Showing posts with label united nations joint staff pension fund. Show all posts
Showing posts with label united nations joint staff pension fund. Show all posts

Monday, December 12, 2016

In Ban Ki-moon's UN, Pension Fund's Leaked Audit Shows Failure, Delay


By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive Full Text
UNITED NATIONS, December 11 -- UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in late August awarded the top UN job in Kenya to his own son in law, Siddharth Chatterjee, and did not recuse himself.
UN irregularities under Ban have extended to the UN Joint Staff Pension Fund, a confidential UN Office of Internal Oversight Services audit of which Inner City Press is exclusively publishing in full text today, here, and embedded below. 
 It show that Ban Ki-moon has failed, unresponsive even to UN staff, leaving them unresponded to even four years after death. The audit states among other things that 
"The first action to mitigate the accumulation of outstanding cases, which was the establishment of a task force, was initiated in February 20 I 6, which was six months after the blackouts had caused the accumulation of cases. The delay in taking mitigating actions in turn contributed to delays in processing / payment of benefits to beneficiaries."
"There was no provision for callers to leave voice mails if their calls were not answered. This very low level of response to telephone calls was contrary to the UNJSPF Quality Management Policy which stated that the Fund should respond immediately to telephone calls during working hours."
"OIOS review of the relevant email folder of Client Services on 24 August 2016 showed that the last 'high priority' email responded to by Client Services was dated 22 June 2016 (i.e., two months since receipt)."
Note: this is similar to Ban Ki-moon's top two spokespeople, who did not even confirm receipt Inner City Press' November 25 questions including about use of funds and restrictions on media; the deputy spokesman later used the December 8 noon briefing to justify, while still not answering.
This too: "On 6 June 2016, another iSeek announcement reported that the Fund Secretariat had cleared 97 per cent of the backlog of 3,436 cases, leaving only 95 cases (3 per cent) to be processed/paid in June 2016. However, OlOS review indicated that 1,368 of these 3,436 cases were yet to be processed/paid as of 31 May 2016."
Then again, OIOS has yet to act on detailed conflict of interest complaints filed in February 2013 and reiterated in November, involving not only Ban but also his head of Communications Cristina Gallach, already named in an OIOS audit, here, in Paragraphs 37-40 and 20b.  Access to Ban will be sold for $1200 on December 16 - is this appropriate?
Ban's service is even worse in Africa, to staff as to such crises as Burundi and South Sudan. From the UNJSPF audit:
"OIOS selected the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) for further analysis of long outstanding cases... OIOS review of ten longest outstanding cases, which had not yet been paid after one year or more, showed that in five cases, the former staff members had died in service. These cases should have been given the highest priority, but the surviving beneficiaries had not been paid for more than 4.5 years since the staff members' death."
  Ban Ki-moon has failed; while he now leaves, so should Gallach. And the UNJSPF must be reigned in. We'll have more on this.


After Inner City Press asked about the textbook case of nepotism of Ban promoting his own son in law, video here, Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric replied that an inter-agency advisory panel had been involved, before Ban signed the letter appointing his own son in law to the post. But then Dujarric refused to say who was on this panel; he told Inner City Press to "ask UNDP," which in term told Inner City Press to ask something called the "DOCO" which doesn't have a spokesperson. 
Dujarric didn't answer any of Inner City Press' questions submitted on Friday September 2 at noon, then deferred another on Burundi until September 6. Meanwhile Ban's son in law Chatterjee's response is to block Inner City Press on Twitter, photo here. 
There are more and more irregularities in Ban Ki-moon's UN system - staff say, a fish rots from the head - and among staff this is circulating:

