As UN
Belatedly
Fires Wonder
Woman, UN Spox
Cuts Off ICP
Q, Canned
Statement
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, December
14 --
Under Ban
Ki-moon and
his Under
Secretary
General for
Communications
Cristina
Gallach, the
UN has
drifting into
a parallel
universe where
the two talk
about media
freedom while
evicting and
restricting
the
investigative
press, where
Ban has given
many high
positions held
by women to
men and now
attempts to
reverse course
by naming as a
UN gender
ambassador...
a cartoon
character,
Wonder Woman.
Now
this
ridiculous
decision by
the UN
Department of
Public
Information
under Under
Secretary
General
Cristina
Gallach has
been
belatedly
reversed. But
those in the
UN reporting
on it, who
witnessed
Gallach as the
face of the
decision, are
soft-selling
the reversal
and not
mentioning
Gallach.
As one
UN wag asked,
if one cartoon
character can
be fired, why
can't this
other one?
On
December 14,
after Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman Stephane
Dujarric
canceled the
daily noon
briefing for
two days in a
row, Inner
City Press
began to ask
him about it
at the day's
briefing. But
Dujarric ended
the briefing,
to bring in
Deputy
Secretary
General Jan
Eliasson and
the New York
Philharmonic's
Alan Gilbert.
Inner City
Press asked
them about
Woman Woman
(as well as
Haiti cholera
brought by the
UN); Dujarric
cut in to say
he would
answer on
Woman Woman
after the
briefing.
But when it
was over,
Dujarric
walked out of
the briefing
room and said
he would email
a statement.
We'll have
more
questions, but
here it is:
“The
designation of
the Wonder
Woman
superhero
character as
an Honorary
Ambassador for
the
Empowerment of
Women and
Girls is
linked to a
specific
campaign
titled THINK
OF ALL THE
WONDERS WE CAN
DO which
launched on 21
October, 2016,
the 75th
anniversary of
the first
appearance of
Wonder Woman
in a comic
book. United
Nations
campaigns
featuring
fictional
characters
typically last
no more than a
few months,
and the
designations
sometimes only
last a day as
was the case
in the Angry
Birds
partnership on
climate change
earlier this
year. The
Wonder Woman
campaign/designation
will conclude
on 16
December.
We are
extremely
pleased with
the awareness
that this
partnership
has brought to
Sustainable
Development
Goal #5.”
Gallach was in
the room but
has not
answered. The
Egyptian state
media to which
she is giving
or purporting
to give Inner
City Press'
long time
office, Akhbar
al Yom, was
not present. campaigns
featuring
fictional
characters
typically last
no more than a
few months,
and the
designations
sometimes only
last a day as
was the case
in the Angry
Birds
partnership on
climate change
earlier this
year. The
Wonder Woman
campaign/designation
will conclude
on 16
December.
We are
extremely
pleased with
the awareness
that this
partnership
has brought to
Sustainable
Development
Goal #5.”
Gallach was in
the room but
has not
answered. The
Egyptian state
media to which
she is giving
or purporting
to give Inner
City Press'
long time
office, Akhbar
al Yom, was
not presenWe'll
have more on
this.
The
spokesman for
Ban Ki-moon, who
did not show
up for the
"induction"
ceremony,
later when
Pressed said
that the UN
Woman agency
signed off on
and supported
the naming of
Wonder Woman.
Inner City
Press asked
the head of UN
Women, who
indicated that
was NOT the
case. So on
October 26,
Inner City
Press asked
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric, UN transcript
here:
Inner
City Press: on
Wonder Woman,
you'd said… at
this very
podium, you
had said that
Cristina
Gallach, I
guess it was,
had consulted
that… although
staff… some
staff
protested it,
she'd
consulted with
UN Women and
UNICEF (United
Nations
Children’s
Fund).
And I want to
say that
yesterday I
asked the head
of UN Women,
and I don't
think it's the
case. So
I wanted to
know, can you
get me who she
spoke with in
UN Women?
Spokesman:
You know, I…
UN Women has
been involved
in this
project from
the
start.
Full
stop.
Okay?
Vine
here.
We'll have
more on this.
As to Gallach,
since she
still for now
has the job,
Inner City
Press brought
to her
attention
another way it
is being
hampered in
its reporting
and she said
she would
check into it:
nothing. Inner
City Press'
long time
office is
being assigned
to an Egyptian
state media,
Akhbar al Yom,
which never
came in and
never asks any
questions.
Censorship
must end.
Inner
City Press was
there. Video
here.
Tellingly,
state media of
Turkey TRT,
and France 24,
both with UN
offices, did
not mention
the protest in
their news
loops. Al
Jazeera used
footage of the
UN's response
to Inner City
Press, but did
not name
Gallach - or
Ban. Reuters
ran a Ban for
South Korean
president
campaign
advertisement,
in essence,
confining its
protest
coverage to
its “non
profit”
foundation.
UN
"News Center,"
run by
Gallach,
covered the
announcement,
even quoting
Gallach, without
mentioning the
protest.
The
well-behaved
protesters
marched in a
line from the
UN General
Assembly
lobby, through
a turnstile
open only to
those with a
UN pass and up
the escalators
to the third
floor. Before
being allowed
into the
Economic and
Social Council
chember, they
were told by
UN Security
they could not
take signs in.
Once inside,
UN Security
tried to tell
them to sit
down. Instead
after a time
they stood
with their
backs turned
toward the
stage below,
some with a
fist in the
air. Under
Secretary
General
Gallach, as in
the lead-up,
entirely
ignored them,
instead saying
that UN staff
supported it.
