The continuing ear-infection of Sha Zukang and his two ASG's leave honest staff no other options but to contact available member states and inform them on developments inside DESA and provide them with internal documentation in order to open their eyes and allow them to have a transparent look inside DESA's "high society" and it's "pay for play" modus operandi.
Thursday, 29 January 2009
The United States Mission to the UN posts in its website Internal and Confidential Reports on DESA Corruption
Saturday, 24 January 2009
maybe the world should finally decide and nominate Kim Won-so in the post of Secretary General, and send the current charlatan and parrot home in Seoul, at least we would have to deal with the real "power man" instead of a fake SG.
John Mary Kauzya and Catherine Pelluso have shortlisted Elia Yi Armstrong as replacement of Adil Khan
is absolutely amazing to even think that a more unqualified, ignorant, corrupt and un-ethical person to be shortlisted for this post. But hey, when UN-DESA has no other but John Mary Kauzya, who is under investigation for fraud, miss-management and gross-negligence conduct, to shortlist the future head of the Economic branch, this is the lowest level DESA has reached in years.
the fact that this korean lady can't stay longer at UNDP, tells a lot about her caliber and qualities.
What a shame !
But let's examine her real CV (see herein attached from UNPAN)
1984-1987 English Instructor Yonsei/Jilin Universities, Changchun, China
1985 - Associate (Piano pedagogy) Royal Conservatory of Music, University of Toronto, Canada
1989-1990 Legislative Aide, State Senator William Maravitz's Office, Chicago, USA
1989 - Master of Science (social policy and planning in developing countries), London School of economics, UK
Friday, 23 January 2009
Monday, 19 January 2009
Friday, 16 January 2009
Jian Tan (Chinese)
Wednesday, 14 January 2009
Dagfinn Knutsen, Director of Internal Audit sent the report (Audit File# 08-01411 and Assignment Nr# AN2007/540/01) to DESA's USG asking Mr. Zukang to properly evaluate and take into account the risk assessment of DESA and ensure that appropriate risk mitigation measures are in place.
Our blog wanted to post the attached Audit already back in July, but we thought that by giving some times to Sha Zukang he would have done the right thing. Well - as ll know he failed miserably to do the right thing, and his administration has resulted as corrupt and colluded as those of Desai and Ocampo.
We ask DESA staff to read the report, learn from it and ask explanations from your supervisors as to what have they done so far to implement the report.
We will continue to bring to you the entire internal-secret reviews, audits and management decisions on DESA. Only by making it transparent and public our mistakes we will be able to eradicate once and for all the internal corruption of Catherine Pelluso, Marie Oveissi, Furio De Tomassi, Guido Bertucci, Elia Armstrong, and many others (soon to come).
Tuesday, 13 January 2009
WHAT'S NEW?Upsss - There is nothing new (Click here)REGIONAL INFORMATION ON GOVERNANCE?Upsss - a blind copy of CIA country profile with UNDP links (Click here)INNOVATORS NETWORKS?Upps - words but there are not networks - the links are bogus and lead you no-where...(Click here)BEST PRACTICES?please don't even go there - is like buying a designer bag in Naples - its so fake and empty and lead to no where.. (click here)PILOT PROJECTS?Uppsss...after 5 years there are not pilot projects....(Click here)
Monday, 12 January 2009
Sunday, 11 January 2009
UN-DESA fails to implement mobility, while 70% of its Managerial force is expected to retire - there is a total lack of succession planning
In closing, let me briefly return to the theme of my address to you last year – a stronger UN for a better world. The foundation of all our work is accountability. The UN Secretariat, including myself, is accountable to you, the Member States. And that is why I push so hard, so strongly for UN reform.
We need to change the UN culture. We need to become faster, more flexible and more effective and more modern. In the coming weeks, I will ask you, the Member States, to support my proposals for a new human resources framework. We need to replace our current system of contracts and conditions of service. It is dysfunctional. It is demoralizing. It discourages mobility between UN departments and the field. It promotes stagnation, rather than creativity. It undercuts our most precious resource – the global, dedicated corps of international civil servants that is the backbone of the United Nations.
But at United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), our management composed by:
- USG- Sha Zukang - Arm Expert;
- ASG- Jomo Kwame Sundaram - the only Economist;
- ASG- Thomas Stelzer - former President of Klangforum Wien, a leading ensemble for contemporary classical music;
All these three gentlemen have been on the job at minimum one year (Stelzer - Feb 08). They need to initiate immediately an assessment of the age structure of the staff across in DESA, to assess the overall dimensions of the average ageing of staff and its impact on human resources management policies, including succession planning, and its financial implications, with a special emphasis on the Professional staff.
