Lykketoft told Inner City Press he “favors” the Danish ex-Prime Minister but plays no role.)
Costa Rica's Juan Carlos Mendoza Garcia told Inner City Press that reforms in Secretary General selection could help reform other selections in the UN system. Inner City Press - and the Free UN Coalition for Access -- ask, isn't the refugee top post something of a test case?
Tellingly, the old UN Correspondents Association demanded to ask - and largely waste - the first question, the time of meritless hierarchy that is precisely what's wrong with the UN. We'll have more on this, and on the September 26 high level meeting.
Back on July 22 the subject was discussed behind closed doors by the UN Security Council. Afterward UK Ambassador Matthew Rycroft emerged and described the meeting as a first step, adding that the UK intends to convene a so-called Arria formula meeting of the Council once candidates come forward.
Inner City Press asked Rycroft if the issue of regional rotation - that is, the the Next SG post belongs to the Eastern European Group -- came up. He said that it did, adding among other things that the UK does not think that is the most important factor. Periscope video here, for now.
Background: on June 30, UN Conference Room 11 was full to discuss the Next SG question, in an event organized by the 27 member states (so far) making up ACT (Accountability, Coherence, Transparency).
Surprising to some, on the panel was UK Permanent Representative Matthew Rycroft, who said among other things that the Next SG should not necessarily be from the Eastern European Group.
The room was full -- Inner City Press stood by the door, broadcastingby Periscope and live-tweeting with laptop in hand -- but with a notable contingent of Eastern European representatives. One question identified herself as such: a woman, and Eastern European. Just saying.
William Pace of WFM reminisced how Boutros Boutros Ghali's second term was vetoed in a deal between the (Bill) Clinton adminstration and then-Senator Jesse Helms, to release dues payments to the UN.
The proposal now is for a single seven year term. Mary Robinson says she knows of another P5 country, beyond the UK, which is open to a single seven year term.
When it was open for questions, Inner City Press (also on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, which unlike the older correspondents grouping actually fights for more transparency by the UN) asked why not have a debate among prospective candidates?
Why not require disclosure of how much is spend on each candidates campaign, including banning or requiring the disclosure of spending of the funds of UN Programmes (UNDP) or Organizations (UNESCO) for their chiefs to campaign to replace Ban Ki-moon?
The UK's Rycroft said that prohibitions are not the answer -- agreed -- but did not answer on requiring financial disclosures. (He said we don't want massive spending, one isn't running for president. Which raises another question: what about some form of matching funds for candidates from lower income countries?)
While much of the focus seems to be on arranging letters from the President of the Security Council to the President of the General Assembly, as Inner City Press asked at the ACT event and asked the new PGA Mogens Lykketoft himself, twice (video), can't the PGA call a high level meeting and invite candidates to present themselves? In this way, the wider world outside the UN could get engaged, and put on some pressure. The anonymous polling of which candidates are “discouraged” by the P5 members should not, FUNCA contends, be repeated.
Costa Rica's Permanent Representative Juan Carlos Mendoza-García wrapped up, and the event was over. It was promising, but moves for reform and opening up should begin as soon as possible. Watch this site.
Back on June 1, after several press conference on the topic and a closed door General Assembly session on April 27, the ACT group of 27 states (Accountability, Coherence and Transparency) submitted their page and a half set of proposals to the Presidents of the Security Council and of the General Assembly.
Even before these proposals are debated, candidates are edging for an advantage; dark horses are positioning themselves for it the post slips away from the Eastern European Group. Inner City Press has mentioned Helen Clark, using the UN Development Program post to campaign (staff who cross her on Twitter are reprimanded, as Inner City Pressreported here.)
Another "dark horse" candidate, Inner City Press is told, is Swedish foreign minister and former UN official Margot Wallstrom. We'd like to hear from her what she thnks of the UN's handling of allegations of sexual abuse by French "peacekeepers" in the Central African Republic, including the role of another reputed dark horse candidate, or at least candidate to head the UN in Geneva, Susana Malcorra. And what did Ban know, and when did he know it?
The Free UN Coalition for Access agrees, there should be formal candidacies, platforms -- and adds, why not debates?
