UK Positions on Somalialand, Press Freedom, Mau Mau, Echoes & Tweets

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 6 -- The UK is very concerned about Somalia. How else to explain their Africa Minister Mark Simmonds arriving in New York to chair a Somalia meeting of the UN Security Council under the UK's presidency, just as the UK's Nicholas Kay takes over the UN mission in Mogadishu?

  We say Mogadishu because it remain unclear, at least to us, what the UK's stance is on Somalialand, its former colony. The UN system handed over its airspace to Mogadishu as well, despite the impact on flights which could have but were not replaced by the EU-funded "Humanitarian Air Service."

  Somaliland couldn't even get their letter to the Security Council circulated to the 15 members earlier this year. Even news of the letter was tightly controlled. But has that become the UK way?

  As we've inquired into since May, and reported on each day this month, the UK is literally presiding over the roll-back in (new) media access to the Security Council from what existed not only during the Council's renovation relocation but also before it. 

  Before, there was a media worktable right by the Council's entrance and journalists could work there with laptops and speak to diplomats and UN officials like Kay now in as they met in and out of the Council.

Now there is a rule, agreed to by the old UN Correspondents Association executive committee largely dominated by UK favorite Reuters as wells the BBC which for now provides:

"f. The Security Council stakeout area, including the Turkish Lounge, is not to be used as a permanent workspace for the media."

Even a small fold-able table set up by the new Free UN Coalition for Access on June 3, the first working day of the UK presidency, was seized and taken away. Very funny.

  Then when Inner City Press for FUNCA asked UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant if he supported continued media workspace at the Council and if so what he would do about it, Lyall Grant said this is a matter for the UN Department of Public Information and "the journalists" -- it's becoming clear which journalists. Even the UK's transcript of Lyall Grant's press conference mis-represents the questions. Is always easier to dodge a question other than the one asked. Compare transcript to UN web cast video, from Minute 17:32.

Who is responsible? In other news, the UK apologizes for Mau Mau torture - but says it is not liable.

So coming full circle, what will be the UK's position on press freedom in Somalia, say? They want to be close to the new government, and so operate with kid gloves.

Even when, despite their position on blog-style new media reporting at the Security Council, their diplomats respond on social media, as UK ambassador to Jordan Peter Millett did yesterday, they speak in grand principles which are not tied down and applied what's actually in front of them, like Jordon blocking over 200 web sites. We are, as noted, experimenting. Watch this site.

Of Samantha Power at the UN, E-Bay & Obama, But What of Sri Lanka and Sudan?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 5 -- In the second act of today's double switch which moves Susan Rice to National Security Adviser, Samantha Power is to be nominated to replace her as US Permanent Representative to the UN. 

  Power wrote the book on genocide -- but some wonder what she DID about it, for example the 2009 slaughter of 40,000 Tamils in Northern Sri Lanka.

  Inner City Press covered that mass killing, and was present when anguished diaspora Tamil denounced, among others, Samantha Power for inaction. Would she have tried to at least get it onto the Security Council's agenda? It's a question that should be asked. See BloggingHeads debate here, at Minute 36.

  Back in 2008, Inner City Press was there when Power arrived at the UN's Delegates Dining Room to raise money from and with E-Bay's founders to educate American on foreign policy. Click here for that story, "Chasing the Flame With Cheese Cubes," a/k/a Fondue. What ever happened with that? It also should be asked.

  In 2010 when Samantha Power visited the US Mission to the UN, Inner City Press asked her why President Barack Obama had not mentioned Sudan much less Darfur in his General Assembly speech. Power put a good spin on things; one wonders if she'll be ask active on Sudan and South Sudan as has been Ambassador Susan Rice. Watch this site.

UN's Censorship Alliance Seek to Ban New Media Reporting from Unused SC Space, Prohibit Free Speech Flyers Except Their Own

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 5 -- The UN and its partner still seek to ban UN Security Council new media access, even more specifically, as well as free speech, according to "Media Access Guidelines" which the old UN Correspondents Association belated sent Wednesday to some but not all of the journalists that would be impacted by the rules.

