By Matthew
Russell Lee, CJR Letter
PFT Audio
UNITED
NATIONS GATE, June
16 –
Amid growing security threats on the
Somalia - Kenya
border Inner
City Press asked
UN
Secretary General
Antonio
Guterres and
his spokesman
Stephane Dujarric
questions on
May 23 and
June 11, with
no answer at
all. Guterres
threw his Somalia envoy
Nicholas
Haysom under
the bus for
signing a
human rights
letter; he support
government sycophant Sid
in Kenya.
Now while
Guterres
claims he
simply must
continue
living alone
in a $15
million
mansion, this:
"The
Secretary-General
condemns
yesterday’s
attack in
Wajir County,
Kenya, in
which at least
eight police
officers were
killed and
others were
injured when
their vehicle
struck an
improvised
explosive
device. The
attack follows
the kidnapping
of three
Kenyan police
reservists in
Wajir County
on Friday,
claimed by al
Shabaab.
The
Secretary-General
also condemns
the killing of
at least eight
people and
injury of
others in a
car bomb
explosion at a
checkpoint in
Mogadishu,
Somalia, also
claimed by al
Shabaab.
He expresses
his deepest
condolences to
the families
of those
killed and to
the
Governments
and people of
Kenya and
Somalia. He
wishes a quick
recovery to
the
injured.
The
Secretary-General
expresses the
solidarity of
the United
Nations with
the
Governments of
Kenya and
Somalia in
their efforts
to fight
terrorism and
violent
extremism.
Stephane
Dujarric,
Spokesman for
the
Secretary-Generak
[sic]
New York, 16
June 2019." Talk
about phoning
it in.
In
Somalia there are growing
protests against Farmaajo,
as civilians
are killed by his forces
and he says nothing.
Also silent is
UN Secretary General
Antonio Guterres, who went
so far as
to call his then-representative
Nicholas Haysom
impolite for signing a
letter with human
rights questions to
Farmajo's government.
In a closed door staff
meeting on January 17 he
said his envoy Nicholas
Haysom's human rights
questions to the
government of Somalia had
been "arrogant" and
"impolite." Audio
here. Since Haysom
was expelled from the
country for the questions,
Guterres was essentially
throwing Haysom under the
bus, with the illusion of
taking responsibility by
adding that the question
letter only went out
because Guterres and his
team had been on
vacation.
But the
message to other UN envoys
is clear: don't ask about
human rights. This is all
the more clear given that
Guterres repeatedly defended
his pro-government envoy
in Myanmar, Renata
Lok-Dessallien, when she
was called not strong
enough on human rights (as here, Inner City
Press quoted by
Canada's CTV before
being roughed
up and banned
from UN.)
Now banned
Inner City Press can
report an even deeper
corruption and
self-interestedness in
Guterres' UN. While
calling questions to
the Somalia government
about its human rights
practices
"impolite,"
Guterres' UN is
willing to complain
to them - about
being asked to pay
taxes. Photo of
letter here.
So Guterres'
UN won't speak up
for Somali
civilians, but
will for
international
staff's wallets.
This is
Guterres' UN,
more corrupt
every day.
If
you side with a government
engaged in mass killing,
Guterres has your back
(the same has been true in
Cameroon). If you question
the killings, Guterres
will tell his staff - and
now a wider audience,
since already banned
Inner City Press got
access to the
meeting through
whistleblowers disgusted
with Guterres - that you
were arrogant and impolite
to ask about human
rights.
This
is entirely contrary to
the UN charter, and to
what Guterres claims to
stand for. One would
expect Guterres to have to
explain - but he and his
Global Communicator Alison
Smale have banned
from even entering the UN
for 197 days and counting
Inner City Press which
asks about this. Guterres'
lead spokesman Stephane
Dujarric, who played a role
in the roughing
up but promised on
camera he would
answer written questions,
has not in seven working
days.
On
this, Inner
City Press has asked
Guteres, Dujarric, Smale
and Deputy SG Amina J.
