By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive Follow Up

UNITED NATIONS, January 17, Video I here -- Minutes after the UN announced on November 26  the departure of Humanitarian Affairs chief Baroness Valerie Amos, Inner City Press asked UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq if the vacancy would be advertised for candidates from all countries, or if it is set aside for Amos' United Kingdom. And, Inner City Press asked on January 16, will the aid group OCHA works with play any role in the review? Video II here.

  On January 9, Inner City Press exclusively reported that the UK after first submitting only the name of Andrew Lansley has added too more, scarcely more qualified.

   And, significantly, the Italy had nominated Emma Bonino, sources exclusively told Inner City Press, and Germany nominated Martin Kobler, currently the head of the UN's Mission in the Congo.

  On January 14, Inner City Press was informed by sources of another candidate, a minister from the United Arab Emirates, Lubna Khalid Al Qasimi, a member of the ruling family of Sharjah. The UAE has, it is noted,, the "Humanitarian City." And the UAE did give $1 million to OCHA's CERF last month.

   Bonino is well regarded in international circles -- one source said she is "too strong a character" for UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to choose, another notes, sadly, health concerns -- and Kobler after Iraq has his experience in the Congo, for better and worse. Either is more experience than the UK troika.

  Beyond Lansley, whose qualification is a brief visit to UN health conferences, the other UK candidates sources tell Inner City Press are Caroline Spelman and Stephen O'Brien. 

  On January 17, Inner City Press asked Ban's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric, video here, transcript here:

Inner City Press: On the OCHA recruitment process to find the new person, I've been informed that the UK has submitted two additional names to make a total of three, that Italy, Germany and UAE have also put forward names and I'm sure others.  So, is it a wide open process?  Have other countries submitted more than one?  Is it still a matter of looking, giving in the first instance a look to the UK of those three names? What of the request by a number of highly respected humanitarian NGOs [non-governmental organizations] that the inter-agency standing committee, i.e. these NGOs that are outside of the UN system, be given some role in the review process?  And I wanted to know what’s the response of the Secretary to that request.

Spokesman Dujarric: Obviously, the recruitment process has been to get the best possible person.  Not for the first time, you seem to have more information than I do.  I have to say, we will not go into the details of the recruitment process.  As we said earlier, a call went out for names, for candidates.  A recruitment process is ongoing but the Secretary-General is solely responsible and it is being done under his authority.

Inner City Press:  In previous cases, even when there's no short list given out, there's a review panel, and I guess the request… since it's been made semi-publicly in a petition, especially for a job that involves providing aid in conjunction with NGOs all over the world--

Spokesman Dujarric:  I think the Secretary-General and his senior staff are well aware of what the job implies.  And one could argue that every senior job in the UN involves working with outside partners.  The recruitment is being handled by the Secretary-General and his staff.
 
  So... no.

  Could the UK really lose this Under Secretary General post? It's looking more likely. If Kobler were chosen, would fellow German Angela Kane have to leave? We'll have more on this.  Follow @innercitypress Follow @FUNCA_info

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 8 -- Amid attacks on journalists and freedom of expression in countries all over the world, the United Nations under Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is no sanctuary, nor champion, the Free UN Coalition for Access has found.

  Beyond stealth attempts to get the Press thrown out of the UN, there is often little but platitudes about attacks elsewhere.  FUNCA is Pressing the issue.

  On January 8, Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about Myanmar jailing at least 10 journalists, and Saudi Arabia preparing to flog a blogger, video here:

Inner City Press / FUNCA: I have two “freedom of the press” questions.  One is about Myanmar. The UN country team there. I saw that the Deputy Secretary-General’s meeting with the UN resident coordinator from Myanmar today.  In light of “Je Suis Charlie," I wanted to ask you the following:  Myanmar is listed as one of the top 10 jailers of journalists.  At least 10 journalists are in jail for having criticized the Government.  And I wanted to know, is it possible to know now or perhaps to hear from this resident coordinator, is this among the issues that the UN raises to Myanmar and what does the UN think of Myanmar’s record for locking up journalists for what they write?

Spokesman Dujarric:  I think the meeting is an internal meeting, as there are many between the Secretary-General… between the Deputy Secretary-General and the resident coordinator.  It’s a routine meeting.  As a principle and as I’ve said here repeatedly over the last few days, the Secretary-General has always reiterated his call for full freedom of the press.  He has spoken out when journalists have been jailed and that’s a consistent position of the United Nations.

Inner City Press / FUNCA:  How about flogged?

Spokesman Dujarric: Oh, go ahead.

Inner City Press / FUNCA:  it seems like the timing is just right, if he’s ready to speak out.  There’s a blogger in Saudi Arabia called Raif Badawi, he’s been sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes for his blogs.  And according to Amnesty International, he’s going to be receiving 50 flogs a week for the next 20 weeks and it begins Friday.  So I wanted to know… this seems pretty extreme.

Spokesman:  Listen, I have… I have not seen that report.  I will take look at it.

  Seven hours later, nothing, even as others have commented on the impending flogging of this blogger.

  On January 6, Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about attacks by Turkey on Dutch journalist Frederike Geerdink whose home in Diyarbakir was searched amid dark self-serving of terrorism.

  UN Spokesman Dujarric replied he hadn't heard of the case. Video here.

  Also on January 6, FUNCA asked UN Spokesman Dujarric about Kuwait sentencing to one year and eight months in jail Saqr Al-Hashash for insulting - Tweeting against -- the Emir. The UN's response was a platitude. But FUNCA will continue.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, December 5 -- The issue of sovereign debt restructuring was taken up against at the UN on December 5, with a resolution on modalities for negotiation sponsored by Bolivia for the Group of 77 and China put to a vote in the Second Committee of the UN General Assembly.

  The US spoke against the resolution and in favor of dealing with it through the International Monetary Fund -- note that the US is blocking IMF reform -- and was one of 16 countries to vote "no."  34 countries abstained and fully 128 countries voted yes.
 
  Afterward Bolovia's Permanent Representative Sacha Llorenti and his counterpart from Argentina Maria Cristina Perceval held a press conference in the UN Press Briefing Room.

  Inner City Press thanked the duo for the Free UN Coalition for Access -- tellingly, the old UN Correspondents Association wasn't there, though the UN Secretariat insists on setting aside question for what's become its UN Censorship Alliance -- and asked about the IMF, and a growing investors in Argentina's debt.

  Llorenti emphasized the greater legitimacy of the UN General Assembly -- one country, one vote -- over the pay to play environment of the IMF. He contrasted the 16 "no" voting countries as a percentage of those in the GA, versus their power in the IMF.

  Perceval joined and expanded in this comments, and declined to comment on the company Inner City Press had asked about, Highland Capital. She said this is not about Argentina's problem but the multilateral process. She said that Argentina took a lead on the issue of the disappeared, though it was too late to help Argentina.

  While understandable, there's nothing wrong with a particular country's problems being an engine for raising an issue of wider import. This is how things get changed, if they do, says the Free UN Coalition for Access. We'll have more on this.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 28 -- The UN in Geneva for days refused to release to US-based media without paid correspondents in Switzerland the UN Committee on Torture's concluding remarks on the US.