Ms. Jaana Sareva is the chief of the legal office of the Pension Fund in New York. Her spouse lives in Geneva, also working for the United Nations.
How she covers those miles between New York and Geneva? Here you are:
She travels near ten times a year from New York to Geneva, creating unnecessary trips and fabricating bureaucratic unreal reasons;
She is often sick (both uncertified and certified), for adding more days to her trips. She uses the maximum available, abusing the benefits of the United Nations. She gives us a negative example of how a public servant should be;
She is not in office normally, extending her trips and absences. None of us know where she is during office hours;
She stays there with her husband in Geneva (in his house), but at the same time she has DSA in her pocket for comfort, and enjoying life in Europe from where she is;
This expensive game costs more than $50,000 a year;
It has been happening since several years ago, with total impunity;
The CEO of our Pension Fund, Mr. Arvizu, authorizes the travel expenses, which ultimate are paid by all the participants and retirees of the Pension Fund. In the meantime, the Pension Fund is not able to deliver pensions in time and is facing the deepest and biggest crisis of management since creation, even considering the enormous budget that we have.
This is Ban's UN - here's more of Inner City Press' coverage of the Pension Fund.
  As to Siddharth Chatterjee's promotion signed by his father in law, now other sources tell Inner City Press it's worse - between the inter agency panel and Ban, the ultimate conflicted decision maker, there is for countries like Kenya (where the UN has a regional headquarters) a role for Ban's Department of Political Affairs, for which Dujarric also purportedly speaks.
  Inner City Press on September 4 reiterated its September 2 unanswered questions, and two more, to Dujarric, who said he will effort to answer them... on September 6.
Meanwhile, an ally of Ban's son in law Chatterjee, Dalvir Singh, has called this series of articles, despite Ban's spokesman's stonewalling and refusal to answer, unfair -- "scurrilous, unfounded and mendacious accusations" by a "blogger."
This is Team Ban's response to questions and stories about the John Ashe and Ng Lap Seng case, DPI Gallach's failure to do due diligence, all leading to ouster and eviction. 
 Turns out Chatterjee, to get previous stories buried, has offered goodies only his father in law can dole out - we'll have more on this.
  So Inner City Press has asked Dujarric who was on this panel, to assess if they were independent from Ban, and who the other candidates, at least on the short list, were. 
 Dujarric has refused to provide this information, and has refused all other Inner City Press questions about Ban's son in law, including about his activities in Sri Lanka as part of the Indian Peace Keeping Force. 
Dujarric has refused to answer; on September 2, he did not even acknowledge receipt of Inner City Press' questions, including about Ban's meeting with Sri Lankan President Sirisena.
   As Ban's spokesman knows, Ban was in Sri Lanka; the story can't wait. So today Inner City Press reports that it has been told of Siddarth Chatterjee posing with dead and disfigured Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam; this has been described as a war crime.
   Inner City Press twice this week asked Dujarric to describe and comment on Ban Ki-moon's son in law's activities in Sri Lanka; it is all the more pressing given the most recent UN promotion without recusal. Inner City Press also asked what forms and rules apply, a question also ignored by Dujarric with respect to a fundraiser held in the UN with Ban's past envoy to Sri Lanka, Vijay Nambiar. Inner City Press asked Dujarric to comment in this context on this, authored by Ban's son in law Sid Chatterjee: no answers.
   And so in common journalistic practice, to assist reader in deciding whether to believe or not believe these reports of Chatterjee posing with dead and disfigured combatants in violation of the Geneva Conventions, we disclose that one of the sources clearly has an interest: Chatterjee's ex-wife Shirpa Sen. 
She is a medical doctor; she has said Chatterjee threatened her to stop providing any information to Inner City Press and an Indian journalist whose publication Chatterjee managed to get to remove a report about one of his promotions under Ban from the Internet. (Censorship seems to run in the family.)
The allegation is that Chatterjee dropped her and then saw his career path advance under his new father in law, Ban Ki-moon; he made threats to make the issues of the past go away.
   We disclose this because readers have a right to know of the interest or animus of the source of information. Here is another online report; here on a court website is the decision on the divorce appeal. And here is an earlier report of Inner City Press asking Ban's spokespeople about Chatterjee's military record, in Sri Lanka Ban's 2009 visit to which Inner City Press covered in-person (Inner City Press has since been BANned, restricted.)
  A direct comment of any kind from Ban Ki-moon's spokesman, requested all week, would have been preferable. 
 But Ban and his Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach should not be able to censor by throwing the Press into the street, New York Times here, audio here. 
Likewise Ban's spokesman cannot be allowed to prevent a timely article by simply refusing to even acknowledge questions submitted in writing, especially after he began the week telling Inner City Press (and the Free UN Coalition for Access which asked for in-person briefings) that he would be answering questions all week. 
Ban Ki-moon's Spokesman did not answer these questions, nor on September 2 even acknowledge receipt of them. Whatever comes in, belatedly, we will publish.
Update: late on September 2, from UNDP to which Ban's spokesman Dujarric referred questions then refused to answer any, came this - not naming the panel or other candidates, but immediately published in full: 
From: Anjali Kwatra [at] undp.org
Date: Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:36 PM
Subject: RE: Press Qs on Resident Coordinator selection process for SG's son in law in Kenya: who on inter-agency advisory panel, who were the candidates, given nepotism issues raised by lack of recusal, referred by OSSG, thank you in advance, -Matthew
To: Matthew.Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com
Dear Matthew,

Siddharth Chatterjee was chosen, in line with established selection process, by the Inter-Agency Advisory Panel of the United Nations. Mr Chatterjee is highly qualified for this role and was previously the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) Representative to Kenya. He has also worked in senior roles with the International Federation of the Red Cross & Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), UN Peace Keeping, UNICEF and UNOPS.

