At UN, Gabon's Ali Bongo Faces Libya Questions & Obiang of Equatorial Guinea

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 25 -- When the world's #16 dictator, Equatorial Guinea's Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo was slated Friday to meet up-and-coming son Ali of the #11 dictator, Omar Bongo and the UN's Ban Ki-moon, the treaty signing photo op was set for 12:45.

But when Inner City Press got there, the UN announced in French, Spanish and English that there had been a delay. The largely African media contingent wanted to ask Ali Bongo about his Libyan friend Gadhafi and his mercenaries; Inner City Press wanted to ask Bongo about the UN playing host to Gabonese opposition figure Mba Obame. (The UN has dodged questions on this for weeks.)

Obiang, meanwhile, had his representatives waiting. Inner City Press spoke with Obiang's lobbying, for today with an Equatorial Guinea Diplomat pass from the UN, Gregory Lagana. After introductions, he told Inner City Press he used to be with the US State Department. This checked out -- assigned for the UN to San Salvador, Quito and Rome. He was also the spokesman for DynCorp, the private military contractor a/ka/ mercenary firm.

Now flush with oil, and head of the African Union, Obiang is trying to rehabilitate his image. He tried to get a prize from UNESCO but this was shot down after opposition. Now he comes to the UN to sign a treaty with his neighbor Gabon, where the opposition figure has had to seek physical protection from the UN.

At Friday's noon briefing, Inner City Press again asked Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky if Ban would raise to Ali Bongo the crackdown on opposition protests, and the UN's hosting of Mba Obame. I don't want to pre-judge what will happen, Nesirky said, promising a read out later in the day. But with the treaty signing photo op put off, nothing was assured. Watch this site.

After Ban Ki-moon Meets Sri Lanka AG & General Silva, UN Won't Say If First Time, No Trip or Panel in UN Read Out

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 24 -- After months of controversy regarding if Sri Lanka will allow UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Panel on Accountability to visit the country and interview officials like the Attorney General if not President, Ban himself met on February 23 with with Attorney General Mohan Peiris and the Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, former General Shavendra Silva.

But when Inner City Press asked on February 24 for a read out of the meeting -- and if this was Ban's first meeting with Silva, himself accused of war crimes -- Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky said the “courtesy call” was about “reconciliation and reconstruction efforts."

Inner City Press asked how it could be that Ban's Panel, President Mahinda Rajapaksa's Lessons Learnt Commission could not be in the read out -- was this, Inner City Press asked, a mutually agreed statement with the Sri Lankan government?

No, Nesirky insisted, he was providing a read out for the UN Secretariat.

When Inner City Press has asked Ban Ki-moon to explain why his Panel has not gone to Sri Lanka, despite his claim on December 17 that they could due to Rajapaksa's “flexibility,” Ban said that they still would go, adding confusingly that he was “still trying.”

But his read out of his meeting with Sri Lanka's Attorney General does not mention any trip, or even his Panel.

The Sri Lankan government, after denying Inner City Press' report that this meeting would take place, then called the Daily Mirror on behalf of External Affairs Ministry Secretary Romesh Jayasinghe to admit it took place -- and said it concerned “legal issues.” This is not a topic mentioned in the UN's read out.

Inner City Press asked Nesirky to confirm that the Panel's already extended deadline is the end of February, as had been reported. Nesirky replied that “the Panel will let us know when we can let you know.”

So when, Inner City Press repeated, is the deadline? Nesirky wouldn't say.

On whether this was Ban's first meeting with former General Shavendra Silva, described by widely read New York press as a war criminal, Nesirky said he has “no idea” - and wouldn't even say he would ask or find out.

This is the transparency and commitment to accountability for war crimes of which Ban has spoken?

Lanka 4 incl Silva, Ban & Nambiar, Panel not shown -or even mentioned? (c) MRLee

Also attending the February 23 meeting but standing off to the side during the handshaking was Ban's chief of staff Vijay Nambiar. Inner City Press nevertheless took a photograph of him standing by the side, and later sitting at Ban's right hand for the meeting.

In recent days, Inner City Press has asked Ban's spokesperson's office for a response to the inclusion of Nambiar in a filing with the International Criminal Court, which asserts

“a basis to question whether Vijay Nambiar was in fact an innocent neutral intermediary or in fact a co-perpetrator within the negotiation related community.”

