UN Censors Internet In Its NY Headquarters, Blocking Media Critique and Non-Google Video Sites

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1censorweb041008.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 10 -- The UN's computer system censors a number of websites, among them the Chinese anti-cnn.com site devoted to searching for what it calls media bias. Also censored is the site dailymotion.com, which after LiveLeaks.com took it down was a remaining site hosting the controversial film "Fitna," which the UN's Ban Ki-moon denounced. In each case, attempts from inside the UN, by staff or in the library, to read either site results in a message from the "ICT Security Unit" that "you have been redirected to this page because the site you are attempting to access is blocked according to the policy as detailed in ST/SGB/2004/15."

This Secretary-General's Bulletin allows staff "limited personal use of ICT resources" unless these involve "pornography or engaging in gambling" or would "compromise the interests or the reputation of the Organization."

But whether or not the UN Organization agrees with the media critique offered, for example, by anti-cnn.com, it is neither pornography or gambling, and keeping up with critiques of mainstream media could hardly "compromise the interests or the reputation of the Organization."

The same is true of the video site DailyMotion.com, and it is worth noting that the UN does not block or censor another video site, YouTube.com. The latter, of course, is owned by the UN's partner Google, which itself assists with Internet censorship in China.

[Full disclosure: Inner City Press was temporarily excluded by Google News earlier this year, which was linked to UN system and affiliates' complaint(s). At the time, the UN sputtered that it does not engage in censorship. But why then are non-pornographic political analysis web sites blocked inside the UN's own headquarters?]

With the UN censoring the Internet inside its own headquarters in New York, its commitment to freedom of the press, particularly of online media, remains suspect. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1censorweb041008.html

Unveiling a Center in Spain, UN's Ban Predicted Voting and the Future, Approval Not Assured

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/ban1valencia041008.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 10 -- While visiting Valencia back on November 17, the UN's Ban Ki-moon with the Vice-President of the Government of the Government of Spain "unveil[ed] a plaque at the site of the future United Nations Peacekeeping Logistics Base." That is how the UN's own web site describes it, in the caption to a photo of the event. There was and is only one problem: the UN's budgeting and decision-making body, the General Assembly, had not back in November approved any funding or future for such a logistics base in Valencia, and still has not approved it.

On April 7, in a press release issued at 6 p.m., the UN confirmed Inner City Press' earlier story that Ines Alberdi of Spain was being named the head of the women's agency UNIFEM. The next day for a follow-up, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson Michele Montas about the connection between Spain's giving $700 million to the UN and Ms. Alberdi's appointment over India's Gita Sen, and the Valencia logistics base. From the transcript:

Inner City Press: And then one last thing that came up in the course of this. It seems that Peacekeeping is going to open a logistics base in Valencia? There's a photograph showing Mr. Ban meeting with the Vice-President of Spain. Does that compete with the Brindisi Center?

Spokesperson: It completes the Brindisi Center. It's a different set up. You can have the information on that very easily.

Actually, there's very little publicly available about this Valencia center or proposal, for reasons that soon became clear.

Inner City Press on April 7 e-mailed the Department of Peacekeeping Operations "as asked at today's noon briefing, what are the specifics of the planned peacekeeping logistics base in Valencia, Spain, when was it proposed and has it been approved by the General Assembly? If so, was it approved before November 2007?"

DKPO's spokesman replied on April 9 that

"The Valencia site will be utilized to provide ICT services to UN peace operations. In conjunction with current operations in UNLB (Brindisi), the creation of this secondary active telecommunications facility will mitigate the single point of failure risk that exists in our current infrastructure and will ensure the safety of peace operations' information/data assets in the event of a catastrophic incident. It will also provide continuous voice, data and video services to field missions in case of short-term disruptions. The proposal to establish this facility is with the General Assembly and it is our expectation it will be taken up in the second resumed session."

This "second resumed session" begins in May 2008. But why, then, did Ban jump the gun and unveil a plaque in Valencia in November 2007, which the UN captioned as Ban and the Vice President "unveil a plaque at the site of the future United Nations Peacekeeping Logistics Base." How can he be so sure? What will other member states think? Watch this site. (Here is a screen-shot of the page, in case it after this is changed.)

And see, www.innercitypress.com/ban1valencia041008.html

At UN, Transparency Debated in Secret, Labor Discussed in the Basement, Arnault in DPKO Mix

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
www.innercitypress.com/un2mgmtreform041008.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 10 -- At the UN these days, there is talk of accountability and reform. A closed-door meeting was held on the topic on Wednesday; the press was not allowed t hear what UN management said to member states or vice versa.

A glimpse was to be had Thursday in the basement, when Under Secretary General for Management Alicia Barcena took the podium to speak to the UN Staff Council, and to take their questions. She acknowledged that the Compact that she signed with Ban Ki-moon, uploaded to the UN's internal website under the heading Accountability, blurred to May 1 a March 1 deadline set by the General Assembly.

She noted the Staff Union's critique of the appointment of the UN's new Ombudsman. She implored not only the Union, however, but also Inner City Press to help her with reforms. "I don't always like what you write," she told the Press, "but you help raise the visibility." So here goes.

The Staff Council says Management wants only to consult, not negotiate, that as in the case of the tour guides, it responds only to negative media coverage and, in that case, a sick-out by the guides. A member asked if the Union will be allowed to make a presentation directly to the General Assembly, saying this was blocked under the tenure of the previous head of the Office of Human Resources Management, Jan Beagle. On accountability, he said that "heads should roll" over the failure in the implementation of the UN's system of performance reviews.

But at the level of UN Management, heads never figuratively roll; there is little accountability. Ms. Beagle was rewarded with an assignment to Geneva, using an UNCTAD deputy chief post the work of which she is not doing. (It is said that the Thai chief of UNCTAD Supachai Panitshpakdi now wants this post back, watch this space.) There's not even accountability on the failure to move the UN's accountability proposal. With much fanfare, the Department of Management said it would create a ten-person Office of Accountability, with at the top a new D-2 post. Cynics said this post was specifically created to reward, a la Jan Beagle, long time official Nancy Hurtz-Soyka. Then Inner City Press was told, the report on the new Office is coming out soon, no questions would be answered until the report came out.

Well, even during the March resumed session of the UN's budget committee, no report on the proposal came out from the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions. Ms. Barcena confirmed this Thursday afternoon in the basement. So the question is, who is going to be accountable for this failure to move even this accountability proposal?

Also present Thursday in the basement was the new Assistant Secretary General of the Office of Human Resources Management, Catherine Pollard. As previously reported, prior to her being named to the post, Inner City Press e-mailed Ms. Pollard a copy of a staff complaint against her, seeking in fairness her comment before publication. She did not respond, then or since. Thursday she spoke only briefly, and she was generally greeted with openness, and a hope she will at least be more open that her predecessor.

Ms. Barcena also confirmed that even Ban's proposal to move the UN to one form of contract (Barcena put it at three forms) would not break down the wall between General Services and Professional staff. She showed Inner City Press a glimpse of a binder of color-coded proposals, some that the Secretary-General could implement on his own, the rest requiring General Assembly approval. Perhaps at Wednesday's session on reform, some commitments were obtained. This is not known, because the discussion on transparency was held behind closed doors. And, despite Ms. Barcena's statements for more than a year now about implementing a UN Freedom of Information policy, nothing has been done. Perhaps this, too, was discussed Wednesday in secret. Only at the UN...