I would need to come back to you on your other questions.

Best,
Anjali Kwatra
Chief, Media and Advocacy
United Nations Development Programme

Wait - was Siddharth Chatterhee ever with UN Peacekeeping? Inner City Press asked: "Thanks for this, but as I asked UN Spox this week, and UNDP earlier today, this is a request, given that the SG signed the letter appointing his son in law Mr. Chatterjee UN Resident Coordinator in Kenya, for the disclosure of

who was on the inter-agency advisory panel

and who the other candidates, at least on the short list, were

also - please state when and in what capacity Mr. Chatterjee was, as you say, in a senior role in UN Peace Keeping."

This gave rise to this curt answer: "All your questions need to be directed to DOCO. "

So Ban's Dujarric referred the questions about Ban's son in law to UNDP, which refers then on to DOCO. When one Googles DOCO, one gets "DOCO The Donut & Coffee Company."


Amid these UN scandals, corruption and nepotism, Ban Ki-moon is now on a two week tour seemingly meant to preview how he could be as South Korean president, visiting Singapore, Myanmar, now Sri Lanka, China and Laos. 
For Ban Ki-moon's visit to Sri Lanka, which is seen as one of the (many) major failures of his UN tenure, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, "On the SG's son in law Siddharth Chatterjee, please describe in activities in Sri Lanka including with the IPKF -- locations, and if available confirmed kills -- including in light of this piece he authored."
Ban Ki-moon's Dujarric replied, six hours later: "It's not for me to comment on a staff member's writings on an activity that preceded employment with the UN."
This seems a strange position for an Organization ostensibly concerned with human rights. Could Shavendra Silva work for the UN? Well, he WAS an adviser to Ban. 
In fact, some UN officials are required to sign pledges regarding their human rights records. So on September 2 at noon, Inner City Press asked Dujarric:
"On the Secretary General's son in law Siddharth Chatterjee's activities in Sri Lanka, you have not answered on what he DID, stating only that “It's not for me to comment on a staff members writings on an activity that preceded employment with the UN.”