Inner City
Press ran to
the UN noon
briefing --
delayed by the
event -- and
asked for a
description of
when and if
Gallach had
spoken with
staff about
this
selection. UN transcript:
Inner
City Press: I
wanted to ask
you about the
protest that
took place in
the ECOSOC
Chamber.
UN staff
members were
told they
couldn't bring
signs
in. They
stood up in
the
back.
I'm told the
photographers
in a front
booth were
told that they
couldn't be
there, their
presence was
questioned.
And a staff
member has
just e-mailed
me and said on
the UN
webcast, it
showed up as a
closed meeting
even though DC
Comics is
broadcasting
it. So I
wanted to…
Spokesman:
First of all,
the meeting
was completely
open. I
mean, I
watched it on
the
webcast.
I watched the
full
proceeding,
so…
Question:
Okay. So
my question
is:
Given that Ms.
Gallach didn't
address the
people
standing in
the back with
their backs
turned toward
her and their
fists in the
air, what…
when did this
process of
choosing a
cartoon
character as
the
empowerment
ambassador
begin?
Who proposed
it? Who
made the
decision?
What
consultations
were… were
held with
staff about
the event?
Spokesman:
I think, Ms.
Gallach, I
think,
addressed, let
me… Let me
finish.
Well, you were
welcome to
come and…
Question:
Well, no, you
said it was
deep
background.
Go ahead.
Spokesman:
Okay. I
think Ms.
Gallach
addressed some
of the
concerns that
people had in
her
speech.
I would, you
know, I would
encourage
people to
listen to
what, to what
she
said. I
don't think
she could, I
could say, it
with any more
passion.
I think it is
clear, first
of all, the
consultations
on this were
had with UN
Women and
UNICEF, who
were involved
in this
discussion.
And I think it
bears, it
bears
reminding that
the UN has a
lot of very
strong
real-life
women who are
Goodwill
Ambassadors,
from Angelina
Jolie to
Marta, the
Brazilian
soccer player,
to a number
of... to Jane
Goodall.
We could go
on.
There's a
list.
All of them
bring
something to
the
table.
All of them
appeal to
different
audiences.
I think no one
is saying that
this fictional
character is
to appeal to
everyone and
is to
represent
every woman or
every
man. It
is to appeal
to a certain
audience, and
I think the
messages that
she brings are
very important
to that, to
that
audience.
It's, the
character of
Wonder Woman
is just, just
one woman, and
I think we are
very happy and
welcome the
fact that
others may
have a
different
opinion.
Staff were
allowed to
protest.
I think, as we
say in any
country, we
support
peaceful
protests.
Staff were
able to
protest,
whether in the
lobby or
whether in the
event.
But I would
encourage
people to go
back on the
webcast,
because it is
on the
webcast, and
actually
listen to what
was said,
listen to the
messages that
were detailed
because I
think they
were very,
they were very
powerful, and
they were very
strong.
Question:
She said thank
you very much
for UN staff
for supporting
this, when
there were
dozens of
people
standing with
their backs
turned.
So I wanted to
ask you:
Was she… or I
guess if she's
not here, you…
were you
surprised by
this protest,
and how did…
if you met
with UN Women
and UNICEF,
what mechanism
was in place
to get a sense
from people
actually
working and
doing the
day-to-day
work of the
UN…
Spokesman:
Well, I think
in my mind, I
think UN Women
is the UN
entity that
deals with
gender
issues.
So I, we have
also since
this, since we
were made
aware of other
views in the
building as
expressed by
staff, Ms.
Gallach has
met with
gender focal
points and
other people
to explain,
and I think
people are
allowed to
have different
views.
The
evening
before, even
high officials
were critical
of Gallach and
Ban; one said
“both must
go.”
They
say, online: “
join us at
11:45am today
at the ECOSOC
Chamber to
show our
silent but
non-disruptive
protest...
Sadly, the
Secretary-General
has decided to
go ahead
without proper
discussion on
either side of
the debate.
The owners of
the character
today met with
the UN and
press in a
closed
meeting. The
content of the
meeting has
been
embargoed.”
On
October 20,
Ban Ki-moon's
spokesman's
office
announced over
the public
address
system, not in
writing, a
“background
briefing” on
Wonder Woman.
Inner City
Press
routinely
covered
background
briefings
which can be
live-tweeted
using the such
monikers as
“Senior
Administration
Official 1”
and the like.
But for this
one, it was
announced --
apparently we
can't say by
whom -- that
it was on
“deep
background and
embargoed.”
Inner City
Press asked
why; it
remains
UNclear (and
in any event
on deep
background and
under
embargo). So
Inner City
Press left.
On October 17,
while refusing
to answer on
UN
Peacekeeping
under Herve
Ladsous using
tear gas on
civilians in
Haiti as in
South Sudan
and on
censorship
near another
of the UN's
regional
offices, Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric got
defensive in
spinning
Gallach's
Department of
Public
Information's
fantasy Wonder
Woman deal.
Dujarric said,
from the UN
transcript:
I
know there's
been some
negative
coverage of
the
announcement.
The project
will go
forward.
We try in our
own ways to
reach out to
the population
at large about
issues that
are of
importance to
the world,
covered by the
SDGs
[Sustainable
Development
Goals],
whether it's
on human
rights,
children's
rights, or
gender
issues.
And I think,
in order to
reach young
people, in
order to reach
audiences
outside of
this building,
we need to be
creative and
have creative
partnerships.
I would ask
for people to
wait for the
announcement
on 21 October
to judge the
project..
