Global Inner Cities Global Inner Cities  In Other Media e.g. Somalia, Ghana, Azerbaijan, The Gambia   Click here for Global Inner City Archives 2006

  Click HERE for Daily UN Reporting on InnerCityPress.com    s  We welcome readers' comments or critiques.  Contact us

Click for March 1, 2011 BloggingHeads.tv re Libya, Sri Lanka, UN Corruption by Inner City Press   2014: MRL on Beacon Reader

December 17, 2018


On Cameroon UN Guterres Envoy Fall Claimed Biya Gender Desks But After Fact Check No Answer

By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR Goot PFT NYP

UNITED NATIONS GATE, December 14 -- After Paul Biya who has ruled Cameroon for 36 years lied that Transparency International was observing his re-coronation, and burned village after village in the Anglophone regions while hiring lobbyists to seek and get support from UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, on October 22 he claimed to win over 71% of the vote and even that 16% of those eligible voted in the Anglophone North-West and South-West regions. None of this is credible. Nor is the new report by Guterres' failed envoy Francois Lounceny Fall, nor Fall's presentation to the Council, entry to cover which Guterres is corruptly barring Inner City Press on December 13, for the 162nd day. After Fall's pitch, and dubious claims of concern from countries which are withholding all documents about Cameroon which Inner City Press has requested from them under Freedom of Information laws like the Dutch WOB, on December 13 and 14 Inner City Press asked the UN: "December 14-6: On Cameroon, on which you have been refusing Inner City Press' questions, now that Francois Fall has said he visited in November and met Government officials, state with whom else he met. He describes “Gender Desks” in police stations but an Inner City Press reader today called the Kumba police station and they'd never heard of it. What is the basis of Mr. Fall's statement?" Hours after the December 14 UN noon briefing at which those allowed in asked not a single question about anything in Africa, much less Cameroon, Guterres' deputy spokesman Farhan Haq sent this: "Regarding question December 14-6, we have provided Mr. Fall’s briefing to the Security Council, in which he details his concerns about Cameroon and his work there." And the Gender Desks? Here is a paragraph of Fall's and Guterres' report: "5. The security situation in the North-West and South-West regions of Cameroon
continued to deteriorate. Sporadic fighting between security forces and armed groups
was reported throughout the reporting period. On 12 July, the convoy of the Minister
for Defence was attacked on two separate occasions near Kumba in the South-West
region. On the night of 28 to 29 July, an armed group attacked a prison in Ndop in the
North-West region, resulting in the escape of 163 inmates. On 26 September, armed
individuals also attacked a prison in Wum in the North-West region, leading to the
escape of 80 inmates. On 5 November, nearly 80 students and staff from a secondary
school in Bamenda, in the North-West region, were kidnapped. All of the students
were released the following day. During the reporting period, there were reports of
sexual violence perpetrated by both security forces and armed groups. In response,
“gender desks” were established at police stations in the South-West region in an
effort to establish a safe and confidential reporting process on sexual and genderbased
violence and related crimes. On 11 October, religious leaders of the Catholic,
Protestant and Muslim communities in the English-speaking regions held a meeting
in preparation for an “Anglophone General Conference” scheduled to be held in Buea,
in the South-West region, on 21 and 22 November, but which was later postponed. At
the same meeting, they reiterated their appeal for the cessation of military and
insurgent operations in the English-speaking regions." And Antonio Guterres... took Biya's golden statue, made a Budget Committee deal to stay quiet on the slaughter, and had roughed up and banned for 161 days and counting the Press which asked him about it.
December 10, 2018

UN Bribery Guilty Verdict Against Ho of China Energy Fund Committee Shows Need For Reform and Oversight of SG

By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR PFT CEFC Video

UNITED NATIONS, December 8 – What will any new Ambassador to the UN, whether Heather Nauert or anyone else, find  that needs to be addressed? Most recently, in two words, rampant and unrelenting bribery, including offers of weapons for oil by UN non governmental organizations which UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres refuses to even audit - while roughing up and banning the Press which asks him about it.

Three years ago Macau based businessman Ng Lap Seng was arrested and charged with bribing UN General Assembly President Josh Ashe and others, though Sun Kian Ip Foundation and other groups still in the UN. Ng was convicted of multiple violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and money laundering. But the issue of faux NGO purchase of the UN hasn't gone away. In fact, a second UN bribery case ended this week in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York with seven guilty verdicts.

In this second case, Patrick Ho was found guilty of seven of eight counts of FCPA and month laundering. (He was only not guilty on money laundering in Chad - where the bribe was not through any US bank but in cash, $2 million in a gift box). The evidence showed that the NGO he ran, China Energy Fund Committee, used its ongoing UN consultative status to pay bribes to Ugandan foreign minister - and Ashe's successor as President of the UN General Assembly -- Sam Kutesa. He was working with precedessor Vuk Jeremic while Jeremic was UN PGA. CEFC even offered weapons, tanks and drones, to Chad's long time president Idriss Deby for oil blocks or a stake in the Chad Cameroon pipeline. (Inner City Press published documents here.)

The night of the verdict I asked UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres what he will do to clean up the UN, where he has left CEFC without any audit, still in consultative status with the UN. On his way from his Mercedes to a glitzy fundraiser including George and Amal Clooney, Guterres refused to answer. The next day when asked by another journalist why Guterres had refused to answer banned Inner City Press' question, his spokesman Stephane Dujarric claimed that the UN has “cooperated” with the prosecution. But the bribery group remains in the UN, unaudited.

Why has the case of US versus Ho, and now the guilty verdicts, garnered relatively so little interest, with the corruption of the UN exposed by it scarcely mentioned all? SG Guterres is hoping it goes away. In terms of corruption, he did not disclose and refuses to answer on the African business links of his son Pedro Guimarães e Melo De Oliveira Guterres. He refuses to answer how much he spends in public funds flying to his home in Lisbon at least sixteen times sofar as SG.

   So CEFC remains an accredited non governmental organization with the UN's Economic and Social Council, while investigative Inner City Press for which I have been covering the case has been dis-accredited by and ousted from the UN, put on a list of those permanently banned without notice, due process or appeal. On December 7 I was informed I am banned from a “UN Human Rights” event on December 10 to be addressed by Guterres and his human rights commissioner Michelle Bachelet. But this reporting will not stop - Guterres' corruption of the UN must be addressed, through oversight or as is discussed elsewhere, impeachment. From the lofty goals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to Guterres' censorship for corruption is UNacceptable.

  With UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet and her Deputy Andrew Gilmour set to speak in the UN on human rights day on December 10, Inner City Press responded to an invitation and was told, "Thank you for registering to attend the Human Rights Day event at the United Nations on Monday 10 December. On Monday, please come to the UN Visitors’ Gate on First Avenue opposite 45th street starting at 2pm, at which time entry passes will be distributed."

Then, past six p.m. on Friday, December 7 this from Bachelet's and Gilmour's Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights: "Dear Matthew, We have received notification from UN Security that your name was flagged as "BARRED" on the list we submitted for passes for Monday's event (3pm, ECOSOC Chamber). We will therefore not have a pass for you and are unable to facilitate entry.
Thank you for your interest and best regards,
OHCHR New York Office." Photo of email here.

   Inner City Press immediately wrote back, to the sender and Bachelet and her assistant, to Andrew Gilmour and to the moderator of the event, "Particularly since you are the UN Office of the High Commissioner for *Human Rights,* did you not ask why a journalist who asks the Secretary General and his spokesmen about the killings in Cameroon, Burundi, UN corruption, UN peacekeepers' sexual abuse of civilians, and Sri Lanka, is “BARRED” from attending your human rights event - without any hearing or appeal? I will appreciate your Office's answer to this."  We'll have more on this.

 Bachelet gave a speech on October 15 in the UN's Third Committee, she emphasized a prioritization of social and economic rights and said one of the officials of her office is "on mission in Silicon Valley" in the US. There are questions about this - but Inner City Press which has covered human rights and the UN for more than a decade was for the first time banned from access a High Commissioner's speech. This has been raised repeated to Bachelet since she took office but she has so far done nothing, not even responded. Meanwhile on October 12 Cameroon, from whose Paul Biya Secretary General Antonio Guterres took a golden statue and favors in the Fifth (Budget) Committee and remains silent on the slaughter of Anglophones, was elected to a seat on the UN Human Rights Council. This system is failing - but if Bachelet cannot even answer on Guterres maintaining a secret banned list including not only Inner City Press but also "political activists" - and anti-corruption campaigners - then the UN of Guterres has hit its newest low. December 3, 2018

In UN Bribery Case Ho Plotted Bribing PGA Ashe with Yan and Repeatedly Entered UN Covered Up by Guterres