  Now they've gone online - and on police brutality they discuss Chicago but not Ferguson, Missouri, from which the family and supporters of Michael Brown, killed by police officer Darren Wilson, even traveled to Geneva. The report as belatedly put online says:

Excessive use of force and police brutality

26. The Committee is concerned about numerous reports of police brutality and
excessive use of force by law enforcement officials, in particular against persons belonging to certain racial and ethnic groups, immigrants and LGBTI individuals, racial profiling by police and immigration offices and growing militarization of policing activities. The Committee is particularly concerned at the reported current police violence in Chicago, especially against African-American and Latino young people who are allegedly being consistently profiled, harassed and subjected to excessive force by Chicago Police Department (CPD) officers. It also expresses its deep concern at the frequent and recurrent
police shootings or fatal pursuits of unarmed black individuals. In this regard, the Committee notes the alleged difficulties to hold police officers and their employers
accountable for abuses. While noting the information provided by the delegation that over
the past five years 20 investigations were opened into allegations of systematic police
department violations, and over 330 police officers were criminally prosecuted, the
Committee regrets the lack of statistical data available on allegations of police brutality and
the lack of information on the result of the investigations undertaken in respect of those
allegations. With regard to the acts of torture committed by CPD Commander Jon Burge
and others under his command between 1972 and 1991, the Committee notes the
information provided by the State party that a federal rights investigation did not develop
sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that prosecutable constitutional
violations occurred, However, it remains concerned that, despite the fact that Jon Burge
was convicted for perjury and obstruction of justice, no Chicago police officer has been
convicted for these acts of torture for reasons including the statute of limitations expiring.
While noting that several victims were ultimately exonerated of the underlying crimes, the
vast majority of those tortured –most of them African Americans–, have received no
compensation for the extensive injuries suffered (arts. 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16).
The State party should:
(a) Ensure that all instances of police brutality and excessive use of force by
law enforcement officers are investigated promptly, effectively and impartially by an
independent mechanism with no institutional or hierarchical connection between the
investigators and the alleged perpetrators;
(b) Prosecute persons suspected of torture or ill-treatment and, if found
guilty, ensure that they are punished in accordance with the gravity of their acts;
(c) Provide effective remedies and rehabilitation to the victims;
(d) Provide redress for CPD torture survivors by supporting the passage of
the Ordinance entitled Reparations for the Chicago Police Torture Survivors.

 The words Ferguson, Missouri and Brown appear nowhere in the report. In a Geneva press conference which was not on UN webcast or even the Treaty Bodies website, one UNCAT member was quoted by CNN. So it goes with the UN. We'll have more on this.

   The day after St. Louis Country prosecutor Bob McCulloch blandly read out a justification of the non-indictment of Police Officer Darren Wilson for killing Mike Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, on November 25 in New York a protest march came by the United Nations, taking over First Avenue with non-violent chants of "Hands up, don't shoot!"

  The UN locked its gates, and New York City sent Corrections Department busses to park in front of the UN compound. Inner City Press joined the march, headed to Times Square, video here and see below.

  On November 28 at the UN in Geneva reports including one on Torture and police brutality in the United States will be released. On November 24 the UN said it was restricting embargoed copies of this report to its "UNOG-based press corps" - that is, media that can afford to have a correspondent in Switzerland.

  How many of the media that have consistently covered the murder of Mike Brown can afford that?

  Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access immediately challenged this restricted distribution. First Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman in New York, and now the UN in Geneva have refused to lift the restriction, without substantive explanation. On November 27, Inner City Press and FUNCA asked:

"Now on the eve of the press conference, reiterating the request below, that embargoed copies not be needlessly restricted only to "UNOG-based" press -
there is as much or more interest by US-based media in the report on US torture and police brutality as by media based in Geneva.  But US-based media that have reporters based in UNOG are larger, more corporate media. So that particular embargoed report should be released to all UN system accredited media, not only those with reporters based at UNOG. The Free UN Coalition for Access says that should go the other way, too -- embargoed UN reports should not be restricted to NY / UNHQ based media either."

On November 27, the UN in Geneva via Liz Throssell Media Officer for the UN Treaty Bodies, replied:

"Dear Matthew, The six-hour time difference is very much in your favour, and unlike the journalists here you will have an entire working day to report on the Committee against Torture's "Concluding Observations" on the eight countries they have been reviewing this session. These will be posted online at around 8:00 a.m. New York Time -- you will be able to find whichever ones that interest you by scrolling down through the countries listed here."

 But this is not responsive. As Inner City Press and FUNCA have replied, "the request is that you not arbitrarily limit embargoed copies only to “UNOG-based journalists.” They will be able to publish stories at the embargo time, while despite your message, others will not."

  Why limited pre-distribution of this report to the media which can afford to have a Switzerland-based correspondent? What is wrong with the UN? Click here for Inner City Press and FUNCA's coverage of the opaque race to head the UN Department of Public Information, here. The UN must do better.

  Back on November 25 in Times Square, amid the neon glitz, there were chants of "we do this for Mike Brown" and light-up signs for Justice. Seventh Avenue was shut down, peacefully. "All Lives Matter" -- video here. But where is it headed?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 21 -- Protesting layoffs and lack of transparency, staff at the UN Office of the High Commission for Human Rights are petitioning new High Commissioner Prince Zeid for due process and accountability. Inner City Press has obtained the petition and is exclusively putting it online here.

In it, the OHCHR staff call for “transparent and comprehensive information on prospective cuts and restructuring, detailing their impact on savings and OHCHR’s overall financial situation... tangible accountability measures by attributing responsibility for the present crisis and taking the requisite action to prevent another financial crisis of this magnitude in the future and a meaningful dialogue and truly consultative decision-making on ongoing financial including putting decisions on hold.”

The staff complain to Zeid that “the lack of transparency, consultation and information on who, where or how, not to mention why, some of us are affected is deplorable and unacceptable.”

The lack of transparency in the current OHCHR extends from Geneva to New York, where the Office anonymously spun its Ukraine report to hand-picked scribes then refused when asked to explain the basis.

 Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access asked at the November 20 UN noon briefing that the New York representative of Prince Zeid hold a press availability about the report, including incongruities in report on labor issues such as the cut-off of pensions, click here for that.

  On accountability, the staff complain that the “senior management level evidently bears much more responsibility. Yet, it is other individuals at lower levels who are paying the price for this mismanagement.”

Also on accountability at the OHCHR, as Inner City Press has twice reported, document leaks from inside the UN have identified improper service of Morocco, on the question of Western Sahara, by a current staffer at the OHCHR, Anders Kompass, and by another who has recently left.

 Prince Zeid has yet to publicly address this scandal, though Inner City Press understands that no only is their an investigation by the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services, but also inquiry from member states such as Sweden. Inquiry on them was not permitted at Zeid's one press availability this week in New York. Zeid's spokesman has indicated there will be no comment at all until OIOS' "investigation is completed." Since the OIOS process is far from transparent, this is the way the UN system tries to make issues go away, but it is even less appropriate at the UN's human rights office.

   Zeid should address this scandal - and his Office's staff. Watch this site.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 13, updated with transcript -- When the International Monetary Fund held its biweekly embargoed media briefing on November 13, Inner City Press again asked about Ebola, including new World Bank estimates of budget shortfalls in Liberia.

