In 1st UN Bribery Case, Ng Lap Seng Threatens to Use OSSC Web Pages, Removed, Spox Spins

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 6 – In the UN bribery case against Macau-based businessman Ng Lap Seng, for which jury selection ran from June 26 through June 28 (Periscope here), Ng's lawyers have said they may use in his defense some UN documents which they have not yet specified. The prosecution has argued "defense counsel stated, 'We also have another document that is from the UN that we are going to introduce which is the secretary delegation members list.” (Tr. 138.) In addition, when sharing proposed opening slides, the Government learned that the defendant had printed out or downloaded two excerpts from UNOSSC websites that have never been produced or identified to the Government, but that the defendant asserted he intends to introduce at trial. The Government does not have a copy of the pertinent webpages, nor does it know whether the website from which they came is currently available or whether, in any event, the excerpts fairly and accurately capture the website." Inner City Press which has covered this inside the UN (and been thrown out by the UN for seeking to cover, in the UN Press Briefing Room, an event by a group funded by Ng's South South News, which will now host Secretary General Antonio Guterres' deputy Amina J. Mohammed) notes that the Office of South South Cooperation has refused to hold a press conference. On July 6, Inner City Press asked UN holdover Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about, video here, UN transcript here: Inner City Press: I want to ask you about the Ng Lap Seng case.  It's obviously continuing, but there are now… it has emerged in… in court filings that the defendant, Ng Lap Seng, charged with bribery in the UN, intends to introduce certain UN documents, including past versions of the Office of South-South Cooperation's website in his defense.  And so the prosecution, the Department of Justice has asked him to disclose that.  He says he's not going to disclose it yet.  What I wanted to ask you as it turns out, we never did get a press conference by the Office of South-South Cooperation.  Can you now get a statement from them on changes they've made to the website since the case broke and why they made them?  Because it becomes… it's not a question of… it's a UN question about an unresolved, never…?

Spokesman:  I mean… listen, I think… I think the Office has responded to your questions and you're welcome to ask them again.

Inner City Press: Are you sure?

Spokesman:  Yes.

  But it's not true: OSSC never held the long promises press conference.  Earlier, two filings revealed that the UN refused to provide information to the US Government for its prosecution, contrary to the UN's repeated statements to Inner City Press that the UN was cooperating. Now in opening statements, Ng's lawyer Tai Park said of Ng's $20,000 a month payments to Francis Lorenzo to run "South South News" (while serving as the Dominican Republic's Deputy Permanent Representative), "It's called wages, ladies and gentlemen, not bribes." Wages for what? As Inner City Press has reported, the UN Department of Public Information kept South South News with full not restricted access long after the indictment, and South South News-ers have returned to the UN. (This week there was a murky event in the UN which strongly echoed Ng Lap Seng's capture of DPI including a one-man painting exhibition in the UN lobby for which DPI did no due diligence, only evicted and restricts the Press which reported on it). Of Lorenzo, Prosecutor Douglas Zolkind said Ng began sending Lorenzo an extra $30,000 a month in late 2012 "for the express purpose of obtaining UN approval for the conference center." This involved getting the UN Secretariat to doctor a General Assembly resolution AFTER it was rubber stamped, and more. Watch this site. The prosecution's June 5 letter criticized the UN Task Force Report as self-serving. On June 28 Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric to defend the UN Report. From the UN transcript: Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you again about this Ng Lap Seng case as it moves up.  I've looked more closely in the court file, and this is something I'd ask you to respond to because it's not regarding guilt or innocence.  They're looking at that the US Government says of the UN task force report on weaknesses in funding of the PGA [President of the General Assembly] office that the report was prepared only by an ad hoc committee without any identifiable special skills or expertise, and it was motivated by a concern for the reputation of the entity that ordered it rather than to determine facts regardless of the impact on the entity's representation.  Do you think this UN report, which will be introduced, at least in part in the trial, is it something the UN stands behind as an objective report, or was it, as the Government seems to say, an exercise in…?

Spokesman:  Look, I'm not going to go…  I'm not going to argue what a party to this trial has to say.  The report was conduct… was ordered following the revelations regarding the former PGA.  It was put… it was conducted in order to see how the operations of the Office of the President of the General Assembly could be improved.  As… you know, as well as I do, the Office of the President of the General Assembly is one that is independent from the Secretary-General and over one he has no authority.

Inner City Press: But it's not just a party.  It's the prosecution that you've said that you're cooperating or have cooperated with.  I mean…

Spokesman:  I'm not going to comment on what… but I just stated our position regarding the report.

  The US Attorney's June 25 letter states, in footnote 1, that "the UN declined to identify to the Government all individuals who were interviewed in connection with the preparation of the Report." This Report is the UN Task Force Report, which Ng is trying to use to show that the UN had so few rules that his payments, including through South South News, weren't bribes but contributions. The UN should now answer for its refusal to cooperate in the prosecution of bribery within the UN. On June 27 Inner City Press asked Stephane Dujarric, the spokesman for new Secretary General Antonio Guterres as for his two predecessors, but he refused to explain. Video here. UN transcript here: Inner City Press: Now that the UN bribery case  regarding Ng Lap Seng has begun — and it began yesterday in lower Manhattan — there's a filing dated 25 June.  This is a quote:  "The UN declined to identify to the Government all individuals who were interviewed in connection with the preparation of the report called the UN Task Force Report."   And this is being used by Ng Lap Seng to say he didn't bribe anyone because everyone bribes everyone at the UN, basically, is his defence.  And so, now, portions of the UN Task Force Report are not going to be produced to the jury because the Justice Department says the UN declined to identify, i.e., didn't cooperate.  I know I've asked you before about and you've said that the UN is fully cooperating with the authorities, and this is a statement in the letter by the Government to the court saying that that's not the case.  How do you explain it?  On what basis did the UN not provide this information as requested by the Government?

Spokesman:  We've cooperated extensively to facilitate the proper course of justice in this case.  The proceedings are ongoing, and I'm not going to make any comments while these proceedings are ongoing.

Inner City Press:  Do you see why it seems contradictory?

Spokesman:  You asked what you asked, and I said what I said.

