New Low: At UN, DPI Nasser Favors Egypt State Media, Saudi & Censor Lobby To Take Over, ICP Has Minders

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 20 – The UN which evicted Inner City Press 14 months ago after it sought to covering UN corruption in the UN Press Briefing Room has on April 20responded that it is fine to continue to confine it to minders, while giving much more access to pro-UN or state media like Akhbar al Yom and others which never ask questions, or challenge incompetence. Maher Nasser, for the second time the "Officer in Charge" of the UN Department of Public Information, responded three weeks after Inner City Press' formal request by saying "U have same access as 3000 other journalists." This while his DPI has given the Resident Correspondent accreditation Inner City Press had for 10 years to entities which just arrived at the UN, or those like a Moroccan correspondent who in fact work FOR the UN. It is disgusting censorship. To become the new head of DPI under Antonio Guterres, candidates Inner City Press has reported on include Michele Montas, the Ban Ki-moon spokesperson who participated in meetings about excluding Inner City Press from Google News and threatening it along with Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, and a correspondents for a Saudi media openly lobbying Guterres officials. Both are, it's said, Americans. Will the US Mission, so recently bragging about transparency in the NGO Committee, allow a censor to head DPI? Allow the lawless, no due process regime of censorship of anti-corruption reporting to continue? Watch this site. The UN, demonstrating hypocrisy on both press freedom and transparency, evicted Inner City Press as it covered UN corruption in the Ng Lap Seng bribery case and restricts it even now, after the evicting official is gone from the UN's unaccountable Department of Public Information. A formal request for reversal, below, was filed 13 days ago. So far only a Kafka-esque one line response, followed by an accusation by the UN's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric that Inner City Press' criticism of the UN and some of its officials is "harassment." Video here. When Dujarric was in charge of media accreditation at the UN, he summoned Inner City Press about a mere tweet, here. This, then, is censorship. And those who took over accreditation after Dujarric, in what's being revealed as the DPI of UN bribery indicted Ng Lap Seng can't even explain the basis of minders and metal detectors for Inner City Press while, for example, Egyptian state media Akhbar al Yom was nowhere to be seen, hasn't asked a single question in ten months. The UN is Corrupt - we'll have more on this.

   Having no response other than a forward to yet more UN DPI officials, Inner City Press asked and was told, Didn't [a particular] DPI official talk to you? Well, no. 

So Inner City Press put it in writing again: "Eleven days ago I wrote with several requests to the Department of Public Information, including regarding the ongoing restrictions in reporting that I face due to a no due process eviction ordered by the former USG of DPI. Other than a notification that my request was being forwarded to still others in DPI, Inner City Press has received no response, except today to be told that one of the addresses was supposed to, or supposedly, told Inner City Press 'there is no change at this time.' This is totally unacceptable. Only in the past few days, I was prevented from staking out the Rwanda genocide memorial as I have in previous years (the DPI escort or minder told me, very quickly, that I had to leave); as I have told DPI, I would have gone to cover the USG of DPA's counter-terrorism briefing today but for the requirement of a minder....This is a reiterated request for reversal or a written explanation of what the UN has done and is doing with regard to Inner City Press." The UN's response? A single line: "upon review of the situation there is no change in the current status." This was copied to UN DPI officials Maher Nasser, Hua Jiang, Hak-Fan Lau, Gallach-aide Darrin Farrant - and then others, on which we'll have more. 

This is the UN's "due process" after a more than one year, ongoing restriction for covering UN corruption? Inner City Press has written back, on which we'll have more: "This response, like the eviction imposed in 2016, does not meet the most basic threshold of due process. What was reviewed? Where are the requested files?  For the record: Inner City Press said in advance it would cover the meeting in the UN Press Briefing Room on January 29, 2016 specifically in order to see how South South News, described in U.S. District Court as Ng Lap Seng's bribery vehicle, was discussed.  For seeking to cover UN corruption, Inner City Press was by then DPI USG Gallach evicted without a hearing, no appeal, remains restricted. Today I asked the Spokesman about the guilty plea in the Ng Lap Seng / John Ashe case, which states that South South News violated U.S. law. Now the Spokesman says South South News is no longer in the UN. But Inner City Press, which covered and uncovered the corruption, remains restricted with no explanation... This is unacceptable: Inner City Press' coverage of the UN is being hindered, triggered by its coverage of corruption. The UN is not complying with basic due process, as noted by the Special Rapporteurs and others. As you know, there are more than 2500 signatories to a petition to the UN to this effect. Please state:  what was reviewed?" Etc - this too went to others, we'll have more on this. 

After the UN's head of Communications Cristina Gallach was given a strange farewell toast on March 30, the UN told Inner City Press that the "position will be filled by an Officer-in-Charge... while the process to find a new Under-Secretary-General for Public Information continues."

