At UN, Talk of Journalist Protection Despite Gatluak, Co-Targeting with Burundi, No Due Process

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 27 -- When  Frank La Rue, now with UNESCO, spoke on Safety of Journalists at the UN on October 27, Inner City Press asked him what the UN in South Sudan had done to protect journalist John Gatluak when he was targeted and killed in the Terrain compound in Juba in July, what the UN is doing in Burundi and why the UN itself provides no due process to journalists. Video here.

  La Rue said a UNESCO official was also attacked in South Sudan -- Inner City Press asked if had been publicized enough -- and that his mandate at UNESCO does not include reviewing the UN, but that he supports Special Rapporteur David Kaye on this.

  Well, Kaye and his follow Rapporteur Michel Forst wrote to UN Department of Public Information boss Cristina Gallach to ask why she ousted Inner City Press without due process. Amongside the wider problem in Burundi, Inner City Press is among the media on a ruling party “enemies list” - even as the UN engaged in its own targeting. We'll have more on this.

How did the UN under outgoing Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his should-be-outgoing "Public Information" chief Cristina Gallach pretextually evict the critical Press from its long time office and confine it to minders, hindering further reporting on their corruption? 

An October 2016 UN report on press freedom (A/HRC/33/32, here) includes both UN Special Rapporteurs David Kaye's and Michel Forst's joint letter to Gallach, here, and her belated and untruthful response, here. Gallach says Inner City Press “trespassed” without stating that it was the UN Press Briefing Room in which the noon briefings are held.

Gallach does not mention that there was no sign that said “closed” nor that even Ban's outgoing spokesman Dujarric admits the arrangement was only oral.

On October 21, Inner City Press asked Special Rapporteur Kaye about his report. Video here. He said he would like to explore the process: if the UN offers due process to journalists. Inner City Press pointed out, for his inquiry, that it was never asked, before on February 19 having its accreditation and badge stripped, WHY it sought to cover the event in the UN Press Briefing Room on January 19. (It was to pursue the UN bribery / Ng Lap Seng story, which is ongoing.)

  So an hour later, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spoksman Dujarric about what Kaye has said, what due process exists or may in the future exist. But Dujarric cut the question off -- “it's about you” -- and said flatly, your case has been adjudicated. Really? By one unaccountable individual, Cristina Gallach, who never allowed any opportunity to be heard? With no appeals process?

 From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: in this room before the Wonder Woman situation, unrelated to it or maybe related, David Kaye, the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, who, in his report, has included a letter from Cristina Gallach responding to his inquiry about her decision to throw a media out for being in the room.  Her letter says that the media… that the press trespassed in this room.  So I wanted to know what he, he raised concerns about due process.  Given that you've worked in that system, what do you learn from the inquiry from David Kaye and Michel Forst asking about it and the comments made today about, about the UN not…

Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Dujarric:  I mean, I think it's about you, and I think your case has been adjudicated.

   Without any due process at all, no appeal, any questioning cut off. Even the countries the UN criticizes offer more due process than this. There should be firings.

This UN "Aide Memoire," which Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric called "leaked" and refused to answer questions on, shows how - as does this Gallach's letter of May 25, 2016. On June 16, Inner City Press was belatedly provided with a copy of the questions UN Special Rapporteurs Kaye and Forst sent to Gallach on February 25, put it online here:

So Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the letter(s), Video here, Vine here, UN Transcript here  and below.

Petition here.

On June 27 at the UN Human Rights Council, Ban's and Gallach's pretextual eviction of Inner City Press as it reported and reports on their links to the Nb Lap Seng / John Ashe UN bribery scandal and other UN misdeeeds, was raised by International Lawyers in a formal session, video here, statement here:

"The Vienna Declaration and Program of Action was adopted under the auspices of the United Nations. It led to the creation of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights the focal point of human rights within the United Nations and established the United Nations at the center of the global human rights movement. At that time, as today, many believed that the United Nations itself should set the example for the rest of the world for upholding respect for human rights. Too often, however, we have seen this is not the case. It is with regret and concern that we must request the Council’s attention for a matter of interference with the right to freedom of expression of a journalist at the United Nations in New York by the office of the United Nations’ most senior official.

