ICP
Asks PGA
Spox Who
Chose NextSG
Questions, Of
Financial
Disclosure
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, April 11
-- How
should the
next UN
Secretary
General be
selected, to
improve the
Organization?
At a minimum,
transparently.
But that's not
what's
happening so
far. On
April 11,
Inner City
Press asked
the
spokesperson
for President
of the General
Assembly
Mogens
Lykketoft if
Lykketoft will
ensure that
financial
disclosure
questions are
or can be
asked, and who
chose the
“civil
society”
questions. The
affable
spokesperson
said to ask
Lykketoft, and
that the list
would be
provided after
the briefing.
Video
here.Video
here.
But it was
not. Even who
chose the
people who
chose the
question was
unclear: some
in the UN who
work with
civil society,
presumably
meaning from
the Department
of Public
Information
which we must
note is the
most
criticized UN
department in
the so-called
John Ashe case
audit,
here, here.
DPI has shown
a willingness
to retaliate,
so we are
reporting this
as
diplomatically
as possible:
once a
spokesperson
has said on
camera that a
list will be
given, it
probably
should be.
At
minimum, the
excuse for not
providing it
should not be,
it would be
misunderstood.
It's it the
job of the UN
Department of
Public
Information to
provide and if
necessary
explain
information,
rather than
withhold it?
Finally it was
said that the
list will be
up online on
April 12,
after the
“interviews”
of candidates
has already
begun. We'll
be there - or
as close to
there as DPI
allows. Watch
this site.
(Inner City
Press also
asked
Lykketoft's
spokesperson
if, in fact,
DPI has at
least
belatedly
complied with
the John Ashe
audit's
Recommendation
5. The
spokesperson
said he will
check. We're
waiting.)
On
April 8, Inner
City Press
asked the
spokesman for
outgoing
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon what
are the rules
governing
current UN
system
officials
running for
NextSG, in
terms of their
use of UN
time,
resources and
staff. From
the UN
transcript:
Inner
City Press: I
wanted to know
what the UN's
rules are
given that
there are now
two candidates
that are
currently
employed by
the UN system,
Irina Bokova
of UNESCO
[United
Nations
Educational,
Scientific and
Cultural
Organization],
Helen Clark of
UNDP [United
Nations
Development
Programme].
I wanted to
know, what
rules apply as
to how they
devote their
time, how
resources of
the agencies
and of other
staff in the
agencies are
devoted to
helping their
campaign.
Spokesman
Dujarric:
Obviously, for
UNESCO, that
is something
for the UNESCO
governing body
to
decide.
As far as
UNDP,
obviously, we
would expect
that and our
understanding
is that this
will have no
impact on her…
on Ms. Clark's
leadership of
UNDP and that,
obviously,
that no staff
resources
would be used
for that.
Inner City
Press:
No, and I
mean, I… I
guess I mean
it with all
due respect,
but
inevitably,
she's going to
be spending
time devoted
to this.
So, the
question is,
like, how much
time should
she…?
It's an
obvious…
Spokesman:
No, no, I'm
saying it's a…
I'm not
debating the
obviousness of
the
question.
That's what I
have to say at
this point.
On
April 4,
New
Zealand
announced for
Helen Clark.
But nowhere in
it did New
Zealand's
announcemeone
find financial
disclosure,
nor a vision
statement.
And
with CLark's
UNDP embroiled
in the the
corruption
scandal
unveiled by
the indictment
of John Ashe,
none of the
correspondents
NZUN invited
for the launch
even asked
about that.
And while
anyone with a
passing
knowledge of
UNDP knows
Clark has a
problem with
staff
relations, to
put it mildly,
no one asked
about that
either.
Voice
of America
asked Clark,
"You’re the
only current
active UN
official who’s
seeking the
post of
Secretary-General."
Never
heard of
UNESCO's
Bokova? .
And how
much UNDP
funds and
powers will be
allocated for
the campaign?
And will UNDP
have finished
and released
its own audit
into Ng Lap
Seng and his
South South
empire before
Clark does
Q&A with
the General
Assembly?
Inner City
Press has
asked, without
answer. Watch
this site
On
February 26
Inner City
Press asked
the President
of the General
Assembly
Mogens
Lykketoft if
those who are
running -- to
date at that
time, six
official candidates
-- will be
required or
even asked to
disclose who
is financing
their
campaigns. Video here.
Lykketoft
replied that
he feels he
has no mandate
to require
such
disclosures.
Inner City
Press followed
up: will
Lykketoft, who
was describing
a process for
“interaction”
with the
candidates
beginning
April 12, even
ask them to
make such
disclosures,
ideally in
writing before
April 12, or
during their
appearance?
Lykketoft told
Inner City
Press, I
encourage you
to ask them.
Now Inner City
Press notes
that
"Bulgaria
has allocated
a budget of
BGN 106 000 to
be spent on
the campaign
of its
candidate for
United Nations
Secretary-General,
Irina Bokova. This
was announced
by the working
group in
charge of
coordinating
the activities
of the
Bulgarian
nomination...
The working
group was
established
immediately
after the
Bulgarian
nomination had
been announced
in February
and since then
it has been
working on the
active
preparation
and promotion
of the
Bulgarian
nomination.
The first
sitting of the
working group
was held on
February 20
with the
participation
of Bokova
herself.
An official in
each Bulgarian
embassy has
been selected
and entrusted
with promoting
and
championing
the country's
candidate."
So how
much did South
Korea spend on
Ban?
