Claimed UN Reforms are Sagging, High Flying Ban Oversees Raids on Press, Lawless

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 12 -- What is UN reform? For some it revolves primarily around air travel costs, with the intern in business class a sort of modern day welfare queen in a limousine.

  But in terms of accountability, when the UN Staff Union voted “no confidence” in Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, and Inner City Press asked repeatedly how much Ban spends on travel for himself and his entourage, no answer has been given.

  Doesn't transparency start at the top? 

  Similarly, while it was in the context of his “mobility” plan that Ban Ki-moon answered Inner City Press that his opponents in the UN Staff Union in New York were “selfish,” many point to Ban's closest adviser who merely move laterally, not out to the field.

  Shouldn't mobility begin at the top? It happened for Fink Haysom. It is happening for Michael Myer. Why not, say, Bob Orr?

  Oh we forgot, Ban's scribe Tom Plate, in belatedly launching his book “Conversations with Ban Ki-moon” at the Princeton Club, called Orr invaluable. All the more reason to share him with the world!

  There are claims of increased whisteblower protections. But just this week, James Wasserstrom decried the Sisyphusian processing of his retaliation claim.

  The focus on air travel mentioned above we attribute to US Ambassador for Management and Reform Joe Torsella. We have to say, we saw him in the North Lawn working it on the report of the Senior Advisory Group on Peacekeeping Operations.

  Friday as the General Assembly adopted the other reports of the Fifth (Budget) Committee, but not SAG, a well placed African ambassador told Inner City Press that Torsella, Miguel Berger of Germany as Fifth Committee chair, and the Permanent Representative of Fiji representing the Group of 77 had been charged with “cooking” a final SAG proposal.

  Apparently the dish was not ready: by close of business Friday it had not been adopted.

  So, is the UN being reformed? We think not. Down in the world of press relations, the new Free UN Coalition for Access has submitted twelve simple reforms to the top of the Department of Public Information. 

  Not a one has been implemented; there is not even a process. There are still no rules of due process for journalists.

  Hitting a new low, DPI conducted a raid on Inner City Press' office on March 18, and when the Spokesperson was asked by BuzzFeed about the raid, the photographs including of Inner City Press' desk and bookshelf were immediately leaked to BuzzFeed through an anonymous “Concerned UN Reporter” e-mail account.

  Reform? We think not. But there are people trying. Watch this site.

UNder Ban, Mistura for Mali, Staff as Selfish, Stonewalling, Raiding Press

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 5 -- As UN big wigs gather tellingly in Europe, there are several elephants in the room. The hottest job in the UN system, envoy to Mali, is slated to go to another European, Staffan De Mistura. Click here forexclusive of April 3 from Inner City Press.

  European are on a roll in Africa, at least through the UN of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. He's given Europeans the top posts in the Sahel, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Cote d'Ivoire -- Bert Koenders, chilling this week in New York well in advance of today's session of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions.

  Meanwhile, the UN Staff Union in New York has voted “no confidence” in Ban Ki-moon. Who on the Chief Executives Board will dare ask about it, without immediately dismissing it as somehow proving Ban's strong leadership? 

  What kind of a leader calls those who work for him as levels lower that the CEB “selfish”? Who will ask that?

  Just as Ban's advisers are too timid or self-interested to ask him tough question, Ban does not ask his Under Secretaries General to answer critical questions from the Press. 

  Herve Ladsous has been allowed to openly refuse to answer Inner City Press questions, on UN Television, even having the UNTV microphone seized to try to avoid questions about rapes in the Congo. Video here. Zero tolerance indeed.

  On March 18, Inner City Press' office inside the UN was raided, without notice or consent, by the Department of Public Information. Apres raid video here.

  Either they or those they let in, from the UN Censorship Alliance known as UNCA, took photographs of Inner City Press' desk and bookshelf and gave them anonymously to BuzzFeed.com.

  In fact, the photos were leaked, directly to the BuzzFeed reporter, immediately after Ban's Spokesperson's Office got a call about the raid from the reporter. How did that happen?

  Has there been any accountability, for Ban's UN's descent into dictatorial anti-press tactics? Not yet. DPI won't even disclose who it let into the Press' office. Watch this site.

On Haiti, EU Talks Culture Not Cholera, UN Youth Envoy Has No Answer on Dismissal

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNdisclosed Location, March 20 -- The day before Haiti became the topic in the UN Security Council, Inner City Press asked the UN's new Youth Envoy Ahmad Alhendawi if, like the UN's third highest humanitarian official John Ging, he thought the terse dismissal of claim for bringing cholera to the island hurts the UN's credibility, in his case with young people.