In this light, please confirm or deny that there is a place a policy under which UN officials including USGs and ASGs (please specify what level the Secretary General's son in law is at, as Resident Coordinator in Kenya) must certify compliance with human rights, and state whether this covers time before UN employment." Inner City Press has also asked Dujarric:
"This is a request that your Office confirm or deny that the Secretary General did not specifically mention the UNHRC resolution during his meeting with Sri Lanka President Sirisena, in light of a public report that “The President told us that Ban did not mention the UNHRC resolution even in the 10 minute one-to-one meeting he had with him. In fact Ban expressed satisfaction about the way the Sri Lankan government is handling the issue of reconciliation,” a reliable source in the President’s Office" said.
Five hours later, no answer. This is Ban Ki-moon's UN.
Including in light of the recent non-recusal, we linked to and quote this Sri Lanka piece by Ban's son in law Siddarth Chatterjee:
“The Sri Lankan Army deserves all our respect, gratitude and admiration. These are men who have proved worthy of their calling, and I pray that their fortunes reverse and they are able to inflict on the Tamil Terrorists(not Tigers, as tigers have honour too), a final decisive blow, that puts the LTTE in the dust bin of history. It is a period that calls for strong nerves, single-mindedness (of purpose) and intuitive convictions that success can still be yours after these reverses. They are men of sterling character, and I hope they overcome and demolish the LTTE, this organization of pathological tyrants and killers.”
  Among these Sri Lankan Army heroes are several who would be put on trial for war crimes by any legitimate / international investigation, an issue which Ban is skirting. We'll have more on this.
  In advance of Ban's latest junket, he or his propaganda team granted selected interviews to prepare the ground -- “interview” conducted in writing, without disclosure of who wrote the answers. Pro-Ban editorials by out of date diplomats were arranged (for example here, see comments). But how can blatant nepotism be explained away?
   Inner City Press on August 26 asked Ban's spokesman which of Ban's aides it was who spun the Korea Times on Ban's chances to become South Korea's president in 2017, video here. 
While Ban's Office of the Spokesperson took daily questions at noon during Ban's six-day sojourn in South Korea in May, for this trip his spokesman will not be holding briefings (he has already, on Burundi at least, proved unwilling to answer Press questions in writing). As set out below, this is Ban's censorship.
  We will be covering Ban's trip - watch this site.
Under Ban the UN has become so lawless that Ban's son-in-law Siddharth Chatterjee was just named UN Resident Representative in Kenya without Ban recusing himself.  Inner City Press reported and asked about this on August 25. On August 26, Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric confirmed that Ban had not recused himself, had in fact signed the letter giving his own son in law the job, see below.
It was repeatedly reported that Ban would be in Kenya today for the 6th Tokyo International Conference on African Development Summit, TICADIV or TICAD6. Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Dujarric if Ban would go there and was told to wait with bated anticipation. Now Ban is NOT there - right after his promotion of his own son in law there was exposed.
 How is this acceptable in an international organization? Or this: Ban's mentor Han Seung-soo is a UN official allowed to be on the boards of directors of Standard Chartered, which has UN banking contracts, and Doosan which makes sales to countries Han gives “UN” speeches to.
   On August 25, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric if Ban had recused himself from any role in his son-in-law's promotion, video here.
Inner City Press: Mr. Chatterjee was named the UN representative in Kenya.  So I wanted to know, what’s the process for the naming of a resident representative?  And given this he’s the son-in-law of the Secretary-General, was there any recusal made?  I’m not saying he’s not qualified.  I’m not saying he’s not a long-time official.  I’m just wondering what is the process…[inaudible]… for someone being named…
Spokesman:  The regular process was used.  The fact that he is, indeed, the son-in-law of the Secretary-General, I think, does not take away anything from his very strong service over the years…
Inner City Press: I’m asking about the process.
Spokesman:  Thank you.
Dujarric's only response is that Chatterjee is qualified. That was not the question. After Inner City Press highlighted this, Ban's spokesman Dujarric returned on August 26 with a "supplemental" statement, which still confirmed that Ban had not recused himself, had in fact signed the approval of his own son in law for the promotion. Video here. From the UN Transcript: 
Spokesman Dujarric: I also just wanted to give you a little bit more details on the issue you had raised yesterday with Mr. Chatterjee and expand on what I'd said.  Mr. Chatterjee was chosen through the regular process which is basically that the candidates are chosen by an interagency advisory panel which… which does not… and especially in this case… did not involve the Secretary-General.  I think he has been fully aware of the situation and has kept well away from the selection process.  For RCs, the candidates are chosen and recommended by the interagency panel.  The name of the recommended candidate is then given to the Secretary-General to sign off on.  He does not involve himself… and as I said, especially in this case… involve himself in the selection… in the selection process.  And I would just, again, reiterate Mr. Chatterjee's, I think, very strong qualifications in his career with ICRC and the UN over the years.

Inner City Press: I looked into it, too.  It seemed like they sent it to the UNDG Chair and the Secretary-General.  That's why I was asking yesterday.

Spokesman:  No, I understand.  The Secretary-General… the Secretary-General is very aware of the sensitivities of this case and has stayed well away from it.  The final signature… because the way this works is the Resident Coordinator represents the UN, and it needs the agreement of the host country.  So, the letter of appointment, in a sense, has to be signed by the Secretary-General.  But, his name is given to him by the interagency panel.

ICP Question:  Can I ask you one other?