On June 26, prospective jurors were summoned one by one up to speak to the judge, alongside Ng Lap Seng's lawyers and the prosecution. (White noise was turned on so they would not be overheard). Ng Lap Seng himself sat at the defense table, as he had sat at the UN Correspondents Association fundraiser where he bought access to Ban Ki-moon. In the courtroom on June 26, Inner City Press was spoken to by claimed Ng relatives, saying that Ng did nothing that others don't also do in the UN, pay money for access. That's true. During a break, US Marshals accompanied Ng up to the fifth floor bathroom. In the vending machines, 12 ounce sodas sold for a dollar. On the first floor, an ostensibly recycling garbage can had metal, plastic and garbage all going into the same bag, similar to the UN's fraud, now being exposed. Watch this site. Former South South News chief and diplomat Francis Lorenzo has been described in a Superseding Information as an "agent" of the UN, making it more difficult for the UN to dodge, despite it attempts to hinder Press coverage of the connections. Now in the run up to the trial, the judge has ruled on "evidence or argument concerning payments
made to the Antiguan Ambassador by those other than by Defendant Ng and/or the
media company." The media company is South South News - and in a new low, one of its main UN representatives has in June 2017 reappeared HIRED in the UN, at the UN Security Council no less. The UN is entirely corrupt. Meanwhile defendant Ng Lap Seng is trying to keep out of the upcoming trial his financial involvement with relatives of Jesse Jackson Jr (which again calls into question how the UN Department of Public Information didn't do even Google "due diligence," then evicted and restricts Inner City Press which asked DPI). Ng's filing quotes the government that "Mr. Ng made a loan to a UNOSSC employee who sought funding from Mr. Ng in order to pursue graduate studies." What has the UN done about any of this, beyond evicting and restricting the Press which is covering the story? On May 3, Inner City Press asked UN holdover spokesman Stephane Dujarric, who not only didn't answer but also rebuffed a question about the UN in the DR Congo, UN transcript here: Inner City Press: John Ashe case and DRC [Democratic Republic of the Congo[.  There are two new filings in the John Ashe case, and I wanted to ask you about, in particular, one of them is a superseding indictment of Francis Lorenzo, and it describes him in paragraph 3 as an agent of an organization, to wit, the UN did corruptly solicit and demand, etcetera.  But I guess what I’m wondering is, now, if the US Attorney is describing Mr. Francis Lorenzo as an agent of the UN, does this change the way the UN is looking at the case?

Spokesman:  We’re looking at the case.  I’m not aware that Mr. Lorenzo is an agent of the UN.  But, again, we’re looking at the case.  And, when we have something more to say, we’ll let you know.

Inner City Press: And another filing at the same time says that… that Ng Lap Seng provided money to and educational loans to a staff member of the Office of South-South Cooperation.  That’s not something I ever saw…

Spokesman:  Okay.  I… I… we have… obviously, we’re following the case.  I don’t have anything to say while the proceedings are ongoing.  Thank you.  I’m going to get Mr. Takasu.

  Lorenzo has now expanded his guilty plea to admit paying bribes to now deceased President of the UN General Assembly John Ashe, and soliciting bribes from Ng. Lorenzo will testify against Ng, whose motion to dismiss the case has been denied. But the UN is still in denial. On April 28 Inner City Press asked the UN's holdover spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript here: Inner City Press: Francis Lorenzo, the former head of South-South News and former Deputy Permanent Representative of the Dominican Republic to the UN has expanded his guilty plea to a clear and clean admission of having bribed former PGA [President of the General Assembly], may he rest in peace, John Ashe, and he's going to testify against Ng Lap Seng.  It gives rise… this now seems to be previously just tax charges.  Now he's saying, on the record… taking responsibility, saying he knew it was wrong at the time that he did it.  So, my question is:  As the case… as the case gets more pointedly in terms of what took place inside the United Nations walls… and yesterday I saw the former DGACM [Department of General Assembly and Conference Management] individual, now retired, who I believe… it seems from the audit is the one that changed the document.  What is the ramification?  Was anything ever done for that changed document, and what is exactly OLA [Office of Legal Affairs] doing now that there's admission not just of tax charges or evasion, of bribery…?

Spokesman:  First of all, the alleged bribery you're referring to does not involve a staff member of the UN.  There were audits done, and the situation was looked at very carefully in the past two years, if my memory is correct.  We continue, obviously, to follow the developments in the case, and if we need to act upon anything that is revealed by the time the case is done, we shall do so.
Inner City Press:  But, I guess the goal of the bribery was to obtain a UN document saying that Macau Conference Center was needed, and that document was obtained from DGACM.  So, are you saying that somehow the actual… the ultimate act that they wanted was done without any…?

Spokesman:  That's not what I'm saying.

Inner City Press: But, what was done?  I saw the guy walking around.  Was there any repercussion of any individual named in the audit?

Spokesman:  As I said, as more information comes to light, we'll act upon it.

  Right. The corruption into which the UN sank during the tenure of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, whose head of the Department of Public Information Cristina Gallach did no due diligence as Ng bought illegal events in the UN and even the UN's slavery memorial, and DPI's censorship of and threats against the Press which reports on the Ng and South South News case has yet to be addressed or even stopped. This has been raised to the top of the Secretariat. Ng's associate Jeff Yin has also pleaded guilty to working to violate UN tax laws with South South News. The UN Department of Public Information evicted and still restricts Inner City Press for seeking to cover UN links to South South News; this month DPI has refused to explain the basis. On April 12 when Inner City Press about the UN's holdover spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the guilty plea, he said SSN is "no longer" at the UN, as if that resolved it. It doesn't, and that has been raised. Video here; from the UN transcript: Inner City Press: question about this Ng Lap Seng, previously John Ashe, case.  There’s been now a guilty plea by John Ashe’s lone remaining co-defendant, Jeffrey Yin.  And in his guilty plea, he states that South-South News intentionally paid him in cash in order to evade US tax laws.  That’s what he’s pled guilty to. Given the supposed inquiry by the UN, what’s the response?  It’s not a matter of waiting until the end of the case.  This is a…

Spokesman:  My understanding is South-South News is no longer accredited as a news organization to the UN.

  Under Dujarric, South South News content was included in UN TV webcast and archives; Dujarric threw Inner City Press out of the UN Press Briefing Room for seeking to cover South South News payees in the UN, and worked on the UN misleading memo to the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Paragraph 9 and 10, here.

  Ng is set for trial, but now an adjournment has been granted to May. The letter motion by Ng Lap Seng's lawyers cites a need to review "many thousands of pages of banking records, emails and other documents related to Jeff Yin, Mr.
Ng, Vivian Wang, SKI, and SSN, among others. We are still awaiting production of voluminous
documents, including information contained in DVDs and CDs seized from Vivian Wang’s
residence, tax information for a number of alleged co-conspirators, South South News
documents, phone records, and additional Ashe emails." So is the UN even checking out these new records, to reform itself? It seems not. On April 7 Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript here

UN of Guterres & Mohammed Has No Press Protections, Partners & Parties With Press Evicters

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 6 – The UN has no rules protecting the rights of journalists to investigate and report on UN corruption without being evicted and restricted for their coverage. Despite not making any change to this since taking power, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres' deputy Amina J. Mohammed lists as her lone public appointment on July 6 “remarks at the launch of the 2017 United Nations Correspondents Association Directory.” Tweeted photo here.

This supposed UN Correspondents Association has not pushed for any rules or transparency. In fact, it was for seeking to pursue the UN bribery / Ng Lap Seng / South South Newsstory by covering a UN Press Briefing Room event of UNCA, which accepted funds from Ng's South South News, that Inner City Press was evicted from the UN and remains restricted sixteen months later. (Guterres' holdover spokesman Stephane Dujarric has defended this, saying he "lent" the room to UNCA, Aide Memoire to US Senate here.) 

