UK
Under Performance at UN on
Cameroon and Censorship Worse
Than UNA-UK Report Says
By Matthew
Russell Lee, CJR Letter
PFTracker
UNITED NATIONS
GATE, February 19 – The UK's
role in the UN
and
international
affairs is
even worse than presented
today by the
group UNA-UK.
They choose
three "case studies"
-- Somalia,
ICJ and Chagos
Islands -- while
leaving out
the UK's shameful
performance on
Cameroon, the
former British
Southern
Cameroons. As
86 year old
Paul Biya
ordered the
slaughter of
Anglophone
civilians
there, UK minister Liam
Fox
bragged about
a gas deal
with Biya by
UK-based New
Age.
The UK
never
convened, and
in fact is
said to have
blocked, any
Security
Council meeting
devoted
to the crisis
in Cameroon.
This omission
by UNA-UK is
all the more
surprising
because Liam
Fox' ghoulish
bragging about the
New Age deal
was explicitly tied to
Brexit, the idea
that UK firms
can
still cut deals with
dictators if the UK
is not a part
of the EU (which
cuts its own
deal, for
example with
Morocco for
Western Sahara's
fish).
Additionally,
UNA-UK had declined
to do or say
anything about
censorship of the
Press which
raises these
issues by British USG
Alison
Smale.
One
positive from
the
report, online
here,
is the acknowledgment
"the
UK’s lost vote
on the Chagos
Islands must
not be viewed
purely as a
measure of
global
influence, but
also in
relation to
the
substantive
issues arising
over these
previous
violations of
rights. The UK
should also
consider the
further
reputational
damage caused
by its
decision."
The same and
more, of course, applies to
the UK and the
former British
Southern
Cameroons. But
the word
"Cameroon"
does not
appear even
once in the
UNA-UK report.
As with
as least perfuctory
push back against
Guterres and Smale's
censorship,
maybe next year.
As
the
Cameroon
government of
36 year
President
Paul
Biya
slaughters
civilians in
the Anglophone
regions as well as in
the North, it
has
re-engaged Washington
lobbying firm
Squire Patton
Boggs, on a
retainer
of $100,000 per
quarter
plus
expenses, documents
show. The
UN belatedly
acknowledged
to Inner City
Press,
which UN Secretary
General
Antonio
Guterres had
roughed up on
July 3 right
after it spoke
to Cameroon's
Ambassador Tommo
Monthe and on
which he and
UK USG Alison
Smale imposed a
lifetime ban on
August 17
profiled in
Press Freedom
Tracker US here,
that Guterres
met
with a
Cameroon
delegation on
July 11. Guterres'
spokesmen
have
repeatedly
refused to
answer Inner
City Press e-mailed
question
whether
Guterres was
aware his
meeting was
stage managed
by lobbyists
at Patton
Boggs, and
what was
discussed.
Inner City Press
asked the same and
more to the UK
Mission to the
UN,
president of
the UN
Security Council
for August, in
writing (below)
and verbally.
The UK
Mission has yet to answer
those
questions, or even
acknowledge
Inner City
Press' written
questions about
Yemen (where UK
bombs kill
children) and
Western Sahara.
But on August
29 they
were very
quick to
proudly
support the Press
censorship
order of
their
compatriot
Alison Smale.
Now this has
been raised,
as a case of
first
impression to
the UK
Information
Commissioner's
Office as
retaliation,
background here:
"Dear Mr. Slee
-- I
don't want to
slow down your
work, which
has ben too
long in
coming. I
simply want to
make you aware
of two points: 1)
beyond the
withheld or
redacted
documents you
will be
reviewing in
camera, be
aware that FCO
after after a
full year, and
after Inner
City Press
voluntarily
(or under
information
coersion)
limited its
request to
Cameroon and
Yemen, has not
to provide a
single
document about
Cameroon. This
while UK
Mission to the
UN Ambassadors
Matthew
Rycroft (now
at DFID),
Karen Pierce
and Jonathan
Allen
repeatedly
assured Inner
City Press,
including on
camera, that
the UK was
constantly
reviewing the
situation in
Cameroon's
Anglophone
areas. You
must obtain,
review and I
believe
release these
responsive
documents on
Cameroon.
2) Most
troublingly,
during the
pendency of
this review,
not only was
Inner City
Press ousted
and banned
from the UN -
Inner City
Press is
informed that
the UN is
telling people
that the UK
Mission
supported or
even requested
this roughing
up and banning.
I hereby
assert or
allege,
perhaps as a
case of first
impression for
the ICO, that
the UK Mission
has engaged in
impermissible
retaliation
against Inner
City Press and
myself for,
among other
things,
asserting our
rights under
UK FOIA.
This is a
formal request
that as an
inseparately
part of ICO's
mandate you
inquire into
and acting on
this now
alleged
retaliation.
Please confirm
receipt, and
advise on your
next steps on
these two." We'll
have more on
this. Inner
City Press
wrote to
Ambassador
Pierce, and verbally notified
her
deputy
Jonathan
Allen, that Smale
allowed no
due process or appeal.
This quickly
came back,
from Matt
Moody Spokesperson @UKUN_NewYork:
"Dear Matthew, I
am replying on
behalf of
Ambassador
Karen Pierce
to your email
to her of 29
August. As
you note in
your email,
the United
Nations
Under-Secretary-General
for Global
Communications
wrote to you
on 17 August
setting out
why the
Department of
Public
Information
has withdrawn
your media
accreditation. Media
accreditation
to the United
Nations is a
matter for the
Department of
Public
Information.
We refer you
to them."