The filing, which has been reported in the Australian press, recites that

"NAMBIAR again through the United Nations-24 hour dispatch center in New York. NAMBIAR replied to COLVIN that MAHINDA RAJAPAKSE, GOTABAYA RAJAPAKSE, AND PALITHA KOHONA had assured NAMBIAR that the LTTE members would be safe in surrendering to the SLA and treated like “normal prisoners of war” if they “hoist[ed] a white flag high.”

Ban's lead spokesman Martin Nesirky would not say he would seek a response from Nambiar or the Executive Office of the Secretary General to these descriptions.

Nesirky's deputy Farhan Haq issued an on the record statement to another journalist that “the Inner City Press story is inaccurate; there has been no complaint formally filed at the International Criminal Court.” On February 23, Inner City Press repeatedly asked Nesirky to explain the statement; he has thus far declined. Watch this site.

On Libya, As Malloch Brown Hopes Gadhafi Kin Not UNDP Ambassador, Belated Firing, Ban Ki-moon Dodges

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 23 -- Amid the UN's sudden claims to be getting tough with Libya, Inner City Press since February 20 has been reporting that the UN system named Aicha Gadhafi, the Colonel's daughter, a Goodwill Ambassador.

Inner City Press sought comment in writing from Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky, without answer.

On February 22, Inner City Press asked at the noon briefing for confirmation:

Inner City Press: can you confirm that Colonel Qadhafi’s daughter, Ayesha, is a UN system Goodwill Ambassador with a Laissez-Passer that remains open until 2013? And what does… If so, what does the Secretary-General think about this goodwill ambassadorship? Will it be revoked? Is it, what is your position on it?

Spokesperson Nesirky: As I understand it, she is a national Goodwill Ambassador in Libya for UNDP [United Nations Development Programme]. On the other details you have asked, I will check.

Since Nesirky had checked and gotten the answer from and about UNDP, it is unclear why he didn't answer the pending written question. Perhaps he hoped that, with briefings truncated by meetings, the question couldn't be asked in person.

On February 23, in person, Inner City Press asked former UNDP Administration Mark Malloch Brown about Aicha Gadhafi being a Goodwill Ambassador.

“I hope she's not a UNDP Ambassador,” he said. “I don't think it's UNDP. I was surprised when I saw that... she was an Ambassador to any part of the UN system.”

But it was UNDP. And only on February 23, the day after Nesirky's first confirmation, did the UN announce a belated removal of the Ambassadorship:

“I was asked yesterday whether one of Colonel [Muammar] Qadhafi’s daughters is a Goodwill Ambassador. And as I mentioned, Aisha al-Qadhafi was appointed as National UNDP Goodwill Ambassador for Libya on 24 July 2009. Her appointment at that time enabled UNDP to address the issues of HIV/AIDS and violence against women in Libya, both culturally sensitive topics in the country. Following the recent events, UNDP has terminated the agreement with Ms. Qadhafi, based on article 30 of the UN Guidelines for the Designation of Goodwill Ambassadors and Messengers of Peace. By the way, I can tell you that UNDP Goodwill Ambassadors do not get paid, they volunteer their time, and they do not hold UN laissez-passer travel documents.”

Later on February 23, Ban Ki-moon appeared at the UN North Lawn second floor stakeout and took a handful of questions. When asked if he was calling on Gadhafi to step down, Ban dodged the question then left.

At Malloch Brown's event, the selling of his new book “The Unfinished Global Revolution” in the UN bookstore, Inner City Press asked him about the process for selection the UN Secretary General. He replied that he had wished Ban's 2006 selection had included “hustings and manifestos.”

He contrasted this with the “two most successful Secretaries General, Dag Hammarskjold and Kofi Annan,” while noting that those who voted for them hadn't read their biographies.

Under Dag Hammarskhold, would the daughter of Libya's dictator, who killed his opponents as far back as the 1970s, have been made a UN system Goodwill Ambassador? Watch this site.

Footnote: Malloch Brown, before answering Inner City Press' question, said it should buy a copy of his book, for the “pain extracted from me for so many years.” While it may refer back to some profanity he used, compared to current UN system leadership, at least Malloch Brown purports to take and answer questions.