Footnotes: while the topic was not mentioned at Thursday's basement session, rumors continue to circulate that Ms. Barcena will leave, either to ECLAC in Santiago or the UN's University of Peace in Costa Rica, and that her successor may be the German Joaquim Rucker, who is said to have recently threatened, along with his deputy Larry Rossin, to resign from the UN Mission in Kosovo, but was told if he left UNMIK, there could be no USG of Management post. Other rumors have UN Georgia mission chief Jean Arnault being considered to replace his fellow Frenchman Jean-Marie Guehenno as head of UN Peacekeeping. Unlike Ruecker, Arnault at least has filled out his public financial disclosure, noting a country house in Guatemala. Coming full circle, it's said Guehenno is being considered as a special envoy on Northern Kosovo, to "pull a Bosnia," as one insider put it, meaning to negotiate some form of cantonization or even de facto partition. We'll see.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un2mgmtreform041008.html

UN's Climate Chief Yvo de Boer Unaware of WMO's "World Is Cooler" Statement, BBC Controversy

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/wmo1deboer041008.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 10 -- The UN's point man on climate change, Yvo de Boer, on Thursday told the Press he was unaware of comments to the BBC by the secretary-general of the UN World Meteorological Organization Michel Jarraud that the world has not gotten hotter since 1998. "I have not read the articles," he said when Inner City Press asked him. "If I get then and I were to read them, I'd be happy to respond." Video here, from Minute 48:57.

After the press conference, Inner City Press e-mailed him the articles, but nothing. From another UN source, WMO's back-tracking response arrived, in which "in response to media inquiries," Jarraud is quoted that "For detecting climate change you should not look at any particular year, but instead examine the trends over a sufficiently long period of time." De Boer in the press conference affirmed that the IPCCC has "pointed to, no, has shown" that temperatures have risen "since the Industrial Revolution."

The more troubling part of the controversy, from an independent media perspective, is that BBC while initially standing behind its quoting of Jarraud ended up not only changing its story, but not leaving any mark that it had done so. The piece's author Roger Harrabin is quoted in this UK environmentalists' account, and it does not look good. Following threats, he says, "we have changed the headline and more."

While leaving the UN briefing room, de Boer opined that he has in the past asked for headlines to be fixed. But what about the "and more"? We'll await his or the UN's response.

On straight environmental, and independent media, issues Inner City Press asked de Boer about the calls in Bangkok for the UN's International Maritime Organization and ICAO do to more on climate change. De Boer said both of these agencies -- and the WMO, see above -- are expert, but that some countries don't feel they've gone far enough. He pointed out that ships can use fuel or water as ballast, and can fuel-up anywhere, making enforcement difficult. Video here, from Minute 39:10. That and the exclusive jurisdiction of the flagging nation... To be continued.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/wmo1deboer041008.html

In UNIFEM Spin, Alberdi Speaks Only to Spanish Media, India Calls Sen More Qualified, UNDP Silent

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1unifem041008.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 10 -- What carries more weight, in today's United Nations, $700 million or one billion people? The doling out of the top UNIFEM post this week to Ines Alberdi of Spain, which recently gave $700 million to the UN Development Program, over the official candidate of more-populous India, Gita Sen, implies that money still rules the UN.

On Thursday Inner City Press asked India's Ambassador to the UN, Nirupam Sen, what he thought of the selection. While remaining diplomatic, he said that the (unrelated) Gita Sen "was the more qualified candidates." Since UNDP made a point, 18 minutes after its selection of Alberdi over Sen, of issuing a press release granting the top spot for Asia in UNDP to another Indian, Ajay Chhibber, Inner City Press asked Ambassador Nirupam Sen if he thought that made things right, and if the two appointments were connected.

"I don't think so," Amb. Sen said. Chhibber was already "part of the system... he's not a person in India, coming to work for the UN," he said, noting the Chhibber already worked in the international system. " I don't think you can equate the two," Amb. Sen concluded. UNDP, of course, hasn't answered any of these charges, and Administrator Kemal Dervis has been nowhere to be seen.

Meanwhile, to try to quell the controversy, Ms. Alberdi held a press conference on Thursday at the Spanish mission -- but only for the Spanish press. Ms. Alberdi was asked if she thought that Spain's grants, of $700 million to UNDP and over $11million to UNIFEM, played a role in her selection; she reportedly replied that she couldn't deny there might be some connection. She also argued that President Zapatero's policies on women were be recognized via her appointment.
News analysis: but why then limit Ms. Alberdi's press availability to media from her own nation, which benefited from the transactions with the UN? In Spain, it may be popular to said, we got something back, for the money we are giving. But non-Spanish media would ask the inconvenient question, did you buy the post, and how does Spain and Zapatero feel about in some view stealing a post from a developing country? Watch this space.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1unifem041008.html

On Deby's Chad Evictions, France Offers then Amends Defense, Claims No Deal on Zoe's Ark

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1francechad041008.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 10 -- France's relations with Chad and Idriss Deby were on display Wednesday at the UN, both in what how its Ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert answered on-the-record questions from Inner City Press about mass evictions in N'Djamena and the pardon and release of the Zoe's Ark staff members following their conviction for abducting 103 children, and in how its mission (mis) transcribed Ripert's remarks. The exchange began with Inner City Press asking about reports of evictions after Deby was "almost overthrown in February." Amb. Ripert immediately took issue with this phrasing, saying, "You mean in February when rebels tried to cease power by force against Deby, the elected President of Chad?" Of course, Deby himself took power the same way that the rebels tries.

But on the evictions, Ripert said, "whatever happens in the operations done in N'Djamena, he should do that in respecting the rule of law and the legislation of Chad. if you known N'Djamena, you how it is a very small city and it is difficult to accommodate everyone so the question is not is he allowed to do that, the question is how is it done concretely for the people living these difficult times in Chad." Video here, from Minute 5:44.

The "it" in Ripert's phrase, from the question, signifies evictions. Why isn't it a question of whether he can do it? How is this different from Robert Mugabe's Operation Murambatsvina / Take Out the Trash in Zimbabwe, which France criticized?

The French mission's transcription of Ripert's remarks different from what's actually shown in the video, putting these words in Ripert's mouth: " whatever happens in the operations done in N'Djamena, he should do that in respecting the rule of law and the legislation of Chad. The question is not how did he allow to do that: the question is how it is done concretely for the people who are living." Click here for the French mission's full transcription as sent to media.

The omission of Ripert's statement about N'djamena being so small that not everyone can be accommodated (thereby seeming to justify evictions) and the switch from what he said -- "it is not a question of if he is can do that" -- to "the question is not how did he allow to do that" both operate, after the fact, to make Ripert's defense of Deby's evictions less apparent. Inner City Press has made similar findings in UN in-house transcripts, for example about the UN in Somlia, but until now has taken the French mission's transcripts at face value.

