On New UN Sex Abuse
in DRC, MONUSCO Listed 5
Accused, UNHQ Outsources
By Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS,
May 1 – Amid vague claims of
reform at the UN, even the
victims of high profile UN
malfeasance such as the sexual
abuse of children in Haiti,
the DR Congo and the Central
African Republic remain
without any remedy - or even
the DNA tests that the UN
took. The UN won't even answer
questions. On April 28, Inner
City Press asked the UN's
holdover spokesman Stephane
Dujarric, UN transcript here.
But he said he hadn't seen it.
And three days later, he
didn't bring it up, Inner City
Press did. From the May 1 UN transcript:
Inner City Press: sorry to go
back to something, but on
Friday, I’d asked you about
MONUSCO (United Nations
Stabilization Mission in the
Democratic Republic of the
Congo) saying that there are
at least five new allegations
of sexual abuse by military
and non-military personnel,
including from Burundi.
What’s the policy now in terms
of making these
announcements? Are they
done by headquarters, by the…
Spokesman: I think they…
we expect… we very much expect
the missions to regularly
update on where they are and
we need… we can echo it from
here, but it’s up to the
missions to do it. CDU
website, the website of the
Conduct and Discipline Unit,
is regularly updated. I
think you can sign up for
email updates for them.
I think… I felt bad because I
think I should have been
prepared to know… to have
known what was announced, but,
whatever, there was a
breakdown in
communications. But it’s
perfectly appropriate and, in
fact, expected for the perm…
for peacekeeping missions to
do those announcements
themselves.
Inner City Press: My question
was one of the things they
seem to emphasise at MONUSCO
is that one of the alleged
victim that’s a minor is going
to be, quote, turning… you
know, in the care of UNICEF
(United Nations Children’s
Fund). And given the
recent report and call by Code
Blue that UNICEF didn’t follow
through on victims in CAR
(Central African Republic),
has anything been learned from
that? Is there any UN
response?
Spokesman: I think it
was an allegation from Code
Blue. I think you’ve
seen the response from
UNICEF. You’re also
welcome to contact them.
I think UNICEF works very
closely with the victims, and
we have no doubt that this
particular person will be
assisted and well assisted by
UNICEF for medical and
psychosocial care.
Really. From the April 28
transcript: Inner City Press:
I wanted to ask you about
these new sexual abuse
allegations in the DRC
[Democratic Republic of the
Congo]. Seems like… like
now the UN, I guess, there is
naming a Romanian military
observer accused of sexual
abuse of a minor and others,
including from Burundi.
Have you seen the story?
Can you respond to this?
Spokesman: I have not,
but I will take a look at that
as soon as I leave the podium.
Inner
City Press:
Seems like MONUSCO [United
Nations Organization
Stabilization Mission in the
Democratic Republic of the
Congo] has said this…
Spokesman: I'm not
disputing it. I'm just
saying if I haven't seen it
with my own eyes, it's hard
for me to respond.
Inner City Press: I
would assume, having seen all
the posters around the
building, like, wouldn't DRC
have said… wouldn't MONUSCO
have told the UN…?
Spokesman: Matthew, I
don’t…
The day
ended with no update at all.
On April 13 in the UN Security
Council US Ambassador Nikki
Haley took the issue on,
recounting the luring of
children in Haiti with cookies
and snacks, and the
"disgusting" video-taping of
an attack in 2011. She said
that Troop Contributing
Countries which do not
prosecute those charged with
abuse should not be paid. Video
here; transcript below.
On April 21, Inner City Press
asked the UN's holdover
spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript
here: Inner City
Press: On Haiti I wanted
to ask, I’m sure you saw the
article in The
Guardian about the
failure of the UN to assist
and cooperate with women who
had children by peacekeepers,
they say, getting DNA tests;
and there is one case where
the woman was 16 at the time,
under the age of consent, and
the UN did a DNA test in
February 2014 but has not,
according to her lawyer,
shared it with her. How
is this consistent about the
statements of accountability
and zero tolerance to not
share this DNA test with a
person who it seems was victim
of statutory rape by an UN
peacekeeper?
