Showing posts with label NGO Committee. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NGO Committee. Show all posts

Monday, January 21, 2019

UN Briber China Energy Fund Cttee Belatedly Challenged in NGO Cttee As Guterres Hides Links to CEFC and Censors Press


By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR PFT CEFC Video

UNITED NATIONS GATE, January 21 – While UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres was refusing throughout 2018 to begin any UN audit into China Energy Fund Committee, implicated in the UN bribery prosecution US v Patrick Ho, Guterres had a secret: his role on the board of Gulbenkian Foundation which was trying to sell its Partex Oil affiliate to CEFC. See Inner City Press' first exclusive report here.

  Now while Guterres continues to ban from entry the Press which asked him about his CEFC links, in the UN Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations on January 21 the US belatedly requested the suspension or dis-accreditation of CEFC from the UN. This is what Guterres has refused to act on for more than a year, while concealing his links to the group. But will the US administration, or if necessary individual members of Congress, ensure that Guterres is held accountable for the cover up and proliferation of corruption and censorship during his tenure? CEFC has until January 25 to respond. China did not respond in the ill-attended Committee meeting which Inner City Press, banned from entry by Guterres, never the less covered. Watch this site.
  Inner City Press continues its exclusive series on some of the CEFC connections in and through the UN that should have been identified in the audit that Guterres corruptly refused to begin, with his conflict of interest. (Even his predecessor Ban Ki-moon ordered an audit after Ng Lap Seng was indicted - Guterres still hasn't after Patrick Ho was convicted.)
  One of the people identified in the Ban Ki-moon audit of Ng Lap Seng and South South News was Ion Botnaru. He was allowed to retire, after changing a UN General Assembly document along with then President of the General Assembly John Ashe, who died under indictment ostensibly crushed by his own barbell, to benefit Ng's Sun Kian Ip group. Botnaru reappears again with CEFC, here. And, crying out for audit, the President of the General Assembly who swore in Guterres, Peter Thomson of Fiji, traveled like Ashe and Vuk Jeremic and Sam Kutesa to meet CEFC's Ye Jianming in Hong Kong. 
  Inner City Press has asked Guterres and his spokespeople, among many other questions, "Beyond the 37 questions from Inner City Press you refused to answer last week, still set forth below for promised answer, this is a request, given that Peter Thomson is the SG's rep on Oceans that you describe in detail Thomson's 2017 meeting with now disappeared Ye Jianming of CEFC, name which UN DSS officials were with him and what reports they filed, what their duties were; what was seen by those accompanying Thomson, at least two of whom are still in the UN (one is with China)."
  Typically, Guterres and his spokespeople did not answer. So here, pending listing those from UN Department of Safety and Security the group which roughs up the Press without accountability and maintains a retaliatory "lifetime" banned from the UN list, are the names: "During his two-day visit, the President of the UN General Assembly was accompanied by his senior advisors Abdelghani Merabet, and Zhang Yi, as well as by the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs’s Director of the Division for Sustainable Development, Zhu Juwang." Now, Thomson staffer or embed Zhang Yi has gone (back, or more openly) to working for the Chinese government: "On August 14 [2018], Deputy Director-General of China International Center for Economic and Technical Exchanges Zhang Yi was invited to attend the FOCAC - Africa-China Poverty Reduction and Development Conference, an important sub-forum under the FOCAC hosted by the State Council Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation and Development and co-organized by the International Poverty Reduction Center in China and the China Belt and Road Institute for Agricultural Cooperation of China Agriculture University. Attending were more than 300 participants including government officials, international organizations’ representatives, non-governmental organizations’ officials, business leaders, experts and scholars from China, United States, Japan, Denmark and 40 African countries like Angola, Botswana and Mauritius."
  What did they see during Thomson's meeting with now-known briber Ye Jianming? Zhu Juwang  is still with UN DESA; Abdelghani Merabet  is with the current PGA. We'll have more on this: the UN should be answering these questions, now.
  In 2017, the year in which CEFC's Patrick Ho was indicted and arrested for UN bribery, CEFC in the UN engaged at least twice with Lenni Montiel, including for example on 6 July 2017, and also with DESA official Pingfan Hong. Some photos here. Inner City Press before Guterres had it roughed up and banned now 176 days for its inquiries into Guterres' corruption has politely questioned both Montiel and Hong - but Guterres has made that impossible and his Spokesmen refused to answer any written questions, for more than a week now. There are more connections.
  Guterres got favors from Peter Thomson when Thomson was President of the General Assembly. Rudimentary open source research - including on the UN's own website here - finds that Thomson, like implicated Sam Kutesa and John Ashe and Vuk Jeremic, visited CEFC's Ye Jianming in Hong Kong. What was discussed? Inner City Press previously covered, critically but civilly, Thomson. Now corrupt Guterres has had Inner City Press roughed up and banned 175 days, with his Spokesman Stephane Dujarric refusing to answer any questions despite the promise of Guterres' USG Alison Smale. 
   After receiving favors from Thomson as PGA, Guterres gave him a job in his Secretariat, Representative on Oceans. Here is Patrick Ho, interviewed by Guterres' DESA, on Oceans. There should have been an audit. There still should be. Another of Guterres' special advisers, Jeffrey Sachs, after denying Inner City Press' documented report Sachs was on a UN - CEFC board, abruptly closed his Twitter account, story here. Guterres goes on robo-tweeting from parts unknown, spending public money undisclosed. Guterres should explain and / or resign.  We will have more in this series.
   A now-removed Gulbenkian Foundation web page says Guterres continued as a board member into 2018. Archived here. In fact it was on 9 February 2018 that Gulbenian tweeted that Guterres was no longer on the board - AFTER it was reported that Gulbenian was trying to sell, or even had already sold, Partex to CEFC. This is called guilty knowledge. 
 While Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric is refusing to answer Inner City Press' written questions, contrary to promises by Guterres' Global Communicator Alison Smale, it appears Guterres' evasive defense is claiming that he left Gulbenkian in November 2016 and therefore somehow had no conflict of interest in refusing and blocking the obviously needed UN audit of CEFC after the arrest of its Patrick Ho for UN bribery. This defense is dubious.
  Why did Gulbenkian take down its webpagedisclosing that Guterres remained on board into 2018? Why - sixteen months after Guterres ostensibly left - did they wait until February 2018 to tweet that he left? Because their negotiations with CEFC became public (see 2 February 2018 Bloomberg here, and 6 February MacauHub here: "CEFC China Energy buys Portugal’s Partex Oil & Gas.")
  In any event, Guterres' "2017" Financial Disclosure, which explicitly says it covered the year 2016 in which even in this new story he remained on Gulbenkian's board into November, more than 80% of the year - did not disclose his role in Gulbenkian, only on the Club of Madrid. Guterres has had previous financial disclosure omissions, for example in Portugal, here. CEFC was hardly unknown: it bought a Portuguese insurance company in November 2017, here.
    Guterres' failure to disclose and, separately and even more so, his refusal to audit CEFC in the UN was a direct conflict of interest, which he has tried to cover up by roughing up and banning Inner City Press which asked him about it. (See January 2018 press conference here, July 2018 roughing up by Guterres' UN Security here, banning letter via Press Freedom Tracker here.)

