UN's Ban Ki-moon Says He Defends Press -- After His UN Ousted & Restricted Inner City Press, Banned

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, March 7 -- After Inner City Press was summarily ejected from the UN, which it has covered for 10 years, on February 19 (audio here), the ostensibly deciding official Cristina Gallach told no less than Nobel Peace Prize laureate Jose Ramos Horta that Inner City Press would still be able to cover the UN.

What she didn't say was that Inner City Press' ability to cover the unfolding UN corruption scandal in which she has played a role would be curtailed under the proposed arrangement - by design.

 Inner City Press is as of March 7 not allowed to cover anything on the second floor of the UN conference building (ECOSOC, Trusteeship Council), cannot effectively edit videos of UN Q&A, and must leave the building by 7 pm. These are restrictions.

  All this, without any due process, for having sought as a journalist to cover an event in the UN Press Briefing Room on January 29. Petition here.

  UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, whose office has confirmed receipt of at least three petitions to reverse Gallach's order, and seenprotests of the UN in for example Jaffna in northern Sri Lanka for ousting Inner City Press, said these words in Baden-Baden, Germany on March 7:

"journalists face growing efforts to silence their voices – through harassment, censorship and attacks.  Journalists are not criminals.  But they are often mistreated."

Note: on February 19, Inner City Press was physically ousted from the UN Security Council stakeout where it was writing up the evening's Syria meeting and was told "you are a trespasser" in the UN and that it would be handed over to NYPD. Audio here.

 "During the past nine years as Secretary-General, I have been working hard to defend the press."

  Well, the above happened on February 19, and restrictions remain in place with no right to appeal, and no due process. Ban and his senior advisers have been informed of it.

  On February 26 the Government Accountability Project, which defends whistleblowers, wrote to the US Mission to the UN, Ambassador of Management and Reform Isobel Coleman, to ask the US to ensure Inner City Press gets back its office and Resident Correspondent's pass. GAP letter here.

  GAP's Beatrice Edwards cited the UN's lack of due process and of rules, and the seeming retaliation against Inner City Press for its reporting. (There's also the physical ouster of Inner City Press, audio here.) Other missions have openly taken action: what will the US Mission do?

 On February 29, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric another question about UN - this time DPI - seeming corruption, and about GAP's letter, Video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: I'd asked you previously about South-South News, which is pretty much in… is in this indictment of Mr. [Francis] Lorenzo and Mr. Ng Lap Seng as a conduit for funds for the alleged bribery at the UN, why its… its footage and a number of its pieces are included in UNTV in an archive, and I checked today.  They're still there.

I wanted to know, since there's no other med… non-UN media that I can find that has its material inside that archive, why is that, and why does it remain to be the case, given the fact that it's named as a vehicle for bribery?

Spokesman Dujarric:  Obviously, I think that's a question you can address to my colleagues in DPI.

Inner City Press:  Okay.  They're not communicating too well.

Spokesman:  [Calls on another.]

Inner City Press: Again, I'll keep it very short, but I wanted to ask you, the Government Accountability Project, which you know, which represented Mr. [Anders] Kompass and other UN whistle-blowers, has issued a letter on Friday in which they say… they call for… I guess I'll put it in personal terms… for my resident correspondent pass to be returned and my office.  And they say the action was retaliatory in response to independent critical journalism.  I'd like to know what your response to this respected group reaching that conclusion is.

Spokesman:  My simple response would be no, and I'm sure they will get a response from whoever they addressed the letter to.

 We'll see.

 Meanwhile in defense of Ban and Gallach, anonymous troll account has taken to tweeting, now at Spanish journalists, that Gallach is fine and didn't throw Inner City Press out of the UN on two hours notice without once speaking to it. But those are the fact. Among the new troll account's followers are Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric and four UNCA board members, plus Reuters bureau chief Louis Charbonneau, who has a history with this, see here.

US Mission to UN Is Asked to Ensure ICP Gets Its Office & UN Pass, by GAP by Matthew Russell Lee

  Because as a working journalist it needed access to cover the February 25 UN Security Council meeting about North Korea, and only in connection with filing a lawyer's letter telling Gallach and the UN not to touch Inner City Press' office or files, Inner City Press late morning entered the UN with a so-called "Green P" non-resident correspondents pass.

  At the day's noon briefing, after asking of Burundi, Western Sahara, Darfur and the UN corruption scandals, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric two simple question, to which he said #AskGallach. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: I'd like this to go smoothly, so I'll do it really quickly.  I noticed that on Monday, when I was not able to attend the briefing, that you had a little Q&A about my accreditation status.  So, I just want to state one thing very briefly.  A legal letter has been received by DPI [Department of Public Information] to not touch my office, not touch any of the files, but I need to cover the meeting this afternoon.  I'm just stating that, because I thought it was inappropriate.  But, my question is as follows:  Is it common UN practice to… to tell a journalist to leave the building and give up Resident Correspondent status without ever once speaking to them?  Is that considered an investigation?  What is the lowest standard that the UN can go to to have something to be considered a review of the facts?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I would encourage you to direct all those questions to Ms. [Cristina] Gallach and to DPI.

Inner City Press:  I have one more question.  What are the rules for the use of physical force by UN security?  Because on Friday evening, I was pushed down the escalator and into the street, and my laptop was thrown on the street, and I… and I was offering absolutely zero physical… physical… so I wanted to know what is the recourse for someone to whom this happens?  That's my question.

Spokesman:  I would encourage you to raise all these issues having to do with your accreditation, your treatment, and so forth to Ms. Gallach.

Question:  What are the rights of people not to be pushed by UN security?

Spokesman:  That's… that was my answer to your question.  Thank you.

  Wait - so the UN has no protocols on the use of force? Or DPI's Gallach is in charge of the use of force, and ordered it? How can the UN and USG Gallach be so contemptuous to the most basic forms of due process?

Inner City Press is opposing all this.

  And so now are a range of people from around the world, who have signed a petition to immediately restore Inner City Press to the UN Resident Correspondent accreditation it had for nine years until, without any due process, the UN pass was physically torn from its chest as UN Security throw its laptop onto the sidewalk in front of the UN (also owned by the UN and immunity from US law including the First Amendment).