  Back on May 21, the new Free UN Coalition for Accesscommented to the UN Department of Public Information (DPI) against a ban "media workspace" in front of the Security Council, a proposed ban on fliers and even for example a FUNCA sign on journalist's own office doors, and other absurdities.

  The president of UNCA for 2013 Pamela Falk told some she hadn't seen that draft. But on Wednesday her office sent out what was still called a "draft" rule -- with the ban on media workspace still in and made even more specific.

  On June 3 when Inner City Press sought to cover Security Council meetings on the program of work, it put in a small work table. DPI seized the table. 

  To cover the Security Council in blog-style, one needs to be present throughout meetings, speaking with all manner of diplomats on all topics and writing stories right there. It may be different for television station or some big wire services - but this is new media style, and there is no reason or right for UN, much less the UNCA board, to ban it.

On June 4 to cover the UK Presidency's horizon scanning briefing on Syria, the Sahel and Iraq - Kuwait, Inner City Press sat with laptop on a staircase leading to a door that is said to always be locked.

At least two UNCA Executive Committee members -- Louis Charbonneau of Reuters and Tim Witcher of AFP -- took note, as did the "lady from DPI" who seized the table on June 3. (Immediately after this, anonymous social media accounts associated with UNCA and Reuters, among others, began messages opposing any push for the same media access that used to exist.)

The rule UNCA put out June 5 prohibits using that area to work, that is, arguably blocking access to a door thatthat is always locked. 

  Only at the UN, is doing work prohibited. This remains in the rule sent by UNCA:

"f. The Security Council stakeout area, including the Turkish Lounge, is not to be used as a permanent workspace for the media."

Meanwhile while UNCA broadcasts its name on the door of a space given to it at the top of the third floor escalator, it proposes a rule to ban even a flier saying FUNCA -- on a journalist's office door. This is censorship, by the UN's Censorship Alliance, and an illegitimate attempt to impose what amount to a one-party system. To this has UNCA, and its partners among some in DPI, descended. We'll have more on this.

On ICC and Sudan, No UN Response on ICC Indictee Ali Kushayb Rampages, Chad Courted for UN's Mali Mission

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 5 -- Sudan and the International Criminal Court are on the UK Presidency's program of work for the UN Security Council for this morning. A UK government twitter account has announced it will be covering it. (There are obstacles, under the UK Presidency, to independent blog-style social media coverage of the Council, hence today's approach, click here for that.)

  So what is the UN doing about the ICC indictees in Sudan? The UN has offered free flights on UN helicopters to indictee Ahmed Haroun, as Inner City Press covered extensively.

  On June 4, Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Martin Nesirky:

Inner City Press: in Darfur it is reported that, that, that, that Ali Kushayb, who is one of the ICC [International Criminal Court] indictees, was seen in April as part of an attack on a village; and I wanted to know, since UNAMID is there, are they aware of that? Are they aware of the involvement of an ICC-indicted individual in this attack and, if so, what do they think of it? Do they think that this proves that that the ongoing involvement of these individuals in war crimes?

Spokesperson Nesirky: I’ll check with UNAMID, Matthew. I think you had one other question.

  Yes, but what about that one? In the 19 hours since, no answer from UNAMID or DPKO has been provided. In fact, the update on the Congolese Army's 135 rapes in Minova that Inner City Press asked DPKO chief Herve Ladsous for on May 29 -- he said, "You know I don't respond to you," video here -- has still not been provided.

  How about Chad, which invited indictee Omar al Bashir but is being courted to be part of the UN mission in Mali? So what about the UN and the ICC indictees? Watch this site.

As UK Punts on Media Access to UNSC, Ironic Video With Defenders of UN's Stonewalling

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 5 -- The UN and the UK, including the UK at the UN, talk a lot about social media, and some about new media. 