On Sri Lanka, As UN Haq Claims No Nambiar ICC Filing, Meeting Disputed

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, February 23 -- With the UN accused of misstatements by Sri Lanka's government, the UN spokesperson's office has claimed that there is no filing with the International Criminal Court involving chief of staff Vijay Nambiar, in the process telling media covering Myanmar that an Inner City Press story is inaccurate.

But when UN spokesman Martin Nesirky was publicly asked Wednesday by Inner City Press about his deputy Farhan Haq's statement that “the Inner City Press story is inaccurate; there has been no complaint formally filed at the International Criminal Court,” Nesirky did not answer, only claiming “we spoke about that yesterday.”

The previous day, Nesirky would not commit to seeking a response from Nambiar if the descriptions of his involvement in Sri Lanka were accurate.

After that, at 7 pm on February 22, Haq received a question about Inner City Press' story about the ICC filing involving not only Sri Lanka Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona but also Nambiar, and why Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has not responded to calls, including by Permanent Five and other members of the Security Council, to on Myanmar replace Nambiar with a full time envoy.

Haq replied:

From: Farhan Haq [at] un.org
Date: Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 7:16 PM
Re: Question about Nambiar, ICC and Burma envoy role

Yes, he is still the acting Special Adviser on Myanmar.

The Inner City Press story is inaccurate; there has been no complaint formally filed at the International Criminal Court. Please ask the ICC for anything more on that.

As for a full-time Special Adviser, Ban Ki-moon has been considering that idea; there is nothing to announce for now.

Inner City Press on February 23 asked Nesirky the basis for Haq's statement that “there has been no complaint formally filed at the International Criminal Court.” On both February 22 and 23, Inner City Press told Nesirky that the ICC filing had been widely reported in the Australian press. Did the UN seek any retraction or correction from the Sydney Morning Herald?

Nesirky said he would only take a few questions on February 23 -- he used time accusing Inner City Press of making noise with its laptop, which was untrue -- so Inner City Press was unable to ask for the UN's response to Sri Lanka's government's claim that Ban Ki-moon daily schedule for February 23 is false, and that the UN has never even asked to meet wth members of Mahinda Rajapaksa's Lessons Learnt & Reconciliation Commission.

The Government today rejected reports that External Affairs Ministry Secretary Romesh Jayasinghe and Attorney General Mohan Peiris were in New York to meet with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. Deputy Minister of External Affairs Neomal Perera told the Daily Mirror that the External Affairs Ministry Secretary was overseas on a private visit and that, to his knowledge, there was no meeting scheduled between the Attorney General and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

The Minister further rejected claims that the government had hindered the UN Secretary Generals’ Expert Panel from contacting the local Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC).

“We are in constant contact with the UN Secretary General’s office and they have not requested to meet with the LLRC. If they so wish they can contact them through us or even directly”, he said.

A representative of the LLRC told the Daily Mirror that any contact between the panel and the LLRC would generally have to be through the External Affairs Ministry. “The Commission has not been contacted, normally however it is understood that any contact would have to be made through the External Affairs Ministry; the Secretary Generals office or the UN office in Colombo would have to contact them- but no such contact has been made,” the representative said.

Reports claimed today that besides disallowing the UN Panel to visit Sri Lanka the government had rejected the Secretary Generals offers for those from the Panel to contact members of the LLRC through video conferencing or written questions.

Watch this site.

Under Gadhafi, UNDP Praised Libya on MDGs & UN Women, Contra Ban

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 22 -- As questions mount about the UN's coddling of dictators in the Middle East and North Africa, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his spokesman have claimed that the UN, through the UN Development Program and its Human Development Report, have been criticizing the region's lack of democracy for years. Click here for UN's February 17 answer to Inner City Press.

But the UN system's coordinator for Libya, UNDP official Costanza Farina, has in fact been praising Gadhafi's regime. She has said, “''Libya has made immense progress and is well positioned among the countries that will be able to say that they have reached 8 of the Millennium Objectives in 2015.” And click here, 2010 "UNIC Tripoli organizes Reception at UN House in celebration of UN Day."

