In
UN Censorship,
Staff
Reprimanded
For Twitter
Reply to Helen
Clark
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, May 6
-- The UN
system is very
proud of its
social media
presence,
recently
declaring
Helen Clark of
UNDP its
Number One
tweeter.
But what
happens when
an actual UN
staff member
tweets a substantive
reply to Helen
Clark?
From
a UN Dispute
Tribunal ruling,
online
here:
On
7
September
2013, Ms.
Helen Clark,
Administrator
of UNDP
tweeted that
Governance is
an important
driver of
success of the
next global
development
agenda.
6.
In
response the
Applicant
tweeted to Ms.
Clark that
“UNDP is
shutting down
governance in
RBEC which
will impact
our work
hugely in
Central Asia”.
7.
On
11 September
2013, the
Applicant
received an
e-mail from
Mr.
Patrick
Keuleers,
Officer in
Charge of the
Democratic
Governance
Group and Mr.
Olivier Adam,
Director,
Regional
Centre, RBEC.
The e-mail
subject was
titled “Note
to file –Your
message on a
public
internet
platform in
response to a
twitter
message from
UNDP
Administrator
Helen Clerk.”
In
the
e-mail, the
Applicant was
informed that
both Mr.
Keuleers and
Mr.
Adam were
aware of the
twitter
message that
she had posted
on 7 September
2013. It cited
that:
Response
on
a public
internet
platform is
very
unfortunate;
it lacks
professional
judgment and
seriously
questions your
ability to
continue
representing
the
organisation
at a
professional
level. As
stipulated in
the UN Staff
Rules and
Regulations,
as
international
civil
servants, we
do not
criticise
senior
managers’
decisions
publicly and
certainly do
not launch
unfounded
statements
that the
organisation
would withdraw
its governance
support to one
region...
It
concluded
that: Given
the
seriousness of
this incident,
we have
jointly
decided, in
consultation
with senior
management in
the
organisation
to...
Communicate to
you this note
that will be
recorded in
your personnel
file,
indicating the
corporate
disapproval of
the statements
you have made
publicly,
while
acting in a
UNDP Policy
Advisor/Team
Leader
position...
Your
reaction to it
will be
included in
this NTF [Note
to File]
This is akin
to the UN's
crackdown on
whistleblowers
- see Inner
City Press'
coverage
earlier today
of UN
Peacekeeping
boss Herve Ladsous
urging the
resignation of
a staffer who
made public
reports of
child rapes in
Central
African
Republic by
troops from
Ladsous'
native France.
But it is
censorship,
too, and
impinges on
the ability of
the
independent
Press to cover
the UN. The
new Free
UN Coalition
for Access
is opposed to
this, and
believes that
accessibility
to the media
-- not just
one way
Tweeting -
should be a
criterion in
the selection
of the next UN
Secretary
General, a
position Inner
City Press has
reported,
based on UNDP
sources, Helen
Clark wants.
Back on April
27 the
question was,
how should the
next UN
Secretary
General be
selected, to
improve the
Organization?
First in a 10
am press
conference by
the campaign
called "1 for
7 Billion:
Find the Best
UN Leader."
Inner City
Press asked
the panel if,
as happened
last time,
increase trade
and aid
funding by a
candidates'
country should
at least be
disclosed, if
not
prohibited.
William Pace
of WFM replied
not only about
countries
spending
hundreds of
million of
Euros, but
also about the
heads of
international
agencies using
their posts to
campaign.
Since UNDP's
Helen Clark is
known to have
told
associates and
underlings she
would like to
be the next
SG, Inner City
Press asked
the panel for
comment. They
were
diplomatic,
including on
the UK, said
to be a
reformer on
the SG post,
having
insisted it
retain the
Emergency
Relief
Coordinator
position,
albeit in the
person of
Stephen
O'Brien and
not Cameron's
first nominee
(and National
Health Service
destroyer)
Andrew
Lansley.
Natalie
Samarasinghe
of UNA-UK said
the campaign
around (well,
against)
Lansley was a
positive step
forward; she
said that
social media
makes secret
processes less
possible. (But
see the
replacement at
Yemen envoy of
Jamal Benomar
by a
Mauritanian
official who
has not made
public
financial
disclosure).
Yvonne
Terlingen, now
Senior Policy
Adviser at
WFM,
also cited the
OCHA process
or campaign.