Mohammed: "January 17-1:
Please immediate explain
what SG Guterres meant
in this morning's Town
Hall meeting by using
the words "impolite" and
"arrogant" to refer to
ex-SRSG Haysom's human
rights questions to
Somalia - Inner City
Press is formally
requesting that Guterres
release the full video
and audio of his remarks
this morning, including
calling staff criticism
'unilateral
and unfair.'" No answer, and
it seems it will not
be asked at
Guterres' rare press
conference on
January 18,
with attendees
handpicked by
Dujarric and
Smale for
Guterres.
Guterres'
positions, praising
pro-junta Lok-Dessallien
and trashing the human
rights questions on
Haysom, may explain the
weakness of Guterres'
envoy in the DR Congo,
Sudan, Libya, Sri Lanka,
Yemen - everywhere the UN
is failing. We'll have
more on this.
In
a closed door UN staff meeting Secretary
General Antonio
Guterres on January 17
blamed his own
envoy
Nicholas
Haysom for
getting thrown out
of Somalia,
calling Haysom's
letter to the
government
about human
rights
"impolite" and
"arrogant."
Inner City
Press knows and
exclusively publishes
audio of this,
here,
because UN
staff
disgusted by
Guterres' sell
out of human
rights and of
them are exclusively
providing
information to
Inner City
Press, which
Guterres had
roughed up and
banned now for
197 days and
counting.
Guterres' comment
confirm that
he is even
weaker on
human rights
than Ban
Ki-moon was,
and that he
does not back
up even his
senior staff,
much less day
to day UN
staff
including
national
staff.
Ironically,
when
challenged in
the meeting
about this Guterres
called the
criticism from
his staff
"unilateral
and unfair."
He has roughed
up and
censored the
Press and
concealed
his own links
to UN briber
CEFC China
Energy,
through the
Gulbenkian
Foundation from
which he took
money. For all
of
these reasons,
now most
recently this
sell out of
his envoy in
Somalia,
Guterres should resign or
be impeached,
the
whistleblowers
say. He must
certainly stop
banning
the Press
which covers
his mismanagement
and
corruption. For
weeks the UN of Secretary
General Antonio Guterres
has refused to answer
Press questions about
Somalia. Now after
Guterres' SRSG
representative Nicholas
Haysom was
ordered to cease
operations in, and
presumably leave, Somalia,
Guterres on January 4
has said the country
CANNOT declare
Haysom
Persona Non
Grata, since
the UN "is not
a state." Why
then can
Guterres rough up and
ban a journalist
and claim
immunity? And
Inner City
Press, which
Guterres had roughed
up on 3
July 2018 and
banned
since, had
before that
asked
Guterres' Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric
about a
PNG-ing of UN
staff by
Burundi and
Dujarric said,
"I don’t know
what the
status of the
staff member
who was 'PNG-ed.' We
can check." Video
here.
But it's
worse. When
the UN tried
to send an
SRSG to Iraq and
the government
objected, the
decision was
reversed. But
never, UN
staff tell
Inner City
Press, has a
UN Secretary
General
given in as
quickly as Guterres
has to
Somalia. They
tell Inner
City Press
exclusively
that Guterres
was hung up on
on the phone.
And that the
UN Political
Affairs operation
under Rosemary
DiCarlo was
not even in
the loop on
the absurd statement
read out by
Farhan Haq at
at
noon. "She's nothing,"
a long
time DPA
official told
Inner City Press. "If
Washington
every looks
closely she'll
be fired." If
it happens, it
should be
for the
scandal of the
handover of
the
Department's
website to the
photographer husband
of her chief
of staff,
unacted on by
the titular
head of the UN
Office of
Internal
Oversight
Services who
has
disappeared and is
said by
her own staff to
be... well,
that will have
to wait. Watch
this site. Sierra Leone
PNG-ed Michael
von der
Schulenburg,
of whom Inner
City Press also asked
before being roughed
up and banned
under
Guterres - who
claims
immunity for
all of this.
We'll have
more on this.