Q:
Was this the
best thinking
of the UN DPI
and the
Secretary-General
and the
Secretariat
that a cartoon
or a comic
personality
would be a
Goodwill
Ambassador
while there is
disappointment
among the
women groups
for gender
parity and
dodging all
the female
candidates for
the position
of the
Secretary-General…
Spokesman
Dujarric:
I think the
two are… the
announcement…
the press
release that
went out and,
obviously, the
vote on the
next
Secretary-General
are clearly
not
related.
The aim of
using cartoon
characters,
whether it's
Angry Birds,
whether it's
Wonder Woman,
is not to
reach people
like you and I
or at least
not to reach
people like
me. I
don't know
what you like
to read.
[Laughter] You
know, the
campaign's
main theme,
which it'll be
think of all
the wonders we
can do will
highlight what
we can do
collectively
to achieve…
what we can
collectively
achieve if
women and
girls are
empowered,
along with
examples of
women and
girls who have
made and are
making a
difference by
overcoming
barriers and
beating the
odds to reach
their
goals.
You know,
people are
free,
obviously, to
have whatever
opinion on a
campaign that
hasn't been
fully
launched.
I would urge
all of you to
sit back and
look at the
campaign and
judge it on
what you'll
see on 21
October..
yes, it's a
comic
book.
It's science
fiction.
There are
other way…
there are ways
to get
messages out
on climate, on
human rights,
on everything
that's covered
in the SDGs
through
nontraditional
media
coverage.
It… you know,
there are a
lot of good
messages in
Star
Trek. I
love Star
Trek, a lot of
good messages
and positive
message, but
I'm fully
aware it is
science
fiction.
Let's go to
something a
little more
serious.
How
does the UN
under Ban Ki-moon
and his "Public
Information"
chief Cristina
Gallach
pretextually
evict the
critical Press
from its long
time office
and confine it
to minders,
hindering
further
reporting on
their
corruption?
This UN
"Aide
Memoire,"
which Ban's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric
called
"leaked" and
refused to
answer
questions on,
shows how - as
does this
Gallach's
letter of May
25, 2016. On
June 16, Inner
City Press was
belatedly
provided with
a copy of the
questions UN
Special
Rapporteurs
Kaye and Forst
sent to
Gallach on
February 25,
put it online
here:
On June
27 at the UN
Human Rights
Council, Ban's
and Gallach's
pretextual
eviction of
Inner City
Press as it
reported and
reports on
their links to
the Nb Lap
Seng / John
Ashe UN
bribery
scandal and
other UN
misdeeeds, was
raised by
International
Lawyers in a formal
session, video
here,
statement
here:
"The
Vienna
Declaration
and Program of
Action was
adopted under
the auspices
of the United
Nations. It
led to the
creation of
the Office of
the High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights the
focal point of
human rights
within the
United Nations
and
established
the United
Nations at the
center of the
global human
rights
movement. At
that time, as
today, many
believed that
the United
Nations itself
should set the
example for
the rest of
the world for
upholding
respect for
human rights.
Too often,
however, we
have seen this
is not the
case. It is
with regret
and concern
that we must
request the
Council’s
attention for
a matter of
interference
with the right
to freedom of
expression of
a journalist
at the United
Nations in New
York by the
office of the
United
Nations’ most
senior
official.
After
covering the
United Nations
for more than
a decade, on
19 February
2016, Inner
City Press was
ordered to
leave the
United
Nations’
premises on
two hours’
notice in a
letter signed
by the UN
Under-Secretary-
General for
Public
Information.
The official
reason given
was that the
journalist
covered a
private
meeting. This
meeting was
held in the UN
Press Briefing
Room, which
all press are
ordinarily
allowed to
attend, and
the journalist
immediately
left the room
when asked to
do so by UN
Security.
Moreover, the
apparent
harassment of
Inner City
Press, which
had been
covering the
United Nations
for more than
a decade,
appears to
have commenced
after it began
covering a
story
concerning
corruption
linked to the
Office of the
United Nations
Secretary-General.
While the
story has been
widely
covered, it
was Inner City
Press that
repeatedly
asked pointed
questions
about it at UN
Press
Conferences
given by the
spokesperson
of the
Secretary-General.
The timing of
the expelling
of an Inner
City Press
journalist
from the UN,
then the
closing of its
office, at the
time this
story alleging
corruption
within the
Office of the
Secretary-General
was being
covered, at
best seems
suspicious and
at worst a
blatant
interference
with the human
rights to
freedom of
expression by
a body who
should know
better and set
a better
example.
Moreover,
we have just
recently
learned that
the UN’s
Office of the
Secretary-General,
apparent to
justify its
action,
provided one
of the
Council’s
mandate-holders
false
information
when he
enquired into
the matter.
The veracity
of the
information
provided by
the UNSG’s
Office
alleging “an
altercation”
took place at
the alleged
‘closed
meeting’ is
contradicted
by video
showing this
to be untrue.
We call
on the High
Commission for
Human Rights,
who is himself
an
Under-Secretary-
General, to
condemn the
actions of the
Office of the
Secretary-General
and to urge
him to
exercise his
good offices
to resolve
this dispute
in a manner
that is
consistent
with the right
to freedom of
expression,
including a
free press,
and to report
to the Council
the results of
his efforts."
Inner
City Press'
long time
shared office,
pretextually
taken and
purported to
be give to an
Egyptian state
media which
never comes
and never asks
questions must
be returned,
immediately,
among other
remedies to
protect
freedom of the
press.
From
the UN's June
16 transcript:
Inner
City Press:
I've become
aware today of
a letter that
was sent by
Special
Rapporteur
David Kaye and
Special
Rapporteur
Michel Forst
to Ms.
[Cristina]
Gallach of DPI
[Department of
Public
Information]
on 25
February,
asking about
ouster and
eviction of
Inner City
Press.
