UNITED NATIONS, January 30 -- While the UN purports to be recycling, its garbage cans with separately holes for glass, paper and waste in fact have a single bag behind them: nothing is separated.
After exposing the fake recyclining on January 22, and asking UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about in on January 25 (he said everyone can see it's fake, so it's OK), on January 29 Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's Special Adviser on Climate Change Janos Pasztor about it. Video here.
To his credit, after the briefing Pasztor came with Inner City Press to see one of the fake recycling garbage cans, directly in front of the door of the UN Correspondents Association. Looking in through the separate Glass, Paper and Waste openings and seeing inside a single garbage bag, Pasztor agreed that it was and is totally unacceptable. We'll see.
Later on January 29, the response of UNCA -- whose president Giampaolo Pioli was right there when Pasztor was shown the scam -- was not to recycle, but to simply remove the top of the garbage can.Tweeted photo here. This is today's UN, and those who are supposed to watch it. We'll have more on this.
Inner City Press also asked Pasztor about the $100 billion in the Paris Agreement on climate change, and what percentage might just be market rate loans, even to coal projects. Video here. We'll have more on this, too.
On January 25, Inner City Press asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the fake recycling. Video here. Dujarric said that everyone can see it, then that he was going to lunch. Video here.
But not only is this fake recycling contradictory to the UN's and Ban's ostensibly environmental positions - it also appears, from responses Inner City Press has received, that many people are not aware of this particular pretense by the UN. From the UN's January 25 transcript:
Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you about recycling at the UN. I noticed that these cans that are, that exist that have circles for glass and plastic, paper and waste, when you look into them, there's just one bag. So, it seems like it's all mixed, and it's not actually being separated or recycled. Is that true? And if so, what's the point of having the separation?
Spokesman: Well, if you've seen it, I have no doubt that it's true. I can look into the situation and… I can look further into the garbage recycling issue.
Inner City Press: I think the question really is, is it misleading to pretend to be recycling if you're not? If you're just not, just say you're not.
Spokesman: I think anybody can look, when you throw something into the garbage, anybody can look and see what's going on. On that note, I'm going to have lunch.
Then after interaction, Inner City Press broadcast the garbage can live on Periscope, preserved on YouTube here.
Isn't this hypocrisy? Why didn't the media using this scam garbage can -- CBS, Voice of America, Foreign Policy, Reuters and AFP from down the hall, the UN Correspondents Association right next door -- say anything about this?
Inner City Press, aware of UNCA's and these media's attempts to censor and even through the investigative Press out of the UN, filmed it and puts it online here.
Amid self-congratulations about the Paris Agreement on climate change, several environmental groups even inside the conference site on December 12 were critical. But when UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon took three softball questions from correspondents at the UN on December 14, it was another stage in Ban and his enablers' use of the UN to campaign for a Nobel Prize. The first question was, by CBS, to ask Ban about his legacy.
The next, by the outgoing vice president of the UN Correspondents Association -- selling seats with Ban for $6000 on Wall Street -- was, There is criticism, what is your response? But not a single criticism was listed: the easiest question possible. The last was, from UNCA's earlier in the day question, was What should be do?
Inner City Press asked loudly about corpses dumped in the streets over the weekend in Burundi, where several UN member states are warning of a new genocide, and on which Ban and his office have yet to comment. Ban had no response - he returned to say he will brief the General Assembly; his spokesman said he will take more questions on December 16: also pre-selected?
Later in the day, Ban and his UN Censorship Alliance which sells access with him will be reviving and re-establishing UN corruption in the wake of the indictments of former President of the General Assembly John Ash, Sheri Yan, the founder of South South News and Ng Lap Seng. Watch this site.
On COP 21, earlier on December 14, Inner City Press asked at the UN climate change press conference which replaced the noon briefing and all other topics about developed countries skirting responsibility and liability, and of the Trans Pacific Partnership undercuts efforts on climate. The answer was of a Twitter feed nearly uniformily positive. The UN, apparently, hears and answers only what it wants.
An NGO from the United States pointed out that President Barack Obama is pushing the Trans Pacific Partnership, which will undercut climate change efforts; Obama's “climate change hiatus” after the failure of the Waxman Markey bill failed in 2009.
An NGO from the Philippines called the agreement less concrete than in the past; another called it a “huge disappointment” on human rights. But there was Ban Ki-moon, talking about all his travel in the past nine years (and, one surmised, campaigning of a Nobel Peace Prize, with an eye on the Korean peninsula). A stream of press releases ensued; we'll have more on this.
Back on November 20 in the run-up to the talks, Inner City Press asked UN official Janos Pasztor if commitments on adaptation funding will be increased, about corporations making sometimes dubious pledges in connection with CoP21 and specifically about requests that the Green Climate Fund not accredit HSBC or Credit Agricole, given their track records.
Pasztor earnestly answered the questions, though he said he was unaware of the request to the GCF about the two banks (see here); he also said that while the march planned in Paris for November 29 has been canceled by the government, marches can be held elsewhere - in other countries.
Agence France Presse, before other journalists got even one question, cut in with repeated “follow-ups.”France is branding CoP21, while now limited civil society participation - except for corporations.