By Matthew Russell Lee, Video I II III RS HK

FEDERAL COURTHOUSE, November 30 – In the UN bribery prosecution by the US against Patrick Ho of China Energy Fund Committee, on the morning of November 30 the prosecution  detailed how CEFC bought UN PGA Sam Kutesa - and played an audio wiretap of Ho discussing bribing UN PGA John Ash with Sheri Yan, who did jail time in the first UN bribery case of Ng Lap Seng. As to Uganda, CEFC instead of $500,00 case did a wire transfer - it was cheaper, through pliant HSBC bank which also money launders for Mexican drug cartels - and there was Ho, in purple like today, as Museveni's inauguration. He brought gift with him - a vase, painting, what locked to be a clock - to a dinner at Kutesa's residence. Then the prosecution flashed a list of the times Ho entered the UN - the UN has that information, you see, though they refused to provide it when Inner City Press asked, as to Francis Lorenzo, Ho and Carlos Garcia, preferring to ban Inner City Press. The prosecution left for Monday showing the agreement under which CEFC and its missing Chairman Ye bought unit 78B in Trump World Tower. After a wan cross examination by Ho's lawyer Benjamin Rosenberg (Judge Preska essentially shut him down), the jury was told they may get the case as early as Wednesday, when Antonio Guterres like his predecessor wil be put up for sale at Cipriani on 42nd Street. Th week, along with the depths of UN corruption, revealed how in China the formal government has a murky relationship with quasi state firms like CEFC, which on the one hand paved Xi's way into the Czech Republic and on the other, tried to get Chad's Deby to "make" Chinese stat oil company CNPC to get it a piece of the action, perhaps for the Defense Committee of the Chinese Communisty Party, presumably the sources of the weapons and drones CEFC was offering to Deby and others in Libya and South Sudan. This is the NGO that Antonio Guterres has refused to audit and keeps in the UN while roughing up and banning Inner City Press. Kutesa's sale of the UN began through previous PGA Vuk Jeremic, who told Kutesa it would be "win - win" with CEFC. Then Ho emailed Kutesa's chief of staff Arthur Kafeero, whom Inner City Press wrote about before being banned from even entering the UN by UNSG Antonio Guterres. Later Ho did his emailing with Sam's wife Edith Gasana Kutesa, who asked for money to supposedly make good on an electoral campaign pledge help Kutesa's young constituents (although she also bragging that Kutesa had no opposing candidate). She wrote, Youth are impatient - so send me the money! Ho arranged for $500,000 while pitching Edith on all the things (and people) CEFC had bought in Czech Republic. As Inner City Press reported and asked about before being roughed up and banned by UNSG Antonio Guterres, the Czech Ambassador headed ECOSOC, which refused to even look into CEFC's accreditation after Ho's arrest. CEFC used the UN to pitch weapons to dictators. And Guterres is covering up for them. Ho met Kutesa and his son Isaac for three hours in the PGA office - the type of entry Guterres is trying to prevent coverage of - and as his "PGA residence." Ho would email Kafeera and be scheduled as  speaker at the UN, which under Guterres took CEFC's $1 million even AFTER Ho was arrested. The UN of Guterres is corrupt. Periscope video here. Also on November 30, finishing up on the Chad scheme with FBI Agent Galicia, a CEFC web page with Bill Clinton was shown. We'll have more on this. On November 29, Senegal's former Foreign Minister Cheikh Gadio admitted he took $20,000 from an unnamed courier from a businessman he did not want to identify. Then Gadio pushed a journalist in the street and told Inner City Press he would answer its questions later. Video here (YouTube), shorter (Twitter). But if that seemed to give home to Ho, the upcoming Uganda scheme should not. Whether not a disputed prosecution chart comes into evidence, the undelying timeline is damning. Ho for CEFC told then UN President of the General Assembly Vuk Jeremic, who was already working for CEFC, that they wanted to meet his successor Sam Kutesa of Uganda. This culminated, while Kutesa was still UN PGA, in CEFC's chairman Ye Jianming being named a special adviser to the United Nations PGA. This is disgusting, given that CEFC was pushing weapons to Idriss Deby in Chad. More disgusting, Ho used Ye's inroaded into the Czech Republic, whose ambassador to the UN, chairing UN ECOSOC, refused to act on ECOSOC accredited CEFC even after Ho was arrested. Guterres and his spokesman Stephane Dujarric played their cover up roles in this. We'll have more on all this. Gadio is not the defendant in this bribery case - he is, at least so far, the prosecution's lead witness, with a Non Prosecution Agreement. But does that NPA cover Gadio, after his testimony, pushing a journalist on the street outside the court? Video here (YouTube), shorter (Twitter). Inner City Press along with other journalists, mostly from Hong Kong media, waiting outside the Southern District of New York courthouse at day's end. Gadio emerged and Inner City Press asked him how he thought the day had gone. He did not answer but rushed past. Inner City Press asked, louder, "Are you still running for president of Senegal?" Gadio turned back and pushed a journalist who was following him. This happened again a few blocks away. Finally on the stoop of a pharmacy on Canal Street Gadio's companion said he would not be answering questions today but to give your business card. Inner City Press gave its and asked if the former President of Senegal Gadio wrote took money from China for dropping Taiwan was Abdoulaye Wade. Gadio looked back in recognition - then was gone. Inner City Press preiously questioned him in the UN when he was the Organization for Islamic Cooperation's envoy on the Central African Republic. Much has changed since then. As Inner City Press reported yesterday, Gadio was already on shaky ground when his email to Ho complaining he hadn't gotten Chinese money after, as Senegal's foreign minister in 2005, he worked to drop Taiwan and recognize the PR of China. But the bag of (campaign) cash allegation, dropped without warning in cross examination by Edward Kim, caused a break in the proceeding. Inner City Press rushed down to retrieve its phone and tweet and quickly live stream the news, here. Back upstairs, the name of the businessman was not disclosed, allegedly to protect him - from current president Macky Sall? We'll have more on this. Gadio testified for a second day about how he tried to broker weapons to Chad's President Idriss Deby from CEFC's Patrick Ho, who delivered gift boxes with $2 million in cash inside. Gadio's testimony got more specific, that in March 2015 Deby wanted to keep the meeting with CEFC small and confidential, "because of the war situation." Gadio cited Boko Haram, and Ho in a text message said CEFC's offer, for CNPC's 10%, was $200 million "and some arms." This is the head of a still UN accredited NGO, offering weapons for oil - with no audit by SG Antonio Guterres.November 26, 2018

After Cameroon Leak Said PR Van Oosterom Thanked Lobbyists Now Skype Hearing on WOB Appeal

By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR Letter  Denial

UNITED NATIONS GATE, November 22 – As the Cameroon government of 36 year President Paul Biya prepared for today's re-coronation to a seventh term by slaughtering civilians in the Anglophone regions as well as in the North, it  re-engaged Washington lobbying firm Squire Patton Boggs, on a retainer of $100,000 per quarter plus expenses, documents show. The UN belatedly acknowledged to Inner City Press, which UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres had roughed up on July 3 right after it spoke to Cameroon's Ambassador Tommo Monthe, that Guterres met with a Cameroon delegation on July 11. Guterres' spokesman Farhan Haq has three times refused to answer Inner City Press e-mailed question whether Guterres was aware his meeting was stage managed by lobbyists at Patton Boggs, and what was discussed. While suspended but before the UN outrageously purported to impose a lifetime ban on entry, Inner City Press asked the same and more to the Dutch Mission to the UN, in writing and in person. (And now has its "WOB" appeal set for a hearing, albeit by Skype, below, as now Dutch Ambassador Karel von Oosterom and his Spokesman refuse to answer any Inner City Press questions, unlike other UNSC Ambassador, November 19 video here.) After Guterres banned Inner City Press from entry from July 3 onward, in order to report on the UN Inner City Press had to seek answers other than at the UN Noon Briefing and UN Security Council stakeout position, from which Guterres and Smale also banned it. Inner City Press asks question in front of the UN Delegates Entrance, and has gotten about put online responses from, among others, outgoing UN Human Rights Commissioner Zeid, Burundi's Ambassador, and on August 20, for example, a diplomat on the North Korea sanctions committee -- whose Dutch chair Karel van Oosterom refused to comment.

 This stakeout is where Inner City Press asks questions only because Guterres and Smale have banned it since July 3. But in her August 17 letter, Smale justifies the ban imposed July 3 with this post-July 3 interviews, and says that UNnamed member states - and somehow correspondents - have complained.

 Is that Dutch Ambassador Karel van Oosterom? Inner City Press submitted a FOIA or WOB request - and now an appealon which there will be a Skype hearing, including based on October 7 election irregularities and the denial's evasion on Dutch role in UN censorship which now includes a secret barred list which violations applicable law, see below.  First, the request: "This is request under the WOB / Dutch Freedom of Information act for the following records as that term is defined in WOB, including but not limited to all electronic records, emails, text/SMS message and communications in any form, involving the Netherlands Mission to the UN in New York since August 15, 2017 regarding Cameroon and/or Southern Cameroons and all meeting including Amb van Oosterom's July 11 meeting with Cameroonian ministers, all responses to communications received about Cameroon including but not limited to Inner City Press' communications of

July 14, 2018 to "Eybergen, Bas van"
NYV@minbuza.nl
Frits.Kemperman [at] minbuza.nl,
NYV-COM@minbuza.nl, Oosterom and Kaag

July 25, 2018 to the same recipients;
and August 12, 2018 to the same recipients;
and multiple verbal questions to your PR and DPR since July 3.
  To explain the last part of this request, the head of UN Dep't of Public Info Alison Smale in issuing a lifetime ban to my on August 17 wrote "“We would also note your conduct at the entrances of the United Nations premises and nearby, including the use of profanities and derogatory assertions and language toward individuals accessing the United Nations, in close proximity to them. Video / live broadcasts of this are frequently published on the Inner City Press' website and other media platforms. This conduct gives rise to potential safety concerns for Member State diplomats...The conduct described above has generated multiple complaints to the United Nations from Member States."

  Given Ambassador van Oosterom and his Deputy PR's flat refusal to answer or even acknowledge the Cameroon questions I asked them at the Delegates Entrance stakeout, most recently Amb van Oosterom on August 20 about North Korea (on which other delegations answered, despite PR van Oosterom being the chair), this is a request for all record that reflect or are related to any communications by the Dutch Mission to the UN about questions or comments received at the stakeout(s).
Given the situations in Cameroon and South Cameroons, I and Inner City Press asked for expedited processes of this request." And we received back this: "Bedankt voor uw e-mail.
Afhankelijk van de aard en inhoud van uw bericht kunt u binnen twee werkdagen een reactie tegemoet zien.
Uw kenmerk is E3487878
Met vriendelijke groet,
Informatie Rijksoverheid
Thank you for your e-mail.
Depending on the nature and content of your message you can expect a reply within two working days.
Your reference is E3487878
Kind regards,
Public Information Service, Government of the Netherlands." But now on September 20, another extension: "
Date September 2Oth 2018 MinBuza-2018.1035870
Re Postponement notice in relation to Wob application
Dear Mr. Lee,
By email of August 22th 2018 you submitted an application to my Ministry as
referred to in section 3, subsection 1 of the Government Information (Public
Access) Act (Wet openbaarheid van bestuur; WOB) concerning PVVN meetings
regarding Cameroon.
The Wob provides that a decision must generally be taken within four weeks after
receipt of the application, but may be deferred by four weeks. It is not possible to
decide on your application within four weeks because more time is necessary to
ensure that the decision is taken with due care. On the basis of section 6 of the
WOB 1 am therefore extending the time limit for deciding on your application by
four weeks.
1f you have any questions concerning the status of your application and the time
limit for dealing with it, please contact DJZ-NR.
Yours sincerely,
For the Minister of Foreign Affairs,
the acting head of the Netherlands Law Devision of the Legal Affairs Department,

mr. drs. ie" But having received no documents on October 22, still banned but watching van Oosterom say how he would tweet each of the ten points in his UN Security Council speech, Inner City Press itself tweeted that it had no WOB response. Minutes later an email from his Alternate Political Coordinator
Charlotte van Baak with a letter dated October 17, five days before, denying access to any documents at all. Letter here on Patreon, here on Scribd.

