UN's Corporate Partnerships Will Be Reviewed, While New Teaming Up with
Microsoft, and UNDP Continues
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee at the U.N.
UNITED NATIONS, July
13 -- The UN under Kofi Annan has increasingly worked with corporations.
Questions have been raised about background checks and safeguards. A day after
Inner City Press reported that the UN's Geneva-based refugee agency had not
known that Swiss banker Ivan Pictet is on the UN Investment Committee when the
UNHCR Kashmir Relief Note placed money with the Pictet Funds India Equity fund,
the agency's spokesman mused, "Isn't the UN Investment Fund based in New York?"
Inner
City Press asked if it would have been helpful to UNHCR if the UN system had a
database of the companies controlled by the outside business people who serve on
bodies like the UN Investment Committee. A Google search for that committee and
Pictet found close to nothing. It appears that there is no easy way to find who
is on the UN Investment Committee.
UNHCR's
Ron Redmond answered that that it would "have been helpful to have that type of
information... For UNHCR to look it up is labor intensive, with all the possible
company names." He later added in writing, "Any additional information on
prospective corporate partners is of course always welcome; it would facilitate
our screening processes." Mr. Redmond states that UNHCR was never required to
ask SocGen to cease using the UNHCR visibility logo, in part because the
brochure that it was on was only intended to be used for a brief period. But
records show that individuals high in UN Headquarters chided UNHCR for the use
of such terms as UNHCR "teams up" with SocGen. Despite this in-house chiding, or
perhaps because the chiders refuse in their defensiveness to comment for the
record, this practice continues in the UN system to this day, literally. Click
here to
view the UN's World Tourism Organization's July 12, 2006 press release, "UN
tourism agency teams up with Microsoft,"
which was published on the UN News Center just as UNHCR SocGen-derilab's April
5, 2006 press release was. They just keep teaming up.
As the UN
increasingly has intercourse with corporations, basic safeguards are still not
in place. Inner City Press has previously reported on the lack of background
checks when corporations are allowed to join the UN Global Compact, and has
twice been rebuffed in requests to interview or ask questions of corporate CEOs
who have come to meet the Secretary General or on other Global Compact business.
At
Thursday's noon
briefing,
spokeswoman Marie Okabe was asked if any of the individuals in the Secretariat
who were asked to comment on the UNHCR - Pictet - Societe Generale transaction
had in fact spoken or provided guidance. We're still working on it, Ms. Okabe
answered.
Near six
p.m., Ms. Okabe called Inner City Press and said she had spoken about the
matter, as requested, with Under Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown. "They are
aware of the issues," Ms. Okabe said. "This case highlights the complexities of
the UN's partnerships with the private sector and so current guidelines and
practices of various funds and agencies and programs will be reviewed" to try to
avoid "potential conflicts of interest" and misuses of UN logos.
Great.
But what about the continued "teaming up," now with Microsoft? There's more work
to be done.
[A note on UNHCR's
work about Uzbekistan: the agency managed to visit in Kazakhstan with
Gabdurafikh Temirbaev, the Uzbek dissident threatened with refoulement
back to Tashkent, and has, its spokesman said, gotten a commitment to be able to
review Uzbekistan's extradition request.]
Alongside
UNHCR's work, unlike at the
UN Development Programme, at least UNHCR answered the questions and acknowledged
that things could be better. On UNDP and human rights, on UNDP and refusal to
answer press questions, what will happen?
Zimbabweans
On the
issues surrounding UNDP, the Office of the Spokesman for the Secretary-General
managed to get some response from UNDP to a question Inner City Press asked UNDP
in writing more than a week ago: why does UNDP help the government of Uzbekistan
to collect taxes, given the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights'
finding that this government shot and killed its own people in Andijan in May
2005. Here now is UNDP's response:
"As far as your UNDP/Uzbekistan questions
from the other week, here's what I can tell you... in Uzbekistan and most of the
140 developing nations where UNDP operates, UNDP works with government and civil
society on a broad range of governance projects, including economic reforms, of
which tax administration and fiscal policy are a significant component. Other
governance projects in Uzbekistan focus on gender equality, internet access, and
public administration reform. It may be worth noting that UNDP works in a wide
range of political environments, from Costa Rica to North Korea, with the belief
that UNDP's mandate as a development agency is to work constructively on behalf
of the people of the developing world wherever and whenever possible."
One wag
wondered if UNDP's programs in Uzbekistan might involve technical assistance on
not putting political dissidents in boiling water, as the U.K.'s former
ambassador in Tashkent has testified takes place. And see above, that UNHCR has
managed to visit in Kazakhstan with Gabdurafikh Temirbaev, the Uzbek dissident
threatened with refoulement back to Uzbekistan, where he would face
torture -- perhaps with tax funds UNDP helped to collect. UNDP has still not
even purported to answer the week-old question about
UNDP's funding of
Robert Mugabe's purported "Human Rights Council." Now the Zimbabwe Lawyers for
Human Rights has
called for a boycott.
What was that again, about UNDP working with civil society? To be continued.
Feedback: editorial
[at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-453A,
UN, NY 10017 USA Tel: 718-716-3540
Conflicts of Interest in UNHCR Program with SocGen and Pictet Reveal Reform
Rifts
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee at the U.N.