  But they now impose new obstacles on new media coverage of the Security Council, and are social in only a selective way.

  Before the Security Council was relocated from 2010 to June 1, 2013 and during the relocation, there was a media worktable in front of the Council where the press could file stories and tweets while speaking with diplomats entering and leaving even closed door consultations.

  At times, three to six blog-style pieces could be filed in the course of a Council meeting. This relied on being able to remain physically present in front of the Council, and having a table or surface to work on.

  The UN apparently didn't appreciate this coverage: when the Security Council returned to the second floor this week, there was no table. With its partner the old UN Correspondents Association, the UN's Department of Public Information cooked up a rule that

"f. The Security Council stakeout area, including the Turkish Lounge, is not to be used as a permanent workspace for the media. When the Council is not in session, correspondents should minimize the amount of time in the area, unless interviewing or conversing with a U.N. delegate or official."

  This rule hinders blog-style or new media coverage of the Security Council, to put it mildly. That the president of UNCA Pamela Falk of CBS uses the word "blog" as an insult, as if to mean "not a journalist," may not be unrelated to UNCA's role in the above-quoted rule.

  June's Security Council president is Mark Lyall Grant of the UK, who along with many in the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office is doggedly entering the world of social media, Twitter, Tumblr, all under the heading #DigitalDiplomacy.

  So one might expect them to be supportive of blog-style, new media, even Twitter coverage of Council meetings. But when Inner City Press, on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access which has opposed the above-quoted rule, asked Lyall Grant on June 4 for the UK's position, he essentially punted. Video here, from Minute 18:10.

  Lyall Grant said this is up to the UN's Department of Public Information and "the journalists directly to sort out." Which journalists? Well, on the UK Mission to the UN's website is a "World Press Freedom Day" video; the interviews are all big media and two of them have filed stealth complaints with the UN against the Press.

  Agence France Presse's Tim Witcher explicitly complained to the UN about how Inner City Press asked a question at the Security Council stakeout about the 135 rapes by the Congolese Army at Minova -- a topic Inner City Press also asked Lyall Grant about on June 4. Video here from Minute 17:32.

  Reuters' Michelle Nichols filed a related complaint, which was immediately piled on by Reuters' bureau chief Louis Charbonneau, who has previous told the UN's accreditation boss that he might leave the UN if Inner City Press were not thrown out. 

  Both are associated with anonymous social media accounts whichthroughout June 4, until past 9 pm, were engaged in trolling Inner City Press for pushing for UNSC media workspace, use as their "argument" photos taken during DPI's March 18, 2013 non-consensual raid on Inner City Press' office. World Press Freedom Day? Indeed.

   (At Lyall Grant's June 4 press conference, ended with an apology that only one last question was possible, Reuters was given two questions because it sent two correspondents; some noted that a third, ex-Reuters reported was also called on. When is enough, enough?)

  The issue is not to turn away from the Western wire services that have served UK diplomacy so well. But to allow such corporate scribes to work with some in the UN to try to ban blog-style coverage of the Security Council is a strange position for the UK and its #DigitalDiplomacy. We'll be covering this, as an experiment in this way. Watch this video edit -- explicitly credited to the UK Mission to the UN, added commentary identified as such. And watch this site.

Now UN Says Video of Syria Rebels' Chemical WeaponsUse Went to Sellstrom, Chides ICP for Filming in UN Briefing Room

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 4 -- The day after video footage depicting Syria rebels' use of chemical weapons was described dismissively to Inner City Press by UN official Angela Kane, UN spokesman Martin Nesirky insisted it had nonetheless been given to prober Ake Sellstrom.