Netherlands Denies Press Ac... by on Scribd

This is the text: "Mission of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the United Nations 666 Third Avenue, New York 10017 www.netherlandsmission.org
Contact Bas van Eybergen
Date
October 17, 2018 WOB Request on Cameroon
Dear Mr Lee,
In your email of 8/22/18 you requested information on Cameroon, invoking the Government Information (Public Access) Act (Wet openbaarheid van bestuur; WOB).
The documents you requested concerned "all electronic records, emails, text/SMS message and communications in any form, involving the Netherlands Mission to the UN in New York since August 15, 2017 regarding Cameroon and/or Southem Cameroons and all meeting including Amb van Oosterom's July 11 meeting with Cameroonian ministers, all responses to communications received about Cameroon including but not limited to Inner City Press' communications."
Statutory framework Your application falls within the scope of the Government Information (Public Access) Act.
Specification of documents In response to your application, the following documents have been found:
- Internal emails from August 2017 until October 2018
External emails from August 2017 until October 2018 A preparatory document for a meeting with a delegation of another UN member state, dated 07/12/18 One instruction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to the Permanent Mission, dated 10/12/18 Two reports of the Permanent Mission to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, dated 08/23/18 and 10/14/18
Decision I have decided not to disclose the requested documents. Please find the considerations for my decision in the next paragraph.
Considerations
Intemal Consultations Section 11, subsection 1 of the WOB provides that where an application concerns information contained in documents drawn up for the purpose of internal consultation, no information will be disclosed concerning personal opinions on policy contained in them.
It is apparent from the history of the legislation that the phrase "documents drawn up for the purpose of internal consultation' should be deemed to include papers drawn up by civil servants, the ministry's senior management and political leadership, correspondence within a ministry and between ministries, draft documents, meeting agendas, minutes, summaries and conclusions of internal discussions and reports of civil service advisory committees. As regards these documents, the intention to treat them as documents for internal consultation must either be expressly apparent or reasonably surmisable. This limitation of the duty of disclosure has been included in the WOB because it is necessary to ensure that civil servants and any external participants taking part in the internal discussions and involved in formulating and preparing policy do not feel constricted in doing so. They must be able to communicate entirely frankly among themselves and with government ministers. Only the positions actually adopted by the administrative authority are relevant constitutionally. Personal opinions on policy include views, opinions, comments, proposals and conclusions, together with the arguments put forward in support of them.
The internal emails have been drawn up for the purpose of internal consultation and contain personal opinions on policy. I have decided not to disclose any information of those internal emails, as I do not consider that public disclosure of the positions taken individually by civil servants would be in the interests of effective, democratic governance. I therefore see no reason to disclose.
Interational relations Section 10, subsection 2, opening words and (a) of the WOB provides that data should not be disclosed if the interest in disclosure is outweighed by the interest in maintaining relations between the Netherlands and other States or international organisations. The history of this provision shows that this ground for refusal is intended to prevent a situation in which a statutory duty to disclose information would have the effect of harming Dutch international
relations. In order for this provision to be applied, it is not necessary for deterioration of good relations with other countries to be expected. It is instead sufficient if the provision of information is likely in some ways to make international contacts more difficult, for example if maintaining diplomatic relations or conducting bilateral consultations with countries would be harder than before or if people in these countries would be less inclined to provide certain data than previously.
The external emails, and the documents dated 07/12/18, 10/12/18, 08/23/18 and 10/14/18 include information that could harm the international relations of the Netherlands. I have therefore decided not to disclose them.
Yours sincerely,
Charlotte van Baak Alternate Political Coordinator of the Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the United Nations in New York." 
Is this Freedom of Information in The Netherlands - every document withheld, by one's own subordinate? And so on October 24, to the Mission and Ministry's Legal Adviser Mirnel Comic, Inner City Press has filed this appeal: "NOTICE OF OBJECTION

October 24, 2018

This is a formal notice of objection to / appeal from the total denial of my 22 August 2018 WOB request. After repeated delays, the response from the Dutch Mission to the UN only mentions one part of my request, on Cameroon, and on that denies access to every single documents, external as well as internal, with a logic that would make the Ministry of Foreign Affairs entirely exempt from the WOB, clearly not the legislative intent.

Beyond the shameful denial of all Cameroon related documents, the belated response troublingly does not mention this portion of my request: “the head of UN Dep't of Public Info Alison Smale in issuing a lifetime ban to my on August 17 wrote "“We would also note your conduct at the entrances of the United Nations premises and nearby, including the use of profanities and derogatory assertions and language toward individuals accessing the United Nations, in close proximity to them. Video / live broadcasts of this are frequently published on the Inner City Press' website and other media platforms. This conduct gives rise to potential safety concerns for Member State diplomats...The conduct described above has generated multiple complaints to the United Nations from Member States."

Given Ambassador van Oosterom and his Deputy PR's flat refusal to answer or even acknowledge the Cameroon questions I asked them at the Delegates Entrance stakeout, most recently Amb van Oosterom on August 20 about North Korea (on which other delegations answered, despite PR van Oosterom being the chair), this is a request for all record that reflect or are related to any communications by the Dutch Mission to the UN about questions or comments received at the stakeout(s).” This was and is not limited to questions about Cameroon but rather any documents related to the area around the Delegates Entrance Gate and related to freedom of the Press, communications with UN Department of Public Information / Global Communications or UN Security. The invocation of the exemption used implies the Government, or at least Mission, wants secrecy in order to lobby for the censorship the UN is engaged in. I demand expedited treatment of this appeal, in that the withdrawal of my media accreditation amid questions on Cameroon and other topics has morphed into a seemingly lifetime ban on a secretary “barred” list that the UN claims is an internal document [video here] even with respect to people on it. This is a violation of human rights, including EU/EC rights. I demand expedited treatment, also after irregularities in the Cameroon elections of Oct 7, for this notice of objection." And now (on October 30) from The Hague and not like the response from the very Mission questioned this acknowledgement of appeal and timeline: "Dear Mr. Lee, I hereby ackowledge receipt of your notice of objection to the decision on your Wob request dated 8/22/18. I would like to draw your attention to the handling period for your notice of objection. You receive a decision or adjournment notice within six weeks of the day on which the deadline for submitting the notice of objection expired. In the event of an adjournment notice, the decision on your notice of objection will be adjourned for a maximum of six weeks.
Met vriendelijke groeten, / With kind regards,
Edith Kraaijeveld Administratief medewerker"

And on November 22 - US Thanksgiving - this:
"Dear Mr. Lee,
Your objection will be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the General Administrative Law Act (Algemene wet bestuursrecht; Awb). This means that, provided your notice of objection satisfies the requirements of the Awb, you in principle have the right to be heard on the matter of your objection.
With a view to establishing a objections committee for the purpose of a hearing, please inform me before December 1st 2018 whether you wish to exercise the right to be heard in accordance with section 7:2 of the Awb. This hearing will take place by Skype.
If you do not indicate before this date that you wish to exercise this right, no hearing will take place.
Met vriendelijke groeten, / With kind regards,
Edith Kraaijeveld
Administratief medewerker
Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken
Directie Juridische Zaken
Afdeling Nederlands Recht
Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Legal Affairs Department | Netherlands Law Division (DJZ/NR)." Inner City Press on Thanksgiving replied: "This is to confirm that I do hereby assert my right to be heard in accordance with section 7:2 of the General Administrative Law Act and to pursue these records I have been seeking for months. Please advise." Watch this site.
November 19, 2018


In UN Bribery Case of China Energy Iran Sanctions and Arms Deal Evidence Will Come In, Belt and Road Is Out

By Matthew Russell Lee, Video, Q&A, HK here

FEDERAL COURTHOUSE, November 14 – In the UN bribery prosecution by the US against Patrick Ho of China Energy Fund Committee,  Ho has tried to use CEFC's ongoing UN "Special Consultative Status" to avoid criminal charges. This and Ho's other motions were denial by Judge Preska on November 14, including a motion to exclude testimony from Cheikh Gadio, from government expert Mr. Walkout, and to exclude Ho's dealings with Sam Kutesa's predecessor as UNGA President Sam Ashe. All of this will come in at trial - and makes the failure by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres to even audit CEFC's bribes in the UN more outrageous. This UN-accredited NGO offered to broker arms not only to Chad but also Qatar, Libya and South Sudan, about which Guterres and the UN purport to care so much. Ho and CEFC offered themselves as  way to evade Iran sanctions. This evidence will come in a trial; the government has agreed not to mention terrorism or US - Iran relations. A 23 minute video of Ho's UN speeches will not come in, being called "gauzy" as is the UN of Guterres who has banned Inner City Press which covers the UN's increasing corruption, from Ng Lap Seng and Ashe to CEFC, Kutesa and beyond, ongoing. We'll have more on this. Ho was trying to exclude testimony from initial co-defendant Cheikh Gadio about Chadian President Idriss Deby's reaction to the bribe. The papers were filed on November 13 and are first being reported by Inner City Press, which as it covers this second UN bribery case has been roughed up and now banned for 132 days by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres who won't even audit CEFC's ongoing activities in the UN. Four months after the arrest for UN bribery of former Senegalese foreign minister Cheik Gadio and Patrick Ho, the head of China Energy Fund Committee full funded by CEFC China Energy, his ultimate boss at CEFC Ye Jianming was brought in for questioning in China. On October 4 Ho was again denied bail. Periscope video here. On October 22, the new trial date was set for November 26. On November 12 Inner City Press, banned from the UN by Secretary General Antonio Guterres amid its questions about the CEFC bribery and its connection to the Ng Lap Seng conviction, asked Guterres and his spokesmen: "November 12-4: Now that it is clear that Foreign Intelligence Surveilance Act wiretaps show Sheri Yan, jailed for UN bribery in the PGA John Ashe case, communicating and planned with Patrick Ho of CEFC, please explain why SG Antonio Guterres has not even started an audit into the range CEFC's bribery and interactions in the UN, why it still has access to UN while Inner City Press which which pursued Ng Lap Seng's and Yan's bribery even into the UN Press Briefing Room (29 Jan 2016) and the Patrick Ho / CEFC case, has been denied access to anything in the UN for 131 days with no due process." Guterres' deputy spokesman Farhan Haq conducted a noon briefing Inner City Press was banned from, starting with a total of three correspondents. Video here. He and the UN have not answered since, see below. After he did not answer - but he did answer Yahoo News for a story which, inexplicably, does not mention Guterres or his failure to audit CEFC's activities at the UN. Others who have done nothign about the bribery, or about Guterres' roughing up and banning of Inner City Press, like HRW's Ken Roth and FP's Colum Lynch, belatedly retweeted the Ho / Yan corruption story. But what will they and the UN they love so much do? On November 4 Ho's attempt to "suppress all evidence obtained or derived under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act" was denied, with a decision that no hearing on it was needed. The FISA information includes wiretaps of Ho and another bribing NGO the Global Sustainability Foundations's Sheri Yan or her deputy planning to pay bribes. This is described today by the Sydney Morning Herald, which while saying that UN officials who it leaves unnamed are lavishing praises on the Belt and Road which Ho now uses as a defense of his alleged bribes, fails to mention main praiser Antonio Guterres. Nor does SMH - Shaking My Head -- mention that unlike even Ban Ki-mon with Ng Lap Seng, Guterres has refused to even start an audit into Ho's (and Yang II's) bribery in the UN, but instead had roughed up and banned Inner City Press which reports on it. Ng Lap Seng paid money to a group Guterres is slated to headline a fundraiser for on December 5, a group he and his spokesman Stephane Dujarric use to support their attack on the investigative Press. We'll have more on this. Hong Kong television has broadcast a report on these alleged UN and Deby bribes, including an interview with Inner City Press which has been banned from the UN by Antonio Guterres amid its coverage of UN corruption and Guterres' refusal to even audit, has been broadcast.
November 12, 2018

