As UN Under Ban Ki-moon Attacks Unions, G Staff & IBEW Engineers, Will Labor Fight Capital Master Plan?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 6 -- With the US polarized by fights between labor and state governments, and with the UN attributing turmoil in North Africa and the Middle East to employment and cost of living issues, the UN under Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has moved on several fronts to undercut labor rights.

For some time, Ban's administration has been trying to break the UN Staff Union, most recently by moving to no longer collect dues for it. Meanwhile, it has moved to pay its General Service staff less frequently, and to downgrade Tradespeople to general service staff.

Ban's office has been served a petition with hundreds of signatures attached, protesting his move to pay General Service staff less frequently.

The text of the petition, attached, notes the UN's “United States Headquarters Agreement, Section 7(b) which states, 'Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement or in ,the General Convention, the Federal, State and local law of the United States shall apply within the Headquarters district.'”

That then is a question: does US and local labor law apply to what Ban's UN does to workers in the Headquarters district?

If it does, not only would or should the UN have problems with the Democratic Party constituency it works most closely with -- most recently in defense, along with Peter King (R-NY), of the UN keeping $100 million in US Tax Equalization Funds -- but also with the organized labor groups from the AFL-CIO and Teamsters who are on the UN campus as part of the Capital Master Plan.

One labor side observer mused that Ban Ki-moon is creating a little Wisconsin on the banks of the East River.

After weeks of telling Inner City Press to hold off the story because negotiations continued, on March 6 the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union, Local 1212, sent Inner City Press and a handful of other UN correspondents a press release about workers of UN TV, as well they say of IBEW engineers in UN Radio and Conference Services:

NEW YORK, NY, TBD 2011: Local union representatives are preparing for what they describe as United Nations actions' that could result in bankrupting their pension fund and significantly reducing the size of their bargaining unit. The United Nations has notified IBEW Local 1212 through its contractor, Priority Productions Services, Inc., (PPS), that it intends to remove seventeen union positions and place them under the direct auspices of the United Nations. The individuals hired in these positions will receive less pay than the individuals they will be responsible for supervising. In addition to decreased benefits, these individuals will lose not only their collective bargaining rights, but also the protections provided by Federal and New York State Labor Laws.

The Union is concerned that this is just the first step, eventually leading to the UN's absorption of the remaining bargaining unit positions by the end of June 2012. The Union currently has 67 members employed as broadcast engineers by PPS at the UN. After this initial "reorganization", the unit size will be decreased to fifty. Although, the Union engineers have provided uninterrupted television and radio broadcast, and conferencing services at the United Nations headquarters in NYC for the past sixty-seven years, the UN seems focused on decreasing, if not eliminating, the Union's presence.

The UN's actions will require seventeen current supervisors and maintenance engineers to reapply for their jobs as UN staff employees at a lower pay rate and with a considerable reduction in benefits. They will have to compete for their positions with UN staff members, as well as with applicants from the general public. The supervisors and maintenance engineers may opt to decline to apply for the UN positions, in which case they will automatically be demoted to non-supervisory positions at a significant reduction in compensation. The scheme will result in a ripple effect as one IBEW engineer will be laid-off for each supervisor or maintenance engineer who declines to apply for the new UN position. Additionally, the elimination of seventeen positions would seriously impact the Union Pension Fund's financial stability as there would be a reduction in contributions to the fund. The resultant decrease in participants in the medical coverage offered by contractor PPS may also lead to an increase cost for the remaining engineers.

The UN intends to implement these changes on June 30, 2011 when the current union contract expires. The United Nations has stated that its plan is a cost cutting measure that will provide the UN with continuity. Union representatives have offered cooperation in negotiating an alternative resolution with the UN in exchange for protecting the collective bargaining rights of its members. The union maintains that it is prepared to offer workable, alternative scenarios. The UN has not commented.

Inner City Press previously covered when the UN, under officials Angela Kane, Andrew Nye and Joan McDonald, gave the contract for this work to sports broadcasting company Venue Services Group on the verge of bankruptcy which as it shrank moved its furniture inside the UN for storage. Now Ms. McDonald is back, as one of many Ban administration returning retirees, making new decisions, with no accountability, some say.

But this time, with the CMP underway and being questioned, there could be consequences for these anti-labor moves. Watch this site.

UN Admits 2d Flight of ICC Darfur Indictee Haroun to Abyei in Sudan, Impunity

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 4, updated -- The UN has for a second time offered a free UN flight in Sudan to Ahmed Haroun, under indictment by the International Criminal Court for war crimes in Darfur, the UN admitted Friday in response to questions from Inner City Press.

On March 3 the UN Security Council met about renewed fighting in the disputed Abyei region. Back in January, Inner City Press got the UN to acknowledge they had flown ICC indictee Haroun from South Kordofan, where he serves fellow ICC indictee Omar al Bashir as governor, to Abyei.

