UN Correspondents Association Gives Haiti Award Without Peacekeeper Shooting Questions Answered, Turkish Billionaire, UN's Censorship Alliance

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 16 -- Tonight the UN Correspondents Association, which has tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN, gives an award about Haiti without any questions have been answered about UN Peacekeepers shooting demonstrators there. (Instead, UNCA blocked Inner City Press from its Twitter feed; later its web site began to require a password to view it: no access.)

  This is the UN's Censorship Alliance, or an organization in decline, or both. This apparently is what happens when you try to censor, or when the censor in chief Giampaolo Pioli returns to helm the group turning in on itself.

  What's on the menu?

  Pioli, who rented one of his Manhattan apartments to Palitha Kohona, Sri Lanka's Ambassador who later got Pioli to agree, without the agreement of other UNCA board members, to screen a war crimes denial film in the UN, has a real estate mini-empire founded on pasta, some of it, at least initially, Turkish.

  Beyond the Italian tenor Andrea Bocelli and the Turkish billionaire Enver Yucel (presumably absent any explanation to the contrary chosen by UNCA's Italian president and Turkish first vice president), are UNCA's other awardees aware UNCA blocks access by the press? 

  One awardee is an UNCA board member, so one would assume he knows. Another has indicated it's not worth the time to cover UNCA and its actions, even trying to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN or otherwise censoring.

 But how about Hanan Alkiswany, Al-ghad Daily (Jordan), Francesco Semprini, La Stampa, Alice Su, Freelance, Marina Aizen, Revista Viva, Clarín (Agentina), Soma Basu, Down to Earth Magazine (India) Amy Yee, Freelance and, with regard to Herve Ladsous, below, Tatiana Mossot, France 24? Are they aware of their awarder's censorship and blocking of the Press? What do they think of it? Four of the above have been made aware, by Twitter. Now the site is behind a wall. Watch this site.

   This is the association with which the UN partners, giving it a big clubhouse even as the UN threw the News Agency of Nigeria out of its work space, claiming it was in short supply.

The claim is that UNCA represents those who cover the UN; it's at the $100 (and more) UNCA ball Secretary General Ban Ki-moon will speak, though almost certainly not about the UN's responsibility for cholera in Haiti, and shooting at protesters there. This is the UN's Censorship Alliance.

  Less than 100 correspondents of the thousands who cover the UN voted for its past and future president, Giampaolo Pioli - and that without competition, for his and the other top five spots.

   But now we ask in more detail: who controls the UNCA Twitter account with the right of censorship - just Pioli? The 15 members of the Executive Committee, or just the six officers listed below? The (less than) 100 voting members?

The six officers of UNCA, elected in each instance with less than 100 votes out of the thousands of journalists who cover the UN, consists of:

Giampaolo Pioli, Quotidiano Nazionale / La Nazione / Il Resto de Carlino / Quotidiano.net / El Giorno; Kahraman Haliscelik, TRT Turkish Radio & TV; Sylviane Zehil, L'Orient Le Jour; Ali Barada, An-Nahar / France 24; Bouchra Benyoussef, Maghreb Arab Press; and Seana Magee, Kyoto News Agency.

  The rest of the Executive Committee, who may have been involved -- we have been checking -- includes Reuters, Bloomberg, Al Arabiya, the US Broadcasting Board of Governors, and the Italian news agency ANSA, with votes out of 105:

Nabil Abi Saab, Al Hurra (US Broadcasting Board of Governors) 71 of 105

Talal Al Haj, Al Arabiya 51 of 105

Emoke Debiak, DPA 58 of 105

Sherwin Bryce-Peace, SABC 68 of 105

Zhenqui Gu, Xinhua 57 of 105

Melissa Kent, CBC 66 of 105

Michele Nichols, Reuters 58 of 105

Valeria Robecco, ANSA 65 of 105

Sangwon Yoon, Bloomberg 53 of 105

 For now we ask: is this an Italian thing? Now that Giampaolo Pioli is returning to head UNCA, after his previous attempts to use UNCA to censor articles about himself, does that explain this new Twitter block? We'll have more on this.

