In Other Media e.g. Somalia, Ghana, Azerbaijan, The Gambia Click here for Global Inner City Archives 2006
Click HERE for Daily UN Reporting
We welcome readers' comments or critiques. Contact us
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.
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
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
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
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
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
Thank you for your interest and best regards,
OHCHR New York Office." Photo of email here.
immediately wrote back,
to the sender
her assistant, to
and to the
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
GATE, November 22 – As the
to a seventh term by
regions as well as in
Boggs, on a
of $100,000 per
to Inner City
which UN Secretary
roughed up on
July 3 right
after it spoke
July 11. Guterres'
Farhan Haq has
City Press e-mailed
before the UN
Inner City Press
asked the same and
more to the Dutch
Mission to the
writing and in
now has its
appeal set for
albeit by Skype,
below, as now
Oosterom and his
Press from entry from
July 3 onward,
in order to report
on the UN
Press had to
other than at
the UN Noon
Briefing and UN
and Smale also banned
in front of
and on August
example, a diplomat
on the North
sanctions committee -- whose
is where Inner
City Press asks
questions only because
banned it since
July 3. But in
her August 17
imposed July 3
and says that
member states -
FOIA or WOB
and now an
there will be a
based on October 7
irregularities and the
denial's evasion on
Dutch role in
the WOB /
act for the
that term is
limited to all
in any form,
Mission to the
UN in New York
not limited to
July 14, 2018 to "Eybergen, Bas van"
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,
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
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
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
1f you have any questions concerning the status of your application and the time
limit for dealing with it, please contact DJZ-NR.
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:
the Kingdom of
New York 10017
Contact Bas van Eybergen
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.
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.
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"
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,
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.
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
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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
NATIONS, October 12 – When Donald Trump
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.
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.
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
21 -- As the
regions as well as in
the North, it
Boggs and Mercury
Public Affairs, documents
to Inner City
which UN Secretary
up on July
3 right after
it spoke to
Monthe and on
August 17 declared
July 11. And
is raising the
or as the
in the capital
foretold in the
here. And the
had roughed up
from the UN
for 80 days
Onyeama the foreign
engaged in the
Tabe. For now,
questions, and his
even worse than he
was then. On
in a briefing
adviser on the
Dieng said, as
must be done
secession - a
beyond what is
supposed to be
have it, Inner
20 asked Dieng
why he'd done
said that he
wants to visit
the country. Video
Then, still in
that the SG's
is seeking to
how it is
speak, as he
today's by the
SG I am banned
and how the SG
position is a
for the UN and
it could play
a role if it
said what the
be." Six hours
Now in North-West
imposed - in
one is going.
here. It was
for Inner City
Press to get
any comment from the UN of Guterres,
has banned Inner City
from the building
for 77 days
now, and his
Dujarric has not
abuse by a
in the Central
campaign to gain the release
of imprisoned and
Thomas Awah is
by the authorities.
Ekona in South-West Region Cameroon's
and his sons,
one of whom was
steps" the UK
Karen Pierce asserted
this week to
from the UN,
Inner City Press
for 66 days
Things have reportedly
point that in
the South West
the division. One
needs to pay
FCFA 20, 000
for the 'Laissez
nothing, in order
to try to get
chair of UN Budget
Inner City Press'
questions on August 31, video here,
is now in China which
Biya. Now with
of Inner City
to cover the
greeted Paul Biya,
headed to China
Biya was the
this year. It
was the sixth
trip to China
"That is why,
I think the
Belt and Road
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?" On 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
GATE, September 14 – That the US government is
$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
roughed up on July 3 as it covered the
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
Smale, until a year ago the Berlin
bureau chief of the New
but remains silent
on and stands
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,
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
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