The UN has defended this controversial flight by saying that Haroun and Haroun alone could stop violence in Abyei. The UN never explained why the government of Sudan, which has an air force currently bombing civilians in Jebel Marra in Darfur, couldn't itself fly Haroun.

The UN said it was a scheduled flight, then UN Mission in Sudan chief Haile Menkerios admitted to Inner City Press that it was a special flight. Inner City Press is told such flights cost $40,000, and the UN has confirm no reimbursement has been sought from the Bashir government.

But now the violence has continued, making the UN flight of ICC indictee Haroun harder to justify even by the UN's own argument.

March 3 in front of the Security Council, Inner City Press asked Council president for March Li Baodong of China if the UN Peacekeeping official who briefed the Council, Atul Khare, had mentioned if Haroun would again be flown in a UN helicopter. Li Baodong did not directly answer.

At the March 4 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky to confirm or deny that that the UN would once again fly ICC indictee Haroun to Abyei, even now that his work in connection with the first flight has proved ineffective.

Nesirky said he would check. Ten minutes later, Nesirky's deputy Farhan Haq announced by speaker to all UN correspondents that yes, Haroun attended today's meeting in Abyei, and yes, “he was transported” by the UN.

This UN promotes impunity, even for one of the few people indicted for war crimes by the ICC. Meanwhile Ban Ki-moon brags about the Security Council's partial referral of the situation in Libya to the ICC -- a referral that Ban Ki-moon did not even call for until after the Council voted to make the referral.

This UN is promoting and enshrining lawlessness, with no transparency or accountability. Watch this site.

Update of 3:48 pm -- Human Rights Watch, via Richard Dicker, submitted this comment:

“This is the second time in recent weeks the UN has transported Ahmed Haroun who is charged by the ICC with war crimes in Darfur. We have real concerns because the U.N. should not be in the business of transporting Haroun. There needs to be an extremely high threshold of urgency for such action by UNMIS.”

Responses have been sought from the Missions to the UN of France, the UK and the US, with the latter two asked if they knew in advance of the UN's new flight of ICC indictee Haroun. Given her statements this year about social media, & after hours of non-response by the US Mission to the UN,@AmbassadorRice has been asked directly as well. Watch this site.

Update of 4:30 pm -- Then this, from UK Mission to the UN spokesman Daniel Shepherd:

“As spokesperson, I would only reiterate the message that my two Ambassadors have both said on the record (and published by Inner City Press) first time around: that we aren’t going to second guess how UNMIS fulfills its mandate to provide good offices to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) parties in efforts to resolve differences through dialogue and negotiations. I’d only add that this work is particularly important at this sensitive time, to contain any potential escalation after the recent Abyei violence.”

We could note again that violence has persisted despite the UN flying ICC indictee Ahmed Haroun in the first time, and that it is the role of UN member states to oversee the UN Secretariat, not to defer in this case to what some see as its promotion of impunity - but at least the UK would put its position on the record.

Update of 4:43 pm -- this too has come in, perhaps in response:

Date: Fri, Mar 4, 201
Subject: Haroun and Abyei
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com

You guys ask great questions! Have you noticed perhaps that the United Nations seems to be unaware of who is causing the violence in Abyei. And yet "diplomatic sources" report seeing the burial of 33 bodies - all southerners.

The Arab nomads say the violence started when SPLM police shot at them (Hitler used a similar ploy to invade Poland) - and today thousands of civilians fled Abyei fearing another crisis like in June 2008. The Dinka Ngok villages north of Abyei, such as Maker, have been burnt to the ground. The end explains the means. There is a creeping ethnic cleansing going on in the Abyei region despite the agreements of 2005 and the Court of Arbitration ruling in 2010.

Why fly Haroun to Abyei - what is his cv? It is, as you correctly point out, that of arming arab militias to burn villages. I hope to see more of your questions pinning the UN to the responsibility to protect.

As US Holds Hostage Funds for Abkhazia Process, Sources Say, Western P-3 Media Strategy Misleads

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 4 -- In belated backroom follow up to the cancellation of the UN's Observer Mission on Georgia, a budget letter is needed from the Security Council so that the General Assembly's budget committee can vote on funds for the so-called “joint incident prevention and response mechanisms” of the Geneva process on Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Inner City Press has learned.

But obtaining this letter, on a topic that the United States and its British and French allies say is important, has turned out to be a problem.

On March 2 while the Council met in consultations on its program of work for March's Chinese presidency, the deputy chief of UN Peacekeeping Atul Khare arrived, surrounded by staff members. He emerged half an hour later stern faced and strode quickly off.

A source told Inner City Press, the only media then in front of the Council chamber, that the “awkward” visit concerned Georgia. But what about it?

Later Inner City Press asked Khare directly, “What about Georgia?”

It's not about Georgia, he said. It's about the joint incident prevention and response mechanism.