While a
UNTV stakeout
will be set up
outside the
“interactive”
meetings,
nothing
requires the
candidates to
take
questions. And
Inner City
Press being
present to ask
such questions
is being
opposed and
undermined by
the UN
Department of
Public
Information.
We'll have
more on that,
as relates to
Next SG.
The
frontrunner,
many say, is
Bulgaria's
Irina Bokova,
current the
head of
UNESCO. In
fact, in that
capacity and
on that
dime Bokova was scheduled
to appear
in
UN
Headquarters
on February
22, for an
event called
“UNESCO Green
Citizens:
Pathfinders
for Change.”
In the run-up,
Inner City
Press asked
on Twitter
what Bokova
and UNESCO
thought of UN
Public
Information
chief Cristina
“Maybe She
Should Be SG”
Gallach having
Inner City
Press thrown
out of the UN,
literally.
There's been
no answer.
Inner City
Press RSVP-ed
for the UNESCO
event, February
22 at 6 pm.
Despite being
told at 9:45
am that it is
“Banned
from all UN
premises,” UN
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric in a
staged
colloquy
at the noon
briefing
claimed that
Inner City
Press is NOT
Banned - just
has to "vacate
its office."
Why?
Inner City
Press, with
the paper
UNESCO pass,
attended the
February 22
event. Some
discussion,
attempting to
resolve the
situation,
will not be
reported here.
But threats
were repeated;
Bokova it
turns out
canceled at
the last
minute,
leaving some
correspondents
- not this one
-
disappointed.
There was for
a moment an
open mic, and
Inner City
Press for one
wished for
some dark
horse
candidate to
grab the
moment, and
the mic, and
shake things
up. It's
needed: the UN
is in decay.
Meanwhile,
another
seeming
candidate
Susana
Malcorra --
still wonder
her views on
the ouster,
while noting
that her
successor
Edmond Mulet
hasn't even
answered --
has left,
shall we say,
eyes behind.
We'll have
more on this.
Meanwhile
a person who
worked for Ban
from 2014 “to”
2016 took
to the
editorial
pages of the
New York Times
to promote
Angela Merkel
as the Next
SG.
Inner
City Press has
asked
questions
about that
-- and, again
by analogy,
about why Ban
is refusing to
make public
those who are
seeking to
become the
head of UNEP.
Here's
the February
16 UN
transcript.
Back in
early
February, Inner
City Press was
informed that
two
candidates,
one declared
and one not
yet, were
campaigning at
the African
Union summit
in Addis
Ababa:
Argentina's
Susana
Malcorra, and
FYROM's and
former PGA
Srgjan Kerim.
What is the
position of
each of these,
for example,
on the UN
having a
Freedom of
Information
Act?
The
UN
Spokesperson's
Office this
week refusing
to provide
basic
information
about how it
"lends" out
the UN Press
Briefing Room
shows the need
for a FOIA.
And what
changes would
the candidates
bring to the
OSSG, and
information
availability
generally?
There will be
questionnaires...
Meanwhile a
spat has
broken out in
which
Australia
indicates it
does NOT have
to support
Helen Clark,
agreed to by
Tony Abbott,
but rather
could support
Kevin Rudd.
Has Helen
Clark even
declared? If
and when she
does, will she
step down as
UNDP
Administrator?
Watch this
site.
On January
18 at an event
marking
Slovakia's
70th year of
membership in
the UN,
reference was
made to the
country's
candidate(s)
for the
position: both
foreign
minister
Miroslav
Lajcák and, as
Inner City
Press has
previously
asked about
and reported,
Ján Kubiš,
currently the
UN's envoy to
Iraq.
After
the event,
with speeches
by Ban
Ki-moon's
chief of staff
Edmond Mulet,
the head of
DPI and
Professor
Stephen
Schlesinger, a
cynic opined
to Inner City
Press that
despite or
because of all
the Eastern
European Group
candidates,
maybe Mulet's
predecessor
Susana
Malcorra, now
being
“seasoned” in
Argentina,
will return
and get the
job. We'll
have more on
this.
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.
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.
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.
The Security
Council's
President for
July, Gerard
von Bohemen of
New Zealand,
spoke at the
UNTV stakeout
after the
consultations.
Inner City
Press asked
him as well
about the
regional
rotation
issue. Periscope
video for now
here. He
said he had
come up; he
said that New
Zealand's
position is
consistent
with that of
the ACT -
Accountability,
Coherence and
Transparency -
group, see
background
below. Here's
from July 22
transcription
by the NZ UN
Mission:
Inner
City Press:
How would you
characterize
the issue of
regional
rotation in
the Eastern
European
Group, just to
give some
sense of what
people said or
what the view
is?
A: Well, a
number of
speakers
referred to
it, no one
disagreed with
it, but it
wasn’t seen as
being
inconsistent
with the
processes,
some of the
processes that
were being
recommended.
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, or
at least
candidate to
head the UN in
Geneva, 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?
We'd like to
hear the Swiss
view on this -
from today
forward, from
a new mission
spokesperson,
Simone Eymann.
Her
predecessor
Adrian
Sollberger at
his farewell
reception on
June 1 joked
how being an
elections
officer is
like speed
dating. He is
remaining with
the the
Foreign
Department of
Switzerland
working in the
Cabinet of the
Secretary of
State, in
Berne.
So why NOT
some debates
among
candidates for
Secretary
General, when
they declare?
We'll have
more on this.
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.