Galbraith Claims Disclosed Oil Interest to UN, Eide Leaked Before Leaving? Successor Tales

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/unama1leak121109.html

UNITED NATIONS, December 11 -- As the Norwegian press reports UN envoy to Afghanistan Kai Eide will leave the post in March if not before, the conflict between Eide and his former deputy Peter Galbraith has taken a new twist.

In an e-mail to Inner City Press, Galbraith claims that he disclosed to the UN his interest in a Kurdish oil field, and expresses "surprise that a Norwegian tabloid happened to write a story about it within a week of my Washington Post Outlook piece describing Kai Eide's role in downplaying the fraud in the Afghanistan elections."

The implication, spelled out by Galbraith's supporters, is that the UN and perhaps Kai Eide himself leaked Galbraith's financial information to the Norwegian press. Galbraith has refused, however, to release a copy of the financial disclosure form he filed with the UN.

Inner City Press has asked the UN if Galbraith disclosed the oil interest. UN Ethics Officer Robert Benson responded that Galbraith filed a form, but that its contents will not be disclosed, even to the UN's executive 38th floor, apparently. The financial disclosure forms are filed with PriceWaterhouseCoopers. It is unclear who in the UN system vets them for conflicts of interest.

Additionally, the Norwegian media which reported Galbraith's interest were following a story between the oil company DNO and the Kurdish Regional Government. During their course of their inquiry, they stumbled on documents reflecting an interest in the oil field by a company which only later was discovered to be controlled by Galbraith.

Still, UN officials have bad mouthed Galbraith both on and off the record. At a press conference at UN headquarters, the number two official of UN Peacekeeping Edmond Mulet said that Galbraith had an ulterior motive which would later be revealed. And a senior UN official from the 38th floor called UN correspondents to make them aware of the Norwegian stories.

While Eide unilaterally announced he will stay until March, the word from the 38th floor -- read, deputy chief of staff -- is that Eide will leave after the conference on Afghanistan.

A question is, who's next for the UN in Afghanistan? While Inner City Press joked on Friday with former Nepal envoy Ian Martin -- "next stop Kabul?" -- the smart money is on former UN envoy to Iraq Staffan de Mistura. The reasoning is telling: if the UN puts someone higher profile in, they will have to spend more on security. One wag also wondered whether de Mistura would bring his previous chief of staff with him.

Jean Marie Guehenno was said to be in the running, but apparently France is not lobbying for him. Inner City Press sought to question Mr. Guehenno at an event on the Congo one week ago, but he declined to answer questions. Zut alors!

Galbraith wrote to Inner City Press that:

Subj: Re: Press Q from UN: did you disclose oil interest
From: Peter Galbraith
To: Inner City Press

Dear Matthew,

I did disclose all financial holding and interests to the UN including the fact that I had a breach of contract claim in arbitration against DNO. (This is the accurate description of the interest and not as described in the NY Times.) The contents are confidential and, for lots of reasons, I intend to keep them that way. The key accusation in the NYT story--that I pushed through constitutional provisions for my own benefit is untrue and illogical. I was a private citizen and had no ability to push through anything. The NYT provides no source for this allegation and, in a breach of any standard of fairness, never asked me to respond to it.

My arrangement with DNO dates back to June 2004 or more than five years ago. I do find it surprising that a Norwegian tabloid happened to write a story about it within a week of my Washington Post Outlook piece describing Kai Eide's role in downplaying the fraud in the Afghanistan elections. But, I also find the UN's ever shifting public explanations for my firing also to be curious. Not one of them was ever mentioned to me at any time. And they all smell of desperation to come up with some rationale for firing a senior UN official who had a private disagreement with boss about whether UNAMA should be concerned about massive fraud in a UN funded and supported election.