UNITED NATIONS, July
12, 11:45 am, updated 7 pm -- Eager to "team up" with banks Societe Generale
and Pictet & Company, the United Nations' refugee agency allowed SocGen to use
the UN logo in a way subsequently criticized by UN legal staff, and to invest
Kashmir Relief Notes funds in a Pictet & Cie fund despite owner Ivan Pictet
being a member of the UN Investment Committee. Criticized by other UN units,
UNHCR agreed to cease renting out the UN logo, but said nothing can be done
about the investment with Pictet et Cie.
Inner City Press
first raised these matters in April 2006. Earlier today UNHCR in Geneva finally
responded, confirming but defending the investment in a Pictet fund. UNHCR's
Ron Redmond wrote to Inner City Press that
"based on the information available to us,
there is no conflict of interest created for Mr. Ivan Pictet, managing partner
of Pictet & Cie, and ad hoc member of the UN Investments Committee, by the fact
that Pictet Funds Indian Equities is one of the funds in which KRN funds are
invested. Societe Generale, the issuer of the Note, is solely responsible for
choosing the funds and this selection is based on recognized risk management and
hedging criteria; UNHCR plays a purely passive role as the recipient of a
donation and has no interest in the performance of the Note. Moreover, Mr.
Pictet's membership in the UN Investments Committee was unknown to all parties
involved in drawing up this investment product, and we trust therefore that the
decision to include a fund managed by Pictet & Cie was taken in good faith."
Whether this
is in keeping with current and proposed UN standards of ethics and transparency
will be seen in coming days. Whether the stated lack of knowledge of Mr.
Pictet's membership on the UN Investment Committee comports with minimal
corporate or competence standards is also in question. The problem is a wider
one: in a defensive internal memo reviewed by Inner City Press, UNHCR lawyer
Helmut Buss argues that UNICEF similarly partners with FIFA and NIS Petrol Co,
and that the World Food Programme does the same with TNT Airways and the World
Rugby Board. Nevertheless, UNHCR has agreed to drop the logo use and the "teams
up" language deployed in its
April 5 press release.
The investment in a fund controlled by a member of the UN Investment Committee UNHCR defends, including by pointing out that
Morgan Stanley's Francine Bovich
is also on the UN Investment Board, while the UN does much business with
JPMorgan Chase. (Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan Chase, despite the comment
reference to Pierpont, are not related companies.) The UNHCR memo's argument is that it's too
complicated or burdensome to avoid conflicts of interest. UNHCR's earlier
justification to Inner City Press argued that "we are
not talking about the usual procurement procedure," when talking about an
investment in a fund controlled by a member of the UN Investment Committee.
This
conflict-or-reform debate has included at least in the carbon copies Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch-Brown,
who appears to have agreed that UNHCR's actions were improper. The paper trail
may be important. The story began with a
UNHCR press release on
April 5 of this year, headlined "New corporate
investment scheme helps fund UN quake relief efforts" and stating that "the
United Nations refugee agency has teamed up with two Swiss investment
companies in a scheme that will benefit its earthquake relief operation in
Pakistan. The joint project launched by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR),
Zurich-based Societe Generale Corporate & Investment Banking, and derilab s.a.,
a derivatives company, will allow investors to participate in a financial
product that affords a unique opportunity to support reconstruction and relief
efforts."
Inner City Press
inquired into the release and published a round-up
article on April 11 questioning
the partnership: "It might well be on the level. But
it's not yet clear that if it weren't, the scheme would not proceed. It would
help if the follow-up questions were answered."
Inner City Press' article included at length the
statement of UNHCR's Olivier Delarue:
From: Olivier
Pierre Delarue
To: Matthew.Lee [at] innercitypress.com
Sent: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 14:18:54 +0200
Subject: Re: Fwd: Press inquiry concerning how Societe Generale Corporate &
Investment Banking, and derilab s.a were selected for participation with UNHCR
I work in
UNHCR's Private Sector Fund Raising Service as Senior Corporate Relations
Officer and your query about this fund raising initiative was forwarded to me...
Based on the previous exchange of email you sent, your focus seems to be on the
procurement and bidding process done by the UN. This particular initiative,
however, is a fund raising project first proposed by corporate entities and
aimed at raising funds for UNHCR's humanitarian program. Therefore, as with any
fund raising project, we are not talking about the usual procurement procedure.
In my capacity
as Senior Corporate Relations Officer, my role is to work on creating new
partnerships with the corporate world in order to increase our donor base and
receive greater financial and expertise from the private sector. In this
particular case, Derilab s.a. approached us in the aftermath of the earthquake
in South Asia and proposed to assist us pro bono in finding new ways of raising
donations from the financial market for this emergency. As this was never done
in the past, a financial product which incorporated a charity/donation component
was not easy to build. Derilab presented the project to all the major banks
involved in structured and derivative products. Only Societe Generale showed a
serious interest in working on this new concept. As matter of principle, UNHCR
screens all new partnerships with the private sector. Societe Generale, the only
bank to show an interest for this project, was screened. As a result of our
careful review, Societe Generale was screened positively for various reasons,
including their participation in the UN Global Compact. Please note that in the
case of this initiative, UNHCR is only a receiver of donations through this
financial product -- but is not endorsing the product itself
The phrase "we are not talking about the usual
procurement procedure" may have been an understatement, given the investment
with a company controlled by an individual who is a member of the UN Investment
Committee. Regarding the last above-quoted phrase, even the UN Headquarters
staff who subsequently questioned UNHCR's program apparently found dubious this last point:
the use of the phrase "teams up" implies an endorsement, the question-memo
noted. ICP reiterated its broader questions to UNHCR in Geneva on June 1,
including directly to Mr. Delarue, to whom UNHCR's spokesman's office also
forwarded the request.