On July 5 as Guterres gave a “reform” speech about how Amina Mohammed will take over the UN Development System, Inner City Press was ordered to stop staking-out the meeting unlike other correspondents. Actually, at the same time UNCA was holding an unrelated event in the clubhouse the UN gives them. 

It's like an in-house union, which has allowed a two-tier system of access and actively sought to get the investigative Press thrown out. In this context it is also troubling that the acting head of the UN Department of Public Information Maher Nasser, who has maintained the double standard of access for ten weeks and counting recently "multiple reportedly" attended a Hamptons event of -- and accepted gratuities from, as they'd put it in the Ng Lap Seng trial -- UNCA big wigGiampaolo Pioli, who previously vowed to get Inner City Press thrown out if it did not remove from the Internet a story concerning his rentingof an apartment to the ambassador of Sri Lanka, implicated in the White Flag murders of surrendering combatants. 

These things are not all UNCA members' fault, nor most of those who accept their gratuities. But the UN Secretariat's failure to have content neutral rules, and for example to have now disparately treated the investigative Press for sixteen months while trying to give its office and full access to an Egyptian state media, Akhbar al Yom, whose Sanaa Youssef rarely comes in and never asks questions - is shameful. It's the UN Censorship Alliance. We'll have more on this.

As North Korea Fires, In Stages, US Sets UNSC Meeting, Guterres Still in Lisbon, WIPO on Cyanide

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 4 – After North Korea fired another missile, on June 3-4, UN Secretary General was in his stomping ground of Lisbon, Portugal, after days of not disclosing where he was. The US Mission spokesman, in stages, announced that Ambassador Nikki Haley "requested an urgent UN Security Council meeting on North Korea in response to ballistic missile launch. Session [July 5] afternoon." 

The launch, now said to be intercontinental, also in stages, was also expected to be discussed at the upcoming G20 meeting in Germany. The UN Security Council president for July, China, had only hours before reiterated its suspension for suspension proposal, while UN DESA chief Wu Hong Bo had said of course North Korea would have the right to place a Junior Professional Officer in the UN. The UN's World Intellectual Property Organization had defended working on cyanide patents for North Korea, and Guterres' spokespeople had defended it. It was a circus, and no one know when the Security Council would meet. After the last launch, the UN Security Council added to its sanctions list 14 individuals and four companies. Inner City Press put the resolution online here. This as some on the UN Security Council, and UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres or at least his spokesman Stephane Dujarric have no problem with or comment on the UN's own World Intellectual Property Organization helps North Korea with a patent application for social cyanide (WIPO site here).  On Capitol Hill on June 28, Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) urged US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley to act on WIPO, including its retaliation against whistleblowers. Haley spoke about reviewing peacekeeping missions, which is needed - as is a review and reversal of the UN's lack of protections for free press, and continued restrictions on investigative Press. At the day's UN noon briefing Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN Transcript here: Inner City Press: down in Washington this morning, there's a hearing in the committee… House Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the issue of the… the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), not only its dealings with patents for North Korea, but its retaliation against its own staff, you know, has been raised.  So, I've asked you about it before.  I just wanted to know, what does the Secretary-General… given there's even some provisions of US law about failure to protect whistle-blowers, has he taken any action on the… the numerous cases within WIPO of…?

Spokesman:  The Sec… WIPO is an independent agency, specialized agency.  It has its own governing body, on which the United States is represented.  I expect those discussions are going on between the US and WIPO… the WIPO leadership, and I really have nothing else to add than what I've previously said on the issue.

Inner City Press: Right, but given that they're a part of the Chief Executives Board (CEB) and there are certain, I guess, minimum standards in the UN system, such as not using criminal defamation against the press, I would assume…?

Spokesman:  As a matter of principle, the Sec… and this goes across the board for every organization.  The Secretary-General expects all UN agencies, whether specialized or not, to… to uphold standards… minimum standards.  But, I'm not going to go into the details of WIPO management, which is an issue that WIPO management will… dealing with, with its own governing body.

  The UN Secretariat alsobacked up WIPO on May 26 when Inner City Press asked, transcript here and below. Inner City Press on May 16 began to ask US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley about it (video here). 

On May 17, Nikki Haley replied to Inner City Press' question: "All parts of the UN system need to support the Security Council in its efforts to respond to the grave threat of North Korea’s weapons of mass destruction programs. Sodium cyanide is banned for export to North Korea by the Security Council. A common sense reaction would be for WIPO to inform the Council of such patent applications. Its failure to do so may have dangerous consequences.” 

The UN through spokesman Stephane Dujarric told Inner City Press it supports WIPO, video here. On May 19, Inner City Press asked North Korea's Ambassador Kim In Ryong about it, without answer. Video here.  Then the US Mission to the UN issued a longer press release, here. On May 26, Inner City Press asked the UN's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq to respond. UN transcript: Inner City Press: since, since I last asked, the US Mission has put out a second, more-detailed statement about the World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO) work on the sodium cyanide patent for either a North Korean individual or the Government.  They seem to insist that there was no need for them to inform the Sanctions Committee that everything is fine with that.  And I wanted to know, what does the Secretary-General think, given his calls and his own statements that all Member States take this very seriously both, implementing… does he think that WIPO has met all of its obligations and that it should continue in the future to do patent work in North Korea on cyanide without informing the Committee?

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, as you're aware, the World Intellectual Property Organization has, twice now, on its website, put explanations of its actions, and we would refer you to what they have said on this.  Of course, the Secretary-General does want all Member States, and, indeed, all parts of the UN, to abide by Security Council resolutions, but you can see what the explanation is provided by WIPO itself.

Question:  But, what does he think of their explanation?  I guess that's my question.  He's the head of the UN System.  Does he think… obviously, there are some that think that the…   what they're saying is asinine, and they think that it's fine.  So, I'm asking what does he think of it?

Deputy Spokesman:  We're aware of what their explanation is, and we refer you back over to them. 