Here are just some of the comments of those signing the petition directed to Ban Ki-moon:

UN cover-up artists are taking advantage of the dying months of Ban Ki-moon's tenure to remove a thorn in their side, because they are worried the new SG won't want to start out with a fight. -James Bone, Shelter Island Heights, NY

ICP has been the only voice for the oppressed in #Burundi, #Haiti & #Yemen at #UN. -Eloge Tinya, Lagos, Nigeria

Innercitypress is the voice of many oppressed Burundians and many Africans under dictatorship. I have decided to stand with the oppressed and not the oppressor, UN needs to practice what it preaches by setting free innercitypress to do his work! -Lievin Manisha, Pineville, LA

ICP asked questions that will bring clarity on the agreement the Prime Minister of Dominica signed in Macau on August 25, 2015 together with Ng Lap Seng and a UN official. -Hon. Hector John, Salisbury, Dominica

I am signing for UN to restore Matthew Lee Inner City Press right to access to the UN as a Resident Correspondent to question authorities because it is the fundamental of free speech as the UN preaches to other countries it must first practice itself to set example. -Smret Kibrom, San Gallo, Switzerland

Freedom of press. -Prem Kumar, India

innercitypress defends the human rights of Burundians and help to avoid genocide, please free innercitypress! - MICHAEL Tim, London, United Kingdom

I'm signing because the barring of access to Mr. Lee appears to be at worst motivated by a reluctance to engage with and continue to receive the probing questions he asks, and at best the result of a petty personal vendetta based on unprofessional antipathy towards Mr. Lee by the 'respectable' wing of the United Nations press corps. -Marlon Ettinger, Hastings-on-Hudson, NY

I am signing this petition for Matthew Russell Lee and Inner City Press be restored to the shared UN office and Resident Correspondent accreditation they have had for eight years prior to this pretextual incident. It also requests, as does the Free UN Coalition for Access that Matthew co-founded, that an investigation be launched into how all of this occurred. Moreover to call for aggressive investigative journalism at the UN and to tell the leaders of the UN that the UN, too, must live up to the principles of due process and freedom of the press. -Martha Fassil, New York, NY

Comment l'onu peut agir de sorte alors qu'ils sont comme meilleur modèle de la démocratie, je garde espoir qu'on aura un jour un vrai dirigeants de l'onu pour tous. -Steve Ndacasaba, Montréal, Canada

I'm signing cause, want a real journalist who tells it like it is. No agenda but the truth. I am supporting him for standing up for UN bully. -Paulos Welday, Cambridge, United Kingdom

Han er en journalist som forteller sannheten til verden.
Mussie Tesfay, Oslo, Norway

UN should walk the talk. Practice what you preach - rule of law, democracy, freedom of expression, of press. Reinstate ICP Mathew Russell Lee to full resident reporter. -Seble Ephrem, London, United Kingdom

we need a voice for africa
redae medhane, Kitchener, Canada

Incredible. This banning is the exact opposite of the transparency and accountability that the UN should be defending for all institutions. This must be reversed.
Denis Rancourt, Ottawa, Canada

ICP is the most reliable source of information at the UN. The other corporate media are controlled by the special interest groups. Thus their journalistic integrity is always suspect. ICP is voice of the voiceless - of course unlike the UN and its sponsors and financiers. -tsehaie mahary, edmonton, Canada

I express my solidarity with Mathew, God bless you friend
Mohamed MAYARA, El Aaiun, Western Sahara

Matthew Lee has been a lone voice asking the difficult questions in the UN press gallery. -Martin Field, Geneva, Switzerland

I have seen Matthew only defending the truth. He is a journalist with a genuine journalist ethics. He is also the one of the most intelligent and courageous journalist. He is a model how other journalist should be. He should be given a noble prize for what he does not get banned from the UN. -Yacob Woldehiwot, London, United Kingdom

The UN cannot be dismissive of new media as people get their news from new media.The UN cannot pick and choose media persons according to their whims and fancies. -soraya patel, India

Shame on UN. -ibrahim alhaifi, Sanaa, Yemen

I believe this is censorship of the press. Shameful. -Douglas Smith, New York, NY

I believe this is censorship of the press. Shameful. -Douglas Smith, New York, NY
I'm signing because I believe in ICP to bring balance to the reporting of UN activities around the globe. I also believe in the ability of Lee to investigate, without fear or favour, to keep the UN reputation intact. -Saare Tsehaye, London, United Kingdom

Because this is censorship on free press. Inner City stands for Truth, Justice & Peace !!! -Aman Kubrom, Frankfurt, Germany

How can the UN be so ridiculous?
Feridun Akpinar, Turku, Finland

For Truth & Transparency, there must always be those who Question more. -Auet Melache, Bolton, United Kingdom

I am signing because UN is being unfair and need to take some responsibility. -Lynda Charles, Boynton Beach, FL

He's credible and follows the ethics of journalism to the fullest. -Amanuel Tseggai, Stone Mountain, GA

We need the alternative,independent and investigative media to be present everywhere. -Marja Konttila, Solna, Sweden

I demand the U.N. unconditionaly and ASAP to restore access to Inner City Press`Matthew Russell Lee to the U.N. as a Resident Correspondent. -johannes abraham, Germany

I believe in press giving independant views on ignored issues
Cyrilla Bwakira, Johannesburg, South Africa

Ban is a tool. -Michael Klett, San Francisco, CA

InnerCity Press has been very professional and a life saver. His reports on different issues around the world helped uncover certain hidden truths. If Ban was in #Burundi 2 days ago, I can say it is mainly because of his persistence of bringing Burundi to light from the repression of de facto president
Manirambona Juma, Kirundo, Burundi

Matt spells out the truth and exposes the games protecting the outdated system for what it currently is.Matt actually supports the principle of the UN, those within it, support themselves. -Andy Wren, Littlestone, United Kingdom

Weil ich sihe das innercity einsige unabhengige median vetretete vor
Stimmenloss. -Iassu nugusse, Germany