Relatedly, when the UNFCCC held a press conference in Bonn earlier in the week, the corporate media in the room had no questions, then few questions. But the selection of questions submitted by social media trended toward Thomson Reuters Foundation and the Climate Group; press questions submitted by Twitter and email were never answered. We'll have more on this.
On October 13 Inner City Press asked Pasztor about criticism of the OECD's claims about developed countries' progress toward $100 billion in 2020, and about the IMF's or Christine Lagarde's call for a carbon tax.Video here.
Pasztor replied that at the meeting in Peru, finance ministers had raised questions about the OECD's methodology, which he said the OECD Secretary General had responded to. He called Lagarde's proposals “an important way that countries can address this issue.”
Back on September 21 the 2015 Equator Prize winners were announced at a UN press conference featuring Alec Baldwin and Hilaria Baldwin, UNDP's Helen Clark and UNFCCC's Christiana Figueres, about whose 3 degree Celsius prediction Inner City Press asked last week.
Inner City Press asked Figueres about her fellow UN official Janos Pasztor's prediction that current Intended Nationally Determined Contributions would equate to 3.5 degrees. She did not disagree; UNDP's Helen Clark said the INDCs are not ambitious enough yet.
Given UNDP's direct work with governments, Inner City Press asked Helen Clark about, for example, the Democratic Republic of the Congo being accuses of going soft on illegal logging, for example on Lebanese-owned firm Cotrefor. Video here.
Alec Baldwin cited Canadian tar sands, and also ExxonMobil (earlier on September 21, Inner City Press asked about BNP Paribas funding coal power plants). Climate Week began...
Inner City Press on September 17 asked UN's Assistant Secretary-General on Climate Change Janos Pasztor whether INDCs to date would raised temperatures by 3 degrees Celsius, as Christiana Figueres has said, or 2.5 degree as the Guardian has an unnamed UK official saying.Video here.
Pasztor's answer to Inner City Press included "3.5 degrees;" Figueres' spokesperson chimes in this is the difference between frying and cooking. But who was the Guardian's anonymous "merely warming" source?
Amina Mohammed, Special Advisor to the Secretary-General on Post-2015 Development Planning, spoke about financing issues, on which Inner City Press asked about how to count if the $100 billion goal is reached by 2020.
Back on August 11 after the climate change announcement of Australia, Inner City Press on August 11 asked UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about it, video here, transcript here:
Inner City Press: in the statement about the countries coming out with their climate change targets, Australia came out with one. It's sort of become a touchstone, many people are saying there's no way it would lead to 2°C…
Spokesman Dujarric: First of all, we very much welcome countries that issue their INDC. It's an important step, and we very much hope that all Member States will do so. They really need to be seen as a floor and not a ceiling. They're a starting point. There will be discussions prior to Paris. There will, obviously, be discussions in Paris. People are free to, obviously, express their opinion on certain countries' INDCs, but for our part, we're glad we have them, and we do see them as a starting point in the discussions.
Back on June 18 when the UN gave a climate change briefing by UNDP's Cassie Flynn, and Jo Scheuer, on June 18 Inner City Press asked about the under-funding of the Least Development Countries Fund, and if South Korea is backsliding in its Intended Nationally Determined Contributions. Video here.
The answers, on film, were to promote other funding vehicles, and to say that South Korea has still yet to file its INDC.
Pasztor said that the CDM is still needed; he said country have committed not to backslide. Video here. (South Korea had yet to submit its INDCs, it seems). Inner City Press asked Pasztor to provide a comment, if he has one, once South Korea's filing is made.
Back on May 5, Inner City Press asked him about criticism of the Green Climate Fund, including at the recent Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. Video here and embedded below.
Specifically, why will the "Green" Climate Fund provide financial for coal-powered plants? Pasztor replied that some felt that an exclusion for coal would have been divisive. On statements at the PFII that the UN is helping to "monetize" nature, Pasztor replied that most states feel differently. But what about the indigenous?
Pasztor in his opening statement had praised the UN Pension Fund for now investing in "green equities" and "green bonds." Since the UN has responded to Press questions about irregularities alleged at the Pension Fund by emphasizing how separate and independent it is, Inner City Press asked Pazstor if the UN Secretariat had brought about this Pension Fund decision.
Pazstor replied that the Pension Fund answers to the Secretary General and that "she" - Carolyn Boykin, presumably - had made this decision. We'll have more on this, after noting Pasztor by no means the least responsive UN official...
When last September 21 the People's Climate March assembled at Manhattan's Columbus Circle, there were anti-corporate puppets in front of the Trump International Hotel and Tower, speeches by coal miners and from the Marshall Islands.
Many called on the UN to do better. But UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon joined the march mid-way, at Radio City Musical Hall with New York Mayor Bill de Blasio. Senator Chuck Schumer was on hand, walking by a Bronx contingent chanting how Fresh Direct has broken its promises.
Inner City Press' 90 second video of the march is here.
The UN's or "BKM" (Ban Ki-moon) Climate Summit will feature Cargill and Walmart, Credit Agricole and Bank of America. The last of these is the first, in terms of funding mountain top coal removal. These are the contradiction. Inner City Press tweeted photos on@InnerCityPress. More to follow.