Inner City Press also asked about Deby's pardon and France's release of the Zoe's Ark staff convicted of kidnapping, and whether as has been reported that was any quid pro quo, for France to help defend Deby from the rebels in exchange for Deby pardoning the French citizens. Ripert denied not only a deal, but even any negotiations, even according to the transcript: " there was absolutely no negotiation, no exchange and there is no commitment of the French Government to pay any kind of money that those people hold from the families of those victims."
This was later clarified to mean, France might collect the money for Chad, but it would be coming from the social workers -- perhaps, it was suggested, from the advance and royalties Eric Breteau is said to be receiving for a book about the case. Breteau has alleged that the French government knew what he and his colleagues, including the good doctor Philippe Van Winkelberg, were doing. We'll see.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1francechad041008.html

Top Post in UN Women's Agency Slated for Spain in "Donor-Driven Process," $700 Million Echoes

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1alberdi040708.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 7 -- Moves are afoot to give the top post at the UN women's agency UNIFEM to a Spanish national because of $700 million in funding which Spain gave the UN Development Program last year. The candidate, Ines Alberdi, is said not to have been the recommendation of the selection panel, but as one insider phrased it to Inner City Press, "in the UN these days, you have to pay to play."

Inner City Press called the spokesman for the Spanish mission to the UN, Jose Caballero. He said he was not surprised by the juxtaposition of Ms. Alberdi's name and the UNIFEM post. "Spain is not well represented at the high level" of the UN, he said. "We will have more and more representation because we are under-represented."

Inner City Press asked Mr. Caballero directly about the nexus with the $700 million. Mr. Cabellero said, "Some years we give a large amount and money and there is nothing, this year..."

Perhaps the difference is more targeted funding. According to UNIFEM's most recent Annual Report, Spain was the largest donor to its Trust Fund, click here to view, at page 21.

To be clear, this conversation with the Spanish mission was not the confirmation that Ms. Alberdi would be named to the post. The confirmation came less than two hours after the conversation, when UNDP rushed out a press release. But the prospect of Ms. Alberdi being given the top UNIFEM post caused considerable push-back from non-governmental organizations and feminists. They point out that Ms. Alberdi's experience is nearly entirely in Spain, and as an academic. Some say that at a time when Ban Ki-moon is speaking of strengthening the "gender architecture" of the UN system, such a nakedly donor-driven appointment sends the wrong message.

On the other side of the gender-political spectrum, others wonder of the consonance of Ms. Alberdi's views with not only the Pope, slated to visit the UN this month, but with other regional groups in the UN General Assembly.

Back on March 7, a coalition of non-governmental organizations wrote to Ban Ki-moon about the leadership vacuum at UNIFEM, and about UNDP's selection process. While the advocacy may have sped up the process, the results has not been what the advocates expected. "If it's all about money," one said, "why is Spain only getting the head of UNIFEM? They should have gotten an under-secretary-general post!"

But in fact, Spain is getting more for its $700 million. In November 2007, Ban Ki-moon traveled to Valencia to "unveil a plaque at the site of the future United Nations Peacekeeping Logistics Base." Some called this gun-jumping, and wondered about Italy and the UN Peacekeeping base in Brindisi. But which country has been giving more money to the UN these days? Watch this space.

Footnote: in the aftermath of UNDP's 6 p.m. garbage time announcement of capitulation to Spain on the UNIFEM post, it emerged that NGOs from all over the world had told the UN that their candidate of choice was the Indian Gita Sen. (Some of these NGOs says that even among the European candidates, Ms. Alberdi was less qualified that the director of Amnesty International in Germany.) While rebuffing this nomination-from-below, UNDP's Kemal Dervis made another appointment, announced at 6:18 pm., of Ajay Chhibber from India to replace Hafiz Pasha as UNDP's head for Asia. And UNDP preaches, or pretends to preach, meritocracy and transparency...

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1alberdi040708.html

Banning the Olympics, To Skip Beijing Games, UN's Ban Cites "Scheduling Issues"

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/ban1olympics041008.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 10 -- Ban Ki-moon is not "in a position to attend this important event," the opening ceremony of the Olympics in Beijing, "due to scheduling issues," his Deputy Spokesperson Marie Okabe answered Inner City Press' question on Thursday. Video here, from Minute 8:45. She declined to answer follow-up questions on what these "scheduling issues" might be, and on when Ban received a formal invitation to attend from the Chinese government.

On April 9, Inner City Press asked Ms. Okabe at the UN's noon briefing, "has the Secretary-General been invited to attend the Beijing Olympics and, if so, what's his response?" Ms. Okabe said, "Yes, he has been invited, but I have nothing to announce today on his travel plans. " Click here for transcript, here for video, from Minute 13:38, and here for yesterday's Inner City Press story.

Inner City Press had been told that China, to counter Ban's position that he would not attend, had issued a formal invitation, with the idea that this would force Ban's hand. Later on Thursday, a South Korean source in the UN indicated that following the noon briefing question, the odds of Ban attending had gone up.

Whereas a visit by Ban to Beijing in connection with the G-8 Summit in Japan on July 7-9 was being floated as the reason not to return to the Far East for the Olympics opening ceremony on August 8, as of Thursday afternoon consideration was being given to scrapping the July side-trips to Beijing and Seoul, and to grant China's wish of Ban's presence at the sure-to-be-contentious Olympic Games.

Other South Korean sources bemoaned that Olympics politics, in this scenario, might preclude Ban's long-awaited visit to Seoul as Secretary-General. Now, with the surprising announcement that Ban will not travel to China for the Olympics, but that according to Ms. Okabe other visits to China are planned, the G-8 Summit trip to Japan may once again be combined with both China and South Korea. We'll see.

News analysis: Ms. Okabe was asked that, since some countries are discussion boycotting the Olympics opening ceremony citing such issues as Tibet, Darfur, Myanmar and China's forced return of asylum seekers from North Korea, did Mr. Ban intend his non-attendance as any type of political message? While one assumes that Ban's ultimate answer to that question will be "no" -- and even that he may reverse himself and end up attending on August 8 -- Mr. Okabe on Thursday replied that the above-quoted was all she had to say on the subject. Watch this space.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/ban1olympics041008.html

Banning the Olympics, To Skip Beijing Games, UN's Ban Cites "Scheduling Issues"

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/ban1olympics041008.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 10 -- Ban Ki-moon is not "in a position to attend this important event," the opening ceremony of the Olympics in Beijing, "due to scheduling issues," his Deputy Spokesperson Marie Okabe answered Inner City Press' question on Thursday. Video here, from Minute 8:45. She declined to answer follow-up questions on what these "scheduling issues" might be, and on when Ban received a formal invitation to attend from the Chinese government.

On April 9, Inner City Press asked Ms. Okabe at the UN's noon briefing, "has the Secretary-General been invited to attend the Beijing Olympics and, if so, what's his response?" Ms. Okabe said, "Yes, he has been invited, but I have nothing to announce today on his travel plans. " Click here for transcript, here for video, from Minute 13:38, and here for yesterday's Inner City Press story.

Inner City Press had been told that China, to counter Ban's position that he would not attend, had issued a formal invitation, with the idea that this would force Ban's hand. Later on Thursday, a South Korean source in the UN indicated that following the noon briefing question, the odds of Ban attending had gone up.

Whereas a visit by Ban to Beijing in connection with the G-8 Summit in Japan on July 7-9 was being floated as the reason not to return to the Far East for the Olympics opening ceremony on August 8, as of Thursday afternoon consideration was being given to scrapping the July side-trips to Beijing and Seoul, and to grant China's wish of Ban's presence at the sure-to-be-contentious Olympic Games.