Matthew Russell Lee, founder of the Inner City Press, is a veteran investigative journalist I have relied upon on UN news for the past six years. He is truthful, and pursues truth in reporting tenaciously and with integrity. We need more journalists like him at the UN to keep us informed. He and his Inner City Press must be reinstated as a fully accredited resident journalist to the UN. -Elias Amare, San Rafael, CA

We need unbiased and impartial reporting from the UN. -David Macilwain, Australia

Does the UN have something to hide? The UN is also obligated by the same principles and norms it preaches. I demand the UN to reinstate Matthew Russell Lee to his desk so he can do what he does best- pure journalism. He is the only honest journalist at the UN compound and being the voice of the voiceless. -Daniel Berhe, Seattle, WA

I am signed because ICP thrown out on the street by the decorator of UN media Personnel with out his belongings Shame UN. -Yakob Tesfaye, Edmonton, Canada

I am signing this because I want to learn about the corrupt UN security council.
TEKLU BAHTA, NORTH CHICAGO,

I respectively ask UNSG and Mr Ban ki-moon to reture Matt to his post us a dedicated reporter in the UN. I have a huge respect for the guy. It would be a travesty of justice if a reporter like matt is out the office of the biggest office in the world when we need a reporter of such kind. -Kibrom tekeste, berkeley, CA

I'am signing because I believe in freedom of speach and Free Press Reporters/Journalists. -Ndayizeye APOLLINAIRE, Gatineau (Hull), Canada

The UN repeatedly acts like human rights protections apply to everyone but themselves. -Betsey Chace, Cambridge, MA

Matthew is the only bona fide journalist reporting on UN. He alone is rectifying the defects created by system of diplomatic immunity. Why makes his job harder? Do you have something to hide from him? He makes UN a more acceptable organization and indeed, by genuinely reporting he makes this world a better place. -T Chan, London, United Kingdom

I am signing for UN to restore Matthew Lee Inner City Press right to access to the UN as a Resident Correspondent to question authorities because it is the fundamental of free speech as the UN preaches to other countries it must first practice itself to set example.
Sara Haile, Alexandria, VA

Matthew Lee is, far and away, the hardest-working and most dogged of any journalist at the United Nations. His arbitrary expulsion is both outrageous and a reflection of the fact that things are not as they should be at the United Nations, and certainly not what YOU would expect. - alberto martin, New York, NY

He is the best one, for the world in the UN which tells us the truth. So if he is out of his work then the UN only remains with out the truth.
ghebreyohanis michiel, bachenbülach, Switzerland

Burundi medias burned by violent/genocidaire regime;our genuine source of information from UN was ICP:fair,not sided.Pls,Reestablish ICP in its rights!
Ange Nganji, Bujumbura, Burundi

I'm signing because I believe in the freedom of the press. I often reads Matthew Lee's work which reports on difficult topics and events that need covering and exposure. He should be reinstated at your earliest convenience.
Rebecca Myles, New York, NY

I'm signing because I'm an advocate for real, independent journalism and condemn the UN's decision to remove Inner City Press's access based on a nonsensical pretext! -Hermon Gebrai, Northamptonshire, United Kingdom

I appreciate Inner City Press' persistent and prepared journalism at the United Nations. -Brian Concannon Jr., Marshfield, MA

Freedom of the press. -Luiz Rampelotto, New York, NY
18 hours ago

The UN needs to be held to standards of openess, transparency and freedom of the press. -Samuel Horton, Silsden, United Kingdom

Lee should not have been expelled, it's a disgrace to the UN. -Richard Johnson, Potomac, MD

It's unfair to throw someone out like that with out hearing from his side of history. -Hermon Tsegay, Slough, United Kingdom

Such a crck down on media in an organization promoting freedom of speech and information is really awkward and clearly disgraceful and unacceptable. -Florent Nduwayo, Kibungo, Rwanda

This is another in a long line of incidents conclusively evidencing the UN's complete and utter disrespect for the laws of its HOST country, the US, in particular the 1st amendment!! UN IMMUNITY = IMPUNITY--END IT NOW!! Journalists are the ultimate whistleblowers, and I am well aware of how UN whistleblowers like Mr Lee are persecuted and suffer grievous harm at the hands of rogue UN officials. The treatment of Mr. Lee is an outrage.

How ironic this has happened just as the US House Committe on Foreign Relations is today, on 24 Feb, holding a hearing about the gross mistreatment of whistleblowers at the UN and WIPO. Congress must act now to cut off 15% of US appropriations to the UN this year on account of its failure to protect and encourage UN whistleblowers like Mr Lee, as provided for in US law, as it already did to WIPO!! -ted beacher, Geneva, Switzerland

ICP is doing a great job. UN should support,respect and promote free speech. -Kalu Thapa, Kathmandu, Nepal

There are more...

 But the UN Correspondents Association, at least its 15 Executive Committee members, issued a February 22 statement in context fully supporting the throwing of Inner City Press into the street, the seizure of passport, the Banning, all of it. We wonder if these scribes' employers know about this.

  For now we reiterate the obvious: the UN Press Briefing Room is presumptively open to all press. If Spokesman Dujarric, or DPI's Gallach, wants to lend it to their friends, at least provide a notice so journalists hungry for news don't get excluded and get nothing.

UNESCO on Free Press in South Sudan, Its Irina Bokova on Press Ouster from UN Headquarters?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, February 21 -- In the UN's continued withholding of news and answers about South Sudan, the reports of the UN's own knowledge of abuses are now being withheld from its own impacted national staff.  So Inner City Press has published below multiple leaked documents from inside UNMISS.

  Amid or because of this reporting on what the UN knows but doesn't say, on February 19 at the demand of UN Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach, Inner City Press was thrown out of the UN. Audio here. Its UN Pass has been confiscated and its files seized. Questions sent to Gallach and Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric have not been answered.

 In South Sudan, UNESCO has today "welcomed the establishment of an autonomous Media Regulatory Authority in South Sudan, to oversee the media industry in terms of regulation, media development and issuance of broadcasting licenses. This is expected to contribute to a vibrant, independent and pluralistic media in South Sudan, by curbing the increased rate of incidents affecting journalists, end impunity on crimes against journalists as well as create an enabling environment for the media to operate in."

  Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access it co-founded have repeatedly asked the UN about attacks on journalists in South Sudan (and also in UN Headquarters), often without response.

  (Here is an email to Gallach that was never answered:

"On February 27 [2015], Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access asked Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the case of journalist Mushfiqul Fazal and JustNewsBD.com. Video here. While vague assurances were offered, there was no clear guidance that countries (or others) cannot seek to get journalists dis-accredited from the UN (which has happened before, leading to the formation of FUNCA, see below). Nor has the Spokesperson's Office responded on the new issue of Internet censorship and danger to the journalist's family. Hence this e-mail, and request for your action on the case of Mushfiqul Fazal and JustNewsBD.com.

We understand that you only began earlier this month, but you should be aware that your predecessor Peter Launsky communicated regularly with FUNCA on press freedom issues. Due to actions taken by the UN Correspondents Association's Executive Committee in 2012, including UNCA secretly meeting with UN officials and seeking to expel investigative media (see documents obtained under the US Freedom of Information Act here and here and hereand here), I and another elected board member quit and co-founded FUNCA.

FUNCA stands for the defense of journalists, and for fair treatment of all journalists. We do not believe the UN should partner with a group that has sought to get journalists expelled from the UN; we are opposed to first quesitons at press conferences or stake-outs being set aside for such a group. We are for a more than one-party system. We are for fair treatment.

Unlike what UNCA has recently said, we are opposed to the UN being able to search the lockers or other belongings of the journalists who cover it; Luiz is particularly opposed to the idea of using UN identification card swipe information to track the movement of journalists, against which he says assurances were given when the swipe system was implemented.

On all of that you will hear more from us. But for right now, we are writing to ask you to take action on this case of a UN accredited journalist having his media blocked in his home country, and that you make clear that states or others cannot lobby your DPI to try to get journalists asked critical questions expelled, or threaten them in any way.

We will appreciate your written response, thank you."

  This email was received but never answered; no contact until the order on February 19 to clear out in two hours. There is no UN appeals process, and Gallach never asked Inner City Press for its side of the story before ordering it out.

  So the UN's treatment of the independent press inside UN Headquarters does not meet the standards UNESCO is welcoming in South Sudan.

  UNESCO chief Irina Bokova, who wants to succeed Ban Ki-moon as Secretary General, will be in UNHQ in New York on Monday, February 21. Inner City Press, its resident correspondents badge torn off by UN Security, apparently will not.

 But what does UNESCO's Bokova think of the Press being thrown out of the UN on two hours notice for a principled disagreement on journalists' rights to cover events inside the UN Press Briefing Room? The question has been publicly asked, here, and publicly seconded. Watch this site.

  In South Sudan beyond the UN's shameful failure to search for weapons and then to protect in its Malakal "Protection of Civilians" camp, and attempt to cover up the SPLA's shooting and looting in the camp, now the problems have spread to or re-appeared in Wau.

 On UNMISS' failure to search for weapons, entirely ignored or covered up at the UN Security Council on February 19, here is a first-hand account exclusively provided to Inner City Press:

"“Peacekeepers were given info 2 days ago as was info passed out raising concerns. IDPs (Shilluk and Nuer elders raised this direct with UNMISS at the time of being aware of info. UN sat on it until first incident erupted. That came about as Padiang dinka 'IDP' walked passed UN contracted gate guards (Warrior Security I think) with significant volume of ammunition for weapons and was stopped by Shilluk IDPs. Fight broke out, Padiang dinka killed and ammunition given to UN.

According to the information  obtained from the camp, this problem started day before yesterday when UNMISS Protection Security Officers received sufficient security report that Dinka Internally Displaced Persons staying in Malakal UNMISS Protection Camp received illegal weapons smuggled from main town center into IDPs camp by their tribe security agents controlling the town since first week of July 2015 when SPLA- IO withdrew tactically from Malakal town. UNMISS protection soldiers wanted to conduct the search for illegal weapons smuggled inside the protection camp but Dinka Internally Displaced Persons refused to allow UNMISS Security to conduct the search for weapons then the attack happened last night at 8:00pm.”

 Here is another internal email exclusively leaked to and published by Inner City Press, with names redacted for obvious reasons:

"From FAO Wau
From Wau: Subject: Serious Security Situation in Wau
Dear XXX

I hereby wish inform you about a serious security situation we are currently experiencing in Wau since yesterday evening.

Indeed security has been recently shaky in Wau and vicinity, but yesterday it worsened to the extent that many of our staff members had to seek for a refuge at night at the UNMISS compound.

Since this morning, all the vehicles are grounded at the office, as no driver could move and there is no authorization for any vehicle to move out of the UNMISS compound.

We are in contact with the FSCO, although no information has been circulated so far. With regards, XXXX”"

 In Malakal, while the UN publicly blamed violence on ethnic youth, internally it knew the SPLA was shooting and attacking IDPs, burning and looting in the UN Malakal camp.

Inner City Press exlusively published a leaked email proving this, then at the February 18 UN noon briefing asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric about this, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press:  I wanted to ask you, on Malakal, I’d saw that press release by UNMISS.  But I’ve also seen an e-mail inside the UN saying that the SPLA (Sudan People’s Liberation Army) entered the camp, shot and attacked IDP’s (internally displaced persons), that… that groups have been separated by ethnicity or tribe inside the camp and that there was looting of tents by the SPLA.  So I’m wondering… I’m asking you, why wouldn’t the UN report… would characterize as ethnic violence something that actually involves the Government of the country entering a supposed protection of civilian camp?

Spokesman:  "I don’t have… you, obviously, have more operational details and are on more e-mail lists than I am, which is useful for you, not useful for me.  It is clear, from what I’ve just read out, that the Mission reminds all the parties and the Government to respect the sanctity of the camp.  And I think that speaks for itself."