After covering the United Nations for more than a decade, on 19 February 2016, Inner City Press was ordered to leave the United Nations’ premises on two hours’ notice in a letter signed by the UN Under-Secretary- General for Public Information. The official reason given was that the journalist covered a private meeting. This meeting was held in the UN Press Briefing Room, which all press are ordinarily allowed to attend, and the journalist immediately left the room when asked to do so by UN Security. Moreover, the apparent harassment of Inner City Press, which had been covering the United Nations for more than a decade, appears to have commenced after it began covering a story concerning corruption linked to the Office of the United Nations Secretary-General. While the story has been widely covered, it was Inner City Press that repeatedly asked pointed questions about it at UN Press Conferences given by the spokesperson of the Secretary-General. The timing of the expelling of an Inner City Press journalist from the UN, then the closing of its office, at the time this story alleging corruption within the Office of the Secretary-General was being covered, at best seems suspicious and at worst a blatant interference with the human rights to freedom of expression by a body who should know better and set a better example.

Moreover, we have just recently learned that the UN’s Office of the Secretary-General, apparent to justify its action, provided one of the Council’s mandate-holders false information when he enquired into the matter. The veracity of the information provided by the UNSG’s Office alleging “an altercation” took place at the alleged ‘closed meeting’ is contradicted by video showing this to be untrue.

We call on the High Commission for Human Rights, who is himself an Under-Secretary- General, to condemn the actions of the Office of the Secretary-General and to urge him to exercise his good offices to resolve this dispute in a manner that is consistent with the right to freedom of expression, including a free press, and to report to the Council the results of his efforts."

Inner City Press' long time shared office, pretextually taken and purported to be give to an Egyptian state media which never comes and never asks questions must be returned, immediately, among other remedies to protect freedom of the press.

From the UN's June 16 transcript:

Inner City Press: I've become aware today of a letter that was sent by Special Rapporteur David Kaye and Special Rapporteur Michel Forst to Ms. [Cristina] Gallach of DPI [Department of Public Information] on 25 February, asking about ouster and eviction of Inner City Press.  And her response was two months later, and she referred to an altercation in this room that required… so I'm asking you.  You were here.  Other than you turning off my phone, was it an altercation?  Is that an accurate statement?

Spokesman Dujarric:  Matthew, Matthew… I have not… I will not comment on your personal issues.

Inner City Press:  You're saying it's a personal issue.  This was a letter sent to the Special Rapporteur.

Spokesman:  And the letter, if you want to ask for the letter, you could ask the Special Rapporteur.

Inner City Press:  No, I've seen the letter. 

And below is Gallach's letter, here, which itself calls for action.

UN's Gallach Claims Evicted ICP Because Of “Altercation” When Video Shows None, Except Ban Spox Trying To T... by Matthew Russell Lee

It was provided to Inner City Press only on June 16, by a UN / Kaye staffer, under this cover letter:
And herebelow is Gallach's letter, which itself calls for action. It was provided to Inner City Press only on June 16, by a UN / Kaye staffer, under this cover letter:

"Two UN Special Rapporteurs communicated to ask for clarification on your case last February. The letter was made public just recently in the report of all communications sent by rapporteurs in the period accessible here (communications of this type remain confidential initially and are made pubic every HRC session):

https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G16/106/44/PDF/G1610644.pdf?OpenElement

UNDPI responded to your letter only in May (and this is why the response is not made public online - it will come only in September). In any case, the SR encloses here the response received. Again, sorry for the slow communication. With thanks and regards,
Marcelo Daher, Human Rights Officer, Special Procedures Division, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

And here is from Gallach's highly problematic letter:

“The privilege of the use of such office space was withdrawn after an incident in which Mr Lee trespassed in a closed meeting of the United Nations Correspondence [sic] Association. The disturbance and altercation that his behavior caused required the presence of United Nations Safety and Security Officers to defuse. Thus, as was made clear in my letter of 19 February 2016 to Mr. Lee his behavior did not comport with the express requirements of the United Nations Media Accreditation Guidelines, which are applicable to all journalists to the United Nations. These circumstances, consequently, occasioned the withdrawal of Mr. Lee's resident correspondent accreditation.”

  This paragraph is full of lies. There was no altercation - the only physical contact was Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric stabbing at Inner City Press' cell phone to try to turn off the Periscope live stream.