Secretary General Ban Ki-moon made a proposal a year ago that the Council hasn't moved on, and now the budget committee needs a letter from the Council. While many would assume that it would be Russia, which vetoed the continuation of UNOMIG, that was blocking this letter, it is not, Inner City Press has learned.

The United States has put a hold on the letter.

Why? The US would like to use the UN's need for this letter as an opportunity to have the Council meet about Georgia, which it hasn't done since Russia's veto. It is slowing the process of funding the replacement mechanism in order to try to bring this about.

Without revealing the sourcing for this report, Inner City Press can say it is not the United States, nor the UK, nor France. Each of these countries has in the days following Atul Khare's abortive visit to the Council held by invitation only press briefings for Western media.

While those are off the record or on background, it must be said that this issue was not discussed.

Rather, the sessions were used in part to spin the UN's screw up of publicly alleging the delivery of helicopters from Belarus to anti-Western Laurent Gbagbo in Cote d'Ivoire, to claim that despite UN Peacekeeping chief Alain Le Roy's public admission of a mistake, the Western intelligence was in fact “all true.”

This backroom spin continues of topics of even wider concern such as Libya. As simply one example, while UK Permanent Representative walked away from a filmed General Assembly stakeout when Inner City Press asked if the UK thinks that Security Council approval would be required to legitimate a no-fly zone over Libya, the UK Mission to the UN confined its answer on this public question to a private, off the record briefing for UK selected journalists.

And still the public doesn't know the real UK position on this, nor on the Cote d'Ivoire helicopter intelligence, a topic on which the US is stealthy very active, or the UN and International Criminal Court indictees on Darfur, Omar al Bashir and Ahmed Haroun.

The French Mission to the UN, in fact, held its English language off the record briefing by Permanent Representative Gerard Araud at the same time as the Council formally met about Abyei in Sudan, to which the UN flew Ahmed Haroun, an issue the French say they care a lot about. Only two reporters covered that Council meeting, due at least in part to the French connection.

During the Security Council's deliberations on the Libya resolution last Saturday, from among the Western P-3 came much off the record trashing of the positions of other Council members. When some of those attacked issued on the record denials, the trash talkers disappeared into the Council woodwork without explanation -- or accountability.

What do these Western Permanent Three members accomplish by this and by limiting their briefings to media already supportive or inclined to believe their positions? They attempt to control reporting from the UN without leaving any finger prints. Does this assist the truth, or even better public understanding of their positions? No.

These are among the reasons for the call to reform or even disband the UN Security Council. Click here for a “BloggingHeads.tv” debate of these issues, this week, featuring Inner City Press.

On Georgia, it seems likely that the letter will in the end issue, and the money be allocated. Nearly invisible UN representative to the Geneva talks Antti Turunen will plod along, as will the apparently coordinated media strategy of the Western P-3. And what will be accomplished? Watch this site.

Amid Abyei Fighting, Different Stories from Sudan Mission, Haroun to Fly?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 3 -- After dozens of death in Abyei, the matter was taken up Thursday in the UN Security Council. Outside the chamber, Inner City Press was confronted by two different versions of events, from two Ambassadors co-exising in Sudan's Mission to the UN under the Comprehensive Peace Agreement.

The Ambassador of Southern Sudan / SPLM said that Khartoum is trying to take Abyei step by step, using the nomadic tribes.

The Permanent Representative from Khartoum, on the other hand, said that the tribes were simply going about their traditional business when local police with the SPLM stopped them then shot at them.

The Chinese Council President for March, Li Baodong, read out a press statement and took a single Press question: who is to blame for the violence, and did UN Peacekeeping say if the UN Mission in Sudan will again, as it did in January, be providing a free flight to South Kordofan governor Ahmed Haroun, indicted for war crimes in Darfur by the International Criminal Court?

We are watching the situation closely, Li Baodong replied, presumably referring to the fighting in Abyei and not any UN assistance to indictee Haroun. A Western Deputy Permanent Representative and his spokesman said that they hadn't heard DPKO give any notice in consultations of a repeat flight for Haroun. But... we'll be watching the situation closely.

Footnotes: at Thursday's noon briefing, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Martin Nesirky about reports of continued bombing from the air by the government in Jebel Marra in Darfur. Nesirky said he didn't know about this and would look into it. We'll see.

Meanwhile the South Sudan representative says very few Southerners went to Libya, while there are many Northerners there. The International Organization for Migration has told Sudan it can only repatriate those who get out, mostly to Tunisia.

Khalil Ibrahim of Darfur's Justice and Equality Movement is still in Tripoli. Inner City Press asked Nesirky if the UN would respond to calls, including from Suleiman Jamous, to get him out and to Doha.From the UN's March 1 transcript:

Inner City Press: on Libya, there is this Suleiman Jamous; there is this high profile JEM leader, the Justice and Equality Movement in Darfur, has said that the JEM has asked the UN to help get Khalil Ibrahim, the leader of JEM out of Libya, maybe to take him to the Doha talks or otherwise. Can you confirm that a request has been received and what is the UNs response to, not to say that one person, but this is somebody that Mr. [Djibril] Bassolé has been dealing with, it now says they want to go to Doha. Are they going to be taken out of Libya? Can the UN do anything about that?

