UN
Rapporteur
Kaye Asked
Guterres USG
Smale About
Ousting Inner
City Press
Answer Full of
Lies Still
Banned
By Matthew
Russell Lee, CJR Letter
PFTracker
UNITED NATIONS
GATE, October 25– Two key
elements of press freedom are
not banning access as the UN
has done to Inner City Press
for 113 days now and being
transparent, another UN
failing. And this failure was
on display again on October
25, when UN Special Rapporteur
on Freedom of Expression David
Kaye sent to Inner City Press
his
letter to UN Under
Secretary General Alison Smale
about her
ouster of Inner City
Press - and Smale's Orwellian
answer,
still without due process or
answer on any appeals process
and repeating the barely met
promise that the UN will
answer Inner City Press'
questions (no answers to seven
questions on October
25). Inner City Press
immediately replied, including
to Smale, Secretary
General
Antonio Guterres and his
Deputy Amina J. Mohammed and
chief of staff Maria Luiza
Viotti - with no response yet,
as Inner City Press covered
Guterres' photo op with
Sweden's Margot Wallstrom from
the sidewalk of the mansion
where Guterres is holding his
meetings, video here.
Here was Kaye's letter:
UN
Rapporteur Kaye Asked Gu... by
on Scribd
"Mandate
of the Special Rapporteur on the
promotion and protection of the right to
freedom of opinion and expression
REFERENCE: OL OTH 45/2018, 20 July 2018
Dear Ms. Smale,
With reference to my letter of 3
November 2017 regarding the importance
of an access-to-information policy for
the United Nations as a whole, I would
like to bring to your attention a
specific case submitted to my mandate.
On 25 February 2016, I sent a
communication to the then
Under-Secretary-General for
Communications and Public Information,
Ms. Cristina Gallach, regarding the
decision to withdraw the Resident
Correspondent accreditation at the UN
office in New York of Mr. Matthew Lee,
journalist with Inner City Press, in
favour of a non-Resident Correspondent.
Ms. Gallach responded in a letter of 25
May 2016, informing that under
non-resident correspondent
accreditation, Mr. Lee has been free to
continue his full journalistic
activities in reporting in and about the
United Nations. The letter furthermore
noted that the use of space in the UN
Headquarters was a matter of privilege
previously accorded to Mr. Lee,
contingent upon his observing the UN
Media Accreditation Guidelines, and was
revocable by the UN in its sole
discretion.
In June 2018, I received new information
from Mr. Matthew Lee who reportedly on 22
June 2018 had been ordered out of
the UN premises by Security Officers
while in the middle of covering an
event. During this incident, Mr. Lee
reportedly had his arm
twisted and his shirt torn due to
use of force by a Security Officer who
refused to give his name. [NOTE: Kaye
merges two separate assaults, the second
of which was on July 3 outside the UN
Budget Commmittee meeting, video here,
UK Independent here.]
Mr. Lee was subsequently banned from UN
Headquarters and is now unable to enter
the UN premises.
In this connection, I would appreciate
your view on the above mentioned
information, and I would also like to
ask for clarification to the following
questions:
1. What standards apply to determine the
various statuses for journalists at the
United Nations? Would you kindly
identify where those standards may be
found in UN rules, regulations or
policies? In addition, who has the
authority to interpret and implement the
standards? Are decisions and actions
under those standards subject to
appeal?
2. How were those standards applied to
the situation of Mr. Matthew Lee? What
specific standards did he violate,
according to your office’s findings?
3. How does your office respond to the
allegations lodged by Mr. Lee about the
use of force by security officers? Has
your office undertaken any kind of
evaluation to determine whether force
was used and, if so, whether it was
excessive?
I would appreciate receiving a response
within 60 days. Your response will be
made available in a report to be
presented to the Human Rights Council
for its consideration.
While awaiting a reply, I urge that all
necessary interim measures be taken to
address the situation described and
prevent its re-occurrence and in the
event that an investigation supports or
suggests the allegation to be correct,
to ensure the accountability of any
person(s) responsible.
Please accept, Ms. Smale, the assurances
of my highest consideration.
David Kaye
Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
protection of the right to freedom of
opinion and expression." Smale's answer,
a full two months later, repeats by rote
her August 17 withdrawal of Inner City
Press' accreditation, and claims that
Inner City Press formal complaints to
the UN about being roughed up by UN DSS
Lt Ronald Dobbins and unnamed others "is
still under review." But Inner City
Press say Dobbins still on the payroll
on October 24, while Inspector Matthew
Sullivan bragged
that the secret banned from the UN list
Inner City Press is now on is an
internal document that the UN is making
the NYC government not disclose. Inner
City Press immediately replied to Kaye,
Smale, Guterres, Mohammed and Viotti:
"Thanks for sending this - I'm looking
to see what if anything you did after
your lone July 20 letter. Since the
allegations in USG Smale's August 17
letter predate my accreditation in April
2018, how can they form a basis to not
only withdraw my accreditation -
apparently permanently - but now have me
on secret barred list?