Then, despite Kane's comments being in the UN briefing room after her colleague said to ask her any pressing questions, Nesirky reproached Inner City Press for recording without telling Kane. Is that necessary, in a press briefing room? From the UN's June 4 transcript:

Inner City Press: your office on May 23rd said that information provided by the journalist Anastasia Popova had been received by the High Representative, and was being converted into a usable format and being sent to Mr. Sellström. And then, yesterday, speaking to Ms. [Angela] Kane, she said there was some problems with the material, that it was much shorter than she thought it would be, it seemed to me that it hadn’t been given to Mr. Sellström. Do you, are you aware whether it has been or not and is there a way to find out whether, and if not, why not?

Spokesperson Nesirky: There is a way to find out, Matthew; the footage of alleged chemical weapons use that was provided by Anastasia Popova has been passed on to the head of the mission, Mr. Åke Sellström. And, as I have said, he continues to conduct the mission’s work outside of Syria, and to analyse all information made available to it.

Question: Her colleague who was with her yesterday said that they tried, but technically it wasn’t feasible; maybe they, that he just mean he couldn’t, they couldn’t make it as good as they--

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, maybe you could go back and look at the footage that you’ve recorded on camera without actually telling Ms. Kane. What’s your next question?

Inner City Press: ...Sure, I do have another question. But since you brought this filming thing, I just wanna make it clear, it took place here in the briefing room, and I was told that, if you have a pressing question, ask her; so, I, I don’t think there was any, should be any surprise that you might be filmed in the briefing room answering a question.

So why is the UN so defensive?

Inner City Press on June 3 asked Kane about the footage provided by Russian state TV reporter Anastasia Popova.Video here and embedded below.

  Kane said "it's like two seconds each picture." The UN official with her added, "we tried to make it as documentary... we never managed, technically."

Inner City Press cited back to the UN's May 23 statement. Kane said, "I had nothing to do with the response." She added that Sellstrom, Ban's chemical weapons prober, has "received a number" of submissions. 

 Her colleague said Popova's was "dozens of very short clips."

Back on April 30 at the Russian Mission to the UN, Popova, told Inner City Press that while she had information about the use of chemical weapons in Al-Asal, the UN panel headed by Paulo Sergio Pinheiro had declined to look at it.

  Inner City Press wrote the story, and on May 1 asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson Martin Nesirky if Ban's prober Ake Sellstrom would be willing to look at Popova's evidence. Yes, Nesirky said, to the surprise of some. And those some were again circling on June 4. Watch this site.

On Minova Rapes, UK On Zero Tolerance & Kang on DPKO, But No Answers from #Ladsous2013

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 4 -- The UN's partners in the Congolese Army committed at least 135 rapes in Minova in late November, with very few arrests since. What is the UN Security Council, and the UN's humanitarian arm, doing about it?

Inner City Press on June 4 asked June's Security Council president Mark Lyall Grant about the Minova rapes, and about Tanzanian president Kikwete's comment that Rwanda should negotiate with the FDLR militia. 

  Lyall Grant spoke of "zero tolerance," as the UN does, but it remains unclear if the Council during his month will inquire into the Department of Peacekeeping Operations' questionable implementation of its Human Rights Due Diligence Policy.

  When new Assistant Secretary General for humanitarian affairs Kyung-wha Kang appeared at the day's noon briefing, Inner City Press asked her about follow-through on Minova. 

  She said, essentially, to "ask our colleagues at DPKO." But Inner City Press asked DPKO chief Herve Ladsous just that, for an update on Minova, on May 29 and he said, "You know I do not respond to you." Nor has any update been provided since.

  On the FDLR, Lyall Grant spoke broadly about the Intervention Brigade. But what about doubts of its objectivity, given that it is led by a Tanzanian commander? Watch this site.

Footnote: Inner City Press also asked Lyall Grant if the UK favors maintaining the media access and workspace that existed at the Security Council before and during the relocation. He said that's up to "DPI and the journalists." We'll have more on this.

