In Other Media-eg CJR, Independent, Fox, New Statesman, AJE, FP, NYT,  CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR PFT CEFC Video

UNITED NATIONS GATE, March 19 – In the run up to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act sentencing of Patrick Ho of CEFC for UN bribery which UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has been refusing to audit, new FCPA allegations against the UN are being made. Inner City Press on the morning of March 18 asked Guterres and his spokesman Stephane Dujarric, as well as Alison Smale and Amina J. Mohammed, about this - with no answer at all. Here now is more: "Contracts for telecom infrastructure with more than 400% cost higher and double paid some services to SITA supplier (DDoS, etc).  26.3.3 Some dubious contracts such as Mr. Gabriel Rosca have worked on Valencia with the DFS team to develop some cloud templates and after that UN brought the same templates through a Spanish company, close to Mr. Gabriel Rosca.  26.3.4 Mr. Amat Gaye participated for a week, in Washington DC, at a conference related Project Management Institute (PMI), although the OICT Project Management methodology is Prince 2.  26.3.4 Some aspects related licensing and support that the UN paid.  26.3.5 Mr. Gabriel Rosca - without to hold a BS' degree, diplomas or certifications, although in his resume appear that he has a BS diploma, he is formally appointed as a project manager although he is not, and he works as a system administrator, however, the UN pays with 30+ % more than for a resource without BS diploma. He was nominated as a “strategic resource” on the cloud project notwithstanding he did not have practical experience to implement cloud. He is an evident conflict of interests with the UN.  26.3.6 Mr. Olivier Debargue, a P5 staff - without to hold a required degree in Information and Communication Technology or other relevant areas, without to have effective communication, without to have enough technical skills, without to have certificates or diplomas in ICT.   Although, Mr. [MR] held a master’s degree equivalent diploma in IT and 75+ top certificates or diplomas, and he has a 21 years of experience with international organizations (such as IBM,Alcatel, Motorola, NATO, Interpol, etc), Mr. MR argues that he was not asked and appointed based, on a competition, to a new post, however, his colleagues were reassigned. Some examples from a long list, are listed below: certificates or diplomas in cyber-security, he was appointed, without competition as an Information Security Officer with RTC-A. As well, he is a UNOPS staff like Mr. MR.  certificates or diplomas in cyber-security, he was appointed, without competition as an Information Security Officer with RTC-A. He is a subcontractor staff too, but Mr. MR is a UN staff.  Mr. James Lee – without to hold any degree in Information and Communication Technology, without to have experience in information technology (other than Citrix) and without to hold certificates or diplomas in this field, he was appointed, without competition as an Information Technology Officer with RTC-A. As well, he is a UNOPS staff like Mr. MR.  his resume appear that he has a BS diploma, he is formally appointed as a project manager although he is not, and he works as a system administrator, however, the UN pays with 30+ % more than for a resource without BS diploma. He was nominated as a “strategic resource” on the cloud project notwithstanding he did not have practical experience to implement cloud. He is an evident conflict of interests with the UN.   As you know Prince 2 is the UN Project management methodology, however in job description was requested to have a PMP certificate, only the certificate that is held by Mr. Amat Gaye. Referring to the request for about two years as a PMO at a similar level, Mr. Amat Gaye did not make successful this request. As a consequence, without to know Prince 2 and associated processes, Mr. Amat Gaye was not able to deliver (pending from one year) a business case and all program deliverables for one of the most critical UN projects with substantial financial impact. It is epic that Mr. Amat Gaye performed in the same manner on his previous project. Between Mr. Amat  8 Gaye and his supervisor (Mr. Erzen I.) are in an old (they worked on together on the last job) and deep relationship. Mr. MR applied and was shortlisted for this position. As a Project Manager, on the program that Mr. Amat Gaye is appointed as a Program Manager, I have delivered all project deliverables at the requested quality and in time.  Mr. Olivier Debargue, a P5 staff - without to hold a required degree in Information and Communication Technology or other relevant areas, without to have effective communication, without to have enough technical skills, without to have certificates or diplomas in ICT.  Mr. Olivier Hyppolite is not recognized by the people that graduated the same MBA with him in the same year.  