  It was Inner City Press which asked for a UN Security guard to come, to rule if it was a closed meeting or not. The UN has separately told the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee that it has no written record that it was a closed meeting -- so how did Inner City Press “trespass,” as Gallach alleges and misstates to the Special Rapporteurs?

   Gallach has allowed Giampaolo Pioli, the president of the UN Correspondents Association, the name of which she misspells, to come to the UN Security Council stakeout and loudly call Inner City Press “an assh*ole.” So what about those civility rules? This is a pure pretext and retaliation; Gallach should have been recused, after being questioned by Inner City Press in October 2015 about her role in Ng Lap Seng's South South Awards with Francis Lorenzo.

   Gallach doesn't even purport to answer the Special Rapporteurs' questions about the lack of due process. The Handbook she cited to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is not available online. So she makes up an “altercation,” which is a lie. We'll have more on this.

Eviction of Inner City Press Inquired Into By UN Rapporteurs on Freedom of Expression and Human Rights Defe... by Matthew Russell Lee

25 February 2016

Dear Ms. Gallach,

We have the honour to address you in our capacities as Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders pursuant to Human Rights Council resolutions 25/2 and 25/18.

In this connection, we would like to bring to your attention information we have received concerning the withdrawal of the accreditation of Mr. Matthew Lee, an investigative journalist with Inner City Press, a web journal reporting on issues related to United Nations.

According to the information received:

On 19 February 2016, Mr. Matthew Lee received a letter, in which the Under Secretary General for Communications and Public Information informs him of the Department of Public Information’s (DPI) decision to withdraw his Resident Correspondent accreditation at the United Nations office in New York in favour of non-Resident Correspondent, a status that would be renewable after an initial four-month period. The letter further informed him of the need to vacate his present office inside the UN and arrange for a new identification corresponding to his new status.

Later in the day, UN Security personnel removed Mr. Lee’s identification and escorted him out of the UN headquarters. His laptop was allegedly tossed out of the gate onto the sidewalk. Mr. Lee’s working files remained within the UN premises.

The steps taken against Mr. Lee’s accreditation were, according to the letter he received, based upon an incident that occurred on Friday, 29 January 2016, which DPI allegedly determined was in violation of the United Nations Media Guidelines. On that date, Mr. Lee’s allegedly tried to cover a meeting in the UN Press Briefing Room, from where he left after being informed by the UN Security of its restricted nature. Allegedly, no information was requested from Mr. Lee or any other written communication was sent to him on this incident, until the receipt of the letter on 19 February.

Without prejudging the accuracy of this information and the pertinent accreditation procedures within the United Nations and while respecting the critical role of DPI in providing access to information within the UN system, we are nonetheless interested in understanding how the rules governing media access operate to advance the principles of access to information and press freedom and how the rules were applied in this particular case.
We would also be grateful for your observations on the following matters:
1. Please provide any additional information and any comments you may have on the above-mentioned allegations.

2. Could you please clarify the reasons for the withdrawal of the accreditation of Mr. Lee’s resident correspondent accreditation at the United Nations?

Please also provide relevant rules from the Media Guidelines that were applied to this situation.

3. Could you please describe the inquiry procedures pursued following the incident, which led to the withdrawal of Mr. Lee’s accreditation?

4. Could you please indicate whether Mr. Lee, or other journalists similarly situated, are permitted leave to appeal against a decision to withdraw accreditation (or other such actions)?

We wish to inform you that this communication together with your response will be made available in a report to be presented to the Human Rights Council for its consideration.

Please accept, Ms. Gallach, the assurances of our highest consideration.

David Kaye
Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression

Michel Forst
Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders

First, Ban's spokesman Dujarric made a non-public deal on January 26 with Giampaolo Pioli of the UN Correspondents Association to privatize the UN Press Briefing Room on January 29 - but not tell anyone it was private.

Next, when Inner City Press which quit UNCA in 2012 finding it too close to Ban and corrupt, for example Pioli's unilateral granting of a "UN" screening for Sri Lanka's war crimes denial film at the request of its Ambassador Palitha Kohona who had been Pioli's tenant, click here, appeared to cover the event, get Dujarric to order Inner City Press to leave, without showing any paperwork.