Guterres'
deputy
spokesman
Farhan Haq
said Guterres
will
nevertheless
replace Haysom
"in due
course." This
is Guterres' full
statement via Haq:
"The
Secretary-General
deeply regrets
the decision
of the
Government of
the Federal
Republic of
Somalia to
declare the
Special
Representative
of the
Secretary-General
for Somalia
and Head of
the United
Nations
Assistance
Mission in
Somalia
(UNSOM),
Nicholas
Haysom,
persona non
grata.
The
Secretary-General
has full
confidence in
Mr. Haysom, an
experienced
and respected
international
civil servant
who has
distinguished
himself in
numerous
senior
leadership
roles, in the
field and at
UN
Headquarters.
The doctrine
of persona non
grata does not
apply to, or
in respect of,
United Nations
personnel.
As described
in the 1961
Vienna
Convention on
Diplomatic
Relations, the
doctrine
applies to
diplomatic
agents who are
accredited by
one State to
another in the
context of
their
bilateral
relations.
The United
Nations is not
a State and
its personnel
are not
accredited to
the States
where they are
deployed, but
work under the
sole
responsibility
of the
Secretary-General.
At the same
time the
Secretary-General
is totally
committed to
ensuring that
the needs of
the Somali
people are at
the forefront
of the work of
the United
Nations in
Somalia. UNSOM
needs to be
able to carry
out in the
most effective
manner its
mandate to
support the
country.
Therefore, he
intends to
appoint in due
course a new
Special
Representative
for Somalia
and Head of
UNSOM.
The
Secretary-General
remains
strongly
committed to
assisting
Somalia in its
efforts to
achieve peace,
stability and
prosperity for
all."
While
Guterres' spokesmen
refused to answer banned
Inner City Press'
written questions on
January 2, including
about Somaliland,
in the briefing
room Deputy
Spokesman Farhan
Haq said
"at
this stage, I
can’t officially
confirm
it. What I
can say is that
we’re looking
into the
matter.
We’re trying to
get the various
details
corroborated,
and we’re going
to see, based on
that, what
further steps
are
needed.
Question:
Fink was due to
address the
Council
tomorrow, was he
not?
Deputy
Spokesman:
Yes, and he is
going to address
the Security
Council, and I
believe he’s
also scheduled
to meet with the
Secretary‑General
tomorrow." But
there is nothing
on Guterres'
public schedule,
for the second
day in a row
after a ten day
junket with
location and
costs undisclosed.
Fink, indeed. Somaliland's
government issued
a statement that
“Somalia’s
decision to expel
UN Rep doesn’t
concern Somaliland;"
its Upper House
has invited
Haysom to relocate
there.
Guterres was on a
junket
location
UNdisclosed
for more than
ten days; on
January 2
there is
nothing on his
public
schedule. And
he has still
said nothing,
including on
this: Somalia's
foreign ministry is
notifying United Nations
Secretary General that Mr
Nicholas Haysom is banned
and cease all operations
within the country. This
decision comes after Mr
Haysom deliberately and
intentionally interfered
in state affairs."
And, typically, from the
UN of Guterres, nothing.
This remained the case
even many hours later when
Guterres robo-issued a
statement about what
Haysom had called an
indirect attack on the UN
compound: "The
Secretary-General strongly
condemns today’s attacks
against the United Nations
compound in Mogadishu. He
wishes a speedy recovery
to the injured
colleagues.
The Secretary-General
recalls that intentionally
directing armed attacks
against United Nations
personnel may constitute a
violation of international
humanitarian law. He urges
the Somali authorities to
investigate the attacks
and swiftly bring those
responsible to
justice.
The Secretary-General
reaffirms that such acts
will not diminish the
strong resolve of the
United Nations to continue
supporting the people and
Government of Somalia in
their efforts to build
peace and stability in the
country." Guterres, whose
spokespeople have declined
10 days of questions as to
where the UNSG is and how
much it costs, refuses
Inner City
Press'
questions about
why it is
not a conflict
of interest to
refuse to
audit CEFC when in
2018 it
tried to buy Partex
Oil & Gas
from the
Gulbenkian
Foundation of
which Guterres has
been a
paid
board member...