Made Diplomats and UN Officials Feel UNsafe But Solution Is Simple

By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR  Q&A, NY Post

UNITED NATIONS GATE,  NOVEMBER 8 -- As Inner City Press moved forward with its inquiry into UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres' personal use of public funds, silence on slaughter in Cameroon and elsewhere and failure to disclose family members' financial interests in Angola and elsewhere, his spokesman Stephane Dujarric on 20 June 2018 said that “things will soon be getting worse” for Inner City Press' reporter. Inner City Press has now been banned from the UN for 127 days and Dujarric is providing his and his boss' pretext, as purported background, to some of those asking questions, at least if they come from Europe, see below. The pretexts are lies - now that they are becoming public, the ban is more disgusting and should be UNtenable.

  Two days after Dujarric's threat this reporter was pushed out of the General Assembly lobby during a speech by Guterres by UN Security Lieutenant Ronald E. Dobbins, who did it again more violently on July 3. Since then Inner City Press has been banned from entering the UN, and Guterres even tried to get Inner City Press ousted from Park East Synagogue twenty blocks north of the UN on October 31.

   As many online have questioned this no due process ouster, including from Cameroon, Japan, the UK, Italy and other places in Europe, we can now report that Dujarric while refusing to answer Inner City Press' and a UN Expert's written questions about how to appeal this lifetime ban has reached out to try to quiet some critics.

Tellingly, while he has entirely ignored for example Anglophone Cameroonian critics regardless of how polite or articulate they are, or how many social media followers they have, Dujarric has reached out to European critics. What does he tell them?

  To give the UN its best chance, Inner City Press on the morning of November 8 emailed questions to Guterres, his Deputy Amina Mohammed, Alison Smale, Dujarric and his Deputy Farhan Haq including: "November 8-2: I am informed that the SG's spokesman has selectively contacted those (from Europe) raising questions about the UN 3 July 2018 Press ouster and ban since, including stating that unnamed UN staff members or officials demand a lifetime ban in order to feel “safe.” Given the lack of due process, please name which officials or safe claim to feel unsafe in order to justify censorship, and the basis for your claims. Also, again, answer UNSR David Kaye's and others' question: what is the appeals process for a unilateral no due process physical ouster and banning by the UN of a journalist?" But seven hour later, no answer to any of the questions.

   So, for now due to the UN's constant threat of retaliation even against those it has unilaterally chosen to reach out to with dirt that cannot stand the light of day, this is a composite:

Dujarric claims that Inner City Press made "diplomats" feel unsafe. But he has yet to provide the name of a single diplomat, other than the false Morocco Mission complaint in USG Alison Smale's 17 August 2018 ban letter.

Dujarric claims that his staff didn't like having the movement reported on. This seems to refer to Inner City Press, once it had no office to use, working on a bench in the Secretariat lobby and noting when spokespeople who refused to even acknowledge formal questions went out to lunch. This is not a basis to ban a journalist for life.

Dujarric goes low and says that unnamed female reporters didn't want to see Inner City Press doing stand-up Periscope broadcasts. But the purpose of these -- filming on the fourth floor was permitted without an escort, Inner City Press was told by Media Accreditation -- was to show EMPTY offices, for example Morocco state media, while Inner City Press had nowhere to work. In fact, Inner City Press went out of its way not to speak with or engage in any way with Dujarric's coterie of pro UN correspondents - that why it left the building after work through the garage, which was later used against it.

  There is more, and we will have more. But it is clear these are pretexts. And even if Antonio "The Censor" Guterres, who believes it is impermissible for a journalist to do a critical stand up on the public sidewalk across two lanes of traffic from the $15 million publicly funded mansion he (sometimes) lives in believes these pretexts, an interim solution was and is clear.

 Simply allow Inner City Press in to go to the noon briefing and asked question - unless that is what they are afraid of - and to cover UNSC stakeouts and Budget Committee meetings. It is pathetic that a UN and Secretary General that be focused on "conflict prevention" can't find a solution other than violent ouster and banning for a critical journalist. We'll have more on this.

November 5, 2018

UN Guterres On 16th Public Funded Trip to Lisbon For Lula Award Decided by CPLP in Cape Verde Where His Son Pedro Does Business

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive, CJR Letter PFTracker

UNITED NATIONS GATE, November 3 – Before Inner City Press was roughed up by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres' Security on June 22 and July 3, 2018 and banned since then, it insistently asked for disclosure of how many of Guterres' publicly funded trips took him through his real home, Lisbon. The questions are not been answered by Spokesman Stephane Dujarric, who on November 2 simply bicycled away as Inner City Press asked about Guterres' failure in Cameroon and attempt to get even Park East Synagogue to oust Inner City Press from covering his October 31 speech about tolerance.  Guterres has had Inner City Press banned from the UN for life, by his Alison Smale. But Inner City Press, even banned, on August 28 published the first in an exclusive and detailed series. Now on November 3 with this total lack of transparency from the UN Secretariat itself, Inner City Press can exclusively report that Guterres' current four day trip to Lisbon, his 16th as Secretary General, was only booked on October 24, making it more expensive, and is entirely paid for by the public. What is the pretext for the trip? Receiving the José Aparecido de Oliveira Prize from the Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries, CPLP - previously awarded to, among others, the currently incarcerated Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. The decision to give it to Guterres was made months ago in July in Cabo Verde, where Guterres' son Pedro Guimarães e Melo De Oliveira Guterres does UNdisclosed business; no recusals or safeguards from Guterres, only the roughing up and banning of the Press which asks. Then a speech on November 5 at a "Web Summit" event that has little to do with the UN. We'll have more on this. Back on September 7 Inner City Press reported that Guterres intends to use even Kofi Annan's death and the September 13 event in Ghana as a pretext to again fly to Lisbon. He'll turn it into a five day junket, leaving New York on September 11 (when he's arranged a Myanmar white washing CPPF meeting, also reported exclusively by banned Inner City Press, here), offer praise sure to be ironic of Kofi Annan who Rest in Peace never had a critical journalist roughed up and banned - then fly to Lisbon on the public dime, until September 16. How much will it cost? The UN refuses to answer. But it is not their money. And the climate of cover up includes Guterres not disclosing his own son Pedro Guimarães e Melo De Oliveira Guterres' business links in Africa and elsewhere. We'll have more on this: it is what journalism is supposed to do, hold institutions and those who lead them accountable. October 29, 2018

UN Rapporteur Kaye Asked Guterres USG Smale About Ousting Inner City Press Answer Full of Lies Still Banned

By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR Letter PFTracker

UNITED NATIONS GATE, October 25– Two key elements of press freedom are not banning access as the UN has done to Inner City Press for 113 days now and being transparent, another UN failing. And this failure was on display again on October 25, when UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression David Kaye sent to Inner City Press his letter to UN Under Secretary General Alison Smale about her ouster of Inner City Press - and Smale's Orwellian answer, still without due process or answer on any appeals process and repeating the barely met promise that the UN will answer Inner City Press' questions (no answers to seven questions on October 25). Inner City Press immediately replied, including to Smale, Secretary General Antonio Guterres and his Deputy Amina J. Mohammed and chief of staff Maria Luiza Viotti - with no response yet, as Inner City Press covered Guterres' photo op with Sweden's Margot Wallstrom from the sidewalk of the mansion where Guterres is holding his meetings, video here. Here was Kaye's letter:

UN Rapporteur Kaye Asked Gu... by on Scribd

"Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression REFERENCE: OL OTH 45/2018, 20 July 2018
Dear Ms. Smale,
With reference to my letter of 3 November 2017 regarding the importance of an access-to-information policy for the United Nations as a whole, I would like to bring to your attention a specific case submitted to my mandate.
On 25 February 2016, I sent a communication to the then Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information, Ms. Cristina Gallach, regarding the decision to withdraw the Resident Correspondent accreditation at the UN office in New York of Mr. Matthew Lee, journalist with Inner City Press, in favour of a non-Resident Correspondent.
Ms. Gallach responded in a letter of 25 May 2016, informing that under non-resident correspondent accreditation, Mr. Lee has been free to continue his full journalistic activities in reporting in and about the United Nations. The letter furthermore noted that the use of space in the UN Headquarters was a matter of privilege previously accorded to Mr. Lee, contingent upon his observing the UN Media Accreditation Guidelines, and was revocable by the UN in its sole discretion.
In June 2018, I received new information from Mr. Matthew Lee who reportedly on 22 June 2018 had been ordered out of the UN premises by Security Officers while in the middle of covering an event. During this incident, Mr. Lee reportedly had his arm twisted and his shirt torn due to use of force by a Security Officer who refused to give his name. [NOTE: Kaye merges two separate assaults, the second of which was on July 3 outside the UN Budget Commmittee meeting, video here, UK Independent here.] Mr. Lee was subsequently banned from UN Headquarters and is now unable to enter the UN premises.
In this connection, I would appreciate your view on the above mentioned information, and I would also like to ask for clarification to the following questions:
1. What standards apply to determine the various statuses for journalists at the United Nations? Would you kindly identify where those standards may be found in UN rules, regulations or policies? In addition, who has the authority to interpret and implement the standards? Are decisions and actions under those standards subject to appeal?
2. How were those standards applied to the situation of Mr. Matthew Lee? What specific standards did he violate, according to your office’s findings?
3. How does your office respond to the allegations lodged by Mr. Lee about the use of force by security officers? Has your office undertaken any kind of evaluation to determine whether force was used and, if so, whether it was excessive?
I would appreciate receiving a response within 60 days. Your response will be made available in a report to be presented to the Human Rights Council for its consideration.
While awaiting a reply, I urge that all necessary interim measures be taken to address the situation described and prevent its re-occurrence and in the event that an investigation supports or suggests the allegation to be correct, to ensure the accountability of any person(s) responsible.
Please accept, Ms. Smale, the assurances of my highest consideration.
David Kaye
Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression." Smale's answer, a full two months later, repeats by rote her August 17 withdrawal of Inner City Press' accreditation, and claims that Inner City Press formal complaints to the UN about being roughed up by UN DSS Lt Ronald Dobbins and unnamed others "is still under review." But Inner City Press say Dobbins still on the payroll on October 24, while Inspector Matthew Sullivan bragged that the secret banned from the UN list Inner City Press is now on is an internal document that the UN is making the NYC government not disclose. Inner City Press immediately replied to Kaye, Smale, Guterres, Mohammed and Viotti: "Thanks for sending this - I'm looking to see what if anything you did after your lone July 20 letter. Since the allegations in USG Smale's August 17 letter predate my accreditation in April 2018, how can they form a basis to not only withdraw my accreditation - apparently permanently - but now have me on secret barred list?