Other South Korean sources bemoaned that Olympics politics, in this scenario, might preclude Ban's long-awaited visit to Seoul as Secretary-General. Now, with the surprising announcement that Ban will not travel to China for the Olympics, but that according to Ms. Okabe other visits to China are planned, the G-8 Summit trip to Japan may once again be combined with both China and South Korea. We'll see.

News analysis: Ms. Okabe was asked that, since some countries are discussion boycotting the Olympics opening ceremony citing such issues as Tibet, Darfur, Myanmar and China's forced return of asylum seekers from North Korea, did Mr. Ban intend his non-attendance as any type of political message? While one assumes that Ban's ultimate answer to that question will be "no" -- and even that he may reverse himself and end up attending on August 8 -- Mr. Okabe on Thursday replied that the above-quoted was all she had to say on the subject. Watch this space.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/ban1olympics041008.html

At UN, Some Call Management Reform an Oxymoron, G to P Barriers and Breakaway UNDP, Ban Soldiers On

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1mgmtreform040808.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 8 -- "Get the Secretariat out of the information Stone Age and into a modern one," UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon intoned Tuesday to a chamber full of Ambassadors and the his most senior officials. The topic was Management Reform, and what was called a debate consisted of the serial reading-out of speeches, many of them at cross purposes. The Group of 77 and China spoke of the need to make UN procurement more diverse -- that is, to stop favoring European and American companies with the largest contracts. The European Union, who spoke immediately after, did not even mention procurement as a reform issue. If you're getting the contracts, why would you complain?

Ban spoke of equality, saying he has "proposals to introduce one UN contract under one set of Staff Rules." The trend however in the UN system in the past year, in which the UN Development Program was allowed to exempt itself from the UN's Ethics system and its ostensible whistleblower protections, has gone in the opposite direction. And Ban does not, it seem, propose to abolish the wall between so-called General Service and Professional staff, a divide that few get promoted over, thereby wasting the talents of many UN workers. Some say that Kofi Annan, who as a long-time UN staffer understood the G to P wall, should have been the one to break it down, but didn't. Will Ban come to understand and do it, as a reverse Nixon goes to China?

In fact, on the same day of this debate, the Secretariat's problems with the Staff Union became again apparent. To the new four-member internal justice advisory body, Ban appointed two consummate management insiders, the current and past directors of the General Legal Division of the UN Office of Legal Affairs, OLA. In terms of reform and transparency, the current head of OLA did not include in his public financial disclosure the fact that he was receiving at least $10,000 a month of his government, Switzerland, to pay for his housing. There have been no repercussions for this, but Ban's speech said that "accountability is not just a management word, it means taking responsibility."

Ban said that in the new system for the administration of justice, "if it is found that an improper decision has been made, the individual manager should be held accountable." Does this mean for example that UNDP's Kemal Dervis or Ad Melkert would be held accountable for Ban's Ethics Office's finding that UNDP committed prima facie retaliation against a whistleblower? Will there be accountability for the managers who left UNHCR workers in Algiers, at the time of the deadly December 11 bombing, outside of the coverage of the UN's Malicious Acts Insurance Policy?

Ban complained that "the way it stands now, some of my Special Representatives in the field earn less and serve under less favorable conditions that those coming from within the system, in particular from a Fund or Program" -- like the UN Development Program.

At Tuesday's noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson, "Can we get more information on what he meant, in terms of what Special Representatives of the Secretary-General are paid and who in UNDP or any program he’s comparing it to? Are all Special Representatives of the Secretary-General paid the same amount?"

The spokesperson responded, "we can get that information for you from the Management Office. I don’t have it with me now." But by the end of the day, a single unrelated link about "conditions of service" had been provided. Ah, responsiveness and transparency. But how much do the SRSGs get paid? And what about accountability for the SRSG now accused of having accepted favors and even land from Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe? Click here for that, and watch this space.

Footnote: at the highest levels, the problems even the internal justice advisory panel picks were known. Chief of Staff Vijay Nambiar wrote to the staff union, urging them, as the Department of Management's Alicia Barcena previously did, to buckle under to the Staff-Management Coordination Committee. The Staff Union insists that not the vehicle to be making these appointments. Ms. Barcena, who was on the Management Reform podium all day and nothing but polite in the hallway outside, is still widely said to be leaving; one of her rumored replacements, Joachim Ruecker, is reported to have told his interviewers that "we don't work at the UN for money." Tell that to Nicolas Michel...

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1mgmtreform040808.html

UN Refugee Agency Workers Impacted by Algiers Bombing Were Uninsured, Funds Diverted, Sources Say

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un3unhcr040708.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 7 -- Of the seventeen UN victims of the bombing on December 11 of the UN premises in Algiers, four were UN system contractors for whom the UN had not bought any insurance, according to Inner City Press' sources and as partially confirmed by the UN's Deputy Communications Director. While payments are being made to victims, in the case of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, this is coming out of the operating budgets, insiders say -- that is, from funds meant to be helping the poor and refugees. Specifically, UNHCR sources describe internal documents in which $1.5 million is set aside for uninsured workers for UNHCR, and say that since this cannot be paid out of the administrative budget, it must come out of operations, funded intended for refugees.

Among the uninsured UNHCR victims according to colleagues were Mouloud Bouledroua, who was killed; Zaidi Hasina, broken foot and several injuries, Zeccar Yasine, broken feet and several injuries; Boutaiba Sofiane, several injuries; Zeccar Yasine, broken feet and several injuries, and Kamel Housnia, both legs amputated. How $1.5 million will be split between them is unclear. The UN's Deputy Communications Director Stephane Dujarric, in an April 7 e-mail to Inner City Press, put UNHCR's fatalities at two, and noted that one fatality each at the World Food Program and the International Labor Organization were outside of the coverage of the UN system's Malicious Acts Insurance Policy.

While the majority of those killed were Algeria, other UN system workers who got killed came from Senegal, the Philippines and Denmark; higher-level UN officials focused on this last Danish case, noting the tragedy that since he had only recently arrived in Algeria, he was not covered by insurance. But UNHCR, and it is believed WFP and ILO, routinely leave their national staff uninsured. No one Inner City Press spoke to in preparing this story suggested that the UN does not owe these people. Most, in fact, felt that the UN pays too little. Rather, many questioned UNHCR's use of uninsured contracts, the lack of accountability for the decisions make in the run-up to December 11, and the UN's lack of transparency.

Twelve days ago, Inner City Press asked the UN refugee agency UNHCR and the UN Development Program about the insurance coverage. UNHCR said answers would be provided March 27, but none arrived. On March 26, the UNDP's Christina Lonigro, to whom Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson's office referred Inner City Press, said she was getting right on the information request. On March 27, she said she was soon have answers from UNDP's Arab States bureau, except they were out at a meeting. She added, " if you are you insinuating that I am purposefully not answering your questions, I assure you that is not the case." A UN staffer in the Office of the Spokesperson of the Secretary-General supported the delay, arguing that the UN provides responses more quickly than Wal-Mart (whose employment practices UNHCR seems to be emulating, in the lack of insurance coverage).

On April 2, UNDP's Lonigro changed course and said "on your questions regarding compensation for the Algiers bombing, due to the ongoing processing of claims and the Brahimi investigation, I have no information to give you at this time." A spokesperson for Ban Ki-moon echoed that "UNDP is the lead" on this issue and that "claims are still being reviewed." Ultimately, and to his credit, Deputy Communications Director Stephane Dujarric agreed to provide a response, and Inner City Press agree to wait an additional five days to get it.