We'd like to hear the Swiss view on this - from today forward, from a new mission spokesperson, Simone Eymann. Her predecessor Adrian Sollberger at his farewell reception on June 1 joked how being an elections officer is like speed dating. He is remaining with the the Foreign Department of Switzerland working in the Cabinet of the Secretary of State, in Berne.
So why NOT some debates among candidates for Secretary General, when they declare? We'll have more on this.
How to pick the next UNSG: that was the question on the afternoon of April 27 in what was called a "closed" meeting in the Trusteeship Council Chamber. The meeting being labeled closed, and not on UN webcast, is a bad beginning, the Free UN Coalition for Access believes.
To counter-act this Inner City Press did its reporting about the meeting, from India urging that there be more than one - a panel - of candidates proposed, to Moldova emphasizing that the next SG should come from Eastern Europe.
Canada said regional rotation should inform but not determine the selection. The UK to its credit released a copy of the speech by new Permanent Representative Matthew Rycroft - but how to square its proposals with David Cameron nominating Andrew Lansley to replace Valerie Amos as Emergency Relief Coordinator, then insisting that the UK should have the post, now in the person of Stephen O'Brien.
Update: With only a few dozen states choosing to speak, the chair decided to try to finish them all -- five states in twelve minutes? -- to end the debate on April 27. This too may not be the right spirit.
Update II: And when the rushed session ended, the next one was announced for May 12, on the "institutional memory" of the Office of the President of the General Assembly.
Earlier in a 10 am press conference by the campaign called "1 for 7 Billion: Find the Best UN Leader."
At the April 27 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson for Ban's views on needed reforms. Apparently there are none: it is up to member states, he said, adding that selecting a women would be good. What about pay to play?
Inner City Press asked the panel if, as happened last time, increase trade and aid funding by a candidates' country should at least be disclosed, if not prohibited. William Pace of WFM replied not only about countries spending hundreds of million of Euros, but also about the heads of international agencies using their posts to campaign.
Since UNDP's Helen Clark is known to have told associates and underlings she would like to be the next SG, Inner City Press asked the panel for comment. They were diplomatic, including on the UK, said to be a reformer on the SG post, having insisted it retain the Emergency Relief Coordinator positioon, albeit in the person of Stephen O'Brien and not Cameron's first nominee (and National Health Service destroyer) Andrew Lansley.
Natalie Samarasinghe of UNA-UK said the campaign around (well, against) Lansley was a positive step forward; she said that social media makes secret processes less possible. (But see the replacement at Yemen envoy of Jamal Benomar by a Mauritanian official who has not made public financial disclosure).
UNITED NATIONS, January 29 -- Since Mogens Lykketoft took over as UN President of the General Assembly, Inner City Press has asked him about Denmark: Danish former PM Helle Thorning Schmidt using his office if not him to campaign to head UNHCR, and funds from Denmark and others. Now, Inner City Press has asked Lykketoft's office about his comments about Denmark, so far without answer. On the morning of January 29, Inner City Press asked Lykketoft's two spokespeople:
“This is a request for quick comment on what PGA Lykketoft has been quoted as saying about Denmark (see below). Among other things, can you explain the use of (UN) background, and how the PGA intends to use his platform at the UN with regard to Denmark's reputation.”
But there has been no answer. Inner City Press' sources have provided this loose summary:
“A tired and sad Lykketoft explains that his choice of words in his private birthday party speech were not for public consumption. He did not plan the leak. He understands that people in Denmark have attacked his choice of words. He spoke with humor and did *not* make any implied allegations of wrongdoing. He did not imagine that some of his guests would forward his speech to the press.
“But he is very sad about the state of Denmark, and he is sad that the former government could not prevent the liberals and Løkke getting into power. He stresses that is not happy at all of what is said abroad about Denmark for the moment. This is much more serious. This has damaged Denmark's reputation.We have a common obligation to minimize the damages. He will do it from his platform in the UN.”
Inner City Press' questions, in part, about about this use of the UN platform. We'll have more on this.
Two weeks after UN President of the General Assembly Mogens Lykketoft said that in the wake of the indictment of his predecessor John Ashe he would be more transparent, on November 17 Inner City Press asked Lykketoft's spokesperson for basic disclosures: of Lykketoft's daily schedule, and of what gratuities he receives, including free tickets to events others are paying for, sometimes substantially paying for.Video here, and embedded below.