Silent on UN Security Council Media Access, UNCA Trolls Say Faceless Is The(ir) Only Way

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 4 -- As the UK as president adopted its UN Security Council program of work on Tuesday morning, outside for the second day in a row -- the second day in years -- there was no media worktable. 

  Inner City Press has been shown a rule that would ban media workspace, and even discourage journalists' presence when the Council is not in formal session.

But it's worse. As Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access have been advocating for restoration of the media access that existed before, anonymous social media accounts associated with the old UN Correspondents Association have not only been arguing AGAINST media workspace, but presenting their method of work as the only one. 

   This method seems to involve rarely coming to the Security Council stakeout, and only speaking to Western P-3 ambassadors or more frequently their spokespeople.

  One small message, sent mid Tuesday morning, was to chide Inner City Press that "Real journalists report and investigate the news - they don't create it!" That is, real journalists are faceless pass-throughs for those in power.

  That came from an account which previously sent a cell phone photograph from the storage room behind the temporary Security Council location. It is from a journalist at the UN, and one closely involved with UNCA. We will have more on this in the days to come.

  Where was the president of UNCA, Pamela Falk of CBS, during all this? Not at the stakeout. (Several of her board members who have tried to get smaller more investigative press thrown out of the UN were: Louis Charbonneau of Reuters, Tim Witcher of AFP, there's more).

  Nor obviously was Falk doing anything to rein in her UNCA trolls, of which she has been informed since at latest February 22. Rather she was getting ready to try to claim the first question about the Democratic Republic of Congo at the noon briefing, to UN official Kyung-wha Kang.

  To what end? Does she ever report on this on CBS? Or is it simply a make-up question to promote UNCA or herself? These might seem like tough questions, but at least they are on the record. It is UNCA and certain lazy, faceless and resentful big media reporters on its and its affiliate's boards who for months has been hiding behind anonymous accounts. They have hit a new low. Watch this site.

On Syria in Geneva, Pinheiro Report Has No Qatar or Del Ponte, Ladsous' Clouseau-Like Probe of Qatar Role in Golan Kidnappings?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 4 -- As the Syria report of the UN Commission of Inquiry was released and debated in Geneva Tuesday morning, the report was as noteworthy for what was not in it as for what was.

  When panelist Carla Del Ponte said publicly there were "serious suspicions" of chemical weapons use by the rebels, CoI chairperson Paulo Pinheiri quickly put out a press release undercutting it. 

  And lo and behold, his report says in Paragraph 138 that while "it is possible that anti-Government armed groups may access and use chemical weapons... there is no compelling evidence that these groups possess such weapons or their requisite delivery systems."

So there are "strong suspicions" (Del Ponte) but according to Pinheiro's final report, no "compelling evidence"? How to square these two?

On June 3 Inner City Press exclusively reported that despite a statement by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Office of the Spokesperson that video said to indicate rebel use of chemical weapons at Khan Al-Asal was being processed by the UN's Angela Kane for submission to Ban's prober Ake Sellstrom, this has not taken place. Then again, Pinheiro wouldn't even consider the footage.

  Likewise, while the Pinheiro report recites the repeated kidnapping of UN peacekeepers in the Golan in Paragraph 72, it does not even mention the allegation of involvement from Doha, Qatar. During the debate, it was (mis?) stated that Ban's head of Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous is investigating Qatar's role.

  Ironically, Qatar in its speech denounced the abduction of people. Really?

  Pinheiro did speaks against the transfer of weapons in to Syria. At the UN in New York on June 3, the UK's Alistair Burt told Inner City Press his country wants the flexibility to do just that. 

While Botswana said talks could lead to an "amicable" resolution, it's hard to imagine any denouement that would be "amicable."

US Ambassador Eileen Donahoe praised the opposition's "awareness campaigns" -- apparently PSAs by the FSA, Public Service Announcements by the Free Syrian Army. But what about the Al Nusra Front? Watch this site.

As UK Presides Over Press Banning from UN Security Council, Going Social One Week, #UKPres

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 4 -- The UK at the UN are an idealistic lot, but in a conflicted way.