Spokesman: My
understanding from our
colleagues in the mission is
that of the cases that are
discussed in the article,
eight out of the nine are in
our records. Out of the
eight cases, one is closed,
where paternity has been
established and an ex gratia
payment has been made for
child support by the mother of
the… to the mother by the
Member State and the other
seven, we are following up
regularly with the concerned
Member State. In some
cases, paternity has been
established through DNA
testing that the mission has
facilitated between the victim
and the Member State and in
others we are in touch with
the Member State to facilitate
the DNA testing and process
the claim. We have
requested the ministry to
encourage the lawyer to
provide credentials of one of
the victims whose name does
not appear in our
records. So as far as I
understand, the cases are
being followed up on and it’s
clear that the Member States
of the peacekeepers who are
being accused have a
responsibility to cooperate
and to pay ex gratia, to pay
the mothers of the victims and
if there was a crime that
those people be prosecuted.
Inner City Press: Can
you explain in English what ex
gratia means and can you say
how much is paid…?
Spokesman: I don’t have
the information because that
is something issued between
the Member State and the
family. Ex gratia just
means a cash payment, as far
as I understand it, but you’re
the lawyer so you may know
more.
Back on April 13, Inner City
Press asked UN Spokesman
Stephane Dujarric, video here,
transcript here:
Inner City Press: today,
in the Security Council [...] child sex
ring run by the UN in Haiti by
Haitian peacekeepers, you
said, well… you didn't say
bygones. You said it was
long time ago. So I
wanted to ask you…
Spokesman: It's not,
it's not at all what I said,
Matthew…
Inner
City
Press:
I have the trans…
Spokesman: You have the
transcript. You can
interpret the transcript…
Inner
City Press: Here's
my question.
Spokesman: It's not at
all what I said.
Inner
City
Press:
And I would like you today, at
end of the day, on your
holiday, I would like you to
get an answer, of the more
than 100 Sri Lankan
peacekeepers known by the UN
to have bought children for
sex with cookies and snacks,
were any of them ever
prosecuted? And, if they
weren't, why is it that DPKO
[Department of Peacekeeping
Operations] has continued to
deploy Sri Lankan soldiers to
the three missions you
mentioned yesterday, and I
believe they're on tap for
Mali?
Spokesman: I don't think
they continue to deploy.
As you know, there was no
deployment of Sri Lankan
peacekeepers for a long
time. The issue of
impunity of peacekeepers who
committed horrendous crimes,
who violated the trust given
to them and were not
persecuted is one of the
reasons, and one of the many
reasons, this
Secretary-General and his
predecessor have pushed for
greater accountability and
have pushed for greater
partnership for Member
States. And Member
States have not always given
us the information we
needed. So I would urge
you to check with, with the
Sri Lankans.
Inner
City
Press:
But I'm asking you, as the UN
that continue, that deploys
this troop-contributing
country, of the 100… this was
in the AP story yesterday,
child sex ring. So it
seems like it's important to
say…
Spokesman: Of
course. Everyone is, is
vetted, and the troop
contributors have a
responsibility to certify that
none of the soldiers that are
being deployed from wherever
they come from have ever been
implicated in any sexual
abuse, and we would expect Sri
Lanka and all other troop
contributors to do the same.
Inner
City
Press:
But they don't accept the
charge…
Spokesman: Benny.
Inner City Press: So
they don't accept they're
implicated.
We'll have
more on this, and on the UN's
continued retaliation against
whistleblowers
and on the Press
which reports on them-
later on April 12, Inner City
Press asked UN Spokesman
Stephane Dujarric about the
sexual abuse in Haiti and he
called the Press' tweets
"harassment," here.
The UN has become a place of
censorship, it must be
reversed. USUN transcript:
"it’s a nightmare for many in
Haiti, who will never be able
to forget and live with brutal
scars. We must acknowledge the
abandoned children, 12 to 15
years old, who lived everyday
with hunger. They were lured
by peacekeepers with cookies
and snacks. The high price of
this food was sexual abuse.
According to Paisley Dodds of
the Associated Press, the
children were passed from
soldier to soldier.
One boy was gang-raped in 2011
by peacekeepers who
disgustingly filmed it on a
cell phone.
What do we say to these kids?
Did these peacekeepers keep
them safe? We must acknowledge
these realities. How can we
learn from these acts? These
peacekeepers are sent into
vulnerable communities to
protect the innocent, not to
exploit or rape them.
The United States has made it
clear to the UN and all
troop-contributing countries
that these abuses must stop.
Countries that refuse to hold
their soldiers accountable
must recognize that this
either stops or their troops
will go home and their
financial compensation will
end. The abuses do not
represent poorly to a
troop-contributing country if
they hold these abusers
accountable and stress this to
the soldiers that are in
place.
