At UN Office of Drugs and Crime, Problems of Lack of Oversight, Slow Sleaze in Kabul

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN

UNITED NATIONS, March 21 -- The head of the UN Office of Drugs and Crime, Antonio Maria Costa, came Wednesday to UN Headquarters to discuss problems in the poppy eradication attempts in Afghanistan. Problems at UNODC itself, however, were raised, and to some degree responded to.  Inner City Press asked Mr. Costa about an until-now unreported analysis by the UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services, that UNODC does not have the capacity to manage it far-flung drug-fighting programs. Mr. Costa acknowledged both the report and these problems, but was strangely dismissive of the shortfall, saying it was "peanut-sized money" and impacts only 10% of UNODC's budget. Video here, from Minute 26:05 to 30:40. Below are quotes for the OIOS report.

            On Afghanistan, Inner City Press asked Mr. Costa about the March 15 report by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, which noted that of $74 million pledged to the Counter-Narcotics Trust Fund (CNTF) in Afghanistan, only $1 million has actually been disbursed.

            Mr. Campo replied that the "news is worse that was indicated in that report." He said that beyond the CNFT's $77 million, there is a $22 million Good Performance Fund, but that of this total $99 million, only $750,000 has been spent, less than one percent.

            "You are asking why," Mr. Campo said. Yes, we are. He cited bureaucratic delays and competition between ministers (meaning, in many instances, between warlords).  He did not address, and there was no time to ask, about another incongruity in the report, that while "opium poppy cultivation and the drug economy continue to grow," the International Monetary Fund claims that "inflation continues to decline." How can these two be reconciled? Mr. Costa noted with apparently pride that narcotics traffickers in Southern Afghanistan have been added on December 22, 2006, to the UN Security Council's Al Qaeda / Taliban sanctions list. But is a showing of connection to these groups required? Should it be? All this is left unaddressed, in rushed briefings about late provided glossy anti-drug brochures.

Mr. Campo with glossy brochure, OIOS report on UNODC not shown

            From the OIOS report on UNODC:

"UNODC decided to close the Regional Office for the Caribbean affecting 29 countries based solely on its funding situation.  In this particular case, OIOS noted with concern that while the funding situation was precarious prior to 2004,  not enough efforts have been made to redress the situation.  OIOS believes that any re-profiling decisions should be based on the regional needs, wider consultation  and analysis of the strategic and programmatic variables  necessary to achieve UNODC goals in order to avoid gaps in support to Member States requests."

            So while little is said at headquarters of UNODC's finances, 29 countries were impacted by this shut-down. The OIOS report continues:

"wider consultation with the staff council through the Joint Advisory Committee is required.  In contrast to the previous inspection by OIOS,  OIOS noted improved transparency in decision making through the Executive Committee.   The use of ExTrack, a tracking mechanism to monitor the implementation of ExCom decisions  has further enhanced their follow-up and management accountability. However, wider access and dissemination of the ExCom decision's implementation  would improve transparency further. In OIOS view, the ExCom does not lend itself to a focused and in-depth discussion of substantive issues."

            In this, UNODC is similar to UNDP, where the serious problems at the agency are barely discussed by its Executive Board. On human resources policy, the report says that

"OIOS noted that transparency in the selection process was partly flawed by way of exceptions  in cases where they did not seem necessary."

            This sounds like the UN Pension Fund, where hiring exceptions have become the rule, including through the use of Pension Fund-only contracts. The point address by Mr. Costa was summarized in the OIOS report as follows:

"UNODC's most immediate concern was an expanding mandate and the apparent insufficient Regular Budget (RB) resources provided to it for its implementation - 11% of UNODC total budget for 2006-2007 is RB funded.  OIOS noted that while the amount of RB resources grew minimally from 2002-2003 to 2004-2005, there was no increase in real terms for the current biennium.  UNODC's RB share of the total budget  decreased from 15% in 2002-2003 to 13% in 2004-2005 to its current level.  This was mostly due to increased extrabudgetary earmarked contributions. OIOS attempted to obtain clarity on the amount and complexity of the new mandates given to UNODC and some resource estimates to cover the needs for those mandated activities including core functions which are claimed to be implemented with XB resources. However, UNODC did not have such information and analysis available and it was unclear what core functions or additional mandates did not have enough resources.  OIOS noted that additional initiatives started at UNODC's discretion were not always supported by additional funding."

            The result of this is summarized in this communication to Inner City Press:

Subject: UNOV/UNODC financial crisis plus

From: [Name withheld in this format]

To: Matthew Russell Lee

Campo-- will Ban re-appoint despite turmoil? UN reform or business as usual? Cover up or just white-wash? Where is Board of Auditors? UNOV staff get one year contracts due to UNODC's lack of money.. Barcena, Orr to be lobbied. Donors demand answers.