 After UN peacekeepers fired tear gas and a pistol at Haitians demonstration for democracy on December 12, on December 13 Inner City Press wrote to four agents of Italian tenor Andrea Bocelli, slated to receive an UNCA humanitarian award about Haiti this week, to request comment on the shooting and on cholera.

  No response has been received. But on December 15, UNCA blocked Inner City Press from the Twitter account it had used to announce giving awards to Bocelli (about Haiti) and also now to a Turkish billionaire, the selection process for which has not been explained.

  This is the UN's Censorship Alliance.

  Not only is the UN's role in bringing cholera to Haiti being ignored -- afterUN Peacekeepers under Herve Ladsous shot tear gas and pistols into crowds of protesters for democracy, Andrea Bocelli, his management Almud and his Andrea Bocelli Foundation have been asked for comment and have not provided any. 

   If he's accepting a UN-related award, shouldn't he? 

  The UN Censorship Alliance belated announced another awardee -- a for profit education magnate from Turkey whose firm Bahcesehir Ugur ismajority owned by the Carlyle Group. The president of UNCA is Italian (Bocelli), and the vice president is Turkish (Enver Yucel) - is this any coincidence? The latter chimes in to note scholarships by Enver Yucel, saying these should be encouraged and not discouraged. We note this, as offered to the former - but dispute that association with the UN's Censorship Alliance is "encouraging." 

The group, which has tried to get the investigative Press thrown out, has grandiosely (and hypocritically) issued statements on some other journalists jailed. Given its current officers, will it in this case? And if it doesn't, what does attending its grotesque ball really mean?

  After this question was posed, about arrest of journalists by Turkey and whether the "United Nations Correspondents Association" and its first vice president would stay silent, the response received involved defending the honor of the mysterious (or not so mysterious) selected billionaire, thusly:

"Having been very well known for his contributions to the cultural and educational life in Turkey and providing 25m USD of scholarship every year to the students in need, Enver Yücel was awarded with 'Outstanding Service Award' by The Turkish Grand National Assembly in 2008. He was also awarded with the 'Education Award' by the American Turkish Council in 2010. Mr. Yücel was accepted by His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI for his contributions to the alliance of civilizations."

  The proffered paragraph has been published in full. But where is the answer as how the Turkish billionaire and the Italian tenor were selected? And will this dubious UNCA, before its grotesque ball, issue a statement about censorship by Turkey?

  Posed otherwise if Federica Mogherini, until recently Italy's foreign minister, speaks out against these arrests of journalists in Turkey, will UNCA ostensibly under the leadership of Giampaolo Pioli do so? Or, as before, is the first vice president position the one to watch (out for)? Watch this site.

  On the same day, the sentencing of Barrett Brown is scheduled, and the US government is fighting to keep all filings confidential from the press and public. 

  When Ban Ki-moon was selected as UN Secretary General in 2006 it was an untransparent process, with secret ballots in the Security Council.  But at least there was competition. Now reportedly the top spot at the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs may be given without competition.

  This trend at the UN under Ban, including for example UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, has been enabled and concealed by what has become the UN's Censorship Alliance, formally the United Nations Correspondents Association.

  On November 14 this organization in decline formally announced a slate of six officers -- all without any competition at all. These six were "elected" on December 3. The top post was handed (back) to Giampaolo Pioli of Italy, who engaged in outright censorship while last using the position. 

   An Italian media, the only ones reporting Pioli's coronation, said that "Back to guide the Italian Association of correspondents accredited to the United Nations (UNCA). Giampaolo Pioli, the National Newspaper, and 'was elected president of the organization that owns the 250 journalists 'residents' at the UN that become about three thousand in the days of the General Assembly."Click here for that, then (Google?) translate.

  It's telling, the idea that UNCA "owns" journalists, particularly all resident correspondents -- that is false. Also, well under fifty percent of that false 250 number voted. And what is that percentage, of 3000? The censor does not have the mandate that Dujarric UNwisely publicly claimed, for the UN's Censorship Alliance. Will correction of any of this be sought? We'll see.