Three times now Dujarric, his deputy Farhan Haq and Office of the Spokesperson colleagues Marcia Soares Pinto and Keishamaza Rukikaire, as well as Guterres, his chief of staff Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti and Deputy SG Amina J. Mohammed have refused to answer this: "Beyond the 36 questions from Inner City Press you refused to answer last week, still set forth below for promised answer, this is a reiterated request past deadline that you (1) state when SG Guterres left his position on the Gulbenkian Foundation, (2) state why Gulbenkian was not listed on SG Guterres' public financial disclosure which covered 2016; (3) explain how it is not a conflict of interest for SG Guterres to have refused to start an audit of CEFC in the UN, as requested by Inner City Press in January 2018, given CEFC's bid for the oil business of Gulbenkian. Also, again, state why under SG Guterres there have been no updates to the UN public financial disclosures since those filed for 2016. Also, again, explain your refusal to answer any of Inner City Press' questions this week despite USG Smale's statements to GAP, me and UNSR David Kaye." No response at all, even as spokesman Dujarric for example tweets at actor Seth Rogin. Dujarric, as simply one example, on 1 March 2018 evaded Inner City Press' in-person questions about CEFC and Guterres, less than a month after Gulbenkian said Guterres was off the board, amid oil negotiations with CEFC. Video here. Then Guterres and Dujarric had Inner City Press roughed up and banned from the UN. Guterres' wife Catarina Vaz Pinto also worked for Gulbenkian. This is today's corrupt UN.