  As they revive the Security Council "horizon scanning" briefing for their Presidency in June, we too will scan their horizon, through the first week of their month.

  They say they want to be open: but only so far, and only in their way. They provide information, but often only those friendly to them, in a way that is controlling.

  We begin as we must by noting that Monday they presided over the first day in years in which a media worktable was not only not present, but was actively discouraged and seized, in front of the Council.

  The Mission saw this coming, even talked with members of the press corps on both sides of the issue -- shocking that there is an "anti-access" side among the media, but that's another story, one that we will tell this week as well -- but still it happened.

  As the UK began its bilateral meetings with other Missions on June 3, for the first time in years there was no table. Various Missions, to the level of Permanent Representative, commented on it and said it should not stand. 

  But the UK seemed to think it was funny. Even after a small replacement table bought and brought by the new Free UN Coalition for Access was seized and taken away by the UN Department of Public Information, there was levity.

  Later on Monday Inner City Press was told not to engage in "personalization" in articles. But who to report without naming names? And with the UK so savvy now in social media, how not to name the handles? 

   So this is how we'll do it, setting the deadline of the week: we'll cover the UK in precisely the way they have decided to make themselves available: not with media workspace presence in front of the Council, but through social media. And it will, as it must, be personal. One new name per story.

  Mark Lyall Grant rather than the ritual 12:30 press conference has moved it, and is having one online from 2:30 to 3, complete with hashtag. We'll be there, via hashtag. Can you spell #UNfreePress?

  Even over the weekend, the UK went public with a press statement it proposed about Qusayr in Syria, then selectively blamed one Mission for blocking it. (Inner City Press spoke with that Mission on Monday and heard their side of things: in person, not online.)

  The UK told some resident correspondents perceived as friendly the minister Alistair Burt would go do a stakeout about the Arms Trade Treaty. The goal, it seems, was to not have to answer the obvious contradiction: it was the UK that sought the "flexibility" to arm the Syrian rebels, whiletrumpeting the ATT. 

  The ICRC calls it inconsistent, but who's counting? Control Arms apparently doesn't.

  Back in May, for Press Freedom Day, the UK put on its Tumblr page the statements of favored correspondents, presumably though it thought represent free press. 

  But as we'll show this week, at least two of them have openly been quite anti-press, trying to get others thrown out of the UN, trolling and accusing journalist which whom they don't agree of being funded by Assad or, pertinent to the UK, by the defunct Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka. 

  The UK Mission knows or should have known about this: but friends are friends, useful pass-throughs are just that. Press Freedom Day indeed.

  The issue of the table is telling. It was there before the Council moved, and during the relocation. The UK has presided, literally, over its elimination. It's a week of moves and getting settled in, Inner City Press is told. A week? We'll see. Watch this site.

On France, IMF Says Banks Have Far to Go, Of UBS, KBC, "Exports" & Noyer's Dream World

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 4 -- In an International Monetary Fund report embargoed until 5:45 am today, the IMF says that "French banks still have some way to go" and speaks of "limited public disclosure of financial sector data." Both are understatements.

  Take for example French fraud charges for CDO chicanery by the bank KBC, which is based in Belgium, and moves on UBS (France) for helping tax evasion, after the grilling CEO Jean-Frederic de Leusse -- then ask if the French banks didn't do the same or worse.

  France's regulators, meanwhile, remain in a dream world. Banque de France governor Christian Noyer while presenting the annual "prudential" report on May 29 bragged that "in the banking sector, the institutions have … improved their liquidity position by accumulating reserves." Many don't agree.

