On Aid
Finance, ICP
Asks Georgieva
of Transparency,
Next SG Q from
FUNCA
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, January
17
--
Outgoing UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon often
names “High
Level Panels,”
not only as
today on
humanitarian
aid but also
for example on
the scandal of
peacekeepers'
rapes in the
Central
African
Republic. But
today's Panel
is on aid,
headed by one
of the
reported
candidates to
replace Ban as
SG, Kristalina
Georgieva of
Bulgaria and
the EU. The
report is
here.
Inner City
Press at an
embargoed
briefing prior
to the release
of the report
asked
Georgieva
about the
report's
proposal for
“Participation
Revolution” in
which the
recipients of
aid could hold
it
accountable.
Inner City
Press for the
new Free UN
Coalition for
Access asked,
would that
include for
example a UN
Freedom of
Information
Act, so that
the public
could get
disclosure of
how money is
spent?
Georgieva,
responding by
video from a
roomful of
other
journalists in
Brussels,
acknowledged
that there is
a need for
standardized
accounting;
she did not
directly
response, as
FUNCA will be
asking all
Next SG
candidates to
do, on the
need for a UN
FOIA.
Ban
Ki-moon issued
a canned
statement
including that
“In May last
year I asked
the panel to
identify ways
in which the
gap between
rising needs
and the
resources
available to
meet them can
be closed. I
am also
requesting
them to work
on generating
solutions
around the
issues of more
timely and
predictable
funding, as
well as ways
in which
resources can
be used more
effectively.
Since they
began their
work the needs
created by the
demand for
humanitarian
aid have
continued to
rise
dramatically.
We are living
in the age of
the
mega-crisis.
But, as this
report clearly
demonstrates,
the gap in
funding is a
solvable
problem.”
We'll have
more on this.
How
should the
next UN
Secretary
General be
selected, to
improve the
Organization?
On
December 15,
after
President of
the General
Assembly
Mogens
Lykketoft as
well as US
Ambassador
Samantha Power
co-signed a
letter to
all states and
Observer
States to put
forward
candidates,
Lykketoft took
questions.
On
January 15,
Lykketoft's
office put online a
third
nomination
letter, that
of Montenegro
for Igor
Luksic,
joining
FYROM's Srgjan
Kerim and
Croatia's
Pusic. Here.
And
when, we ask,
might Slovakia
put in a
nomination for
Jan Kubis? And
would Czech
Republic make
a nomination,
while its
Deputy Prime
Minister says
"no more
refugees"?
Earlier
on January 15,
Inner City
Press asked
Lykketoft who
is paying for
his trips to
the United
Arab Emirates,
Davos and
Jordan. Video
here.
Later
Lykketoft's
spokesperson
replied, "The
PGAs trip to
Abu Dhabi is
being funded
by Govt of UAE
and the rest
of the trip by
the Office of
the PGA." The
answer is
appreciated;
we'll have
more on this.
On
Next SG, back
on December 15
Inner City
Press asked
Lykketoft if
the General
Assembly's
“dialogues”
with
candidates
will be open
-- yes -- and
if he thought
a candidate
currently
heading a UN
agency should
step down to
run. (He did
not answer
this.)
Lykketoft said
so far there
are two formal
candidates:
Croatia's
foreign
minister Vesna
Pusic and
former PGA
Srgjan Kerim
of FYROM.
Inner City
Press asked,
during the
press
conference,
how for
example a
person like
ex-PGA Vuk
Jeremic,
without the
support of his
government at
present, could
run. Lykketoft
said that
another state
could nominate
him.
(An
aside: if it's true
that neither
Pusic nor
Kerim are on
Twitter, what
does that say
about the
place of
technology and
social media
in the current
Next SG race?)
Minutes later,
on Periscope
(speaking of
transparency),
Inner City
Press asked
Lykketoft of a
nomination
from a
non-state
would even be
processed. No,
he indicated.
So much for
“We the
Peoples.” And
so much,
perhaps, for
Eastern
Europe, if
Crimea becomes
a litmus test.
On December
11, Inner City
Press asked
the foreign
ministers of
both Ukraine
and Lithuania,
both members
of the Eastern
European
Group, about
who should be
next SG. Video
here.
From
the answers,
it seems at
least these
two countries
will demand a
candidate
which would
condemn a P5
Security
Council
member's
violation of
the UN
Charter. Since
p5 members
have a veto
over the SG,
maybe the post
will move
beyond the
group. We'll
be covering
this, watch
this site.