            We'll see.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

Search WWW Search innercitypress.com

Outsourcing of UN Pension Fund Delayed Through April, Cocheme's Inaction on OIOS Report

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN

UNITED NATIONS, March 5 -- The proposed outsourcing of $9 billion of the UN Pension Fund will not take place at least through the end of April, said Alicia Barcena, Under-Secretary General of Management, on Monday.

            The outsourcing, widely questioned by UN staff and beneficiaries, had been aggressively pushed by previous Under Secretary General for Management Chris Burnham and UN Controller Warren Sach. The bids of 13 investment banks were opened on February 15. In response to questions from Inner City Press on February 28, Mr. Sach said the winner would not be selected until the end of March. On March 1, Ms. Barcena took over for Mr. Sach as the Secretary-General's representative to the Pension Fund.

            Asked Monday about the outsourcing on Monday, Ms. Barcena moved the date back at least another month, to the end of April, and put in sequence before any final decision the completing of an asset-liability management study, and decisions on an investment strategy, which she said she'll discuss this week with the chair of the Pension Fund's investment committee, Merrill Lynch official William McDonough. Video here, from Minute 33:08.

            Ms. Barcena also appeared to distance herself -- wisely, observers say -- from Pension Fund CEO Bernard Cocheme. Mr. Cocheme was presented with an investigative report by the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services in late March 2006, which among other things called for him to take action on, Dulcie Bull and Paul Dooley, two managers who were involved in steering no-bid contracts to the previous boss of Mr. Dooley.  After first claiming that the OIOS report was never final, then being quoted as "disagreeing" with the report, Mr. Cocheme on February 28 claimed that OIOS has allowed him to take no disciplinary action. If so, the problems only grow deeper, including in light of the UN General Assembly's Fifth Committee March 5 discussion of failure to follow OIOS reports on spending following the tsunami.

            Ms. Barcena, asked by Inner City Press about the failure to impose any disciplinary action despite OIOS' written findings and recommendations, said that the "the person to responsible to answer is Bernard Cocheme," but that she will be meeting with him "on this ground." Video here, from Minute 36:09. We expect to have more news about Mr. Cocheme and his future on Thursday. Ms. Barcena has been asked follow-up questions about Mr. Cocheme and the Pension Fund.

Mr. Ban, boss of Ms. Barcena -- AND of Mr. Cocheme

            For now, we note that on December 16, 2005, Cocheme wrote to the UN Staff Council to complain about their resolution 69, which criticized his management. In the letter, Cocheme along other things claims that the OIOS reported was "requested by me" and "rejects any allegations of wrongdoing or irregularities in its management," a claim challenged by the OIOS' findings three months later. Even before then, Rosemarie Waters of the Staff Council wrote back stating that "I have personally spoken with members of the UNJSPF management concerning staff allegations of abuse of authority, yet those concerns were never acknowledged or addressed."  And now it only gets worse. Developing.

At UN Pension Fund, No Outsourcing in March, Cocheme Speaks As Complaint Filed to Block Press Access

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN

UNITED NATIONS, February 28 -- The proposed outsourcing of $9 billion of the UN Pension Fund will probably not take place for at least a month, UN Controller Warren Sach said Wednesday at a press conference with Pension Fund CEO Bernard Cocheme.

            Mr. Sach spoke first, and explained that the evaluation of the 13 bids for the outsourcing contracts is ongoing, and will in all likelihood require the hiring of yet another outside contractor. When asked if these additional contractor will be chosen through a bidding or request for proposals process, Mr. Sach said no.

            Bernard Cocheme read out loud a statement he had made on February 15 to the UN Pension Board's Audit Committee. Video here, from Minute 16:35 through 25:30. Inner City Press had attempted to observe or at least ask questions outside that meeting, held at the Pension Fund's office at 1 Dag Hammarskhold Plaza. After waiting nearly half an hour in the Pension Fund's reception area, Inner City Press was told that its questions would be answered later, in writing. Inner City Press then left the Pension Fund's office.

            Wednesday Mr. Cocheme stated that later in the day at that February 15 meeting, the head of the UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services came and told the Committee that there had been no need for Mr. Cocheme to discipline the senior managers named in a March 2006 OIOS report, namely Dulcie Bull and Paul Dooley, who awarded no-bid contracts to his previous boss Gerard Bodell. Mr. Cocheme's statements on Wednesday are at odds with the statement provided and to date not retracted by Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson's office, that Mr. Cocheme told OIOS he disagrees with the report and "will take no action" --

Subj: Your question on OIOS and the Pension Fund 

Date: 2/8/2007 2:48:05 PM Eastern Standard Time

From: Farhan Haq [at] un.org

To: Inner City Press

In March 2006, the OIOS completed an investigation into allegations of possible conflict of interest, favoritism and mismanagement at the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund. Based upon the evidence adduced, OIOS concluded that several staff members - including two Senior UNJSPF staff - have acted improperly in connection to contracts for information technology services awarded to a consultant retained by UNJSPF.