Several UN officials contacted Inner City
Press about its initial story. Subsequently UN staff in New York wrote to UNHCR
in Geneva, demanding an explanation including of the seemingly violative use of
the UN logo contrary to GA Resol. 92(I) of 1946. More than a month later,
UNHCR's Helmut Buss sent back a multi-page memo, acknowledging the investment in
Pictet Funds Indian Equity Fund, and that Ivan Pictet is on the UN Investment
Committee. Mr. Buss claimed to have determined that this conflict had been
stumbled into "in good faith," and that avoiding conflicts would be difficult,
given for example that
Morgan Stanley's Francine Bovich
is also on the UN Investment Board.
How
will conflicts of interest be avoided in the future? More than 12 hours before
initial publication of this report, Inner City Press put these questions to UNHCR in
Geneva, as well as to Ivan Pictet by fax at his place of work. Inner City Press' request for UNHCR's comment stated that "while it
shouldn't need to be said, Inner City Press has been appreciative of UNHCR's
responses, when received, on refugee-related questions on Zimbabwe, Uzbekistan,
etc.. This inquiry, which began in April and was attempted to be concluded in
June, is neither anti-refugee nor anti-UNHCR. As many have said, transparency is
good for the UN system, in the long run. In this short-run, this is a formal
request for UNHCR's written comment as quickly as possible."
In the
short and medium-run, UNHCR has declined to answer press questions about this,
back in April, in early June, and now. What will happen in the longer run
remains to be seen.
At 8:15
a.m. New York time, 12 hours after sending its written request for comment,
Inner City Press telephoned UNHCR deputy spokeswoman Jennifer Pagonis in Geneva and
reiterated the request for comment. Ms. Pagonis indicated that the request had
already been forwarded to Mr. Delarue for response by midday. But since he had
been asked back in early June to comment on developments of which Inner City
Press was even then aware, and he did not respond, to await Mr. Delarue's
belated second response seemed neither necessary nor appropriate. "It is not really
about Mister Delarue," Inner City Press explained to UNHCR's Jennifer Pagonis.
"It's about UNHCR and the wider United Nations." Subsequently, the following
was received:
From: REDMOND [at]
unhcr.org
To: Matthew.Lee [at]
innercitypress.com, BUSS [at] unhcr.org, DELARUE [at] unhcr.org
Sent: Wed, 12 Jul
2006 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: Request
for comment asap on UNHCR / Societe Generale's Kashmir Relief Note/ Pictet Funds
- on deadline
Dear Mr. Lee,
Olivier Delarue and
colleagues have looked into your questions and their reply follows.
- Use of UN name and
logo: UNHCR has not authorized Societe Generale to use the UN name and logo, nor
of the UNHCR official logo, both of which are indeed protected under GA/RES/92(I)
of 1946. In line with the "Guidelines on Cooperation between the United Nations
and the Business Community", issued by the Secretary-General on 17 July 2000,
however, UNHCR has, for the sole purpose of the raising of funds for UNHCR,
allowed SocGen to use, on its brochure announcing the KRN, the UNHCR "visibility
logo" with the addition "in support of". For your information, Article 16 (d)
(ii) of the a/m Guidelines authorizes the use of the name and emblem "to assist
in the raising of funds for the Organization".
- Potential conflict
of interest: Based on the information available to us, there is no conflict of
interest created for Mr. Ivan Pictet, managing partner of Pictet & Cie, and ad
hoc member of the UN Investments Committee, by the fact that Pictet Funds Indian
Equities is one of the funds in which KRN funds are invested. Societe Generale,
the issuer of the Note, is solely responsible for choosing the funds and this
selection is based on recognized risk management and hedging criteria; UNHCR
plays a purely passive role as the recipient of a donation and has no interest
in the performance of the Note. Moreover, Mr. Pictet's membership in the UN
Investments Committee was unknown to all parties involved in drawing up this
investment product, and we trust therefore that the decision to include a fund
managed by Pictet & Cie was taken in good faith. In any event, Mr. Pictet had no
involvement whatsoever in UNHCR's decision to accept the funds thus raised by
SocGen. Finally, you may also note that the volume of this investment (US$1
million shared over a number of funds, only one of which is Pictet & Cie's)
cannot be considered to benefit Mr. Pictet in any substantial manner.
- Screening of
Corporate Partners: Societe Generale is a member of the Global Compact .
Moreover, our research at the time demonstrated that Societe Generale was rated
over the past years as one of the best banks in the world, and the best in terms
of derivative products. For your information, private sector partnerships are a
relatively recent addition to UNHCR's fundraising strategy. In its dealings with
the private sector, UNHCR consistently bases itself on the a/m Guidelines issued
by the Secretary-General. In addition, UNHCR is in the process of installing an
advisory board to ensure even more checks and balances. This process, by the
way, was already on the way before the KRN was even first considered.