 On April 3, Inner City Press wrote to this Officer in Charge, who copied the request to several others to be named: 

"Four hundred and five days ago, without any hearing or opportunity to be heard, I was ordered out of the United Nations for having sought to covering a meeting in the UN Press Briefing Room that was nowhere listed as closed to some journalists and not others. Inner City Press, still without any hearing and no appeal since, was then evicted from its shared office S-303 which has sat largely unused since. I have been forced, for more than a year, to only enter through the metal detectors at the Visitors Entrance, and my pass has not worked on the second floor turnstile, precluding me from covering events on the second floor as other correspondents could. There are other restrictions and double standards, hindering reporting, of which DPI has been made aware.

 Yesterday was the last day atop DPI for the official who without speaking to me once signed the February 19, 2016 letter, and for the April 2016 eviction. The Deputy Spokesperson told me yesterday, in a noon briefing where I asked six questions (earlier the week there was a noon briefing where from the entire rest of the accredited press corps there were only three questioners), I was told that you are the Officer in Charge of DPI. In that capacity, this is a formal request that Inner City Press be restored to the office it was ousted from without due process... and that I be restored to Resident Correspondent accreditation immediately... I also incorporate this link to the Special Rapporteurs for Freedom of Expression and Human Rights Defenders letter: and, again, this petition."

 Days later, no ruling, attempted jokes while Inner City Press worked to write up the Syria UN Security Council meeting from a bench in the UN lobby. We'll have more on this.

On March 28, forwarded not sent to Inner City Press, this: "UNCA will host a farewell reception in honor of Under-Secretary-General of DPI, Cristina Gallach, on Thursday, March 30th at 5:30 pm in the UNCA room (3rd floor, UN Secretariat Building, room 310). Food and wine will be served. Please join us for a farewell toast!" Toasting what? Allowing into the UN with no due diligence the Macau-based businessman Ng Lap Seng, as detailed in the UN's own audit at Paragraphs 37-40 and 20b? Evicting the Press without any hearing or appeal? The decline in media access? On March 29, Inner City Press asked among other things, "yesterday your Office replied, regarding the USG of DPI, 'We will announce arrivals and departures as they occur.' Now that your partner has arranged a farewell for this USG for March 30, what is the rationale for your Office refusing to confirm her departure and the status of recruiting a replacement?" The UN spokesman replied, "Regarding Under-Secretary-General Cristina Gallach, her position will be filled by an Officer-in-Charge upon her departure while the process to find a new Under-Secretary-General for Public Information continues." We'll have more on this.

  In early 2016, covering the UN corruption scandals which have resulted in two sets of indictments for bribery involving the UN, Inner City Press was ordered to leave the UN Press Briefing Room by then Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric.

  Other correspondents were allowed to stay in the briefing room, which Dujarric had "lent" them. But he insisted that Inner City Press leave. Video here.

  Inner City Press asked to see any paperwork that the event was closed; none was provided. Inner City Press stated that if a single UN Security official asked it to leave, it would. Finally one guard came and said Dujarric wanted it to leave. 

  Inner City Press immediately left, uploaded the already live-streamed Periscope video, and continued digging into the corruption that's resulted in the indictment for bribery and money laundering of Ban Ki-moon's brother Ban Ki Sang and nephew Dennis Bahn.

  But three weeks afterward, without a single conversation or opportunity to be heard, Ban's Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach ordered Inner City Press to leave the UN, after ten years, on two hours notice. Order here.

   This was enforced, as Inner City Press worked on its laptop at the UN Security Council stakeout, by eight UN Security officers led by Deputy Chief McNulty, who tore Inner City Press accreditation badge off its chest and said, "Now you are a trespasser." Audio here.

  Inner City Press was marched down the escalator and around the UN traffic circle, without even its coat which was up in its longtime office. It was pushed out of the gate and its laptop, in a bag, was thrown on the sidewalk and damaged.

  The next work day when Inner City Press arranged for a fellow journalist to sign it in as a guest so it could cover the Security Council, UN Security official Matthew Sullivan said it was Banned from UN premises worldwide. Audio here.

   After three days covering the UN from the park in front in the sleet, and articles like this one, Inner City Press re-entered with a "non-resident correspondents" pass - to which it is still, more than eleven months later, confined.

  The then-US Mission under Samantha Power and Isobel Coleman, even petitioned by the DC-based Government Accountability Project, did nothing. Indirectly, a offer was made of an upgraded pass if Inner City Press would agree to a gag order, to which it would not and will not agree.

  There has been no UN opportunity for appeal or reinstatement. After having five boxes of Inner City Press' investigative files thrown on the sidewalk in April, Gallach is giving its office to an Egyptian state media Akhbar al Yom which rarely comes in, a correspondent Sanaa Youssef who had yet to ask a single question. 

Her only claim is that she was once, decades ago, a president of the United Nations Correspondents Association, the group to which Duajrric "lent" the UN Press Briefing Room, without notice or written record, on January 29, 2016. 

 Even as the scope of Ban Ki-moon's corruption is being exposed upon his return to South Korea, here, his successor Antonio Guterres has yet to reverse this year of censorship and no due process. On January 6 Dujarric and Gallach led him on a tour of... the UN Correspondents Association, which now wants him again in their clubhouse. (More on this to follow.)

 On January 27 as Inner City Press moved to cover Guterres at the UN's Holocaust event, it was targeted by UN Security and told it could not proceed without a minder, who did not appear for over 15 minutes. 