The night before the People's Climate March, the UN buildings on First Avenue lit up with photos and footage of trees and fish and written messages. It is called "illUmiNations." Inner City Press video here.
Looking back at the UN's press release for the upcoming "VIP Press Screening" -- hard to know how they could exclude non-VIPs from it, or why they would want to -- there were laudatory quotes about UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, and:
Obscura Digital has staged similar large-scale architectural mapping projection events on the Sydney Opera House, the Guggenheim Museum, and the Sheikh Zayed Grand Mosque. For examples of previous work, please visit the following link http://wdrv.it/1tx7Emd.
In that video compilation, well worth watching, there are also corporate projects for Coca-Cola and YouTube owned by Google, with history at the UN.
A message Inner City Press photographed on September 19, here, was "In nature's economy, the currency is not money but life." Is this true of Coca-Cola?
There are questions about the UN's UNcritical approach to corporations and corporate "partnerships."
In the run up to the UN's September 23 Climate Summit, the UN put out a media advisory promoting the participation of 14 corporations ranging from Saudi Aramco through Cargill, McDonald's and Walmart to Bank of America and Credit Agricole.
Orr mentioned a luncheon during the summit about carbon pricing and the UN Global Compact, a branch of the UN which repeatedly says it does not enforce substantive standards, only encourages reporting and dialogue. Well, Saudi Aramco did not respond to the complaint about “employees allegedly dismissed after being detained for participation in civil rights protests in Saudi Arabia.”
And what of the environment? Bank of America has been the number one funder of mountain-top removal coal mining, but Ban Ki-moon made it chairman the chief of his Sustainable Energy for All initiative.
On behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, Inner City Press asked that those making commitments, like the 14 corporations named, hold question and answer sessions during the summit. We'll see.
As ICP Asks UN of Fraud of Ban's Nephew, Who Rents to UN, Spox Says No Contact
By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, May 29 -- UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was in his native South Korea for five days then headed to Vietnam while Press questions remained and remain unanswered by the UN about his links to the Vietnam related scandal surrounding the suicide of South Korean businessman Sung Wan-jong, and his own nephew Joo-hyun "Dennis" Bahn. Inner City Press asked the UN on May 15, video here.
Now a sworn affidavit regarding Ban's nephew Bahn's conduct has surfaced, here. Given the UN's refusal to answer questions -- Ban's deputy spokesperson called Inner City Press an "obnoxious child" for its questions, while Ban's head of peacekeeping outright refuses all Press questions -- the publication of this affidavit should require some response by the UN, given its similarity to what Bahn did, saying Ban spoke to Qatar's Emir about real estate.
Inner City Press: I’ve asked a lot about this, that is why I’ll ask again now. It has to do with the nephew of the Secretary-General. I read what was said in Seoul. You were on the trip. But I’ve obtained and have been extremely troubled by a court filing regarding Mr. Dennis Joo-hyun Bahn in which basically the same structure of what was alleged in the Viet Nam building, false documents, making claims that weren’t true, were alleged in a US court involving real estate in Pennsylvania that he presented himself as a representative of a real estate company out in Pennsylvania, opened up a false bank account, solicited money from individuals, and put it into it. And this is a sworn affidavit, and the individual said that he called the FBI, as well as the Fort Lee police, and produces a document showing that he set up a fake company.
So I understand people are not responsible for their relatives. I’m sorry to ask you this, but it does seem to me extraordinary that this type of fraud is alleged against a relative of the Secretary-General who’s at a company doing business with the UN. So I’d like some kind of a comment on why the Secretary-General apparently never disclosed that his son… his nephew works at Colliers and what his response is to these practices that seem to involve invoking the name of the UN and of the Secretary-General—
Spokesman Dujarric: I think the Secretary-General spoke very clearly on his relationship with his nephew. I think we’ve briefed you on the few contracts that Colliers had with the UN, which predate the Secretary-General. They now, I think, have some sort of involvement in the FF building, which came because they… they took over or renamed a company that previously managed it. The FF building has been occupied by the UN for decades or a long time, way before Ban Ki-moon became Secretary-General. He has no knowledge. He has no update. He has no involvement and no knowledge of what his… this gentleman does. And I think if you have any questions, you could also ask the nephew.
Inner City Press: When’s the last time he spoke with his nephew?
Spokesman: He has no contact with his—
Inner City Press: The nephew called a newspaper in South Korea to try to do damage control. Spokesman: He has no contact with his nephew.
"I, John Dragone, do hereby make the following Declaration based on personal knowledge and good faith belief:
TCI engaged Defendant Bahn in January 2011 as an independent contractor that had the ability to refer customers to TCI for the purpose of attempting to obtain mortgages. In the event such referral led to a loan, Bahn would be paid a commission.
In fact, Bahn defrauded the Plaintiff and at least one other person by assuming a title of “Managing Director” of TCI, issuing fake letters purporting to be from TCI, collecting deposit monies from the victims, and then depositing those funds in a bank account of “Terrace Capital LLC”, set up without my or TCI’s knowledge in New Jersey.
After investigation, on January 11, 2012, I learned of Bahn’s contact with Peter Salvatori, who I understand has an interest in the Plaintiff. I promptly contacted Mr. Salvatori’s mortgage broker and advised him of Bahn’s fraudulent activities.