If you cannot or will not do more
than a single letter with no follow up
for a journalist roughed up in, and
permanently banned from, the UN, is
there some problem with the mandate
holding the UN itself accountable? Did
you contact UNODC, whose information I
gave you? Have you looked into this
troubling permanently banned list? What
is your response to USG Smale's
justification for censorship without due
process? I urge you to do more,
including publicly - that is one reason
for the cc's. 113 days of exclusion from
today largely empty UN press conferences
is enough... To be clear: there was
nothing in my coverage of the UN
materially different since Antonio
Guterres and his team came in from how I
covered the UN under Ban K-moon (and
even the tail end of the tenure of Kofi
Annan, RIP).
I worked the same hours, including
periodic Periscope broadcasts of the
fourth floor to show how absurd it was
and is that DPI gives offices and full
access to state media who rarely come
in. I specifically asked USG Smale's
MALU if I needed an escort to film and
was told no, I did not need any escort
on the 3d and 4th floors. MALU knew and
did nothing to stop everything that I
was doing, even told me the complaint(s)
cited in USG Smale's Aug 17 letter were
frivolous.
If something changed, DPI or “Global
Communications” should have spoken to
me.
To suddenly have UN Security roughing me
up for doing what I have done for years
- cover the UN Budget Committee meeting
crunch time - and push me out from
covering an SG speech in the GA lobby on
June 22 while leaving other non resident
correspondents is make it clear to me
this was and is targeting censorship.
This is what I am asking to addressed,
by your mandate or if not, anyone else.
I wrote to USG Smale's Media
Accreditation and Liaison Unit with a
series of questions including what the
roadmap, if any, is - no answer. Every
day the damage grows.
Sorry to add to initial response so
quickly but at 2:30 there is a photo op
of the type I covered without incident
under Ban Ki-moon but am now excluded
from. So I will try to cover it from
outside. The UN, like any government,
shouldn't get to pick and choose in this
way who gets to cover it.
What is the response?" So far, no
response. Disgusting. On October 23
before a UN noon briefing it was banned
from, but with the promise its written
questions would be answered, Inner City
Press asked in writing to 10 UN
officials and spokespeople: "October
23-2: It is reported that the UN is
blaming its continued lack of any
Freedom of Information Act procedure on
supposed management reforms. What is the
connection? What is the hold up? And for
example, how many times has the SG
visited Lisbon since January 1, 2017 and
how much, including in Security costs,
has it cost the UN / the public?" Eight
hours later, no answer at all. No
response to any of the five questions
Inner City Press submitted, four on
Africa, after a noon briefing in which
not one of the correspondents allowed in
the briefing room asked any questions
related to anything in Africa, on which
the UN (and the Secretary General's son
Pedro Guimarães e Melo De Oliveira
Guterres) raise money. For years, before
being roughed up by UN Security under
UNSG Antonio Guterres and banned by a no
due process letter by his Global
Communicator Alison Smale, Inner City
Press has pushed
for a Freedom of Information Act
covering the UN and its use of public
money. Now it turns out that Smale, who
have never spoken to Inner City Press
before banning it, has dissembled about
her and Guterres' supposed commitment to
transparency. The publication EYE writes
this week: "In an interview with EYE in
February of 2018, Alison Smale, Under
Secretary General for the Department of
Public Information, said the Secretariat
would like to create a rigorous” access
policy but first needed to resolve an
internal debate about which department
should be the “custodian” of UN records.
The custodianship of records is usually
one of the least difficult issues
handled by institutions adopting access
policies. Since then, the Secretariat
has conducted a major reorganization,
but appears no closer to settling the
custodianship issue or beginning an
effort to prepare an access
policy. A UN spokesman on Oct. 19
cited ongoing management reforms as the
reason, saying, “Any changes on access
to information policies would have to
follow afterwards.'" Always an excuse
from the UN. And where is UN Special
Rapporteur David Kaye, who purported to
call for a FOIA but can't even hold
Smale accountable for no due process
censorship and Guterres for secret
banned list? Meanwhile Inner City Press
has FOIA requests pending with the US
State Department, NYC,
the UK
and Netherlands.
(By contrast, Inner City Press non-UN
related FOIA get responded to and
reported, for example here
in the Intercept.) We'll have more on
this. We have revisited not only the
shocking censorship regime at the UN of
Alison Smale, until a year ago the New
York Times' bureau chief in Berlin, but
the equally shocking failure of the
NYT's three UN correspondents to cover
or even respond on Smale's lifetime ban
imposed on an investigative journalist.
On August 17, Smale after a 45
day "review" that did not include a
single interview with Inner City Press
issues a lifetime ban on its entry into
the UN. It was noted not only in BuzzFeed
and The
Hill, but in the largely
anti-Trump Press Freedom Tracker, here.