 All of this must change. This is a scam, and censorship: the UN's Censorship Alliance. We will have more on this.

On Ban Ki-moon's Nephew, UN Told Inner City Press To "Ask Colliers," UN Deals on 42 St, 45 St, Third Avenue, UNdisclosed

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 20 -- UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is in his native South Korea for five days and Press questions remain unanswered by the UN about his links to the scandal surrounding the suicide of South Korean businessman Sung Wan-jong, and his own nephew Joo-hyun "Dennis" Bahn. Inner City Press asked the UN on May 15, video here.

  On May 19, Ban urged the media not to ask about, or report on, issues surrounding his nephew. Inner City Press has asked, and will continue to ask, what rules and safeguards apply for example to a company the Secretary General's nephew works with, Colliers International, doing business with the UN, as Colliers Vice Chairman brags. Here is theUN's transcription of Ban's May 19 answer in Seoul, and below.

  Inner City Press went to the May 19 UN noon briefing and asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq what Ban had meant, video here, and for how much business Colliers, where Ban's nephew works has done with the UN. Haq refused to provide the latter information, saying "Ask Colliers."

  Inner City Press has in the day since collected information, below. But first we note that Ban's spokesperson's office and Haq himself HAVE previously answered Inner City Press questions about particular UN contractors. For example, in April 2009 Haq answered Inner City Press about the Petrocelli Electric Company. So do they only not answer when a Ban relative is involved? What's the difference?

  For now, here's some of the business with the UN of Colliers International, where Ban Ki-moon's nephew Joo-hyun "Dennis" Bahn works:

220 East 42nd Street: "The United Nations Development Programme signed a 10-year, 42,931-square-foot lease covering the entire 20th, 21st, and 23rdfloors of 220 East 42nd Street, aka The News Building. Andy Roos of Colliers International acted on behalf of the United Nations Development Programme."

220 East 42nd Street:  "United Nations Women is setting up shop at 220 E. 42nd St. where it will lease 71,204 square feet on the 17th, 18th and 19th floors. Additionally a transition team will settle into 13,746 square feet on the 4th floor -- for a total of 84,950 square feet... The deal has been percolating since last year and was made possible because another UN agency moved out. The UN's broker, Andrew Roos of Colliers International, represented the United Nations Population Fund in a move out of the building to 605 Third Ave. last year." 

605 Third Avenue: "In a 15-year, four-party deal, the United Nations Population Fund leased just under 131,000 square feet at 605 Third Ave. The turnkey space encompasses the fourth through sixth floors. The UN was represented by Andy Roos at Colliers International, who said the complicated transaction took 18 months to complete."

  In fact, the UN's "FF" building on 45th Street has a Colliers International sign on the front of it, facing the sidewalk. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's nephew works at this firm. The UN should answer about its Colliers contracts, but won't.

  By contrast on April 6, 2009, Ban's then spokesperson Michele Montas DID answer Inner City Press about a particular contractor, and on April 13, 2009, deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq told Inenr City Press that it had been given details about that contract - NOT being done here, about Ban's nephew.

From the UN's April 6, 2009 transcript:

Inner City Press:  I have a procurement question.  It’s become clear that, number one, the electrical contractor for the UN, Petrocelli Electric, the founder has been indicted in the Southern District of New York for bribery.  At the same time, the operator of UN Television, National Mobile Television Venue Services Group, is basically going bankrupt.  Everything is being sold and they’re trying to move their people into the basement area as a final refuge.  How can it be that these contracts were entered into with companies in one case being indicted, and in the other case going bankrupt?

Spokesperson Montas:  Well, in specific cases, when the contracts were entered, of course, there was no indictment and there were no suspicion that there were any wrongdoings.  In terms of the second contract, of course, we can look into this.  There are several companies going under and we cannot predict in advance which company will go under.  I can try to get more information for you from the Procurement Office, but, at this point, as I said, we cannot predict what will happen when we sign contracts....

Spokesperson:  Matthew, I just got your answer.  It was just brought to me.

The contract with the Petrocelli Electric Company covers overall electrical installations, operations, maintenance, alterations and major projects, and remains in place even though the UN has suspended the vendor from participating in any further procurement activity.  That’s what I have for you.  And we’re also aware of the financial difficulties faced by VSG’s parent company, NMT.  The Organization is dealing with the situation in consultation with the VSG management.  So I got your answer pretty fast for you.

  Then from the April 13, 2009, UN transcript:

Inner City Press: last week I’d asked about this contract with Petrocelli Electric that the UN has, in light of the indictment of the founder of the company.  Over the weekend The New York Times reported that the FBI says that the founder is connected or has associations with the Genovese crime family.  So what I’m wondering is now given... if you accept that report is true in The New York Times, what is the UN going to do about these contracts?

Associate Spokesperson Haq:  Well, Michèle told you what we’re doing in terms of that, and what she said last week hasn’t changed.

Question:  So the current contract is going to continue?  How long does the current contract run?

Associate Spokesperson:  Right now, they’re suspended from the list of vendors, but we do have, of course, our current facility needs.  So we have an existing contract.  But I believe she mentioned to you the suspension last week and...

