At
UNICEF, Still No Answer on N. Korea Audit, Morgan Stanley Partnership Questioned
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
UNITED NATIONS, June
7 -- It is often said at the UN that you might have to deal with the Devil, in
the service of some larger good. That is among the UN agencies' responses to the
preliminary audit report of their operations in the Democratic People's Republic
of Korea, otherwise known as North Korea, which was released one week ago on
June 1. The report criticizes not only the UN Development Program and its
affiliates, UNOPS and UNFPA, but also the better known UN Children's Fund.
While
North Korea among other things tortures those who try to leave the country, UN
agencies including UNICEF were accepting staff seconded from the Kim Jong Il
regime, and paying their salaries to the government. Meanwhile, there were
limitations and then prohibitions on access to audit the programs. To date,
UNICEF has not responded to the audit.
On
Thursday Inner City Press attended a
talk-radio taping in the UN's basement, and took note when UNICEF's Ann
Veneman was interviewed, by Jack Rice of CBS-affiliated WCCO in Minneapolis.
Rice began by asked Veneman about her previous service on the New York City
Council -- apparently confusing her with her predecessor Carol Bellamy -- and
asked if UNICEF uses stamps to raise funds. "We're the greeting card people,"
Ms. Veneman gamely replied, mentioning UNICEF's partnership with Hallmark.
As Ms.
Veneman prepared to leave, Inner City Press asked her if UNICEF will be
submitting a management response to the North Korea audit.
"We're
working on it," Ms. Veneman answered.
"But you
will be submitting one?"
"I don't
know exactly. I have to talk to my people. I don't know if they're going to do a
management response. I don't know what the appropriate resp--" Ms. Veneman
trailed off. "I don't know if they're going to do one yet. They're working on
it."
UNICEF
on tsunami, Ann Veneman at left (Morgan Stanley not shown, see below)
Inner
City Press apologized for the stakeout question. Inner City Press could have
said but didn't that this very question was put to UNICEF in writing on Monday
night, with an end-of-Tuesday deadline, along with other questions discussed
below. Even by Thursday, the question of "will UNICEF be filing a management
response, and will it be public" still had not been answered. Now we know why:
it still hasn't been decided. But the
Spokesman for the General Assembly
President on Thursday noted
that Inner City Press
"asked a question yesterday about the
famous UNDP-DPRK audit report. It is before the Advisory Committee on
Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) and is being discussed today."
When exactly
is it, that UNICEF will decide how to respond?
One
question that UNICEF did answer this week involves how the agency chose to
partner with Morgan
Stanley in a "Junior 8" youth project tied to the G-8 meeting. Inner City Press
asked
"could you describe how UNICEF's
partnership with Morgan Stanley came about, for the 'Junior 8' Summit and
anything else, and what UNICEF's policies and safeguards are for partnering with
corporations, including any reviews done of the corporations' records on human
rights as well as children's rights issues?"
UNICEF's
response has been:
Regarding how
we choose partners: We vett every potential corporate partner for a history of
socially responsible activities and reputation, make a positive contribution to
society, have a history of commitment to development-related causes, keep
responsible labor and environmental practices.
You can read more about this process in
the document linked on
this page entitled
Guidelines and Manual for Working with the Business Community
In the specific
case of the Morgan Stanley International Foundation, which is UNICEF's partner
in the J8: We teamed up with them on the previous J8 in 2006 in St.
Petersburg. MSIF have been enthusiastic and generous partners in bringing
children from all over the world to give them a voice and a platform in the
issues of the G8 – issues that will affect them for the rest of their lives.
While
this response was and is much appreciated, it must be noted, as examples, that
as far back as 2002, on environmental issues, Friends of the Earth issued a
report entitled
"Rogue Traders: A Report on Morgan
Stanley's Financing of Socially and Environmentally Controversial Projects in
Asia." One wonders if UNICEF considered but rejected the report. As recently as
April 2007, Morgan Stanley settled charges
of gender discrimination, click
here for
that.
Morgan Stanley
had settled similar
charges in 2004, here.
The company was exposed in as
advising investors to steer clear of
unionized companies, contrary
to UN International Labor Organization principles; it has been named as
funding a China wig company that uses
forced labor.
This sample litany is set forth in light of UNICEF's
statement that it checks "every potential corporate partner for a history of
socially responsible activities and reputation, make a positive contribution to
society, have a history of commitment to development-related causes, keep
responsible labor and environmental practices." With these be a management
response to this?
Other still-not-answered questions:
--are there any
provinces of DPR Korea where UNICEF does not / will not provide services, or
will provide only some of its services? If so, what are the provinces, when was
the decision made and why?
--In remarks for UNICEF's Executive Board meeting on June 4, [a Board member]
said
"The Board of
Auditors released its report late last week and we would like to know when the
Executive Board can expect a full report from UNICEF... We believe that reports
of the Office of Internal Audit and the Evaluation Office should be available to
the Executive Board."
What is
UNICEF's position on making internal audits available at least to members of its
Executive Board and, separately, to the press and public? To the degree that the
"full report from UNICEF" alluded to above it different from the management
response asked about, when might this full report be produced, and will it be
available to the Press and public?
Also, beyond the
outstanding India question, what about the question, raised on April 16 in
connection with the Moro National Liberation Front, regarding which groups in
control of territory, but not recognized governments, UNICEF has agreements
with?
Finally, is
it possible to get list(s) of UNICEF Executive Board meeting attendees?
This last one should have been
easy -- in Conference Room 2, where the Executive Board has been meeting, there
has been a slot for form "E/ICEF/2007/CRP.6," the list of attendees. It has been
empty for days, but presumably it is an electronic document. [In fairness,
while more has been twice promised in response to the
above-linked India article, UNICEF-NY has in the interim said
that while it has
"not yet received
information from our country office about this
particular incident... UNICEF believes that the use of children and
young people to highlight a particular cause (in this case illiteracy)
should always be done with their best interest as the guiding principle.This
means that the child or young person should feel they are not only helping bring
attention to a particular cause but that they are learning and growing from
their experience."
There are principles, and then
there is practice. Inner City Press has previously praised
UNICEF's expert
on the
Central African Republic,
and work on child soldiers in Congo and
Nepal.
But even for one doing angelic work with children, there is a need for increased
transparency. To be continued.
Click
here for Inner City
Press' June 1 story on UNDP questions.
Again, because a number of Inner City Press'
UN
sources go out of their way to express commitment to serving the poor, and while
it should be unnecessary, Inner City Press is compelled to conclude this
installment in a necessarily-ongoing series by saluting the stated goals of the
UN agencies and many of their staff. Keep those cards, letters and emails coming, and phone
calls too, we apologize for any phone tag, but please continue trying, and keep
the information flowing.
Feedback: Editorial
[at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-453A,
UN, NY 10017 USA Tel: 212-963-1439
Reporter's mobile
(and weekends): 718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner
City Press are listed here, and
some are available in the ProQuest service.
Copyright 2006-07 Inner City Press, Inc. To request
reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com -
UN Office: S-453A,
UN, NY 10017 USA Tel: 212-963-1439
Reporter's mobile
(and weekends): 718-716-3540