  Unlike Ging, Alhendawi said he didn't know much about that; instead he cited a relative who served in MINUSTAH at the time of the earthquake. Likewise, when Inner City Press asked about fairness for younger people applying to work at the UN, he answered that since he got hired, the UN must be fair. Really?

  Also on Haiti, at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva Wednesday morning Ireland for the EU spoke of helping with economic, social and cultural rights. But what about the UN saying the Haiti cholera claims were “not receivable”? Where's the rule of law in that?

  And where's the rule of law in the UN conducting a non-consensual search of Inner City Press' office on March 18 -- and then on March 19 demanding that the video shot after the raid be removed from YouTube?

  On worker fairness, Inner City Press earlier this week reported that Ban Ki-moon would meet with some in the Staff Union on March 19 -- those who didn't refuse to come based on the general membership's vote of no confidence in Ban after he called them “selfish.” 

  Inner City Press published an advance copy of what Ban would be told at the meeting, including about the use of the word “selfish.”

  Then... Ban canceled the meeting. And so it goes at the UN. Watch this site.

UN Raided Inner City Press After Leaks, Here Are More, No Confidence by Staff Union in Ban Ki-moon, Meet Favorites March 19, Leaked Speech

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 18 -- At the UN as Secretary General Ban Ki-moon prepared to confer on March 19 with those UN staff who will meet with him, after he called them all “selfish,” a formal protest to the meeting was filed by an elected UN Staff Union rep, of a union that the UN is trying to eliminate the jobs of.

  Inner City Press, whose UN office was raided on Monday,video here, records searched and photographs taken including by UN Correspondents Association president Pamela Falk of CBS, obtained the e-mail and publishes it below. 

  Inner City Press also obtained an advance copy of the speech of the president of those staff who WILL meet with Ban on March 19, despite the vote of “No Confidence” after Ban told Inner City Press that his opponents are “selfish.”

   Meanwhile, those who want to meet with Ban complained March 15 of Inner City Press' publication of a leak of their e-mail about staff members after Hurricane Sandy forced to work surrounded by rotting paper, with only dust masks. This was opposed by other UN staff.

   So alongside the UN Censorship Alliance a/k/a UNCA, the French Mission which called Inner City Press' publication of leaks “a hostile act,” its fourth head of Peacekeeping in a row, Herve Ladsous, CBS, Reuters and AFP - who was behind the raid? Here's the UN e-mails:

To: Ban Ki-moon, Susana Malcorra et al
From: Alex Smith Staff Representative, Unit 5
Date: 18/03/2013 05:42 PM
Subject: Meeting of the Staff Council and the Secretary-General of the United Nations

Pursuant to the resolution GM/44/02 adopted by the staff-at-large at the Emergency General Meeting on 24 January 2013, against a backdrop of detrimental actions taken against the staff by senior administration officials, and the derogatory statement by the Secretary-General that the staff in New York are "selfish", the staff representatives of Unit 5 will not attend the Staff Council meeting with the very official in whom the staff have declared a vote of no confidence.

There could be no issue of greater importance for the Staff Union, and particularly the Staff Council, than that we (staff representatives) should concede to will of the staff and abide by the Statute and Regulations of the United Nations Staff Union. The Statute and Regulations of the United Nations Staff Union are clear on the role of the Staff Council, vide Statutes 4.2, 7.1, 7.4 and 14.1 -14.3. Statute 14.3 is particularly poignant: 

The overall and operational policies shall be binding on the whole Union.

Should the Council meet with the Secretary-General, it will be a clear contempt of the decisions of the referenced Emergency General Meeting, which may invoke disciplinary procedure in accordance with Statute 15 and Regulation 8.3.1.

Should the Staff Council be in doubt as to the proper action in this matter, I suggest that it seeks the Arbitration Committee's interpretation of the Statute and Regulations of the United Nations Staff Union, in accordance with Statute 17.2, before it can meet with the Secretary-General.

Here was the complaining e-mail of those who WILL meet with Ban, followed by another Staff Union response:

Subject: Inner City Press: Investigative Reporting from the United Nations - another email leak
From: Barbara Tavora-Jainchill/NY/UNO
To: [Many]
Date: 15/03/2013 12:17 PM

http://www.innercitypress.com/unstaff2sandy031413.html

And a Staff Union response:

Subject: Re: Inner City Press: Investigative Reporting from the United Nations - another email leak

Disturbing news indeed, more so in the context in which you communicate it to us.