  That Andrea Bocelli is UNCA's awardee -- Pioli was head of the committee -- was revealed here: "The Made in Italy arrives in America with a partnership against violence against women. The more than 600 distinguished guests will receive the bracelet Tatu, the new brand led by Manuel Giannini, Luca Zafarana Benedettelli and Barbara... This year the United Nations Correspondents Association will award the Master Andrea Bocelli and his wife Veronica Berti with UNCA Global Citizens of the Year for the devotion of the Andrea Bocelli Foundation towards people in difficulty due to illness, disability, poverty and ' social exclusion and for the 'special commitment in favor of Haiti. Sting and Trudie Styler will be rewarded for the work as co -fondatori Rainforest Foundation Fund."

  In fairness to Bocelli, it is pointed out he has worked on the Haiti issue. We'll add a link here - his foundation (which when searched for the word "cholera" yields "no result found - Sorry, we were unable to find any results that matched your search terms.") So what about the UN bringing cholera? What about the group, the UN Censorship Alliance, that's using him and others to prop themselves up?

   UN scribes and censors citing Haiti without reference to the UN having brought cholera there and killed over 8000 Haitians and hidden from court papers since, providing no restitution to families who lose their breadwinner. In a dinner for which they are hawking "discounted" tickets for $100. This is telling.

  After his censorship push in 2012, Pioli was rarely seen at the UN; even when back, pressuring people to vote for him, he did not ask questions in any noon briefing or stakeout (though he did appear in evening wear with his ubiquitous glass of wine, winning the title Party-Boy Pioli.)

  But there is nothing funny about it. Pioli, who had rented one of his Manhattan apartments to Palitha Kohona, Sri Lanka's ambassador, unilaterally granted Kohona's request to use UNCA to screen inside the UN a government film denying war crimes, and sat on a panel with only Kohona and his deputy Shavendra Silva, who is still in the news. 

   When Inner City Press reported, after his screening panel with Silva and Kohona, that Kohona has been his tenants in the past, Pioli demanded that reporting of these facts must be removed from the Internet (compilation of audio here) or he would use UNCA to try to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. There followed a kangaroo court proceeding, which has resulted in Inner City Press receiving death threats from Sinhalese extremists in Sri Lanka. 

 Voice of America, then on the UNCA Executive Board, wrote a letter to the UN asking that Inner City Press' accreditation be reviewed; a Freedom of Information Act request showed that VOA said it had the support of Agence France Presse and Reuters (which they tried to censor its anti-Press complaint to the UN by claiming it is copyrighted, here.)

  Now for 2015 Pioli returns. Reuters has on the board its current correspondent though no longer its retired UN bureau chief. Agence France Presse, which had been off the UNCA Executive Committee after having used it to complain about Press reporting on Herve Ladsous, sought to return but was not able. 

 Only News Agency of Nigeria, which ran in 2013, did not run this time: its UN office space was taken away in 2014, ostensibly due to scarcity when UNCA is given a big room that sits empty and locked most of the time. This is the UN's Censorship Alliance -- now again with a chieftain with a documented history of demanding censorship.

  This is the face of UN decay, sanitized if at all by the desire of some to go to parties and balls, free lunch, or a backdoor way into the UN, like Kohona requested and got unilaterally from his former landlord, without written polling of other board members, to screen inside the UN a government rebuttal to a firm that was not shown in the UN. And then a campaign for censorship, triggering death threats. This is the face of UN decay: unsanitizable.

Silva, Pioli and his former tenant, Kohona, censorship demand not shown (but sample audio links here)


Ready for censorship, raised wine glass, Haiti cholera not shown

 As to the Secretary General's race, a November reform letter's signatories include Avaaz, Amnesty International, CIVICUS, Equality Now, FEMNET, Forum-Asia, Global Policy Forum, Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy, Social Watch, Third World Network, Women’s Environment and Development Organization, the World Federalist Movement-Institute for Global Policy and the World Federation of United Nations Associations.