After Inner City Press, as it said it would, left as soon as a single UN Security guard said to, conspire with Under Secretary General Gallach, whom Inner City Press had previously questioned about her role in the Ban's Ng Lap Seng UN bribery scandal, to issue a letter on February 19 telling Inner City Press to leave its office and the building on two hours notice - without once speaking to Inner City Press.

  Throw Inner City Press in the streets, audio here, evict its ten years of investigative files from its office, video here, then just before Inner City Press could re-apply for its stolen office, gave it to an Egyptian state media, Akhbar Elyom, whose correspondents Sanaa Youssef, a former UNCA president, has not anywhere near met the UN's stated three day a week requirement for such an office, and who never asks questions.

To top it off, leave South South News, founded with Ng Lap Seng's money and by Francis Lorenzo, who has pleaded guilty to UN bribery charges, with its office and Resident Correspondent accreditation. See Courthouse News, here.

   Thus the investigative Press is punished, publicly, and a chilling message sent to anyone else who might dare to cover Ban Ki-moon's role in the corruption scandal, while he seeks to run for the South Korean presidency in 2017. This Ban, or his spokesman, coyly denies of course.

  Of the retaliatory eviction, Ban said “that is not my decision.” But it is. He was set extensive information, including the total inconsistency of what Gallach told Nobel Prize winner Jose Ramos Horta when he inquired for Inner City Press (she said she ouster order was based on an “internal report”) and what the UN told the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee (that the UN has “no records” that the meeting was closed.

  Ban Ki-moon is responsible; he has created an atmosphere of retaliation, has retained and empowered Under Secretaries General like Herve Ladsous, who linked rapes to R&R and openly refuses Press questions, and Gallach. We'll have more on this: it must be reversed.

 For ten years as Inner City Press covered the UN in ever greater detail, showing Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Herve Ladsous' inept overseeing and cover up of sexual abuse and exploitation by peacekeepers, disparate treatment in Mali, dalliance with genocide in Sri Lanka and prospectively Burundi, impunity for cholera deaths in Haiti and until now for UN lead poisoning in Kosovo and cravenly pro-Saudi position on Yemen amid the airstrikes (BBC this week here from Min 6:18), it was never thrown out of the UN.

Now in 2016, Ban Ki-moon's last year at the UN, it has been. New York Times of May 14 here. 

The issue is to be raised at the UN Human Rights Council this coming week.

 And this contraction has already been raised, between the UN's "Aide Memoire" to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying there is no written records of the underlying January 29 meeting being closed, and Under Secretary General Cristina Gallach telling Nobel Peace Prize winner Jose Ramos-Horta that her ouster decisions was based on considering an "internal report."

 So is it no written record, or internal report?

Was inaccurate information provided to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee? Or to Nobel Peace Prize winner / UN official Jose Ramos Horta? On June 13, Inner City Press asked the question to Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, who cut the question off, saying "we're good" then, "You may not be good, I'm really good" - perhaps a new motto for the Ban Ki-moon administration. Video here. UN Transcript:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you this, a request for a document.  The… the Under-Secretary-General of DPI wrote to [José] Ramos-Horta in February and said that she had considered an internal report, and I've seen an aide-memoire, which says that there's no written record of the same topic that she raised.  So, I wanted to know, can you square these two?  How is it possible…?

Spokesman:  No.  I have no… again, these are your personal issues.

Inner City Press:  She wrote to the Senate and she wrote to a Nobel Prize winner…

Spokesman:  Matthew, Matthew.  We're good.

Inner City Press:  No, no, we're not good…

Spokesman:  You may not be good.  I'm really good.

Inner City Press:   I'm sure you're good.

Spokesman:  But, I'm not answering those questions.  Those are questions to be dealt with… your personal case should be raised directly with DPI.

Inner City Press: I'm asking you how a Nobel Prize winner was told one thing, and the Senate was told something else.

Spokesman:  Thank you.  We're going to get our colleague on the phone.

 Gallach told Ramos-Horta Inner City Press had "open" violated a rule and she considered an "internal report" -- when the Aide Memoire, here, shows the UN says it has no written record the meeting was closed and the Handbook allegedly violated is not public:

"Dear mr Ramos-Horta,

Many thanks for your message which allows me to inform you about the
decision I have taken on the type of accreditation that Mr Lee has and will have in the future.