 Inner City Press on November 13 asked, "On Ebola, what is the IMF's response to the US call for debt forgiveness for three countries? The World Bank has indicated that Liberia's revised 2014-15 budget has an unmet financing gap of more than half of the budget deficit projected at over $300 million. What can or will the IMF do about this?"

  IMF Deputy Spokesperson William Murray replied that given the flare up of Ebola cases in unexpected areas, "the IMF staff's previously projections were assuming the epidemic would be brought under control in the first quarter of 2015. However it now appears that it could be well into the second half of 2015 before the Ebola epidemic is brought under control in these three countries." Full transcript below.

 Murray said, "further support, preferably in grants form, will be needed." He replied similarly on debt relief, that the IMF would reach out to donors; he said that Executive Board involvement will be needed.

  From the IMF's subsequently released transcript:

IMF's William Murray: This is from Matthew Lee, Inner City Press. On Ebola, if not answered, what is the IMF's response to the U.S. call for debt forgiveness for three countries, and given the World Bank's estimate of budget shortfalls in Liberia, what is the IMF going -- IMF doing, or will it do? Well Matthew I think I answered that question earlier. I mean, we have -- we've been closely and carefully following developments in West Africa and working actively with the authorities there. One thing I wanted to underline, is that you know, the situation in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone remains precarious. The international effort underway, together with behavioral changes on the part of populations, is making progress in controlling the disease. However, although the incidents in new cases has declined in parts of Liberia, there have been recent flare-ups in previously little affected towns. The IMF staffs' previous projections -- we're assuming that the epidemic would be brought under control by the first quarter of 2015. However it now appears that it could be well into the second half of 2015 before the Ebola outbreak is brought under control in the three affected countries. As a result, the economic outlook for these countries is now worse than it is at the time of the recent additional IMF support, and significant financing gaps are emerging for 2015. Further budget supports through bilateral and multilateral donors, preferably in grant form will be needed. And just to underscore, should the current outbreak be more protracted or spread to more countries within Sub-Saharan Africa, it would have larger spillovers, undermining confidence, investment decisions and trade activities. So the bottom line is we're closely monitoring the situation in the neighboring countries as they step up Ebola preparedness measures and address other fallouts of the epidemic.

  At the UN on November 12 when the UN Security Council met, Liberia's Ambassador Marjon Kamara spoke not of the IMF but of the World Bank, saying "the World Bank recently gave a gloomy depiction of the economic effects of the disease on the three most affected countries - Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone."

     Per Thoresson, Deputy Ambassador of Sweden which chairs the UN Peacebuilding configuration on Liberia, specified that “according to the World Bank, the two-year regional financial impact could reach $32.6 billion by the end of 2015. The World Bank also indicated that Liberia's revised 2014-15 budget has an unmet financing gap of more than half of the budget deficit projected at over $300 million.”

  So where's the money going to come from?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 5 -- After the President of Sierra Leone jailed a journalist for his reporting on Ebola, as well as for daring to question President Ernest Bai Koroma's performance, what has the UN done?

  The UN had a peacekeeping mission in the country, has a Country Team and now the UN Mission on Ebola Emergency Response, UNMEER. So at the UN's November 5 noon briefing Inner City Press asked:

Inner City Press: In Sierra Leone a journalist, David Tam-Baryoh, has been put in jail, maximum security prison, for his reporting on Ebola under a law that says that it is a crime to undermine Government efforts to fight the epidemic. He's also questioned the third term for the Presiden Koroma. So, I wanted to know what is the UN system, given its involvement through UNMEER and otherwise, what do they say about this case? Also, it seems does UNMEER have any human rights mandate or component to it? I thought all kind of UN entities had some overarching or inherent Rights Up Front…

Spokesman Stephane Dujarric: There's a country office in all three countries. Human Rights Up Front does apply to all UN staff and missions. What is… I don't have the particulars of this case, but it is clear that journalists need to be allowed to do their work free of intimidation and fear.

Inner City Press: What about a law that says, obviously, it's important to fight Ebola, but should a journalist be, should a law exist in which you clearly could be arrested for…?

Spokesman: I think, clearly, the media has a very important role to play in fighting… in part of our response against Ebola, whether it's fighting stigmatization or other issues.

Those are generalities, but what is the UN doing? What does Ban Ki-moon's "Rights Up Front," born of his failure in Sri Lanka in 2009, really mean? Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access have been told that UN inquiries are being made. We'll have more on this.

  It was under Sankara that the country's name change from "Upper Volta" to Burkina Faso, land of the upright. History records two meetings of Sankara and France's Francois Mitterand. At the Vittel conference, Mitterand stared stony-faced ahead as Sankara spoke of seeking foreign relations with countries beyond France.

  And later, after South African apartheid leader Pieter Botha had visited France, Sankara criticized Mitterand to his face in Ouagadougou, after Mitterand drove through the streets waving at the crowd. Soon the Compaore coup would kill Sankara, and France and Boigny would congratulate Compaore. The rest is history.

 And new colonies, too: France has laid claim to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, controlling the Security Council's pen and most recent trip there, down to which media could go on the "UN" plane.

  France for over sixteen years has controlled UN Peacekeeping, now through Herve Ladsous, twice spurned, who refuses to answer or even take Press questions.

  What would Thomas Sankara say? On this day, and going forward, we must ask. Watch this site.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 24, with a song -- On the UN having brought cholera to Haiti, the UN Secretariat of Ban Ki-moon didn't even "appear" at the October 23 court hearing. Inner City Press asked UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq again on October 24. Haq replied, "I can confirm there was a hearing yesterday. In light of its immunity, the UN did not appear in court. The US asserted the position that [the UN] officials are immune." Video here (October 24) and here (October 23).

  Inner City Press asked Haq about U.S. Attorney Ellen Blain arguing to U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken that the case could unleash a huge set of claim against the UN. Why, Inner City Press asked, doesn't Ban Ki-moon just waive immunity in this case, while maintaining it in others? No answer.

  Twenty minutes later when pianist Lang Lang appeared in the UN Press Briefing Room as a UN Messenger of Peace promoting the evening's UN Day concert, Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access thanked him and asked what he thought of the UN's impunity for bringing cholera to Haiti, and if he would think of any other ways the UN should improve.

  Lang Lang apologized, saying he hadn't heard of the case.

  That the UN Secretariat tries to downplay it, with UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous refusing Press questions about it is one thing. But earlier on October 24 the so-called UN Correspondents Association took a briefing that would and should have been in the same webcast UN Press Briefing Room as Lang Lang appeared it and put it, without webcast, into the clubhouse the UN give to what has become its UN Censorship Alliance.

   UNCA, this UN Censorship Alliance, angled to privatize this event after itself promoting, protecting and having provided photo ops to Ban Ki-moon, and seeking to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN.

  One continues to wonders why those involved in this event and broadcasters' film didn't go to the UN's Press Briefing Room, sponsored by a member state like St. Vincents which spoke on the issue, as covered here by Inner City Press. That way it would have been promoted to and have included all journalists at the UN, not just that subset which pays money to UNCA. Also, that way it would have been in UNTV webcast, viewable around the world including in Haiti. As noted, an important documentary and panel, but the means are the end: today's UNCA gives Ban Ki-moon's UN more impunity. We'll have more on this.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 16, more here -- As the UN General Assembly Hall filled for the annual election of UN Security Council members, the largest entourage passing the GA stakeout was that of Turkey, photo here, for its face-off with Spain and New Zealand for two seats.