At no time was Bahn a “Managing Director” of TCI or otherwise authorized to use the title “Managing Director”. Neither TCI nor I had any knowledge with respect to Bahn’s use of the title “Managing Director” of TCI. Bahn’s activities with respect to setting up “Terrace Capital LLC” and a bank account in that name were done without the knowledge or authority of TCI and me. Prior to my investigation in early January, neither TCI nor I had any knowledge that Bahn had allegedly demanded and collected monies from the Plaintiff and deposited them in a bank account bearing the name “Terrace Capital LLC”.
19. If Bahn did demand and collect monies from the Plaintiff and deposit them in a bank account bearing the name “Terrance Capital LLC”, it was done without the knowledge or authority of TCI or me.
After my investigation, in February 2012, I contacted the FBI, the Bergen County (NJ) Prosecutor’s Office, the New York Police Department and the Fort Lee Police Department.
I filed a police report with the Fort Lee Police Department detailing Bahn’s fraudulent activities with respect to Mr. Salvatori and the other victim of his fraud."
We'll have more on this - watch this site.
After Ban's deputy spokesperson on May 20 told Inner City Press he would get a simple list of UN contracts of Colliers International where Ban's nephew works, video here, he did not return with it on May 21. But on May 22 he had a read out, and Inner City Press had and has more questions. Video here.
On May 22 when Inner City Press asked if Ban had disclosed that this nephew works for Colliers which rents to and for the UN, Haq said " I believe the disclosure is reviewed, like I said, by an outside company. I… all I can attest to is what's on the website, and you can see that for yourself."
On May 27, Inner City Press asked Ban's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric:
Inner City Press: I’m sorry, it's not to play gotcha, but I'm quite interested in it, the public financial disclosure, which was a major plank of the Secretary-General, okay, yesterday I asked you if [PricewaterhouseCoopers] is still doing it, and it seems like it's not, because I looked at procurement, and KPMG has the contract to do it.
Spokesman: Okay. Then I will check.
Inner City Press: that’s not the main point. That's not the main problem. The problem I have is, even directly on the Secretary-General's main website, it says financial disclosure and it says most recent report, it’s of 2011, so I guess I don't… without… has… is something changed with the programme? Is this as central to the UN's…? It also came up on the Yemen envoy, has he filed? He's not listed…
Spokesman: No one said that he hadn't filed. The Yemen envoy has fulfilled all the requirements in terms of financial disclosure. As to the other questions, I can check. I'm not aware.
Inner City Press: But I… because this came up while you were away. My question is, there's an option of making public financial disclosure, the disclosure of which is simply marking a box and saying, I don't want to disclose. But, he didn't do that. He's not listed in the list. If you look at the current list of UN [Special Representatives of the Secretary-General], he’s not there…
Spokesman: He's done everything that he is supposed to do. Sir.
But then, where's his name? Why is Ban's "most recent" form from 2011? We'll have more on this.
Inner City Press: And on this disclosure question, last week there was a lot of roundabout, so I want to ask a clear-cut question. It seems to be undisputed that the nephew of the Secretary-General works with Colliers International, which had contracts with the UN and still either owns and manages the FF building, which is rented by UNDP [United Nations Development Programme]. So, my question was just, there a UN disclosure… financial disclosures form? It's not in the public one. I was told to check, and I did. Is there a non-public… the non-public financial form what used to be filed with PwC (PricewaterhouseCoopers), and I don't know if it still is, that deals with this issue of relatives being with a company that does business with the UN?
Spokesman: I think the Secretary-General's fulfilled everything that he's been asked to do on the financial disclosure form, and I think, as he said very clearly in Seoul, he has no knowledge and no business and no relationship to what his… to what business his nephew may or may not have. And there's really… I mean, there's nothing for me to add on that.
Inner City Press: The only thing… I'm not asking about the project on Viet Nam. I'm not asking about that whole story line. What [inaudible] something what's sort of a much smaller, but more concrete thing that emerged is this idea that one would assume that a financial disclosure system of the UN would include whether there are relatives of the official that are with the company doing business with the UN. That's the only side I'm asking about. What you said doesn't really answer that. One, is PwC still in charge of the ethics disclosures?
Spokesman: Yes, I believe they are.
Inner City Press: Okay. And is… I mean, I guess are you willing to look at that form and say whether Colliers International in that connection is listed or is it going to be listed in the future…?
Spokesman: You know, I think one has to… again, I think the Secretary-General fulfils everything he's been asked to do and more and has been… led by example on that front. I think in more general terms, there's only so much control one has over a family member. The Secretary-General has absolutely no knowledge of his nephew's business and has no control over it, and I think has spoken eloquently on the issue in his press conference in Seoul.
We'll have more on that. But on Ban's UN website, under "Current disclosure" the year is 2011, discloses only this:
Apartment, Seoul, Republic of Korea Land Residential (Lot), Seoul, Republic of Korea CD Account, Chase Bank, USA, joint with spouse Checking Account, Chase Bank, USA, joint with spouse Deposit Account, Kookmin Bank, Republic of Korea Equity Account, Kookmin Bank, Republic of Korea Savings Account, Chase Bank, USA, joint with spouse Two (2) Savings Deposit Accounts, Kookmin Bank, Republic of Korea
While is his more than subsequently disclosed, it does not list Ban's nephew working with Colliers which rents to and for the UN. Does any subsequent disclosure? Inner City Press asked Dujarric on May 26, its dozenth question in a row on this.