Spokesperson: I have seen the reports, and we’ll follow up on it. I think I probably answered the second part of that question just now, given the security constraints that there are at the moment. What’s your question; the final question now?

[Later, the Spokesperson squawked the following: "The UN-AU joint mediation team has been working for some months with Dr. Khalil Ibrahim of the Justice and Equality Movement regarding his attendance at the peace talks in Doha. The Joint Mediation continues to work with him on his movement to Doha, including under the present circumstances in Libya."]

IMF Called Libya “Favorable” on Feb 15, Now Claims DSK Clairvoyance

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 3, updated -- With a mixture of twenty twenty hindsight and outright revisionism, the International Monetary Fund on Thursday joined the wider UN in turning their mis-analysis of Libya into a case of “I told you so.”

The UN system, which had Aicha Gadhafi as a Goodwill Ambassador until exposed by the Press last month, has belatedly pointed at some UNDP Human Development Reports, even claiming that these inspired the protesters in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and even Yemen, where UNDP Administrator Helen Clark visited earlier this year and said nothing about democracy.

On Thursday, Inner City Press asked IMF spokesperson Caroline Atkinson, “On Libya, what does the IMF now say about its praise of the Gadhafi government's policies in early February 2011? Will events make the IMF modify the way it analyzes.”

Ms. Atkinson began, “Of course we always learn from events.” But she went on to claim, “I do feel the changes, what's happening in the Middle East, shows the importance of the issues the Managing Director and staff have talked about for a while, inclusive growth... providing jobs.”

But an IMF publication dated February 15, 2011 stated among other things that “the outlook for Libya’s economy remains favorable.” Really?

See, "IMF Executive Board Concludes 2010 Article IV Consultation with the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Public Information Notice (PIN) No. 11/23, February 15, 2011."

Ms. Atkinson also read out Inner City Press' question about Nigeria, where labor groups are urging the government not to give in to what they say is the IMF's advice to devalue the Naira. Ms. Atkinson replied that the IMF is not advocating a particular rate, and said that the IMF's Deputy Director for Africa Mark Plant has been quoted as much. Not in Google News. But we'll keep looking.

Ms. Atkinson ended by saying that Inner City Press has also submitted questions about “Pakistan, Libya, Jamaica, whatever,” adding that the IMF will response bilaterally to these detailed questions. We'll see - question submitted two weeks ago about Ukraine, Cote d'Ivoire and the American GSEs have still not been answered. Watch this site.

Update: long after deadline, an IMF spokesperson provided this response on Jamaica:

Q: In Jamaica, please respond to reports IMF froze earmarked funds for upgrading the corridor from Sangster Int'l airport to Greenwod, St. James? What are the IMF's rules for taking questions?

A: You can attribute this to an IMF spokesperson:

False premise. The government’s agreement with the IMF includes only broad fiscal targets for the central government and the public entities as a whole.

At UN, Rice Defends Libya Resolution's ICC Carve Out, Calls Mercenaries Small

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 1, updated -- The Obama administration's demand to exempt from the UN Security Council's referral of the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court citizens of nations which are not members of the ICC was criticized Tuesday by Brazil and even Liechtenstein's Ambassador, then strangely defended by US Ambassador Susan Rice.

While publicly calling for an end to impunity, the US at a Council experts' meeting on the morning of February 26 demanded the following paragraph:

6. Decides that nationals, current or former officials or personnel from a State outside the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya which is not a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of that State for all alleged acts or omissions arising out of or related to operations in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya established or authorized by the Council, unless such exclusive jurisdiction has been expressly waived by the State.

When the resolution was adopted later that day -- after Security Council ambassadors quietly attended a Chinese circus before the 8 pm vote -- Inner City Press asked French Ambassador Gerard Araud about the paragraph.

Araud said, “that was for one country, it was absolutely necessary for one country to have that considering its parliamentary constraints, and this country we are in. It was a red line for the United States. It was a deal-breaker, and that's the reason we accepted this text to have the unanimity of the Council.”

That day, Inner City Press was not called on to ask Ambassador Rice about the paragraph, and so wrote a story with Araud's quote and the paragraph.

On March 1 outside the UN General Assembly, Inner City Press managed to ask Rice:

Inner City Press: Can I ask you a question about the Security Council resolution? (inaudible) On the Security Council resolution that passed Saturday, some have now raised a question about the US asking for that paragraph six, which exempts Americans, and, I guess, others, anyone that's not an ICC member, from referral and prosecution by the ICC. They say it undercuts international law-Brazil said it, now the head of the Rome Statute grouping of member states said it. Why did the US ask for that? And don't you see a downside to saying there's no impunity if you are excluding people from referral?