And her
response was
two months
later, and she
referred to an
altercation in
this room that
required… so
I'm asking
you. You
were
here.
Other than you
turning off my
phone, was it
an
altercation?
Is that an
accurate
statement?
Spokesman
Dujarric:
Matthew,
Matthew… I
have not… I
will not
comment on
your personal
issues.
Inner City
Press:
You're saying
it's a
personal
issue.
This was a
letter sent to
the Special
Rapporteur.
Spokesman:
And the
letter, if you
want to ask
for the
letter, you
could ask the
Special
Rapporteur.
Inner City
Press:
No, I've seen
the
letter.
And
below is
Gallach's
letter, here,
which itself
calls for
action.
It was
provided to
Inner City
Press only on
June 16, by a
UN / Kaye
staffer, under
this cover
letter:
And
herebelow is
Gallach's
letter, which
itself calls
for action. It
was provided
to Inner City
Press only on
June 16, by a
UN / Kaye
staffer, under
this cover
letter:
"Two
UN Special
Rapporteurs
communicated
to ask for
clarification
on your case
last February.
The letter was
made public
just recently
in the report
of all
communications
sent by
rapporteurs in
the period
accessible
here
(communications
of this type
remain
confidential
initially and
are made pubic
every HRC
session):
UNDPI
responded to
your letter
only in May
(and this is
why the
response is
not made
public online
- it will come
only in
September). In
any case, the
SR encloses
here the
response
received.
Again, sorry
for the slow
communication.
With thanks
and regards,
Marcelo Daher, Human
Rights Officer, Special
Procedures
Division, Office
of the United
Nations High
Commissioner
for Human
Rights
And
here is from
Gallach's
highly
problematic
letter:
“The
privilege of
the use of
such office
space was
withdrawn
after an
incident in
which Mr Lee
trespassed in
a closed
meeting of the
United Nations
Correspondence
[sic]
Association.
The
disturbance
and
altercation
that his
behavior
caused
required the
presence of
United Nations
Safety and
Security
Officers to
defuse. Thus,
as was made
clear in my
letter of 19
February 2016
to Mr. Lee his
behavior did
not comport
with the
express
requirements
of the United
Nations Media
Accreditation
Guidelines,
which are
applicable to
all
journalists to
the United
Nations. These
circumstances,
consequently,
occasioned the
withdrawal of
Mr. Lee's
resident
correspondent
accreditation.”
This paragraph
is full of
lies. There
was no
altercation -
the only
physical
contact was
Ban Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric
stabbing at
Inner City
Press' cell
phone to try
to turn off
the Periscope
live stream.
It was Inner
City Press
which asked
for a UN
Security guard
to come, to
rule if it was
a closed
meeting or
not. The UN
has separately
told the U.S.
Senate Foreign
Relations
Committee that
it has no
written record
that it was a
closed meeting
-- so how did
Inner City
Press
“trespass,” as
Gallach
alleges and
misstates to
the Special
Rapporteurs?
Gallach has
allowed
Giampaolo
Pioli, the
president of
the UN
Correspondents
Association,
the name of
which she
misspells, to
come to the UN
Security
Council
stakeout and
loudly call
Inner City
Press “an
assh*ole.” So
what about
those civility
rules? This is
a pure pretext
and
retaliation;
Gallach should
have been
recused, after
being
questioned by
Inner City
Press in
October 2015
about her role
in Ng Lap
Seng's South
South Awards
with Francis
Lorenzo.
Gallach
doesn't even
purport to
answer the
Special
Rapporteurs'
questions
about the lack
of due
process. The
Handbook she
cited to the
Senate Foreign
Relations
Committee is
not available
online. So she
makes up an
“altercation,”
which is a
lie. We'll
have more on
this.
We have
the honour to
address you in
our capacities
as Special
Rapporteur on
the promotion
and protection
of the right
to freedom of
opinion and
expression and
Special
Rapporteur on
the situation
of human
rights
defenders
pursuant to
Human Rights
Council
resolutions
25/2 and
25/18.
In this
connection, we
would like to
bring to your
attention
information we
have received
concerning the
withdrawal of
the
accreditation
of Mr. Matthew
Lee, an
investigative
journalist
with Inner
City Press, a
web journal
reporting on
issues related
to United
Nations.
According
to the
information
received:
On 19
February 2016,
Mr. Matthew
Lee received a
letter, in
which the
Under
Secretary
General for
Communications
and Public
Information
informs him of
the Department
of Public
Information’s
(DPI) decision
to withdraw
his Resident
Correspondent
accreditation
at the United
Nations office
in New York in
favour of
non-Resident
Correspondent,
a status that
would be
renewable
after an
initial
four-month
period. The
letter further
informed him
of the need to
vacate his
present office
inside the UN
and arrange
for a new
identification
corresponding
to his new
status.
Later
in the day, UN
Security
personnel
removed Mr.
Lee’s
identification
and escorted
him out of the
UN
headquarters.
His laptop was
allegedly
tossed out of
the gate onto
the sidewalk.
Mr. Lee’s
working files
remained
within the UN
premises.
The
steps taken
against Mr.
Lee’s
accreditation
were,
according to
the letter he
received,
based upon an
incident that
occurred on
Friday, 29
January 2016,
which DPI
allegedly
determined was
in violation
of the United
Nations Media
Guidelines. On
that date, Mr.
Lee’s
allegedly
tried to cover
a meeting in
the UN Press
Briefing Room,
from where he
left after
being informed
by the UN
Security of
its restricted
nature.