On this context is explicable why: a) the UN telephony system is not encrypted and it very easy to intercept and record any phone call in Secretariat, that is unacceptable and not allowed by law to did not protect the confidentiality and integrity of phone calls, privacy, and confidentiality with a huge risk (if you intend to evidence acquisition, evidence examination and identify the persons that record and uses this vulnerability and opportunity is recommended to don’t use your OICT Cyber-Security team) ; b) the network configuration is up to 50% secure and reliable; c) critical tools that should protect the UN IT system doesn’t work as stated by request, d) a simply incident (usual a test for a junior to be performed in 15 minutes during a practical test) was solved in 6 hours by 7 OICT specialists, e) a network incident is solved in more than 3 hours instead of 15 minutes as per industry, etc. f) usage of FoC Linux tool/scripting/method of authentication without a security assessment can be fatal for an organisation. I can provide a full list of issues/risks, and I am confident that an independent audit can confirm.  For all of the above, Mr. MR considers that his Human Rights were violated by discrimination in Hiring, firing, and work assignments, Promotions, Work environment, equal treatments and other decisions that affect the terms and conditions of employment, the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, and International Labour Organization’s Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work." We'll have more of this. Here's the first filing, sent to Inner City Press which Guterres was banned from the UN amid its questions about his links to CEFC: " To Whom It May Concern,    I am writing to inform you about a possible FCPA violation may have occurred between Microsoft Corporation and the United Nations:   The name of the company and/or person who offered, paid, promised to pay, or authorized the payment of a bribe: Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) The nature of the bribe: Cash or thought a financial services company    The name and title of the official who received or was the intended recipient of the bribe: Erzen ILIJAZI and Amat Gaye  Office of Information and Communications Technology (OICT)  Chief Strategic Information and Communications Technology Management Service  Chief Regional Technology Center of Americas  United Nations  1-917-367-4641    The public international organization for whom the bribe recipient or intended bribe recipient works: United Nations Headquarters  405 East 42nd Street,  New York, NY, 10017,  USA.  Tel: (+ 1) (212) 963-1234    The name of any third-party used to pay the bribe A buffer US company and a financial service company. The UN buy licenses and services with 50+ % that normal prices, using a buffer company.     The approximate date or general time frame when the corrupt activity took place 2016-2019    A narrative description of your complaint, including how you obtained the information that supports your complaint; and I am aware that you didn't have any constitutional authority vested for the United Nations system, but you can contribute to a better world and provide to the UN the list of noncompatible persons if my suspicions will be confirmed.    This is an example and I can provide you with a list of possible cases, including the UMOJA where the Umoja team has contracted PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) to provide systems integration, and Deloitte & Touche (Deloitte) to provide strategic advisory services for the design phase ....  On 16 March 2018, starting from a piece of information that was reported on an Under-Secretary-General, Department of Management (USG DM Report 20180315.docx), where was stated “PD in collaboration with OICT negotiated 15% discount off government prices for all Microsoft Azure cloud services.”, I had an email exchange with Mr. Erzen ILIJAZI about a contract with Microsoft. >> Mr. MR on 16 March 2018 9:19 AM – “Hint: Request to AWS or MS to have the same discount level as World Bank (same category as UN). OICT will have the best price from UN agencies and will be the key for negotiations”.  >> Mr. Ilijazi on 16 March 2018 9:21 AM: “I did something even better Marius! We got with Amazon discount 15% less off World Bank prices. Nobody ever negotiated discount this high. I am very very satisfied. Note: Microsoft Azure instead of Amazon (Note: there is a typing error consisting in the fact the contract is with Microsoft for Azure cloud instead of Amazon (there is no contract with Amazon);  >> Mr. MR on 16 March 2018 9:22 AM: “Excellent! WBG = gov-35% “(Note: It is evident that 35% is more than 15%)  >> Mr.Ilijazi on 16 March, 2018 9:23:08 AM : “Don’t share this info please. J “  In fact, the Microsoft discount for Azure cloud and Office 365 was 15% from the ordinary price instead of governmental price -15% as per Mr. Erzen ILIJAZI’s report. For a non-profit organisation the Microsoft discount is per Annex “Core discount = up to 75% discount; Premium discount = up to 60% discount “.  When I’ve asked about the discount level, I’ve received the recommendation to forget this topic because important people are involved, the mechanism of bribery is complex and tested over years, and that something bad can happen to me.  The acquisitions of licenses and services are through an intermediary/ buffer company.  The estimated detriment is around 12,000,000 USD/year." We'll have more on this.  throughout 2018 to begin any UN audit into China Energy Fund Committee, implicated in the UN bribery prosecution US v Patrick Ho, Guterres had a secret: his role on the board of Gulbenkian Foundation which was trying to sell its Partex Oil affiliate to CEFC. See Inner City Press' first exclusive report here.