Lykketoft's spokesperson said he was not disclosing his daily schedule due to concerns raised by his security detail. But these are from the UN Department of Safety and Security, the same DSS which provides security to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his Deputy Jan Eliasson, for both of whom a daily scheduled is published, in advance.
On gratuities including free tickets, Lykketoft's spokesperson said it was the type of disclosure that Lykketoft had said he would make -- then he added that in some even most of these cases Lykketoft would be attending in his official capacity and therefore not expected to pay.
That's what makes it a gratuity that should be disclosed.
Let's take an example. As Inner City Press has raised, the UN Correspondents Association is soliciting $6,000 or more for tickets to its “ball” on Wall Street, including sitting at the “VIP” table. This seems like selling access to Ban Ki-moon -- a sample Permanent Representative approached Inner City Press and called UNCA's solicitation “disgusting” -- and one wonders what Lykketoft things about it. More pertinently, is he participating in it? Either taking a comped ticket, or worse, sitting at the very VIP table access to which is being sold?
Here is UNCA's recent pitch:
"Dear Ambassador,
The United Nations Correspondents Association is honored to invite you to participate and contribute to the 20th annual UNCA Awards event with guest of honor U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and H.S.H. Prince Albert II of Monaco, recipient of the 2015 Global Advocate of the Year Award for climate change. Exclusive raffle prizes include business class airline tickets around the world with hotel accommodations and a grand prize FIAT 500X car. As your esteemed presence will ensure the success of this event, we are pleased to send you the below opportunities to attend the gala dinner:
Mission Table Special Price / $6000 (half-table) 5 seats at VIP table at the gala event
Special Ambassador Contribution / $2,000 -1 VIP ticket for Ambassador with premium seating to dinner + 1 complimentary VIP ticket for spouse or guest -Special acknowledgement of the Ambassador and the Mission in the UNCA Awards Journal of the evening -Additional tickets for UN Diplomats of the Mission can be purchased at the special price of $750 each
Giampaolo Pioli, UNCA President Please make all checks payable to 'UNCA Awards Committee' Contributions to the UNCA Awards Committee are tax deductible. The UNCA Awards Committee is a 501-c(3)"
What - to sell photo ops with Ban Ki-moon to businessness / brothel owners indicted for corruption and out on $50 million bail, the same money used to make contributions and then get UNCA "journalism" awards?
These UNCA prices, though elevated, are less than what UNCA took from Ng Lap Seng's vehicles.
Having been told by the UN Office of the Spokesperson to ask the PGA's office where Ashe's and Sam Kutesa's documents are, Inner City Press asked the PGA Office's spokesperson - who said they don't have them. Round and round, UNreformed.
Inner City Press will, of course, be covering the UN General Assembly session on November 20 about migration and refugees, and the Third Committee, etc. But these are very basic disclosures that are being requested - the information should be disclosed.
Back on November 4, without one mentioning the name of John Ashe, much less his fellow indictees Ng Lap Seng, Frank Lorenzo and Sheri Yan, on November 3 both UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and President of the General Assembly Mogens Lykketoft gave speeches about post-indictment reform.
After the two speeches, Inner City Press asked Lykketoft about his proposal still allow financial flows from "host organization[s]" like Ng Lap Seng's Sun Kian Ip Group and if Lykketoft would establish a Freedom of Information procedure so that the Press and public could requested documents. Lykketoft replied, on this, "we have no access whatsoever to documents from earlier PGA offices." Video here.
Then when Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, "Does the Secretariat have any of Mr. Kutesa or Ashe’s documents?" Dujarric replied, "I’m not aware that we do, because those are the documents held by the presidents themselves."
This is a major problem - how can this be? On November 4, Inner City Press asked again, video here, UN transcript here:
Inner City Press: I wanted to ask about these documents as well, because it seems, it was pretty extraordinary yesterday that Mr. Lykketoft said he has no records of Ashe or Kutesa and what you said here. So I wanted to ask you a very specific question, for example, in the charge document by the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation] there is extensive emailing between Ng Lap Seng and his affiliates and the PGA. There's also reference to the Chief of Staff and people that are actually UN staff members. And I'm… I've looked at this thing called archives.un.org, which instructs staff to, like, retain records, record-retention policy. So I wanted you to know or to say maybe later today, would emails from these outside parties to people working in Mr. Ashe's office, such as the Chief of Staff, have been retained?