Allegedly, no
information
was requested
from Mr. Lee
or any other
written
communication
was sent to
him on this
incident,
until the
receipt of the
letter on 19
February.
Without
prejudging the
accuracy of
this
information
and the
pertinent
accreditation
procedures
within the
United Nations
and while
respecting the
critical role
of DPI in
providing
access to
information
within the UN
system, we are
nonetheless
interested in
understanding
how the rules
governing
media access
operate to
advance the
principles of
access to
information
and press
freedom and
how the rules
were applied
in this
particular
case.
We would also
be grateful
for your
observations
on the
following
matters:
1. Please
provide any
additional
information
and any
comments you
may have on
the
above-mentioned
allegations.
2.
Could you
please clarify
the reasons
for the
withdrawal of
the
accreditation
of Mr. Lee’s
resident
correspondent
accreditation
at the United
Nations?
Please
also provide
relevant rules
from the Media
Guidelines
that were
applied to
this
situation.
3.
Could you
please
describe the
inquiry
procedures
pursued
following the
incident,
which led to
the withdrawal
of Mr. Lee’s
accreditation?
4.
Could you
please
indicate
whether Mr.
Lee, or other
journalists
similarly
situated, are
permitted
leave to
appeal against
a decision to
withdraw
accreditation
(or other such
actions)?
We wish
to inform you
that this
communication
together with
your response
will be made
available in a
report to be
presented to
the Human
Rights Council
for its
consideration.
Please
accept, Ms.
Gallach, the
assurances of
our highest
consideration.
David
Kaye
Special
Rapporteur on
the promotion
and protection
of the right
to freedom of
opinion and
expression
Michel
Forst
Special
Rapporteur on
the situation
of human
rights
defenders
First,
Ban's
spokesman
Dujarric made
a non-public
deal on
January 26
with Giampaolo
Pioli of the
UN
Correspondents
Association to
privatize the
UN Press
Briefing Room
on January 29
- but not tell
anyone it was
private.
Next,
when Inner
City Press
which quit
UNCA in 2012
finding it too
close to Ban
and corrupt,
for example
Pioli's
unilateral
granting of a
"UN" screening
for Sri
Lanka's war
crimes denial
film at the
request of its
Ambassador
Palitha Kohona
who had been
Pioli's
tenant, click
here,
appeared to
cover the
event, get
Dujarric to
order Inner
City Press to
leave, without
showing any
paperwork.
After
Inner City
Press, as it
said it would,
left as soon
as a single UN
Security guard
said to,
conspire with
Under
Secretary
General
Gallach, whom
Inner City
Press had
previously
questioned
about her role
in the Ban's
Ng Lap Seng UN
bribery
scandal, to
issue a letter
on February 19
telling Inner
City Press to
leave its
office and the
building on
two hours
notice -
without once
speaking to
Inner City
Press.
Throw Inner
City Press in
the streets, audio
here,
evict its ten
years of
investigative
files from its
office, video
here, then
just before
Inner City
Press could
re-apply for
its stolen
office, gave
it to an
Egyptian state
media, Akhbar
Elyom, whose
correspondents
Sanaa Youssef,
a former UNCA
president, has
not anywhere
near met the
UN's stated
three day a
week
requirement
for such an
office, and
who never asks
questions.
To top
it off, leave
South South
News, founded
with Ng Lap
Seng's money
and by Francis
Lorenzo, who
has pleaded
guilty to UN
bribery
charges, with
its office and
Resident
Correspondent
accreditation.
See
Courthouse
News, here.
Thus the
investigative
Press is
punished,
publicly, and
a chilling
message sent
to anyone else
who might dare
to cover Ban
Ki-moon's role
in the
corruption
scandal, while
he seeks to
run for the
South Korean
presidency in
2017. This
Ban, or his
spokesman,
coyly denies
of course.
Of the
retaliatory
eviction, Ban
said “that is
not my
decision.” But
it is. He was
set extensive
information,
including the
total
inconsistency
of what
Gallach told
Nobel Prize
winner Jose
Ramos Horta
when he
inquired for
Inner City
Press (she
said she
ouster order
was based on
an “internal
report”) and
what the UN
told the U.S.
Senate Foreign
Relations
Committee
(that the UN
has “no
records” that
the meeting
was closed.
Ban Ki-moon is
responsible;
he has created
an atmosphere
of
retaliation,
has retained
and empowered
Under
Secretaries
General like
Herve Ladsous,
who linked
rapes to
R&R and
openly refuses
Press
questions, and
Gallach. We'll
have more on
this: it must
be reversed.
The
issue is to be
raised at the
UN Human
Rights Council
this coming
week.
And
this
contraction
has already
been raised,
between the
UN's "Aide
Memoire" to
the U.S.
Senate Foreign
Relations
Committee
saying there
is no written
records of the
underlying
January 29
meeting being
closed, and
Under
Secretary
General
Cristina
Gallach
telling Nobel
Peace Prize
winner Jose
Ramos-Horta
that her
ouster
decisions was
based on
considering an
"internal
report."
So
is it no
written
record, or
internal
report?
Was
inaccurate
information
provided to
the U.S.
Senate Foreign
Relations
Committee? Or
to Nobel Peace
Prize winner /
UN official
Jose Ramos
Horta? On June
13, Inner City
Press asked
the question
to Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric, who
cut the
question off,
saying "we're
good" then,
"You may not
be good, I'm
really good" -
perhaps a new
motto for the
Ban Ki-moon
administration.
Video
here.UN
Transcript:
Inner
City Press: I
wanted to ask
you this, a
request for a
document.
