UNITED NATIONS, September 25 -- With the Pope scheduled to be in the UN for a few hours on September 25, workers in the UN Cafeteria right next to where he will speak were told they cannot as before eat in the regular cafeteria but must go to a side room.
“It's discrimination,” an outraged food worker exclusively told Inner City Press. But it is the type of hypocrisy for which today's UN increasingly known, from equating peacekeepers' rapes with “R&R” to irregularities and a lack of transparency in who is let into his the Pope's first event in the UN.
At the UN, transparency and access are in decline, due to collusion. Despite talk of the upcoming Papal visit and UN General Assembly week having Facebook and Instagram, virtual reality (photo here) and even Ban Ki-moon on Snapchat, things threaten to get worse. Inner City Press asked the UN whopicked the scribes allowed into the Pope's meeting with UN staff without being in the lottery, including the UN-friendly CBS and FP, and the UN Spokesman said he doesn't know. The immaculate selection?
Neither saw fit to explain how they wrangled their insider's spot, and so we are compelled to report: the CBS correspondent, when she asks questions at the UN, says things like “What are we” - conflating herself WITH the UN -- about such and such a problem.
FP is less blatant, but became the UN's go-to guy to present its defense of the indefensible, for example after the UN covered up the killing, by Afghan forces, of UN security officer Louis Maxwell. Neither has ever reported, for example, on UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, no only when he openly refused to answer Press questions, but more recently when he linked UN rapes to “R&R.” Is THIS why they got the insiders' spots? We waited to hear, we asked and there was no answer. We'll have more on this.
For the Pope's visit to the UN on September 25, as everywhere else, there is more demand than there is space, so the UN purported to hold a lottery for journalists. The Free UN Coalition for Access went to observe the lottery, and was appreciative for that -- but found that the old UN Correspondents Association had already grabbed six spots. Then it grabbed more.
With no transparency, UNCA (now the UN's Censorship Alliance) president Giampaolo Pioli of Quotidiano Nazionale informed only those who pay UNCA money that six places at the Pope's first meeting in the UN, with UN staff, would be doled out to, among others, his predecessor from CBS, and the ex-Washington Post, now Foreign Policy correspondent. Who decided this? On what authority? Perhaps these individuals, with their long pedigrees, will explain publicly, as they should.
Then during the (faux) lottery, which Inner City Press for FUNCA on less than an hour's notice was invited to observe, Pioli's colleague Valeria Robecco, formerly of Quotidiano Nazionale and now ANSA, first said Inner City Press, when its name was drawn, was not really a photographer. Inner City Press said, take a vote. But it was called a decision that needed consensus, and Robecco broke it.
But when minutes later there was no winner for the final staff meeting slot, it was proposed that Robecco be given it. Inner City Press walked out - volare - so clearly there was no consensus. But hours later, hers was the first name announced by the UN as attending the Pope's meeting with staff. The UN's announcements never named CBS or Foreign Policy, much less the correspondents' names: a total lack of transparency, a faux lottery, a fix.
And so on September 24 Inner City Press from FUNCA asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric how picked these people, and how. Video here. He said he has no idea. UNtransparent: the immaculate selection? Or not so immaculate: one of them is already bragging online that they'll be there. But how? Though what process?
There was another UNCA board member with more than one entry, but they still "won" a spot. Meanwhile others not liked or known by the two UNCA observers were bounced on various pretexts. FUNCA stood up for one less than tech-savvy applicant.
UNCA Executive Committee member Robecco told multi-media Inner City Press, You are not a photographer and said it shouldn't get a spot to cover the Pope's meeting with UN staff - then took a spot for herself.
This is today's UN - but Inner City Press will nevertheless have Papal coverage on September 25, no thanks to UNCA. Maybe even, like Ban Ki-moon, on Snapchat (InnerCityPress), certainly Periscope.
Later on September 22, there was an again-appreciated media walk-through (Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access Periscoped some of it, for wider benefit, while trying to not portray either the speaker or listeners, never easy). Among the upshots is that the General Assembly UNTV stakeout is being set up in a location of the third floor that few speakers would or even could find and go to. Media access, FUNCA says, is in decline: due to collusion. We'll have more on this.
Up to September 11, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has not held a Q&A press conference at the UN since December 17, 2014 -- more than eight months ago, after at least a monthly press conference was promised.
Instead, Ban and his team dole out quotes to favored media, apparently conditioned on positive or at least not negative coverage. Ban's UN partners with the old UN Correspondents Association, UNCA, whose leadership is focused on getting privileged access for itself, and effectively censoring others.
On September 11, Inner City Press for the new Free UN Coalition for Access -- yes, FUNCA -- challenged the UN's attempt to Ban smartphone broadcasting in the upcoming UN General Assembly, and sought confirmation that no country to expel journalists it doesn't like from the UN Press Briefing Room, as France did last year.
UNCA's past and current head then asked, if country do so, could the (closed) briefing be broadcast out? Of course, one couldn't then ask questions. But this UNCA leadership is not about the right to ask questions - if did nothing, for example, when UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous began picking which media he would respond answers, saying "I don't respond to you Mister," and the UN Spokesperson's Office colluded in this.
The main point of UNCA, now the UN's Censorship Alliance, was for it to be able to send a pooler / scribe to photo-ops. FUNCA said it has no objection, as long as the supposed "pool" is shared with all journalists, not just those who pay UNCA money and prop up censorship. Let the UN / MALU run it. We'll see.
Prospectively, FUNCA asked the UN to set up a web page to upload answers about access, where people can go, so it can be shown to Security in real time, on phones.
For the upcoming UNGA Week, the Free UN Coalition for Access to be pushing the envelope, seeing more information, more access, more accountability. Watch this site.
On September 9 Ban's Spokesperson's Office sent out a photo of Ban with New York 1, talking about the Pope's visit. Ban's deputy told a rarely seen Italian journalist, the landlord president of the old UN Correspondents Association (now known at the UN's Censorship Alliance), that the Nobel Peace Prize should go to... the Italian Navy. There were and are things to be reported, but they are not. Yet.
On September 10, Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access asked Ban's Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here, transcript here:
Inner City Press: I’ve noticed in recent days that the Secretary-General has done a series of interviews, with the Guardian, ITV, maybe New York 1. So one thing I wanted to know is, I went to the web page, and I looked at press conferences, and at least… Q&A press conferences in this room. And the last one that I find is from December 2014. So is that the case? Is that… is there something…?