It was worth it. Mr. Dujarric confirmed that several UN agencies, including UNHCR, ILO and WFP, are outside of the UN's Malicious Acts Insurance Policy. He told Inner City Press:
Thirteen out of the seventeen staff members or SSA contractors killed in Algiers are covered by the UN's Malicious Acts Insurance Policy. Their claims are being processed by insurers. Disability claims will be identified on completion of medical process. The additional staff/SSA that belonged to non-participatory agencies is having their claims processed by their 'home' agencies. [UNHCR (2), ILO (1) and WFP (1)].

In addition, claims for payments for killed and injured staff/SSA contractors on official duty are being handled under the internal self-insured scheme called Appendix D of the Staff Rules which leads to payments for injured staff members or to recognized dependants in case of death... So far, 13 claims have been received by the UN. There is internal system in place for reviewing these claims by a board consisting of representatives of staff and management.

This Appendix D is derided as being out of date, specifying low set payments for example for the loss of a limb. Those confined to this internal UN justice system contrast their situation with that of "outsiders" who alleged negligence by the UN, for example in the aftermath of the flying glass at the Canal Hotel bombing in Baghdad in 2003. There is talk of large settlements to certain outsides, while some trapped in the UN system's justice system have cases pending in the UN Administrative Tribunal since 2003.

But even some long-time UN watchers expressed shocked when informed today that UNHCR, and perhaps WFP and ILO, are outside of the UN's Malicious Acts Insurance Policy. One source indicated WFP had at least tried to get insurance for its contractors. But it would seem that the Executive Boards and governing bodies of each of these agencies -- and applicable national governments -- should demand answers from management, and make the answers public.

Many view the Lakhdar Brahimi inquiry -- Brahimi himself said not to call it an investigation -- as not conducive to finding the truth about and assigning some responsibility for, or even learning lessons from, the run-up to and aftermath of the December 11 Algiers bombings. Brahimi has said he will focus on why people target the UN; it is highly unlikely he will report on whether those impacted had insurance. Nor has the UN said if his report will be made public. The first UN report, by the Department of Safety and Security, is being withheld. One of its lines, though, is known: "care has been taken not to apportion blame or responsibility." And so it goes, for now, at the UN.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un3unhcr040708.html

From Comoros to Yacht Taken by Somalia Pirates, France Looms Large in African Seas, UN Not in Sight

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN

www.innercitypress.com/un1comoros040808.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 8 -- France's role in the seas off Africa is in the news, but not at the UN. Inner City Press on Tuesday asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson if the UN has any involvement in trying to free from the French yacht off Somalia's coast the crew, not only French but Ukrainian and reportedly Filipino. No, the spokesperson said, "the UN has no involvement in this."

So who beyond France does? Inner City Press asked French Ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert if his country is coordinating with, for example, the Philippines or Ukraine. Ripert answered that France maintains contacts with many countries, particularly in this case with the government of Somalia. That would be the Transitional Federal Government, the one opposed by the insurgents, the Islamic Courts formations and, separately, by the pirates.

Nor did the UN get involved in the conflict about the breakaway Comorian island of Anjuan. The African Union, under Tanzania's leadership, went in guns blazing. (Insiders tell Inner City Press that South Africa, for one, was urging further negotiation). France was accused of harboring lead rebel Mohammed Bacar, first on Mayotte and now on the island of Reunion. French mission sources scoff at these accusations, countering that it was France which transported the African Union troops to retake Anjuan. Zut alors! As some have noted, "since independence in 1975, Comoros has had 19 coups and attempted coups."
AU in Anjuan, France not shown (but present)

It is also said that the Zoe's Ark six, recently pardoned for kidnapping 103 children from Chad and Sudan, face some unspecified further investigation in France.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1comoros040808.html

At UN's Rwanda Genocide Commemoration, Questions of Ex-Interhamwe FDLR, Darfur and UNDP's Callixte Mbarushimana

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1rwanda040708.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 7 -- While the 14th anniversary of the start of the genocide in Rwanda was commemorated Monday at UN headquarters, the issues raised are not over. In Eastern Congo, the ex-Interhamwe FDLRs are being encouraged by the UN to disarm and return to Rwanda. At Monday's UN event, Inner City Press asked Rwanda's Ambassador to the UN Joseph Nsengimana what will happen with the FDLR fighters who return. They must come back without arms, he said. Then they will be treated like any Rwandan citizen. Does this mean that a form of amnesty is being granted, even to those who participated in the genocide?

Tanzania's Ambassador Augustine Mahiga spoke at the event, on behalf of the African Union, and said that in Liberia, too, he had seen "massacres go unpunished and uninvestigated." He spoke of seeing Rwandan genocidaires never separated out in the refugee camps in Bukavu in what he called, even Monday night, "eastern Zaire." By that stage, humanitarian and justice-seeking imperatives were deemed to be in conflict, needing to paralysis.

The UN's role in Rwanda in 1994 is not only one of inaction. UN Development Program staffer Callixte Mbarushimana "lent vehicles and satellite telephones of the UNDP to military officers, that he also used the UNDP vehicles to facilitate his own contribution to the killings," as stated in an article on the UN's own DR Congo website. Another UN documents recites his role in "the death of UNDP’s National Personnel Officer, Ms. Florence Ngirumpatse, and a number of refugees in the residence where they had taken refuge."

After the 100 days of killing, Mbarushimana was allowed to continue working for the UN for seven more years, for example (as recited in the course of the UN's process leading to an additional payment of $35,000 to Mbarushimana) "from December 1996 to December 1999, he was with UNDP-Luanda, Angola." As noted in a more detailed account, Mbarushimana wan't even language-qualified for this UNDP post. We hope to have more on this.

Inner City Press asked Rwandan Ambassador Nsengimana about Mbarushimana's case. "The UN's awareness came very late," he said. In fact, the UN has yet to answer when it knew what it came to know about Mbarushimana, and what actions if any it took on what it knew. Now after repeated extradition requests from Rwanda, Mbarushimana is under investigation in France.

There did not appear to be an French representation at Monday's Rwanda genocide memorial, held in the two-storied Delegates' Entrance lobby. Sudan's Ambassador was present, and took umbrage when the final speaker linked Rwanda's genocide with more recent events in Darfur. Afterwards, he told Inner City Press, Rwandan Ambassador Nsengimana apologized to him for the comments. Never again?

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1rwanda040708.html

UN Bans Interns from its Bar, Pictures on Facebook and Long Lines for Beer Led Two Delegations to Complain

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1dellounge040508.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 5 -- The UN negotiates with dictators in North Korea and Uzbekistan and with indicted war criminals in Uganda. But faced with noise, mess and long lines for beer caused by its own interns' presence once a week in the UN Delegates' Lounge, rather than talk and seek a solution, the UN has simply banned all interns from the bar.

The new policy was in place on April 4, and the Lounge was at best half as crowded as usual. Bar sales declined by slightly less, thirty-five percent, with some using this as evidence that interns had brought in their own liquor. Several Ambassadors complained to Inner City Press, with one delegate prominent in climate change debates saying that while he rarely spoke with the interns, he now missed their presence, their "energy." This is the UN, he said. Couldn't they have been negotiated with and some compromise reached?