Spokesman: I think, the office the President of the General Assembly is run by the President of the General Assembly. So I would encourage you to aim your questions in that direction.
Inner City Press: We asked yesterday and he said he has nothing…
Spokesman: I can't… I can't speak to the details of how either Mr. Ashe or others have run their offices.
Inner City Press: But do you see the problem on this?
Spokesman: I'm not arguing with you about the line of questioning. I just… that's as far as I can go.
Lykketoft on November 3 published some "transparency" material on his Office's website which, upon Inner City Press review, appears largely derived from a previous PGA Handbook by Switzerland and "its" PGA Deiss. That docuemnt states:
... "the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management (DGACM) Executive Office is responsible for all financial, personnel, and general administrative matters concerning DGACM, including the Office of the PGA.. In executing his/her duties, the PGA is supported by the Office of the President of the General Assembly (Office of the PGA, or OPGA). The team supporting the PGA is also called “the Cabinet of the PGA.” Although the Office of the PGA is independent in the execution of its mandate, for administrative purposes it is attached to the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management (DGACM)."
So doesn't DGACM have these documents? Here's a UN "Frequently Asked Questions" Inner City Press has found: "records, like all assets, are the property of the Organisation...You need to list the most important groups of records and documents required to fulfill your function. You should be familiar with how these key records are protected, who has access to them and how long they need to be kept. What are you and your team members specific responsibilities?"
What, indeed. We will have more on this. Watch this site.
From the PGA's Office's transcript:
Inner City Press: thanks for doing the stakeout. I see in your information note under official travel, it says that other funding sources can be used including host organisation. And since some of the allegations are that, for example, as recently as August 2015, Mr. Ng Lap Seng and his Sun Kian Ip foundation... he's since been indicted... travel for UN staff, ambassadors and others to Macau, how is this going to close that loophole in which a business... in... in... a business executive can offer luxury hotels, first-class tickets to faraway places?
And I also wanted to ask you... I'm going to say this, I guess, diplomatically. The Presidents of the 68th and 69th sessions, both of their spouses took compensated positions with NGOs that have since been... the heads have since been indicted, Global Sustainability Foundation and South-South News, I mean the heads of each. How would you address that?
And, finally, would you consider implementing some sort of a freedom of information policy in your office i.e., rather than just putting things on your website, if the press or public make a request for a document, unless there's some reason to withhold it, to make it available in a certain period of time? Thanks a lot. Sorry for the long question.
President Lykketoft: "I think I'm not able to go much further into the accusations raised. That's not for me to... to comment on. And I can say that we have no access and thus maybe also a procedure that should be changed in the future, but we have no access whatsoever to documents from earlier PGA offices. So I can't give you any details about what was present there and... and... in that connection, I think, it's... it's of interest what the Secretary-General just said about the investigation he has put into force about what is of information in connection with the case in other parts of the UN organisation. But we have no access to any of this now if you look backwards.
If you look forwards, of course, I would be willing to provide any kind of access to information about travelling I do during my tenure as President.
Much of what we have committed ourselves to do has to be generalized during the considerations in the General Assembly over the revitalisation, probably in... in the shape... in the form of resolution. But what I can tell you here is what we will do, how we will proceed with the openness of information during this coming year."
Dujarric tried to say that having records about the Trust Fund account that Ashe barely used was enough. But where are the documents? Is there no UN document retention policy applicable here? Dujarric did not answer. We'll have (much) more on this.
Mogen Lykketoft, meanwhile, couldn't bring himself to say Ashe's name, only referring to the President of the 68th General Assembly session. Lykketoft, who allowed his Office to be used for fellow Dane Helle Thorning-Schmidt to campaign for the top spot in the UN's refugee agency UNHCR, said he will be making reform proposals. We will be there - with questions for Lykketoft.
Ban again mentioned what he told Inner City Press at his last stakeout, a task force under his chef of staff Susana Malcorra. But as Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Dujarric, with all due respect, Malcorra accepted one of Ng's South South Awards, for Ban. We'll have more on this.
UNITED NATIONS, December 15-- How should the next UN Secretary General be selected, to improve the Organization?
On December 15, after President of the General Assembly Mogens Lykketoft as well as US Ambassador Samantha Power co-signed a letter to all states and Observer States to put forward candidates, Lykketoft took questions.
