Saturday, January 21, 2017

UN Again Bans Staff From Women's March, ICP Questions, Gallach at Samantha Power's Election Night Party

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 21 – UN system officials told their staff not to attend the "Global Women's March" on Saturday, January 21. 

After Inner City Press asked, the directive was reversed - then reinstated at 6 pm the night before the march. Below is UN email first published by Inner City Press. Meanwhile senior UN officials like Under Secretary General Cristina Gallach violate the stated UN rules. Below is an email from the UN World Food Program.

  After Inner City Press published and Periscoped about it and asked four WFP spokespeople about it, by email and phone, UN deputy spokesman Farhan Haq at the January 20 noon briefing answered Inner City Press that WFP's Ertharin Cousin, from Chicago, reversed her agency's Ethics Officer and said staff can march. YouTube video here.
But then just before 6 pm on January 20, the eve of the March, another UN "Broadcast" email went out, further muddying the waters before the Women's March and showing again that Cristina Gallach (and some other USGs) have violated the UN's rules. That email is below; here are the questions Inner City Press has submitted to the UN's top three spokespeople for clarification:
"These are two Press questions asked before the Women's March (in DC, and in front of the UN, as well as elsewhere) starts, in light of the unsigned, unclear Ethics Office broadcast email below sent out yesterday evening after, and contradicting, the answer given to my question at the noon briefing about the UN's position on the March.

Given that, and many questions Inner City Press has received from confused (and angry) UN staff - and the unprecedented request for the extradition of the just-former Secretary General's brother - these questions should be responded to immediately:

Who is responsible for the Ethics Office broadcast email below? Is Elia Armstrong still the head of / involved in the Ethics Office?

Why is it unsigned? Who is accountable for it? Was it cleared with the Office of Legal Affairs? Are there two different instructions for Secretariat staff and Ertharin Cousin's WFP staff?

Separately, please comment on the US government formal request to South Korea to extradite Ban Ki Sang, and again, was the UN ever contacted by prosecutors about Ban Ki-moon or his family members?

   There are still the majority of the questions below [only two and a half of 22 have been answered.] On deadline." Watch this site.
 The UN's 6 pm, January 20 email:
"To: OAH, DPKO, UN Funds Programs & Tribunals, HQ NY Secretariat
From: BROADCAST-UNHQ/NY/UNO
Date: 01/20/2017 05:57PM
Subject: Message from the Ethics Office: Public Pronouncements and Political Activities

Recently, there have been a number of questions regarding public pronouncements including participating in political activities and social media discussions.  The questions include participation in tomorrow’s Women’s March on Washington. Are such activities in line with our status as international civil servants? 

In this respect, we would like to remind staff of their obligations as international civil servants.

The private activities of UN staff members must remain within the limits of the Organization’s core values as reflected in Staff Regulation 1.2 and Staff Rule 1.2.  While the Organization respects the inviolability of your personal views and convictions, including your political and religious convictions, as well as your right to freedom of expression, we must ensure that the expression of those views and convictions do not adversely reflect on our status, or on the integrity, independence and impartiality that are required by that status.

As international civil servants, we are called upon to uphold and respect the principles set out in the Charter, including faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women.  Nonetheless, as international civil servants, our Standards of Conduct (para 9 and 33) make clear that we do not have the freedom of private persons to take sides or to express our beliefs publicly on sensitive political matters, either individually or as members of a group nor can we criticize or try to discredit a Government.

Public pronouncements, which could have an impact on our independence and impartiality as international civil servants, come in many forms including but not limited to:
-marches, protests, demonstrations;
-online petitions:
-social media activity:
-group walks/activities.

Accordingly, participating in certain activities, especially those with political overtones, may be viewed as incompatible with our status as international civil servants."
 Haq would not answer if UN Under Secretaries General on Samantha Power's election night "party" complied with the impartiality even Cousins claimed. We'll have more on this.
Here's WFP's email:
From: Catherine COLMAY [at] wfp.org on behalf of Bonnie GREEN
Date: Thursday 19 January 2017 at 16:36
Subject: Guidance on Public Political Activities

Message addressed in bcc to All HQ Staff
On behalf of Bonnie Green, Director, Ethics Office
Dear HQ Colleagues,
I am writing about the Women’s March in Rome, scheduled for this Saturday, the 21st January 2017, and our obligations as employees of an international civil organization.
Although the Women’s March in Rome has many goals including respect for civil rights, the March in Rome is part of the “Global Women’s March” conceived as a reaction to the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States and is intended “…to send a bold message to the new US administration on their first day in office.” [As per Women’s March in Rome Facebook page and other collateral.] 
Whereas our personal political convictions remain inviolate, while we work for WFP, we do not have the freedom of private persons to take sides or express personal political views publicly, either individually or as members of a group. As such, it is not appropriate for us to participate in the Women’s March in Rome or any of the marches as part of the “Global Women’s March”.
The Standards of Conduct for the international Civil Service may be accessed in English,French, Spanish and Arabic, and feel free to pass by the Ethics Office (1Y08) for hard copies in any of the languages.  
As always, the Ethics Office is available to you for additional guidance in person or at WFP.ETHICS [at] wfp.org.
Regards,
Bonnie E. Green
Director and Chief Ethics Officer
Ethics Office
World Food Programme
   While there is much to be said about this, what is clear to Inner City Press is that this eleventh hour face- (or funding-) saving attempt exposes again the double standards at work in the UN.
  While UN system line staff are told not to participate in this Women's March on a Saturday, UN Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach proudly retweeted of outgoing US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power's UN-heavy "election night party."
  Gallach also, among other things, highlighted the critique of Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson reportedly considering not having a traveling press corps. But Ban Ki-moon, who as UN Secretary General, hired Gallach to communicate for him, did not have a traveling press corp, and rarely held press conferences.
  This same Cristina Gallach had her Department of Public Information use public funds to pay a trainer to tell non-governmental groups accredited to the UN that Detroit, Michigan is a third rate city" in "flyover country," here.

  This while Gallach used public money to travel to her native Barcelona to receive a personal award, and refused to answer or explain about it.

  As to the UN's comment on any of this, now Ban's holdover spokesman at the UN, Stephane Dujarric, has answered only two and a half of 22 questions Inner City Press submitted, and that on a delay. Whatever is provided now will be published.

 In full disclosure Cristina Gallach is also the UN official who, as Inner City Press inquiredinto her and now-gone UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's connections to the corruption scandals surrounding the UN - the John Ashe / Ng Lap Seng bribery case (Gallach did no due diligence, UN audit at Para 37-40 and 20b), and now the indictments against Ban Ki-moon's brother and nephew, who worked for the UN's landlord Colliers International - evicted Inner City Press without any due process, and restricts it still, with no right to appeal. 

We'll have more on this.

Friday, January 20, 2017

UN Banned Staff From Women's March, WFP Reversed, Now Waffles, Gallach on Samantha Power's Election Night Party



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 20 – UN system officials told their staff not to attend the "Global Women's March" on Saturday, January 21. Below is an email from the UN World Food Program.

  After Inner City Press published and Periscoped about it and asked four WFP spokespeople about it, by email and phone, UN deputy spokesman Farhan Haq at the January 20 noon briefing answered Inner City Press that WFP's Ertharin Cousin, from Chicago, reversed her agency's Ethics Officer and said staff can march. 

But then just before 6 pm another email went out, further muddying the waters before the Women's March and showing again that Cristina Gallach (and some other USGs) have violated the UN's rules.

 The new UN email:

"To: OAH, DPKO, UN Funds Programs and Tribunals, HQ NY Secretariat
From: BROADCAST-UNHQ/NY/UNO
Date: 01/20/2017 05:57PM
Subject: Message from the Ethics Office: Public Pronouncements and Political Activities

Recently, there have been a number of questions regarding public pronouncements including participating in political activities and social media discussions.  The questions include participation in tomorrow’s Women’s March on Washington. Are such activities in line with our status as international civil servants?

In this respect, we would like to remind staff of their obligations as international civil servants.

The private activities of UN staff members must remain within the limits of the Organization’s core values as reflected in Staff Regulation 1.2 and Staff Rule 1.2.  While the Organization respects the inviolability of your personal views and convictions, including your political and religious convictions, as well as your right to freedom of expression, we must ensure that the expression of those views and convictions do not adversely reflect on our status, or on the integrity, independence and impartiality that are required by that status.

As international civil servants, we are called upon to uphold and respect the principles set out in the Charter, including faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women.  Nonetheless, as international civil servants, our Standards of Conduct (para 9 and 33) make clear that we do not have the freedom of private persons to take sides or to express our beliefs publicly on sensitive political matters, either individually or as members of a group nor can we criticize or try to discredit a Government.

Public pronouncements, which could have an impact on our independence and impartiality as international civil servants, come in many forms including but not limited to:
-marches, protests, demonstrations;
-online petitions:
-social media activity:
-group walks/activities.

Accordingly, participating in certain activities, especially those with political overtones, may be viewed as incompatible with our status as international civil servants."
 Haq would not answer if UN Under Secretaries General on Samantha Power's election night "party" complied with the impartiality even Cousins claimed. We'll have more on this.
Here's WFP's email:
From: Catherine COLMAY [at] wfp.org on behalf of Bonnie GREEN
Date: Thursday 19 January 2017 at 16:36
Subject: Guidance on Public Political Activities

Message addressed in bcc to All HQ Staff
On behalf of Bonnie Green, Director, Ethics Office
Dear HQ Colleagues,
I am writing about the Women’s March in Rome, scheduled for this Saturday, the 21st January 2017, and our obligations as employees of an international civil organization.
Although the Women’s March in Rome has many goals including respect for civil rights, the March in Rome is part of the “Global Women’s March” conceived as a reaction to the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States and is intended “…to send a bold message to the new US administration on their first day in office.” [As per Women’s March in Rome Facebook page and other collateral.] 
Whereas our personal political convictions remain inviolate, while we work for WFP, we do not have the freedom of private persons to take sides or express personal political views publicly, either individually or as members of a group. As such, it is not appropriate for us to participate in the Women’s March in Rome or any of the marches as part of the “Global Women’s March”.
The Standards of Conduct for the international Civil Service may be accessed in English,French, Spanish and Arabic, and feel free to pass by the Ethics Office (1Y08) for hard copies in any of the languages.  
As always, the Ethics Office is available to you for additional guidance in person or at WFP.ETHICS [at] wfp.org.
Regards,
Bonnie E. Green
Director and Chief Ethics Officer
Ethics Office
World Food Programme
   While there is much to be said about this, what is clear to Inner City Press is that this eleventh hour face- (or funding-) saving attempt exposes again the double standards at work in the UN.
  While UN system line staff are told not to participate in this Women's March on a Saturday, UN Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach proudly retweeted of outgoing US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power's UN-heavy "election night party."
  Gallach also, among other things, highlighted the critique of Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson reportedly considering not having a traveling press corps. But Ban Ki-moon, who as UN Secretary General, hired Gallach to communicate for him, did not have a traveling press corp, and rarely held press conferences.
  This same Cristina Gallach had her Department of Public Information use public funds to pay a trainer to tell non-governmental groups accredited to the UN that Detroit, Michigan is a third rate city" in "flyover country," here.
  This while Gallach used public money to travel to her native Barcelona to receive a personal award, and refused to answer or explain about it.
  As to the UN's comment on any of this, now Ban's holdover spokesman at the UN, Stephane Dujarric, has answered only two and a half of 22 questions Inner City Press submitted, and that on a delay. Whatever is provided now will be published.
 In full disclosure Cristina Gallach is also the UN official who, as Inner City Press inquiredinto her and now-gone UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's connections to the corruption scandals surrounding the UN - the John Ashe / Ng Lap Seng bribery case (Gallach did no due diligence, UN audit at Para 37-40 and 20b), and now the indictments against Ban Ki-moon's brother and nephew, who worked for the UN's landlord Colliers International - evicted Inner City Press without any due process, and restricts it still, with no right to appeal. 

We'll have more on this.

US Asks For Ban Ki-moon Brother To Be Extradited, Cover Up By Censorship Crumbling



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 20 – Ban Ki-moon left the UN on January 1 and tellingly his first move was to take legal action against the press. Before he left, he named his own son in law Siddarth Chatterjee to the top UN top in Kenya. 

  Now the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York has asked South Korea to arrest and extradite Ban Ki-moon's brother Ban Ki Sang. The cover up by censorship is crumbling.
   Just as Ban left his brother Ban Ki Sang and his nephew Dennis Bahn, of whom Inner City Press has asked Ban's UN spokespeople since at latest May 2015, were indicted for bribery. Bahn was described using his family connections - Ban Ki-moon - to try to sell real estate in Vietnam.

  Inner City Press' questions to Ban's longtime spokesman Stephane Dujarric were referred to a Ban supporter in Seoul, Lee Do-woon, at a number which was never answered. On January 17, after Inner City Press appeared on TBS radio in South Korea about Ban's corruption and censorship, Dujarric provided a number for a second spokesman: Yoon Won-joong.