Derilab, finally, is
not a signatory to the Global Compact. It is a very small Swiss company
consisting of former bankers, that offered to provide its expertise in the
highly specialized field of derivative products to come up with innovative
approaches that could increase UNHCR's ability to raise funds from the financial
market.
Apologies for the
delay in getting back to you. The past month is one of the busiest times of the
year at UNHCR.
Regards, Ron Redmond
Head, Media Relations
& Public Information, UNHCR Geneva
Update 1 p.m. July 12
-- Asked at
the noon briefing if UNHCR is correct in invoking in its defense of this
program and investments Kofi Annan's "Guidelines on Cooperation between the
United Nations and the Business Community," spokeswoman Marie Okabe said that
UNHCR has submitted a detailed response and that she, and presumably for now the
Secretariat, have nothing to add to it. While UNHCR's written response was, as
always, appreciated, on-the-record inquiries will continue, first into whether
this UNHCR program, SocGen's initial use of the logo and the investment with
Pictet & Cie, are viewed within the Secretariat and elsewhere as comporting with
current and proposed standards of transparency and ethics. Inner City Press is
aware of views within the Secretariat, not close to the ground, which are at
odds with UNHCR's positions and actions. These views are being solicited,
on-the-record.
If Ambassadors to the
UN, even from the Permanent Five, answer questions at the Security Council
stakeout about their positions on such issues as amnesty for the Lords
Resistance Army's Joseph Kony, and who should repair the Gaza electrical power
plant, the Secretariat should answer regarding this UNHCR program. Watch this
space [and see Report of July 13, 2006, above.]
Inner City Press'
earlier story on this, followed by UNDP - Uganda, etc.
Inner City Press
Global Inner Cities Report - April 11, 2006
Byline: Matthew Russell Lee at the UN
UNITED NATIONS, April 11 --
An
inquiry to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, about what they
called a financial "scheme" with
Société Générale and derilab s.a., resulted in the following answer:
From: Olivier
Pierre Delarue
To: Matthew.Lee
[at] innercitypress.com
Sent: Thu, 6
Apr 2006 14:18:54 +0200
Subject: Re:
Fwd: Press inquiry concerning how Societe Generale Corporate & Investment
Banking, and derilab s.a were selected for participation with UNHCR
I work in
UNHCR's Private Sector Fund Raising Service as Senior Corporate Relations
Officer and your query about this fund raising initiative was forwarded to me...
Based on the previous exchange of email you sent, your focus seems to be on the
procurement and bidding process done by the UN. This particular initiative,
however, is a fund raising project first proposed by corporate entities and
aimed at raising funds for UNHCR's humanitarian program. Therefore, as with any
fund raising project, we are not talking about the usual procurement procedure.
In my capacity
as Senior Corporate Relations Officer, my role is to work on creating new
partnerships with the corporate world in order to increase our donor base and
receive greater financial and expertise from the private sector. In this
particular case, Derilab s.a. approached us in the aftermath of the earthquake
in South Asia and proposed to assist us pro bono in finding new ways of raising
donations from the financial market for this emergency. As this was never done
in the past, a financial product which incorporated a charity/donation component
was not easy to build. Derilab presented the project to all the major banks
involved in structured and derivative products. Only Societe Generale showed a
serious interest in working on this new concept.
As matter of
principle, UNHCR screens all new partnerships with the private sector. Societe
Generale, the only bank to show an interest for this project, was screened. As a
result of our careful review, Societe Generale was screened positively for
various reasons, including their participation in the UN Global Compact. Please
note that in the case of this initiative, UNHCR is only a receiver of donations
through this financial product -- but is not endorsing the product itself.
Inner City Press responded with follow-up
questions, including regarding Societe General's long embroilment in a money
laundering scandal, and asked:
-is membership in the Global Compact the main
screen UNHCR applies to its corporate engagements, whether philanthropic or in
procurement? What are the other "various reasons"? Did your careful review of
Soc Gen -- just as an example -- include the issues raised by the money
laundering allegations sketched below, including those in Nigeria (we're aware
that Soc Gen has not been convicted of anything, but that wouldn't seem to be
the standards for a careful review).Again, these questions don't go to the
merits of how the funds are used by UNHCR -- as an aside, hats off for your work
in the Balkans and with Return, Afghanistan, etc.
- is derilab s.a a signatory to the Global
Compact? (I'm aware I could look it up, but the question also includes -- if a
company is not a signatory to the Compact, what else do you look at?)
Neither question
has yet been answered. A Web search for derilab reflects that nearly all of the
"hits" are about its recent "scheme" with UNHCR. It's own
web site says
only
"derilab(R) was recently founded by
experts in the field of financial derivative and structured products. derilab's
focus is to provide it's [sic] customers with key information on derivative and
structured products. derilab also advises on the structuring of financial
products."
It might well be on the level. But it's
not yet clear that if it weren't, the scheme would not proceed. It would help if
the follow-up questions were answered.
UN
Acknowledges Abuse in Uganda,
But What Did Donors Know and When?
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee at the U.N.
UNITED NATIONS -- The rights of Ugandan civilians have been abused by government soldiers,
leading the UN Development Programme to halt its programs in eastern Uganda,
Kofi Annan's spokeswoman Marie Okabe
stated
on June 29, 2006. (Video is here, answer is Minute 11 to 13:35. The newspaper
The New Vision picking up on Inner City Press'
reports,
click
here to view; the
AP
in New York has also followed up).