Recently mr Lee openly broke the rules that guide all the resident correspondents. After careful consideration of the internal report elevated to me, I decided to continue providing him with a press pass that allows him to work without any impediment at the UN, as the vast majority of
journalists. What the UN cannot do is to let him use an space exclusively for  him, after the mentioned events.

As you can see, mr Lee will have a valid press card as soon as he presents himself to the accreditation premises.

Rest assured that I am the first person to be interested in ensuring totally free and safe reporting from the UN HQ and about the UN. This is what mr. Lee will be able to do.

I remain at your disposal for any further clarification that you might need and want. My warmest regard, Cristina"

But the UN says it has no written record the meeting was closed; the Handbook allegedly violated is not public. And "without impediment" has turned out to mean "with minders," and even not permitted to cover a Western Sahara briefing Inner City Press was invited to, only on June 10.

 The UN is trying to give Inner City Press' long time shared office to an Egyptian state media, Akhbar Elyom, whose correspondent hasn't come close to meeting the three day a week requirement and never asks any questions. It rewards others like this, while retaliating against and trying to censor the critical Press.

This will be raised this week at the UN Human Rights Council; the UN in continued attempt to censorship has not responded to Inner City Press' formal requests submitted more than two week ago. Watch this site. 

On June 8 Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric outright refused to provide a copy of, or any answer questions about, the "Handbook" the alleged violation of which the UN told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was the basis for evicting Inner City Press. Aide Memoire to SFRC here.

Before Inner City Press was even able to ask the question, Dujarric cut it off, and later disallowed an unrelated Press question about other UN corruption. Video here, transcript here and below, with quotes from Ban Ki-moon later on June 8.

Ban later on June 8 said: "I will continue to defend the rights of journalists and to do everything possible, publicly and privately, to ensure that journalists have the freedom to work...I will also continue to stand up for the rights of journalists and their defenders to be represented here at the United Nations.

"I am extremely disturbed by recent remarks by the President-elect of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte. [Inner City Press had asked, here.] I unequivocally condemn his apparent endorsement of extrajudicial killing, which is illegal and a breach of fundamental rights and freedoms.  Such comments are of particular concern in light of on-going impunity for serious cases of violence against journalists in the Philippines. I have expressed my disappointment that the Non-Governmental Organization Committee voted to deny the Committee to Protect Journalists consultative status with the Economic and Social Council...I have presents for each of you [segue to presentation]. "

e This is what it has come to: censorship while Ban exchanges gifts and drinks champagne with his friends and sells out the UN human rights lists to the highest bidder (for now, Saudi Arabia.) From the June 8 transcript:

Inner City Press:  I've asked you about this aide-mémoire that was sent by the UN to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.  So I want to ask you about it again.  What I want to ask you about…

Spokesman:  My answer's not going to change.

Inner City Press:  No, here's what I want to ask you about specifically.  You call it a leaked document.  It's hard to understand if it's sent from the UN to a committee.  It's leaked.  But this is my question.  And it's sort of a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) like question.  The document says that what was violated is something called the UN Handbook for Safety and Security Personnel.

Spokesman:  Matthew, Matthew, your personal issues will not be discussed here.

Inner City Press:  You're calling it personal…

Spokesman:  Thank you.  Masood?

Inner City Press:  But if you can punish journalists, where is the document?  I'm requesting the handbook.

Spokesman:  Talk to DPI (Department of Public Information).

Inner City Press:  I did, and they don't have it.

Spokesman:  Talk to them again.

Even as groups like the Government Accountability Project tell Ban to reverse the eviction and give Inner City Press back its long time office and Resident Correspondent pass, Ban's UN tellingly moved to award Inner City Press' office to Egypt state media Al-Akhbar / Akhbar Elyoum. 

While Ban told Inner City Press "That is not my decision," and his Under Secretary General Cristina Gallach has yet to explain anything to Inner City Press, on June 5 we published the UN's "Aide Memoire" which claims that the "rule" against being in an interpreters booth is in a UN Security handbook that is not available to the public - it is not on the Internet, not on the UN's in-house iSeek and on June 6, UN MALU did not have it -- and states there is no paper work for the underlying meeting being closed. 