  But it's gotten worse, both on the ground in Malakal and within the UN.  UNMISS belatedly put out a press release on five dead (and counting) in the PoC site, but did not mention the SLPA, instead

"The United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) strongly condemns the violence  that erupted last night  between Shilluk and Dinka youths in its Protection of Civilians site in Malakal... Violence involving the use of small arms, machetes and other weapons broke out between youths from both communities in the late evening on 17 February. According to preliminary reports, there have been 5 fatalities among the Internally Displaced Persons’ (IDP) community and approximately 30 injured."

  But internally, as exclusively provided to Inner City Press by whistleblowers (and pilfered by some other media without credit), the UN said to the UN Security Management Team (SMT) in Juba:

"Dear SMT Members,

SPLA troops numbering 50- 100 have entered the UNMISS POC Sector 1 and 2 in Malakal reportedly attacking IDPs, shooting sporadically, burning tents and looting properties. IDPs continue to flee into the former POC area and have now occupied and filled up former POCs 1, 2, 3, 4.  Casualty figures are yet to be updated.

 Sporadic shooting is continuing. Crisis Management Team is in session."

 So the UN knows the SPLA is shooting and attacking IDPs, burning and looting - but blames it on ethnic youth.

On February 11, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Dujarric, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: On South Sudan,  yesterday I'd asked you about Maridi, and today I want to ask you about Mundri.  Seems like, basically, there are offences in at least these two places, maybe more, by the SPLA against the SPLA-IO.  And I'm just wondering, were you able to get any… did you hear anything back?

Spokesman:  Again, you should also take a look at the website from the Joint Verification Mechanism.  They are responsible for monitoring the implementation of the ceasefire.  So, their updates, I understand, are going up daily.  As soon as we get updates from the field, we share them with you.

 But this website is rarely updated. What IS the UN's job?

 On February 10, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Dujarric about Maridi, still no answer. Nor, from a week ago, about chemical weapons:

  UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous hits new lows daily. On February 3 at a briefing in Juba largely triggered by leaks, UNMISS was asked about the use of chemical weapons in Mundri.

From the transcript:

"Answer: Please refer to the JMEC Monitoring and Verification Teams – I cannot comment."

 But Inner City Press is told by South Sudan sources that "fighting started early am the other morning around Katigiri and proceeded WNW towards Mundri.  Chemical agents were clearly within SPLA ammunition (mortar rounds, recoil-less rifles), the medics know the issue will be squashed."

  So Inner City Press in New York asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq about the deference in Juba to JMEC. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: in South Sudan, there are now people saying that chemical weapons were used in a place called Mundri.  And I wanted to know, I know that UNMISS (United Nations Mission in South Sudan) has started holding briefings there.  There's a question by a, quote, unidentified journalist about the chemical weapons, and the answer was, “Simply refer to the JMAC (Joint Mission Analysis Centre) monitoring and verification teams.”  And I wanted to know, how is it that the UN has a near-billion-dollar peacekeeping mission there but can't speak about an issue as important as chemical weapons?  And what is the state of the UN's knowledge on the reported use of chemical weapons by the Government side in Mundri?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Well, I mean, the basic point is that, at this stage, we don't have a confirmation of the use of chemical weapons.  If we do, we would report that.  It's a matter of serious concern.  We have a peacekeeping mission on the ground.  If it can confirm these reports, it will.

Inner City Press:  So the answer there given only to refer to JMAC actually meant the UN is trying to confirm it, and if it can, it will.

Deputy Spokesman:  If we have any solid information to confirm this, of course, we would follow up on that. 

   So what the UN said in Juba is belatedly cleaned up by UNHQ. But they also refuse to answer basic questions in NY, here.

 We'll have more on this.

UN's South Sudan Report, Sept 2015, Leaked to Inner City Press byMatthew Russell Lee

  The full document we have put online here. A quote:

In March 2014, a labelling error was discovered whilst transporting containers loaded with duty equipment for the UN Ghanaian peacekeepers in Unity State which brought strained relations to even a lower point. The error was exploited to galvanise hostility towards the UN in favour of the government by falsely presenting the UN as supplying weaponry to the opposition. It took elaborate interventions, investigations
and communications to clear the false impression that this created.

[ICP note: the same type of "labeling" or "clerical" error occure this months with weapons headed to MONUSCO. This is what UN Peacekeeping has become under Herve Ladous, who linked peacekeepers' rapes to "R&R, here.]

We'll have more on this.

After French Mission Asserts Diplomatic Impunity, Araud Shouts of Romain Serman NYPD Record On Which His Mission Declined to Comment

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 14 -- When does diplomatic immunity become diplomatic impunity? 

  Last week Inner City Press compared the high profile case of Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade who was indicted in connection with allegedly underpaying a domestic worker with an earlier case of a French diplomat Romain Serman who was taken into police custody while attempting to buy cocaine, according to NYPD records.

  Inner City Press had asked the French mission to comment on the NYPD record and Serman's case but was told only that it was a "hostile act" if the records, also including leaked documents showing France's domination of the UN with regard to former colonies in Africa, remained online. Inner City Press rejected that French censorship bid.

  On January 13, after the comparison to the Indian diplomat, things escalated. Both on his way into the Security Council and again on his way out, French Ambassador Gerard Araud stopped to shout at Inner City Press about the story. 

  When Inner City Press began pointing out that his Mission had been asked for comment but had only responded with the "hostile act" threat, Araud shouted over the point, and made another threat, to sue.

Click here for video / audio by UNTV taken at the stakeout. And embedded below: "flag shot" with UNTV ambient audio.

  Perhaps Araud or the French Mission to the UN do not understand press freedom as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. This is what investigative journalism is: ferreting out such documents, seeking comment on that, analyzing and comparing them, publishing.

  The French mission should have commented, if it disputed the document or thought it should be amplified with some explanation -- for example, that citing diplomatic immunity made the arrest, but not this record, go away: 

"for attempting to purchase cocaine and marijuana from a known drug dealer...106th Street and Park Ave...claimed to be a diplomat from the country of France and displayed a ID which proved such. When...Miranda rights he refused to cooperate...was taken into custody"

  That is the story: that for attempting to buy cocaine, for which many are in prison in the US and New York State, a French diplomat not only was not treated similarly, but was allowed to leave the country and then return, now, as French consul in San Francisco. 

