Your support
means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you
access to exclusive bonus material on
our Patreon page. Click
here to become a patron. MRL
on Patreon
UNITED
NATIONS, April 6 --
As UN Secretary
General Antonio
Guterres took off
for a six day trip
to China, Inner City
Press which has
pursued the UN
bribery scandals of
Ng Lap Seng and now
the China Energy
Fund Committee asked
Guterres' spokesman
Stephane Dujarric on
April 6 if Guterres
will address any of
these issues during
his five days in the
country. Dujarric
was dismissive, and
ended the briefing.
Video here.
From the UN transcript:
Inner City Press: I
wanted to ask about
the… the trip to
China by the
Secretary-General.
You know, as you
know there's…
there's one being
concluded and one
still active UN
bribery cases
pending in the
Southern District of
New York. Most
recently…
Spokesman: I
don't agree with
your
characterization.
Inner
City Press:
They're both about
bribing the
PGA. I guess
you can say the PGA
is not really the
UN, but…
Spokesman: Go
ahead. Go
ahead.
Inner City
Press:
Okay. So my
question is since
there seems to be a
pattern of… in two
cases, one was Ng
Lap Seng,
South-South News,
who Vivian Wang has
now pleaded
guilty. The
other is the China
Energy Fund
Committee, which
remains in
consultative status
with ECOSOC
[Economic and Social
Council]. Is
this an issue that
the
Secretary-General,
in visiting the home
base of both
operations, and both
are alleged to be
Government
connected?
Spokesman: The
United Nations has
cooperated with the
Southern District
here in New York in
whatever way we can
in any and all
investigations.
The legal process
here has played
itself out and is
playing itself out,
and as for the
accreditation of the
ECOSOC
accreditation, as
I've told you
numerous times, it's
a member state
issue…". And then
Dujarric ran off the
podium. We'll have
more on this. The UN
has been targeting
not only Inner City
Press for
censorship, but also
its sources, for
retaliation.
It was
reported and quoted
here:
"Looks like UN is
making efforts to ID
people who send
stuff to media:
'Identified a
computer used to
print an email that
was later leaked to
Inner City Press, by
correlating an URL
on the top of the
leaked document with
Webmail & DHCP
logs.' Are they
punishing
whistleblowers?"
Well,
yes. And the
investigative Press.
On
March 14, Inner City
Press asked UN
Secretary General
Antonio Guterres'
deputy spokesman
Farhan Haq about the
above-quoted and he
said, since the UN
has confidential
information it can
and does investigate
leaks and leakers.
Video here.
But isn't that, in
leaks to Inner City
Press ranging from
Burundi to Cameroon
to cover ups to
North Korea, going
after
whistleblowers? Haq
dodged, and Inner
City Press asked if
a person who leaked
the memo to Kofi
Annan about
impending genocide
in Rwanda would be
investigated.
Apparently yes - but
Haq again claimed
that there is no
retaliation. What
about Anders
Kompass, fired after
releasing a document
bout French
peacekeepers' rapes
in Central African
Republic? Or Miranda
Brown? Or Emma
Reilly? On March 15,
after asking Haq
about threats of
retaliation made at
and by UNAIDS, Inner
City Press asked
what type of leak
the UN investigates,
and for whom. Haq
said any kind the UN
wants, and
ostensibly for
member states. Video
here.
From the UN transcript:
Inner City Press: On
the issue of
investigations,
given what you said
yesterday, I took
the time to digest
it. I've also
heard from some
people that were
surprised by
it. I want to
just be clear. You
said the UN can
absolutely
investigate
perceived leaks
because it deals
with confidential
information, if I
take you
correctly. I
mean, you said that
it can do that, but
you seem to also
claim that no one is
retaliated
against. So,
the two things I
wanted to know is,
when can the UN
investigate?
Is it… does it have
to be information
labelled
confidential?
Can it be… in what
cases does it… and…
and if the Anders
Kompass case or the
Miranda Brown case
or the Emma Reilly
case, these are all
cases of
retaliation.
So, can you explain
what you were saying
yesterday?
Deputy
Spokesman:
With the cases
you're referring to,
these are cases
where the system
itself examined what
was happening.