  While Guterres continues to ban from entry the Press which asked him about his CEFC links, now in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York the sentencing of Patrick Ho, long set for March 14, has been pushed back to March 25. For now, Ho has filed a more than one hundred page sentencing submission, the memo accompanying which says "Beginning in 2013, the CEFC Think Tank also held annual symposia at the United Nations (“UN”) devoted to issues raised at the most recent annual political convention in China. In addition, the CEFC Think Tank, in consultation with the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (“UN-DESA”), established and funded the “Powering the Future We Want” grant—an annual $1 million award for a promising sustainable energy project (the “Energy Grant”). The CEFC Think Tank donated approximately $2 million to the UN every year to fund the prize and its administration." And yet Guterres has never audited this, choosing instead to rough up and ban the Press which asked him why he wouldn't audit (the answer seems to be Guterres' paid position with the Gulbenkian Foundation which tried to sell its oil company to CEFC). Ho's sentencing submission index  lists Frederick Tschernutter and former Shell Oil CEO John D. Hofmeister. UNSG Antonio Guterres, of course, has refused to audit Ho's CEFC's activities in the amid his conflict of interest and censorship. In the UN Committee on Non Governmental Organizations on January 21 the US belatedly requested the suspension or dis-accreditation of CEFC from the UN. This is what Guterres has refused to act on for more than a year, while concealing his links to the group. CEFC was given until Friday, January 25 to answer on the issues. The acting chief of the UN NGO branch on Friday afternoon said it had not responded. Pakistan and Russia raised questions if this meant that as a matter of precedent it should have its status withdrawn. On January 28 following a written inquiry by Inner City Press a self-described diplomat on the NGO committee confirmed that "the NGO Committee recommended that ECOSOC consultative status be withdrawn for CEFC.  ECOSOC will decide whether to approve the NGO Committee’s recommendation at its June 2019 ECOSOC management meeting." So they're still in. Guterres' cover up of his link to the group remains unaddressed - with no answers from his spokesmen Stephane Dujarric and for this entire week, Farhan Haq. We'll have more on this.
 Inner City Press on the morning of January 21 wrote to Guterres, Alison Smale and their spokesmen: "January 21-1: Please immediately provide the SG's response on the request made this morning in the UN NGO Committee to disaccredit China Energy Fund Committee whose Patrick Ho was indicted and convicted of UN bribery, explain why SG Guterres never even started a OIOS audit of CEFC and why he omitted his paid directorship in Gulbenkian Foundation from his UN Public Financial Disclosure form covering 2016, and on Gulbenkian trying to sell its Partex Oil to CEFC China Energy in 2018." There's been no answer - as there have been no answers from Guterres and Smale and Dujarric for two weeks despite promises to UNSR David Kaye and on camera. And the UN's "meeting summary" omitted even Patrick Ho's name, much less the UNSG Guterres never audited CEFC as it tried to buy Partex Oil from the Gulbenkian Foundation Guterres was a paid board member of while omitting it from his public financial disclosure covering 2016. Here is the entirety of the UN meetings coverage on this: "The representative of the United States, expressing regret that some organizations come to the United Nations to perpetrate fraudulent and illicit activities, said her delegation wrote to the Committee last week requesting that the special consultative status granted in 2011 to the China Energy Fund Committee be withdrawn, after one of its officials was convicted by a United States federal court in November 2018 on corruption, money laundering and conspiracy charges.  The Committee must take prompt action, she said, adding that if the organization in question wishes to respond, it should do so before 25 January."