By far the majority of those Inner City Press spoke with in the bar on Friday night after interviewing Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic were opposed to the new absolutist policy of barring the interns. In further inquiry with Ban Ki-moon administration sources, two countries' delegations to the UN were identified as having lodged complaints that operated as "the straw that broke the camel's back," as one source put it, winking and saying this phrase was a clue to which regional group both complainants are from.

Others argue that the identity of this complainers is less important than the new technology which made this year's intern antics more of a worry to the UN than before. Some interns were posting photographs from the Delegates' Lounge on Facebook and other social media sites. This was viewed as going too far, and rather than negotiate, the decision was made to simply prohibit entry by interns.

Some with longer memories say that the current move to ban the interns was set in motion by a breathy New York Post article in September 2007, describing the Delegates' Lounge as a singles bar with disco music. The Post's writer for that story has not been seen since in the building. Also impacted are journalists not deemed resident correspondents, and contractors, such as those running UN TV, many of who have worked in the UN for decades while the private company holding the contract has changed. (An affiliate of the current contract holder is said by sound-men or sound-persons to be near to bankruptcy.)

Recently the Delegates' Lounge has innovated in its offers, from expanding the wine list to bringing in beer on tap, including an organic brew. Since the bar is run by the same contractor as the cafeteria, Aramark -- the work force is involved in a contract dispute, quietly marked by the deployment of "UNITE HERE" union lapel pins -- often sandwiches and salads not sold during the day are given out free at night in the bar. On April 4, there was more food than people, as chef salads sat uneaten, alongside a tray-load of cold mozzarella sticks.

Aramark's flash web site to drum up outside business for its Delegates' Dining Room catering service promises "this world renowned setting where diplomats, ambassadors and world leaders dine, celebrate and arbitrate." But in this case, there was no arbitration.

Several highly-placed Ban Administration officials frequent the Delegates' Lounge on Fridays, and one wonders what this new policy, if unaltered, says about their diplomatic skills and commitment to egalitarianism. The UN is already almost laughably hierarchical, with its system of coded identification cards worn around the neck, and employment status grouped into G for General versus P for Professional, with very little mobility between the two.

A defender of the new policy told Inner City Press that there are simply "too many interns," even if they could be convinced to forego Facebook. But why not then deem one Friday for interns with last names A to L, the next for M to Z? While the situations are not comparable, would the UN stop providing services in the field because too many people lined up for them? Or would they try to come up with a workable system?

Press analysis: a lack of creative problem solving on something so simple right in UN headquarters may not be unrelated to recent diplomatic gaffes in such places as Kosovo, click here for that, and watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1dellounge040508.html

At UN, Serbia's Vuk Jeremic Speaks of Kosovo, Says Ruecker "Doesn't Deserve" Higher UN Post

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/sc5kosovo040408.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 4 -- Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic met late Friday with the UN's Ban Ki-moon, then after 7 p.m. took question from the two media outlets left, a television station and Inner City Press. He spoke of Serbia asking the International Court of Justice to declare Kosovo's unilateral declaration of independence, and some countries' recognition of it, as illegal. Inner City Press asked him about the European Union's announcement that so-called Pillar IV of the UN Mission in Kosovo will end in June. While Ban's Deputy Spokesperson declined to comment on this earlier on Friday, Jeremic replied that he told Ban that the UN must keep up UNMIK, under Security Council Resolution 1244. He said that Ban assured him that the UN is in fact conducting an investigation of its actions in Metrovica on March 17, when they stormed the courthouse and re-took it by force.

Back on April 1, Inner City Press had asked Ban's Associate Spokesperson Farhan Haq about "reports that UNMIK in Kosovo has alleged that Serbian Interior Ministry personnel were in Mitrovica when this courthouse incident took place and that somehow they have an office there, something that Serbia rejects. Is that what UNMIK is alleging and, if so, based on what evidence?

Haq answered, "I'll have to look into that. I hadn't heard of that before."

But rather than look into it and provide an answer or evidence, while the noon briefing was still going on, Haq's colleague upstairs e-mailed Inner City Press that the question should be directed to UNMIK. But UNMIK increasingly says it is waiting for guidance from New York, meaning that the questions should be asked in New York. Ultimately, Ban Ki-moon is responsible, as Vuk Jeremic on Friday made clear.

Of the rumor inside the UN that the current head of UNMIK Joachim Ruecker might come to New York to take over the Department of Management, with a promotion to Under-Secretary-General, Vuk Jeremic said without hesitation, "He doesn't deserve it." We'll see.

Press analysis: A Balkan diplomat consulted by Inner City Press said the reason that a Swiss cantonization of Kosovo could never work is that while "Switzerland is rich," Kosovo does not have the economy to support such an arrangement. He mused that in Ban Ki-moon's upcoming trip to Russia he will attempt to render moot what he said was Russia's threat to veto any second term as Secretary-General for Mr. Ban. He predicted that Kostunica would represent Serbia at the Council's April 21 debate, and openly questioned why the UN never responded to Serbia's formal request for an emergency meeting following the events of March 17 in Mitrovica. "It's strange they didn't answer," he said. Strange indeed...

and see, www.innercitypress.com/sc5kosovo040408.html

UNICEF, Still Without Gucci's Money, Dodges German Scandal, Answers on Heroin in Sri Lanka, Does Good

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
and see,www.innercitypress.com/un3unicef040408.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 4 -- Two months after it lent the UN's name and North Lawn to Gucci, which claimed the event celebrated its store opening on Manhattan's Fifth Avenue, and to Madonna, for a charity affiliated with the Kabbalah Center of Los Angeles, UNICEF has still not received any of the money raised by the event, according to an agency spokesman.

UNICEF still refuses to provide any answers about the prospective use by Madonna's group of funds raised using UNICEF's name and the UN's lawn, stating that it "has no relationship" with the organization. UNICEF insiders still doggedly defend the irregularities in the fundraiser as being attributable to the ostensibly independence U.S. Fund for UNICEF. But is clear that this doppelganger is closely enough linked to UNICEF to trigger reputational harm to the UN, if not legal responsibility -- since the UN system is, literally, lawless, cloaked in immunity from legal action including to elicited presumptively public information about the agency's spending in action.

In a parallel universe across the Atlantic, UNICEF Germany has now scheduled a re-election of its entire board of directors, after a scandal which found that the organization falsely claimed it did not pay commission fees to individuals who helped organize large donations. "By paying a commission of $45,000 without getting any demonstrable service in return, UNICEF Germany has violated the principle of the economical and careful use of funds," the watchdog organization Central German Institute for Social Questions, or DZI, has said.

Inner City Press had asked UNICEF's headquarters for an update on the UNICEF Germany scandal, including a copy of an audit a previous agency response said largely disproved the mounting scandal. UNICEF Headquarters then declined to provide a copy of the audit, stating that "it was the German National Committee for UNICEF that hired KPMG and that has the legal relationship with KPMG, so you will have to contact the NatCom regarding any requests for KPMG documentation." But it's UNICEF's and the UN's name that is in question.