Spokesman Dujarric: Well, I mean, since you are in this room every time there’s an event, I think you probably have a pretty good record…
Inner City Press: How would you explain this, eight months, when it was said that he would do it every month?
Spokesman: I… I think the Secretary-General, whenever he travels, has had press engagements. I mean, he is the Secretary-General of the United Nations. So he does engage with the press globally wherever he goes. We also organize one-on-one interviews throughout the year. He also does press stakeouts when we feel there’s a need and when he feels there is a need to do a stakeout. There was one not too long ago. And he does press conferences. There are an army of tools in our toolbox in order for the Secretary-General to engage in the press. A press conference in this room is just one of many.
Inner City Press: And this is the… kind of procedural question is other… you know, I’m thinking of John Kerry, but I’m sure this is true in other countries as well. One, they do globally and in their headquarters. But they also… the spokespeople office for these people put out… they’ll say, this interview took place and will air then. Sometimes they’ll put out transcripts. How are we to know what was said?
Spokesman: You could also spend more days at the State Department. We all work differently.
Inner City Press: Right. No, but what’s your reasoning for doing it — given there’s a whole world interested in what Ban Ki-moon says, why not make it more available?
Spokesman: I think the Secretary-General is extremely available to the press.
Inner City Press / FUNCA: I disagree respectfully.
Spokesman Dujarric: There you go. I disagree respectfully as well.
The UN props up as its "adversary" a group it buys off with faux access.
The Free UN Coalition for Access takes a different approach: UN officials like Peacekeeping Chief Herve Ladsous should take questions from the media which cover peacekeeping. He should have to answer about the peacekeeper rape scandal.
Given these trends, discontent within UNCA rank and file led to the release of these [annotated] minutes of a July 13 meeting of UNCA, now the UN's Censorship Alliance:
"Giampaolo Pioli (Chair), more proxies than present
"Giampaolo announced dinner at Cipriani Wall Street, "special discount price of $100." Site was selected because of SG’s schedule and space availability. Honorees include Prince Albert of Monaco and most likely Leonardo DiCaprio whose final confirmation is expected in August. UNCA members were encouraged to apply for the media awards [No conflict there, of course].
Security arrangements for the upcoming UNGA: Green Ps will not have to wait in the same line as those seeking accreditation... High speed internet issues: a possible solution is having a separate access code for media center reporters in the NLB. [UNCA seems most concerned with obtained more privileges than other journalists.]
UNSC stakeout: No access to the council when meetings are not being held, but reporters can move there before meetings once UN TV sets up. [UNCA "leaders" have tried to limit other journalists like this before: FUNCA resists it.]
Reporters will be able to pay for high speed internet and access to other Time Warner channels for a fee. Anyone who wants to subscribe to TW needs to inform Melanie by email in order to provide a list to the installers. [So UNCA is a middleman, purportedly for all journalists, for corporate Time Warner?]
Review of procedures for holding UNCA press conferences: It was decided that UNCA will be more selective in hosting press conferences and will focus on subjects and speakers that are a big draw. Meeting adjourned at 5:00 pm. It was followed by a wine and cheese reception."
The invitation, which even most UNCA members ignored, said "At the end of the meeting, we will have a glass of wine to wish everyone a good summer vacation."
Whether the Hamptons or the Amalfi coast, when UN press access is in decline, it time to share a glass of wine.
2015 opened with Ladsous openly refused to answer Press questions, video here.
"Leadership" of the UN Correspondents Association, far from questioning this, took advantage by grabbing two qeustions, just as UNCA demands and most often wastes side-aside first questions at UN press conferences.
The following day, January 23, there was a UN Security Council meeting about human rights and UN Peacekeeping missions, including MONUSCO. But the meeting was closed to the public and press. Inner City Press for theFree UN Coalition for Access asked and asks, Why? The old United Nations Correspondents Association, on the other hand, not only doesn't protest such closures - it scheduled its only "faux fighters" meeting for exactly the same time.
This decayed UN Correspondents Association, run by president Giampaolo Pioli who has himself demanded censorship, held its annual meeting on January 23, and even by its own account, not a work about access problems or lack of information.
Here was the agenda, annotated, now with "minutes" as provided by disgruntled members who say the UN "makes" them pay UNCA, added in italics:
Space, "including journalists on the waiting list for office space" -- on January 23, UNCA's "leadership" said that "that after meeting with DPI working space on the 4th floor willbecome available to 6-8 journalists beginning in February."
Even or especially if this representation is true, there is a problem: UNCA is essentially selling or trying to sell these UN spaces. UNCA tells correspondents that if they pay money to join it, they will be helped in getting office space from the UN. Is this proper?
Less than a quarter of those UNCA took $66,485 from attended this meeting; numerous Executive Committee members did not attend. Pioli bragged of "a larger number of sponsors," but the minutes did not list them. There'll be more on this.
Meanwhile, UNCA leadership is proposal to downgrade some with "white" UN passed to "green," requiring them to go through a separate entrance and metal detectors. UNCA is responsible for Banning many from entry into the UN.
Now UNCA brags that HRW will use or be used by its space. This is shameful - and we'll have more on it. Pioli sat in on the January 26 noon briefing, apparently to see if any of these outrages would be aired, typically asking no questions at all.
"Social media" - despite Ban's UN purporting to use UNCA to reach all journalists at the UN, the Press is blocked from UNCA's moribund social media presence. Is this attributable to all 15 Executive Committee members? Just Pioli?
On January 23, Pioli said that the Reuters correspondent who grabbed two questions after Ladsous said "I don't respond to your questions Mister" is in charge of UNCA tweets.
Similar to the claim that UN labor issues are handed in happy one-way meeting with staff during country visits, it is with this that it seems the UN will partner to say it has listened on media access issues.
After the September 2014 General Assembly week UNCA "minutes" and partial list of grievances were provided to FUNCA by one of UNCA's many disgruntled members. They are laughable. The ejection of non-French journalists from the UN Briefing Room was not mentioned, nor the physical blocking of filming.
Instead, UNCA complains that there is too much news during the General Assembly -- they want fewer side events -- and apparently too many journalists at the UN: they want a private wi-fi password leaving the current open wi-fi only for "guests and others."
Tellingly, one of the UNCA proposals is for a booklet co-signed by Ban Ki-moon and UNCA.