But from the New York Times, nothing.
Since then, a two-page New York Post
story, here. And still no financial
disclosure from Smale. Instead, a
telling tweets / re-tweets by Smale of
the NY Times, and of UK Minister Lord
Ahmad of Wimbledon, here.
And more hypocrisy: Smale
virtue-signaling on NYT internship
policies, here, while the UN continues
unpaid internships. No due process to
oust for life critical media: Smale is a
Censor. Inner City Press submitted
material to the NYT editorial pages and
James Bennet - no response. Inner City
Press emailed the NYT's three UN
correspondents, Rick Gladstone, rickg
[at] nytimes.com, Somini Sengupta
sengupta [at]nytimes.com, and the newer
but no more responsive Michael schwirtz
[at] nytimes.com - and days later,
nothing, to this: "I'm requesting that
you / the NYT report on this: the UN's
ex-NYT Alison Smale as USG of DPI on
Friday imposing a lifetime ban on me,
with no due process, no appeal.
The letter is attached. My rebuttal(s)
so far are online at
http://www.innercitypress.com/unguterres4smalebansicpmoroccoscam081818.html
The reasons given are bogus - the
warning letters, one the product of a
complaint from the Mission of Morocco
whose policy on Western Sahara I often
question, the other a complaint from a
DPI official who didn't like an article
I wrote. How can I be banned from the UN
for this? Most pressingly, how can Smale
and SG Guterres block me from covering
next month's General Assembly high level
week, which I've covered for 12 years?
The deadline to accredit is September
5. If I have to, I will cover it
from the street (a practice Smale called
derogatory, but see "On Cameroon Inner
City Press Video Guterres' Smale Calls
Derogatory for Lifetime Ban Remonetized
by YouTube.") I do not believe the
UN should, or legitimately can, target,
rough up, suspend and now ban for life a
critical journalist. I am requesting
that you cover this, or work so another
NYT reporter does. It is UN (and beyond)
story. Since the NYT reported Inner City
Press' entry into the UN, it would seem
it would cover its being roughed up,
suspended and now banned for life, on
such bogus grounds, particularly at this
time and given The Times' advocacy for
press freedom and access elsewhere." And
days later - nothing. We'll have more on
this. Tellingly, while one might expect
the UN Department of Public Information
to be more public than other of Security
General Antonio Guterres' departments,
the chief of DPI Alison Smale is not
even on the public disclosure list as of
August 16, 2018. What could explain it?
Since DPI has all day and a bent to
propagandize, one can imagine the excuse
being that Smale was only awarded the
position on 9
August 2017, after, say the USG of
Counter Terrorism who is listed: he was
named in June 2017. But the excuse
breaks down: making public disclosure, here,
of a property in Moldova, is Natalia
Gherman who was only awarded her UNRCCA
position on 15
September 2017, more than a month
after Smale. So why isn't Smale in the
public financial disclosure list? Isn't
this particularly inappropriate for a
former Berlin bureau chief of the New
York Times, which calls for such
disclosures by public official like
Smale is, but doesn't act like? We'll
have more on this, and on other
disclosures: some don't even fill out
the Assets section, only Outside
Activities, for example. Why have
Guterres and Smale, and their non-responsive
spokesman Stephane Dujarric, banned
Inner City Press from the UN and the
noon briefing for 44 days now? Watch
this site. The New York Times on
Wednesday evening put online its faux
humble contribution to the 100
editorials called for the Boston Globe,
saying Trump's - studiously not named -
"attacks on the press are particularly
threatening to journalists in nations
with a less secure rule of law and to
smaller publications in the United
States." The irony, now raised to the
Times' James Bennet and others, is that
their former colleague and bureau chief
Alison Smale is, at the UN, engaged in
an attack on a smaller investigative
Inner City Press. After it was roughed
up by UN Security on
June 22 and July
3 while covering a speech by her
new boss UN Secretary General Antonio
Guterres and his budget, Smale
despite the conflict of interest about
Inner City Press' coverage of her internal
Town Hall meeting and whistleblowers say
diversion of Swahili
funds saw fit to ban Inner City Press
from the UN for 43 days and counting
now. She has put herself in charge of a
"review" of Inner City Press involving
anonymous complaints Inner City Press
has not been shown. (That Smale's
significant other, Russian pianist
Sergei Dreznen told Inner City Press it
should change
and wear a suit or face her wrath is
another matter.) Smale's UN Department
of Public Information has told those who
have asked, including for example even
the Kazakhstan Mission to the UN as well
as the Government Accountability Project
and the Reporters Committee for Freedom
of the Press that her review and ruling
will be issued soon - with no due
process for Inner City Press, whose
reporting has been injured for more than
six weeks, on its beats from UN
corruption to Yemen
and Cameroon.