F On
November
18, after the
UN Security
Council met
behind closed
doors on the issue,
the month's UN
Security
Council
President
Matthew
Rycroft of the
UK emerged and
read a short
Elements to
the Press on
“the issue of
the letter
that will be
written
shortly by the
President of
the Security
Council and
the President
of the General
Assembly, on
the selection
process for
the
appointment of
the next
secretary
general, and
an exchange of
views on the
basis of a
draft letter
from the UK
and we agreed
to do further
work, both on
the letter and
to keep in
touch with
each other on
the timing of
that, in order
to fulfill our
side of the
work of the
security
council. The
General
Assembly has
already begun
with their
resolution
69/321.”
But less than
an hour
before,
Russia's
Ambassador
Vitaly Churkin
had told the
press that
“I’m sure the
President of
the Council is
going to
speak. And
what I
proposed,
half-jokingly
I must admit,
that we should
set a working
group which
will have
weekly
meetings until
the end of
next year on a
draft letter
by the
President of
the General
Assembly and
the President
of the
Security
Council. In
fact, if we
stick to the
resolution of
the General
Assembly, it
says that they
are asking for
a joint
letter, which
is going to
describe the
process and
invite
candidates.
The process is
described in
the Charter
and inviting
candidates is
saying yes
please, submit
your
candidates.
But if you try
to turn it
into a lengthy
negotiation,
some kind of a
fancy
document, then
it will take
12 months for
us to achieve
this draft
letter. So my
pitch, which
was shared by
some
colleagues,
let’s not
over-complicate
things. Come
on. And if we
don’t over-complicated
things, then I
think it can
be done.
France 24
asked Churkin,
You have a
candidate?
Churkin
replied there
are seven or
eight
candidates
from Eastern
Europe, but
France 24
insisted,
“From Russia?”
Churkin
explained that
Permanent
members of the
Security
Council don't
submit UNSG
candidates.
And so it
goes. We note
that at the
increasingly
corrupt UN
Correspondents
Association,
there are no
term limits
and this year,
all six
officers are
running
without
opposition,
headed by
Giampaolo
Pioli who
previously
rented one of
his apartments
to Sri Lanka's
ambassador
then screened
his war crimes
denial film,
and now sells
seats with Ban
Ki-moon for
$6,000. Let's
hope this
process can
lead to an SG
who can clear
the UN up.
On
September
22, after
the Permanent
Representatives
of Estonia and
Costa Rica
announced a
high level
meeting on the
topic on
September 26;
Estonia's Sven
Jürgenson said
his priority
is the best
candidate, not
necessarily
from the
Eastern
European
group.
Inner City
Press asked if
this same push
for
transparency
applies to the
current murky
process of
selecting the
new High
Commissioner
for Refugees,
of which it is
said Ban
Ki-moon alone
choose (Danish
UNGA President
Mogens
Lykketoft told
Inner City
Press he
“favors” the
Danish
ex-Prime
Minister but
plays no
role.)
Costa Rica's
Juan Carlos
Mendoza Garcia
told Inner
City Press
that reforms
in Secretary
General
selection
could help
reform other
selections in
the UN system.
Inner City
Press - and
the Free UN
Coalition for
Access -- ask,
isn't the
refugee top
post something
of a test
case?
Tellingly, the
old UN
Correspondents
Association
demanded to
ask - and
largely waste
- the first
question, the
time of
meritless
hierarchy that
is precisely
what's wrong
with the UN.
We'll have
more on this,
and on the
September 26
high level
meeting.
Back on
July 22
the
subject was
discussed
behind closed
doors by the
UN Security
Council.
Afterward UK
Ambassador
Matthew
Rycroft
emerged and
described the
meeting as a
first step,
adding that
the UK intends
to convene a
so-called
Arria formula
meeting of the
Council once
candidates
come forward.
Inner City
Press asked
Rycroft if the
issue of
regional
rotation -
that is, the
the Next SG
post belongs
to the Eastern
European Group
-- came up. He
said that it
did, adding
among other
things that
the UK does
not think that
is the most
important
factor. Periscope
video here,
for now.
It was argued
to Inner City
Press that
while the UN
Charter in
English
assumes that
the Secretary
General is
male, that is
not the case
in the Chinese
(or Russian)
versions - for
what it's
worth.