With this bogus list and presumably seeking that booklet, they say that the UN's Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit proposes to meet only with their Executive Committee. This is akin to a fake wrestling match, in which the two sides pretend to fight, for an audience.
The Free UN Coalition for Access has told MALU, but repeats: if they even aspire to legitimacy, the UN must reach out to all journalists, at the UN and ideally beyond, and not that subset which pay UNCA money. That is a decidedly partial subset: a fake wrestling match.
The UN while throwing out media from workspace gives its UN Censorship Alliance a large room, which it then limits to those that pay it money in dues. Here's how it works: a new media at the UN is told, from the pinnacle of the UN's Censorship Alliance, to pay UNCA $90 and UNCA will get the UN to give the media UN office space.
The Free UN Coalition for Access targeted these censorship practices in aSeptember 29 flier, online, in the UN including on the "open" bulletin board it got the UN to install (the flier was torn down, one can only imagine by whom, but has gone back up.)
UNITED NATIONS, June 22 -- French soldiers in the Central African Republic allegedly sexually abused children, as exposed in a UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights report given to the French government by longtime OHCHR staffer Anders Kompass.
Kompass was urged to resign -- according to a UN Dispute Tribunal ruling reinstating him, by French head of UN Peacekeeping Herve Ladsous, who has since tersely denied it -- and Miranda Brown who worked with him did in fact have her UN service ended, see below.
The UN tried to forestall questions by saying Secretary General Ban Ki-moon would name an independent panel to investigate. On June 5, Inner City Press exclusively reported that Ban himself told a group of states his panel would include at least one African, and one woman. The slower FP Turtle re-reported this, days later, as if heard for the first time; later it said Sweden is on the group, which is not the case.
Inner City Press at the June 22 UN noon briefing asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric how then it could be considered independent. He insisted it should be seen that way, while separately stating that everyone who works for the UN is paid by the UN. We'll have more on this.
The other two members are Yasmin Sooka of South Africa, previously on a UN panel on Sri Lanka, and Marie Deschamps, a retired Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. “No Volcker,” one observer remarked.
Inner City Press asked Dujarric to confirm that Ban's deputy Jan Eliasson met on June 19 with concerned member states -- he did -- and to explain why this was not on Eliasson's public schedule (he did not). Inner City Press asked about Spokesman Dujarric about a UN spokesperson calling whistleblower Kompass a “sleaze-bag.” Video here.
On June 11 Miranda Brown wrote a second letter to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, stating that Ban's Executive Office and presumably his Deputy Jan Eliasson knew back on August 8, 2014 of the evidence of child rape in CAR by French "peacekeepers" - and did nothing except months later try to get Kompass to resign.
On June 12, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about this and he denied that Deputy Secretary General Eliasson knew anything about the CAR sexual abuse allegations in August 2014, saying he only learned of them in April 2015.
Inner City Press asked if this meant the UN was denying the existence of an April 8, 2015 email from Ban's executive office saying that Eliasson would be briefed.
Dujarric responded by saying "categorically" that Eliasson was not told of the CAR allegations until April 2015. See transcript below.
In light of this response, Inner City Press now reports it is informed that the August 8, 2014 response from Ban's Executive Office was not from any clerical or scheduling staff, but high official Andrew Gilmour, whose influence spreads to Syria and elsewhere, who said DSG Eliasson would be briefed that afternoon." If he wasn't, why not? And who was briefed? We'll have more on this.
Inner City Press: Two interrelated questions. One has to do with Miranda Brown, who I have asked you about before, whistle-blower, has put in writing that the Office of Ban Ki-Moon was told about the sexual allegations and evidence of sexual abuse in Central Africa Republic on, at latest, 8 August 2014. She says there was a response by that office to Mr. [Anders] Kompass's assistant saying that Jan Eliasson had been put in charge of it. I'd like to know what’s your response to that? It's very different than hearing what they heard about it in the spring. How would you explain the lack of action, given that? The inter-related question is that on the report that you insist on calling a draft, when it was given to the DFS [Department of Field Support], but actually it was finished, it was just withheld for a month. It says clearly in the report that victims are not… that there's a problem. United Nations have performed very poorly in assisting victims of sexual abuse and assault. Only 26 of 217 SEA [sexual exploitation and abuse] victims were even referred for assistance and it's unclear if they received any. So, I'm wondering, on Monday, are you going to have, like, a written response that is available?
Spokesman: I think what… it's hard for me to predict what I'm going to do in the next hour, so I don't know what we'll have on Monday. On your second part, this UN report, this OIOS report is yet another tool to help the system, DFS, DPKO and all the parts of the house to perform better on issues relating to sexual abuse and exploitation. We can always do better and we need to do much better. On the issue of support for the victims and follow-through in support of the victims, one of the big challenges that we have had is the lack of funding, is that what had been proposed by the Secretary-General was not funded by the Member States. We've had to do it with existing resources and we haven't had the funds that we needed. We also need to do better in terms of communications to the population at large in terms of how they can access hot line, what their rights are, what is illegal, how they can protect themselves. There are all sorts of ways we can improve. I think what we have seen since, over the past number of years, is a decrease of cases of sexual abuse while overall the number of peacekeepers has increased. What I would go on to Miss Brown, she makes a number of claims in her letter, which are, you know, claims. Obviously, as to who was told in various offices, when, what and where it will be looked at thoroughly by the external panel, independent panel, which we hope to announce, hopefully next week. What I can tell you categorically is that the Deputy Secretary-General was only made aware of this issue in April. So, that is a fact which I am telling you now. What information was passed onto his office, to whom it was passed on, how that was dealt with, that will be looked at by the review panel, but the Deputy Secretary-General was not made aware of this issue until April of this year.
Inner City Press: So, are you saying an 8 April 2014 email from Executive Office of Ban Ki-Moon to Ms. Linnea Arvidsson, Mr. Kompass's personal assistant, indicating that the Deputy Secretary-General would be briefed on the report that was submitted doesn't exist?
Spokesman: That's not what at all I'm saying. What I'm saying is that obviously the panel will have access to e-mails, will look as to who received what documents, who was informed, who was not informed. What I can tell you categorically is that, personally, the Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations was not informed of this until April.
Inner City Press: In March on the timeline… in March, when it was the staff retreat in Turin and Ms. [Susana] Malcorra asked OIOS and the Ethics Office to get together to speak about Mr. Kompass, who else other than Miss Malcorra was made aware that…?
Spokesman: All these issues will be looked at, but she makes a claim regarding the Deputy Secretary-General, which I counter and which to me is false.