Question:  For future business.  I just want to know how much the current business is and whether this new report makes any changes.

Associate Spokesperson:  I think she mentioned to you what the details of that contract were.  But I can just re-submit that over to you if you don’t have those details.

Question:  I don’t think she said either length or dollar value or any of the details.

Associate Spokesperson:  No, I think she mentioned what the services are.  So, I’ll get that over to you.

Now from the UN's May 19, 2015 transcript:

Inner City Press: I want to ask two press freedom questions.  One is on Burundi — there are these reports that the media or particularly foreign correspondents are not being allowed into this neighbourhood and cameras taken by the police.  I want to know whether Mr. Djinnit is aware of what, what the UN thinks of that.  And I wanted to ask, maybe if you can clarify or amplify.  I saw the Q&A the Secretary-General did in South Korea, and he said, "I have seen reports having to do with my nephew.  While I'm fulfilling… whether true or not, while I'm fulfilling my duties now as Secretary-General, while such unnecessary incorrect allegations or rumours cause inconvenience to my work as Secretary-General, so I'd like to ask you to refrain from doing that."  So, because of the… like, what is he saying?  Is he saying refrain from asking questions, refrain from…?

Deputy Spokesman:  No.  First of all, that's an abbreviation of the transcript.  I'll refer you to the full transcript.

Inner City Press:  I looked… okay.

Deputy Spokesman:  He makes a denial of any involvement in this issue.  But, his basic point is that he will go about his own work.  These questions really don't apply to him or his activities.

Inner City Press:  But, who… my question is this.  Who is he asking to refrain from doing what?  That's a direct quote from what he said.

Deputy Spokesman:  He's not making an order to anyone in the press.  It's very clear, and it's particularly clear in the context if you look at the transcript that he's talking about an issue that for him, in his head, is resolved.

Inner City Press:  But this is… okay because this is the one part of it.  I guess I understand that if… if… that things are being played out in a court in Seoul and whether the nephew… what he said that the Secretary-General did or not is, I guess, not going to be answered until it's answered there.  But, there's a simpler question, which is, the nephew works for Colliers International, which is a New York real estate firm, and the Vice-Chairman said online that they do business with the UN.  So my question is… and I asked you this before, but I'm going back to this because it seems like a very fair question — what are the rules when a relative of the Secretary-General or any high official does business with the UN?

Deputy Spokesman:  Procurement at the UN is done through our procurement office.  It is not done through any sort of issue having to do with family or family connections.  It's a procurement process that all firms have to abide by, and that's how firms get contracts.

Inner City Press:  So how did Colliers… how much business has Colliers done with the UN?

Deputy Spokesman:  You would have to ask Colliers.  As for UN procurement, it makes contracts by its normal activities.  This is not connected to anyone related to the Secretary-General.  Yes.  Oh, and… oh, wait.  You had another question on Burundi.  And on your Burundi question, see, you ask so many questions that it gets lost.  On your Burundi question, of course, we'd be concerned at any efforts to crack down on press.  We do have a small human rights team… team of human rights workers who are in Burundi and they're examining human rights issues and they'll follow up on any sort of allegations of any problems in the country.

   Here is what Ban said, by the UN's own transcription:

"I’ve seen reports having to do with my nephew. Regardless of whether it’s true or not, I feel quite ashamed that a scandal like this has surfaced and caused controversy. About my nephew’s business activities, I have never known and never took part in any of this. I’d like to tell you clearly that this has nothing to do with me. As the Secretary-General of the United Nations, I am doing a lot of things for the international community and the international community expects a lot from me. While I am fulfilling my duties as Secretary-General, such unnecessary and incorrect allegations or rumours cause inconvenience to my work as Secretary-General. So I’d like to ask you to refrain from doing that."

  Who is Ban request to "refrain," from what? The questions about his nephew are entirely legitimate, and continue because they have not been answered. They don't just go away.  

  Tellingly, the current head of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous has been allowed to openly refuse to answer Press questions, as if the issues of cover up of rapes in DR Congo, Darfur and now Central African Republic will go away.

  While the Free UN Coalition for Access openly opposes such non-answering by Ladsous (and Ban's spokespeople), Ban praises and partners with the old UN Correspondents Association, whose leaders praise Ban back, do not ask about conflicts of interest, and have even tried to get the investigative Press thrown out for such reporting. This is the context.

 On May 18, Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq an event more specific question: did Ban raise any of its relatives' real estate projects, for example Landmark 72 in Vietnam, to the Emir of Qatar in a meeting on September 24, 2013? May 18 video here and embedded below.

  Haq repeated that Ban is not involved, that he and Ban's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric have "nothing to add." On May 15, Haq told Inner City Press that the UN does not have to respond about any relative of Ban who is not a UN staff member, even if they do business with, or with the name of, the UN and Ban. Inner City Press has raised that higher within the UN.

  The JoongAng Daily reports that its affiliate JBTC has obtained an email in which Ban's nephew Bahn Joo-hyun wrote:

“QIA said the emir of Qatar had an official meeting with the UN Secretary General at the United Nations [Headquarters] at 11:30 a.m., and [Secretary General Ban] mentioned the Landmark 72 upon request of [Ban Ki-sang]" - Ban's brother.