  But when the voting was over, in the third round, Turkey got only 60 votes, bested by Spain with 132. In the first round New Zealand won a seat with 145, joining Angola with 190, Malaysia with 187 and Venezuela with 181 and eight abstaining - including the US?

  In the middle of all this voting, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon insisted on holding a "travelogue" stakeout, as one diplomat called it, about his trip to Israel and Palestine. 

  After receiving numerous complaints from diplomats, Inner City Press ran and asked Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric if Ban didn't agree that the General Assembly is the highest organ of the UN, with all 193 member states represented - and all 193 present on October 16 for voting.

  Dujarric replied that this was the only time that Ban could speak. Really? Inner City Press put the same question to the spokesman for General Assembly President Sam Kutesa, Jean Victor Nkolo, who said diplomatically that the vote took place in the GA Hall, presided over by the PGA.

  Afterward diplomats told Inner City Press that Turkey's policies, most recently on Kobane, hurt it, that even some Arab League states that "had" to vote for Turkey told their Asian colleagues not to. One diplomat asked, perhaps, if Turkey will now give up the "Turkish Lounge" area it branded in front of the Security Council -- and from which the Free UN Coalition for Access notes the press has been banned. Another asked if the 3:30 pm photo op of Ban and Turkey's foreign minister will be canceled. We'll have more on this.

   Inner City Press polled diplomats about their votes -- there were more laughs than candid answers -- then headed up to the photographers' booth over the GA floor. All was well until the President of the GA said to not take photos as countries cast their ballots. So they can tell you what to photograph?

  On behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access, Inner City Press challenged the policy, tweeting a photograph of the desks below, complete with New Zealand's swag bag.

  UN Media Accreditation and Liaison came in and told Inner City Press to leave the booth, it was only for "wire services." But MALU has no definition of wire service, as another FUNCA member has long pointed out. And the spot Inner City Press was ousted from was given to the UN's in-house photo service. This is today's UN.

  On the eve of the vote at the UN to elect five new members to the Security Council, one of the candidates in the contested race, Turkey, held a reception at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel.

  Numerous diplomats milling around the Starlight Roof Ballroom marveled to Inner City Press at Turkey's bombing of the PKK while across the border Kobane is under siege. But even most of these predicted that Turkey would win a seat, citing the OIC, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and its 57 votes.

  Introduced by Turkish Ambassador Halit Cevik, Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu thanked those in attendance, singling out his Spanish counterpart, then gave a short speech. He said, "Peace at home, peace in the world," which some found ironic.

More here.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, October 4 -- More than twenty four hours after French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian came to the UN on October 3 and met the UN's Ban Ki-moon and former French diplomat Herve Ladsous, the UN had provided no read-out.

  Earlier on October 3 Le Drian had met with US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, and Hagel said they discussed if France will join the US in airstrikes in Syria. Did Le Drian discuss this with Ban and Ladsous as well?

 Even France 24 reported what Hagel said. To extrapolate to the UN is not a stretch - except, apparently, for big wigs or grands fromages in the UN press corps. At NPR, Michele Kelemen interviewed Le Drian who said France is very "transparent" about its positions on Syria. So why no read-out?

 There emerges a photo of Le Drian and Ladsous, marking some agreement, here. Ostensibly it's for the French troops in Sangaris to cooperate with Ladsous' MINUSCA mission in the Central African Republic. But with reports of French troops killing in CAR, most recently in Bambari, would UN Peacekeeping under former French diplomat Herve Ladsous really look into this? He does not answer Press questions.

   As regards Syria, Ladsous most recently ordered peacekeepers from Fiji and the Philippines to surrender to the Jabhat al Nusra rebels, or terrorists, in the Golan Heights.

  When Inner City Press tried to asked Ladsous questions on September 26, Ladsous refused to answer. On September 27, as Inner City Press filmed from the entirely legal UN General Assembly stakeout area, Ladsous came over and blocked Inner City Press' camera and demanded, what do you want with this?

UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric has been asked twice about what Ladsous did, for the Free UN Coalition for Access, but has yet to respond. Dujarric previously told FUNCA that then French Ambassador Gerard Araud should have accorded a UN correspondent from Lebanon (more) respect rather than telling the correspondents, “You are not a journalist, you are an agent.” But Dujarric declined to instruct the French mission to this effect. Of Araud's replacement Francois Delattre the Press so far knows little but retains an open mind.

  We repeat, now also on behalf of FUNCA:

  For a meeting like Ban's with Le Drian, there should be a a read-out. Watch this site.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 27, video here -- When UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous arrived at the General Assembly stakeout to try to do his question and answer on Mali early as he did on South Sudan, without the Press present, it didn't work.

  Turkish Cypriot leader Dervis Eroglu had booked the stakeout, and Inner City Press was there. As Ladsous stood at the stakeout, Inner City Press filmed as it did on September 26 when Ladsous refused to answer basic Press questions about his missions in Central African Republic and Golan.

  Ladsous demanded, What are you going to do with this? He and a staffer tried to block the filming with file folders. Then he got UN Media Accreditation to ask Inner City Press to put down the camera and stop filming. But this is the stakeout. The Free UN Coalition for Access defends the rights to cover the UN. (The old UN Correspondents Association has partnered with Ladsous, first along with Agence France Presse and then further.)

   Ladsous and one of his "publicity" staffers tried to block the filming with file folders. Video here. Finally Ladsous walked away with his team including the Reuters correspondent who has himself engaged in censorship, telling Google to remove from Search his "for the record" complaint to UN Media Accreditation, claiming it is copyrighted. It is a strange position from a media that claims exclusive leaks.

   After Ladsous stormed off, two of his staffers returned to say that the stakeout still might happen. But at 2:42 pm, an hour and forty-two minutes after it was supposed to happen, the UN said it was canceled - but not why.

   Before UN Peacekeeping held its September 26 meeting about the Central African Republic, Inner City Press asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about Uganda deciding not to send its troops as peacekeepers to the MINUSCA mission, under Herve Ladsous.

Dujarric said he would try to get an answer, but none was sent six hours later. So when Herve Ladsous, the fourth French chief of UN Peacekeeping in a row, came to the General Assembly stakeout past 6 pm on September 26, Inner City Press several times put the question to him: What about the Ugandans? Video here.

  Ladsous made his opening statement only in French, then ignored the Press question in English about Uganda pulling out of his peacekeeping mission, at the same time that the Philippines is pulling out of Ladsous' mission in the Golan Heights after he ordered their troops to surrender to the Al Nursa Front extremist group, which still has their UN Peacekeeping vehicles, weapons and uniforms.

Instead, Ladsous pointed at Agence France Presse, which previously on Ladsous' behalf filed complaints against Inner City Press, including through UNCA, now the UN's Censorship Alliance.

  The first time was when Inner City Press reported that Ladsous was by no means the first choice to replace Alain Le Roy atop peacekeeping, but was deposited into the job after the UN decided that the first choice, Jerome Bonnafont, was too flashy. So they got Ladsous.