She has also praised Gadhafi on women's rights, as Libya is on the board of UN Women:

“the UN chief for Libya, Costanza Farina, said that the fight against violence against women was one of the priorities of the agencies operating in the country and announced that the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), thanks to a contribution from the Dutch embassy in Tripoli, would be able to support the programme financially. Farina added that Libya is one of the 41 members elected to the executive committee of the new UN Women agency, which was created on July 2 to show the desire of governments to respect women. Farina also said that "Libya confirmed the equality in rights between men and women in 1969.”

Maybe she is unaware, as “local UN officials said, the new coordinator of the UN in Libya, Costanza Farina, credited only last June 1, is located in Geneva.”

As of February 22, UNDP Libya had a blank press release page.

On February 17, Inner City Press had asked Nesirky

Inner City Press: Is there any thought of using the existing UN programs on the ground, whether it is UNDP or otherwise? There was some criticism of this training of police in Egypt prior to the — there was criticism by NGOs that it didn’t bring in human rights activists but rather Government people. Is there some thinking of how — the UNDP website about Libya hasn’t been updated now in several months, I guess — it seems to some, due to the turmoil. What about these UN…?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Who might that be? Who is it, these people who think it might be?

Inner City Press: People that look at it and have seen that it was updated all the way, until suddenly there was turmoil in the country and then it is not updated any more. What’s the role, according to the Secretary-General, of the existing UN programmes in countries like Libya and Yemen, where Helen Clark visited and didn’t say anything about democracy?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, there are lots of, as you know, across the region, there is a UN presence in different constellations; country teams with different components, whether it is UNDP or other UN agencies, funds and programmes. Of course, given that they are already on the ground, given that they have been working there in different capacities on different projects, they are well placed to be further involved. But this is part of a bigger picture, and it is being very carefully coordinated.

Inner City Press: Is there any change of policy? I guess I am saying, given that the announcement today that the UN is sort of taking cognizance of all this, is there, is that…?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, Matthew, it’s hardly an announcement today. This is something that has been said consistently for a number of weeks now. And indeed, further back, as you know, the Human Development Reports on the Arab world have been saying this for the best part of a decade. So, okay, thank you very much.

What have the UN and UNDP been saying about Gadhafi, other than praising MDG achievements and women's rights in Libya? Watch this site.

As Libya Burns, UN Ban Ki-moon in Hollywood, Faceless at Facebook

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 22 -- It wasn't clear why the trip was scheduled, and even less clear why it was not canceled after Libya starting bombing peaceful protesters from the air.

But Tuesday as the UN Security Council convened behind closed doors on a request for a formal meeting on the bloodbath in Libya, Ban Ki-moon was in Hollywood talking about climate change and Haiti.

Would he be asked about the protests against the UN in that country for militarization and, they say, bringing cholera in?

Would Don Cheadle ask about how little the UN is saying as Sudan bombs the Jebel Marra region of Darfur?

Ban's trip is a faint echo of that of Ambassador Susan Rice, to the headquarters of Twitter. Ban is going to Facebook, moderated by Zuckerberg relative Randi; Ban has appeared in the LA Times, albeit under the name Ki-moon.

The CEO of the UN Foundation Kathy Calvin has traveled out there, and the UN's head Washington lobbyist Will Davis. Will they speak about Libya, and Gadhafi's daughter being a UN Goodwill Ambassador with a UN Laissez Passer?

The goal is to get UN story lines in the movies. Inner City Press exclusively attended and reported on filming of Transformers 3 in the General Assembly Hall. What will it get for the UN?

Inner City Press wrote to Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky, and his deputy Farhan Haq, on the morning of Sunday February 20 asking

In the wake of the gunning down of 46 democracy protesters in Libya’s second largest city, Benghazi, by security forces under the command of Colonel Gadafi, is the UN reassessing its relationship with Col Gadhafi’s daughter, Aicha, who the UN has designated a “Goodwill Ambassador?

http://www.libyaonline.com/business/details.php?id=10374

Has the Secretary-General sought to use the UN’s special relationship with its Goodwill Ambassador Dr Aicha Gadhafi to persuade her father not to use such excessive force against peaceful demonstrators?

Two days later, no response at all from the UN. Inner City Press also asked Ban's spokesman Nesirky “in this context, the Secretary-General's planned trip to California to meet and greet 'the entertainment industry,' how much is this trip costing, and is it funded by the Regular Budget of the UN -- and if not, what is the funding source?” Again, no answer. Faceless at Facebook indeed.