On UN Eviction of ICP, UN Aide Memoire to Senate Foreign Relations Committee Admits No Written Record, Oral... by Matthew Russell Lee

The UN Aide Memoire says the entire event -- which included UN paid sound engineering - was organized orally between UNCA President Giampaolo Piolo and Ban Ki-moon's Spokesman Stephane Dujarric. So on June 5, Inner City Press asked Dujarric about it, video here, only to have Dujarric call it a "leak" he could not verify and to insist Inner City Press ask  the Department of Public Information.

. UN Transcript here:

Inner City Press: This I wanted to ask you and I'll try to keep it brief.  I've seen now a aide-mémoire that the UN, I guess, Office of Legal Affairs sent to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and they said this. It had… since it involves you, I wanted to ask you about it.  It says that, as to a meeting held in this room on 29 January, the UN has no documents, correspondence or other written materials in print or electronic that it was a closed meeting.  And it says you arranged it entirely orally that it would be closed.  So, I wanted to ask you this.  As a financial matter, how is it possible to arrange for UN audio engineering without there being any written record and how…?

Spokesman:  Matthew, I don't know what document you're quoting for or what… the veracity of this leaked document.

Inner City Press:  They sent it to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Spokesman:  We've gone through your personal case here over and over again, and I would ask you to take it up with DPI [Department of Public Information].

Inner City Press: This quotes you.

Spokesman:  Lot of things quote me.

 But here is what the UN's Aide Memoire provided to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee says, in Paragraph 9:

“The Spokesperson of the Secretary-General of the United Nations has informed the Office of Legal Affairs that on or about Tuesday, 26 January 2016, he was approached by the President of UNCA who orally requested permission from the Spokesperson for the use of the UN Press Briefing Room in order to hold a members-only meeting of UNCA. Among his other duties, the Spokesperson grants permission for the use of the UN Press Briefing Room for meetings other than press briefings. The UNCA President told the Spokesperson that the UNCA Meeting Room on the fourth floor of the United Nations Secretariat Building was being prepared for a reception to be held after the closed members-only meeting and so, the UNCA Meeting Room was unavailable for such closed members-only meeting on the 29th of January. The Spokesperson gave permission orally to the President of UNCA during that encounter on or about the 26th of January.”

   As Inner City Press reported, there were UNTV audio staff in the engineers' booth for the UNCA meeting. Is it credible that this use of UN resources was organized without a single written record? Inner City Press was told that the engineer was to make sure to disable the microphones in the briefing room, other than those at the podium occupied by this UNCA President Giampaolo Pioli and two others.

 The UN's response is false in many ways - but note that the UNCA Meeting Room is NOT on the fourth floor. So what else is false? Watch this site.

Aide Memoire now here  It states that Gallach has NO paperwork that the meeting she ousted and evicted Inner City Press for attending was closed. This was requested:

“Documentation received by Cristina Gallach, Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information, including emails, letters, and any other written communications indicating that the United Nations Correspondents Association meeting in the Press Briefing Room, that Mr. Lee was barred from attending, was a closed meeting.”

  Here is the UN's response:

“No official of the United Nations has received or is in possession of any documentation, correspondence or any written materials, whether in print or electronic form, indicating that the closed meeting of the United Nations Correspondents Association (UNCA), which took place on Friday, 29 January 2016, was taking place or was a closed meeting.”

  So if the UN admits there is NO WRITTEN RECORD that this event in the UN Press Briefing Room was a closed meeting, how was it a closed meeting? How could Inner City Press be ousted and evicted for seeking to cover, in the UN Press Briefing Room, an event attended by other correspondents and NOWHERE listed as closed?

  And now Inner City Press' long time office given to an Egyptian state media which rarely comes to the UN and never asks questions? This is a scam; this is UN censorship..

  The UN "aide memoire" also claims that Stephane Dujarric orally told UN Correspondents Association honcho Giampaolo Pioli, who previously demanded that Inner City Press remove from the Internet a factual story about his financial relationship with Sri Lanka's Ambassador Palith Kohona, that the meeting was closed. This is a joke; this is a pretext.   This is censorship.
Tweeted photograph here.