  After speaking with him, Inner City Press on January 18 asked UN deputy spokesman Farhan Haq, video here, UN transcript here: 

Inner City Press: I guess it was Stéphane Dujarric that sent the phone number of a second Ban Ki-moon Spokesman.  I did speak to him, but in fact, the coverage there is giving rise to a question I have to ask you as the UN.  There’s a story in today’s Korea Times, the title of which is “Prosecutors say Ban Ki-moon was ‘indeed on bribery list.’”  And it describes a list that was provided by Mr Park of Taekwang Industry, saying he had given money to Ban Ki-moon during the time frame that he was Secretary-General.  So the question becomes… there are… obviously, there are questions to Ban Ki-moon there.  The question becomes, when did South Korean prosecutors -- because this article says that what would have held them up was… was immunity, that, as Secretary-General, they would be unclear whether they could even question him or go… or look into this matter.  Was the UN contacted by the prosecutors about this Park list?  And, if so, what did they do?

Deputy Spokesman:  No, I don’t have any comment on that.

Inner City Press:  It’s a UN question.  I mean, do you acknowledge… because I talked to the guy for about five minutes yesterday, but he said those are UN questions.

Deputy Spokesman:  I don’t actually have any comment on this.
  Well, the UN will have to. We'll have more on this.
 Late on January 17, from New York, Inner City Press reached Yoon Won-joong and asked him when Ban Ki-moon knew that his nephew was using his name to try to sell real estate, and what he did.
  Yoon Won-joong said "I don't know when, exactly, he knew about it." It is an important question.
   Yoon Won-joong told Inner City Press, "he has no further comment at this point. Maybe later on, he may make several announcements in relation to that issue... I can ask him how he tried to proceed this issue... Then I'll be aware how he stands."
  We'll be waiting. For now, given push-back, here is the complete audio, on SoundCloud, here.
  "He will be joining a political party, probably, after Chinese New Year. The UN doesn't want to mention about him anymore. He came back to Korea as a general citizen and he wants to stay on that status for a while."
  Maybe forever. Not ready for prime time.  Yoon Won-joong ended the call asking to be sent a text. He received these two:
"since Inner City Press in May 2015 asked the UN spokespeople about Dennis Bahn using Ban Ki-moon's name to try to sell the building in Vietnam (and working at UN landlord Colliers), when did Mr. Ban Ki-moon become aware of each of those? And what did he do?"
"there is also the question of Ban Ki Ho: when did Ban Ki-moon become aware of Ban Ki Ho's business in Myanmar, what does he know about the UN delegation the Myanmar government lists Ban Ki Ho being a part of, or any other UN system meeting with Myanmar officials with Ban Ki Ho attended?"
  We are awaiting answers.
  Ban's scripted re-entry to South Korea has featured the kissing of babies, the mis-introduction of money into the express train subway, and claims he advocated for the downtrodden - despite selling out 10,000 dead Haitians, and more Yemenis than that.
  But questions of corruption and nepotism have continued to mount.
  On January 16-17 Inner City Press, which Ban had evicted from the UN as it reported on his corruption, was interviewed on Seoul's TBS Radio show "News Factory of Kim Ou-Joon," their transcript here (just machine-translate), Periscope here.  
 The topics TBS Radio asked about included Ban Ki-sang, Dennis Bahn, Ban Ki Ho and Ban Ki-moon's eviction and restriction of Inner City Press, which remains ongoing under Ban's holdover head of DPI Cristina Gallach. Some excerpts: 
Q: It has been Mr. Ban 's brother since a few years ago. Mr. And Collier International, whose son Bahn Joo Hyun joined the company and sold the Vietnamese building. Does this company have anything to do with the United Nations?

Matthew: I have been suspicious of Dennis Bahn for a long time before this indictment. Because Denis Bahn was working for Collier International, Colliers International could be said to be a lease for a UN building. It is a company that receives rent from the United Nations. I used to ask the United Nations if Dennis Bahn could work at Colliers International. Before Mr. Ban Joo tried to sell a building in Vietnam, I think there is a problem in his own work that Ban Ki-moon has worked for a company that his relatives can call a lease of the United Nations. I was not convinced at all. I argued that there should be provisions for the benefit of UN affiliates for the relatives of senior UN personnel. I already asked Stephane Dujarric, a spokesman for Ban Ki -moon in May 2015, about Ban 's nephew. Information about this case has been released since 2015. In fact, not only that, but Mr. Banjo knows that he has been fined for manipulating documents in addition to the charges. But the United Nations has not responded to this and other reporters in charge of the United Nations have not covered the case. To say that Ban Ki-moon does not know about this incident is not making sense at all.
  Except to outgoing US Ambassador Samantha Power...
   On January 13, when Inner City Press asked outgoing US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power about the indictment of Ban Ki-moon's brother and nephew, who used Ban's and UN's name to try to sell a building in Vietnam.  
  Tellingly, Samantha Power said no comment, "that does not involve the UN." Video here.That is false - the indictment describes Ban Ki-moon's nephew Dennis Bahn using the UN General Assembly to angle to meet the Amir of Qatar, which Ban Ki-moon in fact did, on September 24, 2013.
  But it's a two-way streets. One of Ban's very first announcements in South Korea is that he supports the US' deployment of THAAD missiles. 
One hand washes the other. But one hand is leaving, and the other may well lose. Watch this site.
 Even on his main claim, of being a solution to the North Korea problems, Ban Ki-moon has been a failure. Click here for 2011 coverage from Inner City Press, which Ban Ki-moon is desperation in 2016 would have his head of "Communications" Cristina Gallach evict from the UN, and restrict still. How different is Ban Ki-moon from is portrayal of Kim Jong-un?
  Interest in South Korea is growing about Ban Ki-moon's brother Ban Ki-ho's mining in Myanmar, including Ki-ho not only being on a "UN delegation" as ICP first reported, but having a January 21, 2015 meeting with Myanmar officials - and UN officials. We'll have more on this: including on an upcoming South Korean radio program.
  Ban's moonlighting mentor Han Seung-soo was allowed by Ban to be a UN official while his Doosan Infracore sold desalinization equipment in the UAE, where Han gave speeches - and sold equipment to a gold miner(hmm) in Myanmar.
And after leaving the UN, Ban openly enlisted a person still in the UN job he'd given him, Jeffrey Sachs, to campaign for South Korea's presidency with him. This is now reported by CNBC as well, here.
Inner City Press on January 9 asked Ban's holdover spokesman Stephane Dujarric about Sachs' comments and Dujarric said, as he so often does without coming back with anything, that he will look into it. Video here.
This while media reports link “full time” UN official Kim Won-soo to Ban's wannabe campaign.
  Ban Ki-moon has used and abused the UN, not only the General Assembly resolution he is ignoring by running, but by using public taxpayers' money to further his own ambition. 
In his final year Ban evicted Inner City Press from the UN, where still under his successor it remains restricted to minders to cover events on the UN's second floor.
  Back in 2009, when Inner City Press reported on Ban's nepotism in connection with a promotion of Ban's son in law, an invitation to lunch came from South Korea's Mission to the UN. 
Then deputy ambassador Kim Bong-hyun used the lunch to berate Inner City Press on how to cover (and not cover) Ban. (The article, and his full reply, are here). Now he's listed on Ban's campaign team, along with still UN official Kim Won-soo and former South Korean Ambassadors to the UN Kim Sook and Oh Joon.
  Oh Joon has just given an interview claiming that press criticism of Ban Ki-moon is of his "inclusive leadership." How about his nepotism: son in law promoted to top UN job in Kenya, nephew with UN landlord, brother Ki-ho mining in Myanmar after being on a UN delegation?
  Tellingly, the UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services never looked into or acted on these; Ban through still at the UN Cristina Gallach had Inner City Press evicted and still restricted, still even on January 9, 2017 harassed for daring to cover the UN...

Sachs, Ban and his fan club, UN Censorship Alliance, UN Photo
   In early January, Inner City Press asked Kim Won-soo directly, when will you be leaving the UN? He refused to answer, backing away smiling. But it is no joke, to take public funds while reportedly on the campaign team of a political candidate. We'll have more on this.

UN Orders Staff Away From Women's March, While UN Gallach at Sam Power's Election Party




By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 20 – UN system officials have told their staff not to attend the "Global Women's March" on Saturday, January 21. Here is an email from the UN World Food Program:

From: Catherine COLMAY [at] wfp.org on behalf of Bonnie GREEN
Date: Thursday 19 January 2017 at 16:36
Subject: Guidance on Public Political Activities
 Message addressed in bcc to All HQ Staff
On behalf of Bonnie Green, Director, Ethics Office

Dear HQ Colleagues,

I am writing about the Women’s March in Rome, scheduled for this Saturday, the 21st January 2017, and our obligations as employees of an international civil organization.

Although the Women’s March in Rome has many goals including respect for civil rights, the March in Rome is part of the “Global Women’s March” conceived as a reaction to the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States and is intended “…to send a bold message to the new US administration on their first day in office.” [As per Women’s March in Rome Facebook page and other collateral.] 

Whereas our personal political convictions remain inviolate, while we work for WFP, we do not have the freedom of private persons to take sides or express personal political views publicly, either individually or as members of a group. As such, it is not appropriate for us to participate in the Women’s March in Rome or any of the marches as part of the “Global Women’s March”.

The Standards of Conduct for the international Civil Service may be accessed in English,French, Spanish and Arabic, and feel free to pass by the Ethics Office (1Y08) for hard copies in any of the languages.  


Regards,
Bonnie E. Green
Director and Chief Ethics Officer
Ethics Office
World Food Programme

   While there is much to be said about this, what is clear to Inner City Press is that this eleventh hour face- (or funding-) saving attempt exposes again the double standards at work in the UN.
  While UN system line staff are told not to participate in this Women's March on a Saturday, UN Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach proudly retweeted of outgoing US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power's UN-heavy "election night party."

  Gallach also, among other things, highlighted the critique of Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson reportedly considering not having a traveling press corps. But Ban Ki-moon, who as UN Secretary General, hired Gallach to communicate for him, did not have a traveling press corp, and rarely held press conferences.

  This same Cristina Gallach had her Department of Public Information use public funds to pay a trainer to tell non-governmental groups accredited to the UN that Detroit, Michigan is a third rate city" in "flyover country," here.

  This while Gallach used public money to travel to her native Barcelona to receive a personal award, and refused to answer or explain about it.

  As to the UN's comment on any of this, now Ban's holdover spokesman at the UN, Stephane Dujarric, has answered only two and a half of 22 questions Inner City Press submitted, and that on a delay. Whatever is provided now will be published.

 In full disclosure Cristina Gallach is also the UN official who, as Inner City Press inquiredinto her and now-gone UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's connections to the corruption scandals surrounding the UN - the John Ashe / Ng Lap Seng bribery case (Gallach did no due diligence, UN audit at Para 37-40 and 20b), and now the indictments against Ban Ki-moon's brother and nephew, who worked for the UN's landlord Colliers International - evicted Inner City Press without any due process, and restricts it still, with no right to appeal. 

We'll have more on this.

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

On Haiti UN Has Nothing On Protests After Arrest, No Cholera Killing Update



By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 6 -- After the UN under Ban Ki-moon killed more than 10,000 people in Haiti by bringing cholera, Ban spent years dodging court papers and the issue.

Now under Antonio Guterres, on January 6 Inner City Press asked holdover Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: in Haiti,  a Senator-elect, Guy Philippe, who was arrested, and I'm hearing that UN facilities were pelted with stones, and in a WFP (World Food Programme) facility some 66 people couldn't get out.  So I'm wondering, one, can you confirm that?  And, two, why isn't MINUSTAH (United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti)… why aren't you providing some announcement on that?

Spokesman:  I have not received any reports from MINUSTAH on this.  Doesn't mean they're not reporting it to local media, but I haven't gotten anything here.

The UN now says it has a new approach to Ban Ki-moon longstanding impunity for bringing cholera to Haiti. But on October 14, the UN of Ban and his Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach had Inner City Press thrown out of of the “available” meeting on the new approach.

On December 1, in his last month as UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon is presenting this new approach and two hours before his deputy Jan Eliasson and adviser David Nabarro held an embargoed press conference about a just-released 16-page document.

At 3 pm Ban Ki-moon delivered a non-apology: “We simply did not do enough with regard to the cholera outbreak.”

No, the UN did too much: it brought cholera and killed 10,000 people and counting.

On December 2, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video hereUN transcript here:

Inner City Press:  I wanted to ask you about yesterday's… what Philip Alston called a half apology by the Secretary-General.  I want to ask you, I guess, given that he was the Special Rapporteur on the case, he told The Miami Herald the following:  He said, "He apologizes that the UN has not done more to eradicate cholera but not for causing the disease in the first place.  As a result, there remains a good chance that little to no money will be raised and that the grand new approach will remain a breakthrough on paper but one that brings little to the victims and people of Haiti."

I guess I just wanted to ask you, given that this is the phrase that he used, we didn't do enough, when, in fact, some people are saying the UN maybe did too much in terms of bringing it, does this… Philip Alston is a longtime human rights expert.  What's the response to this critique?

Spokesman:  I think yesterday's statement by the Secretary-General and, I think, what we heard from the deputy and Dr. Nabarro, I think, was a very important step forward.  We clearly understand that some people may not be pleased or may not have heard what they wanted, what they wanted to hear.

What we hope they heard is the Secretary-General's words, the apology, and also his sincere determination, determination of the UN system, to move forward on this two-track approach.  And I think, if you heard from… if you listened to the reaction from the Member States that spoke yesterday after the Secretary-General delivered his remarks, I think they were very positive.  They were very encouraging.

Dr. Nabarro is being tasked to follow up with potential donors to ensure that we have the funding, the funding that we need.

Inner City Press:  In most other instances where there's a mass tort by… by… of a kind of negligence or not, the people that were actually injured… you can think of 9/11; you can think of any number of things, where people that were injured were compensated rather than building a playground.