Ambassador Rice: No, I don't see a downside. As you well know, the United States is not a party and we have thought it important, if we were going to, for the first time, affirmatively support such a resolution, to make sure that is was clear the limitations as to who jurisdiction applied to. That's why we supported that phrase. Your assertion and that of others that somehow this provides a pass for mercenaries, I think, is completely misplaced. I don't think that the International Criminal Court is going to spend its time and effort on foot soldiers that have been paid small amounts of money by Qadhafi. They're going to focus on the big fish, so I think your interest was misplaced.

Counting on the ICC not to prosecute a certain size of killer seems a bit strange.

There may have been a better, albeit not to Inner City Press persuasive, defense. At a UN press conference earlier on Tuesday, Inner City Press asked Liechtenstein's Ambassador about the paragraph, and he pointed out the exemption is limited to “alleged acts or omissions arising out of or related to operations in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya established or authorized by the Council.”

While in one reading mercenaries are “RELATED to operations in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya established or authorized by the Council,” another reading would limit it to peacekeepers. That Susan Rice didn't advance this argument, but rather argued that mercenaries are small, is telling.

Inner City Press has asked Brazil about its opposition, and if the US ever sought a bilateral immunity agreement from Brazil. No, Brazil's Permanent Reprentative replied, smiling.

Inner City Press also asked Liechtenstein's Ambassador about a Wikileaked meeting between ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo and then US Deputy Permanent Representative Alejandro Wolff and Rice, at which Ocampo alleged that Sudan's Omar al Bashir has stolen and exported $9 billion from Sudan. (Rice has insisted she does not remember the meeting, but said she would look back into it).

Liechtenstein's Ambassador declined to comment beyond saying that the ICC Prosecutor has to meet states, even non ICC members. He also called “necessary” the UN's flying of ICC indictee Ahmed Haroun in Sudan, a matter on which France but not the US has complained. Watch this site.

Update of March 2, 2011, 11:52 am -- we have received the following, which we publish in full (and reply to)

From: Stefan Barriga [at] nyc.llv.li
Date: Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:42 AM
Subject: yesterday's press conference with Amb. Wenaweser
To: "Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com"
Cc: Christian Wenaweser [at] nyc.llv.li

Dear Matthew, regarding your reflection of yesterday’s press conference with Amb. Wenaweser under http://www.innercitypress.com/usun2merc030111.html, we would like to point out that the sentence “He also called “necessary” the UN's flying of ICC indictee Ahmed Haroun in Sudan, a matter on which France but not the US has complained.”

is not accurate. He only commented on the UN’s policy in general, as you can see on the webcast archive at 47.10. We would be grateful if you could make that correction.

Duly noted. Since Inner City Press asked Amb. Wenaweser as head of the Rome Statute State Parties to comment on the UN flying ICC indictee Haroun and all he recited was the UN's rule for dealing with indictees, it seemed fair to assume from his lack of criticism for the flight that he thought the flight met the UN's stated rule.

We were also surprised by his lack of comment on Prosecutor Moreno Ocampo's Wikileaked meeting with the US Mission to the UN, and the lack of response what on mechanisms to control the ICC Prosecutor's behavior exist and are used. It would be helpful to know what Amb. Wenaweser actually thinks of the UN flying Ahmed Haroun around.

Update of 4:28 pm -- Amb. Wenaweser's office has replied on this that "Ambassador Wenaweser is not in a position to comment on the specifics of the question regarding Ahmed Haroun, mainly for two reasons: First it is primarily up to the UN to interpret and apply its policy; second it is difficult for him to judge from afar whether this was, under these concrete circumstances, indeed an essential contact or not." Nor has the UN been will to state who decided it was essential to provide a UN flight to an ICC indictee from a country with an air force which has bombed both Darfur and Southern Sudan...

Note that member states own and are free to assess what the UN does, and to ask for information from the UN in order to do that.

As Libya Suspended from Rights Council, Venezuela Broods, UK Dodges

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 1 -- After the UN General Assembly acted unanimously and by consensus to suspend Libya from the UN Human Rights Council, Venezuelan Ambassador Valero issued a blistering speech denouncing US imperialism and, by implication, the move to suspend Libya.

Standing outside the GA Hall, Inner City Press asked Ambassador Valero when he left why Venezuela hadn't acted on its speech and cast a “no” vote, abstained or at least asked for a roll call.

“We thought this was more effective,” Valero said cryptically. The night before, Inner City Press was told by a major power, and reported, that Venezuela would not vote against, that there would be consensus. But why?

When UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant came to the GA stakeout, Inner City Press asked him if the UK believes that a new Security Council resolution is needed in order to authorize the imposition and enforcement of a no-fly zone. Lyall Grant heard the question, smiled at the UN TV camera and walked away without answering it.