Spokesman:  I’ll come back to you.  Video here.
Nor have the questions about Han Seung-soo, who refuses Ban's supposed call for public financial disclosure, been answered.
  Instead, Inner City Press which has asked about each of Chatterjee's promotions though the UN system under Ban (for example to and from UNOPS including censorship by the son in law, like Ban) and in the past ten months about Ban's and his head of communications Cristina Gallach's links with the John Ashe / Ng Lap Seng UN bribery scandal, was ousted from the UN in February 2016 (audio here) and had its investigative files evicted onto First Avenue in April (video here). NYT here.
   Since then Inner City Press has been BANned from covering UN events on the second floor unless it has a minder which stays with it all the time; sometime Inner City Press is told there are not enough minders, and coverage is entirely prohibited. This is censorship under Ban Ki-moon.
The UN has been asked why it evicted Inner City Press by, among others, the Government Accountability Project, the UN Special Rapporteurs of Freedom of Expression and on Human Rights Defenders(to whom Gallach provided a false statement two months later about an altercation that never occurred), the SFRC (the UN's response quotes Dujarric) and by Nobel Peace Prize winner Jose Ramos Horta (to whom Gallach falsely claimed that Inner City Press is not not being restricted), and in this petition to Ban. 
But the censorship continues.
.@UN Sec Gen Mr Ban Ki Moon & his wife Ms Ban meeting with the UN Country Teams,  &  + UN Agencies
Gallach's DPI is giving Inner City Press' long time shared office to an Egypt state media, Akhbar Al Yom, whose UN representative Sanaa Youssef rarely comes to the UN, and never asks questions - Dujarric refused to confirm this obvious fact, saying he "does not take attendance" -- but who is a former president of the Ban-friendly UN Correspondents Association. 

Inner City Press put the question of recusal to Ban's spokesman Dujarric entirely civilly, without (there) calling into question Chatterjee's qualification or history (including in Sri Lanka, to which Ban Ki-moon is ironically headed for a visit). Watch this site.

Friday, April 4, 2014

UN Spokesperson's Office Take Only 1 Press Question, Dodging on Central African Republic, Nothing on Union: FUNCA Objects


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 4 -- How should the UN Spokesperson's Office function? 

 On April 2 the Office gave answers on the takeover of Kassab in Syria to other media but not Inner City Press which asked about Kassab on April 2 (video here).

  On April 4 the same spokesperson allowed Inner City Press only one question in the April 4 noon briefing, after calling on another media twice in a row. Video here at Minute 4:49 and 7:06, when Haq said, "Back to you, we're going round robin a bit."

  But Inner City Press was only allowed to ask one question, about the Central African Republic, on which Haq despite a damning report from High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay earlier in the day repeatedly said, we have to wait, it is preliminary, you have acknowledged, you've used the formulation "some have said." 

  The question, still not answered, was whether given the abuse ascribed by the UN's Pillay to the Chadian military, UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous will continue to use Chadian soldiers in Mali, or will seek accountability. Note that Ladsous decided to allow the Chadian Army into the Mali mission despite it being on the UN's own list of child soldier recruiters.

   When after a mere 12 minutes Haq said the briefing was over, Inner City Press - on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, if it must be said -- protested, saying that more questions existed. Haq said he he been standing up too long -- he didn't have to stand -- and then came and asked Inner City Press what its next question was. Inner City Press explained, and followed up with this e-mail minutes later:

Attached as you requested is the document I asked about, as Inner City Press' second question of today's noon briefing after the briefing, despite Inner City Press having four questions to ask, was ended.
A variation of the first page, but with the same draft SG Bulletin, has been widely circulated among UN staff, "in coordination with the UNOG Staff Coordinating Council."
Please confirm or deny this proposal at the UN Joint Staff Pension Fund and respond to the criticisms in the attached cover page.
Inner City Press has other questions but there remain long-outstanding unanswered questions, for example the March 13 question below on the dollar a year USGs (said to be on the "to do list"), and about the Qatar sponsored event held in the North Lawn building, March 21-1, first one below. When will those be answered?

   Beyond Haq, this was sent to lead Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric, who had said the $1 a year / envoy question was from March 13 was on his "to do" list.

  But four hours later at 5 pm there had been no answer, not even an acknowledgement. And so Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access asked, how should the UN Office of the Spokesperson be allowed to operate?