 If you cannot or will not do more than a single letter with no follow up for a journalist roughed up in, and permanently banned from, the UN, is there some problem with the mandate holding the UN itself accountable? Did you contact UNODC, whose information I gave you? Have you looked into this troubling permanently banned list? What is your response to USG Smale's justification for censorship without due process? I urge you to do more, including publicly - that is one reason for the cc's. 113 days of exclusion from today largely empty UN press conferences is enough... To be clear: there was nothing in my coverage of the UN materially different since Antonio Guterres and his team came in from how I covered the UN under Ban K-moon (and even the tail end of the tenure of Kofi Annan, RIP).

I worked the same hours, including periodic Periscope broadcasts of the fourth floor to show how absurd it was and is that DPI gives offices and full access to state media who rarely come in. I specifically asked USG Smale's MALU if I needed an escort to film and was told no, I did not need any escort on the 3d and 4th floors. MALU knew and did nothing to stop everything that I was doing, even told me the complaint(s) cited in USG Smale's Aug 17 letter were frivolous.

If something changed, DPI or “Global Communications” should have spoken to me.

To suddenly have UN Security roughing me up for doing what I have done for years - cover the UN Budget Committee meeting crunch time - and push me out from covering an SG speech in the GA lobby on June 22 while leaving other non resident correspondents is make it clear to me this was and is targeting censorship.

This is what I am asking to addressed, by your mandate or if not, anyone else. I wrote to USG Smale's Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit with a series of questions including what the roadmap, if any, is - no answer. Every day the damage grows.

Sorry to add to initial response so quickly but at 2:30 there is a photo op of the type I covered without incident under Ban Ki-moon but am now excluded from. So I will try to cover it from outside. The UN, like any government, shouldn't get to pick and choose in this way who gets to cover it.

What is the response?" So far, no response.

October 22, 2018

On Cameroon Obiang Pre-Congratulates Biya For Re-Election Amid Guterres Ban and Cover Up

By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR PFT NY Post

UNITED NATIONS GATE, October 20 -- With Cameroon's 36-year ruler Paul Biya having imposed a curfew on the Anglophone regions a week before his planned re-election on October 7, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres' genocide adviser Adama Dieng in an interview with BBC said "things seem to be under control." Here from 2:40, and see below. Now after a canned statement to all sides by Guterres, who has banned Inner City Press from any entry into his UN, on Guterres' banned list with "political activists," the charades of an election in which Biya's spokesman declared victory even before the polling. And now Biya's fellow long time ruler Teodoro Obiang Nguema has already congratulated Biay for re-election, days before the results were to be announced on October 22: ""Sincere and effusive congratulations for your re-election... The people of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea and his Government join me in expressing to your Excellency our sincere and heartfelt congratulations on your re-election as President of the Republic of Cameroon in the past presidential election," Obiang's congratulations read. One imagine Antonio Guterres getting his congratulations ready, the subtext being thanks for help as chair of the UN Budget Committee, for covering of which Inner City Press ws roughed up on July 3 and banned for 108 days since. Opposition candidate Maurice Kamto argued that the poll should be canceled in seven out of 10 regions of the country, because his team observed "massive irregularities", "disregard of electoral laws", and in particular "insecurity and fraud in troubled Anglophone regions" during the vote. "After examining the nine complaints of Maurice Kamto, the Council declares that the petition lacks evidence, is unfounded and therefore rejected," Clement Atangana, president of the Constitutional Council, said - Biya's man. Biya's forces have shut down a press conference by Maurice Kamto. And now it is concluded that Guterres' "colleagues" statement this week about hate speech in Cameroon was in fact again on behalf of 36 year rule Biya, and directed only at the opposition. From Yaounde: "Yesterday’s hearing was filled with Elecam and government’s reaction to post electoral complains from Maurice Kamto’s legal team. Taking the floor, Gregoire Owona, Cameroon’s Minister of Labor and Social Security, accused Maurice Kamto of being an ungrateful tribalist. Owona wondered why the CRM Presidential candidate brought up the issue of Bamileke and Beti to the court. To him, by using such examples, Maurice Kamto is trying to promote hate among peaceful Cameroonians." So those whose press conferences are shut down by Biya are then accused of hate speech by the UN of Guterres, who had Inner City Press roughed up and banned for 107 days and counting. We'll have more on this. In the first of two days of hearings on objections, Justice Clement Atangana, president of the Constitutional Council, pronouned that "Only the President of the Republic who appoints members of the Council has the jurisdiction to sack or question the neutrality of the Council members," Atangana said, "so the petition is inadmissible." So only incumbent candidate Biya controls this review.  The public be damnded: Rigobert Aminou Gabanmidanha, a voter demanded complete cancellation of the vote, citing "irregularities, disregard of electoral code and rigging" observed during the poll. Atangana said the Council rules only on petitions filed by candidates, political parties which took part in the election or any person serving as a representative of the administration for the election. "You were not a candidate. You were not a representative of the administration for the election. Therefore, you have no quality to petition the Council," Atangana said, dismissing the petition as "null and void". Reuters edited by Edward McAllister purported to cover the hearing without mentioning these outrageous rulings and reasoning. Call it a colonial cover up, like Guterres' UN. The final nail is expected to be declared by the Council by Oct. 22.
  October 15, 2018

Nikki Haley Took Names Then Went Native At the UN Now US Promotes Currie on Cuba Ignoring UN Censorship

By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR PFT NY Post

UNITED NATIONS, October 12 – When Donald Trump nominated Nikki Haley as his Ambassador to the UN, it seemed she would be a disruptor and clean up corruption. As she prepares to leave, though, at most one of those things is true: she was a disruptive force. But the UN's corruption and censorship remains. Now as didn't happen before, and ignoring the exclusion of the Press, the US is promoting one of Haley's deputies Currie: Ambassador Kelley E. Currie, U.S. Representative on the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, will deliver remarks at an event launching the campaign “Jailed for What?” about the continuing plight of Cuba’s political prisoners.  Her remarks will take place at United Nations Headquarters, Economic and Social Council Chamber in New York City on Tuesday, October 16, at 1:15 p.m. EDT.

The estimated 130 political prisoners held by the Cuban government are an explicit sign of the repressive nature of the regime and represent a blatant affront to the fundamental freedoms that the United States and many other democratic governments support.  Holding the Cuban regime responsible for its human rights violations and supporting the Cuban people’s aspirations to live in freedom are key components of President Trump’s National Security Presidential Memorandum of 2017.

Following Ambassador Currie’s remarks, Ambassador Michael Kozak of the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor will moderate a discussion that will include Secretary General of the Organization of American States Luis Almagro, Carlos Quesada, Executive Director of the Institute of Race and Equality, former Cuban political prisoner Alejandro Gonzalez Raga, and others who will discuss the Cuban government’s continued use of arbitrary detention and specious charges to silence the Cuban people

The event will be open to the press.. Journalists should be seated in the United Nations Headquarters, Economic and Social Council Chamber in New York City on Tuesday, October 16, no later than 1:00 p.m.

Journalists will need UN credentials to be admitted to the event.

Journalists should apply for their credentials directly with the UN’s accreditation office.. Media who have already completed the UN’s self-accreditation process but who have additional questions can contact Loyda Garcia." Self accreditation?? The US Mission still claims not to know that Guterres' UN censors and bans journalists it doesn't like? This is collusion.

 Haley's disruption of the UN was concentrated in her first few months, when she famously stood in the UN lobby and said she would be "taking names" of countries who opposed US interests, and when she blocked Secretary General Antonio Guterres' nomination of Palestinian candidate Salam Fayyad to be the UN's new envoy to Libya.

After that, however, Haley seemed to settle down and go native at the UN. Trump bragged at her send-off that Haley got to know "everyone" in the organization. But not well enough to get Russia's Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia to answer her calls before the UN's mechanism on Syria's chemical weapons expired. She cast vetoes on Jerusalem and Gaza, popular in some quarters but hardly a measure of the she-knows-everyone diplomacy that Trump spoke of.

Haley called for a UN Human Rights Council Commission of Inquiry into the murder in the Democratic Republic of the Congo of American expert Michael Sharp and his Chilean-Swedish colleague Zaida Catalan. But the Commission never happened, and by June 2018 Haley was standing next to Mike Pompeo, explaining why the US was leaving the Human Rights Council.  The answer, some said, was John Bolton...

Haley got her fellow South Carolinian David Beasley installed as the head of the UN World Food Program; at her Press-less press conference as president of the Security Council in September 2018 a South Carolina journalist who'd flown up for the event asked if she'd be taking the Council members down to her home state. It didn't happen - until, in a different form, just after her resignation.

  Perhaps the most disappointing of Haley's failures to disrupt, or disruption interrupted, is on UN corruption. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres no fewer than 15 times since assuming office in January 2017 has used public money to fly to his home in Lisbon, where his spouse still lives. After for Inner City Press I asked questions about this, I was ousted from the UN and Haley did nothing. In fact, another journalist was told by the UN that the US Mission supported my ouster. Haley's spokesman also worked for Samantha Power; her Deputy Jonathan Cohen has yet to speak to the Press, now asking questions at the UN Delegates Entrance gate.