  Using the time 11:30 a.m., Inner City Press searched past versions of Ban Ki-moon's schedule and found such a meeting: 

"September 24, 2013, 11:30 am    NLB SG Conf Rm 3rd flr The Secretary-General with H.H. Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani, Emir of Qatar"

 But the UN's read-out for that meeting did not mention real estate:

"The Secretary-General met today with His Highness Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani, Amir of the State of Qatar.  The Secretary-General reiterated his call for a political solution to the crisis in Syria, and expressed gratitude to Qatar for its support to the Central Emergency Response Fund and other generous humanitarian assistance.  They discussed the Palestine-Israel issue and also the importance of United Nations political efforts in Yemen.  The Secretary-General thanked the Amir for Qatari support on the Alliance of Civilizations, sustainable development and climate change. 

New York, 24 September 2013."

  The Alliance of Civilizations is headed by Qatar's former Permanent Representative to the UN. 

(On May 18, 2015, Inner City Press also asked Haq for Ban Ki-moon's response to Qatar detaining BBC journalist Mark Lobel while he was reporting on the treatment of migrant workers in the run up to the World Cup there; Haq's and the UN's response seems muted.)

   It is reported that Ban's nephew Ban got business trying to sell off a Sung-linked skyscraper in Vietnam by saying that Ban had discussed the project with Emir of Qatar (on whose private jet Ban has flown), and by reportedly forging a letter of commitment from Qatar's sovereign wealth fund.

  On May 14, Ban's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric replied to Inner City Press that Ban has "no connection" with this nephew - strange, just as a matter of genetics.

 On May 15, Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq a closer question: to confirm that Ban's nephew Bahn has worked for the real estate firm Colliers, and the Colliers has done business with UN.

  (Bahn's LinkedIn page lists him at Colliers, whose Vice Chairman Andrew Roos says "Some of his major clients include various divisions of the United Nations, including its Joint Pension Fund... For the United Nations, he has been responsible for more than 500,000 square feet of leasing transactions.") 

 Despite this set-up, Haq insisted that the UN does not have to, or does not, respond about family members if they are not UN staff.

 But what if the Secretary General's family member does BUSINESS with the UN?  Haq insisted the UN will not comment, that added that he faced similar questions "ten years ago," apparently an allusion to Kojo Annan and the Mercedes in what's called the Oil for Food scandal. To this has the UN sunk. Video here and embedded below.

 Inner City Press will be asking again, if it is legitimate for the UN to say it will not answer any questions about high official's family members using the UN connections to get business and going business with the UN.  Here is what UN deputy spokesperson Haq said, and thenthe transcript

Inner City Press: Yesterday, I asked Stéphane about these developing stories about the nephew of the Secretary-General and the claims made about the Qatar Sovereign Wealth Fund.  And the reason I… he said yesterday, that the Secretary-General has nothing to do with his nephew.  But I wanted to ask because there's been more reporting since even yesterday and basically what's emerged in these articles is that the nephew, Mr.… I don't want to get the name wrong.  We'll call him Mr. Ban… Ban Joo-Hyun… had made two claims.  He had made a claim to the construction company that was run by the now deceased business man, that the Secretary-General had raised this very project to the Emir of Qatar in a meeting.  And he also made a claim that the Qatar Sovereign Wealth Fund was behind the deal.  So this is… the question that I have for you is, is even if the Secretary-General is saying that these statements didn't occur, that's what I was trying to get a yes or no on, or if they did occur, he has nothing to do with them, has he informed the members of his family, including his nephew, including his brother who is part of this story, and including, for example, his son-in-law, not to invoke his name when they seek to do business deals that obviously involve Sovereign Wealth Fund of countries that have business with the UN?

Deputy Spokesman:  The Secretary-General keeps his work life and his personal life separate.  He is not involved in this matter and this is not a matter that involves any UN personnel.  Therefore, I would have no comment on it.

Inner City Press::  But there are obviously people reporting quite to the contrary, so I'm asking you is there…

Deputy Spokesman:  No, they're not.  Actually, Matthew, they're not reporting to the contrary, they're reporting about other people.  Nothing of what you said suggests any connection to the United Nations.

Inner City Press:  Have you read today's Viet Nam news that says…

Deputy Spokesman:  Yes, I have.

Inner City Press:  The nephew said that Ban Ki-moon raised this with the Emir of Qatar, so my question is can you deny that?  Do you deny that the Secretary General has raised that?  Okay.

Deputy Spokesman:  The Secretary-General is not involved in this in anyway.

Inner City Press:  Okay, and also my fourth and further question.  The nephew is reported to work at a New York real estate firm known as Colliers, which partners of whom say they have done business for the United Nations system.  So I wanted to know… this seems… this is a just a factual question, is it true that the nephew of the Secretary-General works for a firm called Colliers?  And is it true, will you confirm or deny that this firm has done business with the UN?

Deputy Spokesman:  I do not have to comment on questions of family members of the Secretary-General who are not employed by the United Nations.

