At UN, Leaked Memo to Ban Ki-moon Complains of Cover Up of Probe of UMOJA, Kane, Pervasive Favoritism

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, February 11 – Alongside Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's $100 million budget cut, of which he says 70% should be from personnel costs or workers' salaries, questions are mounting about cost overruns, waste and fraud in the UN's systems upgrade or “UMOJA” project.

  On December 14, 2012 Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's three top spokespeople to “please confirm or deny that the director of OIOS stopped an investigation of UMOJA, including of the role of the former Under Secretary General for Management, and on what basis.”

  In two months, the UN has not answered this or another related question. 

Meanwhile, the Office of the Spokesperson of the Secretary General has told Inner City Press it will not confirm or deny documents Inner City Press obtains from whistleblowers or, as OSSG calls them, “leaks.”

  Inner City Press has obtained a memo that was sent to Ban Ki-moon alleging a cover up in the investigation of UMOJA and that “former Under Secretary General for Management” (now USG for Disarmament) Angela Kane.

  The memo, which we are putting online here, recounts that the head of the Office of Internal Oversight Services Carman Lapointe at a meeting of Senior Management let it be known that she viewed the UMOJA case, 0303/11, as a “witch hunt” which should be closed.

  On September 17, 2012, according to the memo, Angela Kane was told she was an “implicated staff member” and would be afforded due process -- ironic, since as Inner City Press has found and reported, journalists are afforded no due process by the UN when stealth complaints like those of Voice of America and Reuters are filed against them, and are processed by the UN.

   But two days after notice to Angela Kane, the memo to Ban states, OIOS' director Michael Stefanovic closed the investigation. Then OIOS Assistant Secretary General David Kanja upheld this after a mere two day review of a detailed complaint.

  The head of the UN's “Ethics Office” Joan Dubinsky was informed, according to the memo, which was also cc-ed to Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson and Ban's chief of staff (and personal envoy on the Eastern Congo) Susana Malcorra.

   But what has been done? How much money is wasted and lost, as Ban proceeds with $100 million in budget cuts? Where is the claimed accountability framework -- just another buzzword?

  Also on December 14, 2012, Inner City Press asked Ban's three top spokespeople another UMOJA question, about procurement: “What is the contractual status of Joan McDonald, retiree now acting as procurement official for UMOJA? How was she recruited, and how does this comport with the Secretary General's stated reforms on recruitment?” 

  This is another question that has not been answered in two months.

  Ban's UN appears shot-thought with favoritism, as we reported last week as well, and also based on an answer that WAS provided, albeit on New Years Eve. The UN should improve, and these are test cases. Watch this site.

Amid UN Budget Crunch, Unanswered Questions of Buyouts, Coverups & Recruitments

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 23 -- With the UN budget fight going into its last two days, the head of the UN's Office of Human Resources Management (OHRM) Catherine Pollard has been sighted multiple times by Inner City Press outside of the closed door negotiations in North Lawn Conference Room 5.

  But a number of human resources question that Inner City Press posed nine days ago to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's top three spokesman remain unanswered. And so here are the questions themselves:

Dec14-4 Please confirm or deny that the director of OIOS stopped an investigation of UMOJA, including of the role of the former Under Secretary General for Management, and on what basis.

Dec14-3 What is the contractual status of Joan McDonald, retiree now acting as procurement official for UMOJA? How was she recruited, and how does this comport with the Secretary General's stated reforms on recruitment?

Dec14-2 Please respond to allegation that some people who are retiring are nevertheless given buyout packages of up to 18 months, and coached on how to write the "properly worded" memo, including [three names redacted in this format, but] see e-mail below.

  On this last, reflecting the state of this UN, Inner City Press has been shown e-mail directed to UN official Robert Orr stating

"With regard to our discussions on the buy-out package, I think that Adnan would be the best person to approach... buy-out packages get approved easily when the originating department i.e. EOSG and its Executive Office write to OHRM / Management endorsing the arrangement... Bob, I'd keep on praying or otherwise I might have to write some tawdry book about the UN. And believe me I've got plenty, plenty materials."

   Was this a joke or a threat? 

   According to the e-mails shown to Inner City Press, Orr wrote back, "I've tried Adnan, but will try him again when I get back. Again, I'm sorry for the delay, but just wanted you to know I haven't forgotten. I did make inquiries and got nothing of value back."

   But then value, and more, was given out. It's a question of favoritism, as with the UMOJA procurement officer who was involved in a previous UN procurement scandal. This is how the UN works, including not answering questions.

   Inner City Press reported on Friday morning that on a $8.7 million budget proposal to "implement Rio+20," on Thursday the European Union and Japan proposed to cut that budget to zero. This gave rise to howls among the Group of 77 and China, and accusations that the EU and Japan are hypocrites on sustainable development and the environment.

 Inner City Press went to Friday's noon briefing and asked, "given how important sustainable development is to the Secretary-General and his statements, it’s been proposed by Japan and the European Union to cut funding for the implementation of Rio+20 to zero. This was a proposal made by the two, by Japan and the EU, yesterday and it seems to me… what is… does the Secretariat think about no implementation of Rio+20?"

Deputy Spokesperson Eduardo Del Buey: Well, Matthew, I am not going to get into a budget discussion until we find out what the General Assembly decides.

Inner City Press: But can you say that there will be a Secretariat statement on the budget when it comes up?

Deputy Spokesperson: If the Secretariat believes that the… that a statement is warranted, one may be issued, but I can’t promise you anything on that.

  Now we can report that they also proposed that, not to be "absorbed" like Rio+20, the budget should including $40,000 for a consultant on the arms trade treaty. More screams of hypocrisy. And so it goes at the UN.

 As of Saturday night, re-costing and the performance review report remained in contention. The three unanswered questions above were submitted on December 14 less than two hours after Ban's lead spokesman refused to answer Inner City Press' question, on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, about the United Nations Correspondents Association violating its Constitution.

   Nesirky, despite the UN's partnership, refused to answer on this, saying, "I don’t think that you could ever accuse me or my Office of not providing you with access and providing you with answers...  I will simply not be involved in your difficulties, meaning between the United Nations Correspondents Association and yourself or others."

   We now have more on this, how the UNCA regime tries to handpick its successors while the UN is allowed to not answer questions, even to try to seize the microphone to avoid the questions being asked, video here. Watch this site.