Ladsous on September 26 proceeded to brag about new countries coming into UN Peacekeeping, singling out Sweden. Inner City Press once again asked, what about Uganda pulling out of the CAR mission, and added, what about the Filipinos pulling out of his mission in the Golan? Video here.

Ladsous as has become his practice - compilation here, UK coverage here - refused to answer and walked away with two of his aides.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, September 15 -- The UN's lack of accountability, from bringing cholera to Haiti to using as “peacekeepers” armies under investigation for war crimes like those of the DR Congo and Sri Lanka, is enabled by the lack of even a basic Freedom of Information Act covering the UN.

Inner City Press, which has litigated FOIA cases all the way to the US Supreme Court and submitted FOI request to dozens of countries, has long pushed for a UN Freedom of Information Act.

   As reported on September 15 by the Columbia Journalism Review, “Inner City Press... reported that Burnham’s successor, Alicia Barcena, said it would be in place by the end of 2007. But the General Assembly never agreed on the scheme, and it was quietly shelved. “There were differing views among Member States about what constituted openness,” said Stephane Dujarric, spokesman for Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, in an email.”

  (Inner City Press asked Dujarric about the quote at the September 15, 2014, noon briefing, video here and embedded below.)

  What leadership -- citing “differing views,” the UN Secretariat gave up before it even began. CJR also quotes a rights group which won't disclose what issues it raises to Ban, and correspondents happy to get leaks and text from their Western sources. This same organization, beyond its Executive Committee trying to get the investigative Press thrown out of the UN, withheld its Q&A with Ban Ki-moon even from its own members, here.

  In order to pursue more access to information -- and the protection of the rights of investigative journalists against such insider approaches -- Inner City Press co-founded the new Free UN Coalition for Access.

  FUNCA says it is absurd for the UN Secretariat to blame member states for its own refusal to be transparent with its own financial information. Furthermore, how can Ban's UN make claims about “we the peoples” while blaming unnamed governments for banning accountability to the peoples?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 30 -- Two day after the details of the peacekeepers detained and restricted in the Golan Heights were first published here, but with the UN still refusing to say who was detaining and restricting them, the UN Security Council at 5:21 pm on August 30 put out this Press Statement which while vague narrowed it down:

"The members of the Security Council strongly condemned continued attacks today on United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) positions in the Golan Heights.  They reiterated their strong condemnation of the ongoing detention of 44 Fijian peacekeepers from position 27, as well as the surrounding of position 68, where Security Council-designated terrorist groups and non-state armed actors continue to trap 40 Filipino peacekeepers."

   The UN Security Council cites "SC-designated terrorist groups" soon after their resolution on ISIL and Al Nusra. Here's a page with photos and rationale.

 And the "non-state armed actors"? A previous grabbing of Golan peacekeepers, not followed up by UN Peacekeeping's Ladsous, involved the Al-Yarmouk Brigades. Now it's time to name names, something that UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous has for too long refused to do.

   And so we note the reporting, here in Al-Monitor, that "Jabhat al-Nusra, along with Fallujah-Houran Brigade, Syria Revolutionaries Front, Saraya al-Jihad, Bayt al-Maqdis and Ahrar al-Sham, began a battle called 'the real promise' to seize control of the devastated city of Quneitra and the crossing connecting it with the Golan Heights."

  So there are some names. Kidnapped for their own good has also been a line UN Peacekeeping has used. Now some are under fire - but UN Peacekeeping under Herve Ladsous won't say by whom.

 On August 28 after the UN belated announced that “forty-three peacekeepers from the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) were detained early this morning an armed group in the vicinity of Al Qunaytirah.. in addition, another eighty-one UNDOF peacekeepers are currently being restricted to their positions in the vicinity of Ar Ruwayhinah and Burayqah,” Inner City Press began looking into it.

The UN confirmed "Fiji and Philippines," but only anonymously, initially to scribes. This is Ladsous' UN Peacekeeping.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 14 -- US President Barack Obama's dual rationale for the campaign of airstrikes in Iraq has been the plight of the Yazikis on Mount Sinjar and the protection of US personnel in Erbil.

  Now with the US saying it has broken the siege of Mount Sinjar, whither the campaign?

 On August 14 the UN had at its noon briefing a call-in the spokesperson of its Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Kieran Dwyer. Inner City Press asked Dwyer if airdrops now promised by Australia and Germany are still needed -- and about a UN map showing humanitarian problems and lack of access in Ninewa and Anbar provinces. Click here to view.

   Dwyer replied that bilateral requests are up to Iraqi authorities, and said, yes, there are problems and lack of access in Anbar and Ninewa (where ISIL held Mosul is).

  At the US State Department briefing less than an hour later, the Department's deputy spokesperson Marie Harf was asked if the US might now provided airstrikes or "assistance" in Anbar, and if this would be covered by the last War Powers notice Obama gave to Congress.

  I am not a lawyer, Harf said, adding in essence that the US acts when it can be useful with its "unique capabilities." She was asked why the US did not use military force to protect civilians in Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo or Central African Republic -- Sri Lanka could be added -- and called each case unique.

  The line-of-the-briefing at the State Department was that seven airstrikes to prevent a genocide is not a bad deal. Indeed.

   Smaller gauge, Inner City Press is still asking how exactly the UN is "coordinating" aid, for example could he say why the UK had aborted an airdrop of aid as reported by BBC?

 OCHA's Dwyer on August 11 made various claims about coordinating then couldn't or wouldn't explain the UK's abortive aid delivery, telling Inner City Press to ask the UK or BBC. What kind of coordination is this?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, August 9 -- After the US on August 8 announced completion of its second air-drop of aid to Sinjar Mountain in Iraq, President Barack Obama on August 9 said “I don't think we're going to solve this problem in weeks."

   Obama said that the Iraq military when far from Baghdad did not have the commitment to hold ground against an aggressive adversary: that is, ISIL.  So, Obama said, would move to "play some offense."

  So, the question arises, who else is going to play?

 On August 9 Inner City Press was reliably and for then exclusively informed that Iraq had written to the UN Security Council invite any and all UN member states to deliver aid to areas controlled by Islamic State, with Iraq's agreement. [On August 9, the UK mission confirmed this to Inner City Press, below.]

  And so the question arises -- what about aid from Iran? From Russia? From China -- which has told the Press of $4.9 million in medical supplies to Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone for ebola?

  At the US State Department's briefing on August 8, much as made of Iraq inviting the US, and only the US, in . But now, would others including Iran be welcome? Shouldn't they be?

  Aid is needed, and not only in Sinjar.

Update of 10:18 am: Ten hours after publication of the above, Inner City Press asked the UK Mission, president of the Security Council for August, to confirm receipt of Iraq's letter. By email the Mission to its credit quickly responded, "Matthew, I can confirm the UNSC received a letter from the Perm Rep of Iraq that attached a resolution passed by the Parliament of the Republic of Iraq on 7 August, which calls on the UN and hum'n organisations to provide relief to refugees."

  We'll have more on this.

 Back on August 7 US President Barack Obama announced authorization for airstrikes on Iraq. Then three of his Senior Administration Officials (SAOs) held a 50 minute conference call with the press.