Miranda Brown, regarding whose case Inner City Press has repeatedly asked the UN in New York and Geneva, writes:
"I was the Acting Director of the Africa Branch at OHCHR in early August 2014 during the period shortly after the MINUSCA report came to OHCHR’s attention in Geneva. Mr Kompass was my direct supervisor at the time. My testimony to the OIOS investigation would have supported Mr Kompass’ decision to disclose the MINUSCA report to the French Government and would have shed light on many elements relating to the disclosure.
"Emails document my involvement and I was the key contact between OHCHR and MINUSCA during the period immediately following the disclosure. Following my email to Mr Kompass on 7 August 2014, the Special Assistant to Deputy High Commissioner Flavia Pansieri, Ms Linnea Arvidsson, sent an email to the Executive Office of the Secretary General informing the UN leadership about the allegations of child sexual abuse in the Central African Republic and advising the UN leadership that the unredacted MINUSCA report had been transmitted to the French Government. Ms Arvidsson’s email to your Executive Office included as attachments the unredacted MINUSCA report and the letter of acknowledgement from the French Permanent Representative to the United Nations in Geneva, Ambassador Nicolas Niemtchinow. On 8 August 2014, your Executive Office confirmed receipt of Ms Arvidsson’s email and indicated that the Deputy Secretary General was being briefed about the transmittal of the unredacted report to the French Government.
"Thus the UN leadership, including your Executive Office and the Deputy Secretary General as aware that the unredacted MINUSCA report had been transmitted to the French Government. If child victims and witnesses had been put at risk through the transmittal of the unredacted report to the French Government, why did the UN leadership wait until March 2015 to take disciplinary action against Mr Kompass? At the time, in August 2014, the message being conveyed to OHCHR staff in Geneva was that the UN leadership considered Mr Kompass’ disclosure of the unredacted MINUSCA report to the French Government to b appropriate under the circumstances."
Inner City Press asks again: what did Ban and his Office DO after being informed of the evidence of French "peacekeepers" child rape in CAR on August 7-8, 2014? Ban's (French) head of UN Peacekeeping appears in the UNDT ruling asking for Kompass to resign. His UNexplained subsequent denial then (like Ban) long trip out of New York has left these questions unanswered. But the questions must be answered. Watch this site.
On June 8, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric first about the French forces' non-inclusion in Ban's Children and Armed Conflict list, then about the whistleblowers, video here, transcript here:
Inner City Press: it seems like the abuse the UN was aware of in the Central African Republic by the French Sangaris forces, was there any consideration of including them and if so, why not?
Spokesman Dujarric: On the CAR [Central African Republic], the situation in the CAR, part of the CAR was drafted with the information available at the time of the writing of the report. As you know, the… we do hope to announce soon the external independent inquiry which will shed light on the process.
Inner City Press: I'm sorry to reiterate this. I'd sent you these questions but wanted to ask you. I asked the Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights who said that Mr. Kompass is going to be extended, although he also said it's not Geneva's decision; it's up to New York. And there are several Member State who believe he's not being extended--
Spokesman: No, I have no indication whatsoever that his contract will not be renewed.
Inner City Press: It does apparently expire in one month.
Spokesman: Right. No, as I said, I have no indication whatsoever that his contract will not be renewed.
Inner City Press: ]OHCHR] had said something about contracts being automatically extended if a person is under investigation. Is that your understanding?
Spokesman: I think that is very likely a policy but as I said, for Mr. Kompass, I have no indication that his…
Inner City Press: The other thing I asked you is about Miranda Brown who was an… worked with Mr. Kompass and has since been terminated. I know that she wrote a letter to the Secretary-General dated 23 May saying she's willing to participate, but not if she's fired by the UN and has no immunity. Has the Secretary-General’s responded to the letter?
Spokesman: I don't believe there has been a response. I don't know if it was received. I don't believe she was terminated, I think her fixed-term contract was not renewed.
Inner City Press: What would you say to those who say if you actually want to know… this was a person who was number two to Kompass at the time involved. What arrangements were being made to try to get her evidence?
Spokesman: I think we would have to leave that to the panel once it's named.
Miranda Brown wrote to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon:
"I am a key witness in the Office of Internal Oversight Service (OIOS) investigation into the disclosure by Mr Anders Kompass, Director at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), of the MINUSCA report Sexual Abuse on Children by International Armed Forces in the M’Poko IDP camp in Bangui, Central African Republic to the French authorities.
Despite my appeals to the High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, my employment at OHCHR was terminated on 21 May 2015, one day before I was scheduled to provide testimony as a key witness in the OIOS investigation. Please see attached OIOS’ repeated requests to interview me. As a result of my termination, I now have no functional immunity and given this and the punitive termination of my employment, I am scared of testifying in the investigation.
I was the Acting Director of the Africa Branch at OHCHR in early August 2014 during the period shortly after the MINUSCA report came to OHCHR’s attention in Geneva. Mr Kompass was my direct supervisor at the time. Emails document my involvement and I was the key contact between OHCHR and MINUSCA during the period immediately following the disclosure.
My testimony to the OIOS investigation would have supported Mr Kompass’ decision to disclose the MINUSCA report to the French Government and would have shed light on many elements relating to the disclosure. As such, my testimony would also have been very embarrassing and potentially problematic for High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and others in the UN leadership, who have publicly denounced Mr Kompass for wrongdoing and placing victims, investigators and witnesses at risk.
The stated reason for the termination of my employment at OHCHR is that there is no position available for me at OHCHR headquarters in Geneva, where half of the roughly one thousand OHCHR staff work. This explanation is implausible, deeply suspicious, bears all the hallmarks of retaliation, and is, at best, an abject failure to protect a key witness and, at worst, constitutes possible witness tampering. I have requested an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the termination of my employment at OHCHR.
I understand there may have been a second disclosure of the MINUSCA report to the French authorities by a female staff member at OHCHR, and that because of my prior history as a whistleblower at World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), suspicions may have fallen on me as the source of the second disclosure. This is false. While I agree with Mr Kompass’ decision to disclose the report to the French authorities and enjoy good relations with the French Permanent Mission in Geneva, I have had no contact with the French Government on the MINUSCA report. The French Government would be able to confirm this. I believe that I know the female OHCHR staff member who made the second disclosure to the French Permanent Mission in Geneva. I do not expect her identity will be revealed as she would then herself become at risk of reprisal.