  Inner City Press also wrote to three at the US Mission to the UN: "I noticed in the UN NGO Committee this morning that USUN belatedly requested a review of China Energy Fund Committee, whose Patrick Ho was indicted for UN bribery, FCPA and money laundering in 2017, convicted in 2018.    This is a Press request for a copy of the USUN statement read out in the NGO Committee, for the materials reference there in and distributed to Committee members, and for the Mission's / Amb Cohen's and Amb. Currie's comment on it, why it took so long, and on UNSG Antonio Guterres having not disclosed his paid directorship of Gulbenkian Foundation in his UN Public Financial Disclosure form covering 2016 and refusal to start any OIOS audit of CEFC, which was trying to buy Partex Oil and Gas from Gulbenkian in 2018.     Also, on Guterres and Alison Smale's ongoing ban on US-based investigative Inner City Press even entering the UN, without hearing or appeal, see 2 January 2019 Kaska-eque denial of accreditation, below." USUN Spokesperson John Degory responded, so far, with the text of Deputy Rep to ECOSOC Courtney Nemroff's remarks including: "Last week, we sent a Diplomatic Note to the Committee’s outgoing Chair and to all members of this Committee with our request that this Committee recommend withdrawing the ESOCOC special consultative status of the NGO China Energy Fund Committee, or CEFC, which was granted in 2011.  This request was carefully considered and is being made in the first session of this Committee following the conviction of an individual in U.S. federal court on serious criminal charges relating to his use of the organization as a platform for criminal activity, the details of which are provided in the Diplomatic Note. It is a shame to see an NGO subvert and manipulate its ECOSOC accreditation in this manner, so it is with deep disappointment that we bring this situation to the attention of the Committee today. We are making this request before the full Committee in the full interest in due diligence, transparency, and openness. We believe it is important that the Committee carry out its responsibility to protect and ensure the continued integrity of the ECOSOC accreditation process by taking prompt action to address this case.  CEFC is registered in both Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and in the State of Virginia in the United States as a not-for-profit or charitable organization. CEFC received ECOSOC special consultative status in 2011.  On December 5, 2018, a jury in a Manhattan federal court found Chi Ping Patrick Ho, CEFC’s Deputy Chairman and Secretary General, guilty of taking part in a multi-year, multimillion-dollar scheme to bribe foreign leaders in exchange for business advantages for CEFC China Energy a Shanghai-based corporate entity that was the primary financial benefactor of the CEFC. Mr. Ho was convicted of violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, international money laundering, and conspiracy to commit both. According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, he utilized CEFC’s ECOSOC special consultative status to access UN resources and people and advance commercial goals, including through bribery schemes. We also have been unable to document any activity by this organization out of its Virginia-based location since Mr. Ho’s arrest in 2016, and note that it has not filed the requisite tax documents required of not-for-profit organizations in the United States since that date. We have provided all NGO Committee members with further details on the case, including a press release from the U.S. Department of Justice on the conviction, and are prepared to provide member states with any additional information they may require.  ECOSOC resolution 1996/31 governs the process for ECOSOC consultative status. Article 57(a) of 1996/31 stipulates that the consultative status of non-governmental organizations shall be suspended up to three years or withdrawn “if an organization, either directly or through its affiliates or representatives acting on its behalf, clearly abuses its status by engaging in a pattern of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.”  Article 57(b) of 1996/31 further stipulates that consultative status be suspended up to three years or withdrawn “if there exists substantiated evidence of influence from proceeds resulting from internationally recognized criminal activities such as the illicit drugs trade, money-laundering or the illegal arms trade.”  In view of the conviction of Mr. Ho on money laundering charges and the use of the organization for criminal activity and bribery activities that involved the use of the organization’s consultative status and other organizational resources, the United States has determined that a request to withdraw consultative status in accordance with Article 57 of ECOSOC resolution 1996/31 is appropriate and necessary. We believe the Committee has a responsibility to ensure that ECOSOC special consultative status is not misused as a platform for criminal activity.  We understand, per ECOSOC resolution 1996/31, that CEFC has the right to respond to the request to recommend withdrawal of its consultative status. We request that the Secretariat inform CEFC of its right to respond immediately. We further request that if CEFC chooses to respond, that the Secretariat request it do so before the tenth meeting of this Committee on Friday, January 25, to then allow this Committee sufficient time to consider the U.S. request further. We also remain prepared to provide additional information regarding this matter to the Secretariat, and encourage the Committee and the Secretariat to handle all proceedings in this case as openly and transparently as possible." But will the US administration, or if necessary individual members of Congress, ensure that Guterres is held accountable for the cover up and proliferation of corruption and censorship during his tenure? CEFC has until January 25 to respond. China did not respond in the ill-attended Committee meeting which Inner City Press, banned from entry by Guterres, never the less covered. Watch this site.

