After
UN Bans Inner City Press 45 Days
PGA Gets Formal Request To Take
Over Review Restore All Access
By Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS,
August 17 – Forty
five days
after Inner
City Press' reporter
was roughed
up by UN
Secretary
General
Antonio
Guterres'
Security
officers as he
covered the UN
Budget
Committee
meeting on
Guterres' $6.7
billion
budget, a
formal request
for full
reinstatement
has been filed
with President
of the UN
General
Assembly
Miroslav Lajcak,
below.
The
filing says, "
Before setting
forth the
legal basis, I
remind you
that the day
you were
elected
President of
the General
Assembly, I
asked you at
your press
encounter
about the UN
bribery case
of John Ashe
and Ng Lap
Seng (to which
the case of
Sam Kutesa and
Patrick Ho of
CEFC has since
been added).
You replied,
There will be
no secrets. To
give any
meaning to
this, you
cannot stand
by as an
investigative
journalist is
roughed up and
banned, and is
threatened
with not being
able to cover
the 2018
General
Assembly High
Level Week for
the first time
in 12 years,
simply because
the Secretary
General
doesn’t like
my coverage
and questions
about
corruption,
use of public
funds,
under-performance
in Cameroon,
etc. The
deadline for
covering the
upcoming UNGA
week is
September 5. I
asked that you
ensure all my
rights – and
S303 – are
restored
(well) before
that time."
The
filing continues:
"Dear
President of
the UN General
Assembly,
I write to
request that
you restore of
all my rights
as an
accredited
journalist at
the UN,
specifically
my
reinstatement
as a
‘resident’ UN
journalist
with full
access rights
to UN
premises,
consistent
with the UN
Media
Guidelines1,
as well as the
return of my
office. The
decisions
taken by the
UN Secretariat
in 2016 to
downgrade my
status as a
non-resident
journalist,
and then in
2018 to
withdraw my
access rights
and to
forcibly eject
and ban me
from the UN
premises since
3 July 2018
are ultra
vires.
Before
setting forth
the legal
basis, I
remind you
that the day
you were
elected
President of
the General
Assembly, I
asked you at
your press
encounter
about the UN
bribery case
of John Ashe
and Ng Lap
Seng (to which
the case of
Sam Kutesa and
Patrick Ho of
CEFC has since
been added).
You replied,
There will be
no secrets. To
give any
meaning to
this, you
cannot stand
by as an
investigative
journalist is
roughed up and
banned, and is
threatened
with not being
able to cover
the 2018
General
Assembly High
Level Week for
the first time
in 12 years,
simply because
the Secretary
General
doesn’t like
my coverage
and questions
about
corruption,
use of public
funds,
under-performance
in Cameroon,
etc. The
deadline for
covering the
upcoming UNGA
week is
September 5. I
asked that you
ensure all my
rights – and
S303 – are
restored
(well) before
that time.
The UN
Secretary
General does
not have the
delegated
authority
under the UN
Charter to
take decisions
in relation to
the conduct of
the media or
to institute
sanctions on
the media,
just as he has
no authority
to take such
decisions in
relation to
government
representatives
or
non-governmental
organisations
(NGOs). Under
Article 97 of
the UN
Charter, the
Secretary
General’s role
is limited to
that of the
“Chief
Administrative
Officer” of
the
organisation
(he has
responsibility
for the
administration
of the human,
financial and
other
resources of
the
organisation)
and he cannot
assume further
duties unless
“entrusted to
do so” by the
UN General
Assembly,
Security
Council,
ECOSOC or
Trustee
Council
(Article 98 of
the UN
Charter)2.
To-date, no UN
General
Assembly,
Security
Council or
ECOSOC
resolution has
been passed
conferring on
the Secretary
General the
role as
decision-maker
on media
accreditation,
adjudicating
disputes with
the media, or
instituting
and monitoring
sanctions
against the
media. As such
any decisions
on my
accreditation,
access and
resident
status cannot
be taken by
the Secretary
General, and
must rest with
the General
Assembly, the
main
decision-making
organ of the
UN.