The UK's media strategy at the UN becomes more and more limited every day. Between Tuesday and Saturday of last week -- when Security Council ambassadors attended a Chinese circus between the 5 pm suspension and 8 pm vote -- Lyall Grant spoke primarily to UN Radio. Did he face and answer a question about the need for Security Council authorization, or about the UK's arms sales to Libya?

Inner City Press asked Japan's Permanent Representative Tsuneo Nishida if his country would be supportive of a no fly zone, if on the Council. He amiably declined to answer. At least he came to the microphone.

While there was bragging about African support for the suspension, the Democratic Republic of Congo's Permanent Representative Ileka Atoki told Inner City Press his country was not a sponsor because the DRC has been accused of things without them being verified.

Inner City Press asked DRC's Ambassador Atoki about Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's charge that Cote d'Ivoire's defiant leader Laurent Gbagbo was importing three attack helicopters from Belarus, and he only laughed. Even a diplomat from anti-Gbagbo Burkina Faso said that Ban had badly erred. We'll have more on this.

UN Corruption Scandal in ERP Extends from Hiring & PWC to Capital Master Plan

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive upload

UNITED NATIONS, February 28, followed up March 5 -- A year ago in March 2010 Inner City Press asked the UN and wrote about corruption in the UN's Enterprise Resource Planning or UMOJA program, with the UN dodging questions about detailed hiring irregularities.

On March 9, 2010, Inner City Press asked

Inner City Press: Umoja, which is the ERP or Enterprise Resource Planning, Inner City Press received these documents that seemed to, that indicate that the head of the program, Mr. Paul van Essche, hired a colleague or friend of his, John Solem, who doctored his PHP, Personal History, to delete all references to Mr. van Essche having been previously his supervisor. These are documents. What I want to know is whether you can confirm that OIOS [Office of Internal Oversight Services] was informed of this, if there is an investigation of this and when it will be finished, and what the penalties are in the UN system for altering documents in order to be able to hire friends and cronies?

Spokesperson: Let me find out.

The UN's own Office of Internal Oversight Services investigated the hiring violations and confirmed them, also finding procurement irregularities in contracts to PriceWaterhouseCoopers.

When a short article on this appeared, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky for the UN's response. He said that one would be forthcoming, then later declined to comment.

Now Inner City Press has obtained and is publishing the OIOS report, which is worse than previously reported. PWC was not the low bidder; the UN's Department of Management won't even commit to adopting rule about soliciting and taking Best and Final Offers.

The irregularities extend to the UN Capital Master Plan, into which an additional $100 million in US Tax Equalization Funds are being poured, so far with no paperwork.

Not addressed in the report is that UMOJA chief Paul von Essche took New York Knicks basketball tickets from PWC just when they were getting the contracts despite not being the low bidder.

While the OIOS report leaves names out, here's an insider's account and exegesis of the OIOS report:

Procurement Issues

1. PWC was once a major player in ERP system integration business but sold that practice to IBM in October 2002 (http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/491.wss). This was after the Enron-Arthur Andersen scandal and there was a call to separate audit and consulting practices. When PWC bid for the UN contract in 2008, it was re-entering the integration market.

2. The UN uses two-envelops bidding process (technical and financial), which is normal in public sector. The panel for the technical evaluation, which was set up by the Project Director, was deemed as unfit. The high ratings of the panel gave PWC an advantage even though as a new player it was not the lowest cost bidder, as typical of new entrants.

3. There was no BAFO or cost for deliverables - meaning there is no true cost or time limit for PwC services. When the UN failed to reach a contract with SAP, PwC continued to report to work even though there was no application to work with. The negotiation with SAP ultimately lasted for 16 months. During that time, PwC continued to work

4. Each contract in the UN has an NTE (not-to-exceed) amount which serves as a ceiling for amount to be expended. To exceed that amount, the Headquarters Committee on Contract must approve. Mr. van Essche exceeded the amount with PwC without HCC approval. (Audit Report)

5. In submitting its bid, PwC used profiles of people who did not show up. (Audit Report)

6. A typical ERP implementation requires a single system integrator that stays with the project till conclusion. The project director changed broke the integration services into (Design and Build). That piece-meal approach that favored PwC, as a new entrant, which quite simply did not have the resources for a life cycle integration services at the time of bidding.

7. To curb any unfair advantage PwC may have for the next phase (Build), Procurement Division proposed that PwC does not participate in the next phase. But again, Mr. van Essche persuaded the UN that PwC would install a firewall to ensure that its staff preparing for the next bid have not worked on the project or information about the project aren’t transferred from current project staff to those preparing proposals for the next bid. Unfortunately, there are no mechanism to ensure the integrity of that firewall. Is the UN monitoring PwC emails or movement of its people?

8. A separate contract for the provision of strategic services was entered into with Deloitte. However, many of the deliverables agreed to under this contract were assigned to PwC by the Project Director. The lack of BAFO, conversely the open-ended service contract under which the Project Director can assign anything to PwC makes all of this possible. All PwC has to do is submit attendance and other administrative charges and the UN pays. Some of the deliverables assigned to PwC are project charter, business case, project plan and strategy.