The new Free UN Coalition for Access, formed in response to the decline in media access and transparency generally under Ban Ki-moon, heartily agrees with the need to reform and improve the Secretary General selection process. 

 Candidates so far including Helen Clark of UNDP, who virtually never takes press questions while in New York, the headquarters of UNDP, amiduntransparent layoffs, and Irina Bokova, the Director General of UNESCO, an agency which on November 3 led an event about journalists at which not a single question from a journalist was taken. There's also among others, in this SG race we will closely cover, a Latina trio, Kristalina Georgieva, Miroslav Lajcak, Kevin Rudd, Dalia Grybauskaite, Vuk Jeremic, Danilo Turk, Jan Kubis - that is, unlike the UN's Censorship Alliance, at least there is some competition.

Tellingly, after September's General Assembly debate week, UNCA's“complaints” to Ban's Secretariat are to ask for fewer events, for a private wi-fi network for in-house UN journalist and not those who cover to cover the week, and a booklet co-signed with Ban.

UN Censorship Alliance lunch, Feb 11, 2014 including Pam Falk and continuing Kahraman Haliscelik, Sylviane Zehil, Erol Avdovic, Bouchra Benyoussef, Seana Magee, Nabil Abi Saab, Evelyn Leopold, Talal Al-Haj, Melissa Kent, Michelle Nichols, Sangwon Yoon, Valeria Robecco, Sherwin Bryce-Pease, Zhenqiu Gu UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe

Meanwhile, UNCA makes no mention of restrictions of access that week such as the French mission ordering all non-French journalists out of the UN's Press Briefing Room, and UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous physically blocking the Press' camera, Vine here.

  The new Free UN Coalition for Access has raised these issues, publicly, in fliers and in the UN's Press Briefing Room. Tellingly, the UN Secretariat appears ready to limit its "interlocutors" on media access to the very insiders at UNCA who have overseen and promoted the decline in access. 

 Pioli, while strong-arming in his fashion for votes, said no one could simultaneously be a member of the Free UN Coalition for Access and "his" UNCA. Meanwhile, while UNCA tries to demand that it always gets the first question at press conferences, that this is somehow a precedent, at the December 2, 2014, Program of Work press conference by the Chadian UN Security Council President, the first question explicitly went to the Free UN Coalition for Access. That's it: no precedent, no more, particularly with the return of the Censor in chief.

  An analogy that some have now made: it's one thing that Kurt Waldheim was UN Secretary General once. But what would it say about the UN if he were to return, after a haitus, for more time atop the organization? We'll see.

  Ban Ki-moon, meanwhile, is appearing in polls as running for president of his native South Korea in 2017. Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson about it, who said Ban is “currently” focused on his current job. This has been repeated in South Korea, here. The UN is being used; the UN is in further decline; there are moves afoot to stem the tide of decay. Watch this site.

   

On Haiti Cholera, UN Won't Confirm to Inner City Press that US Attended Court Hearing For It, Pressing Impunity

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 23, with a song -- On the UN having brought cholera to Haiti, the UN Secretariat of Ban Ki-moon would not even "appear" at the court hearing, nor confirm that it or even the United States government on its behalf would attend. Video here.

   Even as U.S. Attorney Ellen Blain argued to U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken that the UN "is absolutely immune absent an express waiver,” UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq told Inner City Press he wasn't sure the US would attend. Video here. One awaited more from state media Voice of America.

 Agence France Presse reported that "If Oetken allows the UN to be sued in New York, it could open the flood gates to a slew of other private parties suing the UN all over the world," presumably attributable to Blain.

  Bloomberg News reported that "a group of Haitians and Haitian-Americans earlier this month sued the UN and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon for negligence" - but the cases were filed long before this month, and UN Peacekeeping's Edmond Mulet was also personally named.

  Reuters reported that "attempts to serve the United Nations with the lawsuit have been rebuffed" -- but in the second case filed in Brooklyn the lawyers for the plaintiffs, of which there are one thousand more this month, say they served legal papers on Secretary General Ban Ki-moon as he entered the Asia Society.