Inner City Press:  Doing business with the UN, you don't have to comment?

Deputy Spokesman:  He is not UN staff.  He has not been UN staff and his business does not concern the United Nations.

Inner City Press:  If somebody does business with the UN… I mean that's what I'm asking…

Deputy Spokesman:  Matthew, a decade ago, people asked me different questions about other different relatives, but the point is what we concern ourselves with is the work of the UN and its personnel.  Yes.

   Inner City Press a month ago on April 17, then again yesterday on May 14, asked Ban's UN spokespeople about scandal, the first time drawing laughter and yesterday on a closer link to Ban, a flat but vague denial. The closer link involves Ban's nephew Bahn Joo-hyun and an allegedly forged letter from Qatar's sovereign wealth fund, the Qatar Investment Authority.

   Implausibly, Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric on May 14 told Inner City Press that Ban has “no connection” with his nephew. 

   In the same briefing he refused to explain why the UN, in responding to Press questions about another UN scandal involving the cover up of child rape in the Central African Republic by French soldiers and Ban's (French) UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, provided answers only to correspondents who hadn't even asked or in some cases reported about the rapes. 

   Dujarric told Inner City Press, "Matthew, I can't be responsible for what parties you're invited to or not invited to." Ban later that day feted the so-called UN Correspondents Association, whose leadership not only never asked about  Sung Wan-jong but actively tried to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. It's the UN's (or Ban's) Censorship Alliance. The new Free UN Coalition for Access, FUNCA, takes a different approach.

  Back on April 17, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson at that day's noon briefing:   (video here)

Inner City Press: about the individual, Mr. Sung Wan-jong, who committed suicide, but apparently before he did, said that he had very close ties with Ban Ki-moon.  That's why he was being prosecuted and said that they developed the Chungcheong Forum together.  So I just wanted to, what was his relationship to the individual who committed suicide?  Why does he think his name has come up in connection with this scandal?  And does he have some kind of statement of --

Associate Spokesperson:  I mean, all we have to say about this is we've seen the reports, and as we've said from this podium and the Secretary-General has himself said many times, his focus is on his job currently and not on Korean domestic politics.

Inner City Press: Sure.  It’s less a question about running for office there, then so much as if somebody, right before they commit suicide, says, it's kind of like “Rosebud”, he said Ban Ki-moon, does he…

Associate Spokesperson:  We have no comment.  [laughter]  We have no comment.

  In the month that followed, even as the scandal developed, no questions  were asked or allowed at the UN about it. Ban's Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq, when Inner City Press pursued follow up questions, said “you must have been such an obnoxious child.”  UNCA said nothing; the Free UN Coalition for Access, FUNCA, challenged this and Ladsous' approach including in a flier it posted in the UN's fourth floor press area.

  Also on press freedom in Ban's UN and his links with South Korea, a week ago on May 8 Inner City Press asked Dujarric:

Inner City Press / FUNCA: There are a number of reporters complaining publicly in a their publications that they sought to attend a “Journalists at Risk” event yesterday inside the UN in which the ambassadors of France and Belgium spoke and that they were not able to attend it and was told the press was being “banned” from the event.

Spokesman Dujarric:  Banning the press is not something I like to do.  No press was banned.  I think there was miscommunication on the part of the organizers, who probably didn't coordinate the way they should have with our colleagues here.  A guest list was provided to our security services, which included journalists.  And those people on the guest list were able to attend.  I think there may have been misunderstanding where journalists wanted to come in with cameras who didn't have accreditation.  We tried to facilitate things as much as possible.  As always here, we're happy to host any event, obviously, the Member States are holding.  It just needs a minimum of coordination with the various services.  But, to say that press was banned, I think is a mischaracterization of what happened.

Inner City Press / FUNCA:  Some are contrasting it to the speed with which journalists were processed to attend the Hillary Clinton stakeout.  They were saying that this was actually… there was more time to do them, but they were told it's impossible, it can't be done.

Spokesman Dujarric:  I would dispute that account, as well.  You had country-specific questions?

Inner City Press: The country is South Korea.  I just want to know, since it's out there and it has been reported in The Korea Times, can you confirm that the Secretary-General is going to South Korea for four days in and around 22 May?

Spokesman Duarric:  I cannot confirm at this point, but I encourage you to attend the briefings next week.

   A week later on May 14, as the scandal grew closer to Ban at least through family ties, Inner City Press asked Ban's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric about it: (video here)

Inner City Press: about this case in South Korea that's been bouncing around for some time, the businessman Mr. Sung, who committed suicide, but mentioned the Secretary-General's name soon before he did it.  And there's a new article in the Korea JoongAng Daily, which says that Mr. Ban's nephew Ban Joo-hyun, the manager of a New York-based real estate firm, is somehow involved in this case.  And it cites him providing a forged letter for the Qatar Investment Authority, saying a building in Viet Nam was going to be built when it wasn't.  I would assume that your office is aware of this.  What is the… is any of this true?  For example, is his nephew involved in this real estate deal?  Does his nephew deny providing a fraudulent Qatari investment fund letter?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I think the… This does not… this does not involve the Secretary-General.  He has nothing to do with this issue, and he has nothing to do with his nephew.  And I think you… I really have nothing else to add.