On the chapter 6 stuff, you are all wet. If you read carefully the questions and answers, you will see they were replies to questions sent both to Amb Redman and me. They reflected the views of the US government, which I represented and not me personally. Since they were questions to the record, I may not have even seen them before they were submitted. (At this stage, I can't recall). The USG took the same position on enforcing the arms embargo as the UK, France, Germany and Russia. None felt legally obliged to report on violations. The only difference is that we were asked our view by the Croatians and the others were not. But their position and behaviour was the same. (except for Russia which was a major source of arms going to Croatia and Bosnia, in spite of the government's pro-Serb tilt.)

I appreciate very much your doggedness in pursuing the issue of how the UN handled the Afghan elelection fraud. Keep up the good work. Peter

Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/unama1leak121109.html

In UN Dispute Tribunal, Ethics Officer Blocked, Cambodia Trial Unwatched

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/undt1basement112109.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 21 -- The UN proclaims that it protects whistleblowers, as a way of reforming its far flung under overseen work. The UN Ethics Office, headed until April 2010 by Robert Benson, is in charge of protection against retaliation. But in a case pending in the UN Dispute Tribunal, lawyers from the UN Secretariat and UN Development Program have argued that Ethics Officer Robert Benson should not be allowed to testify in the case of a whistleblower he recommended be awarded back pay for due process violations.

On November 16, Inner City Press asked about this:

Inner City Press: If you don’t mind, I also wanted to ask you a question about the United Nations Dispute Tribunal. In a recent argument down there, the case of the “North Korea UNDP whistleblower”, Mr. [Robert] Benson of the Ethics Office had recommended that he be paid back pay for due process violations. The Office for Legal Affairs (OLA)], presumably on behalf of the Secretary-General, opposed Mr. Benson testifying to the United Nations Dispute Tribunal, saying that it wasn’t necessary, that there was no jurisdiction, and essentially saying that his recommendation of back pay shouldn’t be done. Has something changed? Because I think in July 2008 from this podium, it was said that the Secretary-General stands behind Benson’s ruling in that case. What’s changed in the interim and what explains OLA’s position in the United Nations Dispute Tribunal?

Associate Spokesperson Farhan Haq: I’d have to check that up with the Office for Legal Affairs. As you know, the Secretary-General does stand by the work of Mr. Benson.

But two days later, no explanation had been provided. Mr. Benson, while confirming to Inner City Press that he will leave the post in April 2010 -- some say he wants to stay in the UN system -- declined to comment on the Secretariat's lawyers move to bar his testimony. So on November 18, Inner City Press asked again:

Inner City Press: I wanted to follow up on two things. One was that I had asked you about the position of the Secretariat with regard to the Ethics Office ruling in the whistleblower case in which OLA [Office for Legal Affairs] has said… I have a document from the Dispute Tribunal in which OLA has argued that Mr. [Robert] Benson should not testify; that his recommendation is irrelevant. You also said that the Secretary-General stands behind Benson’s work and that you checked with OLA. I’m waiting to hear how to square these two positions.

Associate Spokesperson Haq: I’ll still need to get some response from our legal colleagues on any additional issues. So, certainly we support the work of Mr. Benson and the Ethics Office. Beyond that, in terms of what the legal reasoning is, I have to check though.

Even two further days later, no explanation has been provided.

Inner City Press ventured down to another UN Dispute Tribunal hearing on November 20, to find a official of the United Nations Assistance to the Khmer Rouge Trials explaining by video conference that a staffer working on audio visual production for UNAKRT had been underperforming. Or was it that the equipment bought by UNAKRT -- already embroiled in corruption allegations -- was of the wrong kind?

These UNDT proceedings are "open," but the UN refuses to comment on or explain them. One wonders if the Office of Internal Oversight Services is watching, as testimony verges into areas OIOS is supposed to cover.

UNDT Judge Michael Adams grilled the witness, telling him "leave relevance to me." When the Office of Legal Affairs representative tried to cut off the applicant's counsel, Adams stopped both from speaking. Maybe that's what's happened to UN Ethics Officer Benson: he's been silenced. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/undt1basement112109.html

Were Galbraith's Oil Interests As Undisclosed at UN as at Opinion Pages He Wrote For?