  That is the comparison to the Indian case, in which it is said that Ms. Khobragade is on a "watch list" and would be arrested if she tried to re-enter the US where her two children, 4 and 7, live.

  The Indian case was widely reported and it does not seem that the Indian foreign service or Ms. Khobragade threatened to sue any media for reporting it.

   That is Araud's French Mission's tactic, deployed in lesser ways against others covering the UN who in turn were so cowed, or so needed access to the French Mission, that they resisted any reporting of the French Mission's censorship and conditioning of access on positive coverage.

  Araud's threat to sue notwithstanding, the UN is so lawless that it allows its Media Accreditation unit and process to be open for bids at censorship or outright exclusion. After facing such from some atop the United Nations Correspondents Association (now the UN's Censorship Alliance), not unrelated to ces jeux francais, the new Free UN Coalition for Access asserts journalists' right to due process and, even regarding the French mission and French foreign policy, freedom of the press. Watch this site.

Footnote: ironically the day after Araud's threat, French president Francois Hollande said he would not try to sue, since he has immunity and it would be a double standard. But is France engaged, through Araud, in triple standards? Or is Araud on his own on this one and soon, as he foreshadowed, leaving the UN?

   

UN Targets WSJ, Fox and Inner City Press, According to Minutes, Google De-Listing Mulled

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: Press Analysis
www.innercitypress.com/un1vspress060209.html

UNITED NATIONS, June 2 -- The day after after UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon gave a speech about freedom of the press, minutes show that his Spokesperson and three of his Under Secretaries General met about "reporting by the press, particularly Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, and Inner City Press," at which it was proposed to write "cease and desist" and "letters before action" and, "with regard to Inner City Press... complaining to Google News."

At the UN noon briefing on June 2, UN Spokesperson Michele Montas confirmed her participation, while arguing that she doesn't have to account for her participating in such meetings. Video here, from Minute 14:49 to 18:41.

The minutes, prepared by Under Secretary General Angela Kane’s Department of Management, recite that Ms. Kane met on May 8 with "Mr. Akasaka, Ms. Montas, Ms. O’Brien [the UN’s top lawyer and] Mr. Meyers" [sic, chief speechwriter and Director of Communications Michael Meyer] to devise a strategy to counter negative coverage of the UN by the three above-named media outlets.

"We propose writing to professional journalistic bodies which regulate the journalists concerned as well as letters to the editors with copies to their companies' legal counsel," the minutes state.

"With regard to Inner City Press, we should also consider complaining to Google News (they host Inner City Press)," the minutes continue.

While extraordinary, this would not be without precedent. In February 2008, after a similar complaint, Inner City Press was temporarily removed from Google News.

The delisting, and the UN, were criticized by the Government Accountability Project, a Washington-DC whistleblower protection organization, and were covered by Fox News.

Since January 2009, Inner City Press has not only covered whistleblower issues within the UN Medical Service and but has persistently questioned the UN’s and Ban Ki-moon’s inaction as thousands of civilians were killed in Sri Lanka, including the UN’s double standards and withholding of satellite photos and its estimates of civilian casualties.

This is precisely the watchdog role that Ban Ki-moon’s May 7 press freedom speech praised the press and specifically bloggers for. Ban noted that "some 45 percent of all media workers who have been jailed worldwide are bloggers....I urge all governments to respect the rights of these citizen journalists."

But the next day, his highest officials met in secret to devise a strategy to deliver legal threats to three media organizations, and to constructively censor one of them, by seeking to delist (or "de-host") Inner City Press from Google News.

The section of the minutes on these senior UN officials' anti-Press meeting of May 8 is preceded by a discussion of the suspension of the UN's National Competitive Exam (click here for Inner City Press' May 1 article), and is followed by a section on "business continuity training" in light of the swine flu / H1N1. Click here for Inner City Press' May 5 article on Angela Kane's space grab in the Capital Master Plan, here for Inner City Press article on "the wrath of Kane" on May 7, the day before she convened the anti-Press meeting.

Ironically, in light of Kane's purported basis for attacking the Press, that it does not quickly enough publish her response, she has stated in writing to Inner City Press that she has no time to answer questions, and to ask them all at the UN's noon briefing. There, more often than not, questions are left unanswered, or not allowed at all, ostensibly due to time constraints.

Now, as Inner City Press exclusively reported on May 30, Kane's department is seeking to charge the Press $23,000 to maintain office space in the UN which has previously been given without charge, to facilitate coverage.

Inner City Press requested comment on theafternoon of June 1 from Ms. Kane, Ms. Montas, Ms. O’Brien and Mr. Akasaka, the head of the UN Department of Public Information.

This was the e-mail to Ms. Montas to which she did not reply for 20 hours, but rather prepared her statement for the June 2 noon briefing. Similar requests for comment were sent to other listed participants in the May 8 meeting, including USG of DPI Kiyotaka Akasaka, USG for Management Angela Kane (with additional questions), and USG for Legal Affairs Patricia O'Brien, none of whom responded at least for the following 24 hours.

Subj: Hi, request on deadline for comment on May 8 meeting and Press issues, thanks
To: Michele Montas [at] un.org, Kiyo Akasaka [at] un.org
From: Inner City Press
Sent: 6/1/2009 4 P.M. Eastern Standard Time

Mr. Akasaka and Ms. Montas --

Hi. I am writing a story about a May 8 meeting in which documents indicate you both were involved, regarding “reporting by the press, particularly Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, and Inner City Press,” at which it was proposed to write “cease and desist” and “letters before action” and, “with regard to Inner City Press… complaining to Google News.”

On deadline -- am resending this to ensure receipt and response -- could you please either deny despite the documents your participation in such a meeting, or to explain how the above is consistent with press freedom, Article 19 and, here, the First Amendment -- and also, for you [Ms. Montas], your previous career as a journalist.

I'd also like a comment, in light of the above, on the UN’s previous denials of involvement in a complaining to Google News and getting Inner City Press temporarily delisted. See, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331106,00.html

And http://www.whistleblower.org/content/press_detail.cfm?press_id=1310

I appreciated and learned from the S-G's recent trip to Sri Lanka, but was troubled to be urgently informed of the above upon return. Also, the proposed $23,000 charge for media wanting / needing similar office space in the Capital Master Plan, if you have any comment on or insight into that.