On Next SG, Inner City Press asked Lykketoft if the General Assembly's “dialogues” with candidates will be open -- yes -- and if he thought a candidate currently heading a UN agency should step down to run. (He did not answer this.)
Lykketoft said so far there are two formal candidates: Croatia's foreign minister Vesna Pusic and former PGA Srgjan Kerim of FYROM. Inner City Press asked, during the press conference, how for example a person like ex-PGA Vuk Jeremic, without the support of his government at present, could run. Lykketoft said that another state could nominate him.
(An aside: if it's true that neither Pusic nor Kerim are on Twitter, what does that say about the place of technology and social media in the current Next SG race?)
Minutes later, on Periscope (speaking of transparency), Inner City Press asked Lykketoft of a nomination from a non-state would even be processed. No, he indicated. So much for “We the Peoples.” And so much, perhaps, for Eastern Europe, if Crimea becomes a litmus test.
On December 11, Inner City Press asked the foreign ministers of both Ukraine and Lithuania, both members of the Eastern European Group, about who should be next SG. Video here.
From the answers, it seems at least these two countries will demand a candidate which would condemn a P5 Security Council member's violation of the UN Charter. Since p5 members have a veto over the SG, maybe the post will move beyond the group. We'll be covering this, watch this site.
FOn November 18, after the UN Security Council met behind closed doors on the issue, the month's UN Security Council President Matthew Rycroft of the UK emerged and read a short Elements to the Press on “the issue of the letter that will be written shortly by the President of the Security Council and the President of the General Assembly, on the selection process for the appointment of the next secretary general, and an exchange of views on the basis of a draft letter from the UK and we agreed to do further work, both on the letter and to keep in touch with each other on the timing of that, in order to fulfill our side of the work of the security council. The General Assembly has already begun with their resolution 69/321.”
But less than an hour before, Russia's Ambassador Vitaly Churkin had told the press that “I’m sure the President of the Council is going to speak. And what I proposed, half-jokingly I must admit, that we should set a working group which will have weekly meetings until the end of next year on a draft letter by the President of the General Assembly and the President of the Security Council. In fact, if we stick to the resolution of the General Assembly, it says that they are asking for a joint letter, which is going to describe the process and invite candidates. The process is described in the Charter and inviting candidates is saying yes please, submit your candidates. But if you try to turn it into a lengthy negotiation, some kind of a fancy document, then it will take 12 months for us to achieve this draft letter. So my pitch, which was shared by some colleagues, let’s not over-complicate things. Come on. And if we don’tover-complicated things, then I think it can be done.
France 24 asked Churkin, You have a candidate? Churkin replied there are seven or eight candidates from Eastern Europe, but France 24 insisted, “From Russia?”
Churkin explained that Permanent members of the Security Council don't submit UNSG candidates. And so it goes. We note that at the increasingly corrupt UN Correspondents Association, there are no term limits and this year, all six officers are running without opposition, headed by Giampaolo Pioli who previously rented one of his apartments to Sri Lanka's ambassador then screened his war crimes denial film, and now sells seats with Ban Ki-moon for $6,000. Let's hope this process can lead to an SG who can clear the UN up.
On September 22, after the Permanent Representatives of Estonia and Costa Rica announced a high level meeting on the topic on September 26; Estonia's Sven Jürgenson said his priority is the best candidate, not necessarily from the Eastern European group.
Inner City Press asked if this same push for transparency applies to the current murky process of selecting the new High Commissioner for Refugees, of which it is said Ban Ki-moon alone choose (Danish UNGA President Mogens Lykketoft told Inner City Press he “favors” the Danish ex-Prime Minister but plays no role.)
Costa Rica's Juan Carlos Mendoza Garcia told Inner City Press that reforms in Secretary General selection could help reform other selections in the UN system. Inner City Press - and the Free UN Coalition for Access -- ask, isn't the refugee top post something of a test case?
Tellingly, the old UN Correspondents Association demanded to ask - and largely waste - the first question, the time of meritless hierarchy that is precisely what's wrong with the UN. We'll have more on this, and on the September 26 high level meeting.
Back on July 22 the subject was discussed behind closed doors by the UN Security Council. Afterward UK Ambassador Matthew Rycroft emerged and described the meeting as a first step, adding that the UK intends to convene a so-called Arria formula meeting of the Council once candidates come forward.