OIOS issued several recommendations in this case, including that UNJSPF management take appropriate action against its two staff. The Chief Executive Officer of UNJSPF informed OIOS that he disagrees with the findings and recommendations of the report of investigation - as regards the actions of his staff - and advised that he "intends to take no action" with regard to them. OIOS advised him that pursuant to its mandate, it will report his response to the General Assembly.

Pursuant to General Assembly resolution 59/272, the report is available to Member States upon request. It has already been released, in redacted form, to two Member States who have requested it.

            Mr. Cocheme distinguished Wednesday between "take no action" and "take no disciplinary action." He insisted he has told both staff members to in the future avoid the "possible misperception" that they are acting in an "non-prudent manner."

     At few places other than the UN can a person give no-bid contacts to his previous boss and then, even when caught out, merely be admonished not to "create misperceptions" in the future. 

Mr. Sach - Mr. Cocheme, at side, not shown in this UN photo

            Mr. Cocheme stated that since the above-quoted response by Ban Ki-moon's spokesman's office, OIOS has confirmed to him in writing that despite its reports recommendation that "appropriate action" be taking on Mr. Dooley and Ms. Bull, no disciplinary action is required. Inner City Press on Wednesday asked for a copy of such an OIOS statement, but Mr. Cocheme declined. It is imperative that OIOS ask questions, given the seeming non-action on its report and recommendations.

            Mr. Cocheme acknowledged that two emails have circulated this month to all staff in the Pension Fund, to not talk to the media, specially naming Inner City Press. Mr. Cocheme stated that the staff representative sent these without Mr. Cocheme's knowledge. Asked about his previous statements to staff that "it is not okay to accuse colleagues of benefiting from preferential treatment," Mr. Cocheme said that this was not intended to discourage whistle-blowing. He said that "anyone who knows" him would know he would not say to not speak to the press. When told that many Pension Fund staff feel, based on the two recent emails and Mr. Cocheme's previous statement discouraging any complaint about favoritism or corruption, that they are not to speak to the media, Mr. Cocheme respond, "But we are talking to the press." Video here, from Minute 44:15 to the end.

            Immediately following these questions and answers with Mr. Cocheme, including follow-up questions in the hallway outside the briefing room, Inner City Press returned a call to UN Security, specifically to Victor Buttaro of the "Special Investigative Unit." Mr. Buttaro asked, "How did you get into the Pension Fund last week?"

            "Through the front door." Inner City Press signed in, waited in a reception area, and left without incident as soon as the request was made. Inner City Press further explained the attempt to observe or ask questions of those entering the Pension Board Audit Committee meeting on February 15.

            Mr. Buttaro stated that a complaint had been filed about Inner City Press' presence. When asked who had filed the complaint, Mr. Buttaro declined to answer, saying his investigation is open. When asked if the name of the complainant would be provided if and when his investigation was closed, he said, "you could try to get a subpoena." He asked for a written statement, which he said must be signed.

            It seems clear that the Pension Fund management filed this spurious complaint with UN Security, in order to discourage coverage of the meetings of its Pension Board and Committees. Given Mr. Cocheme's statement that the head of OIOS attended the meeting and absolved Mr. Cocheme of any responsibility to take disciplinary action on the individuals named in the OIOS Investigative Report, the attempt to make it impossible to even observe who entered the meeting seems particularly unsavory. As the Pension Fund has used complaints-in-file for domination and intimidation, including of the current staff representative, it seems that the Pension Fund doesn't care that their complaint is meritless. Its mere existence, particularly any memorialization of it, is intended to have a chilling effect and to discourage future coverage.

            Other UN correspondents and staffers consulted on Wednesday also opined that the complaint is absurd and abusive. Reporters at the UN routinely wait outside any and all UN meetings in order to try to ask questions. Most dispositive, a staffer pointed out, is that when the Pension Fund's Ms. Pat Ryder, who functions as Mr. Cocheme's secretary, suggested that Inner City Press leave and await answers later in writing or by phone -- which never arrived -- Inner City Press immediately left. Despite UN Security's current refusal to provide the name of the complainant -- which is something that Mr. Cocheme himself derided in his press conference on Wednesday -- most opined that the complaint can and should be ascribed to Mr. Cocheme, and that it should be immediately withdrawn and expunged. We'll see.