Earlier on August 7 after 6:30 pm, Council president for August Mark Lyall Grant emerged to read a press statement, followed by question and answer stakeouts by French deputy Alexis Lamek and Iraqi Permanent Representative Alhakim.

  Inner City Press asked Lamek if France will take military action. While we'll await the French mission's transcript, Lamek eventually said "that needs to be done indeed."

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 31 -- When UN General Assembly week begins on September 24, US President Barack Obama will speak second after Dilma Rousseff of Brazil, as before. But according to the scheduled Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access are today putting online here, then things get more interesting.

The head of state of Morocco, presumably the King, is scheduled for that same first morning, along with France's Francois Hollande and Argentina's Cristina Kirchner. That afternoon starts with Evo Morales of Bolivia, which has just declared Israel a terrorist state.

Thursday, September 25 has the head of state of Iran, presumbly Hassan Rouhani, and then back to back Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine and President Sisi of Egypt. That afternoon has for example Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe and Mahinda Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka, as well as Joseph Kabila of the DRC and Erdogan of Turkey.

On Friday, September 26, the head of state of the State of Palestine, Mahmood Abbas, is on the schedule; in the afternoon there's Haiti, Venezuela, Serbia and Nepal.

Saturday, deep into the General Debate, Russia and China go back to back represented by ministers, as is Security Council member Australia. The afternoon has Salva Kiir of South Sudan but from Burundi, the Vice President.

Monday, September 29 has the Deputy Prime Minister of Syria and ministers from Thailand and Bahrain. The afternoon has Malaysia.

The final day, September 30, has the Head of Government of Israel and a minister from Sudan in the morning; in the afternoon a minister of North Korea or the Democratic People Republic of Korea as well as Myanmar. And then it's over, or should be. Watch this site.

By Matthew Russell Lee, Follow up on exclusive

UNITED NATIONS, July 24, more here -- How can it be that the UN does not disclose when Secretary General Ban Ki-moon accepts free travel on a private jet, and on July 24 would not tell Inner City Press how and on whose plane Ban flew to Iraq? Video here.

   This follows the UN's only belated acknowledgement, after Inner City Press asked several times, that Ban began his Gaza-related tour by flying on a Qatar-funded jet to Qatar, then Cairo.

 Bigger picture, does the UN, while claiming to abide by its own stated ethics rules, simply not have time for them and waive them?  When Inner City Press asked on July 23, UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq said, if you are here as a lawyer, "You're not entitled to be at the noon briefing." Video here from Minute 4:26.

 Haq has denied that there is any conflict of interest in accepting the Qatar-funded travel, but has still not said when or how an opinion was sought from the UN's Ethics Office. Video here and embedded below. Inner City Press on July 23 asked, in writing:

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 19, more here -- On the day UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is to "travel to the region" of Israel and Palestine, diplomats told Inner City Press that Ban will fly -- on a Qatari plane -- to Qatar, Ramallah (but not for now Gaza), Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait.

  At 6:20 on July 19, the UN announced "The Secretary-General is traveling to the Middle East this weekend to express solidarity with Israelis and Palestinians and to help them, in coordination with regional and international actors, to end the violence and find a way forward. To that end, he will begin his travel on Sunday in Doha, Qatar. From there, he will travel onward to Kuwait City, Cairo, Jerusalem, Ramallah and Amman in his effort to encourage a durable cease-fire. Other stops may also be added. He will return to New York by the end of the week."

   There was no answer, yet, on the use of a Qatari plane. The diplomats who complained to Inner City Press questioned not only Ban taking free flights from a particular country, but also how the use (and landing) of a Qatari plane will play in, for example, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

   Ban's spokesman has responded but not yet answered.

 Inner City Press asked Ban's top two spokespeople, and the spokesperson listed as on weekend duty, the following:

     Later on July 19, the following was received, which we publish in full 25 minutes after receipt:

"The Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), Iyad Ameen Madani, asked the Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon to visit the Gaza Strip during his current tour of the region in order to observe first hand the severe damage to innocent human lives, the destructions of homes and infrastructure caused by the unrelenting Israeli raids on Gaza, that have also claimed the lives of hundreds of mostly defenseless Palestinian elderly and children."

  On July 18 after the Gaza meeting of the UN Security Council, the Press was sent "the revised draft resolution that will be put before the Members of the Security Council by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in its capacity as the Arab representative on the Security Council."

  Inner City Press put the document online, here, explicitly comparing it to Resolution 1860 (2009), which passed because the US abstained but did not veto, as it would later do on settlements. We will stay on this.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, July 12, more here -- The UN Security Council just past noon on July 12 issued a press statement on Gaza, after several rounds of back and forth.

  A half dozen media were present as the Security Council president for July, Rwandan Ambassador Gasana, read out the four paragraphs that Inner City Press first published on July 11.

  Afterward, Inner City Press asked the State of Palestine's Observer Riyad Mansour of the status of the (stronger) draft resolution, and if he expects US Secretary of State John Kerry to mediate or facilitate.

  Mansour said if Israel does not stop, other steps will be taken including in the Security Council.

  As Inner City Press reported on July 11, the press statement had initially been scheduled for 9:30 pm, then after a brief delay sources attributed to the US, was circulated to other Council members at 10:20 pm, under the "silence procedure" until 9 am on July 12. This was extended to noon.

   But at that time, the Security Council presidency, the Mission of Rwanda, told Inner City Press that the silence procedure was extended until 12 noon, when Rwandan ambassador Gasana would read the statement on-camera at the Council stakeout.

  Inner City Press asked, did any Council "break silence," and raise an issue? The Rwandan UN Security Council presidency replied, "Yes, very short silence procedure. Text put into silence Friday evening at 10:20 pm to expire Saturday morning at 9 am."

   It's true: the "other thirteen" in the Security Council, beyond the US and Jordan, shouldn't be taken for granted. They too have to check with their capitals.

  Another source said the final three hours delay was so the Security Council president could read it out on-camera. Afterward, a Gulf media demanded an explanation of the three hour delay, then asked another question to Mansour and the Saudi Ambassador beside him.

  There were four paragraphs, and three questions from two media. That was it.

  On July 11 after Inner City Press specified the timing -- and the stated theory that the US gave in after an emergency session of the Arab Group at the UN moved toward a resolution that the US would have to veto -- something changed.

  This month's Security Council president's Deputy Permanent Representative stepped forward at 9:43, on Twitter, to say that "No Council member has received any draft statement on Gaza this evening."

 And a quick check by Inner City Press resulted in a response that the US then delayed putting the draft under the "silence procedure" - and the four-paragraph draft, first published by Inner City Press here:

  "The US doesn't want to have to veto, so they can continue to point the finger at Russia and China on Syria," as one source put it.  So the US agreed - or was said to agree -- to a press statement calling for a ceasefire.
 
  The source went on "If Israel disregards it and continues, what will the Council do?" What, indeed. .

  Inside the Security Council on July 10, Israel's Ron Prosor told BanKi-moon that while he had given his speech, five rockets had been fired at Israel (Prosor played a rocket warning siren on his phone, to make his point.) At the stakeout, on-camera, Prosor raised the number of rockets to six.