Inner City Press also reiterated its request, pending since the run-up to the Gucci - UNICEF event more than two months ago, for an opportunity to put questions to UNICEF executive director Ann Veneman, who told the UN's Management chief Alicia Barcena to give the North Lawn to Gucci and Madonna. On this last, UNICEF replied that "within the last two months, the Executive Director has found time to give three press conferences, in Haiti, in Sierra Leone and in Liberia" -- that is, in places other than the New York headquarters where the Gucci fiasco occurred, or in Germany where the UNICEF scandal continues to grow. UNICEF's response continues, "Should we decide to hold a press conference at UNHQ we will inform you through the usual channels." We'll be waiting.

In the interim, Inner City Press has been given this UNICEF response to questions raised about a UNICEF worker who arrived recently in Sri Lanka and nearly immediately overdosed on heroin. UNICEF declines to provide the individual's name but states that

UNICEF confirms that on 17 March 2008 a consultant, newly contracted by UNICEF Sri Lanka, was placed under arrest by the police. The consultant arrived in Colombo on 5 March 2008 to commence a 4-month contract with UNICEF, based in Colombo. On 12 March she was hospitalized, and on 17 March was placed under arrest while still in hospital... On 25 March she was brought before a magistrate, and pled guilty. Subsequently the contract between the consultant and UNICEF was terminated by mutual agreement, and she has now left the country. Beyond that, UNICEF considers the resolved by the relevant national authorities and the individual concerned. For this reason, UNICEF will not release or confirm the former consultant's name.

For your information, in the case of short-term individual contractors UNICEF does not require a full medical examination prior to entering into a contract. However prospective contractors are required to provide a medical certificate from his or her doctor certifying that the person is medically fit for service. In this instance, I am advised that the certification was provided.

We will soon have more on the topic of the use of contractors by UN funds and programs such as UNICEF, UNHCR and the UN Development Program. While UNICEF's answers are appreciated, questions about the reported beating of a Somali member of parliament by UNICEF guards in Baidoa, and about the failure to return at least six of the 103 children kidnapped by French NGO Zoe's Ark, remain pending, as does a request for UNICEF's comment on the pardon by Chad and release by France of those who kidnapped the children. A late generic denunciation of impunity is perhaps to be expected.

About the veracity of the child soldier memoir which Ann Veneman has promoted seemingly at every opportunity, Inner City Press has been told that "UNICEF has not fact-checked Mr. Beah's book, 'Long Way Gone.' However it is our view that the book is a credible account of the tragedy of recruitment of children into armed groups, told by one who undoubtedly experienced this abuse first hand. It is an abuse that is still suffered by tens of thousands of children around the world."

For the record, about half of the money raised on the UN's North Lawn, it "will go to Schools for Africa, a joint campaign founded by UNICEF and the Nelson Mandela Foundation in 2004 to promote education for all children in Africa." Good. So, half the money raised in the UN's name is accounted for. UNICEF has also told Inner City Press

The US Fund [for UNICEF] advises that its arrangement with Gucci states that the donation will be paid within 60 days of the event. This means that the US Fund should receive the donation on 6 April (or 7 April, since the 6th is a Sunday). I am advised that this timeframe is standard for events and corporate partner donations, as it takes time for payments from attendees, live auction winners, and pledge donors to be collected. As previously advised, UNICEF has no relationship with Raising Malawi.

No relationship except giving Madonna's Raising Malawi and Gucci access to the UN's North Lawn, and use of UNICEF's name and logo, to raise money... We will continue to follow these issues.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un3unicef040408.html

UN Assembly's President Is Employed By Media Group, Refuses to Disclose Payments, Stepping To Reform

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
and see, www.innercitypress.com/un3pgafunding040308.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 3 -- The President of the UN General Assembly, Srgjan Kerim, is still under contract to his previous private sector employer, the WAZ media group, but the amount WAZ is paying him is called "confidential" by Kerim's spokesman. In mid-March, Inner City Press asked President Kerim about how he is paid. In response, Kerim called for a reform under which the Office of the President of the GA would be funded by the UN, since "it is the right of those who pay to ask favors." Kerim called this situation "unbearable."

In light of these statements, Inner City Press for two weeks has asked Kerim's spokesman Janos Tisovszky to with all due respect confirm or deny that Kerim is paid by WAZ, and how much. On April 3, Tisovszky wrote to Inner City Press that the government of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia "has made an arrangement with Dr. Kerim’s employer the WAZ media group allowing for the one year release of Dr. Kerim to take up his duties as the GA President. This agreement allows for maintaining his contractual status with the media group. Dr. Kerim has a five year contract with WAZ and the details of that contract are confidential."

Even while awaiting a reform, which Kerim to his credit has said he will push for, to have the position of PGA funded by the UN itself, it seems clear that outside payments to the sitting President of the GA, particularly from private corporations, should be disclosed. In this case, it is a media company. It has been argued to Inner City Press that the only conflict of interest would be if this media company got "scoops" about the UN's work. But if this secrecy is accepted, why couldn't future funders be military contractors, oil companies, or even armed non-state parties? While some have pointed about that previous GA presidents received funding from outside the UN, it appears that in previous cases this was only from the president's own government, and not from private corporations, which raise separate conflict of interest questions of first impression.

Indonesia's Ambassador Marty Natalegawa has told Inner City Press that the proposed reform, that the PGA be paid by the UN, should not be quickly adopted without thinking of the ramification for other UN committees that he say have similar outside-funded presiding officers. But do these allow for outside funding for corporations? In amounts that are not disclosed?

To Mr. Tisovszky's credit, certain other of Inner City Press' questions were answered, for example that "no staff member is paid out of the $280,000 budget as this is specified for only to cover official travel, official hospitality, miscellaneous staff expenditures (e.g. temporary assistance, compensatory time off, overtime) and other expenditures, if applicable (e.g. phone charges, newspaper subscriptions, specialized computer software, etc)." French Ambassador Jean-Marie Lacroix had said that perhaps the $280,000 provided should be better used. But divided by 19 staff, it would mean less than $15,000 each.

Tisovszky also answered how many people work in the Office of the PGA -- nineteen -- and what countries they come from: "Brazil, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Rwanda and Slovenia as well as from the President’s own country." This last phrasing seems an attempt to avoid having to choose between the controversial "Macedonia" and the unwieldy "FYROM."

News analysis: Since this name dispute led to a Greek veto and a FYROM walk-out from this week's NATO meeting in Bucharest, circumlocution is understandable. What is not acceptable is for the self-described highest official in the UN to be receiving payments from a private corporation and to refuse to disclose their volume.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un3pgafunding040308.html

In Congo, UN Controls Radio Content But Will Not Show the Contract, Journalists in Danger

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
and see, www.innercitypress.com/un1mediaokapi040308.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 3 -- While espousing commitment to press independence, transparency and freedom of information, the UN has a secret memorandum of understanding with the largest radio station in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, under which disputes about content are be to be decided by the UN, not the journalists or editor at the station, Radio Okapi.

This emerged in response to questions after a screening Thursday at the UN in New York of a film about the station, Ondes de Choc. The documentary, called "Shock Waves" in English, profiles three courageous radio journalists, but does not mention the UN's financial and editorial control. Inner City Press asked if the station had ever for example put rebel general Laurent Nkunda on the air, and whether it has recently put on the air Jean-Pierre Bemba, whose life was threatened during last year's elections. "We don't have his phone number," the station's editor replied. Other questions arose about whether and how Okabi can cover sexual abuse and exploitation by UN peacekeepers and reports of UN peacekeepers trading guns and gold in the Eastern Congo.