9. After winning the contract, PwC provided free office accommodation to the project for over three months. When questions were raised about the practice, the Project Director altered an invoice for services (man-day) in order to show that accommodation was actually paid for.

Hiring Corruption

1. Mr. Jon Solem and Mr. van Essche have been friends for more than 15 years. In fact, the VA was specifically tailored to Mr. Solem’s expertise. The title was changed; Mr. Solem changed his resume as well removing any mention of Mr. van Essche as his previous supervisor and the fact that he was a P4, two levels below the level of the new post he was applying to. It should be noted that Mr. van Essche chaired the two panels the interviewed Mr. Solem for the P5 and D1 posts and was fully of aware of the changes of Mr. Solem’s resume.

2. The other D1 VA was used to hire Ms. Ann Kerney, another friend of Mr. Paul van Essche.

3. Some of the friends he brought in include: Mr. Robert Holden as a P5 and without any selection. Under a special arrangement made solely for Mr. Holden, he works two weeks in NYC and two weeks in Geneva because his family refused to move to NYC. Mr. Holden and Mr. van Essche have been friends for 17 years now dating back to Cambridge Technology where they worked in early 90s. Mr. Holden did not participate, even remotely, in preparation of the business case for the project.

4. Since the audit, the practice has continued. Mr. van Essche has also brought in two more friends – Ms. Patricia Dann as a P5 and Mr. Ronald DeGroot (a naturalized Canadian of South African descent) as a P5 as well. This was based on temporary VAs. Each of these VAs were specifically tailored to suit these external candidates. Mr. deGroot is also listed on Paul’s best friend Jon’s PHP as a reference.

5. Mr. van Essche has also sent resumes of friends for recruitment by consulting companies he has hired to work for the project. Two of such candidates are Brad Manila and Hugh Jetha. These friends were hired by PWC and another was hired by Deloitte. By recruiting them through the consulting companies, they can maximize their renumeration such as paid travel and hotel as well as a hefty $175 per hour. Brad and Hugh reside in Florida and commute weekly to NYC.

6. It is true that there were no background checks done on Mr. van Essche hiring. There was an anonymous letter claiming that he had inflated his background. Including claims that he owned a company called Left Brain when the company was founded by one Richard King. When auditors requested a record of the background checks, they were informed that he got lost while offices were being relocated as a result of CMP.

7. The audit alleges the hired persons were qualified based on a review of their PHP but that is because the VA/TVAs were specifically designed for these people.

Now what will the UN do? The spokesperson's office has so far refused to comment. Angela Kane, who applied for and it's said was initially give post at the top of the UN in Geneva, now won't get that post, which is being given an Italian spokesperson says to Carlo Trezza. Inner City Press has repeatedly asked that Ms. Kane belatedly give a briefing and take questions but this hasn't happened. Watch this site.

Update of March 5, 2011: we have published in full a belated submission by the UN, and responded to it -- click here.

On UN Libya Resolution, US Expert Pushed for Carve Out, Chinese Circus

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 28 -- Two days after the UN Security Council passed its resolution on Libya, various Council sources told Inner City Press how the resolution came about, and what they did during the three hour lull before voting: attend a Chinese circus.

Countries like India were pushing to hold off on referring the case of Libya to the International Criminal Court, arguing that to make the referral in the first resolution would mean the Council had expended all or most of its ammunition and would have nowhere else to go.

They say that when South Africa and Lebanon, after tearful Libyan ambassador Shalgam's letter, came out in favor of immediate referral to the ICC, the consensus emerged.

The US began insisting on an exemption from the ICC referral for citizens of countries which are not members of the ICC at the Saturday morning “experts” meeting. Brazil had abstained from the Council's referral to the ICC of Darfur, in opposition to American exceptionalism. But this time they went along.

At the February 28 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky if Mr. Ban agreed which this carve out from the ICC referral:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask actually about one aspect of the resolution that was passed Saturday that you are saying the Secretary-General praises. There is a paragraph, paragraph six, in which citizens of States that are not members of the ICC [International Criminal Court] are exempt from… even if the crime, even if their acts were in Libya, they won’t be tried by or investigated by the ICC. Brazil was critical of it; there are some others that have been critical of it. I wonder, does Ban Ki-moon have a view on whether this type of exceptions to the territorial jurisdiction of crimes committed in Libya is a good thing, and is it something that he might raise to President Obama? What is his view of this?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, I’ll come back to you on that. As you know, there are two routes if a country is not a State party to the Rome Statute, for action to be taken for the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction to hold. One is if the country concerned agrees to that jurisdiction. And the second is, as we saw on Saturday, a referral by the Security Council to the International Criminal Court.