Friday, July 24, 2015

Inner City Press Asks ECOSOC Prez of Tax, Freedom Now & Palestinian Return Centre



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 24 -- In the UN system, the Economic and Society Council was supposed to be equal or similar to the Security Council, which is dominated by only five countries. But a news search today for ECOSOC finds very little, except for a fight about accrediting two non-governmental organizations to the UN (see below).

  Inner City Press on July 24 asked the outgoing and incoming presidents of ECOSOC about that NGO fight, and about the failure in Addis Ababa on Financial for Development to put corporate tax evasion firmly in the UN's jurisdiction. Video here.

 Ambassador Martin Sajdik, leaving the ECOSOC presidency to work on Ukraine for the OSCE, said that ECOSOC does debate tax, and should be listened to. Incoming ECOSOC president Oh Joon of South Korea acknowledged that Addis was only a first step. On the NGO Committee he said it should try to get NGOs involved, not to judge them except in special cases.

  Like these?

Back on July 20 two non-governmental organizations were accredited in the UN Economic and Social Council, with very different votes.  Freedom Now, with the support of the United Statees and 28 other counties, was accredited after losing 11-4 in the UN NGO Committee (see below). The speeches before the vote emphasized how the UN should accept even NGOs it agrees with.

 But on the NGO Committee's recommendation to accredit the Palestinian Return Centre, many of these same countries voted to disregard the recommendation and to exclude PRC. They said that one year was not enough time to get questions answered; PRC was accuse of links with Hamas, for which it has threatened to sue. 13 countries voted to exclude PRC, including France, Germany, the US and UK, Colombia, Burkina Faso and Greece.

  Sweden and 17 other countries abstained; 16 voted to uphold the recommendation and let PRC in, which occurred. Popularity contest or principle?

Back on May 29 in the UN's Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations, the application of Freedom Now was pushed to a vote by the United States; it was badly defeated, with eleven votes against and only four votes for, with one abstention (India) and three NGO Committee members absent: Guinea, Mauritania and, tellingly, Turkey.

  The “No” voters included Sudan, on which outgoing UN aid coordinator Valerie Amos refused to comment on May 28, here, and Burundi amid its crackdown and simultaneous submission of abusive police officers for service in Herve Ladsous' mission in Mali, MINUSMA, here.

  Freedom Now speaks up for (some) political prisoners, and usually effectively (that the Zone 9 Bloggers are still in jail is telling.) Freedom NOw can and will continue their work without the dubious “legitimacy” this Committee can confer. But the question arose, why did the US push it to a vote that it knew it would lose, and badly?  Why didn't the US work to “turn” some of the votes, at least from “No” to abstention or absent?

    But the “No” camp had their points on May 29. The chair of the Committee repeatedly refused to explain why for example the vote on Freedom Now could be pushed for, while another item in the morning, similarly pushed, was deferred. South Africa raised this, and later the Chair made a point of admonishing them, “for the record,” he said.  He did not appear impartial, whatever that means in the UN. Inner City Press live-tweeted it, here and here.

   The pattern now is for defeated applications like this to be referred to the full ECOSOC Committee, where the political mix is different. Does this mean there is less focus in the run-up to selection for the NGO Committee? Some expect to hear more on this from the US, from Ambassador Samantha Power as before, here, and soon. Watch this site.

 
  

Saturday, May 30, 2015

In UN's NGO Committee, Freedom Now Voted Down 11-4, Turkey "Absent," Move to ECOSOC Predicted



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 30 -- In the UN's Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations on May 29, the application of Freedom Now was pushed to a vote by the United States; it was badly defeated, with eleven votes against and only four votes for, with one abstention (India) and three NGO Committee members absent: Guinea, Mauritania and, tellingly, Turkey.

  The “No” voters included Sudan, on which outgoing UN aid coordinator Valerie Amos refused to comment on May 28, here, and Burundi amid its crackdown and simultaneous submission of abusive police officers for service in Herve Ladsous' mission in Mali, MINUSMA, here.

  Freedom Now speaks up for (some) political prisoners, and usually effectively (that the Zone 9 Bloggers are still in jail is telling.) Freedom NOw can and will continue their work without the dubious “legitimacy” this Committee can confer. But the question arose, why did the US push it to a vote that it knew it would lose, and badly?  Why didn't the US work to “turn” some of the votes, at least from “No” to abstention or absent?