Inner City Press: I'm only asking because it only has connection to possible politics, countries, the commonwealth fund — do you deny it?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I understand… I think… Clearly, the Secretary-General is not involved in any of this.  I would like to… oh.  Yes.  I would like to say have a good weekend.  But, go ahead.  (Video from Minute 3:53)

  Inner City Press has previously and repeatedly asked the UN about Ban family connections and the still UNdisclosed acceptance of gifted travel, from Qatar, here.

  Watch this site.

   

Amid War Crimes Records Talk, UN Withheld Evidence in Sri Lanka in 2009, Censors 2011 and Now Again

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 11 -- On Sri Lanka at UN headquarters in New York the disinterest and delegation continue. On November 11 an event was held about "War Crimes Records," primarily about the Holocaust but with Syria, for example, mentioned by Dan Plesch on the panel.

  Plesch asked, if people could collect records in London under bombing, how not in Syria today? Indeed. But consider that the UN itself WITHHELD evidence of war crimes in Sri Lanka in 2009.

  As reported by Inner City Press:

After claiming of Sri Lanka that "we don't count bodies," the UN has now involuntarily admitted that the "minimum number of documented civilian casualties since 20 January 2009, as of 7 March 2009 in the conflict area of Mullaitivu Region [is] 9,924 casualties including 2,683 deaths and 7,241 injuries," in a leaked document of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs obtained by Inner City Press. 

  OCHA's top official John Holmes, as well as spokespeople for UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, have repeatedly denied that the UN has such casualty figures.  Now it appears that unlike in other conflicts from Darfur to Gaza, the UN withheld the Sri Lanka figures, in effect protecting the Sri Lankan government from criticism.

   On February 17, 2009, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Michele Montas for the UN's estimate of civilian deaths, and whether it was higher or lower than 1200. Ms Montas replied that "we are trying to save people, not count bodies." Video here, from Minute 22:48.

   On March 17, 2009, Inner City Press cited the just-obtained internal OCHA casualty figure of 9,924 including 2,683 deaths to the Ambassador of a European country active with OCHA, asking if Holmes had disclosed this number in the two "classified" briefings on Sri Lanka the Ambassador had mentioned. "Everyone knows the figures are controversial," the Ambassador said, insisting that he not be identified by name or country. "You won't hear these figures from OCHA." But internally, they are in writing.

Jump forward to November 3, 2014: Inner City Pressasked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman about Sri Lanka's allegations about "blank human rights complaint forms." There was no substantive answer; four days later, it was Prince Zeid from Geneva who spoke out.

   And now the Sri Lankan government has predictably shot back, blaming Zeid's statement for what they were already doing: banning the human rights investigators.

Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva Ravinatha Aryasinha has written to Zeid, "This type of action on your part would regrettably constrain constructive engagement which the Government of Sri Lanka has consistently sought to pursue." Right.

  In UN headquarters this is pattern used by the United Nations Correspondents Association under Giampaolo Pioli. 

  When Inner City Press reported as context for Pioli's unilateral decision grant an "UNCA" screening for Sri Lanka's war crimes denial film "Lies Agreed To" that Pioli had rented one of his Manhattan apartments to Aryashinha's counterpart in New York Palitha Kohona, Pioli said take the story off the Internet or he would get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN.

  When Inner City Press complained about this attempt at censorship, by a group that was ostensibly supposed to defend journalists and freedom of the press, these complaints including sent in writing to the private owners of Pioli's listed employers QUOTIDIANO NAZIONALE/LA NAZIONE/Il Resto del Carlino / IL GIORNO, Poligrafici Editoriale S.p.A. via Stefania Dal Rio, and to Voice of America -- 

this was used as the excuse to, yes, try to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN.  Here is Voice of America's letter, for which it said it had the support of AFP andReuters, which then moved to censor its own anti-Press complaint to the UN, here.

  Writing to QUOTIDIANO NAZIONALE/LA NAZIONE/Il Resto del Carlino / IL GIORNO, Poligrafici Editoriale S.p.A. was said, by Voice of America, to havethese companies "preparing a libel lawsuit" -- never filed. It was only meant to silence and censor. And now Pioli reappears, annointed by two year figure head Pamela Falk, to take the helm again at UNCA, become not the UN Correspondents Association but rather the UN's Censorship Alliance.

   In 2009 it was Secretary General Ban Ki-moon who went on the Rajapaksas' victory tour of the bloodbath on the beach. Some of Inner City Press' coverage is here.

 In 2011 Sri Lanka's denial of war crimes, “Lies Agreed To,” was screened inside the UN, hosted by the then-president of UNCA, become the UN's Censorship Alliance.

On November 3, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about a new development, transcript here:

Inner City Press: In Sri Lanka, a newspaper has reported that the Government is searching people down for having “blank human right complaints forms” to the inquiry of the Human Rights Council in Geneva. And since, obviously, there are people who are now charged with this and on the run, I wanted to know: Can you state from this podium or sometime today, are there even… do such forms even exist? Is there a blank form for this inquiry? And if so--

Spokesman Dujarric: I don't know. You may want to refer that question to the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights here.