The United States will
continue to work closely with
Haiti as it makes progress
towards security and
stability. With the
international community, we
stand by the Government of
Haiti and are committed to the
country’s democratic
development, independence, and
economic growth.
We will, however, continue to
push for accountability of
those troops in Haiti, as well
as all troop-contributing
countries involved in
peacekeeping efforts. We owe
it to the vulnerable in these
countries who desperately need
peace and security. I ask that
you join me in this effort.
Thank you."
On April
11 at the UN, there were Press
questions, but few answers,
about the UN's chimerical
response to its Haiti victims.
On April 12, journalist Karin
Mattisson spoke on a panel
with Code Blue, about how
little was done for the
victims in CAR; Inner City
Press ran to the Japan Society
and asked questions, here.
Then Inner City Press ran
back to the UN and asked
holdover spokesman Dujarric,
UN transcript here:
Inner City Press: I want to
ask you two things. One,
there’s a… there’s a… I’m sure
you’ve seen the AP
investigative story about
sexual abuse through the years
in the UN, including of, what
they call a child sex ring run
by Sri Lankan
peacekeepers. And, given
that the Sri Lankans are now
being deployed again to Mali,
I’m wondering what the vetting
is… or, you know, what the…
what the… and also, there was
a press conference today by
Code Blue near the UN, at
which they presented the, the
fact, based on a Swedish
journalist who went to Bangui,
that the children who were
allegedly victims of the
sexual abuse by peacekeepers
received virtually no help
whatsoever from UNICEF.
So they were highly critical
of that. And I wonder, you
were just speaking about
UNICEF. What’s the
response of the UN system to
this, to these two damming
reports, one by AP about 2,000
allegations of sexual abuse
and, two, more locally here by
Code Blue, about a failure to
help victims... The Swedish
journalist who spoke at the
Japan Society said, when she
went to do a show, basically
it was about Kompass
initially, and then she tried
to speak to some of the
alleged victims of the, of the
abuse. And one in
particular that had a child
from a peacekeeper said that
the UN system told her not to
speak to journalists.
And I just wanted to know,
from this podium, is that
appropriate?
Spokesman: Obviously, I
don’t have the details of, of
the case. I have no
reason to doubt the veracity,
but it is clearly not United
Nations policy to tell anyone,
especially a victim, that they
should not speak to the press.
The UN's
retaliation, including against
Swedish official Anders
Kompass, is still in the news
in that country, as in
New York the UN dodges Press
questions about holes in its
claimed whistleblower
protections. Based on
retaliation against three
separate whistleblowers, UN
High Commissioner for Human
Rights Prince Zeid should be
suspended, it has been
requested of UN Secretary
General Antonio Guterres in a
letter
copied to US Senators Bob
Corker and Ben Cardin,
and UN Special Rapporteur David
Kaye, here.
See also this
detailed report by Brett
Schaefer on why the UN budget
should be cut, until
whistleblowers are protected.
On March
15, Inner City Press asked UN
holdover spokesman Stephane
Dujarric, video
here, UN transcript
here:
Inner City Press:
I wanted to ask whether you've
seen today the Government
Accountability Project has
made a proposal that there be
a Special Adviser on
whistleblower and has
expressed some concern that
the current Secretary-General
may be, from their point of
view, as unconcerned with
protecting whistleblowers as
his predecessor citing the
case of Kompass, Miranda Brown
and now Emma Reilly. And
so, I'm wondering, is there
any consideration of
appointing such a position?
Spokesman: I think, I
mean, I always appreciate
hearing from the Government
Accountability Office. I
think anyone who has looked at
the whistle-blower policy that
was approved within a few
weeks of Secretary-General
Guterres coming into office
will see in it his strong
determination to protect
whistleblowers to ensure that
there is the right kind of
policies for the staff and for
whistle-blowers. The
policy was, in fact, approved
by both management and the
representation of the global
staff. So, I think we're
very… we're very confident,
and I think the
Secretary-General is very
determined to ensure that the
right policy is put in place.
On February
23, after Dujarric announced
Guterres will be with Zeid in
Geneva on February 27, Inner
City Press asked about the
letter. Video
here, UN
transcript here:
Inner City Press:
since you said that the
Secretary-General is going to
Geneva, there are now… more
than a week ago, there was a
letter by the Government
Accountability Project.
I know you sometimes say you
disagree with them
automatically. But they
wrote saying to the
Secretary-General about three
whistle-blower cases, Emma
Reilly, Miranda Brown, and Mr.