Thank you in advance, on deadline,

Matthew Russell Lee, Inner City Press

For 20 hours after these requests for comment or denial were submitted, no responses were received. Given the UN's stated concern of Inner City Press not waiting to include UN responses (which often come late if at all), Inner City Press held off running this story until receiving confirmation.

The following day, June 2, Inner City Press asked Ms. Montas at the noon briefing, and she responded with what appeared to be a prepared statement. Why she did not email this response, to avoid taking up time in the noon briefing, is not clear. Other reporters opined that Ms. Montas wanted to give a "public tongue lashing." Whether that is an appropriate use by the UN of its noon briefing is also not clear.

Ms. Montas began by saying, "I don't have to account to you for meetings I participate in," adding that "senior advisors" to Ban Ki-moon can and apparently do have such meetings all the time. We will pursue this. Video here, from Minute 14:49. Inner City Press asked if her, Ms. Kane's and apparently the UN's complaints have to do with Inner City Press' coverage of the UN's role in the carnage in Sri Lanka. We will continue on this. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1vspress060209.html

At UN, "Ban-Handling" of Press Triggers Apology But Not Yet Any Explanation

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/ban1handled050608.html

UNITED NATIONS, May 6 -- After a week of talk at the UN about press freedom, the Organization's commitment to the issue was put to the test, in a small but significant way, this week. On the evening of May 5, after Secretary-General BAN Ki-moon gave a short speech to an audience of a few dozen in the fourth floor penthouse of the Dag Hammarskjold library -- click here for Inner City Press' coverage of the speech -- a journalist spoke with him on his way to the elevator, and followed into the elevator.

During the short ride down, the journalist asked a question about the UN's views about Iraq. Mr. Ban began to answer, but when his staffer Ms. CHOI Soung-ah reportedly said "No questions" and grabbed the journalist's arm, as a restraint. As later recounted, what struck the journalist most was that this took place in the presence of the Secretary-General.

On May 6 at the UN's regular noon briefing, the following brief Q&A occurred:

Question: does the Secretary-General condone the right of journalists to ask questions without interference?

Deputy Spokesperson Okabe: I didn't quite understand...

Question: Following the UNRWA event, I had approached him to ask a question and one of his UN staff held my arm back. Is that something that he condones?

Deputy Spokesperson Okabe: I'm not aware of that incident, so we'll need to talk about that afterwards.

The promised "talk afterwards" focused not on the "ban-handling" of the journalist, but on why the journalist had raised this question during the noon briefing, rather than in private. Meanwhile a number of other UN correspondents remarked that for the common good the issue should be pursued and reported.

While later a one-line apology was issued by the Spokesperson's Office, the question asked, whether BAN himself supports that rights of journalists to ask questions without inference, in this case physical interference, remains unanswered. Nor has Monday's stakeout question to Mr. Ban, whether he supports a Freedom of Information Act at the UN, nor the other related questions put to the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services, been answered. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/ban1handled050608.html

UN Official Michael Adlerstein Speaks of Punishing the Press, Alleges Cowardice, Threatens Ouster from UN for 1 or 2 Articles: Capital Master Plan?

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un1freepress022108.html

UNITED NATIONS, February 21 -- Senior UN officials are trying to formulate responses to investigative documentary journalism about recent events at UN Headquarters. These include a February 17 death on the South Lawn, allegations of UN involvement in censorship and questions of ambulance access to an apparent heart attack victim. On February 21 the chief of the UN's rehabilitation effort Michael Adlerstein spoke heatedly to Inner City Press for ten minutes. The official immediately above him, Under Secretary General for Management Alicia Barcena, also sent a four-paragraph missive in the form of a letter to the editor, which is published in full at www.innercitypress.com/un1freepress022108.html.

We begin with Mr. Adlerstein's comments because they were less scripted, including accusations of cowardice and references to punishment for the material Inner City Press has published. Another journalist was accompanying Inner City Press and tape recording an impromptu interview with the director of a non-governmental organization in India when Mr. Adlerstein, the Assistant Secretary General for the UN's Capital Master Plan, doubled back and began by asking "about this photograph that you published." Inner City Press replied that while it had already taken down the photograph, and had informed Ms. Barcena and others of this fact, any and all questions would be answered, there in the lobby where Mr. Adlerstein chose to dialogue, or in a subsequent column, including the interchange.

On Sunday, February 17 there was an emergency meeting of the Security Council at 1 p.m. about Kosovo. In preparing to cover it, the death, and the placing of bags over the decedent's hands, were inescapable. Mr. Adlerstein asked, "What does that have to do with the photograph?"

Inner City Press replied, and replies, Because that's what the photograph is of, that the bagging of the hands to preserve evidence.

"I've heard people say, maybe you should just have written. And I understand that position; I don't think that's an unreasonable position. I don't know where it is written that a body under a blanket, which AP ran, and it went all over the world, and nobody has said anything to them from the UN. The UN has said to me that if AP did it, it's okay. But if you did something different than AP, we're going to come down on you like a bag of bricks... Now I've received a letter from Ms. Barcena saying 'we're outraged,' cc-ing Vijay Nambiar, Mr. Akasaka, and I'm not sure what the purpose of that is. I'm going to run the letter, and that's fine, that's her position. I don't want to treat it in any disrespectful way, but I'm not, from what I heard yesterday, she seized on it as an opportunity to attempt to throw me out of the UN."

Whereupon ASG Adlerstein said, "What should be your punishment?"

But where in the mandate of the Capital Master Plan does punishing journalists figure?

Adlerstein asked, "Can you say yes or no, did you make a mistake?"

"I don't like the line of reasoning. If I say I made a mistake--"

Adlerstein then cited questions that have been asked of him, about ongoing litigation about an alleged conflict of interest involving a former position in New Jersey, "It's the same line of reasoning that you use on everybody else. You always say, you know, did you screw up here? Your job as a reporter is to hold us accountable. And to hold yourself accountable. Did you make a mistake?"