By Matthew Russell Lee
www.innercitypress.com/uneth1galbraith111209.html

UNITED NATIONS, November 12, updated Nov. 13 -- Following reports that former UN Deputy Special Representative to Afghanistan Peter Galbraith's oil investments are worth up to $100 million, Inner City Press on November 12 asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Marie Okabe if Galbraith disclosed this interest in his financial disclosure form.

Ms. Okabe stated that such forms are filled out when a person joins the UN at the level Mr. Galbraith did, and are "vetted by a professional firm," namely PriceWaterhouseCoopers. But did Galbraith make the disclosure which it's now clear was required?

Ms. Okabe refused to answer, instead referring the question to UN Ethics Officer Robert Benson, who oversees the financial disclosure regime. Inner City Press asked Mr. Benson by both e-mail and telephone, early and late on the afternoon of November 12, but received no answer by the evening.

Update: on November 13, UN Ethics Officer Robert Benson wrote to Inner City Press that "The Ethics Office can confirm that although Mr. Galbraith is no longer with the United Nations, he was a participant in the United Nations Financial Disclosure program following his appointment; however, as provided for in GA Resolution A/RES/60/238, the information disclosed remains confidential."

Inner City Press is informed that Galbraith is now being barred from the op-ed pages of major American media based on his failure to accurate disclose his financial interests. The New York Times confirmed this on November 13. Galbraith is arguing that he didn't read the form, a strange argument for a diplomat who argued that the U.S. didn't have to comply with UN Security Council resolutions regarding the Balkans as long as they were under Chapter VI and not VII of the UN Charter.

Earlier, just after Galbraith was fired by Ban Ki-moon, Ban's deputy chief of peacekeeping Edmond Mulet told the Press that Galbraith had some ulterior motive which would soon become clear. On November 12, Inner City Press asked an involved UN official if Mulet had meant the oil investments, or that he might want to run for lieutenant government of Vermont. "The latter," the official said. Only at the UN.

From the November 12 transcript:

Inner City Press: ...about Peter Galbraith, former Deputy UNAMA representative and his interest in oil contracts in northern Iraq. I wanted to know when he became a Deputy Special Representative, did he fill out the financial disclosure forms, and I’d also like to know whether this investment was disclosed in those forms.

Deputy Spokesperson Marie Okabe: As you know, the financial disclosure forms are something that the Secretary-General has instituted, it’s part of his UN reform, and all staff, once they’ve joined the Organization as senior staff and those in positions that require financial disclosure, are required to fill that form out upon entry into the Organization. So it’s a requirement.

Inner City Press: [inaudible] It seems, this article would make it important to know whether this, they say the investment is worth up to $100 million, whether that was disclosed in the form and if it wasn’t, what were the reasons…?

Deputy Spokesperson Okabe: As you know, these forms are vetted by a professional firm and if they see fit that they need to follow up on any questions that they have, that is done. I think Robert Benson, when he was here last time, gave you a briefing on how that procedure works. And just because they are not made public, it does not mean that they have not been vetted, and the firm that goes through it does the vetting and if they have any questions, they do get back to the staff member and do the follow-up on that.

Inner City Press: [inaudible] is it possible to just, and I don’t expect you to do it right this moment, but to get a yes or no answer, whether that investment was disclosed in the forms. Is that going to be possible?

Deputy Spokesperson Okabe: You know, you can ask that to Robert Benson, but that’s his call.

But Benson has yet to return a call, nor an e-mail asking the above and the following questions, below.

Update of November 13, 2009 -- the following was received:

Subj: Re: Press questions,Galbraith, whisteblowers etc, thanks in advance
From: Robert Benson [at] un.org
To: Inner City Press
Sent: 11/13/2009 9:23:56 A.M. Eastern Standard Time

Dear Mr Lee:

Responses provided:

Hi. At today's noon press briefing, I asked if Peter Galbraith (until recently Deputy SRSG in Afghanistan) had filled out a UN financial disclosure form, and separately if he had disclosed the oil interests in Iraq reported in today's NY Times.