Meanwhile an aggregation piece on Ban's five day trip and ambitions mentions his nephew, and the name Colliers - but NOT that Colliers rents to and for the UN. Some call it, softball behind a paywall. Perhaps more is coming.
Back on May 22, Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq said the following, about the company where Ban's nephew works:
"I was asked a few days ago about whether the United Nations has rented office space through the Colliers company. That’s actually a difficult question, in turns out, because Colliers International NY LLC is a company whose name has changed several times over the years. Although it became known by that name in 2010, it also used to be called GVA Williams many years ago.
"The UN had a contract with GVA Williams from the 15th of June 2007 to 15th of February 2013. By then company had changed its name to Colliers International NY LLC and it was for "real estate consultancy and brokerage services".
"Colliers, in the name of Colliers Tri-State Management LLC, is now the owner and landlord for the FF Building, although the lease to the UN is enacted via a number of leases for sub-“lots” between the UN and a subsidiary company called “304 E.45th LLC”. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) also rents some “lots” in the FF building.
"When the UN first rented space in the FF building, it was with GVA Williams. Apart from the leases for the FF building, the UN has no other contracts with Colliers International NY LLC."
When allowed, Inner City Press began with these few questions (there will be more)
Inner City Press: thanks a lot for this detailed answer on Colliers and its predecessor. So this is something that I wanted to ask. It has to do with, since it is public record that the nephew of the Secretary-General works for the company, and I understand it's your position that there's no connection between these contracts and that. I did want to know whether the disclosures, public or confidential within the UN of high officials, contain any disclosures of the employment or business interests of close relatives so that at least they can be known and checked. This is my question.
Deputy Spokesman Haq: The procurement process goes through a process that is independent of other officials at the UN. There's a very clear process that… by which procurement works. And… and we have actually talked about this at length many times in the past, but it is unrelated.
Inner City Press: Right.
Deputy Spokesman: Both to senior officials, but to any of their family members…
Inner City Press: But what I'm asking about is the disclosure process in the UN. I understand there's two forms of disclosure. There's mandatory internal disclosure that's not made public, and there's a voluntary public financial disclosure. What I'm asking is whether the internal confidential but to the UN, to the ethics office, disclosure of high officials involves business interests of close relatives that do business with the UN. That's just a factual question.
Deputy Spokesman: I don't really… I think that there's an implicit assumption in your question which I don't share.
Inner City Press: I'm not assuming anything. It's just a question.
Deputy Spokesman: The safeguards in the procurement process are built in to keep it separate from other officials.
Inner City Press: But I'm asking about the disclosure process, not the procurement process, just a question about what the UN disclosure process is. It's not about what my assumption of my question.
Deputy Spokesman: Disclosure to whom?
Inner City Press: There are two disclosures… high officials file with the UN detailed supposedly… I haven't… well, I have seen them, but I'm not… the detailed disclosures, and then there's the public website which gives less information…
Deputy Spokesman: There's…
Inner City Press: Does the detailed one contain close relatives that do business with the UN… that’s the question.
Deputy Spokesman: There is a series of financial disclosures where you detail your financial dealings as well as the dealings of your immediate family. And that is disclosed… and that is disclosed to an outside party that reviews these… these financial statements.
Inner City Press: And can I ask whether this one was disclosed?
Deputy Spokesman: First of all, I believe the disclosure is reviewed, like I said, by an outside company. I… all I can attest to is what's on the website, and you can see that for yourself.
But there, Ban lists "Residential lot, Republic of Korea, Apartment, Republic of Korea, and CD account, Chase Bank, joint ownership, USA" -- nothing about his nephew working with a firm that rents to and for the UN.
On May 21, Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Haq:
Inner City Press: I've seen the Secretary-General's nephew has given what's described as an exclusive interview with the South Korean newspaper the Mainil Business newspaper, and among other things he says that Sung Ju-Soo, the second son of Sung Wan-jong, the suicidal business leader, quote, “came to New York last March and asked me to seek help from the Secretary-General over the property sale”. Then he says: But I have never asked for his help regarding the sale. But the newspaper then says the interview confirmed that the son Sung Wan-jong tried to lobby Ban Ki-moon for the deal. This is what I want to know. This now seems a little closer than just that the nephew said it; like, an individual from the company came to New York asked the nephew, can you raise it? And in a written piece of paper, the nephew said it's been raised. Now he said he's never spoken to the Secretary-General. What is your response? Is there some way we can get some response in English rather than simply to — to the South Korean newspaper?
Deputy Spokesman: The response that you are looking for in English was given by the Secretary-General himself in a press conference in Seoul yesterday where he was asked about various situations and you'll have seen — and you even asked me a question about that press conference. So I'm sure you've seen that transcript…
Question: He asked to refrain from reporting on it. [overlapping talking]
Deputy Spokesman: No, that's not all he said. He said quite a bit. Look at his entire response and that is his response and that is the response we have.