WFM's Pace
seemed to
conflate the
entire UN
press corps
with the UN
Correspondents
Association,
a group that
for example tried to
censor Press
coverage of
how Under
Secretary
General Herve
Ladsous got
the job, then
tried
to get
the Press
thrown out.
The new Free
UN Coalition
for Access
seeks to open
the UN and
these
processes -
watch this
site.
Back on April
24 across the
street from
the UN at the
International
Peace
Institution
there was a panel
about
#NextSecGen
moderated by
former Indian
Ambassador to
the UN, and
former
Security
Council
member,
Hardeep Singh
Puri.
The post is
said to be
slated for the
Eastern
European
Group, and the
question and
answer (or
comment)
portion was
top-heavy with
the Permanent
Representatives
of Croatia and
Slovakia (also
the chair of
the Budget
Committee) and
the Deputy
Permanent
Representative
of Estonia
laying out of
the positions
of the ACT
group, echoed
by Costa Rica.
Inner City
Press asked
what about
improving the
transparency
and place of
merit in the
selection of
Under
Secretaries
General?
Recently UK
Prime Minister
David
Cameron's
attempt to put
Andrew Lansley
of National
Health Service
infany atop
the UN Office
for the
Coordination
of
Humanitarian
Affairs was
defeated as
reported in
detail by
Inner City
Press, see credits
in the
Telegraph
and UK
Channel 4.
But, the
position has
stayed with
the UK in the
person of
Stephen
O'Brien
(deemed better
than the
initial
candidate by
panelist
Edward
Mortimer).
Should USG
positions be
“owned” by P3
countries,
like France
has owned UN
Peacekeeping
four times in
a row
(following a
horse-trade
for Kofi Annan
becoming
Secretary
General) and
the US has
held Political
Affairs twice
in a row?
While
Political
Affairs USG
Jeffrey
Feltman came
directly from
the US State
Department
with the
baggage that
may carry,
particularly
in the Middle
East, the most
extreme
example is
Herve Ladsous
of UN
Peacekeeping,
video
here, Vine here.
When asked by
Inner City
Press about
his history
and
qualification
adopted the
position of
refusing all
questions from
Inner City
Press and
having his
spokespeople,
at least one
of whom was
present at IPI
on April 24,
go so far as
to grab the
UNTV
microphone to
avoid
questions.
Ladsous
went so far as
to say "I
don't answer
you Mister" at
IPI itself,
video here.
On the overall
USG question
Jean Krasno of
the City
College of New
York favored
“selecting
candidates for
these
positions on
merit rather
than
geographical.
We want the
highest
quality
people,
serving in an
impartial
matter.”
Natalie
Samarasinghe
of the UN
Association of
the UK said,
On the USG
issue, we want
an SG who has
the freedom to
make merit
based
appoints. At
the moment as
you have seen
it is very
unevenly
applied. We
need to
condemn it.
That pressure
is very
positive.”
Mortimer said
he was among
those who
wrote to Ban
Ki-moon
(selected by
the US and
China, more
than one
attendee said,
some citing
John Bolton's
book) about
Cameron's
first nominee
for OCHA. He
said that
Press
oversight is
important.
Puri said a
good SG would
pick good
USGs. We'll
have more on
all this.
Background:
When
Ban Ki-moon
was selected
as UN
Secretary
General in
2006 it was an
untransparent
process, with
secret ballots
in the
Security
Council.
On February 7,
2015, both
processes were
criticized
by "The
Elders."
Appearing at
the Munich
Munich
Security
Conference,
four Elders
including
Ban's
predecessor
Kofi Annan
along with Gro
Harlem
Brundtland,
Martti
Ahtisaari and
Graça Machel
unveiled a UN
reform plan.
Beyond Security
Council reform,
they
specifically
criticized
Secretary
General
selection
process for
lack of
transparency
and choice,
and suggested
a single seven
year term to
avoid simply
trying to get
re-elected.
To replace
Ban, the
Elders say
"we call on
the General
Assembly to
insist that
the Security
Council
recommend more
than one
candidate for
appointment as
the
Secretary-General
of the United
Nations, after
a timely,
equitable and
transparent
search for the
best qualified
candidates,
irrespective
of gender or
regional
origin. We
suggest that
the next
Secretary-General
be appointed
for a single,
non-renewable
term of seven
years, in
order to
strengthen his
or her
independence
and avoid the
perception
that he or she
is guided by
electoral
concerns."