Marie Okabe referred me to you on both questions.

A1 -- "The Ethics Office can confirm that although Mr. Galbraith is no longer with the United Nations, he was a participant in the United Nations Financial Disclosure program following his appointment; however, as provided for in GA Resolution A/RES/60/238, the information disclosed remains confidential."

Q2 -- I have also been told that in a recent UN Dispute Tribunal hearing, about the UNDP - North Korea whistleblower case, that OLA said they would not "allow" you to testify in the case. Are you aware of this? What do you think of UNDP's failure to follow your recommendation?

A2 -- "Since this is a matter that is before the UN Dispute Tribunal, I prefer not to make any comment regarding the matter."

Q3 - How many whistleblowers deserving protection have you certified / found in the past two years? Based on how many applications / approaches?

A3 - "The detailed information regarding the number of requests for protection against retaliation received by the Ethics Office and their disposition can be found in the Office’s Annual Reports for the previous two (2) years; that is, paragraphs 59-66 of A/64/316 and paragraphs 47-53 of A/63/301."

Q4 - Finally, does your Office cover local staff of UN Peacekeeping Missions? There is a recent case of a former MONUC local staffer, alleging MONUC involvement in / knowledge of diversion of jet fuel among other things, who has told me he feels retaliated against. Would your Office have jurisdiction?

A4 - "Yes, our Office would cover a request for protection against retaliation by local staff member from a UN Peacekeeping Mission. May I suggest that you have the individual contact our Office, in that way we would be able to advise the him/her directly."

Q5 - How long more do you remain in Office?

A5- "My three (3) year appointment as the Director of the Ethics Office will end on 30 April 2010, following which I will retire. During my tenure as the United Nations first Director of Ethics, I have indicated on numerous occasions that I considered it important, particularly in relation to the independence of the Office, that I serve for a fixed term and that I leave at the conclusion of that term. The Secretary-General has been informed and has accepted my plans to retire."

While the answers, even the next day, are appreciated, one wonders in light of Q&A 2, above, who would want this job after the retirement announced in A5 takes place. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/uneth1galbraith111209.html

At UN, Retaliation On Press and Nurse for Expose of Illegal Drugs, Coverage

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1retaliation051609.html

UNITED NATIONS, May 16 – Three weeks after an expose by this publication that at the United Nations “a group of largely unlicensed doctors and nurses are dispensing and in some cases taking and self-medicating with Valium, Diazepam, Demerol, Ambien and other controlled narcotics,” the UN has responded, and retaliated, demanding the removal of evidence from the public record.

A UN Medical Service staff member, a licensed nurse whom UN Management apparently believe to have been the whistleblower for the expose, has been told to “surrender your grounds pass” and has been barred from entering the UN by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in a May 15 letter from the head of the UN's Office of Human Resource Management, Catherine Pollard. See copy of letter, obtained by Inner City Press and placed online here.

As the retaliated-against nurse points out, where narcotics are being dispensed illegally and without license, there is no confidentiality. In fact, issues might now arise whether the UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services, or even Ethics Office, have lived up to their applicable pledges of confidentiality.

The UN purports to have a policy of protecting whistleblowers against retaliation, but the policy seems to have been ignored in this case, by the very head of OHRM. The policy, about which UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has been questioned including by Inner City Press, is ostensibly enforced by the UN Ethics Office. Inner City Press asked Ethics Office director Robert Benson about the irregularities and retaliation in the UN Medical Services, which had been raised to Susan John of his office, but without yet receiving a response.