As Libya Kills Protesters, Gadhafi Daughter is UN Ambassador, UNDP Silent

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 20 -- As in Libya the forces, including mercenaries, of Colonel Moammar Gadhafi shoot and kill peaceful protesters, the UN has been nearly entirely silent.

On the morning of February 20, Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky:

In the wake of the gunning down of 46 democracy protesters in Libya’s second largest city, Benghazi, by security forces under the command of Colonel Gadafi, is the UN reassessing its relationship with Col Gadhafi’s daughter, Aicha, who the UN has designated a “Goodwill Ambassador?

Has the Secretary-General sought to use the UN’s special relationship with its Goodwill Ambassador Dr Aicha Gadhafi to persuade her father not to use such excessive force against peaceful demonstrators?

Nine hours later, no response at all from the UN. Inner City Press also asked Ban's spokesman Nesirky “in this context, the Secretary-General's planned trip to California to meet and greet 'the entertainment industry,' how much is this trip costing, and is it funded by the Regular Budget of the UN -- and if not, what is the funding source?” Again, no answer.

On February 17, Inner City Press had asked Nesirky

Inner City Press: Is there any thought of using the existing UN programs on the ground, whether it is UNDP or otherwise? There was some criticism of this training of police in Egypt prior to the — there was criticism by NGOs that it didn’t bring in human rights activists but rather Government people. Is there some thinking of how — the UNDP website about Libya hasn’t been updated now in several months, I guess — it seems to some, due to the turmoil. What about these UN…?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Who might that be? Who is it, these people who think it might be?

Inner City Press: People that look at it and have seen that it was updated all the way, until suddenly there was turmoil in the country and then it is not updated any more.

Inner City Press: What’s the role, according to the Secretary-General, of the existing UN programmes in countries like Libya and Yemen, where Helen Clark visited and didn’t say anything about democracy?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, there are lots of, as you know, across the region, there is a UN presence in different constellations; country teams with different components, whether it is UNDP or other UN agencies, funds and programmes. Of course, given that they are already on the ground, given that they have been working there in different capacities on different projects, they are well placed to be further involved. But this is part of a bigger picture, and it is being very carefully coordinated.

Inner City Press: Is there any change of policy? I guess I am saying, given that the announcement today that the UN is sort of taking cognizance of all this, is there, is that…?

Spokesperson Nesirky: Well, Matthew, it’s hardly an announcement today. This is something that has been said consistently for a number of weeks now. And indeed, further back, as you know, the Human Development Reports on the Arab world have been saying this for the best part of a decade. So, okay, thank you very much.

But what had the UN been doing about Libya? Watch this site.

After Vetoing Settlements Resolution, Rice Says Trip's No Longer Viable, Denies Lobbying to Remove Sponsors

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 18, updated -- After the veto cast by US Ambassador Susan Rice to the Israeli settlements resolution, the post-veto spin began. Rice scheduled a conference call with some reporters, rather than appearing at the UN Security Council stakeout.

Inner City Press asked, as the first question, about the US role in getting countries to drop off the sponsors list, like the five first reported by Inner City Press, Honduras, Trinidad & Tobago, Panama, Kazakhstan and Cameroon, and about why the US doesn't still support the Middle East trip. Here's a transcription of Rice's answer, to which we'll be returning:

We were not in the business of lobbying for or against cosponsors for this resolution. Our aim was not to have the outcome today, of the Council not being able to speak with one voice. Our aim was to advance this process through a 3-part constructive proposal that had the support of many members of the Security Council that we think would have been unanimously embraced, and that included the Russian proposal for a trip to the region [first in over 30 years]...

a very strong Presidential Statement from the Security Council which would have gone further than we have gone of late on the issue of settlements and other important issues, that would have been agreed by the Council, and we also would have been willing to use the use the upcoming Quartet statement for making some new and important statements on core issues including territory, as well as settlements. It is in our view very unfortunate that this proposal, which would have gotten unanimous support of the Council, was not accepted, because it would have led to process forward rather than lead to the outcome we had today. But the proposal of the trip to the region seems even more complicated today than it was yesterday and I think its viability is quite questionable at this point.