 That is not leadership. Inner City Press adds: condemnation should also include the UN Federal Credit Union, which is soliciting the funds of the North Korean mission and its employees, as well as UNA-USA members. Inner City Press on the morning of May 18 asked the chair of the UN Security Council's North Korea sanctions committee, the Italian Mission to the UN under Sebastiano Cardi, "Does your Mission, which holds the chair of the 1718 Committee, agree that WIPO should have informed the Security Council of this work with North Korea? I recently asked Ambassador Cardi about a DPRK sanctions violation in Germany, without yet much of a response. I notice that the Italian mission stopped sending Inner City Press any information at all in February 2017. Please explain." In the afternoon, the Italian Mission's spokesperson Giovanni Davoli replied, "the Panel of Experts was not aware of this matter. Therefore the Committee could not be. The Panel announced they are going to open an investigation. Once the Committee will receive the report of the panel, we might be able to comment further." We await that, and another answer.
 Inner City Press also on May 18 asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about Ambassador Haley's response - but all Dujarric would do was refer, positively, to a WIPO press release. In its press release, WIPO says "a DPRK individual citizen applicant filed an international patent application under WIPO’s PCT system in respect of a process for production of sodium cyanide." Are there really "individual applicants" in today's North Korea? Isn't the import of sodium cyanide into North Korea a violation of UN sanctions? Dujarric called this WIPO's "very clear explanation." Inner City Press repeatedly asked Dujarric to state if the Secretariat finds WIPO's statement on May 16 -- before Ambassador Haley's response -- sufficient. Apparently yes. We'll have more on this: Inner City Press has asked other UN Security Council members. Watch this site. In an earlier exchange with UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, the UN itself acknowledged that the Security Council's Panel of Experts is belatedly looking into it as a possible sanctions violation. Video here, transcript below. Later to May's President of the UN Security Council, Uruguay's Elbio Rosselli, Inner City Press asked about UN WIPO's (non) compliance with UN sanctions, working on a patent for North Korea's production of sodium cyanide. Periscope video here. Ambassador Rosselli said he had not heard of the issue. At the UN's May 16 noon briefing, Inner City Press had asked the UN about that and its reporting that the UN Federal Credit Union, regulated by the US National Credit Union Administration, openly solicits the business of both North Korean employees of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's mission to the UN and the members of the UN Association of the USA (UNA-USA), amid questions of immunity and a previous UNFCU settlement for sanctions violations.  UN briefing video here, from Min 10:20.

UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric dodged on whether Secretary General Antonio Guterres would this time talk to WIPO chief Francis Gurry, as he did not as Gurry deployed criminal defamation law against the press; he also wouldn't answer on UNFCU. UN transcript: Inner City Press:  About WIPO [World Intellectual Property Organization] doing a patent application for North Korea for the production of sodium cyanide, which is banned to be brought into the country.  Before, it wasn't clear to me if the Secretary-General had communicated with WIPO about their use of criminal defamation against journalists.  But, is this something that concerns him?  I also want to ask you about the UN Federal Credit Union (UNFCU) openly soliciting deposits from… from the Mission of North Korea, as well as the employees of the Mission despite having previously settled sanctions charges for just such activity on another sanctioned country.  Do you think that this is consistent with this whole idea of tightening up?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I don't speak for the Credit Union.  They're an independent body.  I would agree… I would urge you to question them.  On the [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea] and the Fox News report, obviously, I think what's contained in the report is disturbing and demands looking into.  The Panel of Experts… the Security Council Panel of Experts, as you know, is an independent team reporting to the Council.  And they have the prerogative to look into all alleged violations of DPRK sanctions and report to the Council accordingly.   I think, as noted in the article, the Panel's coordinator said the Panel will look into the issue.  And I think we'll need… the Panel will do its work and report back.  And if… we will obviously look more directly into the issue, as well from our end.

Inner City Press:  Given that there have been previous allegations and reported retaliation at WIPO concerning activities with North Korea, do you or the Secretary-General think it's something that at the CEB [Chief Executives Board] or some kind of system-wide, does it need to be reiterated to the UN agencies that these sanctions are reported?

Spokesman:  I think the need… the absolute need to respect the sanctions regime, both whether it's from Member States or within the UN, I think, is clear and should be clear to everyone.

 UNFCU's website lists under “Missions to the UN in New York eligible to join UNFCU” that of “North Korea (DPRK"). Inner City Press asked UNFCU's Senior Manager of Media Relations Elisabeth Philippe questions including “why some UN member states' missions to the UN are eligible to join UNFCU, including the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and others are not, why members of UNA-USA became eligible to join UNFCU, what regulatory filings in any UNFCU made for this change in field of membership, and any restrictions on the use of these UNA-USA members' funds, and what services UNFCU offers to UN agencies and country teams, in which countries, and if there are any restrictions or safeguards.” 

  On deeming the North Korean mission and all of its employees eligible, UNFCU's Ms. Philippe told Inner City Press, “The employees of any mission to the United Nations based in New York are eligible to apply for UNFCU membership. The employees of all missions are eligible to join once their mission has submitted an application and been approved.” The website says the mission itself can join UNFCU. On May 10, Inner City Press asked the chairman of the UN Security Council's North Korea Sanctions Committee Sebastiano Cardi about North Korea's embassy in Berlin renting out space as a hostel, video here. What safeguards does UNFCU, with UNA-USA's members in its field of membership, have?

  On UNFCU expanding its field of membership to including anyone who joins UNA-USA, Ms. Philippe told Inner City Press, “UNA-USA is the largest UN advocacy organization in the United States. UNFCU is a financial organization providing retail banking for the UN community. Members of UNA-USA, who are US citizens or permanent residents of the US, are eligible to become members of UNFCU. In December 2013, the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), the US regulatory body which oversees US federal credit unions, approved the expansion of UNFCU membership to include UNA-USA based on a shared mission and values in support of the United Nations. UNA-USA members who become members of UNFCU are eligible for the full suite of products and services available to UNFCU’s field of membership.”

  But what is in the “full suit of products and services” available from UNFCU? The US Office of Financial Asset Control or OFAC settled charges against UNFCU for, in connection with Mission employees, violating sanctions, see here. And Inner City Press' third question, about precisely what services “UNFCU offers to UN agencies and country teams” - including for example in North Korea - remained at publication time unanswered. Now this: "As a member-owned financial institution that serves the UN community globally, UNFCU provides bank account services to UN/agency staff, and consultants subject to payroll requirements of the various UN agencies and subject to the rules and regulations governing all US Financial Institutions. Accounts are maintained in US dollars and are protected by federal share insurance through the National Credit Union Administration. UNFCU complies with US regulations, including those governing US economic sanctions." But why then did UNFCU settle charges of sanctions violations? We'll have more on this. Inner City Press previously exclusively reported for example that "Sudanese nationals working for the UN have had part of their salaries paid into UN Federal Credit Union accounts, in U.S. dollars. Then they were told that these dollar accounts were frozen, and could only be transferred to the Bank of Khartoum." Watch this site.

***

Amid Libya Failures of UN, Guterres Orders Strategic Review by Ex-UN Guehenno, ICP's Told

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, June 7 – The UN's filings in Libya have forced Secretary General Antonio Guterres to order a strategic review of its presence there, head by French former UN official Jean-Marie Guehenno, sources tell Innr City Press. Guterres got his choice to replace envoy Martin Kobler blocked. The UN's servile role in Libya was exemplified  on April 4, when long time UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric cut off a Press question, to Italy, about its deal with and reported arming of tribesthere in an attempt to stem migrant flows. So on April 5, Inner City Press asked Dujarric's Associate Spokesperson Eri Kaneko, from the UN transcript: 

Inner City Press: I tried yesterday at the UNMAS [United Nations Mine Action Service] press conference to ask this question.  There was a conference held in… Friday in Rome between the Italian Interior Ministry and what was described as tribes from Libya, particularly from the parts not controlled by the UN-recognized Government.  And at least some press accounts say that Italy has agreed to provide weapons to the tribes, basically to stop immigrant… migrants or refugees from coming to their soil.  So, what I wondered is, what's the UN's involvement in this?  One, what do they think of a country arming tribes, if that's what took place?  In any event, what is the UN… either Mr. [Martin] Kobler or… or… or anyone else in the UN system, UNHCR [Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees], are they involved in any way in this Italian interchange with Libyan tribes?