On May 19, Ban urged the media not to ask about, or report on, issues surrounding his nephew. Inner City Press has asked, and will continue to ask, what rules and safeguards apply for example to a company the Secretary General's nephew works with, Colliers International, doing business with the UN, as Colliers Vice Chairman brags. Here is theUN's transcription of Ban's May 19 answer in Seoul, and below.
Inner City Press went to the May 19 UN noon briefing and asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq what Ban had meant, video here, and for how much business Colliers, where Ban's nephew works has done with the UN. Haq refused to provide the latter information, saying "Ask Colliers."
Inner City Press has in the day since collected information, below. But first we note that Ban's spokesperson's office and Haq himself HAVE previously answered Inner City Press questions about particular UN contractors. For example, in April 2009 Haq answered Inner City Press about the Petrocelli Electric Company. So do they only not answer when a Ban relative is involved? What's the difference?
For now, here's some of the business with the UN of Colliers International, where Ban Ki-moon's nephew Joo-hyun "Dennis" Bahn works:
220 East 42nd Street: "The United Nations Development Programme signed a 10-year, 42,931-square-foot lease covering the entire 20th, 21st, and 23rdfloors of 220 East 42nd Street, aka The News Building. Andy Roos of Colliers International acted on behalf of the United Nations Development Programme."
220 East 42nd Street: "United Nations Women is setting up shop at 220 E. 42nd St. where it will lease 71,204 square feet on the 17th, 18th and 19th floors. Additionally a transition team will settle into 13,746 square feet on the 4th floor -- for a total of 84,950 square feet... The deal has been percolating since last year and was made possible because another UN agency moved out. The UN's broker, Andrew Roos of Colliers International, represented the United Nations Population Fund in a move out of the building to 605 Third Ave. last year."
605 Third Avenue: "In a 15-year, four-party deal, the United Nations Population Fund leased just under 131,000 square feet at 605 Third Ave. The turnkey space encompasses the fourth through sixth floors. The UN was represented by Andy Roos at Colliers International, who said the complicated transaction took 18 months to complete."
In fact, the UN's "FF" building on 45th Street has a Colliers International sign on the front of it, facing the sidewalk. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's nephew works at this firm. The UN should answer about its Colliers contracts, but won't.
By contrast on April 6, 2009, Ban's then spokesperson Michele Montas DID answer Inner City Press about a particular contractor, and on April 13, 2009, deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq told Inenr City Press that it had been given details about that contract - NOT being done here, about Ban's nephew.
Inner City Press: I have a procurement question. It’s become clear that, number one, the electrical contractor for the UN, Petrocelli Electric, the founder has been indicted in the Southern District of New York for bribery. At the same time, the operator of UN Television, National Mobile Television Venue Services Group, is basically going bankrupt. Everything is being sold and they’re trying to move their people into the basement area as a final refuge. How can it be that these contracts were entered into with companies in one case being indicted, and in the other case going bankrupt?
Spokesperson Montas: Well, in specific cases, when the contracts were entered, of course, there was no indictment and there were no suspicion that there were any wrongdoings. In terms of the second contract, of course, we can look into this. There are several companies going under and we cannot predict in advance which company will go under. I can try to get more information for you from the Procurement Office, but, at this point, as I said, we cannot predict what will happen when we sign contracts....
Spokesperson: Matthew, I just got your answer. It was just brought to me.
The contract with the Petrocelli Electric Company covers overall electrical installations, operations, maintenance, alterations and major projects, and remains in place even though the UN has suspended the vendor from participating in any further procurement activity. That’s what I have for you. And we’re also aware of the financial difficulties faced by VSG’s parent company, NMT. The Organization is dealing with the situation in consultation with the VSG management. So I got your answer pretty fast for you.
Inner City Press: last week I’d asked about this contract with Petrocelli Electric that the UN has, in light of the indictment of the founder of the company. Over the weekend The New York Times reported that the FBI says that the founder is connected or has associations with the Genovese crime family. So what I’m wondering is now given... if you accept that report is true in The New York Times, what is the UN going to do about these contracts?
Associate Spokesperson Haq: Well, Michèle told you what we’re doing in terms of that, and what she said last week hasn’t changed.
Question: So the current contract is going to continue? How long does the current contract run?
Associate Spokesperson: Right now, they’re suspended from the list of vendors, but we do have, of course, our current facility needs. So we have an existing contract. But I believe she mentioned to you the suspension last week and...
Question: For future business. I just want to know how much the current business is and whether this new report makes any changes.
Associate Spokesperson: I think she mentioned to you what the details of that contract were. But I can just re-submit that over to you if you don’t have those details.
Question: I don’t think she said either length or dollar value or any of the details.
Associate Spokesperson: No, I think she mentioned what the services are. So, I’ll get that over to you.