This is the Times' legacy in press
freedom? Tellingly, despite the New York
Times previously covering Inner City
Press at the UN, for example gushingly
in 2007
and as a character study in 2016
(with quotes from Guterres' spokesman
Stephane Dujarric which have typically
turned out to be false), this violent
ouster and ban by ex-NYT Smale has
garnered not a single word in the
ostensibly pro free press Times, whose
correspondents have been written to and
are aware, despite coverage in The Independent
(UK), the Columbia
Journalism Review, Fox,
POLITICO
and even a note in CNN.
We'll have more on this.
Inner City Press on July 5 was
told at the UN gate that it
was banned from entering any
UN premises, the day after it
filed a criminal complaint
against UN Security Lieutenant
Ronald Dobbins and another for
physically removing
it from covering the July 3
meeting about the UN's $6.7
billion peacekeeping budget,
as witnessed and essentially
cheered on by Secretary
General Antonio Guterres'
Assistant SG Christian
Saunders, tearing its
reporter's shirt, painfully
and intentionally twisting his
arm and slamming shut and
damaging his laptop. Video here. Columbia Journalism Review
here.
On August 11,
amid a now 41 day ongoing
“review” of Inner City Press
that has shifted from the
initial charge of being in the
building too long on July 3
covering the Budget Committee
meeting to undefined
“harassment” of unnamed off
the record correspondents, the
murky role of Alison Smale, a
former bureau chief of the New
York Times which speaks so
much of attacks on the press
from Washington, in attacking
the Press at the UN is coming
into focus.
Smale never responded to a
single one of Inner City Press
e-mails since September 2017,
even as she openly cavorted
with retired corporate media,
even on camera. Contrary to
the wider NYT's purported
celebration of aggressive
investigative press, Smale has
attacked the most
investigative and, perhaps,
aggressive of UN press. She
retweets little but the NYT;
she has said her focus is
making Guterres look better.
Why has she not recused
herself from "reviewing" the
critical Press? There has
already been filed a detailed
misconducted complaint
filed with the Secretary
General, and she has
apparently given up on trying
to respond to the second,
detailed request for answers
from the Government
Accountability Project. Has
Smale become, tongue firmly in
cheek, akin to Aung San Suu
Kyi, previously vaguely
associated with freedom once,
with the power to act, the
totalitarian or merely elitist
impulse becomes clear? While
the NYT publisher finger
waggles, what of Smale's
elitist censoring, featuring a
Kafkaesque star chamber in
which the allegations of
unnamed corporate and state
media are taken as true, with
no opportunity to be heard?
Smale has among other things
been blocking Press coverage
not only of UN corruption but
of the slaugher in Cameroon,
for 41 days and counting.
We'll have more on this.
Guterres'
spokesman Farhan Haq has told
Fox
News: “there have been a
number of allegations from
fellow journalists that Lee
has harassed them over the
years. 'A lot of journalists
have not just been harassed
but threatened by him and
that’s a problem,' Haq said.”
That
last line is extraordinary.
Without identifying a single
one of these "lot of
journalists," Haq declares
their anonymous allegations to
be true: "HAVE not just been
harassed but threatened me
him." This stands in contrast
to the UN not accepting - in
the case
of Alison Smale and Stephane
Dujarric, trying to not even
acknowledge receiving - Inner
City Press' written, on the
record allegations complete
with exhibits. It's called
favoritism, and censorship.
This same
Farhan Haq recently answered
one of Inner City Press'
written questions, about why
Guterres had taken no action
on its documented exclusive
May 24 report
for which it received threats
(and subsequent letter
to Guterres and Smale) that
through presumptive nepotism,
management of the UN Security
Council's website had been
given to John
van Rosendaal,
the
photographer husband of Kyoko
Shiotani, the
chief of staff of Guterres'
Under Secretary General for
Political Affairs Rosemary
DiCarlo, previously US Deputy
Ambassador to the UN under
Susan Rice and Samantha Power.
Haq responded,
"If there are
allegations of misconduct they
should be taken to the
internal oversight offices and
mechanisms. Unfounded
allegations do not constitute
a formal complaint." So how
does Haq for the UN now deem
anonymous allegations against
Inner City Press not only as
formal complaints, and as
true?
This is Kafkaesque. Inner City
Press quit the UN
Correspondents Association
after finding it to be
corrupt. Its president after
having rented one of his
Manhattan apartments to
Palitha Kohona, who as Sri
Lanka's Ambassador to
the UN accused of a role in
the White Flag Killings,
unilaterally granted Kohona's
request to him to screen a Sri
Lanka government war crimes
denial film as an UNCA event,
in the Dag Hammarskjold
Library auditorium. This was
done without approval of or
even notice to all Executive
Committee members of which
Inner City Press was one. When
Inner City Press reported on
it, not only the UNCA
president but only Committee
members from Reuters, AFP and
other outlets demanded that it
take the article offline.