Secretary General, if you would like my testimony in the OIOS investigation and for this investigation to have any credibility at all, you will need to immediately reinstate me in a P5 level position in Geneva, if necessary in another UN organisation or entity. I shall be willing to testify in this investigation or another inquiry if one is launched, once my functional immunity is restored, my job is safe and I no longer fear retaliation. I am sure you will agree that the Member States of the United Nations expect the investigation into Mr Kompass’ disclosure of the MINUSCA report to the French authoritiesand any subsequent inquiry into these matters to be thorough, fair, transparent and impartial.
This will not be the case without my testimony, however inconvenient this might prove to some in the UN leadership."
What will Ban do, now that he has belatedly said he will appoint an “independent” Panel?
Meanwhile, amid reports that OHCHR would not extend Kompass' contract, Inner City Press asked OHCHR spokesperson Rupert Colville to “confirm or deny this decision to not extend this fixed term contract.”
Colville has, in fact, denied, writing to Inner City Press that
“It is not true. Like all the rest of us, Anders's contract has an end date (which is indeed some time in July). The High Commissioner will request that it be extended (the final decision for someone at Anders's very senior D2 level is in fact made in New York not Geneva). However, when someone's contract ends while they are under investigation, an extension is automatically granted anyway.”
The answer is appreciate. But why didn't that policy apply to Miranda Brown? Watch this site.
On June 3, after Secretary General Ban Ki-moon announced an intention to name an independent panel at least 14 UN member statesmet about its terms of reference and to whom beyond Ban it should report, as Inner City Press exclusively details below.
Now Inner City Press reports on the June 5 meeting between four of those states -- minus South Africa - which met on June 5 with Ban Ki-moon and more than a half dozen other officials, including Deputy Eliasson, DFS' Atule Khare, Herve Ladsous' fill-in and others.
The states -- the UN identified them as Australia, Guatemala, Japan and Finland, though the last was Norway -- went in with a series of positions and questions, including:
"We are concerned by the damage that these incidents, and their follow-up, have done to the UN’s reputation and credibility in an area where the UN is expected to uphold the highest standards and values.
The review must be conducted in an expeditious manner and the results must be fully transparent.
It is crucial that the review looks at the whole chain of events, including the senior management’s decisions leading to disciplinary action against Mr. Anders Kompass. This has cast doubt about the credibility of the UN’s human rights commitments in field missions and about the integrity of its whistleblower policy.
It is crucial to remove any doubts that the UN is fully committed to preventing sexual exploitation and abuse and to ensure effective investigation of any such allegations in field missions. In addition, accountability for perpetrators, and protection and assistance to victims, must be ensured.
Questions: What will be the scope of the Independent External Review (CAR only? The UN’s handling of the investigation, SEA more broadly?)
To what extent has the Human Rights Up Front approach been applied?
Will the review look at institutional reforms to better address cases of SEA, including timely reporting and action in cases of abuse?
Will the review look at the protection of whistleblowers? What is the status regarding the pending case against Mr. Anders Kompass – in light of doubts that have been raised about this process?"
In fact, Inner City Press is informed that OHCHR and Zeid personally are poised to not renew Kompass' fixed term contract, set to expire on July 8, 2015, and to give the required one month notice by June 8.
Inner City Press in response to the UN read-out on the evening of June 5 formally asked the UN Spokesman: "I have heard that UN OHCHR has decided not to extend Anders Kompass' fixed term contract, which is set to expire on July 8, 2015. I understand that under UN rules, he must be given one month's notice and will thus need to receive notification by no later than Monday June 8, 2015.
"Given the allegations of retaliation (and the UNDT ruling), please confirm or deny this decision to not extend this fixed term contract."
This retaliation, despite US Mission attempts to protect the UN, could result in funding cuts or at least damaging hearings. But as with Ladsous, high UN officials are allowed to operate out of control in their fiefdoms.
In response to the above, Inner City Press can exclusively report these UN responses:
The Office of the High Commisioner for Human Rights is sending a team to the Central African Republic.
Regarding the External Independent Review, it was assured that it will be done by someone completely outside the UN, also excluding the UN’s own investigative capacity. It was still not decided who would lead the panel, but it would consist of at least one woman and one African. It would examine the specific case of allegations in the Central African Republic, but also look at the broad range of systemic issues being raised.
Regarding the time-frame and further ToR’s of the Review, this would be discussed after the meeting and be determined shortly.
Regarding the case of Anders Kompass, it was pointed out that the separate investigation was ongoing, and the outcome must be awaited before further comments.
But if Zeid intends to not extend Kompas' fixed term contract, that part of it is moot. And Ban is heading off on another long trip. Watch this site.
Note: three days after Inner City Press exclusively reported that Ban told the ambassadors he would name an African and a woman, slower others are repeating it, citing "diplomats." That's the UN beat.
An emerging and damaging question for the UN is who knew what, when. Inner City Press asked when Ban knew of the alleged child rapes -- "March" is now the answer.
There was a retreat of all senior UN officials in Turin, Italy on March 18-19, 2015. This was days after Kompass says he was told the French Under Secretary General for Peacekeeping Operations Herve Ladsous wanted him to resign. (Ladsous now denies this, see below.)
In Turin, Ban's chief of staff Susan Malcorra put together the ostensibly independent Ethics Office and Office of Internal Oversight Services, calling into further question the UN's claimed whistleblower protections.
If Ban's chief of staff knew of the alleged child rapes, it is difficult to believe Ban didn't know. But what did he do?
Which of the other high UN officials present in Turin learned there or before about the alleged child rapes, by then already covered up for months? There is a photo of the participants.
UN in Turin, March 19, 2015 UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe ICP: Who knew?
These include some who want to run to replace Ban, or for other high positions. We will have more on this.
The UN did not give the report to the host country authorities in CAR. And according to UN documents -- on May 29 released in more detail by Code Blue naming Ladsous directly, here -- UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous then urged that the whistleblower Kompass be forced to resign.
The documents also implicate a number of other UN officials, and French government inaction, see below. After Press questioning turned to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, what he knew and when he knew it, Ban on June 3 announced an intention to set up an "independent" Panel. Inner City Press asked if it will report only to Ban -- yes. This is a problem. Video here.
On June 3 a meeting was convened to seek answers and improvement on the UN's response, by Guatemala and Norway, with attendees from all UN Regional Groups, see below. Inner City Press has spoken with several members; Norway will be requesting a meeting for the group with Ban Ki-moon, on topics ranging from to whom the Panel will report to its Terms of Reference to the actions of OIOS and the Ethics Office.