Associate Spokesperson:  I mean, as you know, the UN is not a military force or has no military force in Libya, but I'm sure that the Italians are in touch with our team on the ground.  We'll check with them what they think about this development.

Question:  Right.  But, I guess… well, okay.  Check… check, if you could?

Associate Spokesperson:  Yoshita?

  Eight hours later, there was nothing, no answers. On April 4, the cut off was at a press conference co-chaired by Italy's deputy ambassador to the UN; Libya is one of the countries the UN says it does mine action work in. But when Inner City Press asked about Libya, and Italy, Dujarric cut in and disallowed the question. Later he allowed others to ask “off topic” questions. And, after Inner City Press followed up on its question about Richard Wilcox being proposed as UN envoy to Libya, Dujarric refused to confirm he has been blocked, despite loud protestation about the blocking of Salam Fayyad for the same position. This is today's UN.

   In Libya, the head of UNMAS said they work from outside of the country. Inner City Press asked her about Cameroon, too, including the Internet cut off she said she was aware of from Inner City Press - but that's another story.

After the UN's Antonio Guterres, under the advice of USg Jeffrey Feltman, had the pick of Salam Fayyad for UN Libya envoy blocked, the duo have a new, also US Democratic Party related, name for the position: Richard Wilcox. On March 24, after reporting this, Inner City Press asked Guterres' holdover deputy spokesman Farhan Haq, UN transcript here: 

Inner City Press: the National Human Rights Commission in Libya has expressed concern about a proposal by Italy to open up, they say, migrant camps inside Libya, I guess, to stem the flow of people coming to them, but apparently, they… they… they… Italy believes they can open it without the Government's consent.  And I wanted to know, given that the Secretary-General is a… is something of an expert in immigrat… in migration law, does the Secretary-General or Secretariat have any view of a European country like Italy opening up migrant camps in countries of origin in order to keep people from coming even without that Government's consent?

Deputy Spokesman:  First, we'll check with UNHCR what they're saying about this.  I believe that they'll be looking at this matter, and they've been in touch with the relevant authorities.  So we'll have to see what the response is.
Inner City Press: Also on Libya, I wanted to ask you, the former ambassador here, Ibrahim Dabbashi, has written that the Secretary-General is considering naming Richard Wilcox, in a… he says… according to Dabbashi, an Obama-era official to be Special Representative to Libya.  And I wanted to know, where does the process stand?  Is that the case?  And, if so, would… this is… is this something that the Secretary-General would go through a more extensive process with the P-5 than was the case in the former nominee?

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, the consultations on this issue continue.  There's nothing to announce in terms of any names, and the process that will be followed is the same one that we've been following.

Inner City Press:  But did it work last time?

Deputy Spokesman:  We will continue with our consultations.  Of course, what we want and expect is the cooperation of all parties.  Yes, in the back?

  One wonders if Guterres (or Feltman) will claim they got Nikki Haley sign off. Or, as a high ranking official on the 38th floor of the UN on March 23 asked Inner City Press, who actually has an interlocutor in the White House right now? Watch this site.

  The US blocked UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres' nomination of the Palestinian Authority's Salam Fayyad to be UN envoy to Libya.

  On February 20, Inner City Press asked UN deputy spokesman Farhan Haq if there was any progress in replacing Fayyad as candidate -- apparently not - about an assassination attempt and travel ban on women in the East. From the UN transcript: 

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask about Libya.  Do you have anything on the attempted assassination attempt against Mr. Serraj?  And, also, there’s a reported ban on women… unaccompanied women traveling from the east.  Do you have anything either on that?  And any update on the selection of an SRSG that was previously blocked?

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, regarding the selection of an SRSG, that process… the consultations are ongoing, and I don’t have any… any further details to share for you beyond what the Secretary-General himself said to the press on this over the weekend.

Regarding… regarding the assassination… the reports, I don’t have a confirmation of those reports, so I don’t have any reaction to provide at this point.

Inner City Press: And I’ve noticed that António Guterres has put out a sort of a global call, generic call, for SRSGs to be in some sort of pool to become UN envoys to conflict zones.  I wanted to know, like, on the Libya one, given… given the apparent miscommunication about whether it would be accepted or blocked, is there any thought of doing an open process such as is being done with Department of Management and Department of Public Information, or is there any thought of having that more public or at least routinized process as opposed to a behind-the-scenes process?

Deputy Spokesman:  If there’s any changes to make in the current process, we’ll announce it.  We don’t… while we’re considering certain things, there’s nothing to announce at this point.

For UNSC's Chinese July, ICP Asks of Burundi, if SG Guterres Will Brief on Cyprus, Reforms

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 3 – With the Presidency of the UN Security Council being taken over for July by China, Ambassador Liu Jieyi on July 3 took questions from the media about the month's Program of Work. Inner City Press asked him if UN Secretary General Antnio Guterres will be briefing the Council about his trip to Afghanistan, and fly-by the Cyprus talks, about the the Burundi session set for July 26. Periscoep video here. 

The 226 UN Police mandated a year ago have not been deployed. Ambassador Liu said that the Council will hear from new part-time envoy Michel Kafando, and from Willian Mkapa. It is not clear if or when Guterres will brief the Council about Cyprus much less Afghanistan. (Inner City Press has asked Guterres' top two spokesmen including when Guterres will give his political reforms retreat for member states, July 15 or July 22-23, without response). Liu answered at least ten questioners, mostly on North Korea, on which he reiterated China's suspension for suspension proposal. There wer no other questions on Africa. We will stay on this, including the (unlisted?) briefing on Somalia - Eritrea sanctions and the long delayed Western Sahara envoy, throughout the month. 

On behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, Inner City Press asked the affable Liu to do stakeouts throughout the month. Watch this site. 

Back in May with the Presidency of the UN Security Council  being taken over by Uruguay, Ambassador Elbio Rosselli on May 1took questions from the media about the month's Program of Work. Inner City Press asked him about new envoys for Burundi (Michel Kafando) and Western Sahara (Horst Kohler, apparently Inner City Press' 227thquestion on Western Sahara according to Morocco's count), and about the May 30 meeting on Yemen. Video here. Rosselli said the envoys are up to the Secretary General and spoke about Morocco's ouster, now reversed, of the MINURSO mission. On Yemen he said the meeting is at the end of the month because it is hard to move these around, it's like Tetris. On behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access Inner City Press asked Rosselli after the month's eight closed door consultations to hold on-camera stakeouts on UNTV. We note that Frente Polisario's April 28 stakeout, unlike that of Morocco's Omar Hilale, is still as of this writing on May 1 not on the UNTV website. We'll have more on this.