This extreme case of retaliation will be a test for the UN Ethics Office, which was discredited earlier by having its recommendations that back-pay be awarded for violating a whistleblower's due process rights ignored by the UN Development Program. Mr. Benson has told Inner City Press he is spending more of his time in Africa, giving trainings in such locations as Nairobi. Meanwhile, retaliation and the threat of retaliation have become routine at UN Headquarters in New York.

Relatedly, there is retaliation or attempted retaliation against the press at the UN. At 11 am on Saturday, May 16, the head of the UN's Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit Gary Fowlie wrote to this reporter, three weeks after the article at issue

Subj: Medical record photograph
From: [Chief, Media Liaison and Accreditation at] un.org
To: Inner City Press
Sent: 5/16/2009 11:10:42 A.M. Eastern Standard Time

Dear Matthew

I see that you have republished a photograph containing confidential medical records of UN staff on your website. See the link below to the story and photo of a 'sample sign-out sheet'. I ask that you please remove this photograph out of respect for the confidentiality of all staff concerned.

Gary Fowlie
Chief, Media Liaison and Accreditation,
United Nations, S-250, New York, NY 10017

As the retaliated-against nurse points out, where narcotics are being dispensed illegally and without license, there is no confidentiality. In fact, issues might arise whether the UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services, or even Ethics Office, have lived up to their applicable pledges of confidentiality. Nevertheless, Inner City Press responded the same (weekend) morning, less that one hour later, that it had

“received your email about an article Inner City Press published on April 23, three weeks ago, which gave rise to coverage in other media and, we understand, an inquiry by the US Drug Enforcement Agency.

"While troubled by your request that evidence in this matter be removed from the public record – and troubled by the timing of your request and its possible relation to other coverage by Inner City Press of the UN's performance, including in Asia and Africa – nevertheless in an abundance of caution, the photograph you refer to has been taken down less than an hour after your request.

"You are reminded that covering-up by the UN not only violates the Organization's stated principles, but has other repercussions. I would like to know who raised this matter to your office and when, and for a description of all communications.”

The background and reason for this counter-request is that Ms. Pollard's superior, the director of the Department of Management Angela Kane, is known to have send her staff to the Office of Media Accreditation and Liaison to inquire into the accreditation (or, Ms. Kane apparently hoped, dis-accreditation) of Inner City Press. Click here for May 7, 2009 article, "The Wrath of Kane."

Inner City Press was asked to “write nicely about Angela Kane.” It was not at the time spelled out what would be attempted if the coverage ended up not being positive.

The inquiry came in the context of a series of stories about matters under Ms. Kane's control, from procurement and hiring irregularities through asbestos and failure to do required Security Risk Assessments in connection with the UN's planned billion dollar renovations to allegations, widespread among UN staff, that Ms. Kane acts for the benefit of her country, Germany, in the cancellation (now, postponement) of the UN's National Competitive Exam, in the demotion of Tanzanian Anna Tibaijuka as head of the UN in Nairobi in favor of the German Aichim Steiner, etc..

Ms. Kane previously responded to questions Inner City Press had been directed to pose to her by saying she had no time to answer questions, that everything should be asked at the UN's noon briefing. From the transcript of Friday May 15, the day before the demand to remove evidence from the public record

Inner City Press: I had asked before about the contract with VSG that runs UNTV. Can you confirm that now the UN is actually paying their salary rather than VSG, but that neither pension nor health benefits are being paid by the UN? That the people that work in the UN and UN Television are now without pension payments and without health insurance, and what the UN’s plan is to deal with this now nearly bankrupt UN contractor.

Spokesperson Michele Montas: You can address your question directly to the people involved…

Inner City Press: Who are those? I had written to Ms. Kane in the past and she said ask at the noon briefing, so that’s why I am asking here.

Spokesperson Montas: Oh, she said ask at the noon briefing?

Inner City Press: She did.

Spokesperson: Okay. As soon as I get the answer for you, I’ll find out what the new situation is at this point.