As Inner City Press analyzed below, there is a history of UN panels being used to cover up.
Now Code Blue has these three recommendations:
"First, this must be a truly external and independent inquiry. No member of existing UN staff should be appointed to investigate nor to act as the investigators’ secretariat.
"Second, it must be understood that top members of the Secretary-General’s own staff will have to be subject to investigation. This must go right up to the level of Under-Secretaries General. No one can be excluded, whether the Director of the Ethics Office or the USG of the Office of Internal Oversight Services or the Secretary-General’s own Chef de Cabinet. It would appear that all of them and more acted inappropriately in response to the dreadful events in CAR.
"Third, the reference in the Secretary-General’s announcement of a review to ‘the broad range of systemic issues’ is crucial to the inquiry. What happened in the Central African Republic was an atrocity, but the fact that the UN stood silent for nearly a year after its own discovery of widespread peacekeeper sexual abuse (even if by non-UN troops) is itself a bitter commentary on the Secretary-General’s declared policy of ‘zero tolerance’."
Inner City Press would add, past UN staff and offiicals as well. Consider these past panels, as put together and at the end analyzed by Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access:
On 22 September 2003, Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Mr. Martti Ahtisaari, former President of Finland, to chair an Independent Panel on the Safety and Security of UN Personnel in Iraq.
The priority of the Independent Panel’s investigation of the “oil-for-food” programme was to “get after” allegations of corruption and misconduct within the United Nations itself and, more broadly, the question of the maladministration of the “oil-for-food” programme, stated Paul A. Volcker, Chairman of the Independent Panel, in a press conference at UNHQ.
The UN Commission of Inquiry, appointed by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the request of the Pakistani Government, reached no conclusion as to the organizers and sponsors behind the attack in which a 15-year-old suicide bomber blew up Ms. Bhutto’s vehicle in the city of Rawalpindi on 27 December 2007. The three-member panel, which was headed by Chilean Ambassador to UN Heraldo Muñoz and included Marzuki Darusman, former attorney-general of Indonesia, and Peter Fitzgerald, a veteran official of the Irish National Police, urged the Government to undertake police reform in view of its “deeply flawed performance and conduct.”
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon established the Panel of Inquiry on the 31 May 2010 Flotilla Incident on 2 August 2010. The Panel received and reviewed reports of the detailed national investigations conducted by both Turkey and Israel.
On 22 June 2010, the Secretary-General announced the appointment of a Panel of Experts to advise him on the implementation of the joint commitment included in the statement issued by the President of Sri Lanka and the Secretary-General at the conclusion of the Secretary-General's visit to Sri Lanka on 23 March 2009.
Meanwhile UN staff advocates have written to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, his chief of staff and Ladsous, among others, demanding resignations. On June 2 Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric, who Banned any Inner City Press question to Ladsous on May 29, what Ban Ki-moon DID, once he learned in March about the rapes.Video here and embedded below.
Dujarric said he had nothing to add to his previous answers. Huh?
Inner City Press asked Dujarric, in light of OHCHR Zeid using a private email address for UN business, what the UN's record retention policy is. Dujarric said the policy must be available somewhere. To this has the UN descended.
Dujarric said the investigation by Lapointe's OIOS, discredited in the leaked emails, will "lead where it will lead." But Lapointe has told OIOS invstigators to not go beyond what they are asked to look at -- in this case, only the whistleblower. This is called a cover up.
When Hillary Clinton used the UN Security Council stakeout to belatedly answer questions about her own use of private email while US Secretary of State, it was described as an accident of scheduling, or attempt to use the UNSC backdrop to convey gravitas. But the echo now with Prince Zeid also using private email for presumably public business raises similar questions.
Anders Kompass was asked to send his side of the story -- to a private email address, but wisely declined.
Beyond the treatment of Kompass himself, the documents show pressure brought to bear on lower-level staff to make and thereby launder the high officials' desire for an investigation of Kompass.
Most directly, it is asked, what UN staff member will now report fraud or misconduct, knowing that OIOS and the Ethics Office will then discuss the accusations with their boss? This is a question Inner City Press on May 29 asked UN Spokesman Staphen Dujarric, who BannedInner City Press from putting a single question to Ladsous - the question has yet to be answered.
UN staff advocates have written directly to Ban Ki-moon and his deputy, Ladsous and Atul Khare and others, demanding resignations. They are offended by the exposure of lack of independence at the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services and UN Ethics Office, and question whether the US should cut off funding under the 2014 U.S. Consolidated Appropriation Act, section 7048(a)(1)(B). After reading those leaked documents, how exactly can the U.S. Secretary of State (or anybody else) certify that the UN's whistle-blower policy fulfils the Act's requirements? Is there any "independent adjudicative body" in this chain? Evidently the Ethics Office and OIOS are not."
The staff notice Ban's appearance at another softball soccer game, among those who are supposed to hold him and the UN accountable. The call for Ladsous to resign out be fired has spread from the African Group to Latin America and GRULAC.
On May 30, OHCHR for Prince Zeid issued a statement beginning, "In the wake of the revelations of alleged serious sexual abuse of children."
But Zeid was told of the allegations long before their "revelation" via leaks. And tellingly, he continued to mistakenly think and say the rapes were in Mali and not CAR.
Likewise, both UN Peacekeeping's Herve Ladsous -- listed as urging the whistleblower to resign, which he denies while refusing to take questions on -- and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon both knew of the alleged child rapes by "the Spring," but did nothing.
This requires an investigation, and not by the UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services, shown to not be independent, told to meet Zeid and the UN Ethics Office by Ban's chief of staff Susan Malcorra.
Inner City Press reported on some of the documents and went to Ladsous' rare press conference on May 29 (International Day of UN Peacekeepers) in order to ask some questions. Video here.
But Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, choosing who could ask questions, refused to call on Inner City Press, even for Ladsous to say, as he did under Dujarric's predecessor Martin Nesirky, "I don't respond to you, Mister."
So Inner City Press objected, on behalf of the new Free UN Coalition for Access (the old UNCA has become part of the problem) and asked questions, video here, transcript here.
The documents also call into serious question the claims of "independence" from the office of Ban Ki-moon of the Office of Internal Oversight Services and the UN Ethics Office.
