Inner City Press -- Investigative Reporting From the United Nations to Wall Street to the Inner City

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 8 -- Two elections are scheduled this coming week in the UN; each shows from a different angle why senior UN officials remain unaccountable, for example on the scandal of UN Peacekeeping having brought cholera to Haiti and now refusing to even accept (or confirm denying) service of legal papers.

  The UN Staff Union, which is in a position to hold or compare Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to the principles of workers' rights that the UN publicly preaches, has an election scheduled.

  But late last week a move was made to "recall the polling officers" and put off the election. Inner City Press obtained the e-mail and publishes it here:

On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 7:04 PM, United Nations Staff Union wrote:

Under the statute and regulations of the UN Staff Union, namely 6.17 regarding the recall of officers by means through which they were elected, by a two-thirds majority decision, the Unit Chairs have voted to recall* the Polling Officers because recent information in circulation give the perception of impropriety and looms large over the upcoming elections. The impropriety indicates that the integrity and fairness of the election has been compromised under rule 6.9.

As a result, the current elections MUST BE postponed to ensure the integrity and fairness of the process.

While this is a difficult decision for the Unit Chairs, the majority decided it is in the best interest of the Union and the Staff to have an election not marred by any impropriety. We wish to thank the outgoing Polling Officers and, in a separate email, the Unit Chairs will broadcast a new call for nominations of staff to volunteer for the functions of Polling Officer.

* Result of the vote for recall of Polling Officers was 5 (for)- 1 (against)- 1 (abstain)

  It has been pointed out in response that "the polling officers are an independent body and are not part of the staff union. This is to avoid any conflict of interest during the election process. As they are not part of the union, the regulation quoted does not apply." It has been requested that who voted how -- that is, a roll call vote -- be released. Transparency?

  Meanwhile a re-coronation of Pamela Falk of CBS as the 2014 president of UNCA,now known as the UN Censorship Alliance, is set for next week.

  In 2013, she was asked to reign in those UNCA "leaders" who used the organization to try to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN, as they descended into anonymous trolling social media accounts, counterfeiting the new Free UN Coalition for Access and then Inner City Press.

  Falk's reaction in an on the record meeting was to demand that she not be written about, despite having sought this position, and putting herself forward at every opportunity to ask softball questions the answers to which are most often not published anywhere. Audio here, here and here.

  That United Nations Correspondents Association election also involves indicters and purported judges, and the Reuters successor to the scribe who spied (click here for that).

  This UN Censorship Alliance has just accepted a free Samsung TV, hiding behind the UN's own argument that this is fine. Here's Falk's explanation of UNCA's November 25 "General Meeting" with nowhere near quorum, as provided by an outraged member (Inner City Press quit UNCA and co-founded the Free UN Coalition for Access, yes, FUNCA):

"There was discussion about whether or not UNCA should receive a donation from Samsung and whether or not a Mission was involved. DPI was able to clarify the donation information, which does not involve a mission. This note was received: This is to confirm that once we get the donations from Samsung to the UN, DPI will loan a TV screen to UNCA to replace one of your old ones."

  Now this UNCA is poised to raise money, $250 a plate, for an event Ban Ki-moon is set to attend, after fielding softball questions two days earlier from his hosts (or censors). Can you say, conflict of interest? And this is another way that senior UN officials remain unaccountable. Watch this site.