    But the “No” camp had their points on May 29. The chair of the Committee repeatedly refused to explain why for example the vote on Freedom Now could be pushed for, while another item in the morning, similarly pushed, was deferred. South Africa raised this, and later the Chair made a point of admonishing them, “for the record,” he said.  He did not appear impartial, whatever that means in the UN. Inner City Press live-tweeted it, here and here.

   The pattern now is for defeated applications like this to be referred to the full ECOSOC Committee, where the political mix is different. Does this mean there is less focus in the run-up to selection for the NGO Committee? Some expect to hear more on this from the US, from Ambassador Samantha Power as before, here, and soon. Watch this site.

 
  

Friday, January 30, 2015

UN's NGO Committee Dominated by Sudan, Later US Speaks, Then Sycophants to Power


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 29 -- The UN's Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations on Janary 29 was dominated by Sudan and Mauritania, Cuba and Nicaragua. Led by Sudan, questions were directed at NGOs like Shi'a Rights Watch and the International Association of Independent Journalists. Inner City Press as before covered the Committee's back and forth, here and here.

The United States spoke up on the former, not the latter. At 6 pm the meeting abruptly ended, with the scheduling of a closed door session for 9:30 am on January 30 about the Committee's “work methods.”

  After that, US Ambassador Samantha Power, speaking by Twitter, said “very concerning initiative in NGO Committee to prevent UN from publicly reporting what member states say about NGO's seeking accreditation.... In an era of global crackdown on civil society, the UN's NGO Committee must set the example for openness & transparency. RT if you agree.”

  Among the re-tweeters was the UN Correspondents Association, a group that decided does not support the rights in independent journalists, having tried for example to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN, see here and here and here (UK Guardian here). This led to the new Free UN Coalition for Access, which presses for increased access to the UN.

 The feed of UNCA, more properly known as the UN's Censorship Alliance, is in fact run by censors, here. They didn't even cover the NGO Committee, only playing sycophant to Power after the fact. And so it goes at the UN. Watch this site.

Footnotes: the day before in the UN's NGO Committee the proposal was made to proceed, in meetings making up for those cancelled by snow, without interpretation. Cuba and Nicaragua objected, as others were sure to. We'll see.

Monday, January 27, 2014

At UN, Morocco Grills NGOs on Western Sahara, Of Turkey and Armenians, AU and "Incorrect Actions"


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, January 27 -- In the basement of the UN in New York, countries raise questions about the applications of non-governmental organizations that want to get into the UN. Often these are culture wars, on issues like gay rights. On January 27, Morocco grilled a number of applications for their positions on Western Sahara, for using the word "occupation," for interfering in Moroccan internal affairs.
The US, which last April proposed and then backed off on including a human rights monitoring component in the UN Peacekeeping mission in Western Sahara, repeatedly asked Morocco what its questions were for the groups, so that they could be answered.
Often in the NGO Committee, a country wanting to block a group just keeps asking questions, session after session. Belgium chimed in noting that several of the questions asked on January 27 were inappropriate, in its view.
In the final hour, three NGOs came up for questioning. A "Western Armenians" group was grilled by Turkey about its founding documents, and use of the term "minority." A Christian denomination, Episcopal, was grilled by Sudan. A Norway-based human right and development group, GNRD, was grilled by both Sudan and Israel -- quite a feat -- and then by India as well.
Israel wanted to know what awards the group gave out in Africa, and if the AU had filed a complaint about its staff behavior. The group's representative said they are back in Addis for the upcoming AU meeting (so is UN Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson, and US Deputy Secretary of State William Burns and a large team), so all must be well. But what about those awards?
India wanted to know how a previous answer had been stricken; the answer was the person is no longer with the group due to "some incorrect actions." This did not satisfy India, which asked the group's representative to reflect on it before the next day's session. The grilling will continue, in the UN's basement. Watch this site.

 
  

Saturday, December 15, 2012

In UN Migration NGO Fight, US & Canada Stand Alone w/o Small Islands


By Matthew Russell Lee
 
UNITED NATIONS, December 14 -- It was dark outside on Friday when the UN's Second Committee finally got down to voting on its dispute about migration.
 
  The fight was not actually about immigration, but rather which non-governmental organizations could participate in the UN's "high level dialogue" on the topic.