Inner City Press offered the
UNCA president as much space
on Inner City Press as he'd
want to reply, but he and UNCA
wanted censorship, then as
now.
After Inner City Press quit
UNCA, and faced counterfeit
troll Twitter accounts
and anonymous (but leaked)
complaints to Guterres' now
lead spokesman Stephane
Dujarric from Lou Charbonneau
of Reuters (now Human Rights
Watch) here
and censored from Google with
the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act here
and Voice of America, here as
obtained under the Freedom of
Information Act, it has not
spoken to these individuals
since.
Whatever claimed harassment or
threatens they are claiming to
or for the UN is not based on
any actual interaction, only
Inner City Press' articles
and, it seems, equally First
Amendment protected Periscope
broadcasts, even one that was
inadvertent and deleted but
ghoulishly monitored and
captured by or for the UN.
(More on this soon).
The simple
point: it is illegitimate to
rough up a journalist for
covering a Budget Committee
meeting then ban him from his
beat pending a review of the
incident - then invent new
charges, with unnamed accusers
and not opportunity to respond
with an eye toward continuing
the ban. So what's next? Watch
this site.
On August
3, Guterres' deputy spokesman
Farhan Haq replied to
the Reporters Committee for
Freedom of the Press a week
after RCFP called the
vacationing Guterres' chief of
staff Maria Luiza Viotti to
express concern at the ban and
to offer to facilitate the
restoration of Inner City
Press' access (that call was
returned by lead spokesman
Stephane Dujarric, also now on
vacation). Haq on August 3
said that the UN's "review" is
nearly done, and he promised
that Inner City Press will get
notice of the results in the
"coming days," with a
reference to a "summary of the
findings."
On August
8, with still no results
announced and Inner City Press
still not contacted to be
heard since July 10, Haq was
asked, from the UN transcript:
"Q: Farhan, can you confirm
receipt of a formal complaint
that has been submitted to the
Secretary-General by Inner
City Press on prohibited
conduct? Did you… have
you received…?
Deputy Spokesman: I
believe that has been received
and is being reviewed.
Question: What action
will be taken into… in regards
to that? And will that
hold up a decision that has
been ongoing on the status of
Inner City Press?
Deputy Spokesman: I
don’t believe it will hold up
any decision. I think,
once a decision is made, we
will convey it to Matthew, and
then I will let you guys
know."
But know
about what? For this
investigation, Inner City
Press in the 31 days has been
contacted only once, for a
Kafkaesque "interview" by two
UN Security officers in a
windowless room in the
basement of the UNITAR
building across from the UN.
The officers refused to write
down even Inner City Press
assertion that Dobbins has
animus, given an investigative
piece Inner City Press had
published using documents
leaked to it showing
irregularities in promotions
in UN Security, including but
not limited to Dobbins'.
Since then,
Dujarric who had initially
said Inner City Press'
reporter would be talking to
various parts of the UN system
shifted down to saying the
investigation is only by the
Department of Public
Information. That means no
investigation of or
accountability for UN Security
roughing up Inner City Press.
It also involved a Department
whose leadership Inner City
Press has questioned for its
lack of content neutral
accreditation and access rules
essentially investigating
itself, without even the
pretense of due process for
Inner City Press which has not
been contacted.
Who
is conducting the review? DPI
chief Alison Smale, who has
ignored Inner City Press'
emails and 5000+ signature
petition since she took office
11 months ago, is on vacation.
The Officer in Charge is Hua
Jiang, who work for the UN in
Sudan where Orwellian
investigations are the rule;
Ms. Jiang refused to answer
Inner City Press' questions,
What am I being investigated
for? Ms Jiang also
previously threatened Inner
City Press' accreditation if
it did not take down a sign
for the alternative Free UN
Coalition for Access off the
door of the office she and DPI
evicted Inner City Press from
in 2016, awarding it to an
Egyptian state media whose
essentially retired
correspondent rarely comes
into the UN and hasn't asked
the UN a question in a decade.
(But no investigation of
that.)
What could DPI be
investigating? Haq said Inner
City Press was charged with
two offenses, being in the UN
on June 22 and July 3. But why
was Inner City Press in the
General Assembly Lobby on June
22 at 7:15 pm? There was an
event listed in the UN Media
Alert at beginning at 6 pm.
But Antonio Guterres did not
arrive until 6:45 pm for this
speech. The Access Guidelines
say non resident
correspondents can remain in
past 7 for an advised meeting
and one hour after. So Dobbins
had no right to push Inner
City Press out on June 22. But
he did, and Guterres and DPI's
Alison Smale and the others
Inner City Press wrote to on
June 25 did nothing about it.
Why did
Dobbins and his unnamed
colleague use force, before
talking, on July 3?