Spokesman:  Listen, I think… listen, I hope both the Deputy Secretary-General and the Secretary-General were very clear.  On track two, there are two sub-tracks, right?  The community approach and individual approach.  It is clear from what we've said, from what the deputy said, that initially we will move forward on the community, the community approach.

The individual approach requires a lot more steps, including the identification of deceased, of people who have been, who've been impacted, further consideration, further consultations with the victims' groups and the communities.  So no one is saying no to the individual approach.  What we're saying is, in the immediate, we're focusing on the community approach, and from there, we will move forward.

Inner City Press:  And if Dr. Nabarro becomes the head of WHO, as he's running to become, is there… I mean, you were saying, like, he's the point man to raise money.  Is that…

Spokesman:  I can only speak to the situation up until December 31st at midnight.  Again, as to my answer to [inaudible], there is a determination from the Secretary-General to ensure the transition goes smoothly. The incoming team has been fully briefed on all these files, including and especially the Haiti file.  

Since Ban's approach says some unidentified people the UN consulted prefer payments to “the community” rather than to the individual families whose bread-winners were killed by the UN's cholera, Inner City Press asked if the UN would praise private companies like Coca-Cola if after mass torts like in Bhopal they bypassed victims for “communities.” Video here.

   Inner City Press asked for the UN's response to Philip Alston saying that Ban followed the advice and pressure of the United States in dodging responsibility for cholera in Haiti. Eliasson said the legal position was adopted before he took up his position -- five years ago.

  Nabarro answered Inner City Press' question about how much money has been raised since the October 14 meeting Inner City Press was ejected from -- Eliasson looked surprised, that Beyond the Vine video is here, story here, and here an apparently UNheard audio of eviction -- with a figure of $18 million for Track 1A.

   The 16-page report says that the UN won't consult communities until it has money - but at the press conference it was claimed that these consultations supported not even trying to make individuals whole. Inner City Press raised its hand to ask this question, and another, but it was not allowed (while the media that moderator Stephane Dujarric seemed most concerned with servicing was allowed a second question). This is UN spin.

This to: Ban is not apologizing for the UN bringing cholera, but for its response. And no apology for the many years of lying.

On November 21, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript here: 

Inner City Press: I wanted to, to ask about Haiti and cholera, also on the immunity front.  I'm sure you've seen the story in IRIN where they're saying that very little money has yet been contributed after that meeting on October 13th, but what jumped out at me was a quote by David Nabarro saying, it's hard to have certainty that there will be money without clarity on what the actual material assistance might look like.

So since he's part of the UN's team on cholera and he seems to be saying, like, the time is running out, what is the time schedule for the Secretary-General to… to lay forth his plan?  Does he expect to vote on it before he leaves?

Spokesman:  We expect the Secretary-General to present his plan next week to the General Assembly, and we'd also try to organise a briefing for you, either on or off the record, prior to that, the day before, so you get a little bit of understanding and deeper understanding of what the Secretary-General is going to propose.

Inner City Press:  Request that it be on… on the record.

Spokesman:  I hear…

On October 25, Philip Alston gave a press conference in the UN Press Briefing Room, at which a total of two journalists asked questions: the New York Times and Inner City Press. (Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric did not even list Alston's press conference in his office “Week Ahead.”Periscope video here.

   Inner City Press asked Alston if he saw Ban Ki-moon's UN's impunity for cholera in Haiti as similar to the lack of accountability for rapes, including of children, in the Central African Republic. Alston distinguished the two, saying that some of the problems with peacekeeper sexual abuse are up to member states, and praising Ban for firing Babacar Gaye.

  (One wonders if Alston is aware that Gaye's boss Herve Ladsous of France has publicly raped the rapes to “R&R” and that the abuse has continued after Gaye, from Senegal, was fired.)

   Alston made an analogy to Ban backing down to Saudi Arabia and its allies and dropping the Saudi led Coalition from the Children and Armed Conflict annex on Yemen, and said that the United States is similarly pressuring Ban.

   Inner City Press while quite aware of the U.S. role asked Alston if that explained for example Ban dodging legal papers, having the press thrown out and if in fact the 11th hour offer of charity might just be to attempt to clean up his legacy for a run for South Korea's presidency.

  Alston said he couldn't speak to that, but that he had two meeting with Ban, one in January and another, just with Ban and Ban's deputy. He said he met with the US Mission's deputy ambassador. Inner City Press asked if he meant Isobel Coleman, present in the October 14 “available” meeting Inner City Press was thrown out of and banned from covering. An Alston staff clarified it had been with Deputy Permanent Representative Michele Sison. But what has by the US Mission's and U.S. State Department's role?

Alston decried both the US administration and the UN for failing to provide their legal arguments. As to the UN, this is was also refused, for example, when the UN threw Inner City Press out earlier this year. Here's USG Gallach's first letter and second letterhere's her bogus response to Alston's fellow Special Rapporteurs Kaye and Forst. Here's the UN's memo to the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The lawlessness is pervasive.

On October 26, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Dujarric, Video hereUN transcript here: 

Inner City Press:  I wanted to ask some questions about Haiti.  One is about this teenage girl that was shot and killed while awaiting aid.  I wanted to know whether the… the media reports say that the UN peacekeepers fired rubber bullets and teargas and that… but they… they… they believe that the girl was killed by Haitian National Police with whom the UN was working.  What does the UN know about this death?  And… and, again, it seems like you have this teargas and rubber bullet deployment on… on, in this case, a teenager.  I mean, I guess it depends on the age.  But what was the rationale for the UN using teargas and rubber bullets?

Spokesman:  My understanding from the update we received from the mission is that, indeed, one civilian died; two more were injured yesterday around Dame Marie.  The harbour was, indeed, secured by the Haitian National Police with the support of MINUSTAH [United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti].  The incident took place as the humanitarian assistance was being offloaded from a ship.  There was a demonstration.  Uncontrolled movements by the crowd upon the [arrival of the] humanitarian aid led MINUSTAH and the Haitian National Police to attempt to contain the potentially dangerous situation.  MINUSTAH used crowd control measures, including rubber bullets.  The Haitian National Police also participated in crowd control separately.  According to initial findings, a woman who was badly injured then died in the hospital.  Two other civilians were slightly injured.  The investigation is now being launched by MINUSTAH.  MINUSTAH extends its condolences and sympathy to victims and family of the deceased.  And we, of course, call on all to respect the delivery of humanitarian aid.  I think we all understand the frustration of the people in Haiti, but it's important that people respect humanitarian aid. There's an investigation going on.  If there is uncontrolled movements of people in a dangerous situation, obviously, they will use appropriate measures including teargas, including rubber bullets, if needed.  I'm not going to second-guess the actions of those colleagues on the ground for the time being, but, as I said, MINUSTAH has now launched an investigation.

ICP Question:  And I wanted to ask you, in this room yesterday, as I'm sure you know, Philip Alston, the Special Rapporteur, said that he… among other things, he said that he believed the Secretary-General had given in to US pressure on his legal position on… on not acknowledging that the UN brought cholera to Haiti and not… and I also wanted to… in looking at Mr. [Jan] Eliasson's response, Alston had asked him to respond to five questions by 12 October.  And the letter… that's why I asked you yesterday… it wasn't clear to me, because he did not… there's certainly no numbered bullet points in his response.  But what the questions were, what are the political and policy issues that… that make it impossible for the UN to acknowledge or make some legal recognition in payments?  Will the illegal [sic] advice of OLA [Office of Legal Affairs] be released?  And will the payments, to the degree they're made, be solely ex gratia in order to avoid any type of legal accountability for the cholera?

Spokesman:  I think… I'm not going to go into the advice that the legal counsel gave to the Secretary-General.  That is privileged, as any relationship between the legal counsel and the Secretary-General.  We've explained our position here over and over again.  We very much heard what Mr. Alston had to say and what other Member States had to say.  The legal position does not prevent us from putting forward effective steps to stop cholera and to bring assistance to those who were impacted by the cholera outbreak.  More details of the two-track approach will be released by the Secretary-General, and hopefully, that will answer some of your questions.

QICP Question:  But do… it's not my questions.  I'm thinking about Mr. Alston's questions.  Does the Secretary-General believe that Member States, for example, that get letters from Special Rapporteurs with five questions should, in fact, answer the questions?  And I'm asking you because Ms. [Cristina] Gallach didn't answer…[UN cut off reference to SR Kaye, letter with questions here.]

Spokesman:  No, I understand… obviously, there's dialogue between Mr. Alston and the Secretariat.  That dialogue will no doubt continue.  Questions are asked, and they're answered to the best of our ability.

On October 24, Ban Ki-moon gave a grotesque speech about the rule of law, without mentioning his years of dodging legal papers about Haiti cholera, and continued lack of accountability.

At midnight on October 24-25, Inner City Press reported UN Special Rapporteur Philip Alston's October 5 letter critiquing Ban's approach -- that it is a travesty that the UN is unable to accept accountability --  and Ban's October 5 response - not even by himself, but by his deputy Jan Eliasson, embarrassingly, here.


This is a repeat of impunity. Meanwhile Ban threw David Nabarro under the bus, having him deny science and accountability and spoon-feed quotes to Reuters and AP. This is shameful, and entirely designed to distance Ban himself from his lawlessness and lack of responsiveness, so he can run for President for South Korea. It is time for accountability.Video here.


 From the UN's October 24 transcript: 

Inner City Press: about Haiti.  I wanted to ask you, first, about this report of the… Philip Alston will be presenting tomorrow to the GA about the new approach.  He's quite critical of it.  He says, "There's not yet a promise of an apology or acceptance of responsibility.  The regret and moral responsibility don't do it and set a terrible"… they say… "this will be the ultimate ongoing travesty of justice."

So I wanted to know, one, what… in advance, what the response of the Secretariat is to this critique, two, why Mr. Alston's press release in this room that's set for tomorrow at 1 p.m. wasn't in The Week Ahead and everything else is.

Spokesman:  I don't… for some reason, I don't have it on my calendar.  If he is booked for this room at 1 p.m., I'm sure somebody will bring me a note, but I don't have him on here.

ICP Question:  What do you make of the critique…?

Spokesman:  I… first of all, I think we're obviously all looking forward to his briefing in the Third Committee tomorrow.  We will take a look at that.  We're not going to engage in a tit for tat.  Mr. Alston, as all Special Rapporteurs, plays an important role in speaking out freely and independently.

The Secretary-General expressed his deep regret and his personal commitment when he was in Haiti at doing whatever he can for the UN system to help the people of Haiti deal with the cholera outbreak.

Deputy Secretary-General and others have outlined this two-track approach.  The full details of it will be announced before the end of the Secretary-General's term.

ICP Question:  What I wanted to… I guess… you're saying that you don't want to prejudge it, but I've seen this interview by the Secretary-General or a response by him to Deutsche Welle about…

[brief interruption]

Spokesman:  Is that Margaret Thatcher?

[laughter]

Correspondent:  [inaudible].

Spokesman:  And in Sherwin's phone.  Yes, exactly.  Yeah, yeah, yeah.  Sounds like one of my old English teachers.  Scared me there for a second.

[laughter]

Go ahead.  Sorry.

ICP Question:  Sure.  I wanted to ask, I guess, you're saying not to prejudge, but one of the things that he's most critical of is the Secretary-General's repeated assistance that he doesn't know who brought it.  And, just recently, I don't know when this answer was given, but published, I think, today by Deutsche Welle is a quote by Ban Ki-moon where he says, "On Haiti, we should have done more irrespective of judicial immunity or who caused the epidemic."  And Alston is saying these comments are… are… create an ongoing judicial travesty when it's entirely clear who caused it.

Spokesman:  I… I think people are allowed to disagree.  We appreciate Mr. Alston's work.  The Secretary-General has made his position… has made his position clear.

The legal position notwithstanding, he is focused until the end of his term on trying to get as much help to the people of Haiti to deal with the issue of cholera on the island.

   And tellingly, while Special Rapporteur Philip Alston this week will report on the new approach to the General Assembly's Third Committee and will hold a press conference in the UN Press Briefing Room - Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric omitted this from even his “revised” Week Ahead. Like
Dujarric said when asked why he threw Inner City Press out, he thinks it's HIS room, to do with as he pleases. For how much longer?

  Alston's report says, among other things, “there is not yet a promise of an apology or an acceptance of responsibility. The repetition of previous expressions of “deep regret” and “moral responsibility” is nothing new. The “legal position of the Organization”, which is to deny all legal responsibility, is comprehensively reaffirmed. The obligation to provide an appropriate remedy is thus rejected.”

We'll have more on this - and on Ban's cynical public claim to be focused only on the UN until December 31, while giving a “private” speech to the Council of Korean Americans on the same October 14 his UN was ousting Inner City Press, yet again, this time from the Haiti cholera meeting - a speech for which the Council on Korean Americans sought $100,000 sponsorships.

On October 20, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's outgoing spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: there are, in fact, 800 new cases of cholera since Hurricane Matthew.  And I wanted to know, given the UN's role in having brought cholera to Haiti,  the outcomes of that meeting on Friday, have any pledges been made?  And what does the Secretary-General himself, personally feel about… it's one thing to say sanitation causes its spread, but if the UN caused the introduction of the strain of cholera… what's his response?