Inner City Press: Okay. Even if it were to exist, should people be hunted down for having these forms?

Spokesman Dujarric: Obviously, I can't tell you… I don't know of the existence of these forms or whether there is a police action against it. Obviously, it's important that people have the right to cooperate, should they wish, with any UN human rights investigation

The article is easy to find; it is in The Island, which got leaked one of Ban Ki-moon's wan reports on Sri Lanka. But eight hours later, nothing. 

 In the interim, the previous president of UNCA Giampaolo Pioli, who when Inner City Press reported on his screening of Rajapaksa's war crimes denial film and the fact that Pioli previously rented one of his apartments to Palitha Kohona, still Sri Lanka's Ambassador, tried to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, made a new move.

  Pioli is positioning himself to again head UNCA, posting his name as the only candidate, endorsed by Pamela Falk of CBS who filled in for his for two years. UNCA has not been reformed in any way since its kangaroo proceeding against Inner City Press resulted in death threats.

  Inner City Press submitted requests under the US Freedom of Information Act to Voice of America, whoseMargaret Basheer wrote at the time that the newspaper of UNCA's president -- Pioli -- was preparing to sue Inner City Press for libel for the entirely true report that Pioli rented real estate to Kohona -- pictured below with Pioli and Shavendra Silva.

 It was pure intimidation and big media abuse, an attempt to censor. Inner City Press raised the death threats from Sri Lanka to Pioli's private held newspaper in Italy -- which allows Pioli to, for example, make campaign contributions to politicians he is supposedly covering -- resulting in yet more threats of litigation, attempts to intimidate and censor. There are more more documents obtained under FOIA, and audio clips, most not yet published.

Since then, Inner City Press quit UNCA and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access. But Ban Ki-moon's UN continues to prop up its UN Censorship Alliance, giving it a big room for free to hold screenings in, setting aside all first questions for it, using it to pretend to be doing a good job on press freedom and such issues as Sri Lanka war crimes. We'll have more on this.

   

In DC, Obama to Meet New Qatari Ambassador As Saudi Arabia, Bahrain & UAE Pull Theirs From Qatar, Belgium's Verbeke Returns

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 9 -- When US President Barack Obama receives the credential of Qatari Ambassador Mohammed Jaham al-Kuwari on March 10, it comes as Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates have pulled their own ambassadors from Qatar.

  At the UN, Inner City Press asked if Secretary General Ban Ki-moon had any comment on this split within the Gulf Cooperation Council, which Ban has praised for its work on Yemen. 

  The UN's answer was no. (Afterward it was explained to Inner City Press, not by the UN, that Oman and Kuwait did not withdrew, the latter because chairing the GCC and the former in order to "be independent").

But Syria, during the UN's "Children and Armed Conflict" debate on March 7, noted the split, saying in essence that Qatar is even too extreme in its foreign policy, and too meddling, for its own similar neighbors.

  Mohammed Jaham al-Kuwari was previously Qatar's ambassador to France - can you say, Sarkozy? - and was named to the post in the US in December 2013. 

 More than two months later comes the credentials ceremony, on the same same as the new ambassadors of Tunisia (Mhamed Ezzine Chelaifa), India (Subrahmanyam Jaishankar), Pakistan (Jalil Abbas Jilani), Papua New Guinea (Rupa Abraham Mulina) and Belgium's Johan Verbeke, whose short strange stint for the UN in Lebanon (and then Georgia) Inner City Press covered.

  On July 24, 2008 Inner City Press asked the UN's then spokesperson Michele Montas why Verbeke had not meaningfully deployed to Lebanon. Ms. Montas responded that "I can simply tell you that Mr. Verbeke had to go back home for personal reasons, family reasons, and that's why he was not in Lebanon."

  Inner City Press was told by well-placed Beirut sources that Mr. Verbeke faced threats to his safety, to such an extent that rather than rely on UN Security, he approached the Lebanese government and even the Hariri family. Neither could offer assurances. He stayed for a time in the Moven Pick hotel, Inner City Press is told and can now report, given his transfer to Georgia. But ultimately he left Lebanon due to lack of security.

  So at the August 1, 2008 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked UN spokesperson Montas why Verbeke was leaving, personal or safety? From the transcript

Inner City Press: "I didn't know that there was announcement today of Mr. Verbeke. Before I had asked, and you had said there was some personal issue. I don't want to get into any personal issue, but I do want to ask you, I had heard that there were some security concerns. I know that you also don't like to talk about them. Specific, not to just the mission in general, but to Mr. Verbeke himself. Either threats or that he'd sought protection from either the Lebanese Government or the Hariris, various things. Does this transfer, what is, how does it relate to whatever the personal issue was, which I don't want to know what it was? But is it because of a personal issue or is because of a safety issue? What's the basis of the transfer?"

  Ms. Montas said, "I am not aware of the details." This UN Secretariat stonewalls and becomes more marginal by the day.

  From the UN to DC - that's where the action on Ukraine is heading. Watch this site.