  Inner City Press continues its exclusive series on some of the CEFC connections in and through the UN that should have been identified in the audit that Guterres corruptly refused to begin, with his conflict of interest. (Even his predecessor Ban Ki-moon ordered an audit after Ng Lap Seng was indicted - Guterres still hasn't after Patrick Ho was convicted.)

  One of the people identified in the Ban Ki-moon audit of Ng Lap Seng and South South News was Ion Botnaru. He was allowed to retire, after changing a UN General Assembly document along with then President of the General Assembly John Ashe, who died under indictment ostensibly crushed by his own barbell, to benefit Ng's Sun Kian Ip group. Botnaru reappears again with CEFC, here. And, crying out for audit, the President of the General Assembly who swore in Guterres, Peter Thomson of Fiji, traveled like Ashe and Vuk Jeremic and Sam Kutesa to meet CEFC's Ye Jianming in Hong Kong.

  Inner City Press has asked Guterres and his spokespeople, among many other questions, "Beyond the 37 questions from Inner City Press you refused to answer last week, still set forth below for promised answer, this is a request, given that Peter Thomson is the SG's rep on Oceans that you describe in detail Thomson's 2017 meeting with now disappeared Ye Jianming of CEFC, name which UN DSS officials were with him and what reports they filed, what their duties were; what was seen by those accompanying Thomson, at least two of whom are still in the UN (one is with China)."

  Typically, Guterres and his spokespeople did not answer. So here, pending listing those from UN Department of Safety and Security the group which roughs up the Press without accountability and maintains a retaliatory "lifetime" banned from the UN list, are the names: "During his two-day visit, the President of the UN General Assembly was accompanied by his senior advisors Abdelghani Merabet, and Zhang Yi, as well as by the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs’s Director of the Division for Sustainable Development, Zhu Juwang." Now, Thomson staffer or embed Zhang Yi has gone (back, or more openly) to working for the Chinese government: "On August 14 [2018], Deputy Director-General of China International Center for Economic and Technical Exchanges Zhang Yi was invited to attend the FOCAC - Africa-China Poverty Reduction and Development Conference, an important sub-forum under the FOCAC hosted by the State Council Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation and Development and co-organized by the International Poverty Reduction Center in China and the China Belt and Road Institute for Agricultural Cooperation of China Agriculture University. Attending were more than 300 participants including government officials, international organizations’ representatives, non-governmental organizations’ officials, business leaders, experts and scholars from China, United States, Japan, Denmark and 40 African countries like Angola, Botswana and Mauritius."

  What did they see during Thomson's meeting with now-known briber Ye Jianming? Zhu Juwang  is still with UN DESA; Abdelghani Merabet  is with the current PGA. We'll have more on this: the UN should be answering these questions, now.