[Anders] Kompass, and said
that he should… that there
should be a probe conducted by
the Secretariat of retaliation
in Office of the High
Commissioner. Is he
aware of the letter? And
is it something he…
Spokesman: I don't know
if he's personally aware of
the letter. If we
received the letter, I'm sure
it will be answered.
Sure? Here
are questions from
whistleblower Miranda Brown:
"the SG has
recognized the old policy
failed to protect
whistleblowers, but the new
policy is not retroactive for
me, so I will not be
protected... (this is
tantamount to saying we will
no longer apply the death
penalty, but sadly we will
continue with your execution).
My case before the UNDT is
still pending. However, this
is a procedural case only.
Under the old policy, which I
am being subjected to, I
cannot challenge the decision
by the UN Ethics Office not to
afford me protection.
There is no
justice for whistleblowers at
the UN, no accountability for
retaliation and no punishment
for the retaliators - not even
an investigation into Zeid,
after the UNDT concluded that
his suspension of Anders
Kompass was unlawful.
Does the SG plans
to update the whistleblower
protection policy further,
given that it does not meet
the requirements under US law
for the full disbursement of
US funds (section 7048 of the
Consolidated Appropriations
Act). The revised policy does
not provide external
arbitration nor does it
eliminate the effects of
retaliation (I lost my job at
OHCHR) - both are required
under section 7048.
Also, given that
he has recognized that the old
policy was a failure, why has
he not instituted interim
measures for existing
whistleblowers?"
On February
14 in the morning (New York
time) Inner City Press posed
three questions to Zeid's
spokesperson Rupert Colville,
including:
"Hi. Inner City
Press has a few questions it'd
like answers to as soon as
possible:
1) whistleblower Emma Reilly
tells us that “OHCHR now
claims I can't speak because
of the staff rule that 'in no
circumstances should [staff
members] use the media to
further their own interests,
to air their own grievances,
to reveal unauthorized
information or to attempt to
influence their organizations’
policy decisions.' No response
to my email on how this
squares with OHCHR airing
grievances against me by
falsely stating my claims had
been found to be
unsubstantiated.”
Is that in fact OHCHR's
position?
2) In terms of OHCHR calling
things unsubstantiated, on
social media and in a press
release, is OHCHR denying that
the Ambassador of Morocco
financial supported the sale
of Mr Eric Tistounet's book?
3) ....Please state what
happened at the HRC
organizational meeting
yesterday. Please answer these
asap."
Hours
later, and after a UN noon
briefing in which UN deputy
spokesman Farhan Haq called
Inner City Press obsessive and
an "asshole," still not
answer. We'll stay on this.
Back on
February 10, Inner City Press
asked Guterres' deputy
spokesman Farhan Haq about the
request, and about OHCHR
essentially gagging
whistleblower Emma Reilly. Video
here, transcript here
and below.
Haq
declined to respond on the gag
order Inner City Press quoted
(below), and said that the UN
Ethics Office is handling it.
But Inner City Press
understands that the Ethics
Office - whose director Elia
Armstrong has refused Press
requests to answer questions -
has recused itself, leaving an
official from UNFPA to start
from scratch.
While
whistleblower Emma Reilly has
been prohibited by Zeid's
Office from providing the
Press with her substantive
defense to OHCHR's attempt to
trash her, she has authorized
Inner City Press to use this
quote:
"OHCHR now claims
I can't speak because of the
staff rule that 'in no
circumstances should [staff
members] use the media to
further their own interests,
to air their own grievances,
to reveal unauthorized
information or to attempt to
influence their organizations’
policy decisions.'
"No response to my email on
how this squares with OHCHR
airing grievances against me
by falsely stating my claims
had been found to be
unsubstantiated, revealing
unauthorized information by
referring to a confidential
investigation (for harassment,
against Mokhiber and Darrow -
panel found the facts I
claimed were true, Zeid
magically declared the motive
not to be harassment), or
attempting to influence the
Ethics Office decision by
stating I had never been
subjected to reprisals. Still
no news on what the alleged
second investigation was...
Feel free to use the above -
it's legitimate for me to
quote the reason I can't talk
to you, and it's clear from a
glance at the press release
that they broke the very rule
they are using to keep me
quiet."