By way of
background, I
am a
journalist who
has been
reporting on
the UN and its
specialized
agencies since
2004,
accredited by
the UN in 2005
and made a
resident
correspondent
in 2006 until
that was
stripped from
me as I
pursued the
John Ashe / Ng
Lap Seng case
into the UN
Press Briefing
Room,
inappropriately
“lent
out” by the
SG’s spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric. My
articles,
published at
innercitypress.com3
are widely
read around
the world and,
as is relevant
here, at UN
Headquarters
in New York
and other UN
duties
stations, by
Member States,
UN staff and
by those with
an interest in
the workings
of the
organization.
My articles
are frequently
critical of
the UN
establishment
and its senior
officials. The
fact that I
bear witness
to
inconvenient
truths,
effectively as
a
whistleblower
undertaking
protected
activity, is
no
justification
for my illegal
censure and
ill-treatment.
The decisions
taken by the
Secretariat in
2016 to
downgrade my
status to
non-resident
journalist,
and then in
2018 to
withdraw my
access rights
and to
forcibly eject
me and ban me
from the UN
premises are
fundamentally
flawed,
retaliatory,
unethical,
tainted by
conflict of
interest and
evidence of
corruption.
My physical
ejection was
also criminal,
and I have
filed a
criminal
complaint with
the New York
City Police
(reference
#2018-017-2848_see
attached) on
4_ July 2018,
which
complaint is
still pending.
Further, the
Secretary
General has a
clear conflict
of interest in
my case
stemming from
my reporting,
on an ongoing
basis,
allegations of
corruption,
fraud, serious
misconduct and
unethical
behaviour at
the top
echelons of
the UN, as
well as on the
continuing
retaliation
against UN
whistleblowers.
I have broken
the news on
many stories
at
innercitypress.com
which sadly
reflect
negatively on
the
performance of
senior UN
officials,
including the
Secretary
General.
Many of the
allegations of
misconduct I
have reported
publicly at
innercitypress.com
have been
substantiated
through ‘duly
authorised’ UN
investigations,
including the
UN’s gross
institutional
failure in
responding to
the child
sexual abuse
and pedophilia
by
peacekeepers
in the Central
African
Republic (CAR)
and the abuse
of authority
by senior UN
officials
against Anders
Kompass (see
CAR Review
Panel Report
A/71/994). The
material I
have published
on
innercitypress.com
has been used
by UN
investigators
as evidence in
their ‘duly
authorised’
investigations5.
My articles
continue to
break the news
on sexual
abuse,
perpetrated by
UN
peacekeepers
and staff,
against
vulnerable
people whom
the UN is
supposed to
protect.
I drew the
international
community’s
attention to
the human
rights
violations in
the
English-speaking
parts of
Cameroon and
your apparent
silence in
responding to
these abuses,
which was
noted by many
anglophone
Cameroonians. High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights Zeid
Ra’ad Al
Hussein
belatedly
issued a
statement on
25 July 2018
condemning the
abuses6.
I also
reported the
Secretary
General’s
apparent
failure to
initiate an
audit of the
China Energy
Fund Committee
/ Patrick Ho /
Sam Kutesa UN
bribery case,
which has
resulted in a
US criminal
prosecution
for bribery
and
international
money
laundering7.
I
closely cover
UN public
financial
disclosures as
you know, as
discovered
only yesterday
that USG DPI
Alison Smale,
who purported
to be doing a
“review” of me
without once
speaking to me
or given me an
opportunity to
be heard, is
not listed on
the Public
Financial
Disclosure
website,
despite being
given her
position prior
to Natalia
Gherman at
UNRCCA, who is
listed. You
said, There
will be no
secret. USG
Smale, on whom
I have
reported such
as above (as
well as what
whistleblowers
told me was
diversion of
funds meant
for Swahili
programming to
“social media
propaganda for
SG Guterres”)
has a conflict
of interest in
reviewing me.