This would
mean no oversight of
the UN. So
Inner City
Press wrote to
London - and
on
September 10
received this
shameful cover
up answer in
response:
"Dear Mr. Lee, Thank
you for your
emails of 26
August to the
Foreign &
Commonwealth
Office
Ministers
Harriett
Baldwin MP and
Alistair Burt
MP. I
have been
asked to reply
as Head of the
UN Political
Team. I
note that the
United
Kingdom’s
Mission to the
United Nations
in New York
replied to a
similar email
from you on 29
August,
regarding the
question of
your
accreditation
to the United
Nations. Media
accreditation
to the United
Nations is a
matter for the
UN’s
Department of
Public
Information.
We refer you
to them. Yours
sincerely, Justin
Bedford, UN
Political Team, Foreign
&
Commonwealth
Office." What
makes this buck - (or
Pound-) passing
all the worse is that
now Inner City
Press has
learned that
UN is telling
people the UK
has
supported and
even asked for
its banning of
Inner City Press. Inner City
Press has
immediately
replied to
these MPs,
"Dear Mr.
Bedford, MPs
Baldwin and
Burt - Thank
you for your
response but
it is woefully
inadequate.
First, it
would mean
that the UK
performs no
oversight over
the UN. Would
you refer a
question about
abuses by UN
Peacekeepers
to USG
Lacroix,
without more?
This is
particularly
inappropriate
when the USG
in question,
Alison Smale,
is a UK
national, as
was the ASG
who oversaw my
physical
ouster on 3
July 2018,
Christian
Saunders. But
to make it
clear: my
question, now
and with this
request, is
about the UK
Mission's role
in my banning
from the UN. I
am informed
that the UN
Secretariat is
telling people
that the UK
Mission
supports and
even has
requested my
banning. So I
am asking if
that is true,
appropriate
and consistent
with FCO's and
even the PM's
public
statements
including
about freedom
of the press. I
note Inner
City Press'
petition to
the ICO
because the
FCO did not
provide even
on document to
Inner City
Press about
Cameroon, even
a year after
its FOIA
request. Something
is going
wrong,
including at
the UK Mission
to the UN.
Isn't it the
MPs' job to
look into it? Awaiting
your
response."
Watch this
site. If
someone
raised to the
UK Mission or
FCO rapes by
UN
Peacekeepers,
would they refer
the matter to
USG of
Peacekeeping
Jean Pierre Lacroix?
Or is this deference
to the
obviously no
due process
censorship
order of Smale
because she is
British? Or
because the UK
supports,
benefits from
and seemingly
even called
for this
censorship of
the Press? What about
the British
Assistant
Secretary General
who oversaw
the roughing
up on July 3,
Christian Saunders,
previously
implicated in
UN procurement
corruption - was the
UK Mission
fine with
that? With
Justin Forsyth at
UNICEF and before?
The UK
Mission's /
Ambassador
Pierce's
response seems
to show that
there is no
oversight of
the UN by the
UK, at least
when a British
official is
the
wrong-doers,
or if the UK
Mission
(thinks it)
benefits. Follow
up questions
have
been sent to
the UK Mission
and Ambassador
Pierce,
including
"Please
describe your
and the
Mission's
communications
with British
USG Smale this
year,
including
prior to
her/the
directive to
DSS Lt Dobbins
to begin
physically
targeting me
any time after
7 pm, even if
there was a
Budget
Committee
meeting, or as
on June 22 a
speecch by the
SG?
Does the UK /
Mission /
Ambassador
Pierce believe
that there
should be
content
neutral
accreditation
and access
rules for
journalists at
the UN?
Does
the UK /
Mission /
Ambassador
Pierce believe
that a
journalist
should be
spoken to
before they
are physically
assaulted and
banned from
the UN?
Did you
know that the
March
"warning" was
a frivolous
complaint by
the Moroccan
mission, that
I couldn't use
my camera
phone at the
UNSC stakeout,
that even USG
Smale's MALU
told me it was
frivolous?
Did you know
USG Smale's
MALU told me I
did not
require an
escort or
minder to live
stream on the
fourth and
third floors?
They did.
Repeatedly.
You
"refer' me
back to this
Star Chamber
but as the
letter you
cite shows,
there is no
appeals
process?
Given
your topic
today in the
UNSC I am
banned from,
what does this
no due process
banning
without any
attempt to
address the
issues - like
that parking
lot which were
never raised
to me - say
about the
Secretariat's
and USG
Smale's
"mediation "
and conflict
prevention?
Does
the UK /
Mission /
Ambassador
Pierce believe
that a UN
investigation
or review of a
journalist
should involve
an opportunity
to be heard,
and specific
charges rather
than unnamed
accusers?
So do
you accept
this
censorship by
your
compatriot or
not?" Their
complicity on
the slaughter in
Cameroon,
particularly
in light of
Liam Fox
bragging about
UK-based New
Age's gas deal
with Biya, is
striking, and the failure
to answer
uncomfortable
- hostile? -
questions about
Pierce's meeting
with Biya's
lobbyists need looking into. We
have a FOIA
request in to
FCO on just this
topic. As some
British say:
Shocking, smacking
of the Star Chamber.
After
Guterres banned
Inner City
Press from entry from
July 3 onward,
in order to report
on the UN
Inner City
Press had to
seek answers
other than at
the UN Noon
Briefing and UN
Security
Council
stakeout
position, from
which Guterres
and Smale also banned
it. Inner
City Press
asks question
in front of
the UN
Delegates
Entrance...
***
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UN Office, past &
future?: S-303,
UN, NY 10017 USA
For now
UNder Guterres: UN Delegates Entrance
Gate
and
mail: Dag H. Center
Box 20047, NY 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
|