Consider this: OIOS head Carman Lapointe, writing to James Finness (still in charge of the "investigation" spokesman Stephane Dujarric continues to use as an excuse to not answer question), noted that at the UN staff retreat in March "I received an urgent email from the CdC [Ban's Chef de Cabinet Susana Malcorra] to meet with Zeid, Flavia and Joan."
So OIOS is not independent - it can to told, by Ban's chief of staff, to meet with collaborate with the Ethics Office as well as OHCHR's Zeid and Pansieri.
Inner City Press previously reported on and asked Dujarric about OIOS' flawed process and a high profile recusal, see below.
As noted, Inner City Press reported on some of the documents and went to Ladsous' rare press conference on May 29 (International Day of UN Peacekeepers) in order to ask some questions.
But Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, choosing who could ask questions, refused to call on Inner City Press, even for Ladsous to say, as he did under Dujarric's predecessor Martin Nesirky, "I don't respond to you, Mister."
So why did Nesirky allow Press questions to Ladsous, and Dujarric didn't?
Dujarric set the first question aside for "UNCA" -- but called on an individual who was not elected to their board, who lost the election; her question was a vague softball offering Ladsous a chance to comment on Central African Republic. He said, it was one nation, not under blue helmet.
But Ladsous' MINUSCA mission knew of the sexual abuse since at latest August 5, 2014. Inner City Press said, "Follow up on CAR?" Dujarric called on Reuters, which previously wrote to him trying to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN (then filed to get his leaked complaint blocked or Banned from Google's Search, here.) Reuters did not even aske about the CAR sexual abuse.
What emerged is that both Ladsous -- and, troublingly, Ban Ki-moon -- were formally informed of the sexual abuse of children in CAR "in the spring." What date? And what did they do?
Dujarric said, "last question;" as Ladsous left the room Inner City Press asked Ladsous about him speaking about the whistleblower Kompass with OHCHR's Zeid, also a subject of the new documents -- no answer.
Inner City Press objected to Dujarric, who has fielded or dodged a dozen Inner City Press questions about the CAR rapes and Ladsous' role, not even being allowed to ask a question. Dujarric said, "Noted."Video here.
And what? Again, Dujarric's predecessor Nesirky, and his deputy Del Buey, allowed Inner City Press to put questions to Ladsous. What if the difference? We'll have more on this.
On July 30, 2014, Ambassador Nicolas Niemtchinow, Permanent Representative of France to the UN in Geneva wrote to Kompass that action was being taken. But then, nothing.
On August 5, 2014 the Human Rights Officer in CAR of OHCHR wrote to Renner Onana of the already-then UN mission MINUSCA; DPKO's SRSG Babacar Gaye was referenced.
So when did Gaye or MINUSCA tell DPKO chief Ladsous?
Tellingly, even the UN's cover up was delayed by High Commissioner Prince Zeid thinking he heard of French troops' sexual abuse in MINUSMA (Mali) and not MINUSCA (CAR).
Zeid asked his predecessor Navi Pillay if she met with French representatives about rapes in Mali -- the answer was no -- then much later asked her if she'd met with the French about CAR (the answer was yes.)
It was Zeid's Deputy Flavia Pansieri who conveyed Ladsous' directive to Kompass to resign. Zeid in his statement makes much of Pansieri meeting with a Swedish diplomat in the street, in casual clothes, after Sweden raised l'affaire Kompass at a dinner in honor of Ban Ki-moon's Deputy Jan Eliasson. THe UN's move now seems to be to try to lay all blame on Pansieri, whose term was expiring anyway. We'll have more on this.
"On 12 March 2015 meeting with the Deputy High Commissioner I was informed that the High Commissioner requested my resignation for the way I dealt with the reports of paedophilia in the Central African Republic. I was told that the High Commissioner had been asked for my resignation by Mr. Ladsous, Under Secretary-General for the Department of Peacekeeping Operations in New York, during a visit of the High Commissioner to New York."
Absent from the UN Fifth (Budget) Committee's May 18 meeting was not only embattled Peacekeeping chief Ladsous,, but also OIOS' Carman Lapointe.
In her stead for OIOS was Michael Stefanovic, who told the Fifth Committee that he has recused himself from the investigation and has written to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon as to why.
This is highly irregular. If the recusal was made on a personal connection between Stefanovic and the whistleblower Anders Kompass, Stefanovic would have recused himself from the earlier investigation - but he didn't. If it were such a recusal, he would have written to Lapointe, and not to the S-G.
For now we add this -- if OIOS Director Stefanovic has a conflict of interest, how can the UN be asking others to rely on an OIOS investigation? Inner City Press has asked a Permanent Member of the Security Council -- not France -- if an OIOS investigation would be sufficient, and has been told "No."
Now we have this, from the Fifth Committee's May 20 meeting:
Lapointe, summoned to the meeting via her Byun-kun Min, was asked
-When did OIOS/ID start the investigation into Anders Kompass?
-Why did Mr. Stefanovic recuse himself from the Kompass investigation?
-In view of Mr. Stefanovic recusing himself, did Ms. Lapointe see any impediments for the scope of the investigation, especially as it appeared to implicate an ASG or USG in misconduct?
Note - this is a reference to UN Peacekeeping USG Ladsous.
Multiple sources tell Inner City Press Lapointe replied that Stefanovic told only the Secretary General, not her, that he recused himself, and that the Deputy Director of OIOS in Vienna is now "overseeing" the investigation.
So those now on the case are James Finniss, Kanja and Margaret Gichanga -- who has been asking to interview WIPO whistleblower Miranda Brown, who worked alongside Kompass for a time. We'll have more on this. It is a new low for the UN.
Back on May 18, Inner City Press, staking out the Budget Committee meeting, spoke with Ban's chief of staff Susana Malcorra when she left the meeting. Here is a transcript, followed by an exclusive summary of what happened inside the closed meeting.
Inner City Press: How did it go in there? Are their questions answered?
CdC Malcorra: Well I hope, yes. Some of them still have questions that will be answered by my colleague. I think I’ve made a point of what it is that we’re discussing here. This investigation is a UN investigation. It was led by the UN in the field when they had allegations handed to them. It was the human rights cell in the mission that led this investigation. It looks like we were absent, but it was us...
And this investigation could, at least prima facie, there were places clear enough to further investigate by the member state. And as such, the information was provided to a member state. On a separate front, is how the information is provided. And we cannot accept the irresponsibility of the names of the victims, the witnesses and the investigators shared with the member states ... it’s inacceptable. It may look like a bureaucratic approach. It’s not a bureaucratic approach...