Here's
from the UN's
February 10 transcript:
Inner City Press:
there's a letter directed to
António Guterres by the
Government Accountability
Project specifically
concerning this whistle-blower
issue and saying [Anders]
Kompass, Miranda Brown, and
Emma Reilly in asking that he
be suspended and
investigated. So I
wanted to know, did he receive
this letter before he set off
on his trip? And can you
respond, Ms. Reilly has told
Inner City Press that she's
been ordered not to speak,
which is contrary to what
Stéphane had said, they've
quoted to her some rule... She
said she's been told the
following: that staff
members should not use the
media to further their own
interests, to air their
grievance, or to reveal
unauthorized
information. She feels
it's unfair because they put
out a press release saying
that her charges are
unsubstantiated. So, in
sum, has he received the
letter? And what's the
process to consider the
request by this group?
Deputy Spokesman: Well,
regarding that, I don't have a
confirmation about a receipt
of a letter. What I can
say is we're aware of these
issues. A lot of these
are processes that are being
handled by different
bodies. The question
regarding Ms. Reilly is being…
is something that has been
looked at and is being looked
at by the Ethics Office.
Regarding what she may have
said to you or not, I think
that that's something you'll
need to take up with the
Office of the High
Commissioner for Human
Rights. They are dealing
with that issue. I
believe that they were simply
responding not to her but to
reporting that came out in
media. So they… so that
is something… they were not
trying to take up anything
involving a dispute with her
so much as responding to
reports that had come out in
different published accounts.
Inner City Press: My
understanding is that the
Ethics Office is actually not
handling this. They've
recused themselves because
they say that she… one of her
charges is against them, so
it's been assigned to somebody
from UNFPA (United Nations
Population Fund), and
basically, the process has
started all over. Is
that… can you confirm that at
least that it's back to square
one?
Deputy Spokesman: I'm
aware that… well, not back to
square one. I believe
that the process is
continuing. I don't have
any further details to engage
on that. Have a good
weekend.
A leaked
UN Ethics Office memo that
raises questions not only
about that Office but also the
UN Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights
was published by Inner City
Press on February 1, here.
On
February 2, OHCHR responded
with press
release and tweet
against the now petitioning
Government Accountability
Project and Inner City Press,
claiming
that Inner City Press'
report - based on the UN memo
- was unfounded, and trashing
the whistleblower, Emma
Reilly.
On
February 7, Inner City Press
asked the spokesman for UN
Secretary General Antonio
Guterres what Guterres meant
when he said he had formed a
committee about - but without
- whistleblowers. From the UN transcript:
Inner City Press:
I've seen the
Secretary-General quoted that
he's formed, quote, committees
to deal with thorny issues,
such as the protection of
whistle-blowers and sexual
exploitation and abuse.
Can you say who's on those
committees, particularly in
the case of
whistle-blowers? Are
there whistle-blowers on the…
Spokesman: On the
whistle-blower, I think he was
referring to the fact that, I
think, just two weeks after or
three weeks after he took
office, there was an agreement
between the staff and the
management, and a new
whistle-blower policy was
issued. And he was also
referring to the task force
being led by Jane Holl Lute on
sexual exploitation and abuse.
Inner City Press: The other
one is, I saw in his schedule
yesterday, he met with the ACT
group, Accountability
Coherence and Transparency,
and particularly given the
third noun in their name, can
you give a readout?
Spokesman: No, I don't
have anything to share on the
transparency… meeting with the
transparency group.
OHCHR's
press release also trashed the
whistleblower, while keeping
in place rules prohibiting her
from speaking to the press.
OHCHR claims, while censoring
rebuttal:
"the staff member
has never faced reprisals. The
staff member has had her
contracts renewed and remains
employed by the organization
on full pay. She has made
allegations against various
managers. These have been
taken seriously, leading to
two separate independent
investigations that have been
carried out to determine
whether or not there is any
substance to her allegations.
In both instances, the claims
made by the staff member were
found to be unsubstantiated."
Inner City Press
replied,
asking OHCHR or
@UNHumanRights to explain how
the finding for example about
Morocco improperly paying for
OHCHR official Eric
Tistounet's book-selling event
was "not substantiated." There
has been no response. If a
response to that, or to
today's GAP request, is
received Inner City Press will
publish it.
On
February 3, Inner City Press
asked UN spokesman Stephane
Dujarric about Morocco's
payments - he refused to
answer - and if the reclusive
head of the UN Ethics Office
Elia Armstrong will come and
answer questions, as for
example her predecessor Robert
Benson did. There has been no
answer.
Now
we can report from a range of
sources that not only did Eric
Tistounet take Morocco's
financial support to promote
his book - he tried to recruit
Moroccan faux NGOs - GONGOs --
to try to make the complaint
go away, seeing if they would
complain about the
whistleblower. This is how the
OHCHR, and wider UN, have been
operating. We'll have more on
this.