Inner City Press asked Rycroft if the issue of regional rotation - that is, the the Next SG post belongs to the Eastern European Group -- came up. He said that it did, adding among other things that the UK does not think that is the most important factor. Periscope video here, for now.
It was argued to Inner City Press that while the UN Charter in English assumes that the Secretary General is male, that is not the case in the Chinese (or Russian) versions - for what it's worth.
Update: as to Russian, an astute reader notes that
Within Chapter XV of the Charter (“The Secretariat”), in the third sentence of Article 97, where the English version of the Charter says of the Secretary-General, “He shall . . .”, the Russian version instead uses the name “TheSecretary-General shall . . .”, thus avoiding specifying the SG’s gender. But in Article 99, where the English says, “The Secretary-General may bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which in his opinion may threaten . . .”, the Russian also uses, “. . . in his opinion”.
h/t/ SC Procedure
Статья 97
Секретариат состоит из Генерального Секретаря и такого персонала, который может потребоваться для Организации. Генеральный Секретарь назначается Генеральной Ассамблеей по рекомендации Совета Безопасности. Генеральный Секретарь является главным административным должностным лицом Организации.
Статья 98
Генеральный Секретарь действует в этом качестве на всех заседаниях Генеральной Ассамблеи, Совета Безопасности, Экономического и Социального Совета и Совета по Опеке и выполняет такие другие функции, какие возлагаются на него этими органами. Генеральный Секретарь представляет Генеральной Ассамблее ежегодный отчет о работе Организации.
Статья 99
Генеральный Секретарь имеет право доводить до сведения Совета Безопасности о любых вопросах, которые, по его мнению, могут угрожать поддержанию международного мира и безопасности.
The Security Council's President for July, Gerard von Bohemen of New Zealand, spoke at the UNTV stakeout after the consultations. Inner City Press asked him as well about the regional rotation issue. Periscope video for now here. He said he had come up; he said that New Zealand's position is consistent with that of the ACT - Accountability, Coherence and Transparency - group, see background below. Here's from July 22 transcriptio by the NZ UN Mission:
"On the Secretary General appointment, this was the first time the Council had discussed the issue, there was a reference made to the ACT letter and the processes suggested in that, but it was a more general conversation than that. I was very encouraged by both the spirit of the discussion, also by the relative convergence of views, although there was no specific agreement on any outcome, there was a recognition that transparency is an important consideration, and clarity and recognition that the General Assembly membership is very interested in this issue and that the Council should be responding to it. So we agreed that this was the first of a number of conversations we would have as to any specific action that might be taken, that’s for the future."
Inner City Press: How would you characterize the issue of regional rotation in the Eastern European Group, just to give some sense of what people said or what the view is?
A: Well, a number of speakers referred to it, no one disagreed with it, but it wasn’t seen as being inconsistent with the processes, some of the processes that were being recommended.
Background: on June 30, UN Conference Room 11 was full to discuss the Next SG question, in an event organized by the 27 member states (so far) making up ACT (Accountability, Coherence, Transparency).
Surprising to some, on the panel was UK Permanent Representative Matthew Rycroft, who said among other things that the Next SG should not necessarily be from the Eastern European Group.
The room was full -- Inner City Press stood by the door,broadcasting by Periscope and live-tweeting with laptop in hand -- but with a notable contingent of Eastern European representatives. One question identified herself as such: a woman, and Eastern European. Just saying.
William Pace of WFM reminisced how Boutros Boutros Ghali's second term was vetoed in a deal between the (Bill) Clinton adminstration and then-Senator Jesse Helms, to release dues payments to the UN.
The proposal now is for a single seven year term. Mary Robinson says she knows of another P5 country, beyond the UK, which is open to a single seven year term.
When it was open for questions, Inner City Press (also on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access, which unlike the older correspondents grouping actually fights for more transparency by the UN) asked why not have a debate among prospective candidates?
Why not require disclosure of how much is spend on each candidates campaign, including banning or requiring the disclosure of spending of the funds of UN Programmes (UNDP) or Organizations (UNESCO) for their chiefs to campaign to replace Ban Ki-moon?
The UK's Rycroft said that prohibitions are not the answer -- agreed -- but did not answer on requiring financial disclosures. (He said we don't want massive spending, one isn't running for president. Which raises another question: what about some form of matching funds for candidates from lower income countries?)