Inner City Press asked again, but what has changed in terms of the trip being a good idea?

Rice responded, the Council is not in agreement. This came to a vote, which was unfortunate. Our proposal had 3 elements that, taken together, would have moved the process forward. The parties didn't choose to accept that, which means they didn't place sufficient value on the utility of a trip, and the other elements.

Back at the UN Security Council stakeout, Palestine's Permanent Observer Riyad Mansour bragged about the support shown by the resolution's sponsors.

Inner City Press asked Mansour about countries which dropped off the sponsors' list, like Honduras, Trinidad & Tobago, Panama, Kazakhstan and Cameroon. Yes but some also joined, he said, saying that only Israel supports its own settlements.

On the proposed Council trip to the Middle East, Inner City Press asked Mansour if it would still be a good idea. Yes, he said, it would address Israel - Lebanon as well.

When Lebanon's Permanent Representative took to the stakeout, Inner City Press asked him about escalating rhetoric between Israel and Hezbollah. That's not what we're here for today, he said, turning to take another question. But you're asked as Lebanon's Ambassador.

On the trip, some opine that the US' offer was a bluff, asking how could the Council and US go to Lebanon (and meet Hezbollah), the Gaza Strip (and meet Hamas), and Egypt at this time? But Susan Rice said that the trip would have moved the process forward. Why not now? Watch this site.

Update: the US's transcript has at least two errors, on identity of questioner, and saying Kyrgyzstan instead of Kazakhstan....

As Suntech Says Got $80 M Contract For UN Peacekeeping, Chief Not Aware

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, February 17, updated -- After a large Chinese company Suntech Power Holdings announced it has won a $80 million contract with the UN to supply solar panels to “serve the UN's peacekeeping forces,” Inner City Press asked head UN Peacekeeper Alain Le Roy about the contract.

“I am not aware of that,” Le Roy told Inner City Press.

At the February 17 UN noon briefing, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Martin Nesirky several questions about the announced contract award: to confirm it (Nesirky could not), and to explain what conflict of interest safeguards there are, since Suntech's CEO Shi Zhengrong is a on Ban Ki-moon's group of Advisors on Energy and Climate Change.

Inner City Press asked: how many other bidders were there? What weight was given to Shi Zhengrong's status with Ban Ki-moon? Nesirky had no answers.

In the hours after the noon briefing, Inner City Press found that while Suntech is nowhere to be found in the UN vendor's data base, under the headline “Suntech Power wins USD80 mln PV contact from UN,” it was mentioned that “teaming up with Peak International Trade (Tianjin), Suntech Power has just won the bidding for the 80 million US-dollar photovoltaic (PV) system program from the UN, Shi Zhengrong, Suntech's Chairman and CEO, announced.”

While Peak International Trade (Tianjin) IS listed in the UN vendor data base, experts conclude that Peak is a Intermediary Vendor, a structure supposedly disfavored by the UN.

The UN's own procurement manual provides that

“There are indications that certain parties have approached prospective vendors offering to act as intermediaries in dealings with the United Nations. Some of these intermediaries purport to have various arrangements with the United Nations, or to possess support facilities within UN missions or projects which can place a vendor in a more advantageous position in a competitive bidding exercise. Vendors are advised that the UN prefers to deal directly with principals to the extent possible. Vendors are therefore urged to consult with the Procurement Division before deciding to submit offers or negotiate contracts through any intermediary.”

So why would the UN allow a non-vendor run by an Advisor to Ban Ki-moon to work around this through an intermediary and announce a $80 million contract with the UN?

In fact, UN contracts contain a clause that

“PUBLICITY, AND USE OF THE NAME, EMBLEM OR OFFICIAL SEAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS: The Contractor shall not advertise or otherwise make public for purposes of commercial advantage or goodwill that it has a contractual relationship with the United Nations, nor shall the Contractor, in any manner whatsoever use the name, emblem or official seal of the United Nations, or any abbreviation of the name of the United Nations in connection with its business or otherwise without the written permission the United Nations.”

So was Ban Ki-moon advisor Shi Zhengrong given special rights and waivers? Is has this publicly traded company (STP.NYSE) made a mis-statement? And why can't the UN answer? Watch this site.