   Haley never even commented much less demanded UN action on a UN bribery case proceeding in Federal court in lower Manhattan against Patrick Ho of the China Energy Fund Committee for allegedly bribing then UN President of the General Assembly Sam Kutesa for oil and other concessions in Uganda. While Guterres has refused to even start an audit to determine the full scope of CEFC's bribery at the UN, Haley has stayed quiet. Perhaps an expanded scope would call into question her oft-repeated claim that it is a new day at the UN. It is not. The UN tends to drag those who pass through it to its level. So it was time for Haley to declare victory and move on.

After twenty four Congressmembers urged Haley to schedule a Security Council meeting about the slaughter of Anglophones in Cameroon, I asked her about it, and she said she was “open” to such a Council meeting. But it never happened, and now even amid the re-coronation of 36 year president Paul Biya, there is no meeting on the horizon.

Haley came out a winner when the New York Times mis-reported that she had accepted $52,000 curtains for her penthouse apartment (the curtains were bought and paid for by the Obama administration). But the real story may have been her living in a $58,000 a month apartment. From there, how could she criticize Guterres spending public money to fly home? Haley herself was taking rides on private jets, as detailed in a formal complaint the day before her resignation was made public.

   Haley's shift from taking names to taking selfies was exemplified on the 4th of July 2018, when the UN gave her its fourth floor Delegates Dining Room and balcony for a party to watch the fireworks. Ambassadors of all stripes lined up, wanting photos with her just as she wanted photos with them, to show how well she was getting along. But what that supposed to be the point?

  The UN is the ultimate swamp, with reform always a chimera, blocked by immunity. Haley's narrative is that she came and quickly cleaned up the UN. Twenty one months in, little has been cleaned up. Perhaps it was time to get out before demands came for results and not rhetoric. At the UN, the corruption and censorship continue -- including with the discovery that under Guterres the UN maintains a secret "active ban" list that includes "political activists' - and Inner City Press. But that's another thing that Haley hasn't acted on; that's another story. Watch this site.October 8, 2018

In UN Bribery Case Patrick Ho Denied Bail Post Gadio Role in Qatar Arms But UN Guterres Bans Inner City Press

By Matthew Russell Lee, Video, Q&A, HK here

UNITED NATIONS, October 4 – Four months after the arrest for UN bribery of former Senegalese foreign minister Cheik Gadio and Patrick Ho, the head of China Energy Fund Committee full funded by CEFC China Energy, his ultimate boss at CEFC Ye Jianming was brought in for questioning in China. On October 4 Ho was again denied bail. Periscope video here. His lawyers argued that dropping the case against Gadio - who will testify against Ho - means that Ho conspired with no one. But Gadio will say he didn't know Ho had $2 million in cash for Chad President Deby in gift boxes; he's being allowed (or made) to say that Deby didn't know either. But this ham handed bribe was converted into a bogus philanthropic gift -- consciousness of guilt, as it were. The trial date of November 5 may not be set in stone, as the defense is planning a filing under Section 5 of the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) to use classified information. Ho has a $2.1 million account in UBS, but Judge Preska said this wasn't the main factor in denying bail. The sleight of hand on Gadio has no impact on the "Uganda scheme" with Sam Kutesa, with whom UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has dealings. Guterres still hasn't started an audit of CEFC - which was openly named in the court hearing on October 4 - in the UN. We'll have more on this. This week in court filings the prosecution make it clear how corrupt the UN is, and why it has banned Inner City Press which reports on it: Ho bribed not one but two Presidents of the General Assembly, and brokered weapons not only to Chad but also Qatar, whose Al Jazeera got the exclusive of Guterres' selection as SG and after getting spoonfed by Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric on June 19 collaborated to get Inner City Press roughed up and banned since by Guterres' corrupt UN. And STILL  Guterres, whose son does UNdisclosed business in Angola, Namibia, Sao Tomo and Cabo Verde, has not even started an audit, only roughed up the Press and banned it now for 93 days. From this week's filing: "Evidence of Transactions with Iran The evidence of the defendant’s interest in and willingness to broker transactions in or with Iran principally consists of emails, spanning a multiple-year period. To choose a few examples: In October 2014, the defendant sent his assistant an email stating, “I am going to BJ [i.e., Beijing] this Friday to see [the Chairman of CEFC NGO and CEFC China] on Sat afternoon. The documents I want to send him before hand in separate items are: . . . 7. Iranian connection (brief).”4 On the same date, the defendant sent his assistant another email, attaching a document, which stated, in pertinent part: 7) Iranian Connection . . . Iran has money in a Bank in china which s under sanction. Iran wishes to purchase precious metal with this money. The precious metal is available through a Bank in HK which cannot accept money from the Bank in China which holds the money but is under sanction. The Iranian agent is looking for a Chinese company acting as a middle man in such transactions and will pay commission. (details to be presented orally) The Iranian connection has strong urge to establish trading relationship with us in oil and products . . . . The following year, in June 2015, the defendant received an email that stated, in pertinent part: “The Iranian team will arrive in BJ . . . . See the attached.” The attachment referenced in the email was a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Presentation to Potential Partners Iran Petroleum Investments.” The next day, the defendant forwarded the email to his assistant, stating, “For writing report to [the Chairman of CEFC NGO and CEFC China].”
The following year, in June 2016, the defendant emailed another individual, blindcopying
his assistant, and stated, in pertinent part, “Will get [two executives of CEFC China] to
meet with [oil executive at company with operations in Iran] in BJ, and [another individual] also on another occasion if he comes. You can start organizing these. . . . Other matters ftf [i.e., face to face].” And also "an email exchange in which Gadio asked the defendant: “Do you think CEFC can intervene with the Chinese state to get an urgent, extremely confidential and significant military weapon assistance to our friend [the President of Chad] who has engaged in the battle of his life against the devils of Bokko Haram?,” to which the defendant replied, “Your important message has been forwarded. It is being given the highest level of consideration. Will inform you once I hear back.”
The defendant also sought to and did broker arms transactions unrelated to the Chad and
Uganda schemes charged in this case. For example: In March 2015, an individual sent the defendant an email, stating, “I have the list and end user agreement. Pls advise next step.” On the same day, the defendant replied, in pertinent part, “Find a way to pass them onto me and we can execute that right away[].” The individual replied, “Attached. [W]e have the funding and processing mechanisms in place. If it works nice there will be much more. Also for S. Sudan.” The attachment to this email was a document entitled “End User Certificate,” certifying that the user of the goods in question would be the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Libya. The goods listed on the document included numerous arms. The following month, the defendant sent an email that stated in pertinent part: “It so turns out Qatar also needs urgently a list of toys from us. But for the same reason we had for Libya, we cannot sell directly to them. Is there a way you could act as an intermediary in both cases?” The person whom the defendant emailed replied: “Qatar good chance bc there is no embargo. Libya is another case bc going against an embargo is tricky.” The defendant responded: “Qatar needs new toys quite urgently. Their chief is coming to China and we hope to give them a piece of good news. Please confirm soonest.” This is outrageous, that an NGO still accredited under Guterres was selling weapons into South South, Libya and Qatar. Resign. And, on multiple PGAs: "among the individuals whom the defendant [Patrick Ho] is charged with bribing is Sam Kutesa, the Ugandan Foreign Minister. The Government expects that the evidence will show that the corrupt relationship between the defendant and Kutesa developed between in or about September 2014 and September 2015, when Kutesa was serving as the PGA (specifically, the PGA for the 69th session of the UN General Assembly). The evidence, in both the form of emails and a recorded phone call, also shows that, just
as he did with respect to Kutesa when he was the PGA, the defendant sought to cultivate a
business relationship with Kutesa’s predecessor, John Ashe, who served as the PGA between in
or about September 2013 and September 2014. As he did with Kutesa, the defendant began by introducing himself to Ashe as the Secretary-General of CEFC NGO. And just as he did with
Kutesa when he served as the PGA, the defendant invited Ashe to visit CEFC NGO in Hong Kong and to speak at various events.
In mid-April 2014, Ashe traveled to Hong Kong and met with the defendant and others.
After the trip, Ashe’s aide sent a letter to the defendant thanking the Chairman of CEFC NGO (who was also the Chairman of CEFC China) for the contribution of $50,000 to support the PGA. The aide had solicited the contribution from the defendant prior to the Hong Kong trip, and the defendant had confirmed that CEFC NGO would make the contribution.
In or about early June 2014, the defendant requested that Ashe officiate over a forum that
CEFC NGO was planning to hold at the UN, and also attend and officiate over a luncheon at the UN the following day. (The defendant made virtually the same request of Kutesa once he
became the PGA.) The day before the forum (July 6, 2014), the defendant emailed two business associates of Ashe, who assisted him in raising funds, to invite them to the forum and luncheon and to request their assistance in “urg[ing] the PGA to grace the occasion with his presence and to deliver a short remark.”
On or about the same day, the defendant and one of these associates (“Associate-1”)
spoke by phone. (See Ex. A (draft transcript).) During the call, which was recorded, the
defendant confirmed that he wanted Ashe to attend his event. The following conversation then took place:
Associate-1: So the last question, so sorry if I ask too direct. . . . [H]ave you, made some
contribution to him . . . ?
The defendant: Yeah, we already paid.
Associate-1: Oh you did? OkayThe defendant: Well, not a whole lot but it’s—it’s okay. On a couple of occasions. But I
think the major contribution will come in after we talk about what he can—what he can
help us with.
Associate-1: What you—what you mean major contribution? It’s after he return uh—
leave the job?
The defendant: Yes, yes.
. . .
Associate-1: Wonderful . . . okay.
The defendant: That’s not a—that’s not a problem. The problem is—uh, it’s give and
take.
Associate-1: Give and take. That’s—of course. This is the—this is business, right?
The defendant: Yeah, right.
 2 These two business associates subsequently pleaded guilty to bribing Ashe, based on
conduct unrelated to the defendant and CEFC. Ashe was charged with tax offenses arising from
his allegedly failing to disclose bribe payments as income. He passed away before trial, and the
charges against him were therefore dismissed." We'll have more on this.
October 1, 2018

UN Guterres Revoked Inner City Press Access to UN Claims E-Answers and Has Not Said For Life

By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR Letter PFTracker

UNITED NATIONS GATE, September 28 – How arrogant and counter-factual a self-styled world leader is has been revealed in the Leader's contemptuous approach to freedom of the press and whose who even gently chide him on it, including a Nobel Peace Prize winner and one of his envoys to a major country.. No, this is not a reference to Donald Trump, but to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. After revoking Inner City Press' media accreditation amid its questions on his use of public funds, silence on Cameroon and conflicts of interest, Guterres' UN did not respond to Inner City Press' request to cover UNGA 73 and blocked it from a "press freedom" event on September 28. On the same day Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric was asked by Simon Ateba of Today News Africa, transcript here, video here: "Recently, you banned Matthew Lee from Inner City Press and he was questioning you about Cameroon, the UN Secretary-General, the… the… he might have had a different method. Who decides what is right and who decides…

Spokesman Dujarric:  The question about… sorry, I'll let you finish first.