The UN supports and funds
AMISOM in Somalia but
rarely answers when AMISOM
kills people. But this
time AMISOM has stepped in
it, and the UN should be
required to answer the
Press, even as corrupt
Secretary General bans it
for the 166nd day. Our
correspondents told us:
"the Ethiopian contingent
under AMISOM abducted
Mukhtar Robow Ali, former
Al Shabab number 2 and
candidate to Southwest
state of Somalia. The
amisom handed over to
Somalia federal government
who was not happy to his
candidacy. As result
people took to the street
and at least 10 people was
killed by
Ethiopian/Amisom.
Amisom works under U.N.
Peacekeeping framework
(outsourced project) and
is funded by EU and US.
Somalia police
participated the killing
is under the payroll of
UNDP. Hours past
still no words from UN
bosses [because they are
corrupt]. The city is
preparing to more riot and
conflict. Robow is
no longer under U.N. or
International sanctions
and recently met the U.N.
envoy however the
government of Somalia is
exploiting the weaknesses
of Amisom through
corruption to the highest
officials. Dozen
Somali federal MPs accused
the Amisom envoy as taking
sides and may have
benefited financially from
the government." On
December 14 banned Inner
City Press in writing
asked the UN, before a
noon briefing it was
banned from and in which
no one allowed in asked
any question about
anything in Africa, much
less Somalia, asked
"December 14-3: On
Somalia, what is the SG's
comment and action on the
deadly violence triggered
by the arrest of Mukhtar
Robow while seeking the
presidency of South West
state in next week's
election? Separately, what
role including logistical
support did the UN play?"
At 2:40 pm deputy UN
Spokesman Farhan Haq
responded, "Regarding
question December 14-3, we
can say the following:
Together with
international partners, we
underscore the importance
of respecting the
electoral process and the
rule of law. We do not
endorse or reject
individual candidates.
We are concerned about
developments in South West
State. We deplore all
violence and any other
acts that could exacerbate
the humanitarian
situation.
We underscore our support
for the agreed framework
governing the elections,
and urge all parties to
respect the integrity of
the electoral process. We
encourage constructive
dialogue to resolve
political differences in
order to advance the
political and economic
progress of the country."
But after more questions
arose, including
resignations, on December
17 before Guterres' lead
spokesman Stephane
Dujarric held a briefing
he banned Inner City Press
for, Inner City Press
asked Guterres and him in
writing, "December 17-1:
On Somalia, what is the
SG's comment and action
now that Somali
authorities say Mukhtar
Robow has been
disqualified from
contesting in this week's
regional elections? Also,
what is the UN's knowledge
of any role by UN
supported AMISOM and/or
Ethiopian troops in the
arrest of Mukhtar Robow?"
And more then five hours
later at close of
business, no answer by
Dujarric to this or any
other Press question
asked. Totally corrupt.
Uganda was recently shown
in the US v Patrick Ho
trial to be soliciting
bribes at the UN, at least
its foreign minister Sam
Kutesa, soliciting a
$500,000 "campaign
contribution" to the
President. We'll have more
on this. In November the
UN Secretariat merely
passed the buck through
its spokesmen when banned
Inner City Press asked
about "peacekeepers" from
Burundi supported by the
UN killed at least four
civilians in Somalia. Here
was the second question,
from Inner City Press
which after covering the
UN from inside for 10
years has been banned by
SG Antonio Guterres for
132 days and counting:
"November 12-3: On the
Burundian troops shooting
civilians in Somalia,
while all your office
answered was to look at
AMISOM's press release,
Inner City Press' question
is how this is impact the
UN continuing to take/pay
Burundi soldiers as UN
Peacekeepers, or if at a
minimum those involved in
the Somalia reprisals will
be barred from UN
“service,” given that
“Burundian troops serving
under the African Union
Mission in Somalia
(Amisom) are alleged to
have opened fire on four
civilians on Tuesday after
their convoy was targeted
by a roadside bomb. Three
of the men died at the
scene, while the fourth
died later in hospital.