Three UN officials spoke after the screening. Inner City Press asked Kevin S. Kennedy, in charge of Africa for the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, where to get a copy of the memorandum of understanding which he had described. Mr. Kennedy shook his head, saying that it is not a public document, that the UN Office of Legal Affairs would have to get involved. (The head of that Office has recently declined to answer questions following coverage of his omission from the public financial disclosure which he filed of housing subsidies paid by the Swiss government.)

Mr. Kennedy suggested that perhaps the counter-party to the MOU agreement, the Swiss-based Hirondelle Foundation, could show its copy. No, said the Foundation's executive director Jean-Marie Etter. He described a range of other engagements with the UN, including at least one other, in Sudan, that appears governed by an editorial Memorandum of Understanding. Etter said that the UN station, Radio Miraya, should have the right to broadcast throughout Sudan, but is being confined to the southern part of the country.

Given that the UN refers to national sovereignty whenever it wants to dodge an issue -- for example, the recent pardon in Chad and release in France of the Zoe's Ark staffers who kidnapped 103 children -- Inner City Press asked for the basis of the claim that the UN can broadcast throughout Sudan. "The Security Council," Etter said, referring to Council resolutions which set up the UNMIS mandate and mission. But if, as Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said earlier this week, the Security Council is not an Elections Board, how much less is it a media licensing body?

It cannot be emphasized enough that the front-line reporters who work for Okapi do so at great risk and with the goal of helping their country, as evidenced by the film, which despite some missing issues is well worth seeing.

Even after the panel discussion, it remained unclear how much the UN spends on Radio Okapi. A glossy hand-out in a DPKO file folder made available at the auditorium entrance listed, as "operating budget for 2008," $4.5 "million (Fondation Hirondelle's contribution)." No UN contribution was listed. During the panel discussion, a UN official said that the station's budget is $10 million a year, which would make the UN's contribution $5.5 million. Afterwards, one UN staffer put the UN's pay-out at $8 million, while another called it "incalculable," given that the UN provides premises, travel, security and other services.

An Okapi journalist was killed in Bukavu last year, Serge Maheshe, and the government's purported investigation and trial of his killers has left organizations such as Reporters without Borders skeptical, as well as noting the death of non-UN journalists such as Patrick Kikuku Wilungula, in Goma.

William Orme, who served as spokesman for the UN Development Program through 2006, praised Radio Okapi as "objected and balanced," and later added that another Hirondelle radio station is housed within the UNDP compound in Bangui in the Central African Republic. Given the refusal to provide a copy of the Okapi MOU in the Congo, it is an open question what editorial control Hirondelle is subject to in Bangui.

Press analysis: For media to be built-up in war-torn countries is important. If the UN is to be involved, it should be more honest and transparent about the control it exercises, directly and indirectly under memoranda of understanding. It should immediately make public such MOU agreements. It is not healthy to be surrouned by media which is tempted -- here, legally required -- to produce positive coverage. The antidote is critical coverage.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1mediaokapi040308.html

UN Development Program "Launders Money" in Latin America, Chart and Sources Say

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
and see, www.innercitypress.com/undp1latam040208.html

UNITED NATIONS, April 2 -- The UN Development Program expends significantly more in relatively affluent Latin America than in Africa, a continent-wide analysis obtained by Inner City Press reveals. In 2006, over 90% of UNDP's $1.3 billion in expenditures in Latin America were so-called "cost sharing," in which governments give UNDP money in order to do procurement or pay salaries to people already in the government's employ.

While being little more than a bookkeeper -- or money launderer, as several inside UNDP sources put it -- UNDP collects a fee for all funds it processes, and books it as income. The model has become attractive to UNDP's offices throughout Latin America, leading to UNDP tarnishing the UN's name by becoming involved in procurement scandals such as a current one in Venezuela. A week ago, Inner City Press asked UNDP a series of question which have still not been answered. On Wednesday, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's Deputy Spokesperson for the Secretary-General's comment on how UNDP under Kemal Dervis and Ad Melkert is making the UN appear.

Just last month, the head of the UN-affiliated World Bank, when asked about UNDP's attempt to attribute its greater expenditure in Latin America than in Africa to its supposed "processing" of World Bank loans, expressed skepticism. The answer for UNDP's disparity, the attached chart now shows, is UNDP's "cost sharing" programs.

UNDP's questionable work in Latin America is not limited to countries like Venezuela, where in 2006 UNDP reported $34 million in "cost sharing." In Argentina in 2006, while spending less than $1 million in "regular resources" to promote development, UNDP processed over $268 million for the government. UNDP's Argentina web site, under the heading Acquisitions, vaguely lists much of its work as "NEX" -- the so-called national execution modality that got the agency into trouble in North Korea. There are also acquisitions of servers from CISCO, a supplier that UNDP sources say is not chosen competitively, but rather is actively promoted and favored by UNDP's country offices on instructions from UNDP Headquarters.

In Brazil in 2006, while again spending less than $1 million in "regular resources" to promote development, UNDP processed over $227 million for the government. UNDP's Brazil web site was soliciting bids, for example, up to March 28 for 100 hotel rooms for a conference to take place April 7-8, 2008 (#758).

Inner City Press is informed by Brazilian sources that the size of UNDP's cost-sharing was revealed in that country when people UNDP paid, with government pass-through money, to work for the government argued that they should not have to pay taxes, claiming they were international civil servants. A dispute ensued, and the full size of UNDP's Brazilian program, which dwarfs African programs, became known. "UNDP is renting out the UN's powers for a fee, it is engaged in essence in money laundering," a UNDP source told Inner City Press on condition of anonymity, given UNDP's known penchant for retaliation, noted not only by the Washington-based Government Accountability Project but also, at least on a prima facie basis, by the UN Ethics Office. The analogy is that governments pay the fee to UNDP in order to work around procurement and other rules -- UNDP does not have to be transparent, and does not have to follow local rules.

While UNDP in Cuba in 2006 reported $7 million in cost-sharing, the UNDP figure in Guatemala was $92 million. In Bolivia it was $31 million, in Chile $23 million, Colombia $82 million, Dominican Republic $5 million, Ecuador $30 million, El Salvador $13 million, Paraguay $32 million, Uruguay $10 million.

From poor Haiti, UNDP took in $16 million in cost-sharing, versus only $14 million in Mexico.

UNDP's response to the controversy around a contract of less than $3 million in Venezuela with Setronix has been to direct Inner City Press to UNDP's online rebuttal. But while UNDP claims that the documents it links to show competitive bidding, the documents in fact refer to " excepcion a un proceso competitivo" - exception to a competitive process. In any case, this is just the tip of the iceberg of UNDP's $1.1 billion of "cost-sharing" in Latin America (compared to UNDP's less than $600 million in annual spending in Africa.)

In Honduras, UNDP's cost-sharing in 2006 was a whopping $103 million. The web site refers, in Spanish, to the modalidad de Ejecucion Nacional (NEX -- national execution "modality," saying that it guarantees that national authorities keep control of the program and of the final responsibility for how the funds are used. UNDP, it seems, just takes a fee, and repeatedly further tarnishes the UN's name in the process.

and see, www.innercitypress.com/undp1latam040208.html