 Inner City Press on October 22 asked Ban's Deputy Spokesperson Haq  if Ban received the papers, and if the UN would be appearing in court. Haq said "I don't feel a need to get into that," video here. When Pressed, he said the UN will not be appearing in court, apparently in either case. 

 Earlier in the October 22 UN noon briefing, a question about UN fundraising for Haiti gave Haq the opportunity to say how much from his perspective is being done, with the World Bank's Kim Yong Kim and Pedro Medrano. But what about accountability?

  On October 24, a telling charade of how the UN works, or doesn't, is now set to take place inside the UN. UNCA, the UN's Censorship Alliance, will faux host those suing Ban Ki-moon, after themselves promoting, protecting and having provided photo ops to Ban Ki-moon, and seeking to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN.

  One continues to wonders why those involved in this event and broadcasters' film didn't go to the UN's Press Briefing Room, sponsored by a member state like St. Vincents which spoke on the issue, as covered here by Inner City Press. The St. Vincent's speaker is reachable online here. That way it would include all journalists at the UN, not just that subset which pays money to UNCA. Also, that way it would be in UNTV webcast, viewable around the world including in Haiti. Instead, this way it is privatized to censors. We'll have more on this.

  At the time UNCA announced this event, only to those who pay it money, there will also be a Security Council meeting about Ukraine, including cluster bomb used by the government. We'll have more on this, too.

  As Inner City Press was the first to ask about at the UN and report on, US Federal Judge J. Paul Oetken has scheduled oral arguments for October 23 in Federal Court in Manhattan on the first case against the UN, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and UN Peacekeeping's Edmond Mulet, whose recently on the record claims about cholera the UN has since asked not be aired, see below.

  In the second case against Ban Ki-moon and the UN, filed in Federal Court in Brooklyn, more than 1,100 more plaintiffs have just been added, bringing the total in that case to 2,600. The lawyers in the second case affirm that Ban Ki-moon was served the court papers as he entered the Asia Society on Park Avenue in Manhattan -- the UN, which long evaded service by the lawyers in the first case, denies service in the second -- and now the UN has taken to publicly contradicting itself, then trying to censor.

 After Edmond Mulet was quoted -- told France 24 in an on-the-record interview -- that the Nepali peacekeepers were screened for cholera before the UN sent them to Haiti, Inner City Press on October 10 first asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq, who had previously made this claim, if it is in fact true. October 10 video here.

  Haq on October 10 didn't directly deny it - but MINUSTAH spokesman Vincenzo Pugliese when asked about it by Jonathan Katzdirectly denied Mulet's claim of screening. 

  Then on October 13 Inner City Press asked Haq about this direct divergence in UN statements, between Mulet and MINUSTAH's Pugliese. To this, Haq said that given pending litigation he did not want to "prejudice" the case by saying anything. Video here and embedded below. 

  The France 24 report noted that "shortly after the interview, Mulet’s press officer asked FRANCE 24 not to air the recording." On October 14 France 24's Jessica Le Masurier read out the specifics of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations' spokesman's email asking France 24 to confirm that the Haiti portion of the interview would not be aired. Video here and embedded below.

  Inner City Press asked Haq if this attempt at censorship is appropriate, if it is now UN practice. Haq said that his Peacekeeping colleagues thought Mulet about "be more secure" if he re-did the interview at some later date after being prepared. Haq encouraged France 24 to give Mulet this do-over.

  On behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access which has opposed this type of selective or privatized UN communication, particularly by UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous, Inner City Press asked that Mulet now do a real press conference for all correspondents, to answer questions.

  Haq laughed and said all France 24 was asking for was an interview. But that's not the only request.

  In fact, it was the big-wigs of the UN's Censorship Alliance who sought to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN, initially at the behalf of UN Peacekeeping's Ladsous and the Sri Lankan government, and have not reformed since. Here is current UNCA president's on the record "presentation" to Inner City Press and FUNCA, audio here, andhere, and here. They market themselves as a cheap way to get into the UN -- as they marketed or sold themselves to the Sri Lankan government. Why aren't those trying to achieve change at the UN more circumspect? Apparently the UN causes this (bad) reaction.