Why was
Inner City Press in the
building at 10 pm on July 3?
There was a meeting of the UN
Budget Committee, advised to
Inner City Press, exactly the
type of meeting has covered
for ten years including the
last two as a non resident
correspondent (reduced to that
status for pursuing the Ng Lap
Seng / John Ashe UN bribery
scandal into the UN Press
Briefing Room). In fact, Inner
City Press many times been
thanked for its coverage of
such budget meeting, not only
from around the world but by
UN staff and diplomats in the
New York area. "It's the only
way if know if we'll have to
come in for vote in the
General Assembly," one said.
DPI only puts the meetings in
the Media Alert if there is a
vote - contrary to its policy
of listing UN Security Council
consultation even if there is
no vote -and there is no way
to know, at 10 pm, if
agreement will be reached at 2
am and a vote taken
thereafter. These are things
DPI should have asked Inner
City Press about, if it has
any thought of rendering
another censorship decision.
These are the ground Haq and
Dujarric listed, later adding
vague civility, with Dujarric
misreprentating the number of
times and location Inner City
Press dropped the "F-bomb"
(once, in the soundproof focus
booth). Dujarric has dropped
multiple F-bombs in the
Briefing Room. And UNCA
President Giampaoli Pioli at
the UN Security Council
stakeout loudly called Inner
City Press an "as*hole." DPI
was told of it, with audio here,
and did nothing. Just as DPI's
MALU told Inner City Press it
could livestream Periscope
video on the third and fourth
floors, and all of the second
floor except through the
turnstiles, without an escort
or minders. And as to 7 pm,
other non resident
correspondents routinely stay
past that hour not even
working like Inner City
Press but, as for example on
June 26, drinking with
Guterres. So it would be
illegitimate to act on Inner
City Press' "incivility,"
particularly without having
given it any opportunity to be
heard, in 31 days, on this or
anything else they might
pretextually come up with.
We'll have more on this. Watch
this site.
While the UN in the past ten
years has become increasingly
resistant to the critical
Press, it has been under
Guterres that the UN's
response has been physical
violence and outright banning.
Earlier this year Guterres'
spokesman Stephane Dujarric
started complaining about
Inner City Press' coverage of
Guterres, including for
example its entirely legal
Periscope live-stream from the
sidewalk across Sutton Place
from the UN mansion Guterres
lives in, which showed that on
the day Guterres told the
world to turn off all lights
for an hour for the
environment, his were all
ablaze.
Trying to defuse Guterres
administration retaliation,
Inner City Press had an
intermediary, whom we'll leave
unnamed, convey to Dujarric on
June 20 that Inner City Press
had voluntarily suspended all
broadcasts from near the UN
mansion, for a month.
Dujarric, who only the day
before had given a private
press conference in the UN
Press Briefing Room to a three
person crew from Al
Jazeera (which
complained when Inner City
Press on Periscope called it a
sleazefest), told the
intermediary it was too late,
"I wish you had been involved
a while ago." There's worse
waiting, Dujarric told the
intermediary on June 20. Worse
waiting to happen: not allowed
in.
On June 22
UN Lieutenant Ronald E.
Dobbins, with his own motive
having been mentioned in Inner
City Press' expose of
irregularities in promotions
in UN Security, arbitrarily
singled out Inner City Press
and made it leave the UN at
7:15 pm in the middle of an
event, in the UN Media Alert,
which featured a Guterres
speech. Inner City Press
live-streamed as it was pushed
through the GA lobby, and did
say “This is corrupt.” (That
cannot be a violation of the
UN's / UNCA's vague injunction
to civility, in the midst of
an impermissible ouster
mid-coverage.)
On
June 25 Inner City Press wrote
to Guterres, the chief of
staff and Deputy SG and DPI's
Alison Smale, saying that Lt
Dobbins had improperly ousted
it and had a personal animus.
Inner City Press sent this and
more to the UN's Office of
Internal Oversight Service,
recently further discredited
in a UN Dispute Tribunal
decision we're soon to write
about.
But
Guterres offered no
protection. In fact, his
spokesman Dujarric and deputy
Farhan Haq refused to answer
any questions about the
improper June 22 ouster, with
Haq on July 3 saying it has
been an appropriate
enforcement of rules (which,
in fact, allow non resident
correspondents to stay in the
UN past 7 pm if there is a
meeting, and for an hour after
the meeting).
On July 3
as Inner City Press covered
just such a meeting, of the
Budget Committee, Dobbins and
other approached and initiated
violence. Inner City Press did
not, as they perhaps hoped,
respond with any physical
resistance. But even saying “I
am a journalist, this is
corrupt” is now characterized
an incivility to justify
banning Inner City Press.
Things got worse, indeed. And
now we know Dujarric and
Guterres are responsible, and
both, now on vacation, should
leave the UN.