While much of the focus seems to be on arranging letters from the President of the Security Council to the President of the General Assembly, as Inner City Press asked at the ACT event and asked the new PGA Mogens Lykketoft himself, twice (video), can't the PGA call a high level meeting and invite candidates to present themselves? In this way, the wider world outside the UN could get engaged, and put on some pressure. The anonymous polling of which candidates are “discouraged” by the P5 members should not, FUNCA contends, be repeated.
Costa Rica's Permanent Representative Juan Carlos Mendoza-García wrapped up, and the event was over. It was promising, but moves for reform and opening up should begin as soon as possible. Watch this site.
Back on June 1, after several press conference on the topic and a closed door General Assembly session on April 27, the ACT group of 27 states (Accountability, Coherence and Transparency) submitted their page and a half set of proposals to the Presidents of the Security Council and of the General Assembly.
Even before these proposals are debated, candidates are edging for an advantage; dark horses are positioning themselves for it the post slips away from the Eastern European Group. Inner City Press has mentioned Helen Clark, using the UN Development Program post to campaign (staff who cross her on Twitter are reprimanded, as Inner City Press reported here.)
Another "dark horse" candidate, Inner City Press is told, is Swedish foreign minister and former UN official Margot Wallstrom. We'd like to hear from her what she thnks of the UN's handling of allegations of sexual abuse by French "peacekeepers" in the Central African Republic, including the role of another reputed dark horse candidate, or at least candidate to head the UN in Geneva, Susana Malcorra. And what did Ban know, and when did he know it?
The Free UN Coalition for Access agrees, there should be formal candidacies, platforms -- and adds, why not debates?
We'd like to hear the Swiss view on this - from today forward, from a new mission spokesperson, Simone Eymann. Her predecessor Adrian Sollberger at his farewell reception on June 1 joked how being an elections officer is like speed dating. He is remaining with the the Foreign Department of Switzerland working in the Cabinet of the Secretary of State, in Berne.
So why NOT some debates among candidates for Secretary General, when they declare? We'll have more on this.
How to pick the next UNSG: that was the question on the afternoon of April 27 in what was called a "closed" meeting in the Trusteeship Council Chamber. The meeting being labeled closed, and not on UN webcast, is a bad beginning, the Free UN Coalition for Access believes.
To counter-act this Inner City Press did its reporting about the meeting, from India urging that there be more than one - a panel - of candidates proposed, to Moldova emphasizing that the next SG should come from Eastern Europe.
Canada said regional rotation should inform but not determine the selection. The UK to its credit released a copy of the speech by new Permanent Representative Matthew Rycroft - but how to square its proposals with David Cameron nominating Andrew Lansley to replace Valerie Amos as Emergency Relief Coordinator, then insisting that the UK should have the post, now in the person of Stephen O'Brien.
Update: With only a few dozen states choosing to speak, the chair decided to try to finish them all -- five states in twelve minutes? -- to end the debate on April 27. This too may not be the right spirit.
Update II: And when the rushed session ended, the next one was announced for May 12, on the "institutional memory" of the Office of the President of the General Assembly.
Earlier in a 10 am press conference by the campaign called "1 for 7 Billion: Find the Best UN Leader."
At the April 27 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson for Ban's views on needed reforms. Apparently there are none: it is up to member states, he said, adding that selecting a women would be good. What about pay to play?
Inner City Press asked the panel if, as happened last time, increase trade and aid funding by a candidates' country should at least be disclosed, if not prohibited. William Pace of WFM replied not only about countries spending hundreds of million of Euros, but also about the heads of international agencies using their posts to campaign.
Since UNDP's Helen Clark is known to have told associates and underlings she would like to be the next SG, Inner City Press asked the panel for comment. They were diplomatic, including on the UK, said to be a reformer on the SG post, having insisted it retain the Emergency Relief Coordinator positioon, albeit in the person of Stephen O'Brien and not Cameron's first nominee (and National Health Service destroyer) Andrew Lansley.
Natalie Samarasinghe of UNA-UK said the campaign around (well, against) Lansley was a positive step forward; she said that social media makes secret processes less possible. (But see the replacement at Yemen envoy of Jamal Benomar by a Mauritanian official who has not made public financial disclosure).