   Still unanswered: what is the UN policy on postponing its noon briefings in deference to particular countries? To whom does the Office of the UN Spokesperson answer?
  On March 27 after the UN General Assembly voted on a Ukraine resolution and Russian ambassador Vitaly Churkin prepared to speak at the GA stakeout, Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Accesstweeted at the UN Spokesperson that the noon briefing should be briefly delayed.
  This was not without precedent at all -- on October 1, 2013 the Spokesperson's Office delayed the noon briefing during the entirety of a speech by Israel.
  After asking Churkin about Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's meeting in Ukraine with the leader of the Svoboda Party -- Churkin said it was disturbing as Svoboda has been characterized as racist -- and without any response from the Spokesperson's Office, Inner City Press ran to the briefing room, camera still uncovered, audio recorder still running, hoping to find the briefing not yet started or at least still going.
  Arriving there at 12:10 pm, the briefing was already over. Inner City Press went and told deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq, "I wish you'd delayed it" to allow coverage of both Churkin's stakeout and the noon briefing.
  Haq replied that there had been seven to eight people in the briefing room, so he began. (Actually, as the UN video shows, it was nearly empty and Haq joked, "Full house, I see" - click here to view.)
  When his Office delayed the briefing for Israel in October, there were many more people waiting, including Inner City Press. So, for FUNCA, Haq was asked what the policy is.
  Haq said, "Matthew, you want a policy where it's all about you." Audio here.
  Well, the UN and Ban's Spokesperson's Office should have a policy, both so journalists can know if and when to run, and so that countries are treated equally, whatever Ban or his spokespeople thinks of them, or whatever they are saying about Ban.
   A week ago when new / old UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric phoned in a briefing from Moscow on his eleventh day on the job, the questions Haq chose for him all pointed in one direction, the type of favoritism growing ever worse at the UN.
   Dujarric's deputy Farhan Haq, who ended his truncated eight minutes of Q&A on the "rest of the world" by chiding Inner City Press for asking too many questions -- actually, only South Sudan and a UN Staff Union protest against Ban Ki-moon's mobility plan -- selected for Dujarric only one type of question.
  In fact, the questions were repetitive, trying to get a statement from Ban even if only spokesperson-mediated that the Crimea referendum was illegal. Haq called on a series of executive committee members of the old UN Correspondents Association, which previously lobbied Dujarric to try to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. Several of these, it has been noted there is no record of them writing or reporting about Ukraine. But this is how the UN works, or doesn't work, now.
   Earlier on March 20, the US announced a series of new sanctions including against Bank Rossiya. Inner City Press thought this should be asked to Dujarric in Moscow, if Ban or Putin or Lavrov had raised it. But none of those called on by Haq even asked the question.  We'll have more on this.
  Last week, Dujarric did not provide a Press requested read-out of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's meeting earlier in the week with Estonia's foreign minister, who was captured on leaked audio recounting that the same snipers may well have shot both police and protesters in Ukraine. No read-out?
  Adding to unanswered questions still not answered by March 27 ranging from Thailand to Terje Roed-Larsen, before 8 am on March 14 Inner City Press asked Dujarric:
  Please state if the Secretary General / Secretariat views the "invitation" from Thailand for the SG to become involved as valid, given questions raised about it in Thailand, see, http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/399785/surapong-seeks-to-quell-un-plan-revolt
In the most recent Situation Report on CAR (as of March 12) it is said
"Targeted violence against minority groups continues countrywide, including in Bangui. Over 20,000 people are besieged and threatened by armed militias in 18 different locations. The majority of them are calling for humanitarian assistance leaving these enclaves for safer areas in or outside the country."
Please confirm that the referred-to "minority groups" are Muslims, and if so please explain why the UN would not identify them as such.
Please state what if anything the UN system has done on Navi Pillay's January 20 statement that France's actions in CAR left Muslim communities vulnerable to attack.
The questions about dollar a year envoys, Nigeria, UN Global Compact member and money laundering / corruption probe, service of Haiti cholera case papers and UN Media Alert and others have not been responded to in any way - please explain.
  Here is the totality of Dujarric's office answers to the CAR question:
On the Central African Republic, officials throughout the UN system have identified specific minorities who have been targeted in specific incidents, and you will have seen the many statements and press releases concerning violence against Muslims.
  Tellingly, the question about UN Peacekeeping run by Herve Ladsous was not even mentioned in this cursory response, nor does the paragraph on CAR show any actual follow up to Navi Pillay's statement about France putting Muslims at risk. 
  These were the other questions asked by Inner City Press at 8 am on March 13:
-While still requesting response with regard to Mr. Roed-Larsen, Mr. Joseph V. Reed et al, here is a more systematic question:
Has the SG yet prepared the guidelines required by Resolution 67/255? Following the GA's decision on $1/year contracts in April 2013, how many individuals currently have $1/year contracts, and who are they?
To assist your answer:
A/RES/67/255, 73rd plenary meeting 12 April 2013 e, excerpt
...63. Stresses that one-dollar-a-year contracts should be granted only under exceptional circumstances and be limited to high-level appointments, and requests the Secretary-General to prepare guidelines regarding the use of these contracts, along the same lines of those established for when-actually-employed appointments, and to report thereon, in the context of his next overview report, to the General Assembly at the main part of its sixty-ninth session;
Third: What is the UN's (or UNMISS') response to South Sudan's information minister Michael Makuei saying “When you go and interview a rebel who ran away from here and you come and play that interview on government territory, and you know that man is not friendly -- this is not the meaning of journalism. You interview him outside and publish it, whatever you do, outside, but when you come and disseminate this poisonous information inside South Sudan, it is an offense.”
What is UNMISS' (or the UN's) response to that, and to Wau University students petition for the UN to leave Bahr al Ghazal. To assist your answering:
“Winnie Babihuga, the world body’s representative in Western Bahr el Ghazal state welcomed the student’s petition and promised to forward it to its headquarters in New York.”
Has the petition yet arrived? This is an ongoing request to be informed if and when it does.
  Even rushing to hold a ten minute briefing, the Spokesperson's Office hasn't answered questions posed TWO WEEKS AGO.
 