On
July 30 Guterres'
sleazy basis
for roughing
up and banning
Inner City
Press for 27
days and
counting was reported
in the Columbia
Journalist
Review: Guterres'
spokesman Stephane
Dujarric has
gone
further, in an article
published July
30 by the
Columbia
Journalism
Review. Dujarric - who
Inner City
Press
directed to
the CJR
reporter to -
is quoted
that " Lee
Periscoped
while
shouting, 'Fuck
you!'
repeatedly.
(Lee says he
was
complaining
that Dujarrac
had given the
Al Jazeera
crew a private
interview, and
excluded him.)
'He
creates an
atmosphere of
incivility
within our
working
environment,'
Dujarrac says."
This is
a lie. (We
noted that
Dujarric himself has
repeatedly dropped
the F-bomb on
Inner City
Press, telling
it it
asked a "fucking
stupid
question" and, while
throwing it
out of the
UN Press
Briefing Room,
saying
"Matthew it's
fucking Friday
night, I'm so
fucking tired,
I want to go
home, just
leave," Vine here.)
Inner City
Press on June 19
when Dujarric
gave a "private
briefing" to Al
Jazeera about
Nikki Haley
and Mike
Pompeo
announcing the
US pull out
from the UN
Human Right
Council said
in the hall
that is was a
"sleazefest."
After closing
the door of
the focus booth
it has been
confined to work in
for two years
by
Dujarric, and long
after the Al
Jazeera trio
including
James Bays and
Whitney Hurst
were done,
said on
Periscope, F-You. Periscope
video - still
online
during this 27
day "investigation" -
here.
So
Dujarric is a
censor,
justifying the
beating up and
banning of a
journalist for
something he
broadcast in
a soundproof
booth to his
audience.
But
Dujarric
(and it seems Guterres'
and Smale's) roles
go beyond
justifying the roughing
up of the
Press. It seems
clear that the
green light
was given.
Consider this,
formally
submitted to a
UN Special
Rapporteur:
Dujarric told
CJR that on
June 19 Inner
City Press
supposedly
repeatedly
said f*ck you
to an Al
Jazeera crew (as
noted, they
must have
heard and
seized on it
only by
listening to
my Periscope
stream archive
afterward) --
1) on June 20,
Inner City
Press
was told by UN
Media
Accreditation
there were
concerns about
“intimidating”
Al Jazeera's
three-person
crew with its
phone;
2)
troublingly,
on June 20
Dujarric told
a person
trying to be Inner
City Press'
intermediary
that things
were “going to
get worse” for
me. So far Inner
City Press has
reported
once, on July
20, about that, here;
3) on June 22,
UN Security
Lieutenant
Ronald Dobbins
and four
others who
refused to
give their
names stopped
me at 7:15 pm
while Inner
City Press was
covering a
speech by SG
Antonio
Guterres and
pushed it
out of the
building,
leaving other
non resident
correspondents
inside.
Inner City
Press now
surmises that
Dujarric, or
higher, gave
an order after
June 19 to
(physically)
target it.
4) on June 25
Inner City
Press wrote
to Guterres,
his chief of
staff, his
deputy Amina J
Mohammed and
USG Alison
Smale
informing them
Lt Dobbins,
with animus,
had pushed it
out of the UN
during an SG
speech, and
implicitly
requesting the
vaunted
'protection of
journalist.'
They did...
nothing.
5) on July 5
Dobbins and
other officer
got even more
violent,
grabbing Inner
City Press'
reporter's
arm and
twisting it,
tearing his
shirt and
damaging his
computer while
Inner City Press
covered the UN
Budget
Committee
meeting in the
same way it has
for ten years,
including the
last two as a
non resident
correspondent
(downgraded in
connection
with Inner
City Press'
coverage of
the Ng Lap
Seng / John
Ashe UN
bribery
scandal in
which Ng is
now in jail).
On July 5 when
Inner
City Press came
to work -
after
reporting the
assault to the
NYPD - it was
told it was banned
from entering
the UN and has
been since.
Inner City
Press now
believes that
Dujarric /
Guterres /
Smale put out
orders to have its
reporter
physically
targeted,
despite the
rules saying he
can stay after
7 pm if there
is a meeting
(true both
times). Maybe
they hoped
Inner City Press
would react in
a way they
could easily
use to ban it.
All he
did was say
loudly “I am a
journalist” -
but they still
banned Inner
City Press.
But they took
a chance
the officers
would more
seriously
injure the
Inner City
Press reporter.