The… the
Under-Secretary-General
of DPI wrote
to [José]
Ramos-Horta in
February and
said that she
had considered
an internal
report, and
I've seen an
aide-memoire,
which says
that there's
no written
record of the
same topic
that she
raised.
So, I wanted
to know, can
you square
these
two? How
is it
possible…?
Spokesman:
No. I
have no…
again, these
are your
personal
issues.
Inner City
Press:
She wrote to
the Senate and
she wrote to a
Nobel Prize
winner…
Spokesman:
Matthew,
Matthew.
We're good.
Inner City
Press:
No, no, we're
not good…
Spokesman:
You may not be
good.
I'm really
good.
Inner City
Press:
I'm sure
you're good.
Spokesman:
But, I'm not
answering
those
questions.
Those are
questions to
be dealt with…
your personal
case should be
raised
directly with
DPI.
Inner
City Press:
I'm asking you
how a Nobel
Prize winner
was told one
thing, and the
Senate was
told something
else.
Spokesman:
Thank
you.
We're going to
get our
colleague on
the phone.
Gallach
told
Ramos-Horta
Inner City
Press had
"open"
violated a
rule and she
considered an
"internal
report" --
when the Aide
Memoire,
here,
shows the UN
says it has no
written record
the meeting
was closed and
the Handbook
allegedly
violated is
not public:
"Dear
mr
Ramos-Horta,
Many thanks
for your
message which
allows me to
inform you
about the
decision I
have taken on
the type of
accreditation
that Mr Lee
has and will have
in the future.
Recently mr
Lee openly
broke the
rules that
guide all the
resident correspondents.
After careful
consideration
of the
internal
report
elevated to
me, I decided
to continue
providing him
with a press
pass that
allows him to
work without
any impediment
at the UN, as
the vast
majority of
journalists.
What the UN
cannot do is
to let him use
an space
exclusively
for him,
after the
mentioned
events.
As you can
see, mr Lee
will have a
valid press
card as soon
as he presents
himself to the
accreditation
premises.
Rest assured
that I am the
first person
to be
interested in
ensuring
totally free
and safe
reporting from
the UN HQ and
about the UN.
This is what
mr. Lee will
be able to do.
I remain at
your disposal
for any
further
clarification
that you might
need and want.
My warmest
regard,
Cristina"
But the
UN says it has
no written
record the
meeting was
closed; the
Handbook
allegedly
violated is
not public.
And "without
impediment"
has turned out
to mean "with
minders," and
even not
permitted to
cover a
Western Sahara
briefing Inner
City Press was
invited to,
only on June
10.
The
UN is trying
to give Inner
City Press'
long time
shared office
to an Egyptian
state media,
Akhbar Elyom,
whose
correspondent
hasn't come
close to
meeting the
three day a
week
requirement
and never asks
any questions.
It rewards
others like
this, while
retaliating
against and
trying to
censor the
critical
Press.
This
will be raised
this week at
the UN Human
Rights
Council; the
UN in
continued
attempt to
censorship has
not responded
to Inner City
Press' formal
requests
submitted more
than two week
ago. Watch
this
site.
On June
8 Ban's
spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric
outright
refused to
provide a copy
of, or any
answer
questions
about, the
"Handbook" the
alleged
violation of
which the UN
told the
Senate Foreign
Relations
Committee was
the basis for
evicting Inner
City Press. Aide
Memoire to
SFRC here.
Before
Inner City Press
was even able
to ask the
question,
Dujarric cut
it off, and
later
disallowed an
unrelated
Press question
about other UN
corruption.
Video
here,
transcript here and
below, with
quotes from
Ban Ki-moon
later on June
8.
Ban
later on June
8 said: "I
will continue
to defend the
rights of
journalists
and to do
everything
possible,
publicly and
privately, to
ensure that
journalists
have the
freedom to
work...I will
also continue
to stand up
for the rights
of journalists
and their
defenders to
be represented
here at the
United
Nations.
"I am
extremely
disturbed by
recent remarks
by the
President-elect
of the
Philippines,
Rodrigo
Duterte. [Inner
City Press had
asked, here.]
I
unequivocally
condemn his
apparent
endorsement of
extrajudicial
killing, which
is illegal and
a breach of
fundamental
rights and
freedoms.
Such comments
are of
particular
concern in
light of
on-going
impunity for
serious cases
of violence
against
journalists in
the
Philippines. I
have expressed
my
disappointment
that the
Non-Governmental
Organization
Committee
voted to deny
the Committee
to Protect
Journalists
consultative
status with
the Economic
and Social
Council...I
have presents
for each of
you [segue to
presentation].
"
e
This is what
it has come
to: censorship
while Ban
exchanges
gifts and
drinks
champagne with
his friends
and sells out
the UN human
rights lists
to the highest
bidder (for
now, Saudi
Arabia.) From
the
June 8
transcript:
Inner
City
Press:
I've asked you
about this
aide-mémoire
that was sent
by the UN to
the Senate
Foreign
Relations
Committee.
So I want to
ask you about
it
again.
What I want to
ask you about…
Spokesman:
My answer's
not going to
change.
Inner City
Press:
No, here's
what I want to
ask you about
specifically.
You call it a
leaked
document.
It's hard to
understand if
it's sent from
the UN to a
committee.
It's
leaked.
But this is my
question.
And it's sort
of a FOIA
(Freedom of
Information
Act) like
question.
The document
says that what
was violated
is something
called the UN
Handbook for
Safety and
Security
Personnel.
Spokesman:
Matthew,
Matthew, your
personal
issues will
not be
discussed
here.
Inner City
Press:
You're calling
it personal…
Spokesman:
Thank
you.
Masood?
Inner City
Press:
But if you can
punish
journalists,
where is the
document?