Considering I was in 3B, work in FMS, and provided dozens of masks, gloves, goggles, and as much protective equipment as I could take without getting in trouble (and I got quite sick), I'm surprised I wasn't properly deposed on the record. As SR for most of the staff affected in 3B, working in 3B at the time (and for 20+ years) none of the reporting by I don't know whom was forwarded to me (surprise!)- once again, no e-mails, no fact finding, no inclusion in the process- this was purposely done, as I am stonewalled at every juncture by the Presidency, the Administration, and staff opposed to my direct, timely, and proper ways.

Ms. Beldo's involvement is post facto (after the storm), and her work has been tremendous and valuable, though it doesn't provide a full scope of what actually happened, and the figures I have seen seem inflated and erroneous (The work Ms. Beldo required the administration to do was done at the lowest levels, by us, completing the vicious circle).

We have an Doctor in the presidency, expert in these matters, on full time release- he could not have possibly chaired this group? What are the professional standards this Presidency adheres to, especially in matters within their purview? I'd like to see this manual! it's very hard to figure out how you come to decisions, and how informed these decisions are, absent any documentary evidence.

Our Medical services are so poor, I question their role in our affairs. You go to Medical, they don't really take care of you. They have provided little in the way of support.

I would like to be deposed and include my findings and work in this narrative. I'm not sure this should be discussed at the SG's meeting, especially not without proper reporting, communication, analysis, and discussions within and by the council, duly recorded, of course.

My humble analysis, based on facts and not hearsay, as follows-

Since only the President, the EB of UNSU, and the recipients of this e-mail were given this communication, it's easy to infer that:

1. You're the leak.

2. A member of the EB is the leak; or

3.One of the recipients of this e-mail is the leak.

I think the council deserves an apology, since you suggested leaks come from council members, yet you would not reveal whom you think it was- no evidence was given by you to support your wild allegations. How rude of you to imply it's a council member, when we aren't privy to these communications, and you KNOW this. Or maybe I'm just rude for pointing it out, as you've suggested to me in your non communications.

The EB is so above reproach, as are you, that I'm certain none of you are culpable (Or am I? Degrees of certainty in this 44th UNSC are hard to predict, just as I posited in March of 2012, on the record).

You have provided no analysis, no opinions, no solutions, yet continue adding wood to the fire. A proposed solution on your part would be very helpful, so no one feels like you're unduly exercising your powers. A lack of proper reporting, relevant documentation and timely work has been a pervasive element of your administration, and you seem to interpret the rules to your own personal whims. (Re: overview of legal 

service invoices, and your narrow interpretations of the ToR).

Please clarify what exactly is the purpose of this link for the rest of the council, and why you don't feel the need for proper communication is necessary. Unless of course, you consider this link a proper form of communication on your part. And you do, to our detriment.

I find this general lack of professionalism on your part quite detrimental to the UN and the rest of the council, and the staff at large. By all means, correct me if I'm wrong. I'm really good at proving my points. And I'm even better at correcting my mistakes. But, on the record.

Thank God your term limits are up- you've been quite a poor leader, this happening at so many levels it's scary. I'm looking forward to a Presidency and 45th Staff Council that provides outcomes, solutions, forward movement, increased effectiveness, transparency, adherence to professional standards, direction.....let me not go on my list is really long, and your term is almost up. It's time for you and the rest of your excellent, hard working team to be out, since nothing has been accomplished that I can actually go back to my constituents with, that would point to positive outcomes during our "reign". This is the vile I get from my constituents, and I have little to defend. It's embarrassing.

UNSU is becoming more and more the laughing-stock of the world, and our inability to reinforce our image in a positive light will make our work in the future that much harder.

I'm hoping you will do everything in your power to make sure the elections are held ON TIME. Last thing I need right now is for you to stay in power any longer, given our shoddy track record and lack of concrete accomplishments.

I will not bring this to the council floor, to waste time debating inferences and assumptions. We have work to do at our meetings.

    Next: advance copy of what Ban Ki-moon will be told on March 19:

Mr. Secretary-General,

Thank you for having us. I have the honor to introduce to you the new Chairperson of the Council, Mr. William Bly. Mr. Bly will say a few words.