  Back at the beginning of March, then-incoming UNSC President Matthew Rycroft of the UK answered Inner City Press on Burundi by referring to France as the penholder. On Yemen -- on which the UK holds the pen -- he said sometimes there is a benefit to a closed door discussion. Fine: but what's the problem with an open briefing, then closed consultations? The Free UN Coalition for Access will continue to pursue this.

  On Yemen Inner City Press also asked if the UK's findings as it looks into more than 250 incidents of the Saudi led coalition will be shared with the Security Council. It remains unclear.

 At the end, Inner City Press asked Rycroft if Nick Kay is still a candidate to be UN Envoy to Libya. Rycroft said the UK supports current envoy Martin Kobler but if he is to be changed, it should be fast, there is momentum.

  Rycroft said that civil society will be invited to participate in the month's wrap up session, a first. Boris Johnson will chair the March 23 meeting on South Sudan, and something on Somalia later that day. We'll have more on this.

Regulators Said Sterling's CRA Data Unreliable, Now Admits Needs to Improve 2017, Denial?

By Matthew R. Lee, New Platform

NEW YORK, July 1 – Sterling Bank, which is applying for approvals to acquire Astoria Bank, is known by its regulators to have filed unreliable Community Reinvestment Act data from at least 2014 through 2016, a documentobtained by Inner City Press shows. The story, and outrage, has been picked up by the American Banker newspaper here, by Paul Davis and Allison Prang, crediting Inner City Press - and Sterling Bank had no comment. 

Instead, Sterling's outside counsel Wachtel Lipton chose to snail-mail its response to the wrong address, and not e-mail it to Fair Finance Watch. Via here, with envelope re-submitted to Fed and OCC. Now another snail-mailed response from Sterling's Wachtel, which we've put online here on Patreon: "Please see Exhibit 1 and Confidential Exhibit C" -- Inner City Press has now requested it under FOIA, but the agencies have already repeatedly extended their time. This is a scam. But crucially, even Wachtel says "Sterling did receive a Needs to Improve rating for the State of New York in Sterling Bank's most recent CRA Performance Evaluation dated January 18, 2017." We'll have more on this - the application must be denied. The OCC has now put up a roadblock to releasing the records Inner City Press has requested under the Freedom of Information Act, writing: "The purpose of this letter is to seek additional information pertaining to your recent request for information from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Your request dated May 13, 2017 was received in my office on May 15, 2017. You requested any and all records related to Sterling Bank's application(s) to acquire Astoria and Sterling Bank's CRA data. Upon further review, we determined that we need clarification on the date range for search of Sterling Bank’s CRA data. If I have not received this information by COB June 19th I will assume that you no longer seek this information and consider your request closed." Inner City Press has responded: "   In response to Inner City Press' now month-old FOIA request concerning the CRA data the OCC knew and knows to be unreliable, you have asked that by June 19 ICP specify the date range for the request. While not understanding the OCC's delay in requesting this, we hereby timely specify that the date range is from three years ago to the date of your response. Please confirm receipt of this (including explaining your letter since you wrote “we need clarification on the date range for search”) and please provide the records as we intend to comment on them, for obvious reasons. Thank you." Meanwhile, Sterling's lawyers at Wachtell Lipton chose to snail mail their response to Fair Finance Watch, putting it in the mail three days after it was dated (now online via Patreon here.) How did it take the OCC a full MONTH to come up with its request? Why was the response snail mailed? This while the Federal Reserve has granted Inner City Press' request for expedited treatment of its FOIA request for all records, promising the responsive documents by June 1. But then the Fed, in a June 1 letter, unilaterally extended its time to June 22. First Fed letter on Scribd, here.

Regulators Said Sterling's CRA Data Unreliable, Sterling Mis-Sends Response, Fed Expedites ICPs FOIA, Here by Matthew Russell Lee on Scribd

Fair Finance Watch has asked both the Fed and OCC to extend their comment periods past this date. Watch this site. Sterling has issued a press release ("covered" without any analysis by Reuters) that "the Federal Reserve inadvertently made public confidential supervisory information.. Because of the legal constraints relating to disclosure of confidential supervisory information, we are working closely with our regulators to craft a more detailed public response." Sterling is working WITH the regulators - the judges in this case - to spin its inaccurate data? After on its last acquisition, challenged by ICP, having to make a CRA compliance plan? Inner City Press has submitted Freedom of Information Act requests (a response here) and Fair Finance Watch has filed additional comments to the Federal Reserve and OCC, demanding public hearings into the unreliable data AND into how the regulators were dealing with (or covering up) the issue, in stealth. We'll have more on this: the US Federal Reserve denied Fair Finance Watch's request to extend the comment period on Sterling's application, in which even the Fed suspects there is incorrect CRA data. 

On May 11, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York along with questions about about branch closures and a CRA plan required after Fair Finance Watch's previous challenge to Sterling asked: "In a letter dated December 23, 2016, from the OCC to Sterling Bank regarding the OCC's data integrity review, the OCC stated that Sterling Bank's 2014-2016 CRA data is not reliable and that Sterling Bank lacks an effective process for collecting, verifying and reporting such data. To the extent that any of the CRA data in the notice is incorrect, submit the corrected data. In addition, describe Sterling Bank's efforts to address its CRA data compliance management deficiencies." 

So on April 26 in Sterling's analysts' call, did CEO Jack Kopnisky or Senior EVP Luis Massiani disclose the “unreliable” CRA data to, among others, Dave Bishop – FIG Partners, Casey Haire – Jefferies, Alex Twerdahl – Sandler O'Neill,, Collyn Gilbert – KBW, Matthew Breese – Piper Jaffray and Erik Zwick – Stephens Inc? Questions about this deal (here) and the Fed's commitment to public scrutiny are raised by its simultaneous denial of FFW's request for a hearing and to extend the comment period. There is no indication that the "corrected" CRA data would ever be made available to the public, or that this issue would not have been swept under the US bank regulators' carpet, like so many others. We'll have more on this.  