  The Free UN Coalition for Access has identified and is opposing a range of censorship at and by the UN. Sample Vine here.

  Haq on October 13 insisted this was not censorship, only that UN Peacekeeping (who's communications chief under Herve Ladsous is Nick Birnback) has understood the interview with Mulet to be about Mali and the Central African Republic and then offered Mulet on Haiti after he had been "prepared."

  But, Inner City Press pointed out, Mulet was the head of MINUSTAH when cholera entered Haiti - isn't that preparation enough?

  Haq said Inner City Press since it has been in journalist should understand what being prepared for an interview is. Video here.

  Frankly, it sounds perilously close to being coached. 

  Haq went on to claim that the France 24 reporter afterward indicated awareness or even agreement that the interview was supposed to be limited to Mali and CAR. We'll await some correction of this: peacekeeping, as a topic, obviously includes the UN peacekeeping mission in Haiti which Mulet headed. We'll have more on this.

  The UN still has not answered Inner City Press' repeated question whether the UN will be sending any representative to the October 23 oral argument in Federal court on the topic. This is impunity.

  On October 9, Ban Ki-moon gave a speech at the World Bank about water and cholera in Haiti, without mentioning the question of how cholera was brought to Haiti, much less the litigation against himself.

  So at the October 9 UN noon briefing Inner City Press asked Ban's Associate Spokesperson Vannina Maestracci if Ban's statement that his "heart ached at the losses that so many thousands of people have had to suffer and die" was a reference to the UN bringing cholera to Haiti.Video here.

  Maestracci responded about the UN trying to raise money for sanitation in Haiti. Inner City Press waited to re-phrase what it had asked, about accountability. Maestracci said "I can see that you really don't care about my answer, you just want to ask another question."

  But it was the same question, about accountability and the rule of law. And neither it nor the factual question of whether the UN will sent anyone to the October 23 court hearing has been answered. 

 On October 8, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric if the UN, which has dodged service of the legal papers, will at least appear in court. Video here. Dujarric said the UN's legal position remains unchanged. Maestracci repeated this on October 9. One might assume it means the UN will ignore the court hearing. But that would be an assumption.

  Also on October 8, and also on UN impunity, Inner City Press asked spokesman Dujarric about a detailed report of rapes in Haiti by UN peacekeepers, for which the UN also refused to waive immunity. Dujarric said he hadn't heard of it, but would be happy to look for it -- it is here. We'll see. 

  Back on August 28, the plaintiffs in the Haiti cholera case against the UN, Ban and Mulet filed their sur-reply, which Inner City Press put online here.

 On September 17, the Institute for Justice & Democracy in Haiti held a conference call about the status and background of the case. IJDH's executive director Brian Concannon said that cholera was introduced to Haiti in October 2010 by UN peacekeepers.

   Concannon said the UN waited 15 months then called the claims "not receivable" -- the same phrase the UN used as to whistleblowers in a belated answer it sent to Inner City Press during the IJDH call, click here for that.

  He described serving the legal papers on Ban Ki-moon and Edmond Mulet, the head of the MINUSTAH mission (and, also on September 17, briefing the Security Council about peacekeepers giving over their weapons, vehicles and even uniforms to the Jabhat al Nusra rebels in the Golan Heights).

  IJDH Legal Fellow Shannon Jonsson described how the UN failed to provide any out of court process to consider claims, in violation of two treaties (and the UN's Status of Forces Agreement.)

  Finally, IJDH Staff Attorney Beatrice Lindstrom described broader advocacy , in Congress and among UN member states, to get justice for those harmed by the UN's introduction of cholera to Haiti. She quoted Martin Luther King that the arc of history is long but bends toward justice. There will be an upcoming demonstration at the UN's logistics base in Haiti. We'll have more on this. 