I'm requesting
the handbook.
Spokesman:
Talk to DPI
(Department of
Public
Information).
Inner City
Press: I
did, and they
don't have it.
Spokesman:
Talk to them
again.
Even
as groups like
the Government
Accountability
Project tell
Ban to reverse
the eviction
and give Inner
City Press
back its long
time office
and Resident
Correspondent
pass, Ban's UN
tellingly
moved to award
Inner City
Press' office
to Egypt state
media
Al-Akhbar /
Akhbar
Elyoum.
While
Ban told Inner
City Press
"That is not
my decision,"
and his Under
Secretary
General
Cristina
Gallach has
yet to explain
anything to
Inner City
Press, on June
5 we published
the UN's
"Aide Memoire"
which claims
that the
"rule" against
being in an
interpreters
booth is in a
UN Security
handbook that
is not
available to
the public -
it is not on
the Internet,
not on the
UN's in-house
iSeek and on
June 6, UN
MALU did not
have it -- and
states there
is no paper
work for the
underlying
meeting being
closed.
The UN
Aide Memoire
says the
entire event
-- which
included UN
paid sound
engineering -
was organized
orally between
UNCA President
Giampaolo
Piolo and Ban
Ki-moon's
Spokesman
Stephane
Dujarric. So
on June 5,
Inner City
Press asked
Dujarric about
it, video
here, only
to have
Dujarric call
it a "leak" he
could not
verify and to
insist Inner
City Press
ask the
Department of
Public
Information.
Inner
City Press:
This I wanted
to ask you and
I'll try to
keep it
brief.
I've seen now
a aide-mémoire
that the UN, I
guess, Office
of Legal
Affairs sent
to the Senate
Foreign
Relations
Committee, and
they said
this. It had…
since it
involves you,
I wanted to
ask you about
it. It
says that, as
to a meeting
held in this
room on 29
January, the
UN has no
documents,
correspondence
or other
written
materials in
print or
electronic
that it was a
closed
meeting.
And it says
you arranged
it entirely
orally that it
would be
closed.
So, I wanted
to ask you
this. As
a financial
matter, how is
it possible to
arrange for UN
audio
engineering
without there
being any
written record
and how…?
Spokesman:
Matthew, I
don't know
what document
you're quoting
for or what…
the veracity
of this leaked
document.
Inner City
Press:
They sent it
to the Senate
Foreign
Relations
Committee.
Spokesman:
We've gone
through your
personal case
here over and
over again,
and I would
ask you to
take it up
with DPI
[Department of
Public
Information].
Inner City
Press: This
quotes you.
Spokesman:
Lot of things
quote me.
But
here is what
the UN's Aide
Memoire
provided to
the U.S.
Senate Foreign
Relations
Committee
says, in
Paragraph 9:
“The
Spokesperson
of the
Secretary-General
of the United
Nations has
informed the
Office of
Legal Affairs
that on or
about Tuesday,
26 January
2016, he was
approached by
the President
of UNCA who
orally
requested
permission
from the
Spokesperson
for the use of
the UN Press
Briefing Room
in order to
hold a
members-only
meeting of
UNCA. Among
his other
duties, the
Spokesperson
grants
permission for
the use of the
UN Press
Briefing Room
for meetings
other than
press
briefings. The
UNCA President
told the
Spokesperson
that the UNCA
Meeting Room
on the fourth
floor of the
United Nations
Secretariat
Building was
being prepared
for a
reception to
be held after
the closed
members-only
meeting and
so, the UNCA
Meeting Room
was
unavailable
for such
closed
members-only
meeting on the
29th of
January. The
Spokesperson
gave
permission
orally to the
President of
UNCA during
that encounter
on or about
the 26th of
January.”
As Inner City
Press
reported,
there were
UNTV audio
staff in the
engineers'
booth for the
UNCA meeting.
Is it credible
that this use
of UN
resources was
organized
without a
single written
record? Inner
City Press was
told that the
engineer was
to make sure
to disable the
microphones in
the briefing
room, other
than those at
the podium
occupied by
this UNCA
President
Giampaolo
Pioli and two
others.
The
UN's response
is false in
many ways -
but note that
the UNCA
Meeting Room
is NOT on the
fourth floor.
So what else
is false?
Watch this
site.
Aide
Memoire now
here
It states that
Gallach has NO
paperwork that
the meeting
she ousted and
evicted Inner
City Press for
attending was
closed. This
was requested:
“Documentation
received by
Cristina
Gallach,
Under-Secretary-General
for
Communications
and Public
Information,
including
emails,
letters, and
any other
written
communications
indicating
that the
United Nations
Correspondents
Association
meeting in the
Press Briefing
Room, that Mr.
Lee was barred
from
attending, was
a closed
meeting.”
Here is the
UN's response:
“No
official of
the United
Nations has
received or is
in possession
of any
documentation,
correspondence
or any written
materials,
whether in
print or
electronic
form,
indicating
that the
closed meeting
of the United
Nations
Correspondents
Association
(UNCA), which
took place on
Friday, 29
January 2016,
was taking
place or was a
closed
meeting.”
So if the UN
admits there
is NO WRITTEN
RECORD that
this event in
the UN Press
Briefing Room
was a closed
meeting, how
was it a
closed
meeting? How
could Inner
City Press be
ousted and
evicted for
seeking to
cover, in the
UN Press
Briefing Room,
an event
attended by
other
correspondents
and NOWHERE
listed as
closed?
And now Inner
City Press'
long time
office given
to an Egyptian
state media
which rarely
comes to the
UN and never
asks
questions?
This is a
scam; this is
UN censorship..