Inner City Press: I want to ask two press freedom questions. One is on Burundi — there are these reports that the media or particularly foreign correspondents are not being allowed into this neighbourhood and cameras taken by the police. I want to know whether Mr. Djinnit is aware of what, what the UN thinks of that. And I wanted to ask, maybe if you can clarify or amplify. I saw the Q&A the Secretary-General did in South Korea, and he said, "I have seen reports having to do with my nephew. While I'm fulfilling… whether true or not, while I'm fulfilling my duties now as Secretary-General, while such unnecessary incorrect allegations or rumours cause inconvenience to my work as Secretary-General, so I'd like to ask you to refrain from doing that." So, because of the… like, what is he saying? Is he saying refrain from asking questions, refrain from…?
Deputy Spokesman: No. First of all, that's an abbreviation of the transcript. I'll refer you to the full transcript.
Inner City Press: I looked… okay.
Deputy Spokesman: He makes a denial of any involvement in this issue. But, his basic point is that he will go about his own work. These questions really don't apply to him or his activities.
Inner City Press: But, who… my question is this. Who is he asking to refrain from doing what? That's a direct quote from what he said.
Deputy Spokesman: He's not making an order to anyone in the press. It's very clear, and it's particularly clear in the context if you look at the transcript that he's talking about an issue that for him, in his head, is resolved.
Inner City Press: But this is… okay because this is the one part of it. I guess I understand that if… if… that things are being played out in a court in Seoul and whether the nephew… what he said that the Secretary-General did or not is, I guess, not going to be answered until it's answered there. But, there's a simpler question, which is, the nephew works for Colliers International, which is a New York real estate firm, and the Vice-Chairman said online that they do business with the UN. So my question is… and I asked you this before, but I'm going back to this because it seems like a very fair question — what are the rules when a relative of the Secretary-General or any high official does business with the UN?
Deputy Spokesman: Procurement at the UN is done through our procurement office. It is not done through any sort of issue having to do with family or family connections. It's a procurement process that all firms have to abide by, and that's how firms get contracts.
Inner City Press: So how did Colliers… how much business has Colliers done with the UN?
Deputy Spokesman: You would have to ask Colliers. As for UN procurement, it makes contracts by its normal activities. This is not connected to anyone related to the Secretary-General. Yes. Oh, and… oh, wait. You had another question on Burundi. And on your Burundi question, see, you ask so many questions that it gets lost. On your Burundi question, of course, we'd be concerned at any efforts to crack down on press. We do have a small human rights team… team of human rights workers who are in Burundi and they're examining human rights issues and they'll follow up on any sort of allegations of any problems in the country.
Here is what Ban said, by the UN's own transcription:
"I’ve seen reports having to do with my nephew. Regardless of whether it’s true or not, I feel quite ashamed that a scandal like this has surfaced and caused controversy. About my nephew’s business activities, I have never known and never took part in any of this. I’d like to tell you clearly that this has nothing to do with me. As the Secretary-General of the United Nations, I am doing a lot of things for the international community and the international community expects a lot from me. While I am fulfilling my duties as Secretary-General, such unnecessary and incorrect allegations or rumours cause inconvenience to my work as Secretary-General. So I’d like to ask you to refrain from doing that."
Who is Ban request to "refrain," from what? The questions about his nephew are entirely legitimate, and continue because they have not been answered. They don't just go away.
While the Free UN Coalition for Access openly opposes such non-answering by Ladsous (and Ban's spokespeople), Ban praises and partners with the old UN Correspondents Association, whose leaders praise Ban back, do not ask about conflicts of interest, and have even tried to get the investigative Press thrown out for such reporting. This is the context.
On May 18, Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq an event more specific question: did Ban raise any of its relatives' real estate projects, for example Landmark 72 in Vietnam, to the Emir of Qatar in a meeting on September 24, 2013? May 18 video here and embedded below.
Haq repeated that Ban is not involved, that he and Ban's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric have "nothing to add." On May 15, Haq told Inner City Press that the UN does not have to respond about any relative of Ban who is not a UN staff member, even if they do business with, or with the name of, the UN and Ban. Inner City Press has raised that higher within the UN.
The JoongAng Daily reports that its affiliate JBTC has obtained an email in which Ban's nephew Bahn Joo-hyun wrote:
“QIA said the emir of Qatar had an official meeting with the UN Secretary General at the United Nations [Headquarters] at 11:30 a.m., and [Secretary General Ban] mentioned the Landmark 72 upon request of [Ban Ki-sang]" - Ban's brother.
Using the time 11:30 a.m., Inner City Press searched past versions of Ban Ki-moon's schedule and found such a meeting:
"September 24, 2013, 11:30 am NLB SG Conf Rm 3rd flr The Secretary-General with H.H. Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani, Emir of Qatar"
But the UN's read-out for that meeting did not mention real estate:
"The Secretary-General met today with His Highness Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani, Amir of the State of Qatar. The Secretary-General reiterated his call for a political solution to the crisis in Syria, and expressed gratitude to Qatar for its support to the Central Emergency Response Fund and other generous humanitarian assistance. They discussed the Palestine-Israel issue and also the importance of United Nations political efforts in Yemen. The Secretary-General thanked the Amir for Qatari support on the Alliance of Civilizations, sustainable development and climate change.
New York, 24 September 2013."
The Alliance of Civilizations is headed by Qatar's former Permanent Representative to the UN.
(On May 18, 2015, Inner City Press also asked Haq for Ban Ki-moon's response to Qatar detaining BBC journalist Mark Lobel while he was reporting on the treatment of migrant workers in the run up to the World Cup there; Haq's and the UN's response seems muted.)