   The US' 15-page letter cited in support of UN immunity the case of Cynthia Brzak, regarding sexual harassment by UNHCR's Ruud Lubber, and a letter to US Ambassador Samantha Power from the UN's counsel Miguel de Serpa Soares, which Inner City Press is putting online, here.  The US letter to the court is here.

  Beyond supporting Secretary General Ban Ki-moon dodging the service of legal papers -- on which Ban's spokespeople have themselves dodged and more -- the US letter cited the UN - Haiti program on cholera on which the UN's Pedro Medrano has still to take Press questions.

  The US letter says, "The General Convention and the SOFA provide that any dispute between a state party and the UN shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice, see General Convention, art. VIII, § 30; SOFA art. VIII, § 58; and the SOFA provides that any dispute between MINUTSAH [sic] and the Government of Haiti shall be submitted to arbitration, see SOFA art. VIII, § 57."

  So much for "we the peoples."

  The sur-reply filed August 28 states that "under the doctrine of unclean hands, the request for immunity should be refused.  The Government fails to present any response to this argument."

   Back on May 15, opposition to the US' first iteration of its position was filed, with amicus support from a bevy of law professors, an ex judge of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and former UN human rights rapporteur on torture Manfred Nowak.

  Nowak said, "the UN needs to understand that immunity cannot mean impunity. If it refuses to provide people alleging harm with a path to justice, courts will refuse to uphold its immunity.”

   But then as now, the UN under  Ban Ki-moon wouldn't even bring its envoy on cholera Pedro Medrano forward for questioning. Inner City Press has asked, for example on April 21:

Inner City Press: … seemed to quote Mr. Medrano as predicting in advance that this panel he would be on with the Government may provide assistance, but he said, like, the word “compensation” won’t be used. So I wanted to know, is that a UN position? Is it his prediction of that the Government doesn’t want the word “compensation” used? And is there some way that we can have by video or otherwise, a kind of, some kind of presentation by Mr. Medrano?

Spokesman Stephane Dujarric: Sure, on Haiti, over the weekend, the terms of reference on this high level committee on cholera, which would be a UN and Government of Haiti committee, have been officially agreed on. And the aim is really for the joint effort of to fight cholera between the UN and the Government of Haiti. The Committee aims at further improving the coordination response to the epidemic and obviously we expect to have an official announcement in the next couple of days. But this is a very important… the establishment of this committee is a very important one in terms of our efforts, and most importantly the Government of Haiti’s efforts, to address not only cholera but also the associated water and sanitation issues....

Inner City Press: Just on Medrano, I will like to say again if you could do a briefing in this room it would help.

Spokesman Dujarric: I hear you.

  But did he? There has still been no briefing. Members of the US Congress have written to State Department diplomats about this case in the past. Based on this letter, will they do so again?

   As the first US answer was released, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was partying with in-house scribes, most of whom never pursued this most outrageous case of UN impunity, or even asked if Ban Ki-moon like a scoff law was hiding from the process server.

 Now on July 8, these same scribes are offering symbiosis, bread andcircuses, or pretzels and beer, in the large room Ban's UN gives them, usually sitting empty even as the News Agency of Nigeria was evicted due to lack of space. This is today's UN.

  Inner City Press, having twice asked asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokespeople to confirm Ban has been served with legal papers,on February 28 asked about Gallon's report:

Inner City Press: on Haiti, there is a recent report just out by Gustavo Gallón, who is the UN independent expert on human rights in Haiti, and he says, as a direct quote, that full compensation for the damage suffered by the Haitian people by the introduction of cholera to the island should be paid as quickly as possible. So, I understand that he is an independent expert and doesn’t work for the Secretariat; at the same time, it’s a respected position and a mandate formed by the Human Rights Council, so I wanted to know what in the face of this sort of either intra-UN or intra-UN system critique, what is the response of the United Nations?

Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: Well, simply, that you answered the question yourself. The Human Rights Council-appointed special rapporteurs and other special advisers of various kinds are independent and they are not appointed by the Secretary-General and I don’t have anything further to say on that.