We do that in
compliance with our
rules and our
procedures, and we
certainly make sure
that all the
whistle-blower
protections are put
in place. That
is why we look into
those individual
cases. What
you were talking
about was a general
question of:
Can leaks be
investigated?
And with the United
Nations, as with any
other entity, you
have the right to do
that to make sure
that the
confidentiality of
sensitive documents
is protected.
Inner
City Press:
So, for example, the
UN's request to the
1718 Committee for a
waiver and the use
of a correspondent
bank that was
leaked, and I did publish
it, can that be
investigated?
Is that considered…
what's… does it
require the showing
of harm to the UN to
investigate it or…?
Deputy
Spokesman:
Those are ultimately
the judgments that
are made by relevant
officials.
It's clear, as with
any number of
institutions,
whether State
institutions or
private
institutions, that
documents leak
out. But, it's
also clear that, for
the diplomatic work
of the UN to
continue, Member
States have to feel
secure in the
confidentiality of
many of those
communications.
And so that is a
judgment that
individual managers
will have to make.
Inner
City Press:So,
is it Member State
information?
Deputy
Spokesman:
Like I said it's a
decision that
managers would have
to make in terms of
what they feel is
important and
sensitive.
Inner City Press:
Can you see why with
the UNAIDS
guy's comment
about "I can
investigate my
enemies", why the
two put together, an
unfettered or
unclear ability to
investigate any
leak, combined with
threats from UN
officials to
investigate any
opponents, might be
problematic?
Deputy
Spokesman:
There is no effort
and, certainly,
there is no
encouragement to any
sort of effort to
pursue people who
are making
complaints.
Those are something…
that's something
that's entitled
within the
system. And,
as you know, there
are a series of
protections
throughout the
system for people
who make complaints
about issues at the
workplace, whether
sexual harassment or
otherwise.
Again, I'm just
stressing the basic
point of principle
that the UN does
have the right, just
as a point of
principle, to
protect the
confidentiality of
its communications."
We'll have more on
this. Here's how the
UN transcribed
it: Inner City
Press: it's been
said here by OHRM
[Office of Human
Resources
Management], which
did a press
conference that UN —
and you just said
it, in fact — that
UN staff are free to
speak. So, I
wanted to ask you,
this is a quote of a
document obtained by
the journalist
Lauren Wolfe, who's
recently written
about “#MeToo” at
the UN. And
the document, it's a
UN document, says:
"Identified a
computer… a computer
used to print an
email that was later
leaked to Inner City
Press by correlating
an URL at the top…
URL at the top of
the leaked document
with web mail and
DHCP logs," which is
Dynamic Host
Configuration
Protocol.
Basically, it
reflects that UN —
and I believe it's
OIOS [Office of
Internal Oversight
Services] — is
conducting
electronic
investigations to
determine which UN
staff member leaked
documents showing UN
wrongdoing, they
believe. And
so, how does this
square with the idea
that people are free
to blow the whistle
and that the UN
wants wrongdoing and
malfeasance to be
confronted in any
way possible?
And is it
appropriate to… to
identify
whistle-blowers that
communicate with
investigative
journalists?
Is that appropriate?
Deputy
Spokesman: No,
whistle-blowers
should be
protected. At
the same time, as
you know, there's a
huge amount of
confidential
information in the
United Nations,
information that
needs to be handled
with great
sensitivity.
And it is
appropriate for
different offices to
monitor how those…
that information is
handled.
Inner
City Press: I just
wanted to ask one…
just… because it
seems like there's…
there could be a
conflict between
saying that
whistle-blowers are
free to speak, but
we're free to
investigate them
because we're an
organization that
has confidential
information.
So, I'm asking about
this specific… and I
believe you can
answer on this one…
Deputy
Spokesman:
Every institution,
including all
Governments, are
free to conduct leak
investigations, and
they do so. We
try to make sure…
and there are, as
you know, different
offices and
different avenues
for protection for
whistle-blowers.
There's a
whistle-blower
protection policy,
and that has to be
enforced.
Inner City Press:
So, if somebody
leaked — for
example, I'm going
to go back so it's
not a hypothetical,
an actual document —
the Rwanda memo that
went to Kofi Annan
that said weapons
are being stored and
a genocide is about
to happen, somebody
leaked it to the
press, would the UN…
would it be
appropriate for the
UN to investigate
who blew the whistle
on human rights
violations, which is
the case in this…?