   Dujarric began on March 10 with questions raised two weeks ago (and before) about censorship and his replacement atop the News & Media Division and UN Accreditation UNanswered.
  Tellingly, some in the press briefing room applauded before Dujarric even said a word. He read a statement for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about "The Ukraine."
  In the question and answer session, four of the first five questioners Dujarric called on were among the 15 executive committee members of theUnited Nations Correspondents Association, with which Dujarric has some history.
  Inner City Press asked if Ban Ki-moon had the Haiti cholera court papers taped to his residence door on January 20 -- no answer -- and for UN response to Channel 4's new video showing abuse by the military of Sri Lanka, from which the UN accepts peacekeepers and even Shavendra Silva as an adviser. (Dujarric said he hasn't seen the video; it is online here: warning, graphic).
  On the case against the UN for bringing cholera to Haiti, Inner City Press asked Dujarric to confirm that the court papers were taped to the door of Ban's residence on January. Dujarric declined to confirm - or deny - this.Video on Haiti (and Sri Lanka) here.

  As it did days ago, Inner City Press asked for the status of selecting Dujarric's replacement as head of the News and Media Division, in charge of UN media accreditation. No answer has been given about this status. This is of concern.
 A flier the Free UN Coalition for Access posted on this topic, on the "non-UNCA" bulletin board it advocated for, was torn down on March 7. At a second briefing, by the CTBTO, on March 10 Dujarric called first on UNCA, then on others. 
  When Inner City Press thanked CTBTO's Zerbo on behalf of FUNCA - the point is, there cannot be only one organization given UNCA's track record of attempted censorship and even more now with Dujarric's history with them -- Dujarric tried to move on (back to UNCA) before the related question on France's nuclear tests in the Pacific was answered. 
  It is a new era, requiring a new approach.
  Two years ago Dujarric was re-introduced to UN journalist as the chief of the News & Media Division, in a reception in what the UN called "UNCA Square." And then the censorship attempts began.
  A journalist for Iranian TV, found to have a rubber gun which was a prop in an independent film he was working on, had his UN accreditation revoked, permanently. Dujarric was in charge of Media Accreditation, and Inner City Press asked him for a justification of this "one strike and you're out policy." No answer was ever provided by Dujarric.
  Also in his Media Accreditation role, Dujarric chastised Inner City Press for daring to go stand outside and try to cover a meeting of Ban's Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations, which included controversial Sri Lankan military figure Shavendra Silva. After the Sri Lankan government directed a complaint letter to the aforementioned UNCA, Inner City Press was told it could not cover the meetings.
Inner City Press, then on the board of UNCA, was not notified when the organization's then president agreed to screen a Sri Lankan government film denying war crimes. After it published an article noting that the UNCA president had in the past rented one of his apartments to Palitha Kohona, Sri Lanka's Permanent Representative to the UN, demands were made that Inner City Press remove the article from the Internet.
UNCA took to sending copies of correspondence to Dujarric, about articles Inner City Press had written about officials and diplomats of Dujarric's native France. Finally, UNCA first vice president Louis Charbonneau of Reuters sent a complaint against Inner City Press to Dujarric, calling it "for the record."
More recently, Charbonneau has gotten one of his complaints to Dujarric banned from Google's Search, using a filing under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act -- straight up censorship. What does Dujarric say?
In fact, Dujarric solicited complaints against Inner City Press from otherbig-media UNCA board members, through a private, including through non-UN email address. Freedom of Information Act responses show thatUNCA board members met with "the UN" to request that Inner City Press be thrown out. Once Inner City Press published some of these, Dujarric on June 29, 2012 asked to meet Inner City Press.