Inner City Press: But does the UN system expect, for example, countries when when they are subject to these type recommendations or criticism by an independent experts of the Human Rights Council to respond in some way to them to say: we agree or disagree, or that is why we disagree?

Spokesperson Nesirky: That’s for each individual Member State to decide.

Ah, leadership. Meanwhile, while the UN has refused to answer if Ban was served the court papers, beyond this song, Inner City Press will now publish the sad litany of attempts to serve what could be described as a scoff law:

On December 19, 2013, at approximately 3:11 PM, a paralegal for Plaintiffs’ counsel contacted OLA by telephone and spoke to a woman who identified herself as “Mae” (who, upon information and belief, is Mae Arkoncel, Assistant to the UN Legal Counsel). Mae confirmed that OLA had received the faxed documents from Plaintiffs’ counsel and stated that the UN was currently 'reviewing the documents'...

Service of process by delivery to Defendant Ban personally through the use of a private process server... was attempted again on January 20, 2014, at approximately 10:05 AM, at Defendant Ban’s residence located at [redacted by ICP]. A security guard informed the server that Defendant Ban was not present, and refused to open the door or accept service.

8. Service of process by delivery to Defendant Ban personally through the use of a private process server... was perfected on January 20, 2014, at approximately 2:00 PM, at Defendant’s Ban residence located at [redacted by ICP]. A male who identified himself as 'security' answered the door and informed the server that he would not accept service and that Defendant Ban was not present. The server affixed the process to the front door with masking tape and informed the security guard that he was doing so with the intention that the documents would be forwarded to Defendant Ban. The server then mailed another copy of the process to Defendant Ban at the same address.

That's called "nail-and-mail," and it's what's used with a fugitive or scoff law. Is that what this UN has become? It's the basis of this lyric, can't serve the papers up in the townhouse, song here. Watch this site.

   

As Inner City Press Questions Ban Ki-moon on Gaza (and Haiti Cholear), UNCA & Reuters Trolling Resumes, UN Censorship Alliance

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 3 -- Here is how the UN works, or doesn't: on July 27, after Inner City Press in the days before had questioned Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's transparency and independence on Gaza, accountability on Haiti, and UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous' refusal to answer questions about his links and DPKO's failures in Africa, the UN's Censorship Alliance decided to fight back.

  A troll social media account linked to the UN Correspondents Association, about which the Free UN Coalition for Access had notified not only UNCA and its head Pamela Falk but also Reuters, whose UN bureau chief tried to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN then lobbied Google (here) to block his leaked “for the record” complaint from Google's search, revived on July 27, attacking Inner City Press' web domain.

  The UN itself was notified of this account, since it continues to partner with UNCA as its UN Censorship Alliance, setting aside first questions and giving it a large, usually unused room even as the UN evicted the News Agency of Nigeria from its workspace at the UN citing lack of space. 

  This same troll social media account has promoted the current UN spokesman, to whom the Reuters bureau chief's complaint to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN was directed.

  Now that same spokesman defends Ban Ki-moon, for example cutting off Inner City Press' August 1 question to UN Department of Political Affairs chief Jeffrey Feltman by claiming it was already answered. 

  His office has in the past censored from the UN's transcripts even the name of the Free UN Coalition for Access, which Inner City Press co-founded after members of UNCA's Executive Committee including for example Voice of America (Freedom of Information Act obtained document here), Agence France Presse (document here),Bloomberg and Reuters, sought to get it thrown out.

What's telling about these revivals of UNCA's trolls social media campaign is it is tied to when the UN is under attack. That's why they call it the UN's Censorship Alliance.

  Now the big room the UN gives them is closed from August 1 to August 19, while its glassed in bulletin board now has an advertisement by one of its UNCA members to buy a used car for over $7,000. Click here. Would you buy a used car from these people? 

  And what of the UN's previous argument against FUNCA's substantive fliers, that they had to be approved by the UN? Are UNCA's used car sales approved by Ban Ki-moon? Are its anonymous trolling social media accounts? Watch this site.