Witnesses interviewed by
Amnesty International
reported that the troops
drove over an improvised
explosive device that
detonated as they
travelled through a
district in the north of
Mogadishu. In response,
the troops are alleged to
have exited their vehicles
and “arbitrarily shot” the
four men, who were named
as Ali Shire Ugas, Hassan
Yusuf Siyad, Qasim Dahir
Khayre and Ahmed Mohamud
Basey. Three of the men
were lorry drivers, while
Basey was a tuk-tuk
driver." To this, on
November 13, the UN
answered: "On question
Nov. 12-3, we are aware
that AMISOM is conducting
an investigation into the
incident. UNSOM has
shared relevant
information with AMISOM as
it proceeds with its
investigation." What
information? Why keep
deploying these troops?
Back on "November
7-4: On
Somalia (and
Burundi) what
is the SG's
comment and
action on that
“African Union
soldiers in
Somalia have
been accused
of killing
four civilians
in the
capital,
Mogadishu.
Witnesses say
the soldiers
opened fire on
locals when
their convoy
was hit by a
roadside bomb.
The incident
happened in
the Huriwa
district in
the north of
the city.On
its Twitter
account, the
African Union
mission said
its convoy had
come across
explosions but
made no
mention of the
shooting,
alleged to
have involved
Burundian
troops”? Hours
later, the UN
told Inner
City Press
only that
AMISOM had a
statement. But
that wasn't
the question -
it was passing
the buck
regarding
killings by
force the UN
Secretariat
supports.
Inner City Press on July 5
was banned from entering
the UN, the day after it
filed a criminal complaint
against UN Security for
physically removing it
from covering the meeting
about the UN Secretary
General Antonio Guterres'
$6.7 billion peacekeeping
budget, as witnessed and
essentially cheered on by
senior UN official
Christian Saunders,
tearing its reporter's
shirt, painfully and
intentionally twisting his
arm and slamming shut and
damaging his laptop. On
August 17, Guterres'
Global Communicator Alison
Smale issued a letter
banning Inner City Press
from the UN - for life.
With no due process. She
and Guterres have put the
UN in the US Press Freedom
Tracker, here.
Smale said, again, that
the UN would answer Press
questions to the Spokesman
Stephane Dujarric and his
Office.
USG Smale,
also now on
three week
vacation, has
claimed that
the SG's
spokesmen are
answering
Inner City
Press' email
questions.
First, for
example, none
of the four
questions
submitted
yesterday
morning, 24
hours ago, has
been answered.
Second, even
if these
e-mailed
questions were
all being
answered it
does not make
up for denying
Inner City
Press the
right not only
to attend the
noon briefing
and other
press
conferences,
but the
stakeouts at
the Security
Council and
elsewhere,
such as the
Budget
Committee
meeting
stakeout I was
physically
ousted from on
July 3. It's
19 days of
outright
censorship,
and counting.
July
23, 2017
Alison Smale,
Under
Secretary
General for
Global
Communications
United Nations
New York, New
York
10017
Dear Ms.
Smale:
Thank you for
your letter of
July 19th
concerning the
actions of the
United Nations
with respect
to
Matthew
Russell Lee, a
US journalist
who has been
covering the
UN since 2006.
Unfortunately,
it is not
possible to
determine from
your response
what guideline
or regulation
Mr. Lee
violated that
resulted in
his expulsion
from the
premises.
First, your
letter tells
us that you
consider the
withdrawal of
Mr. Lee’s
accreditation
as a resident
correspondent
closed because
the US
government was
informed of
the
circumstances
concerning
this
action. Mr.
Lee tells GAP
that he has
not been
informed and
was not
consulted
about this
decision.
Was there some
form of due
process
surrounding
the decision
to withdraw
Mr. Lee’s
resident
correspondent
credentials in
2016, and if
so, who
participated
and of what
did it
consist?
Second, you
explain Mr.
Lee’s two
expulsions by
dispositive
statements
asserting that
he violated
the
scope of his
permissions.
Ms. Smale, the
operative
question is
which of the
media
guidelines did
Mr.