For the
reasons in
this letter,
for the good
of the UN and
as required by
law, you must
take action
(see below).
For years I
have reported
publicly the
UN’s failure
to protect its
whistleblowers,
including high
profile cases
such as Anders
Kompass,
Caroline
Hunt-Matthes,
Miranda Brown
and Emma
Reilly.
My public
reporting of
these failures
by the UN to
protect its
whistleblowers
have now been
substantiated
by the UN
Joint
Inspection
Unit, in their
recent report8
and recognised
by the UK
Parliamentary
Committee on
International
Development’s
Inquiry into
Sexual abuse
and
exploitation
in the aid
sector9. I
have also
reported
publicly that
the ongoing
retaliation
against UN
whistleblowers
appears to
violate the US
law for the
protection of
UN
whistleblowers
(Section 7048
of the US
Consolidated
Appropriations
Act), which
stipulates
that the State
Department
must withhold
15% of the US’
annual
financial
contributions
to the UN
unless the UN
“implements”
best practice
for the
protection of
whistleblowers.
Given that I
have publicly
reported
allegations of
serious
misconduct,
wrongdoing and
unethical
conduct at the
top of the UN
and that these
allegations
clearly
reflect
negatively on
the
performance as
Secretary
General and
that of UN
senior
officials (his
subordinates),
neither he nor
his senior
officials can
bring an
impartial and
objective view
to my case.
The
International
Code of
Conduct of
Civil
Servants, to
which the
Secretary
General is
bound, states:
“Conflicts of
interest may
occur when an
international
civil
servant’s
personal
interests
interfere with
the
performance of
his/her
official
duties or call
into question
the qualities
of integrity,
independence
and
impartiality
required the
status of an
international
civil
servant.”
The failure to
report and
address a
conflict of
interest
constitutes
serious
misconduct
under the UN’s
Staff
Regulations
and Rules. UN
Staff
Regulation 1.2
m states:
“A conflict of
interest
occurs when,
by act or
omission, a
staff member’s
personal
interests
interfere with
the
performance of
his or her
official
duties and
responsibilities
or with the
integrity,
independence
and
impartiality
required by
the staff
member’s
status as an
international
civil servant.
When an actual
or possible
conflict of
interest does
arise, the
conflict shall
be disclosed
by staff
members to
their head of
office,
mitigated by
the
Organization
and resolved
in favour of
the interests
of the
Organization.”
In the case of
a conflict of
interest by
the Secretary
General, the
matter shall
be referred to
the President
of the General
Assembly. The
UN’s Office of
Internal
Oversight
Services’
(OIOS)
classifies
‘conflict of
interest’ as
‘Category I’
‘Serious’, the
highest level
of misconduct,
“according to
the relative
seriousness of
the
contravention
and risk to
the
Organization”10.
Further,
Article 19 of
the Universal
Declaration of
Human Rights
states:
Everyone has
the right to
freedom of
opinion and
expression;
this right
includes
freedom to
hold opinions
without
interference
and to seek,
receive and
impart
information
and ideas
through any
media and
regardless of
frontiers.
Article 10 of
the Universal
Declaration of
Human Rights
states that:
“Everyone is
entitled in
full equality
to a fair and
public hearing
by an
independent
and impartial
tribunal in
the
determination
of his rights
and
obligations...”
I have not
been provided
with access to
any such
independent
and impartial
tribunal.
Instead the
Secretariat
has wrongfully
and
unilaterally
taken on the
role of judge
and
executioner,
with a clear
lack of
independence
and
impartiality.