While clearer than
before in acknowledging abuses by the Ugandan People's Defense Force, which
Inner City Press has reported on for the past eleven days, this statement does
not address what the Ugandan government's funders knew and when they knew it.
UNDP has repeatedly declined to answer this question, which has been put to it
in writing and orally, or has left its answers vague and not, it's said, to be
quoted. Here
however is AllAfrica.
A UNDP
statement issued in Kampala on Thursday, three paragraphs in length, waited
until its last terse sentence to disclose that "pending clarification from the
Government of Uganda on the current disarmament approach in Karamoja, UNDP
Uganda has suspended its support to activities related to the KIDDP."
This
last stands for the Karamoja Integrated Disarmament and Development Plan, a copy
of which Inner City Press has obtained. The KIDDP lists a number of funding
partners, including the Danish International Development Agency, the European
Union, the World Bank, the government of Italy, Germany's GTZ, USAID,
Netherlands' SNV, Ireland's DCI, and the UN agencies World Food Programme and
UNDP. Since UNDP initially named Denmark as the funder of disarmament programs
in eastern Uganda, Inner City Press last week asked the Danish mission to the UN
for its comment on specific allegations of abuses in Karamoja. "It will take
time to look into," the mission's spokesman said. On Thursday Inner City Press
asked the Danish Ambassador to the UN, the outgoing Security Council president.
The World Food Programme was asked for comment a week ago but no response has
been received. The inquiries will continue.
UPDF
& UNDP (cordon & search not shown)
With regard to
UNDP, the statement is undated, and cannot itself be the warning which UNDP
states it has given. Some surmise that the abuses were to meet the aggressive
gun-collection targets, even to provide a photo-op. As with photography,
transparency would have been better from the beginning, and is still being
called for.
Feedback: editorial
[at] innercitypress.com
USA (UNHQ-NYC)
Tel: 718-716-3540
In
Uganda, UNDP's Belated Announcement of Program Halt Leaves Questions Unanswered
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee at the U.N.
UNITED NATIONS, June
28 -- On June 29 in Uganda, ten days after Inner City Press'
questions about disarmament abuses began and two days after a more quiet
announcement, the United Nations Development Programme is slated to go public
with the news that it has suspended its programs in eastern Uganda. This follows
the newspaper The New Vision picking up on Inner City Press'
reports (click
here to view; the
AP
in New York has also followed up). In the field of public relations, the advice
is often to get out in front of events, rather than play catch-up. When that is
missed, it's spin, spin, spin.
In the
Kampala-based New Vision, Ugandan
People's Defense Force spokesman Felix Kulayigye is
quoted as disputing Inner
City Press' reports, stating that "statistics showed that the cordon-and-search
had been more successful than voluntary surrendering of guns" and that "this
month, the UPDF recovered over 1,100 guns compared to 636 guns recovered in two
years ending March 2006." It all depends on the tactics used...
The
AP
has UNDP's spokesman declaiming that "our operations in the region have halted
due to a continuing difficult security situation and concerns about Ugandan
military operations in the area." UNDP's letter goes further, referencing recent
reports of
"killings, beatings, arbitrary detention, intimidation and harassment."
Wednesday in New York, nine days after Inner City Press first raised these
questions, UNDP's spokesman came to speak to Inner City Press for
over an hour, describing the announcement to slated for Thursday in Kampala, saying it will
refer to "security" issues rather than human rights abuses, and arguing that UNDP was and is a "small player" in Uganda's Karamojo region. The spokesman
congratulated Inner City Press for raising the issues, and asked in essence what
more could the UN do at this time?
Plenty,
according to a source in the Prime Minister's Office (OPM) in Kampala. In a
second email to Inner City Press, the source paints a picture quite different
from that offered by UNDP's spokesman in New York, writing that
"OPM terminated the contract of the 4th
advisor, Techeste Ahderom, because of management and performance issues arising
out of this situation. We have brought these matters to UNDP attention but have
received no constructive feedback. As a result the program, support to
implementation of the IDP Policy, which Techeste was managing has suffered
serious setbacks. The human security / Karamoja program is having similar
problems and Robert Scharf has been warned on a number of occasions. One of
Robert's main responsibility was to support coordination of the implementation
of the KIDDP at the highest level including ministry of Defense and internal
affairs. For over six months now he has failed to convene a single meeting - OPM
role in the promotion of voluntary disarmament has been compromised... In the
Mine Action Programme a UK based NGO was recruited to conduct mine assessments
in northern Uganda - more than 90% of DFID money has gone to contracts of so
called experts. They have failed to produce a credible report and the financial
accountability is questionable but UNDP continues to disburse funds to this
NGO."
On the
question of UNDP's use of funds, the agency's spokesman did not bring any budget
documents during his visit Wednesday to Inner City Press. Asked to explain the
use of the $293,000 spent before the program was suspended, the spokesman
referred to start-up costs, including the need to "set up offices in huts." He
stated that now no UNDP program staff remain in the field. He congratulated
Inner City Press for raising the issues, which have now been picked up by
Ugandan press, click
here
for The New Vision, and
with more UNDP involvement, the
AP.