Update of 6 pm - six hours after the questions were raised, all the UN provided was a list of ACECC members. What about the safeguards? What about the other questions, including those raised at the noon briefing?

From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 6:17 PM
Subject: Your question on ACECC membership
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] innercitypress.com

The list of members is publicly available in the AGECC report, which is posted at:

http://www.un.org/wcm/webdav/site/climatechange/shared/Documents/AGECC%20summary%20report%5B1%5D.pdf

Members are listed on page 4 of the AGECC final report, which includes:

Shi Zhengrong, Chairman and CEO, Suntech Power Holdings, China

What about the safeguards? What about the other questions, including those raised at the noon briefing?

At UN, Settlement Resolution Undercut by Honduras, Kazakhs & Cameroon Pulling Away

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, February 17 -- With the Israel settlements resolution pending in the UN Security Council, some of its non-Council member sponsors are moving to step back from the resolution, Council sources tell Inner City Press, mentioning among others Honduras, Cameroon, Kazakhstan and Panama.

“The US is asking them to drop off the settlements resolution,” a well placed source told Inner City Press exclusively on Thursday morning, “in exchange for aid packages.”

While the buzz on Wednesday was of a counteroffer of a Presidential Statement, a Quartet Statement in March and the Russia proposed Middle East trip by the Council. But while on a resolution members can simply abstain or vote no -- five members have the veto -- on a Presidential Statement members have to agree on every word, which they will not.

Cameroon voted against include a US sponsored clause on the protection of gays in a recent resolution on extra judicial executions in the UN Third Committee which it chairs -- then did not vote at all in the full General Assembly, apparently at the request of the US, as here.

Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who a number of Ambassadors have told Inner City Press does not support the Russia proposed Middle East trip by the Council, held a rare press stakeout on Thursday morning. But no questions about the Middle East trip, or settlements resolution, were allowed.

Ban's spokesman said questions had to be limited to what Ban read a statement about -- democracy movements in Egypt and Bahrain. Meanwhile the nitty gritty work at the UN goes on, of large countries buying off smaller ones with money. Watch this site.

Footnote: a Council source also said that the US opposition to the Russia proposed Middle East trip, announced by Susan Rice, has changed not only as a couteroffer, but because "Rice didn't know that Lavrov had spoken to Hillary Clinton." We'll see.

At UN's G-192, France's G-20 Called Untransparent Amid Dictator Flights, Cassez Charges, No Non-French Press

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 16, updated twice -- As France tries at the UN to pitch the upcoming G-20, there is more than a little grumbling, met by a lack of transparency.

Amid news of French ministers accepting vacations and transportation from dictators and their associates, French diplomats descend on the UN General Assembly and its president seeking, they say, the “legitimacy of the G-192” and of democracy.

Last week in the UN's North Lawn building, France's Permanent Representative Gerard Araud emerged from meeting with GA President Joseph Deiss of Switzerland, only to make snarky jokes to a Swiss diplomat sitting in the relocated Vienna cafe.

Araud not having had a Press availability in months, Inner City Press sent questions about the meeting to the spokesman for PGA Deiss, as well as to the French Mission to the UN's spokesmen.

PGA spokesman Jean Victor Nkolo replied that “The topic PGA Deiss discussed with the Permanent Representative of France to the UN was global governance and the French presidency of the G20, in the context of the coming informal plenary of the GA with French Minister Le Maire.”

The French Mission replied curtly that “As for the meeting with PGA Deiss, Ambassador Araud and him discussed global governance reform in the framework of the French presidency of the G20.”

In fact, the Swiss have complained about France not inviting them to the G-20, while inviting among other non-members Ethiopia and Equatorial Guinea -- some jokes, could a junket in Malabo be far behind?

PGA Deiss -- whose housing in New York is paid for by the Swiss government -- has complained about the illegitimacy of the G-20. But he by far the only one, and French Minister Le Maire's pitch on February 17, believed to focus on the rising prices of agricultural commodities, seems unlikely to give the legitimacy Nicolas Sarkozy says he wants. (Click here for a previous Inner City Press report on a Sarkozy visit to the UN, complete with press conference limited to reporters with French passports.)