The
Secretariat
claimed in
2016 that it
cancelled my
‘resident’
journalist
status because
of my
allegedly not
upholding the
UN Media
Guidelines;
however,
notwithstanding
my categorial
rejection of
this claim,
its decision
is in any
event tainted
by conflict of
interest and
hence
fundamentally
flawed. While
Mr. Antonio
Guterres was
not in office
as Secretary
General at the
time the
Secretariat
took its
tainted and
fundamentally
flawed
decision in
2016 to
rescind my
resident
status, he has
perpetuated
the wrongful
decision,
injustice and
violation of
my human
rights: this
must now be
urgently
corrected. The
Secretariat
has unlawfully
appointed
itself as the
decision-maker
in terms of
determining
the residency,
access and
accreditation
rights of
journalists,
without having
the delegated
legal
authority or
mandate to do
so. There are
no legal
instruments
conferring
such
decision-making
authority on
the
Secretariat,
and as such
the decisions
taken to
rescind my
access rights
and ban me
from the
premises are
unlawful. With
NGOs, the
authority to
grant
accreditation
and access is
retained by
Member States,
through the
Committee on
NGOs. The
Secretariat
clearly has a
conflict of
interest in
deciding on
the rights of
journalists,
especially in
cases where
the journalist
has been
critical of
the
Secretariat’s
performance.
I request that
you, as the
President of
the General
Assembly, the
decision-making
organ of the
United
Nations:
1) Immediately
rescind the
Secretariat’s
ultra vires,
fundamentally
flawed,
retaliatory,
corrupt,
unethical
decisions to
withdraw my
status as a
‘resident’ UN
journalist and
ban from the
UN premises –
these
unilateral
decisions are
tainted by
clear conflict
of interest;
2) Immediately
reinstate me
as a
‘resident’ UN
accredited
journalist and
restore all of
my access
rights
(consistent
with the UN
Media
Guidelines),
including to a
suitable
office in the
UN premises,
specifically
S-303A which
is barely
used, by one
who has asked
no questions
in a decade
and barely
came in, and
to remove the
taint;
3) Ensure that
UN senior
officials,
including in
the Department
of Safety and
Security,
Department of
Public
Information,
and the
Spokesperson
and Deputy
Spokesperson
desist from
taking any
further
retaliatory
actions
against
me.
4) Failing
that I request
that you
immediately
lift the
immunity of
the Secretary
General, as he
holds
responsibility
as the ‘Chief
Administrative
Officer’ of
the
Secretariat
for my
physical
ejection from
the UN
premises on 4
July 2018,
detailed in
the attached
complaint to
the NYC
police, so
that the NYC
police may
investigate my
complaint.
Further, I
urge you to
put measures
in place to
ensure that
the
Secretariat
acts with
integrity,
independence
and
impartiality,
and that it
upholds the
Universal
Declaration of
Human Rights,
including on
freedom of
expression, to
ensure that
the injustice
I have
suffered is
not repeated.
I believe that
my
reinstatement
as a
‘resident’
journalist
with full
restoration of
my access
rights and
office would
be in the best
interests of
the
organization
and consistent
with the
wishes of
Member States,
many of whom
continue to
express strong
concerns about
my situation
and more
generally
about the
retaliation
against
journalists
and
whistleblowers.
I note your
statement on
World Press
Freedom Day (3
May 2018)11:
“When
journalists
are silenced,
people suffer.
And when
journalists
are free to do
their work,
people are
given tools
that can help
guide them to
decent lives
on a
sustainable
planet.
And,
journalists
are also
crucial to
what we do
here – at the
United
Nations. They
bring our work
outside these
halls. They
communicate
with people we
sometimes
cannot. They
hold us to
account, and
call us to
action.
So, on this
day and all
days, let us
reassure
journalists
that they can
count on us.
Let us
recommit: to
protect them,
to include
them, and to
respect the
role that they
play both
inside and
outside these
walls.”
The
credibility of
the UN will be
further eroded
if it
continues to
retaliate
against and
crackdown on a
journalist for
exposing
wrongdoing and
unethical
behavior.
The foregoing
is sent
without
prejudice and
under
reservation of
all rights.
Sincerely,
Matthew
Russell Lee
***
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
2006-2018 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
for
|
,