On
Wednesday in New York, UNDP's
spokesman urged Inner City Press to shift the focus of its two week old inquiry, to turn to wider programs and
other funders. The story and its implications are certainly wider than UNDP, and
will be followed where they lead. But here are a list of questions provided to
the UNDP spokesman prior to his hour-long presentation, and still not answered:
-On what date did
UNDP suspend its support of programs in Eastern Uganda?
-What if any are the
conditions of the suspension?
-What is the overall
spending figure for UNDP's programs throughout Uganda for 2006?
-Your 6/27 message
states that 'cordon and search' operations "undermine the possibility of
achieving lasting peace and development for the region" and that "UNDP has
joined with other development partners in Uganda to voice concern about this
exercise to Ugandan authorities." Who are the "other development partners in
Uganda" referenced in this statement?
-Your message states
that UNDP "is aware of the allegations of abuse by the Ugandan military...
including the ones you have raised" but further claims that UNDP "does not have
the mandate to independently investigate accusations of human rights abuses by a
national military against citizens of that country."
-If UNDP does not
"have the mandate to independently investigate accusations of human rights
abuses by a national military against citizens" of a country where UNDP
operates, who in UNDP's opinion does have such a mandate?
-UNDP's then-Country
Director, Cornelus Klein, made a speech on May 25, 2006 where he applauded
Ugandan Government efforts at disarmament and specifically singled out the work
of the UPDF with praise. He said "Uganda… is seizing the opportunity to address
small and light weapons concerns. While UNDP currently provides modest support
to the nation, it is Uganda that can support and lead other countries in doing
the same. Let me take this opportunity, therefore, to applaud the Government for
its strong leadership and commitment. I also wish to express our thanks to the
National Focal Point, the UPDF, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Safer Africa
whose excellent work we have all seen this morning, and all other partners that
have worked collectively towards this important achievement. I hope that the
well trained, hard working and dedicated people we have seen handling this
process will remain busy for a long time so that all illicit weapons in the
country are destroyed."
Six
days prior to Mr. Klein's speech, as recounted in my first message to you nine
days ago, the first reported attack by the UPDF in Kotido sub-county, where on
May 19th the UPDF encircled a village and attacked to force the residents to
turn over their weapons, resulting in four people being killed by the UPDF or
its local defense units, including a 15-year old girl. Over 100 homes were
burned and the village's protective fence was destroyed. Many residents were
taken and detained in the UPDF barracks in Kotido. On the same day, May 19th, in
Nadunget sub county, the UPDF reportedly encircled a village at 4 a.m.. People
were ordered out of their huts and beaten while the army searched the village.
Although reportedly the army found no weapons or ammunition, ten men from the
village were taken and detained at the Moroto army barracks.
Question:
When he gave his speech on 25 May 2006, was Mr. Klein aware of these separate
attacks by the UPDF some six days earlier?
--Reportedly, Mr.
Klein left Kampala "at the end of May, after eight months in Uganda." Where is
Mr. Klein now? Can he and his successor Theophane Nikyema be interviewed?
UNDP's
Klein in Uganda
Beyond
these still unanswered questions, there were questions that were half-answered,
or answered through Internet research:
Does the Office of
the High Commissioner for Human Rights have a presence in Uganda and a mandate
to review Ugandan Government military operations against Ugandan citizens?
The
answer is yes - click
here to
view, and to read on pages 61-63 that
"In the
sub-region of Karamoja, in northeastern Uganda, the traditional culture of
cattle rustling with its increasingly violent modern expressions, persistent
Government neglect, and an unsuccessful disarmament programme have led to
serious security concerns, human rights violations, violence, and a total lack
of protection for civilians. Administration of justice structures, law
enforcement institutions, and other central Government services are virtually
non-existent in the sub-region; as a result, a parallel system of traditional
justice, based on reprisals and revenge, has emerged instead... In recognition
of the need to consolidate peace with the need for justice, accountability, and
reconciliation, OHCHR will establish itself as the lead agency within the United
Nations Country Team, in cooperation with civil society actors and the Amnesty
Commission, to help to develop national reconciliation strategies, which could
include truth-telling, repentance, and compensation, to complement the ongoing
peace process. In the Karamoja sub-region, OHCHR will explore ways to enhance
the protection of civilians, combat impunity, help to restore security through
community-based mechanisms, and facilitate inter-ethnic dialogue on peace and
human rights education. These activities will be conducted in partnership with
the United Nations Country Team, which is deepening its engagement in Karamoja
in response to the Government's Karamoja Integrated Disarmament and Development
Programme (2006–2008)."
We will have more on this wider plan; for now we
note that the UNDP spokesman on Wednesday stated that while UNDP is usually
publicly quiet, it raises the human rights issues it sees to the head of the UN
Country Team, who in turn forwards the information to UN Headquarters. In this
case, UN Headquarters has yet to make a comment.
Question: When
UNDP becomes "aware of allegations of abuse" by the national military of a
country where it works, does it provide this information to any UN entity with a
mandate to independently investigate such things?
This
question, Inner City Press asked to two representatives in Kofi Annan's
spokesman's office, without on-the-record response. UNDP's spokesman described
to Inner City Press UNDP's desire to stay quiet in order to be able to continue
to work in countries, as it does in Myanmar on HIV/AIDS. Asked about the wisdom
of such silence, or even incongruous UNDP praise, for as for the Millennium
Development Goals progress of Uzbekistan, also known for torture, the spokesman
only answered, "good question." But what's the answer?