  While Palestine's Riyad Mansour spoke on camera, the stakeout was nearly full with journalists. But when Prosor spoke there were far fewer -- one of whom told Inner City Press, “This is a question for FUNCA,” the Free UN Coalition for Access. Again Prosor played the rocket siren warning, and used the line “From Abuja to Falluja.”

  Inner City Press asked Prosor about those who say Hamas is not formally part of the unity government; he replied, “Hamas is Hamas.”

  On Palestine joining or complaining to the International Criminal Court, Inner City Press' question which Ban Ki-moon dodged on July 9, Prosor did not answer. Yet.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 21, more here -- On the Iraq - Syria border, the day after UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon speechified at the Asia Society that "Syria’s neighbours should enforce a firm prohibition on the use of their land borders and airspace for arms flows and smuggling into Syria," ISIS took over a major crossing at Qaim, 200 miles west of Baghdad.

  At the UN's noon briefing on June 20, after Ban's speech, Inner City Press asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric:

Inner City Press: I didn’t see it in his speech, but it seems like at least a large part of the Iraqi border may be controlled by ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and the Sham) or ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant).  So, in terms of realism, does this mean now absent Government control, it’s just an open flow of weapons? Is there an acknowledgement by the UN that nothing can be done in terms of weapons?

Spokesman Dujarric:  Well, I think, you know, Member States, groups that have an influence all have a responsibility to stop the flow of arms.

 Surely ISIS is listening to Ban. The Syrian Coalition of Ahmad Jarba, meanwhile, praised the speech and called for "serious" weapons. Inner City Press asked Dujarric:

Inner City Press: the Syrian Coalition of Ahmed al-Jarba has put out a statement praising the speech and saying that:  “There should be serious weapons and training for moderate opposition forces.”  And I wanted to know, just to be clear, the Secretary-General is not in favour of that, thinks this is a bad call?

Spokesman:  I think the Secretary-General could not have been clearer when he’s speaking about an arms embargo and speaking for the halt of flow of arms into Syria.

 But how clear *is* Ban Ki-moon, when he meets with Jarba?

  Now it turns out that near the Asia Society Team Ban got served with legal papers about having brought cholera to Haiti. Dujarric's deputy Farhan Haq told some media -- refusing to answer the Press -- that Ban himself didn't get the papers. We'll have more on this -- and on the UN's pre-spinning of Ban's speech, reviewed here.

   How can Ban's UN be taken seriously on Syria or anything else while dodging service of legal papers for cholera in Haiti, and refusing to answer about it?

On the humanitarian front, Ban “appealed for an end to the sieges” and for “immediate unfettered humanitarian access across internal front lines and across borders.”

  Later on June 20, Dujarric's and Haq's office murkily released a UN report which tracks Ban's speech, which the UN's go-to wire service then said it had "obtained."

  A draft resolution on cross-border aid is being negotiated in the Security Council. But on June 19, Australian ambassador Gary Quinlan told the Press there will be no vote this week. When there is, will that be news? Watch this site.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 13 -- In Iraq as ISIL advances, at the UN Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq if it's true that UN assesses Baghdad to be safe - and is so, why? Video here.
 
  The UN's Haq said while different parts of Iraq are under threat, the UN's assessment is indeed that Baghdad is safe. If you say so.

  Inner City Press also asked for any UN comment on calls to arm the population in Baghdad to confront ISIL. Haq said he'd seen the comment made by "Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, we don't have any comments to make about that." Video here.

  Iraq has blocked much of social media, and Twitter has suspended an account associated with ISIL, which live-tweeted ISIL's advances.
  
   Was Twitter's suspension of @Nnewsi at governmental request -- and to confirm, which government?

   Both censorship moves have echoes in the United Nations, which as part of its renovation accepted money and named an area by the Security Council previously open to all accredited journalists the "Turkish Lounge."

   As set forth below, an anti-Press complaint to the UN's Stephane Dujarric, now Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson, has been banned from Google's Search by an invocation of copyright similar to Erdogan's.

   Google has accepted and acted on DMCA complaints about leaked e-mails, for example from Reuters to the United Nations seeking to get the investigative Press thrown out, and has then blocked access to the leaked documents from its search.

  In this case, copyright is being (mis) claimed for an email from Reuters' Louis Charbonneau to the UN's chief Media Accreditation official Stephane Dujarric -- since March 10 Ban Ki-moon's new spokesperson -- seeking to get Inner City Press thrown out of the UN. 

  Access to the document has been blocked from Google's search based on a cursory take-down request under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

 If this remains precedent, what else could come down?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 5 -- The UN, which since its founding has assigned office space to media to cover it, threw out the News Agency of Nigeria. Its name was simply cut off the door to what had been its office space. Photo here, by FUNCA member Luiz Rampelotto.

  The Free UN Coalition for Access opposed and opposes the move, particularly since other privileged media have been allowed to leave their assigned offices empty and unused for long periods - the rationale used by the UN.

  Inner City Press on behalf of FUNCA asked UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric about it at the June 4 noon briefing, video here, and embedded below.

  FUNCA also put the question to the UN in writing. Now, the UN has responded to FUNCA that "if a new correspondent is accredited to the UN, the Agency will have a space in the building." 

  A flier FUNCA posted was torn down, by the UN says it didn't remove it. So who did? The UN's Censorship Alliance? They said nothing about NAN's eviction, instead concerned with demanding first questions they do not report upon, and celebrating the large space the UN gives them as actual media are thrown out.

  From the June 4 UN's transcript:

  The New York Civil Liberties Union asked the UN to publicly implement due process rights for the journalists which cover it -- but the UN has yet to do so. FUNCA continues to push for this, and for example for the UN to belatedly take some action on French Ambassador Gerard Araud, in the middle of a UN press conference in the UN Press Briefing Room, telling a correspondent, “You are not a journalist, you are an agent.”

  But the UN would not convey, even in its typically wan fashion, the stated position that correspondents should be treated with respect to Araud or the French Mission to the UN. And UNCA, the UN's Censorship Alliance, "dragged its feet," according to the correspondent to whom Araud said, "You are not a journalist, you are an agent."

  Nigeria is a member of the Security Council; its Permanent Representative Joy Ogwu held ten question and answer stakeouts during her presidency of the Security Council in April. (South Korea held only three stakeouts during its May presidency, by contrast.) So why is the News Agency of Nigeria having its UN work space taken away?

  Here is a flier the Free UN Coalition for Access put out, soon after its founding, about double standards (it referred to a previous configuration of offices, over the UN's Dag Hammarskjold Library)

FUNCA Asks a Question: Double Standards Much?

The New York Times has an office inside of UN Headquarters. But its door has been closed, without opening, for months. A thick pile of fliers, months old, clogs the doorway. There’s dust everywhere.

But the UN is doing nothing, because it won’t apply its rules equally to all.

In fact, reporters who want to cover the UN are being denied access to UN Headquarters – on the grounds that there’s just not enough space to go around. And Big Media gets handed big offices that some of them never even use.

The UN’s media guidelines say that reporters need to come in the UNHQ three times a week in order to keep their office space. It’s a catch-22: if you don’t have an office, you also can’t get the right kind of press pass that lets you move freely in and out of Headquarters.

And plenty of small newspapers have lost their desks because they couldn’t keep up with the attendance requirement. But of course, these standards aren’t applied across the board: the New York Times hasn’t even opened the door to their space since October.