All the reports that come from Catherine Pelluso's office provide only general statistics on gender, geographical distribution and the basic demographic profile of staff. Most reports do not pay sufficient attention to age-related issues, lack analytical details about the consequences of the existing age structure, and do not call the attention of Senior Management in DESA and OHRM at Secretariat to the likely impact of the age structure. Often these reports are submitted either for the purposes of "information" or "taking note of" and rarely contain proposals to address age-related issues which are about to engulf Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA).
Both Catherine Pelluso and TCMS's Marie Oveissi are totally ignorant of what a Succession planning tool mean and how that affect the work of the department. For Pelluso and the entire Executive Office at DESA, "succession planning" is done as part of vacancy management, and in most cases it does not go beyond filling vacancies. Instead Sha Zukang should invest in a professional Human Resource Specialist within Executive Office - who should follow professionally the HR strategies and age structure of DESA against the particular mandate and objectives to be accomplished our Department.
Good and fresh example is that of Director of DPADM - instead of being prepared for Guido Bertucci's retirement (and failing to collect the $34,000 as established by OIOS Investigation and requested by Ban Ki-moon), DESA's EO failed to have in place a succession plan and thus being ready to replace both Bertucci (D2) and Khan(D1) right after their departure in July 2008. The lack of such detailed planning led to a leadership gap and a total chaos for the work of the division for the past nine months.
Lack of a coherent HR planning in DESA leads to major implications for a real succession and in endless process of replacing those who retire. While many now believe that such practices are "man maid" - whereby corrupt managers make "deals" with Executive Office (EO) in order to either remain in their positions post-retirement date, or micro-manage the vacancy and replacement process to ensure "continuity".
We will continue to talk about these problems..........
Saturday, 10 January 2009
Friday, 9 January 2009
Accountability? "Ideally the UN, foreshadowing a future world government, ought to be run by a global meritocracy -- rule by the best. In practice, it is the opposite. Any state that can be legally defined as one can join the UN -- it is a club having no rules of probity or morals. … The result is failure and graft. UN officials are not answerable to bodies like Congress or the U.K.'s Parliament, which would be sure to track down, expose and punish gross abuses and manifest failures. No senior UN official has ever gone to jail. It's rare for anyone to be sacked or removed. The top brass resist any kind of investigation, on principle. The oil-for-food inquiry is unique in that it has taken place at all and seems to be garnering results. But will any punishment be meted out? Will any serious reforms be pushed through? Of course not. …"
Paul Johnson, "The UN is for talk, not actions," Forbes (US), March 14, 2005.
Accountability’s importance, then and now “[A free people has] an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean, of the character and conduct of its rulers.”
John Adams, second American president, 1797-1801
“Adams had in mind the ministers of the British crown in the reign of King George III, and presumably he knew that the knowledge in question was interactive, moving mostly in the direction of the man being discovered as a thief but also toward the man afraid of finding out that he’s been robbed.”
Lewis Lapham, “Uncle Sam”, Harpers’ Magazine (US), January 2007, pp. 7-9.
Thursday, 8 January 2009
Tuesday, 6 January 2009
Monday, 5 January 2009
At UN, Ban's Town Hall Is Stacked with Pre-Screened Questions, on G-to-P Injustice and Permanent Contracts, Few Answers
Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
UNITED NATIONS, January 5 -- As Ban Ki-moon kicked off his third year as Secretary General, reviews Monday by UN staff outside Ban's town hall meeting were less than glowing. "It was like a Soviet event," one well-placed staffer quipped to Inner City Press, "complete with pre-selected questions and answers read out of a book." Another marveled how "it's a new day every day in Ban's UN," constant reinvention with no memory of previous new beginnings not followed up on.
Other Headquarters employees grumbled that other duty stations, from Geneva and Vienna to Nairobi, were given questions first. The head of the New York Staff Union, who had been asked to disclose his question in advance, inquired into the elimination last month of the UN's permanent contracts, and whether this violated the UN Charter. Union officials complained that no real answer was given.
Also from New York, a General Service staff member asked Ban why not extend educational benefits to General Services as well as Professional level staff. Ban answered that the limitation comes from the General Assembly, and that American citizens will not get such stipends unless they move and serve in Geneva or elsewhere. At least there was one seemingly unscripted question. The broader unfairness and waste of talent occasioned by the wall between Professional and General Services staff remains unaddressed.
Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson at Monday's noon briefing to respond to this Charter-based argument. The Charter doesn't require or provide for permanent contracts, she responded. The new term is "continuing." But what about whistleblower protection? And what about Article 101 of the the Charter's reference to staff being "permanently assigned"?
Inner City Press spoke with a number of senior UN officials on their way in and out of the town hall meeting. One demanded off the record treatment, when discussing Team Ban's crack down on the Press. Others, however, to their credit made no such request.
Peacekeeping chief Alain Leroy, walking in with his colleague Susana Malcorra, replied about the Lord's Resistance Army that the UN Mission in the Congo must focus in the Kivus, and cannot provide protection to the North. Click here for more on that.
The current Special Advisor on Africa may not long retain that title. "I started with Small Islands," he said, adding that he'd prefer not to be too identified with the Continent. So if Ban in fact complies with the stated wish of the General Assembly, expect a new Africa Advisor.
Controller Warren Sach confirmed that for a time he had been officer in charge of the Department of Management, but not on the day for replying to a report of UN retaliation. The resulting letter to the editor was by Catherine Pollard, "that was December 26," Sach said, "she was in charge." And as the Arab League meeting about Gaza droned on the basement, Ms. Pollard held court in the Delegates' Lounge. Every day is a new day.
Footnote: the Town Hall meeting was closed to the press. Even member states were not, at least as of Monday night, able to access the video. Delegates' link to the UN's intra-net had not been undated so far in 2009.
Is this any way to run the so-called World's Body? We may have more on this.
In 2007, the UN General Assembly committed to establishing a new, independent justice system to ensure the due process rights of staff members and hold managers and other employees accountable. It was originally envisioned that this new system would take effect on January 1, 2008, but the General Assembly extended this deadline to January 1, 2009 at the request of the Secretariat.
Now it appears that the Secretariat will also miss the January 2009 deadline. According to the ACABQ’s report:
Since the adoption of General Assembly resolution 62/228 in December 2007, none of the 30 posts authorized for the Office of Administration of Justice (18 new posts and 12 redeployments) have been filled…As a consequence of the lack of staff in the Office, as well as the fact that the statutes of the Dispute and Appeals Tribunals have not yet been adopted, delays have occurred in such areas as the development of procedures for the transition phase, a code of conduct for legal practitioners, terms of reference for the registries and a training and communications plan for the new system of internal justice…The procedures related to the new mechanisms of the disciplinary process, including the reporting of misconduct, investigations, the due process rights of staff, the evaluation of investigation reports and disciplinary proceedings, have not yet been completed. (paragraph 5 and 16(d))
Meanwhile, the Chairperson of the Joint Disciplinary Committee – one of two main bodies in the current UN justice system – has reportedly submitted a resignation letter, effective December 31, the sunset date of the current system. According to this letter, “there is no valid reason to continue, even as a transitional measure, to rely on this obsolete system. Justice will be much better served by focusing all efforts on launching the new system as soon as possible, and bringing all pending cases before it.”
This effectively means that unless the Secretary-General takes immediate action to complete the reform process, there will be no functioning justice system at the United Nations on January 1. In other words, whistleblowers and other employees at the United Nations – the organization charged with promoting human rights – may have no venue whatsoever through which to defend their own rights.
This could not come at a worse time, as the number of people seeking relief through the justice system has recently increased, with an “exceptionally large number of new cases filed in the first half of 2008.” (paragraph 8) The number of disciplinary cases at the United Nations, jumped from 72 in 2006 to 277 thus far in 2008. (paragraph 10)
As the legal cliché "justice delayed is justice denied" suggests, a delay in justice tends to be most harmful to the victim in the case and violates a person’s right to a speedy trial. Therefore, it is critical that the international body meet the January deadline. In doing so, however, the Secretary-General must also adhere to the recommendations made by the Redesign Panel in its original report and address the concerns raised by the UN Staff Union and seconded byGAP.
Saturday, 3 January 2009
by Claudia Rosett at PajamasMedia.Com
Or is he simply a fool, dutifully reciting excerpts from the UN’s Moral Equivalency Manual and Guide to Validating Tyrants and Terrorists of the Middle East. (Seems like they must have one … Maybe Kofi Annan left his dog-eared copy to Ban?)
Or maybe it all amounts to the same thing. Whatever might be going through the Secretary-General’s head as he pops up to opine about Israel and Gaza, he sounds like he’s either pro-Hamas (which, with Iranian backing, is dedicated to destroying Israel) or living on Pluto.