At the
noon briefing,
Inner City Press asked Kofi Annan's spokesman to comment on UNDP's suspension of
programs in eastern Uganda due to disarmament abuse by the government. The
spokesman said that UN agencies are expected to monitor and ensure that funds
are not misused; on UNDP's suspension of programs in eastern Uganda, he said
there'd be no statement "yet." Perhaps UNDP's press release slated for June 29
in Kampala will trigger some response by the Kofi Annan's spokesman, even during
the Secretary-General trip, which will include the African Union's weekend
meeting in Banjul, where Mr. Annan will,
he responded,
meet with Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe.
Endnotes: most UN
reporters on Wednesday covered the lifting of the budget cap. Freer pundits
opine that the fireworks are still to come, Friday before the 4th of July (for
which UN grounds passes are much in demand).
Mid-afternoon,
both co-chairs of the S-G's Alliance of Civilizations took questions from
reporters. Fox News asked how the Alliance is funded. "We're transparent, ask
the Secretariat," was the answer. Inner City Press asked if the Alliance or its
High Level Group has discussed the crackdown on the Uighurs, Muslims in western
China's Xinjiang province. "I like that question," Spain's foreign minister
said. But he then did not really answer, except to note that both China and
India are represented in the High Level Group. But what about the Uighurs?
UN
Global Compact Board Holds First Meeting, Closed to Press
In undercovered United Nations news, the Global Compact Board met on Wednesday.
Among other things, member Mary Robinson suggested a working group on human
rights. In terms of transparency, despite assurances that its members could be interviewed, Sir Mark Moody-Stuart
proved unavailable at the meeting's conclusion, heading he said to Washington,
DC. While the meeting was closed to the media, Inner City Press has learned that
three of the ten corporate members of the board were absent:
Anne Lauvergeon of France-based Areva, Mr. B
Muthuraman of India-based Tata Steel, and Hiroyuki Uemura of Japan-based
Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Company.
UN
Grapples with Somalia, While UNDP Funds Mugabe's Human Rights Unit, Without
Explanation
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee at the U.N.
UNITED
NATIONS, July 11 --Inner City Press had to
inquire again at the noon briefing if
Kofi Annan's spokesman's office has had any better luck in getting answers from
the UN Development Programme. After facing stonewalling and insults while
inquiring into
UNDP's since-halted disarmament programs
in Uganda, now Inner City
Press' questions are ignored by UNDP. Last week the request was for an
explanation of UNDP's program to help Uzbekistan's Karimov regime collect taxes.
There has been no response; Kofi Annan's spokeswoman said, "They are looking
into it." But it's UNDP's own program.
Now,
Inner City Press has asked UNDP to explain its
funding of a "Human Rights Council"
controlled by Robert Mugabe,
who among other things has been lambasted by UN-Habitat for politically
motivated mass evictions. What standards does UNDP have for such program? There
has been no answer. Inner City Press on Tuesday formally asked for UNDP's
Administrator to come and answer questions.
"We will
ask," the spokeswoman. "But you're free to ask as well."
Inner
City Press has, and in writing. The silence is hard to understand, not only
given the UN's and UNDP's stated missions, but also, politically, given that the
UNDP's current administrator
Kemal Dervis
is described by some in UN Headquarters as a candidate to be the next
Secretary-General. Make that, SECRET-ary...
Other Inner City Press
reports are archived on
www.InnerCityPress.org -
UN Grapples with
Somalia, While UNDP Funds Mugabe's Human Rights Unit, Without
Explanation
In North Korean
War of Words, Abuses in Uganda and Impunity Go Largely Ignored
On North Korea,
Blue Words Move to a Saturday Showdown, UNDP Uzbek Stonewall
As the World
Turns in Uganda and Korea, the UN Speaks only on Gaza, from Geneva
North Korea in
the UN: Large Arms Supplant the Small, and Confusion on Uganda
UN Gives Mugabe
Time with His Friendly Mediator, Refugees Abandoned
At the UN,
Friday Night's Alright for Fighting; Annan Meets Mugabe
UN Acknowledges
Abuse in Uganda, But What Did Donors Know and When? Kazakh Questions
In Uganda, UNDP
to Make Belated Announcement of Program Halt, But Questions Remain (and
see
The New Vision,
offsite).
Disarmament
Abuse in Uganda Leads UN Agency to Suspend Its Work and Spending
Disarmament
Abuse in Uganda Blamed on UNDP, Still Silent on Finance
Alleged Abuse in
Disarmament in Uganda Known by UNDP, But Dollar Figures Still Not Given:
What Did UN Know and When?
Strong Arm on
Small Arms: Rift Within UN About Uganda's Involuntary Disarmament of
Karamojong Villages
UN in Denial on
Sudan, While Boldly Predicting the Future of Kosovo/a
UN's Selective
Vision on Somalia and Wishful Thinking on Uighurs
UN Habitat
Predicts The World Is a Ghetto, But Will Finance Be Addressed at
Vancouver World Urban Forum?