Inner City Press: What about not telling Central African Republic authorities?
CdC Malcora: They are discussing that now.
After the meeting ended, and Inner City Press spoke with numerous attendees - a common refrain was that the UN leadership is "in denial" - we have pieced together this summary of the meeting, and the totally insufficient answer on UN Peacekeeping chief Ladsous' role, a lack of recognition of his UNAMID mission's previous cover up of rapes in Tabit in Darfur, which the US and UK and other say they care about, and lack of follow up on whistleblowers.
Attendees' summary of Ban Ki-moon chief of staff Malcorra:
"Malcorra said she had no idea the session would go into the specifics of CAR, she thought it was to touch upon general Sexual Abuse and Exploitation policy (several attendees were dubious and angry about this approach.)
Malcorra said that in the case of misconduct by UN staff the procedures were in place. In this case, even when it was not UN peacekeepers the human rights cell in Bangui was there and they were the ones that initiated the investigation. It is thanks to the UN that allegations were substantiated and it was enough to decide to proceed with a further investigation.
The wrongdoing of the UN staffer Anders Kompass was to have shared the information without it being redacted putting the victims, witnesses and investigators lives in danger. She repeated many times this was a serious breach and that she disagreed with anyone that didn’t view this conduct wrong.
According to Malcorra the UN investigation lasted three months which allowed them to substantiate the allegations. When that finding was final it went to the two lines of command: The head of mission in CAR and the OHCHR. But, several asked, why didn't either of these tell the CAR authorities?
Malcorra said she would have preferred this case hadn't surfaced in the media and that it is regrettable member states have had to learn matters from the press. But that, Malcorra said, member states have to be aware that the press manipulates everything. Several states talked about the UN image and credibility to which Malcorra said she was very sad with those comments because if not for the UN these troops could have gotten away with these disturbing acts. She also said this was a clear case of damned if you do damned if you don’t. But what about the cover up? What about Ladsous?
Malcorra said that “no other element had been taken into account” for Kompass' firing. But member states were aware of Paragraph 9 of the UN Dispute Tribunal ruling reinstating Kompass. As noted, one Permanent Representatives (and several other diplomats) told Inner City Press that Ladsous should resign.
Tellingly, the sources say, Malcorra claimed didn’t recall any UNAMID coverup allegations. Tabit?
Malcorra didn’t even address the Otis report on whistleblowers - which Inner City Press has been asking Ban's spokesman about, repeatedly -- but assured member states that due protections are in place and that an adequate policy exists.
Malcorra said she looks forward to working further on the UN convention in paragraph 57 of the SG report on SEA and agrees that there are systemic flaws, and therefore there will be a review of all the processes.
According to sources in the meeting -- Inner City Press asked and was told to inquiry with member states -- the Legal Counsel and head of OLA qualified as excellent the cooperation with the French Authorities and that the lifting of immunity so far hasn’t been necessary because at this stage its very general requests of information that the UN promptly has given to the French authorities. For the sake of efficiency hasn’t gone through the lifting of immunity process but if a trial or judge becomes involved they will do it quickly at a later stage. Several member states were dubious. The EU, Inner City ress is informed, said “accountability starts at the top.”
Malcorra left unanswered why the host state, the CAR, was not involved. She is said to have ignored the specific question on the status of the OIOS investigation. She ignored the complaints about under-reporting saying that the trend of decrease was very clear and that the USG of DFS would go into details (what he did, genially, was repeat the Secretary General's report).
An impartial investigation was called for, from both sides of the Atlantic and elsewhere. There was a refrain afterward: Ladsous should resign."
A well-placed African Permanent Representative before the meeting told Inner City Press before the meeting that Ladsous should resign. But with him conveniently absent, would others be left holding the bag, trying to explain why he, Ladsous, appears in the UN Dispute Tribunal ruling as urging that the whistleblower resign?
Back on May 8, Inner City Press asked US Ambassador Samantha Power about both issues - the UN's failure to tell the CAR authorities, and Ladsous' "surprising" role, as High Commissioner Zeid put it earlier in the day. Video here and embedded below. Then Inner City Press asked the UN Spokesman, Stephane Dujarric, about the contradiction; for the first time, he gave a timeline.
Here is the video of Inner City Press questions to US Ambassador Power:
It is an answer that may move things forward. Ladsous, it should be noted, just this week snubbed a Joe Biden-linked Hemispheric peacekeeping conference in Uruguay, wasting an $8,000 first class plane ticket and angering many troop contributing countries. He refuses to answer Press question, for example on rapes in Minova, DRC and Tabit in Darfur.
As noted, on May 8, High Commissioner Zeid held a press conference, and twice refused to comment on why Ladsous was said to have pressured to fire or suspend the whistleblower.
Inner City Press has covered Ladsous' role from the beginning, and highlighted his appearance in Paragraph 9 of the UN Dispute Tribunal ruling reinstating Kompass. On May 7, Ladsous told Inner City Press, "I deny that" - then refused to take questions.
Zeid was asked, and first time said he should first give his view of the pressure to the investigator, not the media.
The second time, he said he was surprised to read it -- his Office did not contest that part of the ruling, effectively admitting it -- and that the head of UN Peacekeeping should not have been intervening about a non-UN force. Video here.
Neither he nor the questioners in the room in Geneva said the obvious: Ladsous is a longtime French diplomat; it is not rocket science to read Paragraph 9 as him (inappropriately) still working for "his" country.
Zeid said other things we'll report later; he alluded to the need for a Commission of Inquiry. Some ask, will Ladsous quit before then? Or after?
Early on May 8, UN system staff complained to Inner City Press that UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid of Jordan, in a closed staff meeting on May 8, tried to downplay the scandal, going so far as to blame imams in Bangui for not playing their role.
But it was OHCHR which didn't even give the report of the rape of CAR children to CAR authorities, only to the French.
In places, Zeid appeared to try to use his record ten years ago on sexual abuse to shift the blame to imams. Inner City Press has shown a failure by his Office to act on past leaking, to Morocco. We'll have more on this.
On May 7, Inner City Press asked more questions about this - including to Herve Ladsous himself.
After a long closed-door consultation meeting of the Security Council, Ladsous emerged. Inner City Press asked him, based on Paragraph 9 of the UNDT ruling, Why did you ask Kompass to resign?"