Sir, it is very unfortunate that we are here today not long after the Emergency General Meeting passed a vote of no confidence on you and your Administration. In this regard, we would like to reiterate what we told the Chef de Cabinet: the vote of no confidence is directly related to comments you made during a press briefing regarding staff members in New York and the Union that represents them. To be more precise, the vote of no confidence happened the day after those comments were made. The “selfish” comments, as we call them, were very badly received by staff; as far as the Union goes, we consider those comments very offensive but an expected consequence of the lack of respect and consideration staff members and staff related issues are being dealt with by the Administration. We are here today hoping that we can turn this unfortunate page and start anew.

There are many issues we would like to address with you but, due to time limitations, we will focus on just a few. The first is staff-management relations.

There seems to be resistance from the Administration in holding full consultations with staff representatives. At first, we were told that Town Halls were a form of consultation; then it was established this was not the case, but still Executive Offices were instructed by the Chief of Staff of the USG/DM that the consultations should be limited to forwarding a sheet of paper with a few questions and answers; recently we discovered that, even though an e-mail was sent by us to all Heads of Departments and Offices providing ways and means of holding consultations even in the absence of elected staff representatives, at least one administrative unit did not share any proposal with the Union and considered the Town Hall held with staff as consultation.

Our question is: how can we have full, good faith staff-management relations if the Administration keeps on avoiding implementing or creating hurdles to implement the basic legislation of this Organization, i.e., Secretary-General’s Bulletins, Administrative Instructions, Information Circulars? The respect for the rule of law starts of home, Sir.

The other issue we would like to bring to your attention is the budget cuts that the Administration has been volunteering to Member States for a while and that may have resulted in Member States recent directive to cut additionally USD 100,000,000.00 from the biennium 2014-2015 budget. We anticipate dire consequences from all the cuts, those proposed by the Administration and the one imposed by Member States, not only in terms of loss of posts and non posts resources but also in our conditions of service.

In this regard, in view of the violence being suffered by staff members all over the world, we would like to ask you the following: how does your Administration propose to ensure the safety and security of staff members given all those budget cuts, including those proposed by your Administration?

Finally, we would like to raise the issue of the UN internal justice system. Recent judgments have been very harsh with the Administration and its lawyers. Moreover, they call for accountabilit of actions taken by high Administration officials. However, we do not see this accountability to happen, on the contrary; it seems to us that processes are delayed and appealed until the manager in question leaves the organization.

On this issue, we would like to know how our organization can realistically expect to spread the word of justice around the world while internally the Administration seems to ignore and disregard decisions at UN courts when those find against managers.

Mr. Secretary-General, one more time we are here to stand our hand to you, to your Administration. We want to be part of the solution. But for this to work, we cannot meet once every 18 months, our contact has to be constant. Therefore we ask you that this is one of many frequent meetings we will have with you, ideally every three months. Finally, we are aware that the Administration is holding important internal discussions on issues such as downsizing, but we are not invited to those meetings. For our relationship to reach the good levels we wish, we have to be present on all discussions that have bearing to staff members’ conditions of service. Thank you.

Watch this site. 

In Ban Ki-moon's UN of Cholera and “Selfish,” Media Boss Stands Behind False Complaint, Then "Out of Office"

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 15 -- This UN has no accountability. It arrogantly “stands behind” whatever it says or does, because it has impunity. A fish, as they say, rots from the head. But the lower down it gets, the worse it smells.

  The UN brought cholera to Haiti, which has killed over 5,000 people. But faced with a detailed legal complaint, the UN waited 15 months then said only that the claim was “not receivable.”

   Inner City Press has asked for the legal basis, a half dozen times, without response.

  Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, when Inner City Press asked him about UN staff opposition to his budget cuts and mobility proposals in the course of a long and seemingly heartfelt response said that his opponent are “selfish.”

  Inner City Press asked his spokespeople if he might wish to rephrase. No, was the answer, Ban Ki-moon “stands behind” what he said.

  Lower down but similar, the UN Department of Public Information invited Inner City Press, representing the new and needed Free UN Coalition for Access, to a meeting on February 22 with the old UN Correspondents Association.

At the meeting, Inner City Press said clearly, “you are on the record.” And UNCA's President, Pamela Falk of CBS, said “he's going to write this up.” Audio here.

   Here is audio of UNCA's first vice president Louis Charbonneau of Reuters refusing to answer questions about 2012 UNCA/ Voice of America requests to Dujarric to "review" Inner City Press' accreditation, which VOA documents say Reuters and AFP supported (and now pursue by bad faith UN Security complaints, see below).

  But after Inner City Press did report on the February 22 meeting, with verbatim quotes and audio, the UN official left in charge of Media Accreditation, Stephane Dujarric, wrote to Inner City Press that “it was clearly understood by all sides there would be no reporting or recording of the meeting.”