Deputy
Spokesman: As
you know, there have
been many different
types of sensitive
documents over the
history of the UN
that have, in fact,
leaked to the press
and no one has faced
any consequences for
that, precisely
because it was in
the public
interest. At
the same time, a lot
of business of the
UN simply could not
be conducted, the
sensitive diplomatic
work we're supposed
to do could not
happen if there was
the presumption that
all documents would
leak.
The decay or need
for reform at the UN
Department of Public
Information was
shown again on March
12, when DPI's UN
Photo called Arancha
Gonzalez of the ITC
the UN National
Security Adviser, here.
This came the
business day after
March 9, when DPI's
now flagship UN News
mis-named the UN's
scandal plagued
peacekeeping mission
in the Central
African Republic
“MONUSCO” instead of
its actual name
MINUSCA. Photo here;
DPI also mistakenly
called Najat Rochdi
a "High
Commissioner." That
came on the same day
that DPI chief
Alison Smale was
criticized, both
fairly and unfairly,
in a General
Assembly meeting
held in the
Trusteeship Council.
Inner City Press,
covering the meeting
but only with the
escort or minder
that Smale's DPI
requires of it but
not more than a
hundred less
prolific, less
critical and seldom
present
correspondents, put
questions after
Smale's holdover
adviser Hua Jiang
sped out of the
meeting to a critic,
then politely to
Smale herself. She
acknowledged little
action to date on
the criticisms, at
least one of which
should have been
directed to the
Department of
General Assembly and
Conference
Management. But all
bureaucratic
niceties aside, how
can a former New
York Times editor
have presided
without explanation
or response over a
system of press
accreditation with
no rules, with
blatant targeted
restrictions, for
more the six months?
In October Smale
said she
acknowledged the
need for the
“courtesy” of a
response to the
Press' petitions -
which has yet to
come - and on March
9 seemed to indicate
an acknowledgment of
the need for rules.
But where are they?
After the reiterated
exchange, Inner City
Press demurred for
days. On March 12 it
reiterated the
request for rules,
to Smale, Guterres
and his chief of
staff, and Deputy
Amina J. Mohammed:
"Dear USG Smale, SG
Guterres, DSG
Mohammed & CdC
Ribeiro: I am
writing to formalize
my oral request to
USG Smale on March
9. Specifically,
that Inner City
Press be given an
opportunity to be
heard on why, after
now more than two
years of restricted
access to the UN for
having pursued the
Ng Lap Seng UN
bribery story into
the UN Press
Briefing Room, it
should be restored
to its long time
office and resident
correspondent
status. Beyond my
particular case - on
which Special
Rapporteur David A.
Kaye wrote to DPI
about the lack of
due process, here.
There is as I
mentioned again to
USG Smale on March 9
the need for UN
rules not only on
how a journalist
gets due process
before any eviction,
but also for how a
once-evicted
journalist can
pursue
reinstatement. I
have been told I am
not even on any
list, as
correspondents who
ask less and produce
less than I do about
the UN have come
after I was evicted,
and been made
resident
correspondents. I
have covered, among
other stories, Cameroon,
DPRK,
Sri
Lanka, Yemen,
Sudan, the new (Nov
2017) UN bribery
case of Patrick Ho
and CEFC
China Energy and the
issues raised by a
UN Security
Inspector openly praising
a controversial GA
speech (the Iran
bomb fuse cartoon
speech), in both
2016 and this month
- and for this last
story, I'm told I
face further
complaints or
restrictions.
Similarly lawlessly,
as I live-streamed
on Periscope a
recent SG photo op
with Egypt's new
Ambassador I was
suddenly told
by UN Security
that I could not
record audio, even
as UNTV recorded
audio. This is
Kafka-esque and must
end, this month
which marks the 25th
month. I will be
trying to cover the
UNSC and CSW, with
the absurdly
required DPI minder
or escort. A meeting
on this should be
held this week by
USG Smale or one of
you." 24 hours,
nothing. We will
continue on this.
The deadline is now.
Watch this site.
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
Past
(and future?) UN Office: S-303, UN, NY 10017 USA
For now: Box 20047,
Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2018 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for