  In 2017, the year in which CEFC's Patrick Ho was indicted and arrested for UN bribery, CEFC in the UN engaged at least twice with Lenni Montiel, including for example on 6 July 2017, and also with DESA official Pingfan Hong. Some photos here. Inner City Press before Guterres had it roughed up and banned now 176 days for its inquiries into Guterres' corruption has politely questioned both Montiel and Hong - but Guterres has made that impossible and his Spokesmen refused to answer any written questions, for more than a week now. There are more connections.

  Guterres got favors from Peter Thomson when Thomson was President of the General Assembly. Rudimentary open source research - including on the UN's own website here - finds that Thomson, like implicated Sam Kutesa and John Ashe and Vuk Jeremic, visited CEFC's Ye Jianming in Hong Kong. What was discussed? Inner City Press previously covered, critically but civilly, Thomson. Now corrupt Guterres has had Inner City Press roughed up and banned 175 days, with his Spokesman Stephane Dujarric refusing to answer any questions despite the promise of Guterres' USG Alison Smale.

   After receiving favors from Thomson as PGA, Guterres gave him a job in his Secretariat, Representative on Oceans. Here is Patrick Ho, interviewed by Guterres' DESA, on Oceans. There should have been an audit. There still should be. Another of Guterres' special advisers, Jeffrey Sachs, after denying Inner City Press' documented report Sachs was on a UN - CEFC board, abruptly closed his Twitter account, story here. Guterres goes on robo-tweeting from parts unknown, spending public money undisclosed. Guterres should explain and / or resign.  We will have more in this series.

   A now-removed Gulbenkian Foundation web page says Guterres continued as a board member into 2018. Archived here. In fact it was on 9 February 2018 that Gulbenian tweeted that Guterres was no longer on the board - AFTER it was reported that Gulbenian was trying to sell, or even had already sold, Partex to CEFC. This is called guilty knowledge.

 While Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric is refusing to answer Inner City Press' written questions, contrary to promises by Guterres' Global Communicator Alison Smale, it appears Guterres' evasive defense is claiming that he left Gulbenkian in November 2016 and therefore somehow had no conflict of interest in refusing and blocking the obviously needed UN audit of CEFC after the arrest of its Patrick Ho for UN bribery. This defense is dubious.

  Why did Gulbenkian take down its webpage disclosing that Guterres remained on board into 2018? Why - sixteen months after Guterres ostensibly left - did they wait until February 2018 to tweet that he left? Because their negotiations with CEFC became public (see 2 February 2018 Bloomberg here, and 6 February MacauHub here: "CEFC China Energy buys Portugal’s Partex Oil & Gas.")

  In any event, Guterres' "2017" Financial Disclosure, which explicitly says it covered the year 2016 in which even in this new story he remained on Gulbenkian's board into November, more than 80% of the year - did not disclose his role in Gulbenkian, only on the Club of Madrid. Guterres has had previous financial disclosure omissions, for example in Portugal, here. CEFC was hardly unknown: it bought a Portuguese insurance company in November 2017, here.

    Guterres' failure to disclose and, separately and even more so, his refusal to audit CEFC in the UN was a direct conflict of interest, which he has tried to cover up by roughing up and banning Inner City Press which asked him about it. (See January 2018 press conference here, July 2018 roughing up by Guterres' UN Security here, banning letter via Press Freedom Tracker here.)