  Dujarric told Inner City Press not to refer to Ban Ki-moon as "Wan Ki-moon" and not to refer to Herve Ladsous, the fourth Frenchman in a row atop UN Peacekeeping, as The Drone despite Ladsous proposing the UN's first use of drones and refusing to answer Press questions about it. 
  This and a specious criticism for having signed Nobel Peace Prize Winner Tawakul Karman of Yemen into the UN, where she dared speak on the UN microphone after a Security Council meeting on Yemen, were linked by Dujarric to re-accreditation he controlled.
  Criticism of stories, coverage and even tweets is fine -- but when done by an official in charge of accreditation, and even tied to accreditation, we call it what it is: censorship.
Disgusted, Inner City Press and another long time correspondent from Brazil founded the Free UN Coalition for Access as an alternative to the insider UNCA, which did not for example offer any defense to the cameraman thrown out for the rubber gun. (Reuters' Charbonneau, in fact, wrote a story playing up the Iranian angle.)
  But Dujarric became the interlocutor for FUNCA. He said only UNCA was needed. After convening a meeting between FUNCA and UNCA, at which Inner City Press openly said "this is on the record" and UNCA president Pamela Falk of CBS said, "He's going to write about this," Dujarric sent Inner City Press a letter which claimed the meeting was off the record and said FUNCA was not a DPI interlocutor for reform.
  So on March 20, it was a UNCA executive committee top heavy circus, here were their election results, compared to votes for that position in December 2011, those called on in the short March 20 Q&A in bold:
Dec '13 Dec '11
Prez: * 78 [85] Pamela Falk, CBS News TV and Radio
1st VP * 74 [79] Kahraman Haliscelik, TRT Turkish Radio & TV
2d VP * 48 71 Masood Haider, Dawn, Pakistan
* 48 [71] Sylviane Zehil, L’Orient Le Jour
3d VP * 55 [62] Erol Avdovic, Webpublicapress
38 Ali Barada, An-Nahar/France 24
Trez * 81 [71] Bouchra Benyoussef, Maghreb Arab Press
Sect * 79 [81] Seana Magee, Kyodo News
Members at Large:
* 57 1. Nabil Abi Saab , Alhurra TV (US BBG)
* 57 2. Talal Al-Haj ,Al-Arabiya News channel
22 3. George Baumgarten , Jewish Newspapers, Nation Media
* 50 4. Sherwin Bryce-Pease, South African Broadcasting (SABC)
* 51 5. Zhenqiu Gu, Xinhua News Agency
* 69 6. Melissa Kent, CBC/Radio Canada
* 56 7. Evelyn Leopold, Huffington Post Contributor
49 8. J. Tuyet Nguyen, German Press Agency DPA
* 67 9. Michelle Nichols, Reuters
41 10. Edwin Nwanchukwu, News Agency of Nigeria
27 11. Cia Pak, Scannews
*54 12. Valeria Robecco, ANSA
* 54 13. Sangwon Yoon , Bloomberg
  Some of the elected are new and their positions on UNCA Executive Committee members trying to get other (investigative) media thrown out of the UN, and the need to preclude this and UNCA leaders' anonymous social media trolling, are not yet known. (Some not elected were among the better / more diverse candidates.)
  There have been no reforms since, quite the opposite. Dujarric, who earlier refused a New York Civil Liberties Union request that the UN provide due process to journalists, continued the Kafka-esque atmosphere in March 2013 when Reuters and Agence France-Presse filed stealth complaints leading with how Inner City Press asked a question to Herve Ladsous. 
  When Dujarric's Accreditation Unit led a raid on Inner City Press' office, photos from which quickly appeared on BuzzFeed, Dujarric denied any role in giving out the photos. But the published photos are identical to the ones his unit took that day.
  Since the letter with the false "off the record" claim, the raid and photos and attempt to censor tweets, there has been very little contact (though there was an attempt to essentially ban FUNCA, another limitation on freedom of association, speech and press). FUNCA has continued, working with UN-focused journalists not only in New York but as far afield as Somaliland and Colombia.
  Now Dujarric is the spokesperson. Can he use this position to pursue the censorship he's sought for the past two years? FUNCA opposes it, and says these questions must be answered. Watch this site.