Spokesman:  I would refer you back to what the Secretary-General himself said in Haiti.  You can look it up.  I think it was, it was very personal and very heartfelt, and that stands.  We're very well aware of the increased cases of cholera.  I think Dr. Nabarro, who was down there earlier this week, even said they were probably underreported.  I think all of that, it just underscores the need to deal with the outbreak, both quickly in terms of sending out chlorine and water purification tablets and other medical supplies.  And as we've said, we're working on this two-track approach, and more details will be unveiled very soon.

ICP Question:  I'd asked or begun asking about teargas last time. And I wanted to just know what your response is.  It seems like it was reported that teargas was used on “looters”, but there's footage of people taking infant children on motorcycles to get the teargas used by MINUSTAH had washed off them.  So, what is… what's the protocol for MINUSTAH and UN peacekeepers to use teargas…?

Spokesman:  It is very important for MINUSTAH to be able to protect the humanitarian convoys.  They're doing their best.  If there are any issues that need to be investigated, they will.

When?

On October 13 Ban's outgoing spokesman Stephane Dujarric said speeches by three UN officials the next afternoon would be available.

   Inner City Press went on October 14 to cover it, and began Periscoping the largely empty Conference Room 2. See video here. Will Ban use this as his new excuse to leave victims without recourse, just as he is trying to use Hurricane Matthew as a reason to not move forward with his belated promise?

Down on the floor were the three UN speakers, and UN official Cristina Gallach who previously ordered Inner City Press out of the UN and its office as it sought to cover corruption by her, and Ban Ki-moon, as part of the Ng Lap Seng bribery case. Also in attendance: the US Mission to the UN's ambassador in charge of management and reform Isobel Coleman, who was asked to act on the UN's eviction of the Press but did nothing.

   During the speech of envoy Sandra Honore, the second of the three UN speakers, Inner City Press was told to leave the media booth and the meeting. When Inner City Press said, check the noon briefing, it was ignored. Upstairs, Dujarric who it is appears is being replaced stayed staring at his desktop computer and said, that's how it is. He previously got Inner City Press thrown out of an event in the UN Press Briefing Room, see here and here.

On October 17, Inner City Press asked Dujarric, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: as you may have seen, Mario Joseph of the Bureau des Avocats Internationaux, while he was there, said it was out… quote, it is outrageous for the Secretary-General to come to Haiti… and I'll simplify it to say… to not directly address the UN's culpability for having brought cholera.  So I wanted to get your response to that.  Also, in terms of media coverage, I did want to ask you why, during the meeting in Conference Room 2 on Friday on this very topic, the press was ejected while Sandra Honoré was speaking.  Was there some miscommunication? And I have other questions.

Spokesman:  On the second part, what I said both on Thursday and Friday is that the meeting would be open to webcast.  I never said the meeting was open.

ICP Question:  What's the difference?  If a meeting can be seen on television, why can't the press be there…?

Spokesman:  Matthew, that's just the way it is.

ICP Question:  The room was empty and I think…

Spokesman:  Everybody… the room was… it was attended by key Member States, and I think we were very pleased with the meeting.

ICP Question:  Then why not let the press go?

Spokesman:  And you were able to follow the issues on the webcast.  On your first part, obviously, everyone is entitled to their opinion.  I think the Secretary-General did address, head on, the issue of cholera and, again, expressed his… his regret and his compassion and underscored that the UN would be… is currently working on a plan… on a two-track plan to address the issue of cholera in Haiti, as the Deputy Secretary-General and others did on Friday, and he will go back to the General Assembly soon with a great… with more details.

ICP Question:  I want to ask about the use of tear gas in Haiti.

Spokesman:  I'll come back to you.

It has yet to be answered.

As Ban Ki-moon nears the end of his term as UN Secretary General, with his eye on running for president of South Korea, he or his advisers have adopted a new strategy: do nothing, but tell eager media they are doing something, or will do something.

That was the case again on September 29, when UN official David Nabarro, already running to head WHO, spoke to a single media outlet about Ban's twice announced, yet to be implemented about-face on Haiti cholera. Beyond the Vine video hereUN transcript here: and below.

On October 13, with Ban on his way to Haiti, Inner City Press asked his spokesman Stephane Dujarric about the World Bank and Ban's role in helping a South Korean garment firm get a sweet deal in Haiti. From the UN transcript:

Inner City Press: I wanted to ask you about Haiti, and disaster risk reduction, which I saw a statement by the Secretary-General on today.  There's a World Bank-managed fund called the Haiti Reconstruction Fund, which redirected $14 million that had been earmarked as natural disaster mitigation.  He… they earmarked it… redirected it to energy projects.  And people are pointing to this as saying, like, is there some coordination between what the UN says and what the World Bank does?   And also, I'd been meaning for some time to ask you about a report… maybe you'll deny this… that for the for the Caracol Industrial Park in Haiti, "With the help of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, a former South Korean trade minister, the organizers recruited Sae-A Trading Co., a South Korean-based global garment giant that supplies many of the clothes you buy at Target, Wal-Mart, Gap, Old Navy and stores…”

Spokesman:  I'm not aware.

ICP Question:  Are you aware of that?  Can you ask him whether, in fact, he played a role in…?

Spokesman:  I'm not aware of the report.  On your first question, I think it's a question for the World Bank.

On October 10 Ban Ki-moon held a two-question stakeout and spoke about Haiti and Hurricane Matthew and even cholera, but made no mention of reparations. As he walked away, Inner City Press audibly asked, what about reparations. Vine here. There was no answer, nor when Ban came out of an untelevised meeting on “financial solutions” later in the day. Financial solutions for whom?

There was a meeting all afternoon about Haiti, but no stakeout afterward, a trend in the UN of Ban Ki-moon and his peacekeeping boss Herve Ladsous. The UN early in the day said only 900 were killed by its cholera; it was changed, after complaints it seems, to 9000.

On October 11, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric, UN transcript:

Inner City Press: at the stakeout yesterday, when the Secretary-General was speaking about Haiti, he didn’t mention the… the second part of what Dr. [David] Nabarro had talked about, which is a… seemed to be $181 million to improve water, water and sanitation and an amount equal or greater than that to somehow try to make whole people that were… or try to, that were the victims who had family members die from cholera.  Is that… was it just an omission on his part, or do you think…?

Spokesman:  No, I think the plan as outlined in greater detail by Dr. Nabarro stands, and we hope to be able to announce something by the Secretary-General soonish.

ICP Question:  And can… I understand the formal announcement is coming, but given that Dr. Nabarro said these things in an interview… it wasn’t a leak or anything else, what is the Secretary-General’s plan, to meet with Member States and ask for money for each of these two baskets…?  [inaudible]

Spokesman:  He will come back to the General Assembly with a more formal proposal and, obviously, a need for those proposals to be generously funded.

On October 7 in the deadly aftermath of Hurricane Matthew, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Farhan Haq, UN Transcript here:

Inner City Press: Even though the guest from Haiti didn't come, I just wanted to ask one question about that, which is I've seen… I guess Dr. [David] Nabarro is down… he's tweeted that he's down in Washington.  He's meeting with the US and others about the possibility of the spread of Cholera in the wake of this hurricane.  So I wanted to know, is what he had described to AFP of $181 million and an equally-sized or larger fund for reparations for victims of the Cholera that was apparently brought by the UN, is what he's discussing down in Washington separate from that or part of that?

Deputy Spokesman:  He's discussing the situation in Haiti including, as the circumstances now have dictated, the current situation, which is the hurricane and its impact.  But of course, there are concerns, including the issue of Cholera, and I do believe that in the coming weeks, the Secretary-General will also have more to present to the Member States on this.

September 29 transcript:

Inner City Press: On Haiti, I've seen this interview by David Nabarro, I guess with AFP (Agence France-Presse).  It's mostly in French, and it seems to be saying that… previewing the plan and saying some $181 million in renewed funding and at least that amount in reparation to victims to be announced by late October.  So since he said it and he works for the Secretary-General, is that the current thinking?  Is that a solid commitment of $181 million for…?

Spokesman:  I think what we're talking about is really a minimum.  There really… I think the Secretary-General was very clear.  He said he would come back to the General Assembly.  He has talked about the moral responsibility that the UN has towards the victims of the cholera epidemic and also helping Haiti overcome the structural issues it has in fighting waterborne diseases.  There really are two tracks to this new approach that the Secretary-General will announce in more details later.  One would be to intensify support to the country for cholera control and response and address the sanitation issues.  And the second one would be to provide material assistance and support to those Haitians who have been most directly affected by cholera.  Now, both of those will require generous and active participation of donors.  There has been… you know, I think, for the two-track approach, it will be more than $185 million, as I think… I think Mr. Nabarro was really talking about a minimum for one of the tracks.  We've had some initial contacts with donors, and we'll continue to do so.  And, as I said, the Secretary-General will present a more detailed plan soon to the General Assembly.

ICP Question:  And what's his goal… I mean, I'd heard some reference to the… I mean, is it tied in any way to the… to the budget committee here, or is it something he aims to raise?  Does he aim to raise this money or get the commitments before he leaves office, or is he announcing it in October with… what's the…

Spokesman:  No, I think the Secretary-General aims to get this well underway before he leaves office.  Obviously, this will not come out of the regular budget.  It will have to be funded by donors, but it is something he does… he wants to leave on a solid footing by December.

  On Auugst 18 after years of harming families in Haiti after bringing cholera there, Ban's deputy spokesman Farhan Haq -- who accused Inner City Press of “bullying” him for actually asking follow up questions -- with a single email casts Ban Ki-moon as reformed on accountability. Has Ban done anything? No. He dodged legal papers.

  Likewise after dropping Saudi Arabia from the Children and Armed Conflict annex on Yemen, and issuing surreal statements equating Saudi airstrikes to low-tech firing across the border, a Ban defender quoted unanmed Ban officials that Ban is about to do something.

On August 18, Inner City Press asked Haq, Vines here (Haiti) and here (Yemen), UN transcript here: 

Inner City Press: to deal with the Haitians impacted, and these obviously include families who lost a… a family member or breadwinner who died due to the cholera.  So, I guess what I'm wondering is, there are headlines all over the world saying Ban Ki-moon is acknowledging his responsibility and putting it in a very positive light.  What… what exactly… I mean, what would you say to a theory that says that these… this combined with the Yemen announcement that Ban Ki-moon may or may not write to the Saudis and reiterate his list is sort of an attempt to make… the Secretary-General is taking action on these two controversial topics without actually doing anything.  What has he actually done?  Is he going to write a letter to Saudi Arabia?  They're two issues.  I'm mixing them because I see…

Deputy Spokesman:  You're kind of mixing two topics.  If you’re…

ICP Question:  They came out on the same day, and they're both quoting unnamed UN officials, and the other one quotes you.  So, what is actually being done on these two topics?

Deputy Spokesman:  Indeed, I'm a named UN official.  And what I can say about Yemen, on the question of a letter… ultimately, what I can say is that there's an ongoing review of measures that the Saudi-led Coalition is taking to stop and prevent violations against children and other civilians in Yemen.  That review is continuing.  And, as you would expect, as part of that review, there will be communications back and forth.

ICP Question:  Right, but, so, it… unless that story is inaccurate, there are senior Ban Ki-moon officials saying that this letter's going out.  And so, stories come out saying Ban Ki-moon's getting tough with the Saudis.  Is this… given that the statement yesterday sort of equated a relatively unprofessional attack across the board onto Saudi Arabia with airstrikes from the air that have been ongoing for days, what is… what's the timeframe for him to take action on Saudi Arabia?  Two months, as well?

Deputy Spokesman:  I don't think that there's an equation.  I think, if you've noticed, in the last four days, there have been three statements about Yemen.  Each of them say fairly tough things, and each of them apply across the board to the need to protect civilians and particularly children in Yemen.  That's one of his priorities.

ICP Question:  Does he now think it was a bad idea to take them off the list, that this may have emboldened them to take these airstrikes?

Deputy Spokesman:  What we have said repeatedly is that they continue to be under review.  That review is ongoing.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's “Special Envoy For Disaster Risk Reduction and Water” Han Seung-Soo is listed on the board of directors of South Korean firm Doosan Infracore - which does business with the UN. Was this approved by Ban Ki-moon? Now it seems Yes. But should it have been?

Especially when, as now, it is exposed that Doosan has billion dollar business with Saudi Arabia, to whose money Ban deferred in dropping the Saudi-led Coalition from the UN's Children and Armed Conflict Yemen annex? This is Ban's UN: see new Inner City Press 47-minute film here, "Banning the Press: Corruption in the UN of Ban Ki-moon, John Ashe and Ng Lap Seng, Yemen."

As Inner City Press first reported and asked about on August 11, Han Seung-soo is on the board of directors of Standard Chartered bank, awarded the UN's master banking services contract (see this UN document, at Paragraph 50), and a brokerage contract (UN Procurement website, here).

When Inner City Press asked about this and how many OTHER board Han is on that do business with the UN, Ban's spokesman Farhan Haq cut off the questions and claimed Inner City Press was “bullying” him. Video hereUN Transcript here:

Inner City Press: Mr. Han Seung-soo is also on the board of Standard Chartered Bank, which was awarded, according to the… the most recent report of the… on the Chief Executive Board's proceedings, Standard Chartered Bank was awarded the UN's master servicing banking contract.  So I wanted to know… I mean, this is why I think I was asking for kind of a more comprehensive response from the Ethics Office in terms of what restrictions they've placed on Mr. Han Seung-soo, because if, as is reflected by the bank's website, he's on the board of a bank that, in fact, has this major contract with the UN, can you please describe to me what possible restrictions deal with this?