Inner City
Press supports the replies of
the Government Accountability
Project, here,
and of the annotator, which we
are putting online
here, along with this
new Kafka-esque game chart.
Eric
Tistounet of the Office of the
High Commissioner for Human
Rights, without Ethics
approval, published a book and
had a member state promote it.
Document
at Page 11. One
pitch mentions the state
of Morocco.
Prince
Zeid's OHCHR responded with a
press
release denying
everything, concluding "the
claims made by the staff
member were found to be
unsubstantiated." Inner City Press
has asked OHCHR this.
But the
Ethics Office memo - on which
UN holdover spokesman Stephane
Dujarric refused to answer
Inner City Press, video
here - admits Reilly's
exposing of Morocco paying to
promote OHCHR's Tistounet's
book created a right to
protection. And the event's
website makes clear Morocco
was paying, against the rules.
That's not "unsubstantiated" -
that's a cover up of
corruption. On this and the
rest, we'll have more.
For now we
only note that Zeid's OHCHR's
self-serving total denial,
seemingly a product of fear of
loss of US funding, has been
welcomed by Pierre Nkurunziza
supporters in Burundi.
And this, from
the annotator:
"They are clearly
panicked, and the OHCHR Press
Release is not saving the
Ethics Office.
This would, of course, be the
same OHCHR that still insists
they did nothing wrong in the
Kompass / CAR sexual abuse
case…...
The question is not whether
there was a casual connection
between Eric Tistounet’s
decision and Cao Shunli’s
death. Eric Tistounet’s
decision gave Emma Reilly
cause to be concerned for the
safety of the human rights
activists in China, and in the
specific case of Cao Shunli,
that concern turned out to be
justified.
The question is whether Emma
Reilly had reasonable grounds
to believe that Eric
Tistounet’s decision might be
misconduct ….. and the Ethics
Office bent over backwards to
say ‘no’!
This would, of course, be the
same Ethics Office as was
involved in “facilitating”
Zeid's misconduct complaint
against Kompass - and didn’t
know that child sex abuse
generally gets a bad rap in
the Press."
Yes,
that's them.
The UN
spokespeople who defended Ban
Ki-moon's corruption to Inner
City Press until the day he
left, and stonewall now, often
say the Ethics Office as
approved this or that. For
example, Ban's mentor and UN
official Han Seung-soo being
on the boards of directors of
Doosan Infracore and Standard
Chartered Bank, which has UN
contracts.
Or Jane
Holl Lute, being on the board
of a railroad, and also a
"senior US administration
official" while being a UN
official. The list goes on.
UN
Ethics Office memo to Emma Reilly,
and on Eric Tistounet, via Inner
City Press by Matthew
Russell Lee on Scribd
But
it gets worse, much worse. As
stated by the memo's annotator
to Inner City Press:
"this is a
whistleblower protection case.
The staff member reported that
OHCHR gave names of Chinese
human rights activists to the
Chinese government. This was
when China was trying to get
on the Human Rights Council.
They prevented a number of
activists from traveling to
Geneva to attend the meetings,
and we know that one of them
subsequently died in police
custody.
OHCHR tried very
hard to keep this quiet, but
one Human Rights Officer, Emma
Reilly, complained about it.
They then retaliated against
her.
Of all the
insanity in this, possibly the
best bit of all is the Ethics
Office arguing that even after
OHCHR deviated from their
usual policy and shared
information with the Chinese
government about which Chinese
human rights activists were
being accredited to attend the
Human Rights meeting, and even
though a human rights activist
DIED after being detained to
stop her traveling to a UN
human rights
meeting..........a UN Human
Rights Officer still does not
have reasonable grounds to
believe that misconduct has
taken place....... so nothing
she said or did is
'protected.' The new
whistleblower policy is a POS
because nothing in it will
give the s/m any comfort when
the Ethics Office bends over
backwards not to recognize
retaliation. There is still
nothing the staff member can
do about this.
Can you make these documents
available on your site?"
But of
course. See more of his
summary here,
and response
to Ethics Office, here.
And see this,
from the Government
Accountability Project which
also requested a reversal of
UN USG Cristina Gallach's
retaliatory eviction of Inner
City Press, without response
from the old
UNSG and old
USUN /
Isobel Coleman
- still UNacted on by the new
SG. We'll have more on this.
***
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
2006-2015 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
for
|
,