Inner
City Press and
the Free
UN Coalition
for Access,
fighting for
transparency
including a Freedom
of Information
Act at the UN,
agree and
believe the
Elders should
have gone one
level down,
more timely,
and criticized
the ownership
of Under
Secretary
General
positions by
P3 Security
Council
members like
Peacekeeping
and France's
Herve Ladsous,
and the process
to replace
Valerie Amos
as OCHA, here
(and above).
Even further
down, the
under-performance
of Team Ban,
including for
example UN
Peacekeeping
chief Herve
Ladsous,
has been
enabled and
concealed by
what has
become the
UN's
Censorship
Alliance,
formally the
United Nations
Correspondents
Association.
These forms of
decay are not
UNrelated.
On November
14, 2014 this
organization
in decline
formally
announced a
slate of six
officers --
all without
any
competition at
all. It was a
pure rubber
stamp, "yes,"
with the only
question being
turn-out. The
top post was
handed (back)
to Giampaolo
Pioli, who
engaged in
outright
censorship
while last
using the
position.
Pioli, who
had rented one
of his
Manhattan
apartments to
Palitha
Kohona, Sri
Lanka's
ambassador,
unilaterally
granted
Kohona's
request to use
UNCA to screen
inside the UN
a government
film denying
war crimes.
Then Pioli
demanded that
reporting of
these facts
must be
removed from
the Internet (compilation
of audio here)
or he would
use UNCA to
try to get
Inner City
Press thrown
out of the
UN.
Voice of
America,
then on the
UNCA Executive
Board, wrote a
letter
to the UN
asking that
Inner City
Press'
accreditation
be reviewed; a
Freedom of
Information
Act request
showed that
VOA said it
had the
support of Agence
France Presse
and
Reuters (which
they tried to
censor
its anti-Press
complaint to
the UN by
claiming it is
copyrighted,
here.)
Now in 2015
Pioli has
returned.
Reuters has on
the board its
current
correspondent
as well as its
retired UN
bureau chief.
Agence
France Presse,
which had been
off the UNCA
Executive
Committee
after having
used it to
complain about
Press
reporting on
Herve Ladsous,
wanted to
return but did
not make it;
it was handed
a seat on
another board
announced by
UNCA.
Only
News Agency of
Nigeria, which
ran in 2013,
did not run
this time: its
UN office
space was
taken away in
2014,
ostensibly due
to scarcity
when UNCA is
given a big
room that sits
empty and
locked most of
the time, then
opens for
events that
could and
should have
occurred in
the UN's Press
Briefing Room,
open and on
UNTV. This is
the UN's
Censorship
Alliance.
As
to the
Secretary
General's
race, an
earlier reform
letter's
signatories
included
Avaaz, Amnesty
International,
CIVICUS,
Equality Now,
FEMNET,
Forum-Asia,
Global Policy
Forum, Lawyers
Committee on
Nuclear
Policy, Social
Watch, Third
World Network,
Women’s
Environment
and
Development
Organization,
the World
Federalist
Movement-Institute
for Global
Policy and the
World
Federation of
United Nations
Associations.
The
new Free
UN Coalition
for Access,
formed in
response to
the decline in
media access
and
transparency
generally
under Ban
Ki-moon,
heartily
agrees with
the need to
reform and
improve the
Secretary
General
selection
process.
Candidates
so far
including
Helen Clark of
UNDP, who
virtually
never takes
press
questions
while in New
York, the
headquarters
of UNDP, amid
untransparent
layoffs,
and Irina
Bokova, the
Director
General of
UNESCO, an
agency which
on November 3
led
an event about
journalists at
which not a
single
question from
a journalist
was taken.
There's also
among others,
in this SG
race we will
closely cover,
a Latina trio,
Kristalina
Georgieva,
Miroslav
Lajcak, Kevin
Rudd, Dalia
Grybauskaite,
Vuk Jeremic,
Danilo Turk,
Jan Kubis -
that is,
unlike the
UN's
Censorship
Alliance, at
least there is
some
competition.
We'll have
more on this.
Ban
Ki-moon,
meanwhile, is
appearing in
polls as
running for
president of
his native
South Korea in
2017. Inner
City Press asked
Ban's deputy
spokesperson
about it, who
said Ban is
“currently”
focused on his
current job.
This has been
repeated in
South Korea, here.
The UN is
being used;
the UN is in
further
decline; but
there are
moves afoot to
stem the tide
of decay.
Watch this
site.