Deputy Spokesman:  I've described to you how the Ethics Office's guidelines work and that those guidelines apply to Mr. Han Seung-soo.  He has engaged and informed them of a number of his business dealings, and they have taken those into account.

ICP Question:  How can you be on the board of a… of a… of a bank that has a con… you just made a point of pointing out that Doosan, although it's listed in procurement contract… procurement database, didn't have contracts during this particular period of time.  But if… I'm… I'm informing you that the Chief Executive Board's report said that Standard Chartered Bank has this contract with the UN, and he's on their board.  So is he still on their board, or is he somehow half on their board?

Deputy Spokesman:  I've described to you what the series of procedures are, and those are what applies to him as well as to other special advisers.

ICP Question:  So how is…

Deputy Spokesman:  We're not going to interfere with their own outside-of-UN lives by going into all of their details at great length, but the Ethics Office has been dealing with this, and they have a series of guidelines, and he's aware of them and is in compliance…

ICP Question:  How can you be on a board of a corporation…?

Deputy Spokesman:  You keep interrupting me.

ICP Question:  All right.  I'm asking because I see you already looking away, and I want… this is a very simple question.

Deputy Spokesman:  I'm looking at someone else who is raising a hand.  But, please, behave yourself.  You need to understand that when someone is asking a question, you allow them to answer.  I've actually lost my train of thought.  So I'll have to gain it…

ICP Question:  I'm asking… I'm willing to because I have a follow-up question…

Deputy Spokesman:  Because the continued interruptions… you're doing it again… actually break people's train of thought.  He has been in touch with the Ethics Office.  And, like I said, they have a series of remedies for the steps which I've detailed.  Beyond that, this is what we have.

ICP Question:  What other boards is he on?  That's my follow-up question.

Deputy Spokesman:  Matthew, Matthew…

ICP Question:  It's simple.  It's simple, because he's on the board of a bank that does business with the UN… I'm finishing my question.  You're cutting me off.

Deputy Spokesman:  No…

ICP Question:  My question is, how many corporate boards that do business with the UN…

Deputy Spokesman:  Matthew, when I start to say something in reply to your question and then you cut me off, then don't accuse me of cutting you off.

ICP Question:  Right, you tried to call on someone else, and I was asking another question.  How many boards is Han Seung-soo on that do business with the UN?

Deputy Spokesman:  At this stage, you're actually just trying to bully me.  To be honest, I've given you a wealth of information about this, including details about how the Ethics Office goes about it.  That's what we've got.  Yes.  Carole?

  As noted, Han Seung-soo is also on the board of Standard Chartered Bank - which was recently awarded the UN's master banking services contract:

“Early in 2016, the master banking services agreement between the Secretariat and Standard Chartered Bank will be the first such global contract to be signed, enabling United Nations system entities to access banking and treasury services in 28 countries from Standard Chartered Bank and its subsidiaries.” (undocs.org/E/2016/56)

   So Ban Ki-moon and his Ethics Office let Ban's mentor and adviser Han Seung-soo serve as UN Special Adviser for Water and Disaster Risk Reduction and give speeches in that capacity while Doosan, on whose board Han sits, sells water desalinization equipment to the same countries he speaks to for the UN.

   Han is on the board of Standard Charter bank, awarded the UN's master banking services contract. This is Ban's UN.

On August 9 Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Farhan Haq directly about Han Seung-soo giving speeches at UN special adviser on water while Doosan, which he directs, makes sales including but not limited to water desalinization equipment in the same places. This is a blatant (mis) use of the UN, by Ban Ki-moon's mentor.

   The UN left Ban Ki-moon's webpage down for August 9, and as of 9 am on August 10 has still not put the August 9 transcript online. Haq read out some generic advocacy points from Ban's Ethics Office, that restrictions are custom-designed for particular conflicts of interest, but would not disclose a single restriction on Han Seung-soo. Anyway, the public record speaks for itself. Watch this site.

After Inner City Press asked, on August 8 Ban Ki-moon's Deputy Spokesman Farhan Haq said, "I was asked last week about Special Adviser Han Seung-soo and his dealings with a company named Doosan Infracore. Mr. Han disclosed this outside interest to the Organization, and the Ethics Office provided advice on the matter.  Mr. Han was informed of the restrictions on his involvement with the company in the context of the nature of his contract with the Organization, under which he serves on a "when actually employed" basis.  The measures put in place serve to ensure that the UN staff rules and regulations are adhered to, that there is no conflict of interest, and that the Organization's interests are fully protected."

From the August 8 transcript:

Inner City Press: I want to ask, given… you said that there's some… advice was given to him about how to operate to comply with the rules.  I wanted sort of… sort of throw in a new fact, which is that Doosan also does business and has large contracts with, for example, Saudi Arabia.  So I'm wondering, can you provide a little more detail on what the safeguards are for… for a UN Special Adviser to be on the board of a for-profit corporation that deals not… not only does business with the UN but which does business with… with countries with… the Secretary-General himself had said, like, Saudi financial threats caused him to change policy essentially.  So I'm wondering…

Deputy Spokesman:  That's… those are two very separate issues.

ICP Question:  So you say.  I'm simply asking you, can you describe what the safeguards are?

Deputy Spokesman:  Like I said, there are safeguards put in place.  He brought this to the attention of the UN organization in 2015, last year, at a time, by the way, when Doosan did not have business dealings with the United Nations.  Over that period, since then, guidelines have been prepared to make sure that there is no conflict of interest and that the organization's interests are protected.  But, like I said, this is part of the way the process works in terms of dealing with officials, including those, like Mr. Han Seung-soo, who are on a when-actually-employed basis and are not full-time employees.

ICP Question:  Okay.  Is it possible to know what these guidelines are?

Deputy Spokesman:  These are the details I've gotten.  I just got them over the past hour.

After publishing these links, Inner City Press on August 4 asked Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Farhan Haq about it, and about Jane Holl Lute for the second time -- this time, answered unlike the five days of questions about UN Security Inspector Matthew Sullivan being on an outside board of a corporation which has held events for, among other things, sneakers in the UN.

So does the UN only answer when it can say that Yes, Ban Ki-moon approved? On August 5, Inner City Press asked again, video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: Yesterday I'd asked about Han Seung-soo and whether he's the Special Adviser.

Deputy Spokesman:  Yes, yes, he remains Special Adviser.  I've put in a request to the Ethics Office to see whether he's made any notifications of different business dealings.  I believe he may have done some, but I'm trying to get it from the Ethics Office.  Alas, at this time of summer, there are some offices that are… will be harder to get replies back from so I'll let you know once I have it.

Question:  Sure.  I guess I want to understand.  There's a rule that says a person needs approval from the Secretary-General for outside.  Does that apply here, or is it just a matter of saying that you're doing it?

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, first I need to check, again, whether the Ethics Office has had any notifications of any other activities.

Three days later, no answer from the UN - even as Doosan's Saudi business is exposed: Doosan, "a South Korea power equipment maker, said today that it signed a 1.1 trillion won ($1.2 billion) contract to build a power and desalination plant in Saudi Arabia." This is Ban Ki-moon's UN see new film here.


 Video here. From the August 4 UN transcript: 
Inner City Press:  I thought you might have it.  Yesterday, I'd asked Stéphane, and he'd said it was not an unfair question, whether the Secretary-General approved the service of Jane Holl Lute on the Union Pacific's Board.

Deputy Spokesman:  Oh, yes.  Yes, we checked, and the answer is yes, she did seek approval and did receive it.

ICP Question:  And what I wanted to ask as a second question, which is that the special… is Mr. Han Seung-soo still the Special Adviser on Water and Risk Reduction?

Deputy Spokesman:  I believe he was appointed that some time ago.  Whether he still has that portfolio or not, I would need to check.

ICP Question:  Because what I want to know is that he's also on the board of directors of a South Korean firm, Doosan Infracore, which is listed in the UN procurement database as doing business with the UN.  So, I wanted to know if maybe you can get like… actually send me the answer, whether, in fact, if these two services are concurrent, whether it's been approved by the Secretary-General and whether… whether there's some special kind of safeguards that he recuse himself from business involving the UN or whether it's possible to be a UN Special Adviser on the board of a company that does business with the UN.

Deputy Spokesman:  Well, first and foremost, I'll need to check what his status is, whether he's an adviser or not.  Have a good afternoon, everyone.

The UN was set to play host on August 2 to a for-profit event led by agroup on which UN Security official Matthew Sullivan is on the board of directors, apparently with the approval of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who has yet to address his and his Under Secretaries General's role in the Ng Lap Seng / John Ashe bribery scandal which resulted on July 29 in a 20 month prison sentence for Sheri Yan's, whose father's one-man show Ban attended in the UN Secretariat lobby.

   The event involves COPsync, Inc, a for-profit company which sells equipment to police departments and whose CEO has previously been sued for securities law violations.

Now Ban's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric, having retured from two weeks away, has flat out refused to say whether, as UN rules require, Ban Ki-moon approved UN Security Inspector Matthew Sullivan's presence on an outside board of directors. Video here.

   Because of the now five times refusal to answer this question, it must be noted that for example Ban Ki-moon's new (February 2016) coordinator against peacekeeper rapes, Jane Holl Lute, was later in April 2016 named to the board of directors of Union Pacific, a position that according to Internet research pays $250,000 a year.

On August 3, after publishing the above, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Dujarric about it. Video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: I'm going to go at this a different way.  On this… the issue that there is a rule saying that the UN… I mean, I can quote from it, but saying you should receive permission for outside engagements.  Rather than ask about the one you've refused to answer on, I want to ask you this.  Jane Holl Lute apparently was hired in February 2016 for this post or put into the post of sexual abuse, bring it under control.  In April of 2016, she was named to the board of directors of Union Pacific, which seems to pay $250,000 a year.  So, on this… in this case, can you say whether this outside engagement was approved by the Secretary-General?

Spokesman:  I can check if that outside engagement exists and see what I can say.

Inner City Press:  There was a press release by…

Spokesman:  I understand.  I have not seen the press release.

Inner City Press:  Do you acknowledge it's a fair question to ask whether…?
Spokesman:  I'm not saying it's not a fair question.

Inner City Press:  When you answer that one, maybe you can answer the other one.

  But Dujarric and his office did not answer the question(s) in the hours that followed. At 6:45 pm, under the eviction order of Ban and his head of Communications Cristina Gallach, Inner City Press was ordered to leave the Security Council stakeout (where it had just asked Ambassador Oh Joon and Samantha Power about the THAAD deployment in South Korea) - even as Gallach passed by, offering a tour of the Trusteeship Council Chamber where under Ban many dubious events have taken place.

   Now this: Ban's “Special Envoy For Disaster Risk Reduction and Water” Han Seung-Soo is listed on the board of directors of South Korean firm Doosan Infracore - which does business with the UN. Was this approved by Ban Ki-moon? Could it be?

  If Ban's Office answers, as it should, in this case, why has it refused in the case of UN Security Inspector Matthew Sullivan and the for profit event? Watch this site.

 Here is another photo of Sullivan, speaking, with some the principals of the postponed event.



UNtransparent: ICP has 4x asked if  OK-ed UNDSS Sullivan on outside board. Here, speaking

It's a simple yes or no question Inner City Press will continue to pursue.

  Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's Office of the Spokesperson about the event three days in a row last week, including whether Ban had given his required approval for UN Security Inspector Matthew Sullivan to be on the board of a directors of an involved group (which was also involved with Francis Lorenzo, who founded UN-resident South South News and had pleaded guilty to UN bribery charges in the Ng Lap Seng case.)

 On August 1, when Inner City Press asked about Jack Brewer listing himself as a "UN Ambassador for Peace and Sport," Ban's deputy spokesman Farhan Haq said that the event is "canceled," there will be no answers on the three prior events or Sullivan being on the board or Jack Brewer listing himself as a UN Ambassador for Peace and Sport.

But as was published before Haq spoke, the event is NOT canceled - it is postponed, until later this month, and still lists UN Inspector Matthew Sullivan as a speaker:

"the decision has been made to POSTPONE this Tuesday’s (August 2) Peace Summit at the United Nations... Our team is scheduling a new date – tentatively during the week of August 15, 2016. The plan is to select and announce the new date within the next few days."

This is a cover-up. This is impunity. This is Ban's UN.

  Last week Ban's deputy spokesman Haq, rather than answer this or which member state or UN Department is the sponsor of the August 2 event, accused Inner City Press of “unethical” Googling, implying that because Ban and his USG Cristina Gallach evicted Inner City Press as it investigated their links to the Ng Lap Seng scandal -- see, for example, this OIOS audit at Paragraphs 37-40 and 20(b) -- Inner City Press is now precluded from investigating that or other corruption in Ban's UN.

   Haq said he is not aware of any problem with UN Security Inspector Matthew Sullivan being on the board of directors of the Jack Brewer Foundation (Brewer lists himself as a “UN Ambassador of Peace and Sports”), implying that Ban Ki-moon has approved all of this. Video here. Watch this site.

  As the UN bribery scandal gathered force Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called for an audit by the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services of the Global Sustainability Foundation (GSF), David Ng Lap Seng's Sun Kian Ip Group and its affiliates including the "World Harmony Foundation" and pleaded-guilty Francis Lorenzo's South South News, among others.

While as of July 27 Ban and his Under Secretary General Cristina Gallach still have this last "bribery conduit" in a UN office after evicting Inner City Press for investigating it, and them, more dubious events are scheduled for Ban's UN. (Gallach, who appeared with Lorenzo, spoke in the GA Hall on July 29 - given her retaliatory evition of Inner City Press, it would only half cover the event with one of Ban's minders.)