It was beyond
censorship,
beyond
reckless - it
must be
reported and
acted on. (It
has been
reported, by
Alex Newman, on July 31, here:
the "UN
spokesman had
vowed to make
things worse
for him after
watching a
video Lee
made. 'I
get roughed
up, banned, no
due process,
no end in
sight.'") Inner
City Press at
noon on July
31 asked
Guterres and
his spokespeople
and Deputy and
Smale (and
has asked the
Rapporteur
to obtain),
"Given
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric's quotes
to Columbia
Journalism
Review, and
the moribund
nature of the
supposed
“investigation,”
please
describe all
instructions
given to UN
Security, Lt
Dobbins and
others, after
June 19
regarding
Inner City
Press, and
also state
whether any
personnel of
Al Jazeera or
[ ] have
been
interviewed
for the
investigation"
- watch this
site.
Amazingly, the UN is pointing
to a vague language
it negotiated with its UN
Correspondents Association
which Inner City Press quit
after finding the organization
took money from now convicted
UN bribery Ng
Lap Seng and had a
president who rented one of
his apartments to a Sri
Lanka war crimes
suspect: "Where unexpected
circumstances arise, the
approach will be to avoid
confrontation, maintain
civility and find the fastest,
safest and most secure
acceptable solution. Those
Correspondents who violate the
ground rules governing access,
including the abovementioned
standards of ethical behavior
may have their accreditation
withdrawn or suspended by the
United Nations."
But it was
UN Security, Lt Dobbins on
July 3 with another still
unnamed, who initiated violent
confrontation, grabbing Inner
City Press' reporter's arm and
twisting it, and tearing his
shirt, as he sat typing up
interview notes outside a
Budget Committee meeting he
had every right to cover,
under the rules. Guterres' UN
has become a Kafkaesque place
of censorship where guards he
had already been warned (in
writing on June 25) were
targeting the Press can
physically assault a reporter
whose saying "I am a
journalist!" can then be used
as a lack of civility or
unacceptable comportment to
ban the journalist. This is
corrupt.
On July 20, with
Inner City Press still banned
from the UN after 17 days with
no end in sight, prohibited
from attending the day's US
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
and Ambassador Nikki Haley
press encounter because it was
in the UN, Inner City Press
waited and politely asked
Guterres and his chief of
staff Maria Luiza Viotti why
it is still banned after 17
days, for being roughed up
twice by Guterres' Security.
(After the first physical
ouster on June 22, Inner City
Press on June 25 notified
Guterres, his chief of staff,
Deputy SG Amina J. Mohammed
and Global Communications
chief Alison Smale that it was
being targeted by Lt. Dobbins;
they did nothing.) On July 20,
despite the quite audible
questions including about
related inaction on the
slaughter in Cameroon which
Inner City Press has asked
about, Guterres got in his
limousine and did not answer,
as did UK Ambassador Karen
Pierce. Video here.
The lack of
accountability for censorship
is growing: Guterres told his
lunch companions "bonne
vacances" and Smale has left
on a three week vacation,
bouncing back all e-mails
with: "I am out of the office
from 1.00 p.m. on Thursday, 19
July through Thursday, 9
August 2018. During my
absence, the Officer-in-Charge
of the Department of Public
Information will be as
follows: 19-25 July - Mr.
Janos Tisovszky.... 26 July
through 1 August - Mr. Ramu
Damodaran... 2-9 August - Ms.
Hua JIang" [sic]." We'll have
more on this. On July 18,
Guterres' deputy spokesman
Farhan Haq was asked by two
journalists about the status
of what he and lead spokesman
Stephane Dujarric called the
investigation of the
"incidents" of July 3, and
apparently not now of June 22.
Video here,
from the UN transcript:
a follow-up to one that’s been
asked here last week and the
week before, and that’s a
report on the current status
of the investigation into the
events on 3 July leading,
ultimately, to the ouster, at
least temporary ouster, of
Inner City Press. And
did the Secretary-General
receive any communications
from any non-governmental
organization (NGO) on… on this
subject? For example, I
think it’s called the Global
Accountability Project or
something like that.
Deputy Spokesman: The UN
has received a letter from the
Government Accountability
Project, and I believe we’ll
be responding to them in due
course.
Question: And… and the
status of the
investigation? Could
you…
Deputy Spokesman: It’s
ongoing... 2d Questioner:
regarding Inner City Press,
you said it’s ongoing.
Is there an idea of when… is
there a date… any idea of when
it’s actually going to come
out and have a result?
Deputy Spokesman:
No. I mean, once we’ve
come to a decision, he’ll be
informed of the decision." On
what - the excessive use of
force by UN Security? This is
Kafkaesque - or now,
Guterresian....
Tellingly,
six days after UN Security
roughed up Inner City Press and
four days after UNnamed
official(s) instituted without
any due process an ongoing ban
on Inner City Press for having
been roughed up, on July 9
Guterres' chief of Management,
Saunders supervisor Jan Beagle,
issued a self-serving
"Administrative Instruction"
which seeks to legitimate
Dobbins' police brutality after
the fact, and ensure it goes on
in the future.
***
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-303,
UN, NY 10017 USA
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other,
earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in
the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright
2006-2015 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
for
|