Question:  Yeah. Who decides, is it not… I mean, who gives you the power to ban people because they are challenging you, because they are questioning you?  Did you ban Matthew Lee because he was questioning you about Cameroon, where a dictator has been in power for 36 years? And you banned a journalist who's asking you questions about him? Is that right? Does it make sense to you?

Spokesman:  First of all, we've answered the question about Mr. Lee repeatedly, and we've also answered Mr. Lee's questions repeatedly.  But, can I just… I'll let you finish if you can let me finish.  We've also answered his questions repeatedly for the last 12 years, and we continue to answer the questions that he e-mails in.  His accreditation was revoked purely for having repeatedly violated the rules… the accreditation rules, which are transparent, and which you all agree to abide by, which are frankly… most of them are self-policing, and it had nothing to do whatsoever with the content of his writings or the questions that he's asking.

Ateba: I mean, what do you mean banning him for life? What does it mean?

Spokesman:  That's not an expression that anyone from here has ever used, and I think I've answered your question on Mr. Lee." Well, no. Dujarric has been answering less than 10% of Inner City Press' written questions. And Alison Smale's ghoulish revocation letter provided no road map to re-apply and she ignored Inner City Press' application to cover UNGA 73. Amina J. Mohammed and chief of staff Maria Luiza Viotti did not answer detailed question about the physical ban on Inner City Press entering the UN even when invited by countries' missions or UN partners like CPJ and Reuters. We'll have more on this. On August 27 Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric answered a question on camera about Guterres banning of Inner City Press by saying that "the revocation of Mr. Lee's credential has to do with creating a hostile environment for diplomats." Vine video with over 1270 views here. But on September 17 Dujarric after trying to avoid or intimidate a question on the same topic said that the decision was by Guterres' Secretariat "without any input from any member state." Video here. So how did Guterres and Smale "know" that diplomats felt a hostile environment? Or was it Guterres who didn't like questions and coverage about his mis use of public funds for junkets to Lisbon, his silence on the slaughter in Cameroon and his son's now exposed business links in Africa? Someone is lying. We'll have more on this
September 24, 2018

In Cameroon Biya Targets Anglophones in Yaounde as Guterres Bans Press From Nigeria FM Briefing

By Matthew Russell Lee, CJR Letter PFTracker

UNITED NATIONS GATE, September 21 -- As the Cameroon government of 36 year President Paul Biya slaughters civilians in the Anglophone regions as well as in the North, it re-engaged Washington lobbying firm Squire Patton Boggs and Mercury Public Affairs, documents show. The UN belatedly acknowledged to Inner City Press, which UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres had roughed up on July 3 right after it spoke to Cameroon's Ambassador Tommo Monthe and on August 17 declared banned for life from entering the UN that Guterres met with a Cameroon delegation on July 11. And they discussed, disturbingly, strategies to reduce negative coverage of Biya's killings, see below. Now Biya's government is raising the specter of Anglophones, or as the UN of Guterres seems to say, secessionists, in the capital Yaounde. A crackdown is foretold in the neighborhoods of Obili, Biyem-Assi, Etoug-ebe. Photo here. And the UN says nothing, refusing to answer even the simplest of questions from Inner City Press which Guterres had roughed up and banned from the UN for 80 days now, on September 21 to be prevented from questioning Geoffrey Onyeama the foreign minister of Nigeria which engaged in the illegal refoulement Guterres supposedly cared about, for 47 including Ayuk Tabe. For now, here were Inner City Press' questions, and his answers, last UNGA High Level week before Guterres got even worse than he was then. On September 19 in a briefing Inner City Press was prohibited from attending, Guterres' special adviser on the prevention of genocide Adama Dieng said, as to Cameroon, that nothing must be done to encourage secession - a position that while Guterres' goes beyond what is supposed to be Dieng's focus, preventing the killing of people based on ethnicity or, here, language. As luck would have it, Inner City Press while conducting its daily sidewalk interviews at the UN Delegates' Entrance gate on September 20 asked Dieng why he'd done beyond his mandate. He said that he wants to visit the country. Video here. Then, still in the morning, Inner City Press asked Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric, who USG Alison Smale said would be answering writting questions, this: "September 20-3: On Cameroon, please confirm that the SG's adviser Dieng is seeking to visit the country and explain both how it is within his mandate to speak, as he did yesterday in the briefing like today's by the SG I am banned from, in opposition to any encouragement of secession and how the SG thinks this position is a legitimate one for the UN and separately how it could play a role if it has already said what the outcome should be." Six hours later, nothing at all. Guterres' UN is corrupt.  Now in North-West Region travel restrictions have been imposed - in fact, one can't leave without saying exactly where one is going. Photo here. It was impossible for Inner City Press to get any comment from the UN of Guterres, since he has banned Inner City Press from the building for 77 days now, and his spokesman Stephane Dujarric has not been answering any written questions, including about sexual abuse by a Cameroon Army "peacekeeper" in the Central African Republic, here. A campaign to gain the release of imprisoned and increasingly sick journalist Thomas Awah is being ignored by the authorities. In Ekona in South-West Region Cameroon's government has engaged in what's become their trademark abuse, the killing at point blank range of civilians, in this case Bezeng Jonas and his sons, one of whom was attending University of Buea. Where are the "positive steps" the UK Mission's Karen Pierce asserted this week to Inner City Press across the street from the UN, from which British USG Alison Smale has banned Inner City Press for 66 days with assists?  Things have reportedly reached the point that in Lebialem Division in the South West region officials have de facto separated the country by instituting an ‘Access Card’ from locals fleeing insecurity in the division. One needs to pay FCFA 20, 000 for the 'Laissez passer' to cross over." After Guterres did nothing, in order to try to get Cameroon's support as chair of UN Budget Committee, and after again refusing Inner City Press' questions on August 31, video here, is now in China which is arming Biya. Now with Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric cutting off question and saying Guterres' ban of Inner City Press is "settled" and that it cannot enter to cover the General Assembly high level week where last year Guterres greeted Paul Biya, Guterres is headed to China September 1-4. And here's from China state media: "In March, Cameroonian President Paul Biya was the first African leader to visit China this year. It was the sixth trip to China by the president. Fruitful deals from FOCAC Beijing summit can significantly revamp the country's economy," Mpoche said. "That is why, I think the Belt and Road Initiative is laudable."
According to the Cartel of Cameroon Entrepreneurs, known in its French acronym as GICAM, close to 100 Cameroonian businessmen will visit China on the sidelines of the Beijing summit, scheduled for early September. The businessmen traveling to China intend to seize the opportunity and sign deals with Chinese private companies to "boost our cooperation and create more jobs for the youths back home," said Magloire, the rapporteur at Cameroon's Ministry of Economy and Finance."  The article makes no mention of Southern Cameroons and Biya's killings - nor, apparently, will Guterres. We'll have more on this.Here are questions Guterres and his spokesman, contrary to the promise of evicter Alison Smale, has left UNanswered: "August 27-6: August 22-3: On Cameroon, your belated July 11 read out does not answer the questions Inner City Press has asked. Before asking more, there are now broken out by letter for ease of reference and for belated answer today, as well as this:

was DSG Mohammed present at the July 11 meeting? And what is the SG's response to what was said about him in the demonstration by Anglophone Cameroonians in Washington yesterday? How does he respond to their charges of corruption?

a) Cameroon has hired Mercury Public Affairs for $100,000 a month, even as the UN is paying money to the government. Is UN money being used for the mass killing cover up campaign? Are there any safeguards in place?

b) please disclose any and all other meeings the SG has had this year arranged by paid lobbyists.

[responded to Aug 22, but see (d) below: c) what is the SG's comment on the recent announcement of seven arrests for summary executions, and the newer video of Cameroon Army executions that has emerged?

d) Specifically, how are these videos being incorporated into the supposed vetting of Cameroon's contributions to UN Peacekeeping missions?

e) please provide a list and read-out of each of the Secretary General's meetings and communications with Cameroon Ambassador Tommo Monthe during Monthe's time as chair of the Fifth (Budget) Committee.

[semi-answered Aug 22 f) In light of statements at the August 8 noon briefing please state whether envoy Fall even requested to meet with President Paul Biya or whether the UN believes that Biya is once again out of the country, in Geneva. Has the UN ever met with Biya in Geneva? ]

g) I reiterate August 7-1 and 8-1 and 9-1, on this: was the SG or anyone else in the UN aware that this Biya delegation's lobbying trip was stage managed by the DC-based lobbying firm Patton Boggs? Why was this meeting not disclosed at the time? Why is there no photo, even just UN Photo, of it? Where did it take place? Who attended, on each side?

h)Has the Secretariat communicated since with the Biya government? Has it ever communicated with the opposition?" 
O
n August 26, in Nigeria those Anglophones displaced by Biya's killings, covered up and support by Antonio "Mr. Refugees" Guterres simply so he could try to get Cameroon Ambassador Tommo Monthe's support for his power grab reform proposals, are called "invaders." But still when they are interviewed some truth emerges: "one of the refugee, Polycarp Ande who fled from Furawa Sub-division into Fikyu village alleged that Cameroonian soldiers led the ethnic cleansing of their people. According to him, hunger, elusive health care, lack of shelter and idleness were major challenges, which he noted has in turn had ripple effect on their host community, who are predominantly low scale farmers. He explained that the villagers and churches has been feeding them, and expressed worry over their increasing numbers amidst meager resources. “Some of our brothers who went back to see how the situation was in our villages keep running back as the onslaught is still going on. ” As at last Saturday, over 15 of our people came into Kpambo-piri in Ussa and more people keep coming into Nigeria every week. “Our children are the most affected because they can’t go to school and we want the government of Nigeria and the world to come to our aid." Inner City Press is inquiring with legislators in the area and others - watch this site. 
On August 22, in response to detailed questions about what Guterres knew - including about Cameroon which received the public's funds through the UN paying Patton Boggs and now Mercury Public Affairs, see below - his spokesman Stephane Dujarric sent Inner City Press, whom he has played his role in banning for life, this which we publish in full: "On Cameroon: On new video released on alleged human rights abuses in Cameroon:
We are aware of the new video released on social media concerning alleged human rights violations in the country and remain deeply concerned over the continued violence. We are encouraged that the Government has pledged to carry out a thorough investigation into these incidents and to publish the results. We continue to ask the Government to grant unimpeded access to the UN human rights bodies. We further reiterate the need to lift all restrictions on humanitarian access to the North-West and South-West regions.
On SRSG Fall’s visit to Cameroon and upcoming elections:
With regard to SRSG Fall’s recent visit to Yaoundé from 4 to 9 August, as mentioned earlier, he met with the Prime Minister, the Minister of External Relations, the Minister for Territorial Administration, the President of the National Commission for the Promotion of Multiculturalism and Bilingualism, and the Director-General of Cameroon’s electoral management body, ELECAM, as well as the Chief of Staff of the Presidency of the Republic of Cameroon, among others. In his meetings with the authorities, he discussed the situation in the country in the lead-up to the 7 October presidential election, as well as humanitarian assistance to those in urgent need.
Meanwhile, the UN continues capacity-building activities, as well as voter education targeting the media and civil society in close cooperation with ELECAM ahead of the elections, and will continue to closely monitor the situation." The UN's no due process "investigation" of Inner City Press with the outcome pre-determined puts the first response into context, as does the government memo describing Guterres that the UN won't respond to. And UN "capacity building" for Biya's latest ghoulish "election"? We aim to have more on this. Watch this site.