On July 29 Inner City Press asked Ban's deputy spokesman Farhan Haq, for the second day in a row, if UN Security Inspector Matthew Sullivan's position on the board of the directors of the sponsor of an August 2 event, which has links with pleaded-guilty Francis Lorenzo, was approved by Ban Ki-moon as required by UN rules. Haq refused to answer, video here.

  Rather than answer this simple question, Haq said he is not aware of any problem with the individual. Does that mean that Ban Ki-moon has given up even pretending to enforce UN ethics rules? Or that Ban Ki-moon has approved this UN Inspector's moonlighting with entities linked with the UN's Lorenzo / John Ashe (RIP) / Ng Lap Seng bribery scandal?

One of the links is through an event held in the UN in January 2015 which Inner City Press has reported about and asked about, by “Reelcause” - the UN speakers included not only UN DSS Inspector Matthew Sullivan, a JBF board member, but also UN DSS Officer Anthony Barzelatto. We'll have more on this, as the UN is refusing to answer the most basic factual questions.

   Even the simple question of who sponsored the use of the UN on August 2, a mission or a UN department, was stonewalled by Ban's Haq. He said, ask the group holding the event. Well, no. The UN premises are being used, and this requires a sponsor.

   In fact, the head of the group now in a press release identifies himself as a UN Ambassador for Peace and Sport. Did Ban Ki-moon give him this title? Or does anything go, now that Ban's own Secretariat sold documents to Ng Lap Seng and Ban only wants to run for President of South Korea?

Now that Ban's UN goes so far as to evict the Press asking the question and "mis-speaks" to the UN Special Rapporteurs on Freedom of Expression and on Human Rights Defenders, and to either the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee or to Nobel Peace Prize laureate Jose Ramos-Horta?

Inner City Press and @InnerCityPress first reported on the dubious concussions event in the UN, involving Matthew Sullivan in 2014, before he and Ban and Gallach ousted and evicted Inner City Press from the UN.

Here is a notice of a for-profit event in the UN announced for August 2 by the Jack Brewer Foundation including JBF (UN) authorized board member UN Department of Safety and Security Inspector Mathew Sullivan, who on February 22 told Inner City Press Ban and Gallach had Banned it from all UN premises worldwide, audio here and petition here, and who further censored Inner City Press on July 26 from covering South Sudan and Haiti meeting.

Significantly, Sullivan was listed for a UN event by “Reelcause,” whose shareholders include not only Jack Brewer Foundation but also the “Montessori Model UN,” founded by Francis Lorenzo who had pleaded guilty to UN bribery charges (while Gallach leaves Lorenzo's South South News in an office after evicting Inner City Press as it investigated it, and her and Ban's links).

The JBF, on whose board of director UN Matthew Sullivan serves, has appeared with South South News, here and Lorenzo, here (and photo).

  So l'affaire Matthew Sullivan, which Ban's spokesman is trying to stop investigation of by calling even Googling unethical, is connected to the Francis Lorenzo UN bribery scandal. Perhaps this explains Ban's spokesmen stonewalling. Lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric stonewalled Inner City Press' previous questions about Montessori Model UN.

   We also note that Jack Brewer Foundation is a shareholder of a company called "Immune Therapeutics," for which Brewer opened doors (including, literally, the UN's) to help the company sell pharmaceuticals. Immune Therapeutics' CEO is named Noreen Griffin, and she is linked to bribing imprisoned ex-Congressman William Jefferson. Why has Ban authorized one of his Security officials to be on this board of directors and to use the UN?

On July 28 when Inner City Press for the second time asked Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Farhan Haq about the specifics of for-profit events in the UN and Sullivan's presence on the board of directors of the events' sponsor, rather than answer Haq tried to call Inner City Press' research and reporting “unethical,” going so far as to ask if it had started research AFTER it was Banned from covering UN meeting on Haiti and South Sudan.

   In fact, Inner City Press reported on the “concussions” event long before Ban and Cristina Gallach ousted it on February 19, and Sullivan on February 22 told Inner City Press it was Banned from UN premises worldwide.  Haq's boss Stephane Dujarric claimed that day that Sullivan had gone beyond the ouster ordered by Gallach. If so, why did Sullivan do it?

  Ban's UN has become a place where officials at all levels think they can sell access to the UN, since Ng Lap Seng so easily bought it. The scandal, as Inner City Press will shortly report, are connected. Ban's UN's response to reporting is to evict the Press, then to question whether Googling is somehow unethical. Vines here and here and here and here. Then video here.  From the UN Transcript: 

Inner City Press: yesterday I asked you about this event that is scheduled for 2 August and you told me to speak to the group and Mr. Sullivan didn't know he was on the list, and wouldn't speak at it.  Since then I've seen there are at least three other events at which he did speak by the same group, involving the same group and that he is on board of directors of the sponsor of the 2 August thing, that Jackie Brewer Foundation.  So I guess what I wanted to know is, one, to me it seems strange that he didn't know that he was listed by them if he is on the board of directors.  But I also wanted to ask, I've seen the Secretary-General orders called outside activities that say staff members should not engage in outside these activities without the approval of the Secretary-General.  So I wanted to know, since this is a private, for-profit company that has had its stock pitched based on the involvement of UN DSS (Department of Safety and Security), whether the Secretary-General has, in fact, approved this or not?  And, if not, what happens next?

Deputy Spokesman:  As I told you, he is not appearing at their function.  He was not aware of this.

ICP Question:  Did you look into it?  He is on the board of directors of the group, so I'm asking.

Deputy Spokesman:  This person who, by the way, has informed me that you apparently have taken some sort of gripe with him because he tried to talk to you at a stakeout.  I'm aware…

ICP Question:  It's not a gripe.  I'm asking you about an official DSS official on the board.  You are cutting me off.  I thought that was unprofessional.  I'm asking a question, how does this regulation apply?

Deputy Spokesman:  I was actually in the process of answering you, and then you can talk.  This is how conversations go: I talk and you talk and so forth.

ICP Question:  Just that you walk away, so that is why I'm making sure I want to ask, there are number of other questions on this.

Deputy Spokesman:  Matthew, that is not fair.  I take a huge amount of questions from you, as every transcript and every video will show.  Now, I have no problem with you asking questions.  I do not think that you should try to use the briefing in terms of personal vendettas against people.  If that is what you are doing, it's unethical and I would have a problem with that.

ICP Question:  You can say whatever you want.  Okay, what I'm asking, a senior UN DSS official is, this is all online, these are all… you could have found them yourselves with ten minutes of Googling.  He is on the board of directors of a group that you said didn't know put him on the list and there have been three separate events, one about sneakers, one about concussions in the NFL (National Football League), and these have all taken place in the ECOSOC (Economic and Social Council) Trusteeship Chamber.  So my question is for the service of this individual on the board of directors of a for-profit company for a for-profit event, has the Secretary-General given permission?  And, if not, is this reflective of a lack of due diligence as in the Ng Lap Seng case, "Yes" or "No"?

Deputy Spokesman:  First of all, to the extent that DSS ever gives briefings at these, there are briefings about security conditions.  Those are standard; outside of those, I'm not aware…

ICP Question:  I urge you to look at the press releases.

Deputy Spokesman:  I'm not aware of anything that is not a standard briefing.  Second of all, did you do any of this Googling before you had your conversation in the corridors with him?

ICP Question:  Yes, I have.  I've been actually following… I wrote about the concussion event because it's a joke these events take place in the UN that are raising money, so I'm now I'm asking you about these events because you said he didn't know and it's not credible.  He has done three events.  Look at them and see whether there were safety concerns.

Deputy Spokesman:  Like I said, I have talked to this person and this is what he said.

When after publishing a story exposing the notice and Sullivan's listed involvement Inner City Press asked Bna's deputy spokesman Farhan Haq about it, Haq said he had spoken with Sullvian who said he had not been aware he was listed, and is not involved. Haq refused ot answer more about the event, and cut off Inner City Press' questions. Video here.

This is not credible. In fact, Matthew Sullivan is on the board of directors of the group holding the event, which is either a violation of UN rules or was approved by Ban "Fast and Loose" Ki-moon. The applicable rule:

"ST/AI/2000/13    Outside activities

      Section 2  Staff members engaging in outside activities authorized under the present instruction shall make clear to the organizers and participants in such activities, including any employers, that they act in their personal capacity and not as representatives of the United Nations.

Section 3 3.1     Under staff regulation 1.2 (o), a staff member shall not engage in any outside occupation or employment, whether remunerated or not, without the approval of the Secretary-General. For the purposes of the present instruction, the expression 'occupation' shall include the exercise of a profession, whether as an employee or an independent contractor."

 Here is a photo of Sullivan with the people he says he doesn't know listed him for the August 2 event.



There are been other events with Sullivan, for example here: "MagneGas Announces Panelists for World Water Day Summit at the UN... The Summit will begin with a welcome from the CEO of MagneGas Corporation Ermanno Santilli and Inspector Matthew Sullivan of the United Nations Department of Safety and Security."

And another ("Reelcause," here in PDF) and yet another: "Discussing the GTX SmartSoles with various officials including Inspector Matthew Sullivan of the United  Nations’ Department of Safety and Security."

In fact, the for profit company has had it stock touted citing UN Sullivan's involvement, here: DirectView Holdings, "facilitated a number of introductions and collaborative meetings for DirectView executives throughout the course of the week including with the United Nations' Inspector of Operations from the Department of Safety and Security."

While Ban Ki-moon cited immunity / impunity for 10,000 killed by cholera in Haiti, a meting on which Sullivan Banned Inner City Press from on July 26, doesn't this implicate at least US securities laws?

Since the above is easily available online, Ban Ki-moon's Office of the Spokesperson's denial and stonewalling is worse then negligent.

 Under Ban Ki-moon, as shown in the Ng Lap Seng / John Ashe case investigation of which resulted in Ban evicting Inner City Press from the UN in retaliation, using Sullivan, everything has become for sale.

Detailed evidence presented, including about Under Secretary General Cristina Gallach who signed the ouster and eviction orders, has been sitting unacted on at Ban's Ethics office, and OIOS for months. Here was Gallach at Ng's South South Awards, and here was Inner City Press questioning her about it, and her passing the buck to Ban's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric, before her ouster of Inner City Press from which she should have been recused.

How high does this particular scam go in the Department of Safety and Security, whose Captain McNulty and seven officer physically ousted Inner City Press on February 19? Audio here; McNulty initially refused to identify himself.  DSS later cited a non-public Handbook to justify Inner City Press' ouster, here. Is USG Peter Drennan in on this? Michael "Mick" Brown, who oversees McNulty? There are some fine people in DSS, but it must be cleaned up, and all retaliation reversed and addressed.

 How about the Department of Management which is titularly in charge of these events in the UN, including Andrew Nye, Craig Boyd and British Assistant SG Stephen Cutts? Ban Ki-moon's UN is corrupt throughout, and retaliates against the Press which pursues and reports on it.  The UN's ouster and eviction of Inner City Press, and harassment and censorship since, has been pure retaliation. Now what?

Here's the notice for the August 2 event, followed by the UN's transcript of Ban's Haq's denials:

"COPsync Co-sponsors #Stand2Protect Peace Summit at the United Nations

DALLAS, July 26, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- COPsync, Inc. (NASDAQ: COYN), announced today that they are co-sponsoring the #Stand2Protect Peace Summit in conjunction with UN Ambassador Jack Brewer, the Blue Alert Foundation, the United Federation for Peacekeeping and Sustainable Development, and Trust 2 Protect. The Summit will be held at the United Nations Headquarters on August 2, 2016, from 3:00 pm - 6:00 pm EDT.

The goal of the United Nations #Stand2Protect Peace Summit is to bring together community and global leaders, law enforcement, politicians and influencers to discuss real solutions to end the growing distrust between communities and law enforcement. Prominent speakers at the Summit will include ... Inspector at the United Nations Headquarters Mathew Sullivan"

  This is a for-profit company, selling services to Police Departments. Why is UN DSS Matty Sullivan involved?

Inner City Press after publishing the above asked Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Farhan Haq, UN transcript here and below; video here

Inner City Press: Yesterday, there was a public announcement by a for-profit company called COPsync Inc. that is going to hold an event in the UN on 2 August called “Stand to Protect Peace Summit”.  And basically, I mean, it's a for-profit company and it sells products and services to police departments.  And maybe they have rented out space in the UN, maybe you will find this out, but I wanted to ask you about is, they list as a participant as part of their pitch to attend it the involvement of Inspector of the UN Headquarters Matthew Sullivan, a UN DSS [Department of Safety and Security] individual.  So, I wanted to ask you either now or later today, what is the UN's involvement in this for-profit event and how is it consistent with the commitments to do due diligence after the Ng Lap Seng South-South News scandal?

Deputy Spokesman:  I actually spoke with Mr. Sullivan earlier today.  He has confirmed to me that he had not heard of this particular speaking engagement before, was not aware of it, and is not participating.

ICP Question:  They put it out on PR Newswire.  So, what is this involving?  Can you get an answer?  They obviously know who he is, so what is his involvement with the Jack Moore Foundation and with these individuals?

Deputy Spokesman:  He is not involved in this.  That is what he has told me.  For anything further, you need to ask them.

ICP Question:  But, it's in the UN, it's a for-profit event in the UN, so I'm asking in the wake of the Ng Lap Seng scandal.  What is the UN's involvement in this event taking place?