It is reported that Ban's nephew Ban got business trying to sell off a Sung-linked skyscraper in Vietnam by saying that Ban had discussed the project with Emir of Qatar (on whose private jet Ban has flown), and by reportedly forging a letter of commitment from Qatar's sovereign wealth fund.
On May 14, Ban's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric replied to Inner City Press that Ban has "no connection" with this nephew - strange, just as a matter of genetics.
On May 15, Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq a closer question: to confirm that Ban's nephew Bahn has worked for the real estate firm Colliers, and the Colliers has done business with UN.
(Bahn's LinkedIn page lists him at Colliers, whose Vice Chairman Andrew Roos says "Some of his major clients include various divisions of the United Nations, including its Joint Pension Fund... For the United Nations, he has been responsible for more than 500,000 square feet of leasing transactions.")
Despite this set-up, Haq insisted that the UN does not have to, or does not, respond about family members if they are not UN staff.
But what if the Secretary General's family member does BUSINESS with the UN? Haq insisted the UN will not comment, that added that he faced similar questions "ten years ago," apparently an allusion to Kojo Annan and the Mercedes in what's called the Oil for Food scandal. To this has the UN sunk. Video here and embedded below.
Inner City Press will be asking again, if it is legitimate for the UN to say it will not answer any questions about high official's family members using the UN connections to get business and going business with the UN. Here is what UN deputy spokesperson Haq said, and thenthe transcript
Inner City Press: Yesterday, I asked Stéphane about these developing stories about the nephew of the Secretary-General and the claims made about the Qatar Sovereign Wealth Fund. And the reason I… he said yesterday, that the Secretary-General has nothing to do with his nephew. But I wanted to ask because there's been more reporting since even yesterday and basically what's emerged in these articles is that the nephew, Mr.… I don't want to get the name wrong. We'll call him Mr. Ban… Ban Joo-Hyun… had made two claims. He had made a claim to the construction company that was run by the now deceased business man, that the Secretary-General had raised this very project to the Emir of Qatar in a meeting. And he also made a claim that the Qatar Sovereign Wealth Fund was behind the deal. So this is… the question that I have for you is, is even if the Secretary-General is saying that these statements didn't occur, that's what I was trying to get a yes or no on, or if they did occur, he has nothing to do with them, has he informed the members of his family, including his nephew, including his brother who is part of this story, and including, for example, his son-in-law, not to invoke his name when they seek to do business deals that obviously involve Sovereign Wealth Fund of countries that have business with the UN?
Deputy Spokesman: The Secretary-General keeps his work life and his personal life separate. He is not involved in this matter and this is not a matter that involves any UN personnel. Therefore, I would have no comment on it.
Inner City Press:: But there are obviously people reporting quite to the contrary, so I'm asking you is there…
Deputy Spokesman: No, they're not. Actually, Matthew, they're not reporting to the contrary, they're reporting about other people. Nothing of what you said suggests any connection to the United Nations.
Inner City Press: The nephew said that Ban Ki-moon raised this with the Emir of Qatar, so my question is can you deny that? Do you deny that the Secretary General has raised that? Okay.
Deputy Spokesman: The Secretary-General is not involved in this in anyway.
Inner City Press: Okay, and also my fourth and further question. The nephew is reported to work at a New York real estate firm known as Colliers, which partners of whom say they have done business for the United Nations system. So I wanted to know… this seems… this is a just a factual question, is it true that the nephew of the Secretary-General works for a firm called Colliers? And is it true, will you confirm or deny that this firm has done business with the UN?
Deputy Spokesman: I do not have to comment on questions of family members of the Secretary-General who are not employed by the United Nations.
Inner City Press: Doing business with the UN, you don't have to comment?
Deputy Spokesman: He is not UN staff. He has not been UN staff and his business does not concern the United Nations.
Inner City Press: If somebody does business with the UN… I mean that's what I'm asking…
Deputy Spokesman: Matthew, a decade ago, people asked me different questions about other different relatives, but the point is what we concern ourselves with is the work of the UN and its personnel. Yes.
Inner City Press a month ago on April 17, then again yesterday on May 14, asked Ban's UN spokespeople about scandal, the first time drawing laughter and yesterday on a closer link to Ban, a flat but vague denial. The closer link involves Ban's nephew Bahn Joo-hyun and an allegedly forged letter from Qatar's sovereign wealth fund, the Qatar Investment Authority.
Implausibly, Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric on May 14 told Inner City Press that Ban has “no connection” with his nephew.
In the same briefing he refused to explain why the UN, in responding to Press questions about another UN scandal involving the cover up of child rape in the Central African Republic by French soldiers and Ban's (French) UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous, provided answers only to correspondents who hadn't even asked or in some cases reported about the rapes.
Dujarric told Inner City Press, "Matthew, I can't be responsible for what parties you're invited to or not invited to." Ban later that day feted the so-called UN Correspondents Association, whose leadership not only never asked about Sung Wan-jong but actively tried to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. It's the UN's (or Ban's) Censorship Alliance. The new Free UN Coalition for Access, FUNCA, takes a different approach.