Inner City Press is told by sources inside Ms. Kane's office that a desire to “set up” Inner City Press arose, and that the UN Medical Services story was belatedly viewed as providing such an opportunity. It appears shameful, certainly. But this is how the UN, or at least some at the top of the UN, work. [Click here for another continuing strand of retaliation for reporting on the UN's failure to discipline those involved, on UN time, in pornography, including an implicated staff member's crack down on and now stalking of the Press.]

Troublingly, these belated retaliation attempts take places in the context of persistent reporting by Inner City Press about the UN Secretariat's inaction as civilians have been killed in Northern Sri Lanka. A week ago, Inner City Press wrote an article noting that while Ban Ki-moon said he would accept the invitation to go to Sri Lanka if he thought it would have a single life, he stayed in New York to meet with China's deputy foreign minister and to celebrate the stealth wedding of his son.

Inner City Press has received numerous complaints about this article from senior Ban Administration advisers. Perhaps they will ask their Office of Media Accreditation and Liaison to take action, to demand the removal of any criticism of the UN from the public record. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1retaliation051609.html

UN's Top Lawyer Calls for Pension Reform, Says Ethics Office Decided Not to Mention His $10,000 Monthly Swiss Subsidy

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un3subsidymichel032408.html

UNITED NATIONS, March 24 -- The UN's chief legal officer Nicolas Michel on Monday cited a conflict of interest as grounds to neither criticize or support the UN Ethics Office's decision not to include the Swiss government's housing subsidy in Michel's public financial disclosure form. Inner City Press had asked the UN Spokesperson about the omission but had not received an answer. In a phone conversation late Monday, Michel emphasized that he had asked Ethics Office chief Robert Benson, who said that "the policy of publication did not cover contributions of that sort."

It is not clear who is making up this policy, and on what basis. The Secretary-General's web site states that the UN's public financial disclosure is important because it "demonstrates that UN staff members understand the importance of the general public and UN Member States being assured that, in the discharge of their official duties and responsibilities, staff members will not be influenced by any consideration associated with his/her private interests."

Inner City Press e-mailed and read this statement to Nicolas Michel, emphasizing the word "any" and in that light if the fact that a senior UN official was receiving a housing subsidy of $10,000 or more every month should have been disclosed. "I cannot answer that," Michel said. "It would be a conflict of interest."

The $10,000 a month figure is derived from Michel's account of the origins of the subsidy. He took the UN post in May 2004, and had a mere two and a half days to find a place to live. A colleague told him that it would be important to live in Manhattan, to be available for unscheduled emergencies. But of the apartments he looked at, the rents were "from twenty to twenty-six thousand dollars a month." Given the size of his family, Michel was looking for four or five bedrooms.

Ultimately, Michel found accommodations for "about half that amount" in suburban Westchester County, from which he commutes, which he calls less than ideal. While this has saved the Swiss government money, it is not clear if the Swiss government put any cap on what it would pay. Michel emphasized that the Swiss government agreed in writing to respect the tenets of Article 100 of the UN Charter, that Michel would be an international civil servant not subject to influence by his country.

Still, this arrangement was not made public at the time, nor earlier this year when the public disclosure forms went online. Michel's form, under the heading "Income," lists the renting-out of his house in Switzerland. On Monday Michel unprompted told Inner City Press that he inherited the house, and rents out two of the three floors. These rent payments from two people who presumably have nothing to do with the UN is publicly disclosed as income, but $10,000 a month from a member state with interests at the UN and its legal department is not in the public disclosure form. Something is wrong with such a public disclosure regime, it seems clear. Michel said twice he would not comment on this, because "it would be a conflict of interest."

Michel went on to criticize the UN's pension system, saying that if he leaves as he now will with less than five years' service, he gets back only what he put in with below market rate interest, and none of the UN's contribution. Inner City Press has most often heard this complaint regarding those serving in UN peacekeeping missions, who generally stay for less than five years and feel that they are subsidizing other UN pensioners. Michel is losing, he told Inner City Press on Monday, some $20,000 a year.