   Guterres' Global Communicator Alison Smale's August 17 letter banning Inner City Press, on which she took 45 days to try to phrase censorship in terms of "professionalism," states that Inner City Press' questioning broadcasts on Periscope, for then 45 days at the gate outside the UN, are derogatory and even somehow dangerous. Dangerous to the cover up of Biya's killings, perhaps, and those who play a role in it.

September 17, 2018

Misplaced Focus on Nikki Haley Curtains While UN Says She Supports Censorship of Press So FOIA Filed

By Matthew Russell Lee, PFT Q&A Haley Scope

UNITED NATIONS GATE, September 14 – That the US government is paying $58,000 a month to rent the full floor penthouse across from the UN for Nikki Haley is one thing. The $52,700 for mechanized curtains was a decision made under the Obama Administration, when Samantha Power was US Ambassador to the UN.

But what needs to have the curtains drawn on it, so to speak, is the current lack of transparency. The UN of Secretary General Antonio Guterres had Inner City Press roughed up on July 3 as it covered the UN Budget Committee meetings on his $6.7 billion proposals, and has had it banned from the UN since - by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres' head of Global Communications Alison Smale, until a year ago the Berlin bureau chief of the New York Times, which has backtracked on curtain-gate but remains silent on and stands behind Smale's censorship.

    The US Mission under Haley has done nothing - in fact, Inner City Press is informed that Guterres' UN is telling people that the US Mission supports and even requested the banning of Inner City Press.

   Inner City Press has filed a Freedom of Information Act request, no documents responsive to which have yet been produced. Asking question at the UN Delegates Entrance, since it is banned from the UN Security Council stakeout and noon briefing, Inner City Press has repeatedly asked Haley about the censorship (and about Cameroon, abuse by UN peacekeepers, and UN bribery). Haley does not answer. This is not transparency - the curtains should be and will be pulled back. Watch this site. How arrogant or out of touch a self-styled world leader is has been revealed in the Leader's contemptuous approach to freedom of the press and whose who even gently chide him on it, including a Nobel Peace Prize winner. No, this is not a reference to Donald Trump, but to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, including as represented by his Franco-American spokesman Stephane Dujarric. And now Inner City Press is told that Guterres is cynically trying to recast his 65 days of censorship as being based on a request FROM the Trump Administration, or at least Trump's UN Mission to the UN and its ally, the UK. A UN Correspondent who sought as many have to get the ban on Inner City Press lifted at least from the upcoming General Assembly week has said, in writing: "I spoke with Stephane the other day and unfortunately your situation remains unchanged. The case against you is based on complaints from the US & UK Missions... I have tried to get you a waiver for the UNGA week but Security remains firm in their refusal." So, the answer is that Guterres ban on Inner City Press -- which began on July 3 right after I spoke with Cameroon's Ambassador -- is now based on questions I have asked the US Mission's Deputy Ambassadors including Jonathan Cohen and UK Deputy Ambassador Jonathan Allen at the Delegates' Entrance AFTER I was already banned. There was also serial questioning of Guterres and UK Permanent Representative Karen Pierce in front of IPI on July 20, Periscope video here. In fact, all of my questioning of the US and UK Missions, and all other Mission, is online on Periscope, full archive here. It is no different that the questions hurled at Trump. But there, the First Amendment applies. At the UN, it seems, an already censoring Secretary General can claim to get subsequent support from... Trump and his Mission. See 6 September 2018 question put to US Ambassador Nikki Haley, here. Inner City Press had already submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the UK government, after statements by UN (British) Under Secretary General Alison Smale. Now today a US FOIA request has been filed to the US State Department in Washington:

"On behalf of Inner City Press and in my personal capacity as its United Nations bureau chief, Matthew Russell Lee, pursuant to the federal Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 for the following information: 1) Most pressingly, any and all record reflecting communications by the US Mission to the UN or its personnel to the UN concerning Inner City Press or me, including but not limited to my questioning and broadcasting on Periscope of and concerning such personnel; and 2) any and all record reflecting communications by the US Mission to the UN or its personnel to the UN concerning Inner City Press or me from January 1, 2017 to the date of your response.    This request, particularly (1) above which can and should be treated separately, should be afforded expedited treatment. I have today been informed that my banning from the UN, including prospectively from covering the UN General Assembly High Level week as I have for 11 years and for which I submitted a timely application on Sept 3, is based on complaints by the US Mission to the UN, who officials I have questioned in a journalistic capacity since July 5. Such a complaint would impinge on my First Amendment rights, and threatens imminent irreparable harm. Expedited treatment must be accorded.  If this request is denied in whole or part, please provide the basis for each such denial or deletion by reference to the specific exemption of the Act which you assert is applicable. Request for All Portions of Material for Which No Exemption to Production is Claimed Please provide all segregable portions of otherwise exempt material. We reserve the right to appeal your decision to withhold any information... I am requested expedited treatment of the request for all USUN communications to the UN about Inner City Press or me since July 3, 2018 due to such communications being cited as a basis to ban me from covering the UNGA High Level week beginning September 24 - the US Mission is being called responsible for the ban and it is imperative to prove or disprove that before then, asap, before irreparable harm including to First Amendment interests takes place." ["Your request has successfully been submitted."] Watch this site. We maintain: on press freedom, in terms of actual acts, Guterres is worse than Trump: Guterres had Inner City Press roughed up, twice, and now banned for life. On September 5, after a report-back from a large democracy - not the United States - which sought to intervene to stop Guterres' censorship, Inner City Press turned it into a question to Guterres' spokesmen and Deputy and Alison Smale: "September 5-2: I'm informed that when approached by a major democracy the/your answer has been that my “issue is being treated as one which does not require consultation with Member States as it relates to Security & DPI taking action in pursuit of existing procedures” (which?) and that this is not the only case where restrictions have been placed and in the past other journalists too have been banned. Please explain by what right the Secretariat ignores member states, given the conflicts of interest and needs for recusals timely raised, and state the precedents of other expulsion, on what grounds, with what due process and for what periods of time. Note my September 3 application." Hours later - after Guterres' ASG Fabrizio Hochschild's declined to answer Inner City Press' question by claiming that Dujarric is answering - Deputy Farhan Haq replied, "as for question 5-2, the Spokesman has never said that." So Inner City Press immediately specified: "The "you" in question Sept 5-2 referred to the UN Secretariat for which you speak. And that's what they tell me was the answer. So the request pre-publication for your Office as the Spokesperson to "explain by what right the Secretariat ignores member states, given the conflicts of interest and needs for recusals timely raised, and state the precedents of other expulsion, on what grounds, with what due process and for what periods of time. Note my September 3 application." After having been told this afternoon by ASG Hochschild that that "Steph" is providing answers - after al this time, response on one (or I guess if you include Sept 5-3, two) out of 24 questions?  Please provide a list of and read outs for SG Guterres' meeting with African officials while in China, including in light of UNanswered question Sept 5-6" concerning Guterres' son's business links in Angola, Cape Verde, Timor Leste and Sao Tome. No answer - but a colleague from the UN's fourth floor said first there were boxes by Inner City Press' workspace then the boxes were gone. The UN went through Inner City Press' files. [Update: because of being contacted by concerned whistleblowers, clearly Guterres' retaliatory UN's goal, we specify: we never print out anything so this intrusion by Guterres and Smale will be for naught. But it shows what they have made the UN.] We'll have more on that, and this: while a major democracy is told Guterres' censorship is none of its business, Guterres' Smale in her letter and Dujarric in his briefing room have used unnamed member states' complaints as the basis of Inner City Press being banned. Smale used an old complaint by Morocco, which her own MALU (Marija) told Inner City Press was frivolous. Did she stoke up other missions to complain to her? Watch this site.

 On August 30, spokes-hatchet-man Stephane Dujarric was asked, again, about how and why Inner City Press was roughed up, ousted and banned for life without due process. Dujarric, with a smile, cut the question off and said to review his previous Orwellian answers, adding "The issue is settled as far as we're concerned." Like the way Guterres golden statue gifter Paul Biya is "settling the issue" in the Anglophone zones, pure force and cover up? Dujarric also called it "asked and answered." What, like the UN's failures in protecting civilians, in raping children, spreading cholera, selling out the Anglophones to Cameroon for a favor in the Budget Committeee? This is disgusting. Video here. Dujarric moved on with a "Mademoiselle," a question about the UNGA week which Guterres and Dujarric have worked - and lied - to ban Inner City Press from. On August 29, Guterres' spokes-hatchet-man Stephane Dujarric was asked, again, about the lack of due process and specifically about Guterres now banning a journalist who has covered the UN General Assembly high level week for a decade. Video here; from the UN transcript: Question: two questions related to the status of Matthew Lee.  The first is whether any consideration is being given to at least giving him temporary access to the UN Headquarters during the General Assembly week and, secondly, just if you would respond to his repeated claims that he was not accorded due process before being banned from the, from the premises.

Spokesman:  The process through which accreditation is given and withdrawal is clear, it’s written publicly in the media guidelines.  You all agree to the process when you accept your accreditation, which accreditation to any institution is a privilege.  Everybody has a right to, to report and to say whatever they, they wish.  But the accreditation process is such.  It’s very clear.  Really?