What kinds of conditions are these? Is it any wonder that we see less and less reporting on international affairs, or that newspapers increasingly rely on wire services for their news? What other options are open to small media?

UN correspondents have launched the Free United Nations Coalition for Access, a group dedicated to guaranteeing equal access for all reporters looking to cover the UN.

We formed FUNCA after a small group of big media – the UN reporters from Reuters, AFP, and Voice of America — banded together to try and dis-accredit Inner City Press, an independent news site that produces tough, watchdog reporting on the UN.

Then the head of the UN’s Peacekeeping Department, Herve Ladsous, announced that he was no longer taking questions from Inner City Press – a policy which he has bizarrely, blithely kept going for months. This means he hasn’t had to answer questions about, say, the UN’s role in allowing rapes in the Congo, or working with the rapists, or in bringing cholera to Haiti. Far from putting pressure on him, most of the UN press corps has sat by silently and let Mr. Ladsous turn a deaf ear to all the tough questions.

FUNCA wants to fill the press freedom vacuum. Right now, we’re advocating along other things for the rights of freelancers who have been denied UN credentials (even as other freelancers have credentials and big offices). We’re pushing more UN officials to give on the record briefings to the press corps. And we now work with journalists around the world, from Somaliland to Colombia to Burundi - and Nigeria.

   Note that despite a commitment that while UNCA maintains a glassed in bulletin board in front of the large office the UN gives it -- while News Agency of Nigeria is thrown out -- FUNCA can post fliers on a separate board, not glassed in, recently these have been torn down, including one about the need for the UN to take action after French Ambassador Araud told a correspondent, “You are not a journalist, your are an agent.”

  We are inquiring into these flier tear-down, just another form of censorship at the UN. Watch this site.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 20 -- A group of UN spokespeople which considers such issues as media accreditation is meeting in New York today and tomorrow, and Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access asked to observe or at least get a summary.

  On May 20, UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric said no, it is internal, and declined to take a follow up question. But previous UNCG Annual Principals Meetings have come out with statements like that it is "important for the United Nations family to engage with all forms of new media, but that some, such as blogs, present particular challenges for accreditation."

   Even today, the UN lags behind the OSCE in raising concerns about the detention by Ukraine authorities of journalists like those of Life News, which put on YouTube video of “UN” marked helicopters in Ukraine. Inner City Press asked Dujarric about this on May 20 and was told that no one in the UN system has even raised the issue to Kyiv, unlike the OSCE. Video here.

   Inner City Press wrote to UNICEF to asked to attend or get access to a webcast of the UNCG meeting but was told: “The UN Communications Group meeting is co-hosted by UN DPI and UNICEF. It’s an internal meeting so isn’t open via webcast or otherwise.”

   But if it concerns topics like accreditation, shouldn't it be open or summarized? Watch this site.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 13, more here -- Ukraine is a major provider of helicopters and air services to the UN, and amid the Kyiv government's “counter-terrorism” offensive on May 13 video surfaced of a white helicopter marked “UN,” here.

The UN has in the past complained of governments using UN-marked equipment for their own military goals. So Inner City Press submitted these questions on deadline to Ban's spokesman Stephane Dujarric and his deputy Farhan Haq:

This is a Press request for UN comment on deadline on this video http://youtu.be/W0P_sv_x4E0

featuring “UN” helicopters in Ukraine. Is this appropriate? Why would Ukraine have helicopters with such markings inside Ukraine? What does the UN allow Ukraine to use them for? What will the UN do? On deadline.

  Hours went by without any substantive answer. Inner City Press asked about the issue at the UN Security Council stakeout, video here from Minute 5:17.

  More than six hours later, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Office of the Spokesperson provided this response to Inner City Press:

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 8, 2014 -- For months, UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous dodged and refused questions about rapes by the Congolese Army FARDC in Minova. Video compilation here.

   Then after other UN officials emphasized that some Congolese soldiers were belatedly being prosecuted, on May 5 the verdicts declared not guilty three dozen of the 39 charged, convicting of rape only two of the soldiers, for more than 130 rapes.

  On May 8 Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq who will decide on implementing Ban's stated human rights due diligence policy of suspending support to units engaged in abuse, and which are not held accountable and are given impunity. Video here from 20:33.

  Haq replied, "I wouldn't say pretty much impunity - there was a trial - that in itself is a step. We are disappointed, we have to evaluate what happened.

  Inner City Press asked, who makes the decision? Mister Ladsous? 

   Haq said, we were pressing for a trial, it's not my place to comment on the workings of the judicial system of the DRC. Accountability meant getting the trials.
  
   But only two convictions for 130 rapes?

  The day before on May 6 at the UN Inner City Press asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's associate spokesperson Vannina Maestracci would would now happen, under the UN's and Ladsous' claimed "Human Rights Due Diligence" Policy. Video here.

    Maestracci insisted, "We said we were disappointed." But is that enough? Is that the due diligence policy? Maestracci said others will be "analyzing" the two convictions.  Inner City Press asked, who will be analyzing, and who would decide on suspending support to the 41st and 391st Battalions?

    "You got my answer," Maestracci said.

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 19, more here -- In the untransparent annual UN cat and mouse process around Western Sahara, French Ambassador Gerard Araud continues denying online any French role, this year or before, in blocking a human rights monitoring mechanism in the MINURSO mission.

 Araud claimed, "there is not, there has not been, this year or last year or previous years, any French veto threat! It is a fact."

 Now he adds, "my 'word' is simply that, contrary to your assertions, France never threatened to veto any proposal. Nothing more, nothing less."

  This stands in contrast below to 2010, when Uganda, Mexico and as now Nigeria were serving on the Council along with Araud, who is now slated to leave in July -- and to the process in April 2011.

  On April 18, 2011, multiple sources told Inner City Press that France opposed any MINURSO human rights monitoring mechanism, counter-proposing only cooperation with the special rapporteurs of the Human Rights Council.

  On April 27, 2011, Inner City Press aske Araud about the High Commissioner for Human Rights' recommendation that a right monitoring mechanism be included in MINURSO. Araud replies that "Ban Ki-moon's" final report, into which the French chief of UN Peacekeeping had input, hadn't adopted the OHCHR's recommend. That is where the lobbying is -- and it is attributable to France, with refusals to answer questions playing their role.

   Araud opposed a human rights monitoring mechanism in 2010 as well:

  On April 30, 2010, six hours into Western Sahara negotiations in the Security Council, the threat to call the vote was made. There would be three abstentions against the resolution drafted by the so-called Group of Friends: Uganda, Nigeria and Mexico.

A compromise that was apparently acceptable to all 15 members, but was opposed by Morocco, would refer to UN "mechanisms" as a euphemism for human rights.

  Frente Polisario says it could live with this language, and is angry that Morocco has become on this issue the one in "P-5 Plus One." Others wondered if France only agreed to put this language to Morocco because it knew Morocco would shoot it down.

Inside the consultations, Inner City Press was informed, Austria's Ambassador wondered out loud how France, so important in forming the concept of human rights, could be so vehemently opposing the inclusion of the term in the Western Sahara resolution.

French Ambassador Araud responded angrily that no one can teach human rights lessons to France.