Update:
as to Russian,
an astute
reader notes
that
Within
Chapter XV of
the Charter
(“The
Secretariat”),
in the third
sentence of
Article 97,
where the
English
version of the
Charter says
of the
Secretary-General,
“He shall . . .”, the Russian
version
instead uses
the name “TheSecretary-General shall . . .”, thus
avoiding
specifying the
SG’s
gender.
But in Article
99, where the
English says,
“The
Secretary-General
may bring to
the attention
of the
Security
Council any
matter which
in his opinion may threaten . . .”,
the Russian
also uses, “.
. . in his opinion”.
h/t/
SC Procedure
Статья
97
Секретариат
состоит из
Генерального
Секретаря и
такого
персонала,
который может
потребоваться
для
Организации.
Генеральный
Секретарь
назначается
Генеральной
Ассамблеей по
рекомендации
Совета
Безопасности. Генеральный
Секретарь является главным
административным
должностным
лицом
Организации.
Статья
98
Генеральный
Секретарь
действует в
этом качестве
на всех
заседаниях
Генеральной
Ассамблеи,
Совета
Безопасности,
Экономического
и Социального
Совета и
Совета по
Опеке и
выполняет
такие другие
функции, какие
возлагаются на
него этими
органами.
Генеральный
Секретарь
представляет
Генеральной
Ассамблее
ежегодный
отчет о работе
Организации.
Статья
99
Генеральный
Секретарь
имеет право
доводить до
сведения
Совета
Безопасности о
любых
вопросах,
которые, по его мнению, могут угрожать
поддержанию
международного
мира и
безопасности.
Background:
on June 30, UN
Conference
Room 11 was
full to
discuss the
Next SG
question, in
an event
organized by
the 27 member
states (so
far) making up
ACT
(Accountability,
Coherence,
Transparency).
Surprising to
some, on the
panel was UK
Permanent
Representative
Matthew
Rycroft, who
said among
other things
that the Next
SG should not
necessarily be
from the
Eastern
European
Group.
The room was
full -- Inner
City Press
stood by the
door, broadcasting
by Periscope
and live-tweeting
with laptop in
hand -- but
with a notable
contingent of
Eastern
European
representatives.
One question
identified
herself as
such: a woman,
and Eastern
European. Just
saying.
William Pace
of WFM
reminisced how
Boutros
Boutros
Ghali's second
term was
vetoed in a
deal between
the (Bill)
Clinton
adminstration
and
then-Senator
Jesse Helms,
to release
dues payments
to the UN.
The
proposal now
is for a
single seven
year term.
Mary Robinson
says she knows
of another P5
country,
beyond the UK,
which is open
to a single
seven year
term.
When it was
open for
questions,
Inner City
Press (also on
behalf of the
new Free
UN Coalition
for Access,
which unlike
the older
correspondents
grouping
actually
fights for
more
transparency
by the UN)
asked why not
have a debate
among
prospective
candidates?
Why not
require
disclosure of
how much is
spend on each
candidates
campaign,
including
banning or
requiring the
disclosure of
spending of
the funds of
UN Programmes
(UNDP) or
Organizations
(UNESCO) for
their chiefs
to campaign to
replace Ban
Ki-moon?
The UK's
Rycroft said
that
prohibitions
are not the
answer --
agreed -- but
did not answer
on requiring
financial
disclosures.
(He said we
don't want
massive
spending, one
isn't running
for president.
Which raises
another
question: what
about some
form of
matching funds
for candidates
from lower
income
countries?)
While much of
the focus
seems to be on
arranging
letters from
the President
of the
Security
Council to the
President of
the General
Assembly, as
Inner City
Press asked at
the ACT event
and asked
the new PGA
Mogens
Lykketoft
himself,
twice (video),
can't the PGA
call a high
level meeting
and invite
candidates to
present
themselves? In
this way, the
wider world
outside the UN
could get
engaged, and
put on some
pressure. The
anonymous
polling of
which
candidates are
“discouraged”
by the P5
members should
not, FUNCA
contends, be
repeated.
Costa Rica's
Permanent
Representative
Juan Carlos
Mendoza-García
wrapped up,
and the event
was over. It
was promising,
but moves for
reform and
opening up
should begin
as soon as
possible.
Watch this
site.
Back on June
1, after
several press
conference on
the topic and
a closed door
General
Assembly
session on
April 27, the
ACT group of
27 states
(Accountability,
Coherence and
Transparency)
submitted
their page and
a half set of
proposals to
the Presidents
of the
Security
Council and of
the General
Assembly.