The UN
"aide memoire"
also claims
that Stephane
Dujarric
orally told UN
Correspondents
Association
honcho
Giampaolo
Pioli, who
previously
demanded that
Inner City
Press remove
from the
Internet a
factual story
about his
financial
relationship
with Sri
Lanka's
Ambassador
Palith Kohona,
that the
meeting was
closed. This
is a joke;
this is a
pretext.
This is
censorship. Tweeted
photograph
here.
On May
19, a sign for
"Al Akhbar
Yom" went up
on Inner City
Press' office
- Inner City
Press has
STILL never
seen the
correspondent
being given
the stolen
office.
So on
May 20 Inner
City Press
went to get an
on the record
explanation
from Ban
Ki-moon's
spokesman
Stephane
Duajrric,
before Ban
sets out on a
campaign trip
to South Korea
(denied by his
senior adviser
Kim Won-soo).
But not only
did Dujarric
refuse to
answer the
question -
Gallach's DPI
intentionally
omitted from
the transcript
Inner City
Press'
entirely
audible
question about
Ban Ki-moon's
commitment to
freedom of the
press. The
question then,
answer itself.
Since
the spin to
the NYT is
that Inner
City Press'
questions on
corruption and
censorship
somehow block
questions
other
correspondents
want to ask,
Inner City
Press twice
told Dujarric
it would hold
one question
to the end.
But Dujarric,
showing that
the spin is a
scam,
insisted: go
ahead. Video
here.From the UN
Transcript:
Inner
City Press: I
have another
question, but
I don't want
to…
Spokesman:
Well, just ask
it.
Inner City
Press:
No, no, I'll
wait.
Spokesman:
I'd like you
to ask it now.
Question:
Okay.
Stay where you
are and I’ll
do it as fast
as I
can. I
wanted to ask
you, you
sometimes say
you don’t have
a long memory,
but you’ve
been a
Spokesman for
a while.
When is the
last time, to
your
knowledge,
that the
publication
Akhbar al Youm
has been in
this room and
asked a
question?
And the reason
I asked… you
said I could
ask.
I’ll do it
quickly.
The office
that was
formerly
"Inner City
Press", has
been given to
this
organization.
I've never
seen them
here.
I'm aware
there's a rule
of being three
days a week
here.
So, I’m
wondering… and
you used to
implement that
rule.
And the reason
I’m asking
you, and
you’re going
to say, ask
MALU [Media
Accreditation
and Liaison
Unit], I want
an on the
record
quote.
This is a
media
organization
that CPJ
[Committee to
Protect
Journalists]
says targets
other medias
for arrest for
not agreeing
with the
Government.
Spokesman:
I will tell
you that I do
not have in my
head the
attendance
records of
journalists
here.
Some of you
are here every
day.
But, for the
rest of you, I
don't keep
tabs in my
head.
And again,
that’s a
question for
you to ask
MALU.
Inner
City
Pres:
But, I'm
asking for an
on-the-record
comment.
What does it
say about
freedom of the
press…
Spokesman:
I’ve given
you… Nabil?
Inner
City Press'
last line,
"What does it
say about
freedom of the
press," was
intentionally
mistranscribed
and censored:
it said, What
does it say
about Ban
Ki-moon's
commitment to
freedom of the
press."
This is
today's UN:
ham-handed
censorship.
The UN
says Resident
Correspondents
must be at the
UN three days
a week, but
Inner City
Press has
never seen
this person,
former UN
Correspondents
Association
president
Sanaa Youssef,
much less
asking a
question in
the UN noon
briefing.
The
point, of
course, which
Dujarric did
everything he
could to cut
off, including
walking out of
the brieifng
room and not
returning, is
what does it
say about Ban
Ki-moon's
supposed
commitment to
free press to
evict the
investigative
Press here
every day for
a state media
never here,
never with
questions,
which targets
other
journalists
for arrest?
The
question is
answering
itself, but we
will continue.
Dujarric's
deputy Farhan
Haq after the
briefing was
heard telling
DPI staff
under Gallach
that he had
predicted
Inner City
Press would
"go after"
Akhbar Elyom.
This is
today's UN:
here's Haq on
Jan 29, video
here,
and before.
Haq claimed
incorrectly
that "non
resident
correspondent"
passes get one
through to the
second floor:
either years
out of date or
intentional
inaccurate.
This too is
today's UN.
Scribes
speaking off
the record
according to
the New York
Times of May
14 "accused
[ICP] of
printing
gossip,
rumors." That
UNCA's
president
rented an
apartment to
Palitha Kohona
then granted
his request to
screenin the
UN his
government's
war crimes
denial film is
no rumor or
gossip.
But
Akhbar Elyom,
to which
Gallach's and
Ban's MALU and
UNCA have
given Inner
City Press'
office, not
only gets
journalists in
Egypt attested
- it targets,
with a "Muslim
Brotherhood"
smear, a
journalist who
works right in
the UN. Arabic
article here.
This is
the journalism
that Ban
Ki-moon and
his Cristina
Gallach want
and reward. By
taking away
Inner City
Press' office,
it is now
required to
have a minder
and is told to
not ask
diplomats
questions.
This is
censorship.
Akhbar
Elyom has been
used to finger
for
imprisonment
non-state
journalists in
Egypt. For
example, in
July 2015
Aboubakr
Khallaf, the
founder and
head of the
independent
Electronic
Media
Syndicate
(EMS), “was
arrested after
a news article
was published
by the
government-owned
daily Akhbar
Elyoum.”
Inner City
Press has
formally
requested the
return of its
long time
shared office
and Resident
Correspondent
status, as
have 1,450
people in this
petition,
here.