On May 19, a sign for "Al Akhbar Yom" went up on Inner City Press' office - Inner City Press has STILL never seen the correspondent being given the stolen office.

So on May 20 Inner City Press went to get an on the record explanation from Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Duajrric, before Ban sets out on a campaign trip to South Korea (denied by his senior adviser Kim Won-soo). But not only did Dujarric refuse to answer the question - Gallach's DPI intentionally omitted from the transcript Inner City Press' entirely audible question about Ban Ki-moon's commitment to freedom of the press. The question then, answer itself.

Since the spin to the NYT is that Inner City Press' questions on corruption and censorship somehow block questions other correspondents want to ask, Inner City Press twice told Dujarric it would hold one question to the end. But Dujarric, showing that the spin is a scam, insisted: go ahead. Video here. From the UN Transcript:

Inner City Press: I have another question, but I don't want to…

Spokesman:  Well, just ask it.

Inner City Press:  No, no, I'll wait.

Spokesman:  I'd like you to ask it now.

Question:  Okay.  Stay where you are and I’ll do it as fast as I can.  I wanted to ask you, you sometimes say you don’t have a long memory, but you’ve been a Spokesman for a while.  When is the last time, to your knowledge, that the publication Akhbar al Youm has been in this room and asked a question?  And the reason I asked… you said I could ask.  I’ll do it quickly.  The office that was formerly "Inner City Press", has been given to this organization.  I've never seen them here.  I'm aware there's a rule of being three days a week here.  So, I’m wondering… and you used to implement that rule.  And the reason I’m asking you, and you’re going to say, ask MALU [Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit], I want an on the record quote.  This is a media organization that CPJ [Committee to Protect Journalists] says targets other medias for arrest for not agreeing with the Government.

Spokesman:  I will tell you that I do not have in my head the attendance records of journalists here.  Some of you are here every day.  But, for the rest of you, I don't keep tabs in my head.  And again, that’s a question for you to ask MALU.

Inner City Pres:  But, I'm asking for an on-the-record comment.  What does it say about freedom of the press…

Spokesman:  I’ve given you… Nabil?

Inner City Press' last line, "What does it say about freedom of the press," was intentionally mistranscribed and censored: it said, What does it say about Ban Ki-moon's commitment to freedom of the press."

This is today's UN: ham-handed censorship. 

The UN says Resident Correspondents must be at the UN three days a week, but Inner City Press has never seen this person, former UN Correspondents Association president Sanaa Youssef, much less asking a question in the UN noon briefing. 

The point, of course, which Dujarric did everything he could to cut off, including walking out of the brieifng room and not returning, is what does it say about Ban Ki-moon's supposed commitment to free press to evict the investigative Press here every day for a state media never here, never with questions, which targets other journalists for arrest?

The question is answering itself, but we will continue. Dujarric's deputy Farhan Haq after the briefing was heard telling DPI staff under Gallach that he had predicted Inner City Press would "go after" Akhbar Elyom.

This is today's UN: here's Haq on Jan 29, video here, and before. Haq claimed incorrectly that "non resident correspondent" passes get one through to the second floor: either years out of date or intentional inaccurate. This too is today's UN.

Scribes speaking off the record according to the New York Times of May 14 "accused [ICP] of printing gossip, rumors." That UNCA's president rented an apartment to Palitha Kohona then granted his request to screenin the UN his government's war crimes denial film is no rumor or gossip.

But Akhbar Elyom, to which Gallach's and Ban's MALU and UNCA have given Inner City Press' office, not only gets journalists in Egypt attested - it targets, with a "Muslim Brotherhood" smear, a journalist who works right in the UN. Arabic article here.

This is the journalism that Ban Ki-moon and his Cristina Gallach want and reward. By taking away Inner City Press' office, it is now required to have a minder and is told to not ask diplomats questions. This is censorship.

Akhbar Elyom has been used to finger for imprisonment non-state journalists in Egypt. For example, in July 2015 Aboubakr Khallaf, the founder and head of the independent Electronic Media Syndicate (EMS), “was arrested after a news article was published by the government-owned daily Akhbar Elyoum.”

Inner City Press has formally requested the return of its long time shared office and Resident Correspondent status, as have 1,450 people in this petition, here.

 Follow @innercitypress Follow @FUNCA_info