Even the IMF says, "Given uncertainty on the pace at which banks can move to an originate-to-distribute model, policies should focus on removing constraints on the deposit base. In this regard, the diversion of an important part of household savings toward regulated savings accounts (due to the past and planned increase in the ceiling of the livret A and thelivret de développement durable) goes against the regulatory objectives set out by the authorities. The parameters that define the distribution of the funds collected through these instruments between the Caisse des Dépôts et Consignationsand the banks could be set in a more flexible manner so as to support the adaptation of financial institutions to the new regulatory requirements. Eventually, a more thorough reform of the taxation of financial income would be desirable toward a maturity-based rather than product-based approach.

  More fundamentally the IMF says that "the structural challenge faced by France is captured by three related indicators: a declining rate of productivity growth, low profit margins, and a deteriorating export performance." 

  But France continues to neo-colonial military exports, from Mali to Niger even into the United Nations with its fourth UN Peacekeeping boss in a row, Herve Ladsous. From exports of this kind back up to shady banking practices, il y-a des problemes. Watch this site.

Lawless UN Has No Answer on Haiti, Threatens for Free Speech, Favors Sycophants

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 3 -- This UN has become lawless, in matters large and small. Big picture, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon tersely denied 5,000 legal claims based on the UN bringing cholera to Haiti, and has yet to respond to a letter from 19 members of the US Congress about it.

  Smaller, but just today, Ban's UN imposed a new rule of "no media workspace" in front of the UN Security Council, going so far as to seize a small work table put there by Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access -- but refused to say whether the rule has gone into effect.

  The same rule would prohibit substantive FUNCA fliers about the reduction in media workspace and access -- but on Monday the UN Correspondents Association which has said nothing about the loss of a Security Council work table erected a large bulletin board. But it has nothing to say. That's just the way the UN likes it.

  From the transcript of Monday's UN noon briefing:

Inner City Press: There has been some back and forth about these media access guidelines or rules, but this morning, since there was no table, I put a small table there to work on in order to cover the bi-laterals. And returning there from the ATT [Arms Trade Treaty] stakeout, the table was gone and I was told the lady from DPI [Department of Public Information] took it. So, I am wanting to know: what are the rules? Did these rules which would seek to prohibit media workspace in front of the Security Council, have they gone into effect, or are they still being considered? And why was the small table actually used for work in covering the Council taken?

Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: Well, I know you’ve had extensive exchanges both with my colleague Eduardo [del Buey], sitting here in the past couple of weeks; and also with Stéphane Dujarric. I don’t have anything to add on that at this point.

Inner City Press: the reason I ask that is just because it seems like the UN often talks about rules, and transparency and since it moved and since it was foreseeable, I wasn’t aware that there was already a ban in effect on work space. That’s why I put the table there. But it’s gone.

Spokesperson Nesirky: As I say, Matthew, I don’t have anything to add to the extensive exchanges you’ve had with a number of people, primarily with Eduardo and Stéphane. Any other questions?

Inner City Press: Would you tell us when the rules go into effect? I just wanna know when.

Spokesperson: Matthew, you can put the question any way you like; I don’t have anything further to add to the extensive exchanges you’ve already had, okay?

But these "exchanges" have not answered the basic question: have these rules gone into effect? Who agreed to them? Who drafted these paragraphs:

"f. The Security Council stakeout area, including the Turkish Lounge, is not to be used as a permanent workspace for the media. When the Council is not in session, correspondents should minimize the amount of time in the area, unless interviewing or conversing with a U.N. delegate or official."

and

"Posting of notices is restricted to the bulletin boards provided by DPI, including the UNCA bulletin board (by U.N. Correspondents Association officials), and the General Access Bulletin Board (by all accredited correspondents). Signs posted on doors are limited to entry restrictions, for example, 'do not disturb' or 'on air' or the identification of your organization. All other notices (e.g. announcement of meetings/event, press releases) are prohibited unless specifically authorized by Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit (MALU).

"Failure to adhere to guidelines in this document can be grounds for withdrawal or suspension of accreditation."

   So a journalist faces "withdrawal of accreditation" for free speech. The above has been edited to be less personal. But.. Watch this site.