While dismissed as unrelated to the G-20, Sarkozy and his ministers including Chrisine Lagarde are loudly beating the drum for Florence Cassez, convicted of kidnapping in Mexico. (Ms. Lagarde says she will bring up l'affaire Cassez at the upcoming meeting of G-20 finance ministers). France derides the Mexican legal system and ask that Ms. Cassez be sent back to Paris to serve out her sentence.

But what ever happened to the those returned from Chad to France from L'Arche de Zoe, also accused of kidnapping? The French Mission does not make it easy to get answers, even for Francophone non-French.

Why did France abstain from the Security Council's Iraq resolution -- most say “BNP” -- and what will happen next? What is France's thinking of deferring the International Criminal Court's prosecution of Sudan's Omar al Bashir?

And, as relates to “its” G-20, how will France pass the G-20 torch to Mexico 2012, while so deriding its legal system? Watch this site.

Update of 6:10 pm -- the French Mission has responded that while the l'Arche de Zoe staff were returned to France in December 2007, their sentences of hard labor being converted to imprisonment, on March 2008 Idriss Deby of Chad granted pardons and they were released.

Inner City Press asked, and asks, where are they now? But answers are appreciated - including by Mr. Le Maire about the G-20. Watch this site.

Update 2 - it is explained that Equatorial Guinea was invited as head of the AU, and Ethiopia for its role in NEPAD.

UN MIssion in Sudan Flew ICC Indictee Haroun on Special Copter, Contrary to UN Claim, "There Are No Regular Flights"

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, February 12 -- Not only did the UN provide air transportation to Ahmed Haroun, indicted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes in Darfur -- the UN also lied or misspoke about it, Inner City Press has found.

After first obtaining confirmation from the UN that it flew Haroun to a meeting in Abyei of nomadic tribes of the kind he organized in Darfur to burn villages down, Inner City Press repeatedly asked for the specifics of the flight, and if the UN had sought or received reimbursement from the Sudanese government (which, it must be noted, has its own air force which could have flown Haroun, just as it bombs Darfur and the border with Southern Sudan).

After first refusing to answer, the UN belated sent this answer:

From: UN Spokesperson - Do Not Reply [at] un.org
Date: Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 2:17 PM
Subject: Your question on Ahmed Haroun
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] InnerCityPress.com

In accordance with its mandate, the Mission provides the necessary support to those key players in their pursuit to find a peaceful solution. In this context, at the request of the Government and on a space available basis, UNMIS provides seats on its flights to Government officials on official business related to the peace process, without any financial implications to the Government and at no additional operational costs to the mission.

But on February 11 when Inner City Press finally had an opportunity to see and ask questions of the chief of the UN Mission in Sudan Haile Menkerios, he answered that there was no regular flights between Southern Kordofan State and Abyei, and that the UN had flown Haroun by special helicopter.

Menkerios told Inner City Press, “There is no direct flight to Abyei. We flew him there in order to take him... We flew him by helicopter to Abyei because there is no flight.”

That is to say, the answer provided by the UN in New York was false, apparently intentionally so, when it said “at no additional operational costs to the mission” and “on a space available basis.” There was only “space available” for ICC indictee Haroun because the UN made a special flight, which cannot have been “at no additional operational costs to the mission.”

While some argue, as Menkerios did on February 11, that it is a good or necessary trade off to provide transport and legitimacy to an indicted war criminal if it might forestall violence threatened (even if by the indictee himself), it seems clear that a public organization like the UN should at least be transparent about it.

The context here is that, apparently in exchange for the government of Omar al Bashir allowing the Southern Sudan referendum, the UN has stayed quiet as things have gotten worse for civilians in Darfur, where Haroun is accused of committing war crimes.

The UN has yet to answer if Menkerios checked with top UN lawyer Patricia O'Brien (who has refused to take questions from the Press) or with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon himself.

Note: ever since the Office of the Spokesperson for Ban Ki-moon provide the February 1 answer above, Inner City Press has repeatedly posed this follow up question in writing:

“On your answer that Ahmed Haroun, indicted by the ICC for war crimes in Darfur, flew on a pre-existing UN flight, in light of footage from interview in South Kordofan which Haroun arranged with UN plane on camera behind him, please state who else was on the flight with him, how frequent UN flights between Abyei and South Kordofan are and what size aircrafts are used.”

Other than Menkerios on February 12, there has been not answer from the UN. Watch this site.