Back on September 12, 2006, Inner City Press asked Kofi Annan's spokesman for the identity of the one official whom the spokesman said was receiving housing subsidy. The spokesman in a public briefing declined to give the name. Michel was, in fact, the guest at that day's briefing. Afterwards, the spokesman said that the individual wanted to come forward, would soon be coming forward. That never happened.

On Monday Inner City Press asked Nicolas Michel, "Was that you?" Michel did not say yes, but rather stated that he wished the spokesman had brought it to his attention at the time, that he was always ready and willing to go public. He said he obtained authorization for the subsidy before agreeing to accept the Office of Legal Affairs post. He said that he had put in a call mid-Monday afternoon to Ethics Office chief Robert Benson, to make sure they had similar recollections, but that Benson was and is away from the office. We will have more on this story of public financial disclosure.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un3subsidymichel032408.html

At UN, Ethics Office Rebuffs Whistleblower of UNDP's Diversion from Africa of Environmental Funds

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un2ethics011908.html

UNITED NATIONS, January 19 -- The UN's Ethics Office, after four months of review, has rebuffed yet another staff member seeking protection against retaliation. In the matter of Mathieu Koumoin, who complained of diversion of funds from Africa to European companies by the UN Development Program / Global Environment Program, UN Ethics Officer Robert Benson on January 15 declined to offer protection. Click here for Benson's "confidential" letter, provided by UN sources. Benson further limits his Office's jurisdiction, stating that while cases in funds and programs like UNDP "could" be referred to his central Ethics Office if the alleged retaliation was by senior officials of the fund or program, only those senior official could make the referral. But why would a wrongdoer consent to outside investigation?

UNDP's Administrator Kemal Dervis, who in August 2007 refused to allow Benson to review the case of a whistleblower about UNDP's suspended North Korea program, has since defended UNDP's decision to give new contractor to a vendor, Corimec, which was suspended from business with the UN Secretariat due to bribery, click here for that story,and here for its follow-up. In this light, for Benson to count on those accused to consent to his jurisdiction is laughable. As one source put it, at this rate Benson should just close down his Office and return to Canada. "Not ready for prime time," said a source, anonymous for fear of retaliation against which Benson offers no protection at all...

Back in September 2007, prior to the purported clarification of the UN's ethics systems, Benson tried to avoid dealing with Koumoin's claims, writing as supporting his non-action that Koumoin had availed himself "of all the relevant recourse mechanisms in relation to the issues that you now raise to the Ethics Office." Click here for that Inner City Press story.

On October 16, UNDP's Dervis in a rare Q&A dodged questions about Koumoin, answering opaquely about needing to "harmonize" the system while leaving UNDP independent, because it is "in the field" (as supposedly the rest of the UN is not). He did imply that there should be some appellate role for the UN Ethics Office, without spelling it out. Video here, from Minute 54:14.

At a December 3 press conference, Benson made much of a so-called safety valve in the new fragmented ethic rules in which the director of a fund or program could voluntarily refer a matter to Benson's office. Inner City Press asked Benson if in cases where an agency's head or deputy head is the alleged retaliator, he or she should refer the case to the central Ethics Office, as a form of recusal. They "could," Benson said. "Should?" Inner City Press asked again, on the theory that even an Ethics Officer stripped of much of his jurisdiction can still provide guidance. "Could," Benson repeated. And now he makes it clear -- unless the accused volunteers for outside review, there will be none.

News analysis: While the UN Ethics Office's Robert Benson is by all accounts and encounters so far both genial and polite -- a nice guy, as baseball manager Leo Durocher's phrase has it -- his public decisions and statements so date have left the problems of retaliation and impunity in the UN unsolved. The answer is not asking those he rebuffs to stay quiet, but may require an ultimatum from the laid-back Mr. Benson: confirm the powers the post had when it was accepted, or find a new Ethics Officer, a new Office, a new day.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un2ethics011908.html