Three times now Dujarric, his deputy Farhan Haq and Office of the Spokesperson colleagues Marcia Soares Pinto and Keishamaza Rukikaire, as well as Guterres, his chief of staff Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti and Deputy SG Amina J. Mohammed have refused to answer this: "Beyond the 36 questions from Inner City Press you refused to answer last week, still set forth below for promised answer, this is a reiterated request past deadline that you (1) state when SG Guterres left his position on the Gulbenkian Foundation, (2) state why Gulbenkian was not listed on SG Guterres' public financial disclosure which covered 2016; (3) explain how it is not a conflict of interest for SG Guterres to have refused to start an audit of CEFC in the UN, as requested by Inner City Press in January 2018, given CEFC's bid for the oil business of Gulbenkian. Also, again, state why under SG Guterres there have been no updates to the UN public financial disclosures since those filed for 2016. Also, again, explain your refusal to answer any of Inner City Press' questions this week despite USG Smale's statements to GAP, me and UNSR David Kaye." No response at all, even as spokesman Dujarric for example tweets at actor Seth Rogin. Dujarric, as simply one example, on 1 March 2018 evaded Inner City Press' in-person questions about CEFC and Guterres, less than a month after Gulbenkian said Guterres was off the board, amid oil negotiations with CEFC. Video here. Then Guterres and Dujarric had Inner City Press roughed up and banned from the UN. Guterres' wife Catarina Vaz Pinto also worked for Gulbenkian. This is today's corrupt UN.

   For years Guterres received money as a board member of the Calouste Galbenkian Foundation, which despite its name is the 100% owner of Partex Oil and Gas. Partex has operations in Angola, Abu Dhabi, Brazil, Kazakhstan, the Netherlands, Oman and Portugal. It was to a Portuguese court that Guterres, while justifying no listing some of his income, disclosed in 2016 that he was paid at least € 2735 per month for his position with the Gulbenkian Foundation.

   But while a now deleted Foundation web page (archived here) stated that Guterres continued with Gulbenkian into 2018, Guterres did not list it on his most recent, and so far lone, UN Public Financial Disclosure, which covered 2016 ("Disclosing financial and other interests for the 2016 reporting year").

  So why did Guterres disclose his position with the Club of Madrid, but not with the Gulbenkian Foundation / Partex Oil and Gas? It is worth noting that Guterres' wife Catarina Vaz Pinto has also been connected to Gulbenkian.

   Following the roughing up and banning from the UN of Inner City Press which has covered the CEFC scandal throughout, Guterres' head of Global Communications Alison Smale promised UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression David Kaye, who asked, that the UN would still answer Inner City Press' written questions.

   But as 2018 came to a close Guterres' spokesmen Stephane Dujarric and Farhan Haq left unanswered 36 questions in a row from Inner City Press, including this: “Beyond the 35 questions from Inner City Press you refused to answer this week, this is a request on deadline that you (1) state when SG Guterres left his position on the Gulbenkian Foundation,

(2) state why Gulbenkian was not listed on SG Guterres' public financial disclosure which covered 2016;

(3) explain how it is not a conflict of interest for SG Guterres to have refused to start an audit of CEFC in the UN, as requested by Inner City Press in January 2018, given CEFC's bid for the oil business of Gulbenkian.

Also, again, state why under SG Guterres there have been no updates to the UN public financial disclosures since those filed for 2016. Also, again, explain your refusal to answer any of Inner City Press' questions this week despite USG Smale's statements to GAP, me and UNSR David Kaye. On deadline.”

   The question was also sent to the e-mail addresses of Guterres, his chief of staff Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti, his Deputy Amina J. Mohammed, and Smale, who earlier in the week told Inner City Press she would take “under advisement” her 17 August 2018 pretextual withdrawal of Inner City Press decade long UN media accreditation.
  It seems clear that Guterres and his team have engaged in censorship for corruption, to conceal a blatant conflict of interest by Guterres. It has been raised by Inner City Press to the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services, and others.  Watch this site.

Back on 5 December 2018 Patrick Ho was found guilty of seven of eight counts of violating the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and month laundering. (He was only not guilty on money laundering in Chad - where the bribe was not through any US bank but in cash, $2 million in a gift box). The evidence showed that the NGO he ran, China Energy Fund Committee, used its ongoing UN consultative status to pay bribes to Ugandan foreign minister - and Ashe's successor as President of the UN General Assembly -- Sam Kutesa.. He was working with precedessor Vuk Jeremic while Jeremic was UN PGA. CEFC even offered weapons, tanks and drones, to Chad's long time president Idriss Deby for oil blocks or a stake in the Chad Cameroon pipeline. (Inner City Press published documents here.)