   As a proponent of Free Access -- in fact, as a founder of the Free UN Coalition for Access, FUNCA -- Inner City Press is predisposed to more rather than less groups.

  But a serious Group of 77 source told Inner City Press that "the Westerners" were using the resolution and vote to try to go beyond the groups that "ECOSOC and the NGO Committee let in." He added, "you know, front groups."

  Before the voting began, Algeria asked to know who had even requested the recorded vote. The chair, full of jokes as the proceedings went on, said it was Cyprus, for the European Union.

  Then the voting screens lit up. But no votes were recorded. There was laughter; there was a call to re-boot the machine, which the chair said would take 15 minutes. There were groans. Finally some votes started showing up. Australia said it's vote was wrong, then relented.

  Ultimately only two countries voted against: the US and Canada. Their allies in opposing Palestine's Observer State status, Palau, Micronesia and the Marshall Islands, didn't even come to vote. (Inner City Press took a photo of Palau's seat, next to where Palestine might be, empty). Israel didn't vote - but it was after dark on Friday.

  Then, this being the UN, there were speeches. Everyone cares about migration, but some said they'd had to abstain: 46 in all. Still there were 110 in favor, so the dialogue will happen. But how will it go? Watch this site.
 
Footnotes: Simultaneous in the UN North Lawn building Friday night were budget consultations, and a meeting abut the proposed mission in Mali, with resistance to the support package proposed by the AU.

  At 8:30 pm there was a fire alarm - did someone want to leave? Others asked about the delay in giving even the direction to "please stand by." But it was the night of the Department of Safety and Security holiday party, following DPKO's. So it was understandable.

  From within ACABQ, Inner City Press has some advance knowledge of the fights that will last to Christmas. But that will be for next week - with or without fire alarms. Watch this site.

Saturday, June 11, 2011

At UN, Gay Group Denied Consultative Status 8-7, Kyrgyz Pivot, India on Dalits

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 23, updated -- Culture wars continued at the UN on Monday when the International Lesbian and Gay Association came up for a vote for consultative status in the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations.

First, countries which opposed ILGA tried to stop them on a so called no-action vote, emphasizing that the group had declined to answer a new round of questionnaires, calling them discriminatory. In February, as exclusively covered by Inner City Press, ILGA was blocked by a no-action vote, 9-7.

This time the blocking vote failed, 7 to 7 with several abstentions:

US- No. Venezuela- abstain. Belgium- No. Bulgaria- No. Burundi- Yes. China- Yes. India – No. Israel- No. Kyrgyzstan- Abstain. Morocco- Yes. Mozambique- Abstain. Nicaragua- Abstain. Pakistan- Yes. Peru- No. Russia- Yes. Senegal- Yes. Sudan- Yes. Turkey- No

After that vote, Belgium asked the committee chair for “rules of procedure for dummies.” Venezuela took exception to being called a dummy. Things proceeded without humor.

Now the vote turned against ILGA, 8 to 7. The swing vote was Kygyzstan, which abstained on the no-action vote, but vote “no” against ILGA:

Sudan- No. Turkey- Yes. US- Yes. Venezuela- Abstain. Belgium- Yes. Bulgaria- Yes. Burundi- No. China- No. India- Yes. Israel –Yes. Kygryzstan – No. Morocco- No. Mozambique- Abstain. Nicaragua- Abstain. Pakistan- No. Peru- Yes. Russia – No. Senegal- No.

The International Foundation for Electoral Systems was delayed, 8-6, on a no action motion. Various groups were delayed by questions. For example, Human Rights House Foundation was blocked by a question from Morocco, backed by China and Sudan. (See update below.)

And the International Dalit Solidarity Network was blocked by India, which questioned if the caste based system is not already adequately addressed by the Indian government. The Dalit are... untouchables. And so it goes at the UN.

Update: the Human Rights House Foundation has written in to say

“We are glad to see that you pay attention to the work of the NGO Committee -- the process in the Committee needs more attention and should get on the radar of the media. On 23 May... some delegations including Morocco needed more time and were requesting that our application is dealt with on 24 May. For your information, HRHF has applied for ECOSOC consultative status in 2005 and received since 2007 51 questions from the NGO Committee. We have been deferred many times, but at this May 2011 session we have not been deferred and on 24 May 2011 the NGO Committee recommended by consensus that the consultative status should be granted to HRHF.”