  Inner City Press has provided audio; another attendee wrote to Dujarric and the head of the UN Department of Public Information that Inner City Press “did indicate, in response to a comment Pam made, that the meeting was being recorded.”

  So since February 27 Inner City Press and FUNCA have requested an explanation or retraction of the February 27 letter, which is in essence a complaint by the official in charge of UN Media Accreditation.

  Having no response at all, Inner City Press wrote to the head of DPI on the morning of March 15.

  Nine hours later, as Inner City Press was covering an evening meeting of the Commission on the Status of Women at which UN Women's Bachelet announced she will be leaving the UN, it was not the head of DPI but Dujarric who replied, stating on this that “the letter stands and I have nothing to add.”

  How can that be, when the central claim of the letter has been disproved by two participants and even recorded audio?

  But this is the UN, where the Secretary General can call the headquarters staff “selfish” and then stand behind it.

  And so, given Dujarric's lawless behavior, it is any wonder that UNCA “leader” Tim Witcher of Agence France Presse has filed a frivolous complaint, along with Reuters' Michelle Nichols, about an entirely verbal interchange with Inner City Press?

  Tellingly, this was about the use by the head of UN Peacekeeping, Herve Lardsous, of Reuters and AFP, on one of whose management boards Ladsous served, as pass-throughs for half-answers to questions about rapes which Inner City Press had asked.

  A fish rots in stages, from the head through mid-level officials to wormy scribes like Witcher.

  Inner City Press immediately responded to Dujarric's flabbergasting statement that his false February 27 letter “stands” -- with audio, send also to the head of DPI. 

  Then an auto-response from Dujarric, that he will henceforth be away from UN Headquarters. Hit and run, they call it. Or lie and run? And what of Ban's DPI? We'll have more on this. Watch this site.

After Vote of No Confidence, UN Staff Won't Meet Ban's Malcorra, DRC Differences

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 17 – In a telling sign of mismanagement, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's chief of staff Susana Malcorra can't meet with the leadership of the Staff Union unit worst impacted by ill-preparation for Hurricane Sandy.

  On a resolution of the Staff of the Publishing Section, e-mails obtained by Inner City Press reflect that Malcorra was rebuffed in a belated attempt to meet. This followed a January 24 Staff Union wide resolution expressing “no confidence” in Ban Ki-moon.

  While related to criticism of Ban's decision that 70% of $100 million in budget cuts must come from personnel costs or salary, the rift was worsened by Ban's reaction to the criticism.

  Inner City Press asked Ban about the opposition, and in the course of a lengthy and heartfelt January 22 answer, Ban used the word “selfish” for UN staff in New York. 

  The next day Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson's office if they wanted to amend or explain the characterization. No, they said, Ban's stands behind it.

  Days later the “no confidence” resolution was passed. Now on a resolution of the Staff of the Publishing Section, being moved from their jobs apparently permanently using water damage from Hurricane Sandy as a pretext for moves taking place before the storm, Malcorra can't even get a meeting.

  Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman about the following leaked e-mail chain:

From: Staff Representative, Unit 5 @UNHQ
To: Susana Malcorra/NY/UNO@UNHQ
Date: 06/02/2013 02:10 PM
Subject: Resolution of the Staff of Publishing Section, DGACM

Dear Ms. Malcorra,

I will not be attending your meeting today with the 44th Staff Council staff representatives. I believe there is an obligation by the staff representatives to ensure the will of the staff is communicated. Please see the attached resolution.

And then

From: Susana Malcorra/NY/UNO
To: Staff Representative, Unit 5 @UNHQ
Date: 06/02/2013 03:01 PM
Subject: Re: Resolution of the Staff of Publishing Section, DGACM

I regret that you will not be able to make it this afternoon. I have received the Resolution and have some comments to make.

Regards,

Susana Malcorra, Chef de Cabinet
Executive Office of the Secretary-General

[attachment "PS Staff Res 02042013.doc" deleted by Susana Malcorra/NY/UNO]

   [We will have more on this deleted attachment and others.] While the spokesman responded to other parts of the question -- including explaining that he had replied in at longest two hours to a wire service where he used to work -- no response at all was given to this (mis) management issue. 

  The less than two hours response was on the Democratic Republic of Congo framework agreement, about which Inner City Press has repeatedly asked not only the Spokesperson's Office but also Malcorra herself. Like they say, no confidence. Watch this site.