The night of the verdict I asked UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres what he will do to clean up the UN, where he has left CEFC without any audit, still in consultative status with the UN. On his way from his Mercedes to a glitzy fundraiser including George and Amal Clooney, Guterres refused to answer. The next day when asked by another journalist why Guterres had refused to answer banned Inner City Press' question, his spokesman Stephane Dujarric claimed that the UN has “cooperated” with the prosecution. But the bribery group remains in the UN, unaudited.

Why has the case of US versus Ho, and now the guilty verdicts, garnered relatively so little interest, with the corruption of the UN exposed by it scarcely mentioned all? SG Guterres is hoping it goes away. In terms of corruption, he did not disclose and refuses to answer on the African business links of his son Pedro Guimarães e Melo De Oliveira Guterres. He refuses to answer how much he spends in public funds flying to his home in Lisbon at least sixteen times sofar as SG.

   So CEFC remains an accredited non governmental organization with the UN's Economic and Social Council, while investigative Inner City Press for which I have been covering the case has been dis-accredited by and ousted from the UN, put on a list of those permanently banned without notice, due process or appeal. On December 7 I was informed I am banned from a “UN Human Rights” event on December 10 to be addressed by Guterres and his human rights commissioner Michelle Bachelet. But this reporting will not stop - Guterres' corruption of the UN must be addressed, through oversight or as is discussed elsewhere, impeachment. From the lofty goals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to Guterres' censorship for corruption is UNacceptable.

  With UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet and her Deputy Andrew Gilmour set to speak in the UN on human rights day on December 10, Inner City Press responded to an invitation and was told, "Thank you for registering to attend the Human Rights Day event at the United Nations on Monday 10 December. On Monday, please come to the UN Visitors’ Gate on First Avenue opposite 45th street starting at 2pm, at which time entry passes will be distributed."

Then, past six p.m. on Friday, December 7 this from Bachelet's and Gilmour's Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights: "Dear Matthew, We have received notification from UN Security that your name was flagged as "BARRED" on the list we submitted for passes for Monday's event (3pm, ECOSOC Chamber). We will therefore not have a pass for you and are unable to facilitate entry.
Thank you for your interest and best regards,
OHCHR New York Office." Photo of email here.

   Inner City Press immediately wrote back, to the sender and Bachelet and her assistant, to Andrew Gilmour and to the moderator of the event, "Particularly since you are the UN Office of the High Commissioner for *Human Rights,* did you not ask why a journalist who asks the Secretary General and his spokesmen about the killings in Cameroon, Burundi, UN corruption, UN peacekeepers' sexual abuse of civilians, and Sri Lanka, is “BARRED” from attending your human rights event - without any hearing or appeal? I will appreciate your Office's answer to this."  We'll have more on this.

 Bachelet gave a speech on October 15 in the UN's Third Committee, she emphasized a prioritization of social and economic rights and said one of the officials of her office is "on mission in Silicon Valley" in the US. There are questions about this - but Inner City Press which has covered human rights and the UN for more than a decade was for the first time banned from access a High Commissioner's speech. This has been raised repeated to Bachelet since she took office but she has so far done nothing, not even responded. Meanwhile on October 12 Cameroon, from whose Paul Biya Secretary General Antonio Guterres took a golden statue and favors in the Fifth (Budget) Committee and remains silent on the slaughter of Anglophones, was elected to a seat on the UN Human Rights Council. This system is failing - but if Bachelet cannot even answer on Guterres maintaining a secret banned list including not only Inner City Press but also "political activists" - and anti-corruption campaigners - then the UN of Guterres has hit its newest low.

***

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

UN Office, past & future?: S-303, UN, NY 10017 USA
For now UNder Guterres: UN Delegates Entrance Gate
and mail: Dag H. Center Box 20047, NY NY 10017 USA

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Search innercitypress.com  Search WWW (censored?)

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2018 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for