Here is a
photo,
re-tweeted
from the Swiss
by the Free
UN Coalition
for Access.
Even before
these
proposals are
debated,
candidates are
edging for an
advantage;
dark horses
are
positioning
themselves for
it the post
slips away
from the
Eastern
European
Group. Inner
City Press has
mentioned
Helen Clark,
using the UN
Development
Program post
to campaign
(staff who
cross her on
Twitter are
reprimanded,
as Inner City
Press reported
here.)
Another
"dark horse"
candidate,
Inner City
Press is told,
is Swedish
foreign
minister and
former UN
official
Margot
Wallstrom.
We'd like to
hear from her
what she thnks
of the UN's
handling of
allegations of
sexual abuse
by French
"peacekeepers"
in the Central
African
Republic,
including the
role of
another
reputed dark
horse
candidate,
Susana
Malcorra. And
what did Ban
know, and when
did he know
it?
The Free UN
Coalition for
Access agrees,
there should
be formal
candidacies,
platforms --
and adds, why
not debates?
How
to pick the
next UNSG:
that was the question
on the
afternoon of
April 27 in
what was
called a "closed"
meeting in
the
Trusteeship
Council
Chamber. The
meeting being
labeled
closed, and
not on UN
webcast, is a
bad beginning,
the Free
UN Coalition
for Access
believes.
To
counter-act
this Inner
City Press did
its reporting
about the
meeting, from
India urging
that there be
more than one
- a panel - of
candidates
proposed, to
Moldova
emphasizing
that the next
SG should come
from Eastern
Europe.
Canada
said regional
rotation
should inform
but not
determine the
selection. The
UK to its
credit
released a
copy of the
speech by new
Permanent
Representative
Matthew
Rycroft - but
how to square
its proposals
with David
Cameron
nominating
Andrew Lansley
to replace
Valerie Amos
as Emergency
Relief
Coordinator,
then insisting
that the UK
should have
the post, now
in the person
of Stephen
O'Brien.
Update:
With only a
few dozen
states
choosing to
speak, the
chair decided
to try to
finish them
all -- five
states in
twelve
minutes? -- to
end the debate
on April 27.
This too may
not be the
right spirit.
Update
II: And when
the rushed
session ended,
the next one
was announced
for May 12, on
the
"institutional
memory" of the
Office of the
President of
the General
Assembly.
Earlier in a
10 am press
conference by
the campaign
called "1 for
7 Billion:
Find the Best
UN Leader."
At the April
27 UN noon
briefing,
Inner City
Press asked
Ban Ki-moon's
deputy
spokesperson
for Ban's
views on
needed
reforms.
Apparently
there are
none: it is up
to member
states, he
said, adding
that selecting
a women would
be good. What
about pay to
play?
Inner City
Press asked
the panel if,
as happened
last time,
increase trade
and aid
funding by a
candidates'
country should
at least be
disclosed, if
not
prohibited.
William Pace
of WFM replied
not only about
countries
spending
hundreds of
million of
Euros, but
also about the
heads of
international
agencies using
their posts to
campaign.
Since UNDP's
Helen Clark is
known to have
told
associates and
underlings she
would like to
be the next
SG, Inner City
Press asked
the panel for
comment. They
were
diplomatic,
including on
the UK, said
to be a
reformer on
the SG post,
having
insisted it
retain the
Emergency
Relief
Coordinator
positioon,
albeit in the
person of
Stephen
O'Brien and
not Cameron's
first nominee
(and National
Health Service
destroyer)
Andrew
Lansley.
Natalie
Samarasinghe
of UNA-UK said
the campaign
around (well,
against)
Lansley was a
positive step
forward; she
said that
social media
makes secret
processes less
possible. (But
see the
replacement at
Yemen envoy of
Jamal Benomar
by a
Mauritanian
official who
has not made
public
financial
disclosure).
Yvonne
Terlingen, now
Senior Policy
Adviser at
WFM,
also cited the
OCHA process
or campaign.
WFM's Pace
seemed to
conflate the
entire UN
press corps
with the UN
Correspondents
Association,
a group that
for example tried to
censor Press
coverage of
how Under
Secretary
General Herve
Ladsous got
the job, then
tried
to get
the Press
thrown out.
The new Free
UN Coalition
for Access
seeks to open
the UN and
these
processes -
watch this
site.
, 