Regulators Say Sterling Bank's CRA Data Unreliable, Astoria Merger Document Shows, Here by Matthew Russell Lee on Scribd

Background: after Astoria Bank's protestedproposal to be acquired by New York Community Bank fell apart in late 2016, it found a new, equally controversial suitor: Sterling Bancorp. Now Fair Finance Watch has submitted a first Community Reinvestment Act challenge to the proposed merger, receipt of which the Federal Reserve has now confirmed, here. Inner City Press' summary of FFW's filing: "Dear Chair Yellen, Secretary Misback and others in the FRS: This is a timely first comment opposing and requesting an extension of the FRB's public comment period on the Application by Sterling Bancorp, Montebello, New York (“Sterling”) to merge with Astoria Financial Corporation, Lake Success, New York, and indirectly acquire Astoria Bank (“Astoria”).
This would be a combination of banks with disparate and in places highly irregular Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (“HMDA”) data. The proposal is the desperate result of the failure of Astoria's attempted merger with NYCB. That is no reason to approve this mis-conceived combination. The applicant's Sterling National Bank (“Sterling”) in the New York City MSA in 2015 for African Americans for home purchase loans denied the applications of African Americans 3.58 times more frequently than those of whites - much worse than other lenders. Sterling made only 22 such home purchase loans to African Americans, versus 495 to whites (and only 37 to Latinos) - again, much more disparate than other lenders. This bank should not buy Astoria. Remember: in the Nassau Suffolk MSA in 2013, Sterling made 149 home purchase loans to whites – and only one to an African American. For home improvement loans, Sterling made 30 to whites, none to African Americans. Taken together, this is unacceptable. The comment period should be extended to clarify – or refile – the HMDA data; evidentiary hearings should be held; and on the current record, the application should not be approved.
For the record, the CRA plan required after Fair Finance Watch's previous protest, we contend has not been complied with, and request evidentiary and public hearings on that basis.
Also for the record:  'The NYCB-Astoria Financial Merger is Kaput: Consumer advocates were among the groups that opposed NYCB’s acquisition of Astoria…'"

   In January, disparate lender Investor Bancorp, on which Fair Finance Watch previously got a condition imposed saw its proposal with Bank of Princeton fall apart.

  There's also Capital One - Cabela, on which Inner City Press commented: "In the New York City MSA in 2015, the most recent year for which HMDA data is available, for conventional home purchase loans Capital One denied the applications of whites 23% of the time, while denying African Africans fully 45% of the time, and Latinos even more, 46% of the time. This is unacceptable.

  Meanwhile, Capital One is “closing branches in Laurel, Gaithersburg, Frederick and Merrifield.”

   Capital One came back with snark, as has Simmons National -- but then announced including to NCRC that  it will withdrawn its application. Onward.

From Cyprus Talks, UNSG Guterres Left July 1, UN Still Won't Tell Press Where To, UNaccountable

By Matthew Russell Lee, Photos here

UNITED NATIONS, July 2 – Before UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres' fly-by the Cyprus talks in Crans Montana in Switzerland, Inner City Press repeatedly asked Guterres' holdover spokesman Stephane Dujarric who long Guterres would stay at the talks, and where he would be from July 1 to July 5. It's a simple question that the administrations in Washington, New York's City Hall and elsewhere know they would have to answer. 

But today's UN is so unaccountable, is so not held accountable, that Dujarric twice dodged the question and has now himself disappeared, not unlike the Cyprus talks (UN) common document, not answering. Dujarris is supposed to be Guterres' spokesman, not Aleem Siddique. Where is the Secretary General of the United Nations? As Inner City Press reported on June 30, many member states are mystified by the slow pace and even scheduling of Guterres' supposed reform plan. As to We the Peoples and the Press, censorship continues. 

In an otherwise empty UN on the evening of June 4, Cyprus talks or attempts to talk ended at 11 pm, with Secretary General Antonio Guterres announcing in the third person that talks would continue "in June," then taking no questions. Nor did those he met with take questions, including Inner City Press' audible question about hydrocarbons. Guterres headed to the Cyprus talks in Switzerland on June 29-30, to only be back in New York on July 5. Now it's reported that Guterres left the talks in Switzerland on July 1 - but no word from the UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, whom Inner City Press twice asked where Guterres would be between July 1 and July 5. If Trump or De Blasio did this, there would be an outcry. Inner City Press emailed the obvious question to Dujarric - while noting that he and his (tag) team refused to answer any of Inner City Press' nine questions, including on Morocco's Rif, Cameroon and UN corruption, from June 12-13. We'll have more on this. On June 30, Inner City Press asked Guterres' holdover spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the delay in reform, and where Guterres will be from July 1 to 5. From the UN transcript: Inner City Press: what was said going to be the reform, the reform of the development system of the UN, I thought it was going to be done in June.  But I'm finding it's now 30 June.  So, has a written proposal been made?

Spokesman:  The Secretary-General will brief the Member States on Wednesday in the morning.  He will brief ECOSOC [Economic and Social Council] and outline his vision for the reform of the UN's development system.  And that will be a public meeting.

Inner City Press:  You'd said yesterday that, you know, wait for him to get to Switzerland before saying what his next moves are. What are his next moves between now and Wednesday?

Spokesman:  Right now, he's focusing on the discussions in Crans-Montana.  So I don't want to preempt when he will leave the discussions as they're still ongoing.

  On July 1, Dujarric issued a statement that "last night, a clear understanding emerged of the essential elements of a package that might lead to a comprehensive settlement in Cyprus. The Conference on Cyprus continues at the political level this morning. The Secretary-General remains fully engaged in these efforts to deliver a comprehensive settlement to the people of Cyprus." Full engaged from where? On June 29, Inner City Press asked Dujarric UN transcript here: Inner City Press: the Secretary-General at the Cyprus talks, are they going on over the weekend?  How many days does he plan to participate in them?

Spokesman:  Let’s get him there, and then we can talk about when he leaves.

Inner City Press:  Will we talk about it?

Spokesman:  Go ahead.  Next question?

   No, this is the question. "When Actually Employed" envoy Espen Barth Eide was present but did not take questions on June 4.  Now on June 9, the spokesman for Guterres (now on a week long Central Asian junket) has issued this: "The Special Adviser is preparing this document based on conversations with all the conference participants. It will be prepared before the conference, in order to help guide the discussions on security and guarantees" and  "In line with the statement issued following the meeting of the Secretary-General with the Turkish Cypriot leader, Mr. Mustafa Akinci, and the Greek Cypriot leader, Mr. Nicos Anastasiades, in New York on 4 June, and following consultations with all participants, the Conference on Cyprus will reconvene in Geneva on 28 June 2017. The Conference on Cyprus will reconvene at the political level under the auspices of the Secretary-General, with the participation of Mr. Anastasiades and Mr. Akinci, as well as Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom as guarantor powers, and in the presence of the European Union as an observer." On June 5, with one hour's notice, Eide was the guest at a truncated UN noon briefing. Inner City Press asked Eide about the hydrocarbons issue, and how many days he works and gets paid. He said twenty day a week, correcting that to money, and said that hydrocarbons barely came up in the meeting. At least he answered the question - later on June 5 when Inner City Press asked Guterres' spokesman Dujarric how many days Yemen enovy IOCA works, and if he will disclose for Burundi envoy Michel Kafando, Dujarric cut the question off - despite the fact that When Actually Employed envoy disclosed less - while indulging Moroccan state media three rounds of questions. On Sunday while Inner City Press arrived at 6:30, and was in the conference room well before 7, even the photo started more than 10 minutes late. Downstairs, Cyprus President Nicos Anastasiades said he wasn't "here for a blame game." Video here. Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akinci said that one side was imposing pre-conditions. Video here. Upstairs, in came UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, who'd remained silent for 18 hours on the London Bridge attacks, accompanied by his equally UNresponsive spokesman Stephane Dujarric, Jeffrey Feltman and Katrin Hett and Espen Barth Eide. There was the three-way handshake, Alamy Live News photos here; Periscope video here. To the side, a dinner setting was on a table facing out toward First Avenue. A stakeout afterward was scheduled. Would the latter include Eide? After the UN's envoy on Cyprus, whom UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric said was full time, said he has no current plans to return to Cyprus, Inner City Press on May 31 asked Dujarric: Inner City Press:  I wanted to ask you about Cyprus. I'm sure you've seen the President of Cyprus has said that Mr. [Espen Barth] Eide was out of line in speaking about hydrocarbons as exploration as a risk, and then mostly I wanted to ask you about this quote by the… the… by the spokes, Aleem Siddique, saying that Mr. Eide has no pl… no current plans to return to the island.  So I just wanted to know, where do things stand from the Secretary-General's point of view on this… this thing that was thought to be coming to a conclusion?  And also just about Mr. Eide, is he "when actually employed?"  When he says he's not going back, is he still working on the case?  Where does he work [inaudible] work?

