Even
on
Rio+20, Ban
Doesn't
Answer, How
Tree in OPT
NGO
Accredited?
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNdislosed
Location,
June 6 -- In
order to
manage Ban
Ki-moon's
communications
challenges,
his
spokespeople
said in
advance that
today's
Q&A
session would
be about Rio +
20.
It seems
inevitable
that Syria
will
come up, and
he'll have
some remarks
ready. But one
purpose of
such
control is to
avoid having
to answer, for
example, why
Ban continues
to have
alleged war
criminal Sri
Lanka general
Shavendra
Silva as a
Senior Adviser
on
Peacekeeping.
That
said, even on
Rio + 20 there
are questions
that have been
put to Ban's
spokespeople
and still not
answered, that
should be
re-asked
particularly
by those
not so under
fire, flames
fanned by the
UN, and
(relatedly)
those
called on by
Ban's
spokesperson
Martin Nesirky
to ask Ban
questions.
On
May 24, Inner
City Press
asked about
something it
exclusively
reported on
May 21:
Inner
City
Press: in the
General
Assembly,
there was a
meeting that
resulted in a
vote for some
53 to 33, and
it involved
the
accrediting
by the
Secretariat,
as it was
described, to
Rio+20 of NGOs
[non-governmental
organizations],
and
specifically
two NGOs which
the
people that
are trying to
block them
said were
never accepted
into
ECOSOC
[Economic and
Social
Council], of
the NGO
Committee. One
is
called the
Jewish
National Fund,
and in the GA
[General
Assembly], it
was said that
they do
business in
occupied
territories,
it’s been
said that
that’s why
they weren’t
made part of
ECOSOC, and
so, a
lot of
questions
arose, and my
question is,
what is the
Secretariat’s
role in
accrediting
NGOs to go to
Rio+20? The
G-77 said
since this
vote was
called, one
shouldn’t
expect
consensus on
Rio, which is
a
pretty bold
big statement.
Is the
Secretary-General
even aware of
this dispute
that seems to
put this very
important
conference
into
some question?
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
The role of
NGOs and civil
society is
certainly very
important,
both in the
run-up to the
Rio+20
Conference on
Sustainable
Development
and at the
Conference
itself. Their
input is
vital, as
it always is.
I don’t have
any specific
comment on the
voting that
you have
referred to;
that would be
a matter for
Member States.
On
the question
you have asked
that underlays
that, if you
like, the
question of
registration
of NGOs, I
would need to
check. I don’t
have the
answer to
that.
Inner
City
Press: It’s
just because
it was said,
and I don’t if
they
are right or
not, but it
was said that
a list wasn’t
circulated,
this is why
there was a
very
ill-attended
meeting and a
hastily
called vote,
but so,
really, it is
a question I’d
like… I mean,
it would be
great to know
what the
Secretary-General
thinks of this
group, given
the
controversy
around it. I
think he has
planted a
tree with
them, but it
would also
just be
important to
know in the
Secretariat
itself how
this list is
created and
whether Member
States
were informed
in advance of
this list.
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
As I said, the
vote itself is
a matter for
Member States.
The
registration
procedure I
would need to
ask about, I
don’t know
the answer to
that. Lou, do
you have a
question?
Correspondent:
No.
Spokesperson
Nesirky:
Your presence
normally would
indicate you
had a
question.
But
the question
about Ban's
role in the
process has
NOT been
answered. Will
it be
asked? Watch
this site.
, 