Lee violate,
and what
action was in
violation of
the
guidelines? If
you cannot
identify the
specific
regulation
broken, we
cannot address
your response.
Mr. Lee tells
GAP that UN
Security
officials
accused him of
exceeding the
time limits
allowing a
non-resident
correspondent
to access the
UN
premises, but
he presents
evidence
clearly
demonstrating
that the
meeting he was
covering was
still in
session when
he was
evicted.
According to
the
guidelines,
non-resident
correspondents
may access the
premises for
two hours
after the
adjournment of
the event they
are covering.
Third,
according to
your letter,
Mr. Lee
behaved in a
confrontational
manner when
approached by
United Nations
Security
officials, who
were therefore
entitled to
expel him.
However, it
was Mr. Lee’s
shirt that was
torn and it
was his laptop
that was
damaged by the
UN officials.
Mr. Lee
asserts that
it
was the
officials who
behaved
uncivilly, and
the videos he
recorded
illustrate
this fact.
Fourth, your
letter informs
us that the
matter is
under review,
but prior to
the release of
conclusions of
the review,
you inform us
of what this
exercise will
find: “As a
result of Mr.
Lee’s recent
actions in
violation of
the Media
Guidelines and
his
unacceptable
comportment
when dealing
with United
Nations
Safety and
Security
officials, Mr.
Lee’s
privileges of
access to the
premises of
the United
Nations as a
non-resident
correspondent
have been
suspended.
Those
privileges of
access will
remain
suspended
pending a
review of this
matter to
determine what
further
actions, if
any, should be
taken with
respect
to such
privileges.”
In other
words, the
review is not
a process to
determine what
actually
happened on the
dates in
question. It
is instead an
exercise to
determine what
further
actions can be
taken against Mr.
Lee. Our
question is,
why is this
matter under
review? Are
you not
enfranchised
to decide what actions
shall be taken
against a
journalist who
has violated
the terms of
his
privileges? A
more basic question
is, why is
there no due
process to
consider a
violation and
evidence
regarding what
actually
happened in
Mr. Lee’s case
(and more
generally)?
Ms. Smale, if
we are allowed
to argue this
dispute before
an objective
decision-maker,
in reference
to
specific
guidelines,
allegations of
violations and
production of
evidence, we
can
demonstrate
that Mr.
Lee’s
expulsion from
UN premises
was
unprovoked,
and most
likely
retaliatory
for articles
he has written
critical of UN
operations.
If, however,
we are subject
to an exchange
of letters, in
which you
respond to
us and to Mr.
Lee with
dispositive
statements,
without
reference to
specific
guidelines
violated or
evidence of
the violation
cited, we
cannot
prevail.
In short, the
United
Nations, and
in particular
your office,
is deciding
who will be
accredited to
inform
the public
about the
operations of
the United
Nations. This
practice, in
itself, is a
violation of
Article 19
of the
Universal
Declaration of
Human Rights,
which the UN
was
established to
uphold.
Once again,
GAP is
requesting
information
about the
specific
guidelines
that Mr. Lee
violated on
June
22nd
and on July
3rd of this
year that
caused his
eviction from
the premises
of the UN. And
most urgently,
we
respectfully
request
immediate
access to the
premises, so
that Mr. Lee
can do his
job. Today, we
are
informed that
the UN
Security
Council is
meeting about
Afghanistan,
Lebanon,
Eritrea,
Ethiopia and
Myanmar, and
Mr. Lee cannot
access any of
those meetings
or the
stakeouts.
Please respond
by e-mail
this
afternoon, if
possible.
Finally, GAP
is aware you
are on
vacation for
three weeks,
but response
(and full
reinstatement)
should
not and cannot
defer to that
schedule...
Cc: Officer in
Charge,
Department of
Global
Communications
And on February
27, 2019,
Inner City
Press without
hearing or
appeal remains
banned from the
UN by
Guterres. This
is UN
censorship.
***
Feedback: Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-303, UN, NY 10017 USA
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 2006-2019 Inner
City Press, Inc. To request reprint or
other permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for