Deputy Spokesman:  First of all, you are trying to tie into similar things.  I don't speak for this company.  You would have to talk to that company about what they're doing.  Regarding how they do their arrangements, you would have to ask them.  Regarding Mr. Sullivan, no, he is not involved in this?

ICP Question:  Are they paying the UN to use the room?  It's being held in UN Headquarters, 2 August at 3 p.m.

Deputy Spokesman:  This is not something… the UN does not charge for the use of the UN.  Yes?

ICP Question:  Why are they in the UN?

Deputy Spokesman:  You would have to ask that company.

Ban's Haq said, ask them. But they have already, according to the UN, lied about Sullivan's involvement. The UN under Ban Ki-moon is a wild west of corruption that is not being cleaned up - instead, Ban throws about the Press that is asking about it.

 On Ng Lap Seng, the UN Development Program began its own audit, which Inner City Press published here, and asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric for a press conference about. That has still not been held. And Dujarric, after misusing the UN briefing room and podiumand training and empowering his deputy to do so, has disappeared. We'll have more on this.

On July 1, Inner City Press asked this Ban Ki-moon spokesman, Stephane Dujarric, about the superseding indictment of Ng Lap Seng to include UNDP and all acts through September 2015. Paragraph 12 names the Secretary General. Video here;
UN Transcript here:

Inner City Press: the UN bribery case of Ng Lap Seng has now had a superseding indictment that accuses Mr. Ng of buying benefits from UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) and expands the time limit of the case up to September 2015.  So, one, I'm wondering if you have any comment on this, as it seems to be an expanding case.  And, two, I want to reiterate the request now for several months that UNDP hold a press conference, at least on the audit that it released, and… and state where… why the money that was given…

Spokesman:  I think on your… on your second part, you can address that request to UNDP.

Inner City Press:  I have.

Spokesman:  I have not seen the new indictment, so I cannot comment on it.

Inner CityPress:  You had said from here that they would do it.  I've spoken to the head of the office, and he hasn't done it.  I'm wondering, has the Secretary, Ban Ki-moon, head of the system…

Spokesman:  I know where we are.

Inner City Press:  Cover up.

Spokesman:  You're always free and have always been free to express your opinions.

Dujarric said Inner City Press is free to say what it wants . Yes: from the street, to which Ban and his Head of Communications, with an assist from Dujarric, first threw Inner City Press on February 19 (audio here) then evicted its files (Video here.) On July 1, Dujarric at noon said he hadn't read the superseding indictment. Then he left the UN just after 3 pm, with no briefing for six days. This IS a cover up, on which we're have more.

  The audit of Ban's Secretariat, completed early this year but first put online by Inner City Press, directly criticizes Cristina Gallach, the Under Secretary General for Communications and Public Information. On June 29, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Farhan Haq, video here, UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: Monday down in… in Federal Court, there was a hearing for Mr. Ng Lap Seng in the ongoing case, and Assistant District Attorney [Daniel] Richenthal basically widened the case and said they're going to be… there's more things they're looking at as to Ng Lap Seng, and he also described in more detail a, quote, conduit of bribery taking place within the UN.  And I wanted to know, since you've said you're monitoring it, what is the UN's response to the new information that was presented on Monday?

Deputy Spokesman:  Yeah, we are aware of the latest information, and, as I've pointed out, the situation of South-South News is under review.  It continues to be under review, but certainly, any new information is useful in light of that.

After the above, a corporate news wire which has a conflict of interest on this passed through South South News' claims that it has had "
no connection with any government at any level" - this is false. But the conflicted corporate wire, with its own Permanent seat on the board of hte UN Correspondents Assocation which took money from Ng's South South News, merely passes through the denial. Call it journalism? We'll have more on this.

On June 27, former South South News reporter turned spokesperson for John Ashe and now his family wrote to the UN press corps, some of whom she saw over the weekend:

"Dear Friends and Dear UN and Media Representatives, I am kindly forwarding a Statement from the Family of the late John. W. Ashe, President of the UN General Assembly 68th Session, at the request of his widowed wife, Anilla Cherian.I have accepted to forward this Statement in my personal capacity and in honor of Ambassador Ashe’s legacy as a long-serving diplomat.  I will not be addressing any questions and I do appreciate your understanding.

It was very nice seeing several of you over the weekend. I hope you are all doing well."

If the goal was to distinguish South South News from John Ashe and Ng Lap Seng, this doesn't do it.

The audit deals with South South News - which as of June 27 STILL has a UN office, photo here, UNlike Inner City Press. In Ban's UN one only gets due process if one has money, or pays money, as South South News did, including to the UN Correspondents Association which then gave Ng Lap Seng a photo-op with Ban. Or as the Saudis did to get Ban to remove them from the Yemen Children and Armed Conflict annex.

On June 27 in Federal Court, Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel Richenthal said that South South News was a conduit for bribery involving the now conveniently (and mysteriously) deceased former PGA John Ashe. (Some with links to Ashe try to erase all trace, but here is one: UNCA with AAshe's spokesperson Konja, formerly of South South News), which one wire-with-a-conflict covering this story never mentions. Compare to this.)



Those with links to dead-under-indictment  (RIP) try to erase links but here's one: UNCA

Meanwhile while Inner City Press can only work with minders, its office given to Akhbar Elyom's correspondent, a former UNCA presdient,  sits empty and Gallach gallavants in Paris. We'll have more on all this.

Ban's audit, notably, does not mention that Ban accepted Ng's South South Award and was in the program of Ng's August 2015 event in Macau.

Nor does Ban's audit mention that his Sri Lanka adviser Vijay Nambiar and his spouse, Ban Soon-taek, were both present at the founding of the Global Sustainability Foundation; the latter took photos with South South News' indicted Vivian Wang at the UN Correspondents Association ball where UNCA gave Ng, from whose South South News it took money, a photo op with Ban himself.

On April 16, at Ban's and his USG Cristina Gallach's direction, Inner City Press' long time UN office in S-303 was evicted and five boxes of files were dumped onto First Avenue. Video here and here.

On April 20, the Free UN Coalition for Access sign on S-303 was removed (photo here) without the consent of Inner City Press' office mate, also a FUNCA member, who was told that the lock was being changed, presumably to sell the office to someone else. Inner City Press immediately objected to MALU, the DSG, Chef de Cabinet and Spokesman, putting them on notice.

And lo and behold it was given to a former UNCA president who never comes to the UN, never asks questions: Saana Youssef of Egyptian state media Akhbar Elyom. This is Ban's UN.

  UNCA, at least under Giampaolo Pioli, openly tells people to pay it money, it can get them UN official space. This is corruption.

  Now since the eviction of Inner City Press, South South News has sent out a press release saying that despite the guilty plea by its President Francis Lorenzo and indictment of its Vice President Vivan Wang, it is clean - and blames its problems on a "few independent journalists." Wonder who's referred to - as the other one(s).

 Not Reuters, which passes through without analysis South South News' press releases - and without disclosing that Reuters' Lou Charbonneau and now Michelle Nichols have occupied Reuters' permanent seat on the Executive Committee of the UN Correspondents Association, which took South South News' money then arranged a photo op for Ng Lap Seng with Ban Ki-moon.

  South South News' founding is described in the John Ashe and Ng Lap Seng indictment; it is portrayed through gauze in the OIOS audit. The name South South News has appeared in the Panama Papers.

  For now, another UN example. To deliver "personal" invitations to the South South Awards, which USG Gallach attended in September 2015, South South News needed access to the UN during the Septameber High Level week. So, Inner City Press is informed, South South News personnel got D or Diplomat passes through Lorenzo's Dominican Republic mission to the UN. Back, indeed.


Here are an initial two of many photographs of that event, these by Luiz Rampelotto of Europa Newswire via Facebook, including one of now indicted Vivian Wang of South South News with Mrs. Ban

Here's from South South News' press release:

"It is disgraceful that a few independent journalists are exhibiting a lack of professionalism and irresponsibility by attacking everything and anyone they believe is linked to this case. This is often done by insinuation, guilt by association and baseless assumptions that disparage many innocent people and organizations. Irresponsible assumptions, fact-twisting and misinformation serve to distort the perception of the situation, while affecting our hard work and the work of many innocent people who have absolutely nothing to do with this case.

These types of attacks are counterproductive and unprofessional. We believe these attacks reflect poorly on the integrity of the profession of journalism as a whole. Not to justify any illegal activities, but all sorts of organizations worldwide have been victims of unscrupulous people, as have other organizations facing similar circumstances.

We as employees will defend our hard and honest work and we will defend the commitment to our goals and objectives of producing quality journalism to inform about these important issues. This hard-earned reputation has been tainted by some unscrupulous acts. Many media and administrative professionals have proudly worked for South-South News and can attest to the integrity of our media operation.

This is a complex case in which many players from different organizations and events have been implicated, as detailed in the Government’s complaint. It is working its way through the United States judiciary system, as it well should. If you have questions regarding the people mentioned in the US Government complaint, you should contact their legal representatives directly.

Again, South-South News is continuing its professional day-to-day functions by providing some of the most comprehensive, high-quality coverage of the UN and disseminating information on global development issues."


The same indicted Vivian Wang of South South News with David Ng Lap Seng at the same UNCA event

  On this, Inner City Press on January 29 sought to cover an UNCA event held in the UN Press Briefing Room, which was nowhere listed as closed.  On February 19 Gallach, without recusing herself, unilaterally deactivated Inner City Press UN residential correspondents pass, and had Inner City Press' reporter physically thrown out on First Avenue without coat or passport. Audio here.

  This is called retaliation. On the afternoon of April 12, Inner City Press while with another colleague asked Ban about Gallach's orders.

  "That is not my decision," Ban said quickly. He is aware; the ouster and censorship serve him, but he says it is not his decision, just as for example Sri Lanka's Mahinda Rajapaksa or higher profile censors might.

  On the evening of April 12 Gallach ordered the final eviction of all of Inner City Press' investigative files on Saturday, April 16 at 10 am. This is the face of today's UN corruption.



This is what the UN eviction order sent to Inner City Press says:

Subject: Office
To:matthew.lee [at] innercitypress.com
From: Tal Mekel [at] un.org
Date: Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 6:47 PM

Dear Mr. Lee,

Further to the letter to you from Cristina Gallach, Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information, on 30 March 2016, we note that you did not remove your belongings from the office by the 6 April deadline as required.

As you have still not removed your belongings, we wish to inform you that your belongings will be packaged on Saturday 16 April 2016 at 10:00 a.m.

After carefully packaging them up, your belongings will be forwarded to Bronx NY headquarters address for Inner City Press that you had listed in your media accreditation application. If you wish us to forward your packaged belongings to another address instead, please let us know as soon as possible.

We request your presence during the packing. Please contact the Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit (MALU) to make the necessary arrangements. If you are not present, the packing and forwarding will still take place at 10:00 a.m. on Saturday 16 April 2016.

Best, Tal

Tal Mekel
Acting Chief
Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit
United Nations - S-250
New York, NY 10017

   And here is some of what the OIOS audit says, about USG Gallach:

"37. On 30 June 2015, Global Sustainability Foundation sponsored an exhibition titled “The Transformative Power of Art” in the visitors’ lobby at United Nations Headquarters. This exhibition was curated by an Italian artist, whose works were displayed along with the works of other artists participating in one of his workshops.

38. Exhibitions in publicly accessible areas at Headquarters are governed by the Secretary General’s Bulletin ST/SGB/2008/6, which stipulates, inter alia, as follows:

(a) The United Nations Exhibits Committee, which is an interdepartmental body of the Secretariat chaired by the Under Secretary General for Communications and Public Information [Cristina Gallach] is the standing body that reviews and authorizes such exhibitions;

(b) Any proposal originating from an NGO or foundation must be accompanied by a written communication of support from a Secretariat department or office, a separately administered organ or programme of the United Nations, an organization of the United Nations system or a permanent or observer mission to the United Nations;

(c) Exhibit proposals focusing on a specific individual, or originating from a single artist, shall not be permitted;

(d) The Exhibits Committee may, at its discretion, reject a proposal for an exhibit in part or in its entirety, or require the elimination or alteration of any part thereof; and

(e) The secretariat of the Exhibits Committee shall inform the Assistant Secretary General, Office of Central Support Services, of the authorization granted for a proposed exhibit.39. OIOS noted that the exhibition held of 30 June 2015 was not in compliance with these provisions. The Exhibits Committee did not authorize the exhibition because it did not receive a proposal in accordance with (b) above. The Chef de Cabinet of the Office of the President of the sixty-ninth session of the General Assembly informed the Exhibits Committee of the President’s decision to host a series of major cultural events, which included an exhibition, reception, and concert. The Committee informed the Office of the President that the exhibition was not in accordance with the regulations for exhibits in publicly accessible areas at Headquarters, but the Office of the President decided to proceed with the exhibition anyway. Therefore, the Exhibits Committee did not accept, reject or alter the “proposal”.

40. OIOS notes that the Exhibits Committee only had an advisory role in the matter, and in the circumstances described, it could not have possibly prevented the staging of the event. However, considering that the exhibition was attended by the Secretary-General and other senior Secretariat staff despite its non-compliance with the Secretary-General’s bulletin on exhibits, the perception that the NGO was given preferential treatment or favour (that too without performing any due diligence checks) could have an adverse impact on the Organization’s reputation. This risk is aggravated by the allegations in the criminal complaint against Sun Kian Ip group, with whom this NGO is affiliated."

While Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric has said this audit will not be made public until April 22, on April 6 as a full text exclusive Inner City Press published the audit while noting affiliates the UN audit omitted, and portions of the audit that some involved seem to be trying to cover up, including not only as to the Department of Public Information, but also the Global Compact and other back-doors into the UN, including but not limited to "Friends of the UN."

  Beyond the Under Secretary General of the Department of Public Information's responsibility for exhibits in the Visitor's Lobby such as the one indicted Sheri Yan's Global Sustainability Foundation held on June 30, 2015, she was also in charge when GSF was allowed, without any due diligence, to on March 25, 2015 sponsor an event entitled "Unveiling of the 'Ark of Return' Permanent Memorial." Audit at Paragraph 20 (b).

  Inner City Press asked the UN about DPI's engagement with the Global Sustainability Foundation around the Ark of Return in October 2015. To be diplomatic, this should have led to / required a recusal.

   DPI, the audit says, was "associated" with Ng Lap Seng's and Frank Liu's World Harmony Foundation through something called the "Friends of the UN" based in Los Angeles / Santa Monica. We'll have more on this.

  As Inner City Press demonstrated even before publishing the audit, the Global Compact as of April 2016 lists Ng's World Harmony Foundation as a member, despite the October 2015 indictments.

  Now we note that the Global Compact, represented at Ng's Macau event in August 2015, has a representative who because not a UN staff member kept the iPad Ng's Sun Kian Ip foundation gifted. What kind of "anti corruption" UN Global Compact is this?

On April 11, after publishing the above, Inner City Press asked Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric about it, and when Ban will answer questions. Video hereUN transcript here:

Inner City Press:  onthis OIOS inquiry, I want to ask you something.  One of the entities controlled by Mr. Ng Lap Seng is World Harmony Foundation.  I don’t know if it was you or Farhan [Haq] last week that said it’s still a member of the Global Compact, but it also seems to partner with DPI (Department of Public Information) is associated through something called Friends of the United Nations, which seems to be based in Santa Monica, California.  It’s a little unclear.  Can you say, is this one of the ground balls that you guys are going to be running down, in terms of what other groups enter through that way?  Also, what explains World Harmony Foundation six months after the indictment still being part of the Global Compact?  And one other Global Compact question.  The audit specifically says that, of the iPads given out at the Macau event in August, the representative of the Global Compact has not returned it, said that he’s not going to return it.  He’s not a staff member and he’s keeping it.  It’s right in the audit.  And so I wanted to know, since the Global Compact said it’s about transparency, anticorruption, is this okay?  And why isn’t he a staff member if he’s representing the Global Compact?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I don’t know.  That’s a question you should… in terms of World Harmony, whether or not they’re still a member, is a question you can ask of the Global Compact.  Obviously, as we said, the audit is an initial step, and other issues are being pursued.

Inner City Press:  But are they going… I mean, I guess Global Compact, UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), are they going to hold a press conference?

Spokesman Dujarric:  You should ask them.  They have press people, like the Secretariat, and they’re there to answer questions.

Inner City Press:  And the Secretary-General, you said he’ll be in the room tomorrow, but he won’t speak.  Looking at the list of press conferences, it seems like the last one was December of last year…

Spokesman:  He will have… there will be some sort of a press conference… there will be a press conference, probably on Friday, tied to the climate event.

  Climate of corruption, some say.

To be diplomatic, on April 8 this is what Inner City Press asked Dujarric, video hereUN transcript here:

Inner City Press: this OIOS [Office of Internal Oversight Services] audit, I obtained it, published it and I want to ask just for today, two specific questions about it.  One is, it talks about funds going to this thing called UNPAN, which I've heard of, but it seems to be pretty obscure.  And in looking at its website, it claims to be publishing articles they say were published in December 2016, which hasn't actually occurred yet.  So, there's something a little… What's been done on the recommendations as to… to UNPAN and the use of its name by the entities that were audited....

Spokesman:  The recommend… the audit, I think, as all of you have seen now, includes recommendations and includes the status of those recommendations, and we're following through with them.

Inner City Press: I'd asked Farhan [Haq] yesterday about the 30 June 2015 event in the Visitor's Lobby, which has a section of the whole audit about DPI [Department of Public Information] being in charge of it, not doing it.  I want to ask you about another event, which was 25 March, this unveiling of the Ark of Return permit memorial, which they said was no due diligence done of the Global Sustainability Foundation.  It seems like, in this audit, they make these two findings about DPI, these two events, but it's only looking at it, I guess, institutionally.  As I've asked you, when Global Sustainability Foundation was founded in this building, a senior adviser of the Secretary-General and his spouse were present…

Spokesman:  I mean, I think…

Inner City Press:  Does this audit look at individuals or only entities…?

Spokesman:  The audit looks at… looked at the systems.  When there are issues related to individuals, further investigations are being done.

Inner City Press:  Right.  But, it seems like they only mention the individuals that were in the criminal complaint.  There was nothing…

Spokesman:  You know, the audit… I think the audit speaks for itself and outlines how we're following up with it.

 There is a need for follow up.

  The audit cites Ng's Interntional Organization for South South Cooperation's engagements with, or capture of, the UN agency UNPAN, the UN Public Administration Network. A visit on April 8, 2016 to UNPAN's website finds them featuring articles they say were publishd in December 2016 - that is, in the future. Ironically, the article(s) address the topic of corruption. That is today's UN.

   The audit for example does purport to cover South South News, but not the big money South South Awards held in September 2015 at the Waldorf Astoria including the Under Secretary General of the Department of Public Information (DPI) Cristina Gallach.

   (Inner City Press in October 2015 questioned Ms. Gallach about her participation in the South South Awards, video here. On February 19, 2016 Gallach ordered Inner City Press to leave its long time office and stripped its Resident Correspondent accreditation, without once speaking to it. This is the subject of an April 5 letter to Ban Ki-moon from the Government Accountability Project, demanding that this “crude and heavy handed” retaliation be reversed, watch this site.)

 On April 7, Inner City Press asked UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq a first round of questions about some of the limitations of the audio, video here,


UN transcript here:

Inner City Press: I've now obtained and published this OIOS audit of selected NGOs and related entity that you said will come out on 22 April.  And there's different things I want to ask you about it, but main thing I want to ask about is, there's an entire section that runs from paragraph 37 through paragraph 40 that it's about an exhibit they say was improperly held in the Visitor's Lobby on 30 June 2015.  And it goes through a lot of detail, and it says that the Under-Secretary-General of the Department of Public Information is in charge of the exhibits committee and, I guess, in charge of the space.  And somehow, this exhibit was held in violation of a number of the rules that apply to it.  What I'm wondering is, what is the response?  Obviously, it seems like you guys have had access to this audit even before it was sent to Member States.  What is the thinking… the way they walk through it is they say… it seems strange. If she's in charge of the space and the exhibit took place without complying with the rules, what is the response to her responsibility for that?  And what steps have been taken?  The audit doesn't say that any steps have yet been taken to address that.

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  Well, with regard to the specific cases referred to in the audit, actions being taken to determine responsibility and any follow-up and any measures that may be deemed appropriate.  And so, we'll continue to study that.

Inner City Press:  And who decides? In getting the audit, there obviously is a long section about South-South News, but I noticed that a related entity of which there's been a lot of coverage is South-South Awards.  And it's unclear, it's not mentioned once in here.  And this is something that… I mean, the Secretary-General received the South-South Award.  This is an entity that's absolutely connected to Ng Lap Seng and Frank Lorenzo et al.  So, the question is, who… maybe that's OIOS, but who decided on the scope of this audit, the date that it would start, 1 January 2012, and the exclusion of… of… one of the things that people covering this scandal have focused on are these glitzy events in the Waldorf.  The Under-Secretary-General of DPI did attend in September, but prior to that, Ms. [Susana] Malcorra took an award for Ban [Ki-moon].  Why is this not in the audit?  And will there be an audit of South-South Awards going forward?

Deputy Spokesman Haq:  I think the audit is what it is.  It's prepared by the professional people in the Office of Internal Oversight who deal with audits.  And you can evaluate the results for yourself.

Inner City Press:  And just one other thing I wanted to ask about, because I know I'd asked Stéphane [Dujarric] and you, going back to October, about the inclusion of South-South News content in UN Television archives.  And, eventually, you came back with this answer that it was due to Habitat.  And I just… I've pointed out to you that there's a number of things that have nothing to do with Habitat, a number of inclusions that you just search UNTV for "South-South News".  But, I do notice in this audit that there is a reference to South-South News and Habitat.  So, I wanted to know, was this finding that you said of people looking into how it got in there, was it basically just taken from reading the audit, or was there a… a… a… an analysis, either by your office or DPI, of how the many other inclusions of South-South News and UNTV archives took place?

Deputy Spokesman:  No, our office had checked with DPI.  That was prior to us knowing about the results of the audit.

   Similarly, using timing as a basis of omission, by stopping the audit at January 1, 2012, OIOS did not address the issue of Ng's South South News getting a photo op directly with Ban Ki-moon in December 2011 at the UN Correspondents Association ball at Cipriani's 42nd Street after giving money to UNCA including for a two page ad spread in UNCA's “ball book.”

  While Dujarric's deputy Farhan Haq allowed four UNCA board members from Reuters, France 24 and Agence France Presse to seek to rebut this including by directly addressing Inner City Press in the noon briefing on April 6, the cut-off at January 1, 2012 is problematic, especially as related to Ban Ki-moon himself.

  The audit goes out of its way to say that Ban's Executive Office of the Secretary General did not know when a letter to it was modified to add the name of Ng's firm and of South South News. How is that possible? And again, why was Ban's direct dealing with Ng cut out from the audit by a matter of days?

   Many of the irregularities in the audit are things first reported by Inner City Press, such as  Yan's Global Sustainability Foundation funding the UN's slavery memorial, including an engagement with Gallach's DPI which even the audit criticizes while DPI tries to deny.

  Undeniable is that Gallach chaired the UN Exhibits Committee which allowed the bogus “Transformative Power of Art” exhibit on June 30, 2015.

   How does Gallach's no due process ouster of Inner City Press on February 19, 2016, when Inner City Press was thrown into the street and its laptop on the sidewalk by eight UN guards, look now that the audit is out? Even with the audit inexplicably omitting the South South Awards -- Ban Ki-moon got one of the awards -- the audit chides DPI for lack of due diligence for its slavery event, and Gallach as chair of the Exhibit Committee which allowed the Jun 30, 2015 “Transformative Power of Art” exhibit.

  Gallach, who was questioned by Inner City Press about her role at the South South Awards with Frank Lorenzo, had a conflict of interest and should never have been near the decision to thrown Inner City Press out of the UN.

 That decision must be reversed, as the Government Accountability Project has asked Ban, even before Inner City Press published the specifics of the audit.

Courthouse News Service of April 6 reports on GAP's first letter:

"The Government Accountability Project complained about Lee's fallout in a Feb. 26 letter to the U.S. Permanent Mission of the United Nations.
     'The action targeted Matthew Lee alone, and appears to be retaliatory in response to independent, critical journalism,' wrote Beatrice Edwards, the project's international program director.
     UNCA, the group whose meeting Lee got in trouble for recording, has denied the appearance of unfairness. 'UNCA stands for press freedom and vehemently defends rights of journalists at the UN and around the world,' the statement says."

  Really? Where? It was the Free UN Coalition for Access asking this month about the UN requiring minders, not only in UN Headquarters but also in South Sudan. The Courthouse News continues:

"Lee blasted what he described as 'post-hoc' justifications for his ouster, which he compared to a Franz Kafka novel. 'Initially, they tried to say that I secretly filmed a closed meeting,' he said.
'That's fallen apart because the meeting wasn't recorded as closed.' Lee laughed off allegations that he entered a restricted area to secretly film the meeting, which he broadcast via a popular web-casting platform. 'It's hard to say that a Periscope live-streaming with my arms up is secret,' he said.

     By downgrading his residential correspondent credentials to a second-tier status, the U.N. has restricted Lee's freedom of movement, forced him to be chaperoned by a minder."

  That's right, a UN minder courtesy of UN Communications chief Cristina Gallach and ultimately, Ban Ki-moon. In terms of violations, and cover up, see Paragraphs 37 through 40 of the OIOS audit.


   Inner City Press on April 5 asked if Ng's World Harmony Foundation is still part of the UN Global Compact; deputy spokesperson Haq said he would check but never came back with an answer. On April 6 Inner City Press asked again and Haq said yes - now we see it is confirmed and criticized in the audit.

   Worse while Inner City Press from October 2015 on asked Dujarric and Haq how South South News got its content in the UNTV archives run by Gallach's DPI, Haq belatedly mentioned only one use, connected to HABITAT. Now we see the HABITAT - South South News interaction is listed in the audit, which it seems Haq consulted before answering (and whatever else he did with the audit).

  But why didn't OIOS look into South South News' OTHER inclusions in DPI's archives of UNTV? Watch this site.

Another question, now more poignant with the full audit online, is why the wire services reporters from Reuters and Agence France Presse, on the Executive Committee of the UN Correspondents Association which took Ng's South South News' money and then gave Ng a photo op with Ban Ki-moon, didn't even MENTION that DPI, their partner in censorship, was listed and criticized in the audit.

 Not only the South South Awards, but the the Gallach-approved bogus exhibition criticized in detail in the audit is nowhere in their reports. Hence the April 6 threat and April 6 noon briefing, video here. We'll have more on this