"I took the photograph down. If that's how you want to interpret it."

Adlerstein said, "I'm not interpreting anything. I'm asking you, did you make a mistake?"

"At the time I ran it, I thought it made sense. Now, I don't think it makes sense to keep it up anymore, that's why I took it down. If anyone is offended, I apologize for it. I know why it was run at the time though."

ASG Michael Adlerstein: You said you apologized to the people who personally know her. It's offensive to mankind to run pictures of victims of suicide, murder victims.

ICP: Watch Al Jazeera, it's on all the time. Al Jazeera is showing footage from Somalia where people killed and dead on the ground.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: Oh, great. Great example. There's a moral--

ICP: Are they being thrown out of the building? They're not. There's not one standard here. If you don't like Al Jazeera, you don't watch it. And if you don't like Inner City Press, you don't have to read it. I want to deal with this correctly.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: So you didn't make a mistake.

ICP: What is the ramification if I say that I do?

ASG Michael Adlerstein: You'll let me know whether you think you made a mistake. I'm not a reporter, I don't give a damn.

Other journalist: It seems to me, if I may interject--

ASG Michael Adlerstein: I find it very cowardly that you won't take a position. Did you make a mistake or not?

ICP: I took the photograph down. You tell me what the ramification for answering is, and I'll answer it. You seem to believe it is legitimate to try to throw a journalist out for one story, and I think that is totally improper. I don't think the UN gets to choose, based on content, who covers it and how they cover it. I do not. And I find it outrageous

ASG Michael Adlerstein: Is it two stories that you need? Two stories are needed?

ICP: I don't know, you tell me.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: You're saying one story is outrageous. Are two stories okay?

ICP: They tried to get the Staff Union to support them. I'm not looking for support. It's just that this is a free country. The White House doesn't throw out a reporter on one story. The Federal Reserve doesn't do it. This place, maybe it thinks it's exempt from those laws.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: Is that what you're saying, two stories is okay?

ICP: Write a rule, and I'll comply with it. They've been trying to set up a process on how to throw people out. And whatever the rule is, that will be fine. But they don't have a rule. And you cannot just zero in on one story. You really can't. You can try.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: That's what I'm asking.

ICP: I don't know, I don't know what the rules are going to be. They're being negotiating between UNCA and DPI. We had a meeting about it two weeks ago.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: Very cowardly. You won't account for yourself.

ICP: I'll write a whole story about it tonight, and I'll say something about it. But I'm going to write about this as well. And that's fine.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: About what?

ICP: This, this conversation. Why not? You tell me. And I will answer your questions, in writing. And you can say whether it's cowardly or not... When somebody kills themselves at the UN, the regular press corps can't get in here. This is one of the reasons I covered it. I guarantee you -- for whatever you believe -- I didn't come that day to cover it. I didn't want to cover it. I came to cover the Kosovo meeting. But as a journalist, if I come in and there's a medical examiner and people's hands are being bagged, I'm going to cover it. And many people in this building have said to me 'please keep looking into that.' I actually would rather not to.

Other journalist: What he did, in terms of reporting the story, I think is in the best traditions of -- inadvertently, because it's outside his expertise -- crime reporting.

ICP: I'm amazed. I had no idea that this was your view of the press. I had zero idea...

ASG Michael Adlerstein: I haven't expressed any view of free press. I asked you whether you made a mistake.

ICP: And you said "would it take two stories to throw you out" and you said "you asked us a lot of questions, what about you". This is a retaliatory thing. You are an official here.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: I'm not saying anyone should be thrown out of here.

ICP: You said two stories, throw you out.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: You said one story is not justified.

ICP: You said how about two.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: How about two. What's the number?

ICP: You said "what should be your punishment?" Most times, if an institution and an official doesn't like coverage, like McCain in the New York Times, you write a letter. That's what you do. You don't imply that you can throw somebody out because you don't like the article.

Other journalist: You have to establish objective rules.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: I walked over here to find out what's going on, what's your position.

ICP: Have you read Ms. Barcena's letter?

ASG Michael Adlerstein: No.

ICP: And she has a conflict. She shouldn't be the one pushing this. She expressed deep anger for me when I wrote about her getting a job for a friend of Ahlenius. And so I don't think she should be the one making the UN's decisions on what to do about this incident. Beyond taking down the photograph and running an apology, I don't know what more they want. She should not be the one running it. She has a personal motive.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: You're asking me right, I don't know.

ICP: I know you're a high official.

ASG Michael Adlerstein: I have no idea whether she's written you a letter or not; I've never seen a letter. I have no idea what you're talking about.

ICP: How did you learn of this? Did you stumble across it?

ASG Michael Adlerstein: People are talking about it.

ICP: Many people talked to me who never even saw it. They heard from Barcena that it showed the woman's face, and that's false. That's one of the reasons I didn't want to take it down, because now they are trying to say that something was what it wasn't. If the problem's the photo, it's down. She said to the Staff Union that it showed the face. Now what am I supposed to do, show the photo again? To show it doesn't? She knows it doesn't. She tried to stoke them up.

Ms. Barcena's letter is online at www.innercitypress.com/un1freepress022108.html. Beyond having incorrectly alleged that the photo showed the decedent's face, she tried to inflame even OHRM staff on the fifth floor to denounce Inner City Press based on articles not read, photos not seen, because removed from the Internet to placate her. Inner City Press was told by the spokesperson's office that not only had USG Barcena written a letter, that the Department of Public Information (apparently, the head of its Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit) would also be writing a letter.

One wonders if MALU wrote a letter to, for example, Al-Jazeera, when in the wake of the deadly bombing of the United Nations in Algiers in December, it placed online an interactive poll which asked if people supported or opposed the bombing of the UN. In that case, not only was no public or even to-file letter written by MALU -- the media outlet was quickly awarded an exclusive interview with Ban Ki-moon, and has been placed on the UN's in-house TV network. For the record, Inner City Press supports Al Jazeera's right to freedom of the press. These freedoms must be consistently and expansively applied.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un1freepress022108.html