Spokesman:  Mr. Eide continues in his role.  I'm not going to comment on whatever comments were made on the hydrocarbons.

Inner City Press:  Is he a full-time envoy?

Spokesman:  Yeah, he is, as far as I know.  If he's not, I'll correct… the record will be corrected, but I believe he is. 

 Update: now in the UN transcript there's this: "[He later added that Mr. Eide is on a “when actually employed” contract.]" Added to who? Perhaps Dujarric announced it over his public address system piped into the office the UN gives to (Dujarric) friendly journalists. But Dujarric evicted Inner City Press from the UN Press Briefing Room and from Inner City Press' long time times office S-303 (see paragraphs 9-10, here); he keeps Inner City Press restricted. He did not email this correction to Inner City Press. On June 1 Inner City Press asked him, UN transcript here: I'd asked you yesterday about Espen Barth Eide, and I did see your correct… your amplification that he's "when actually employed".  So, I wanted to know, in these cases where there are envoys that are "when actually employed"… and this is… it's not… is it possible to know, just in the last… without getting into the specifics of his diplomacy, in… in the course of the last 365 days, how many days has he… has he… and I'm saying it because it's public money, so I… I know there's a balance.  Can you get that number?

Spokesman:  I… we can see.  I don't know if it's tabulated at the end of the year or when they're tabulated if there's…

Inner City Press:  However it's tabulated.

Spokesman:  Yeah.  All right. 

  Seven hours later, nothing. The UN is corrupt. 

At UN, As Guterres Swears In 3 Officials, Trip Begins With Questions UNanswered,Censorship

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 7 – When UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres swore in three new officials on June 7, Inner City Press went to the photo op and small ceremony, which included reclusive head of UN Peacekeeping Jean-Pierre Lacroix, the UN's head of Information Technology, Atul Khare and Miroslav Jenca, previously head of the UN's office in Turkmenistan. It's to there that Guterres tonight takes off on his most recent trip, amid crises in the Gulf and elsewhere, UN failures in Cameroon and Yemen, and continuing Press censorship and lack of reform. Guterres swore in Ursula Mueller as Assistant Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Deputy Emergency Relief Coordinator in the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (she's already been on the job for 100 days, she said); Fekitamoeloa Katoa Utoikamanu on Tonga, Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States; and Alexander Zuev as Assistant Secretary-General for Rule of Law and Security Institutions. With him, Guterres hearkened back to his interview, and said thank you in Russian. Periscope video here. As to the still unfilled Department of Public Information post vacated by corrupt censor Cristina Gallach, Inner City Press is informed of interviewees currently based in Paris and Geneva. It is not or should not be a system run without rules by the top person, but rather one in which the media have due process and appeals rights, and retaliatory action are reversed. Flier here.Guterres will soon by the flier: we'll be covering it. The evening before on June 6 when Guterres did a photo op (Periscope here) and meeting with Gabon's Ali Bongo, who along with his father Omar have consecutively ruled Gabon since 1967, it began a full 15 minutes late. Not because Bongo was picking up another dubious award on the sidelines of the sometimes dubious Ocean Conference (seehere), but because Guterres had another, unlisted visitor. It was, Inner City Press saw, Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the UN, presumably about the standoff with Qatar. Guterres' holdover spokesman Stephane Dujarric has repeatedly said Guterres is not involved. We'll have more on this. On Bongo, he stayed upstairs for 45 minutes and then left with the media he'd brought in, in a caravan of vehicles with a police escort. Periscope viewers told Inner City Press Gabonese were protesting Bongo, who they call a killer, in front of the Peninsula Hotel. Watch this site. On June 5, Guterres met with Fiji's Josaia Voreqe Baininarama, there was a rare attendee: Deputy Secretary General Amina Mohammed. Perhaps it was because Fiji is the co-President, with Sweden, of the Ocean Conference. Earlier on June 5, Deputy Mohammed had been listed as the briefer - and presumably answerer - at a press conference about a more than 1000 page UN book. But Mohammed left; Inner City Press stayed and asked a scientist who seemed to say he'd been at a conference in 1946 about fisheries subsidies. Likewise, Baininarama left the 1 pm stakeout in front of the UN General Assembly before he could be asked any questions. This is also how Guterres did it, speaking in the third person about Cyprus, on Sunday evening. It seems to be catching in his UN. Back on May 30 when Guterres met with Romania's Foreign Minister Teodor Melescanu, it was part of Melescanu's campaign for his country to win a two year term on the UN Security Council, to follow its six-month rotating presidency of the European Council in first half of 2019 (for which it is seeking a bigger building in Brussels).Melescanu has most recently, in Istanbul, defended his country's delaying of Turkish basketball player Enes Kanter after he criticized Erdogan. Melescanu will be in New York through June 3. Guterres, after yet another trip (this time for a G7 speech on Africa and technology with no mention of the Internet cut-off in Cameroon), was back in New York, NYU earlier in the day, then with an unscheduled or undisclosed meeting with a Security Council ambassador that ran past 7 pm. In the meeting with Melescanu were Tanguy Stehelin and Fabrizio Hochschild, among others. The UN's restrictions on the Press, unlike on never present Egyptian state media Akhbar al Yom, continued. But on the 38th floor there was laughter. Last week Guterres met Azerbaijan's Foreign Minister and was given an oil painting; before that Guterres held a meeting with his senior management group since after a two week trip he is in New York for only three days, leaving tomorrow. At the appointed time for Azerbaijan, streaming out of Guterres' conference room were USg Jeff Feltman, Jean Pierre Lacroix who declined to answer Inner City Press' question about France's 20+ year rule of UN Peacekeeping, Oscar Fernandez-Taranco, Fabrizio Hochschild and others. Earlier on May 24 Inner City Press asked Guterres' holdover spokesman Stephane Dujarric to "please state if a David J Vennett is now a/the principal advisor to the SG, if so why he is not in iSeek and how he was recruited and hired and, again, please provide a list of who works in / or the Executive Office of the Secretary General and whether they are paid by the UN, by a UN affiliate like UNOPS, or by a country and is so which." There was no answer.