Ban has by now established himself as a knee-jerk subscriber to the UN formulation of “disproportionate force” — the term which is never applied by the UN to Hamas (or Hezbollah) terrorists launching rockets indiscriminately into Israel, or kidnapping Israeli solders, or gunning down and blowing up Israeli civilians. But “disproportionate force” is habitually howled out by the UN when Israel — having negotiated and conceded and warned — finally strikes back, targeting terrorists in its own defense. In practice, this means that terrorists attacking Israel get a ritual and meaningless tut-tut from the UN, usually while UN aid trucks keep rolling in to keep them resupplied. But when Israel attacks terrorists, that warrants emergency Security Council meetings and special press briefings at the highest levels, and repeated, lengthy statements aimed at generating genuine, massive pressure for Israelis to lay down their arms and let the terrorists carry on. Thus Kofi Annan’s histrionics when Israel struck back after Hezbollah, unprovoked, attacked Israel out of Lebanon in 2006.
And so, since Israel launched Operation Cast Lead on December 27th, to stop the attacks out of Gaza, Ban has been preaching full-throated Moral Equivalence from the UN pulpit, demanding an “immediate ceasefire,” calling on “all parties” to “fully uphold humanitarian law,” and insisting that all border crossings into Gaza should be flung open “to ensure the continuous provision of humanitarian supplies.” He got worked up enough about it to make a rare appearance in person at the UN noon press briefing this past Monday.
You can toil through some of his recent effusions here, and here; or for a bit of earlier history, here is Ban’s statement of September 19,2007, in which he pronounced himself “very concerned” that the government of Israel had declared the Gaza Strip an “enemy entity,” and called on Israel not to interupt essential services to Gaza. Ban did allude to the reason for Israel’s action — calling for a stop to “the continued indiscriminate rocket fire from Gaza into Israel.” But how did he propose to make that happen: “I call for it to stop immediately.” (Note: Ban did not mention the word “Hamas,” or call upon any specific actor firing the rockets; he called for “it” to stop. And, thousands of rocket and mortar attacks later, Ban might have noticed that “it” didn’t give a damn).
OK, so what could Ban do? As Secretary-General, he enjoys the opportunity to provide statements and advice to the Security Council, and of course he can order up a press conference and find an instant world audience. And though it might be something of a departure from custom, he could try finding the backbone to speak the truth — that the UN member state of Israel is under relentless attack out of Gaza by a terrorist group, Hamas, dedicated to its destruction. That another terrorist group, Hezbollah, which infests Lebanon is also dedicated to “Death to Israel.” That both are backed and provisioned and trained by Iran, where the president, who is overseen by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini, has called for Israel to be wiped off the map.
Ban could even throw in a few footnotes, about the role of Syria as a cohort and enabler of all this destructive activity and intent, and Saudi wahhabism in all its ruinous manifestations. He might even add a note about a subject which, as a former foreign minister of South Korea, he ought to know very well — the collaboration of Syria and Iran with nuclear-armed, missile vending, totalitarian North Korea.
Ban might also want to mention a name which, as far as I can see on the UN web site, has not passed his lips in any public setting since a September press conference in which he read out a Quartet statement that included a fleeting reference: Gilad Shalit. Actually, it would be fitting for Ban to devote an entire press conference (and then some) to Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier kidnapped two-and-a-half years ago into Gaza. If Ban is genuinely concerned about humanitarian traffic through the border crossings, would he care to explain why he has been so publicly insistent on the flow of free goods into terrorist-run Gaza, and so apparently uninterested in whether Gilad Shalit might finally be released to travel back out?
All this would be a great help in clarifying the problems in the Middle East. It would be salutary for the UN as well. True, the organization still has no official definition of terrorism, so Ban might find himself venturing into what is, for UN officials, exotic terrain. But there is nothing to prevent the Secretary-General from saying “terrorist,” if he wants to. It might bother the finely tuned sensitivities of actual terrorists, or states that support them. But there’s not much they could do about it. The UN has no procedure for removing a sitting secretary-general. It would be a move of great integrity were Ban to re-focus the UN debate right now, away from the inane formulations about “disproportionate force,” and toward the genuinely germane issue of terrorism.
So that’s what Ban could do, were he willing to stand up for the actual peace-and-human-dignity charter causes of the UN, or even for simple decency. And if he cannot find it in himself to do that, then the least he could do right now is stop making statements that sound like the utterances of a UN-trained parrot. Give it a rest. Take a holiday, Mr. Ban. It will make for a better world.