Inner City Press: This resolution refers, it refers to Libya, but it expressly excludes from the referral any citizens, like American citizens, let’s say, or Indian citizens or, it would also include Algeria, you know, various other… Ethiopia, countries that are non-ICC members but who are alleged to have some of their nationals fighting with [Muammar Al-]Qadhafi, and so, I just, well, that’s what I am wondering. Sort of a big international law issue.

Spokesperson Nesirky: As I say, if I have anything further on that, I would let you know. I think there is little doubt that the resolution that was passed on Saturday evening was an extremely important one, and I think it sent a very clear message to people, not just in Libya, about accountability and the need to ensure that, as I say, people are held accountable for the actions.

Nine hours later, Ban's office had nothing to say. Meanwhile several Council Ambassadors confirmed to Inner City Press that during the lull in the Council's Saturday meeting on Libya, from five to eight pm, they went to attending a Chinese circus acrobats exhibition, to celebrate China taking over the Council in March.

Chinese Ambassador Li Baodong did not go see the acrobats: he had to call and wait for Beijing's answer on the resolution. But many diplomats of the sometimes circus-like Security Council were literally at the circus in the run up to the vote. Only at the UN.

In UN Libya Resolution, US Insistence on ICC Exclusion Shields Mercenaries from Algeria, Ethiopia

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 26 -- After passage of a compromise Libya resolution by the UN Security Council on Saturday night, Inner City Press asked French Permanent Representative Gerard Araud if mercenaries aren't let off the hook by the sixth operative paragraph, exempting personnel from states not members of the International Criminal Court from ICC prosecution.

Araud regretted the paragraph, but said the the United States had demanded it. He said, “No, that's, that was for one country, it was absolutely necessary for one country to have that considering its parliamentary constraints, and this country we are in. It was a red line for the United States. It was a deal-breaker, and that's the reason we accepted this text to have the unanimity of the Council.”

While a Bush administration Ambassador to the UN in 2002 threatened to veto a UN resolution on Bosnia if it did not contain a similar exclusion, the Obama administration has maintained this insistence on impunity, which in this case applies to mercenaries from Algeria, Tunisia and Ethiopia, among other mercenary countries.

(In the case of Algeria, there are allegations of official support for Gadhafi).

While Inner City Press was able to ask UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant about the exclusion for mercenaries from non ICC countries, US Permanent Representative Susan Rice did not take a question from Inner City Press, and none on this topic, despite having mentioned mercenaries in her speech.

When Libya, but no longer Gadhafi, diplomat Ibrahim Dabbashi came out to take questions, Inner City Press asked him which countries the mercenaries used by Gadhafi come from.

He mentioned Algeria, Tunisia and Ethiopia -- highlighted by NGOs as non ICC members -- as well as Chad, Niger, Kenya and Guinea. So some mercenaries could be prosecuted by the ICC, and not others, under language demanded by the US Mission to the UN. Watch this site.

Here is the US-demanded paragraph:

6. Decides that nationals, current or former officials or personnel from a State outside the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya which is not a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of that State for all alleged acts or omissions arising out of or related to operations in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya established or authorized by the Council, unless such exclusive jurisdiction has been expressly waived by the State.

Footnote: Araud blaming the US position on "parliamentary constraints" seemed to some a way to try to blame a decision by Obama's executive branch on the Republicans who recently took over the House of Representatives. But it was an Obama administration decision. More nuanced apologists blame the Defense Department for pulling rank on State. But the result is mercenaries firing freely.

At UN, Portugal Denies It Doesn't Support Referring Libya to ICC, EU Blame Game?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 26 -- On the International Criminal Court and whether and when the case of Libya should be referred to it, even the European Union is not united, it emerged Saturday at the UN. As the Security Council met on a draft resolution which would refer Libya to the ICC, a Western -- and we must say, EU -- diplomat emerged to tell the Press that Portugal was not supporting referring Libya to the ICC, due to concerns about retaliation against their citizens in Libya.

Inner City Press e-mailed the Mission of Portugal and asked for a response, ideally to the assembly UN press corps. And it happened: Portugal emerged and told Inner City Press that Portugal supports the draft as is, with the referral of Libya to the ICC, adding that Portugal is open to a compromise to get a resolution done today.

Some skeptics surmise that there may have been an idea of blaming Portugal for dropping from the draft the referral of Libya to the ICC.

An explanation has been requested: watch this site.

Meanwhile, the US Mission tweets in response to Inner City Press that it will have a lot to say on the record. When?

Update of 1:43 pm -- a Afro-Arab state's representative tells Inner City Press that in consultations, Portugal was speaking of putting referral of Libya to the ICC in a separate resolution. Still no response from the Western spokesperson who threw Portugal under the bus.

Meanwhile there's talk of China being 100% opposed to referral, with the counter-proposal of saying ICC will be discussed later coming from India and Gabon -- whose president Ali Bongo is a supporter of Gadhafi, and which dropped out of a planned joint stakeout with South Africa and Nigeria after Friday's meeting. Watch this site.