At the UN, a
Commando Unit to Quickly Stop Genocide is Proposed, by Diplomatic Sir
Brian Urquhart
UN's Annan
Concerned About Use of Terror's T-Word to Repress, Wants
Freedom of Information
UN Waffles on
Human Rights in Central Asia and China; ICC on Kony and a Hero from
Algiers
At the UN,
Internal Justice Needs Reform, While in Timor Leste, Has Evidence Gone
Missing?
UN & US,
Transparency for Finance But Not Foreign Affairs: Somalia, Sovereignty
and Senator Tom Coburn
In Bolton's Wake,
Silence and Speech at the UN, Congo and Kony, Let the Games Begin
Pro-Poor Talk and
a Critique of the World Trade Organization from a WTO Founder: In UN
Lull, Ugandan Fog and Montenegrin Mufti
Human Rights
Forgotten in UN's War of Words, Bolton versus Mark Malloch Brown: News
Analysis
In Praise of
Migration, UN Misses the Net and Bangalore While Going Soft on Financial
Exclusion
UN Sees Somalia
Through a Glass, Darkly, While Chomsky Speaks on Corporations and
Everything But Congo
AIDS Ends at the
UN? Side Deals on Patents, Side Notes on Japanese Corporations,
Salvadoran and Violence in Burundi
On AIDS at the
UN, Who Speaks and Who Remains Unseen
Corporate Spin on
AIDS, Holbrooke's Kudos to Montenegro and its Independence (May 31, 2006)
Kinshasa Election
Nightmares, from Ituri to Kasai. Au Revoir Allan Rock; the UN's
Belly-Dancing
Working with
Warlords, Insulated by Latrines: Somalia and Pakistan Addressed at the
UN
The Silence of
the Congo and Naomi Watts; Between Bolivia and the World Bank
Human Rights
Council Has Its Own Hanging Chads; Cocky U.S. State Department Spins
from SUVs
Child Labor and
Cargill and Nestle; Iran, Darfur and WHO's on First with Bird Flu
Press Freedom?
Editor Arrested by Congo-Brazzaville, As It Presides Over Security
Council
The
Place of the Cost-Cut UN in Europe's Torn-Up Heart;
Deafness to Consumers, Even by the Greens
Background Checks
at the UN, But Not the Global Compact; Teaching Statistics from
Turkmenbashi's Single Book
Ripped Off Worse
in the Big Apple, by Citigroup and Chase: High Cost Mortgages Spread in
Outer Boroughs in 2005, Study Finds
Burundi: Chaos at
Camp for Congolese Refugees, Silence from UNHCR, While Reform's Debated
by Forty Until 4 AM
In Liberia, From
Nightmare to Challenge; Lack of Generosity to Egeland's CERF, Which
China's Asked About
The Chadian
Mirage: Beyond French Bombs, Is Exxon In the Cast? Asylum and the
Uzbeks, Shadows of Stories to Come
Through the UN's
One-Way Mirror, Sustainable Development To Be Discussed by Corporations,
Even Nuclear Areva
Racial
Disparities Grew Worse in 2005 at Citigroup, HSBC and Other Large Banks
Mine Your Own
Business: Explosive Remnants of War and the Great Powers, Amid the
Paparazzi
Human Rights Are
Lost in the Mail: DR Congo Got the Letter, But the Process is Still
Murky
Iraq's Oil to be
Metered by Shell, While Basrah Project Remains Less than Clear
At the UN, Dues
Threats and Presidents-Elect, Unanswered Greek Mission Questions
Kofi, Kony,
Kagame and Coltan: This Moment in the Congo and Kampala
As Operation
Swarmer Begins, UN's Qazi Denies It's Civil War and Has No Answers if
Iraq's Oil is Being Metered
Cash Crop: In
Nepal, Bhutanese Refugees Prohibited from Income Generation Even in
their Camps
The Shorted and
Shorting in Humanitarian Aid: From Davos to Darfur, the Numbers Don't
Add Up
UN Reform:
Transparency Later, Not Now -- At Least Not for AXA - WFP Insurance
Contract
In Congolese
Chaos, Shots Fired at U.N. Helicopter Gunship
In the Sudanese
Crisis, Oil Revenue Goes Missing, UN Says
Empty Words on
Money Laundering and Narcotics, from the UN and Georgia
What is the Sound
of Eleven Uzbeks Disappearing? A Lack of Seats in Tashkent, a Turf War
at UN
Kosovo: Of
Collective Punishment and Electricity; Lights Out on Privatization of
Ferronikeli Mines
Abkhazia:
Cleansing and (Money) Laundering, Says Georgia
Post-Tsunami
Human Rights Abuses, including by UNDP in the Maldives
Who Pays for the
Global Bird Flu Fight? Not the Corporations, So Far - UN
Citigroup
Dissembles at United Nations Environmental Conference
Other Inner City Press
reports are archived on
www.InnerCityPress.org -
For reporting about banks, predatory
lending, consumer protection, money laundering, mergers or the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), click
here for Inner
City Press's
weekly CRA Report.
Inner City Press also reports weekly concerning the
Federal Reserve,
environmental justice,
global inner cities, and more recently
on the United
Nations, where Inner City Press
is accredited media. Follow those links
for more of Inner City Press's reporting, or, click
here
for five ways to
contact us,
with or for more information.
Copyright 2005-2006 Inner City Press, Inc. To request
reprint or other permission, e-contact Editors [at] innercitypress.com - phone: (718) 716-3540