            As to the wider question of outsourcing, which the Pension Fund's spurious complaints are meant to stop reporting on, some observers argue that the question of passive indexation is much ado about nothing. Lost in such arguments is that the proponents of outsourcing, in mid-2006 at the type of Pension Board meeting where heretofore decisions had been made by consensus, suddenly called for a vote, which the outsourcing side one by 17-11-1, with nearly all staff and beneficiary representatives voting against outsourcing. Some, hearing this, then characterize the questioning of outsourcing as no more than a battle for turf, a power struggle. But with these questions in the air, including the seeming impunity for irregularities in the previous outsourcing of IT services, covered in the OIOS report, a call is growing for Ban Ki-moon to at least delay the outsourcing until more is known, not only from OIOS but also from the asset-liability management study which Mr. Sach said will be finished in July 2007.

We will have more to report about the Feb. 28 press conference and aftermath, but for now file this interim dispatch. Developing...

At UN Pension Fund, Outsourcing, Corruption and Abuse of Staff To Be Questioned

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN

UNITED NATIONS, February 27 -- As questions snowball around the UN Pension Fund, its CEO Bernard Cocheme is now slated to have to give some answers, in a press conference Wednesday in United Nations headquarters.

            On February 5, UN Controller Warren Sach purported to answer questions about the proposal to outsource $9 billion of the Pension Fund. Inner City Press asked for a copy of the Request for Proposal which had already been circulated to, and has now been submitted by, at least 13 investment banks. Not even the RFP has been provided. Inner City Press has run a series of ten articles about the pension fund, and has requested that Mr. Cocheme, who refused to answer telephone or email questions, come to provide answers in the public briefing room.

            There are at least three sets of issues: outsourcing, employment and procurement abuses and inaction on a UN investigative report.

            The rush to outsource began under previous Under-Secretary General for Management Chris Burnham. The Staff Council and many others distrust the plan for that main reason  and others. Mr. Burnham having left the UN to return to Wall Street, specifically to Deutsche Bank, has only fueled these suspicions.

            The Pension Fund's own Annual Report reports the Burnham-procured vote to move ahead with outsourcing, by a 17-11-1 margin. Previously, Pension Board decisions were by consensus. For that reason, staff and beneficiaries saw no harm in having only one-third of the votes on the Board. Then in the June 2006 vote in Nairobi, Burnham turned two thirds against one third. Later the General Assembly deferred to that split decision. (In between, the Fifth Committee said to wait until an asset-liability study is completed). The rush to outsource gathered stream. Now 13 bids have been opened. It is anticipated that once a winner is selected, there will be a rush to sign a contract, so that there will be no turning back.

            The Staff Council has voted to explore the chance to sue. Ban Ki-moon's new Under-Secretary for Management Alicia Barcena rushed to meet with the Staff Council, to deride their legal theory. But it's just as much a test case of management theory. Mr. Ban is the fiduciary of the Pension Fund, and the legal representatives of the people whose interests he is supposed to protect have opposed the outsourcing. Until now, Mr. Ban has deferred to a plan that was set in motion before he took office. With Burnham gone, Ban is in essence deferring to an empty chair. Will Ban now reconsider the outsourcing, and the unique legal status of the Pension Fund?

            A factor militating for putting the outsourcing on hold is the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services' detailed findings, in March 2006, that the Pension Fund's previous outsourcing of IT contrasts were riddled with the appearance of conflict of interesting.  Paul Dooley fed no-bid contracts to his ex-boss Gerard Bodell, with the help of Dulcie C. Bull and Sanjaya Bahel. The last of these three has been indicated and just got out on bail. Ms. Bull and Mr. Dooley, on the other hand, continue working for the Pension Fund, because CEO Cochame has refused to act on the OIOS recommendations.

Bernard Cocheme - soon, another UN picture

            Bernard Cocheme, when Inner City Press first reported on the OIOS report, told the staff that the report was only a draft. Then, when that story could not hold up, he told them that OIOS had agreed that all Cocheme needed to do was to form an internal advisory board. But that is contradicted, too, by the Ban Ki-moon's spokesperson's office:

[See above]

            Mr. Cocheme on Wednesday will be expected to explain his in-house spin of the OIOS report.

            Finally, detailed accounts of abuse of staff at the Pension Fund continue to accumulate. Executive Officer Peter Goddard likes to shout at employees and have them escorted from the building. Dulcie Bull and Norah Fitzgerald like to hand jobs to their friends (in Ms. Bull's case, according to the OIOS report, the favoritism extended to contracts worth millions of dollars).  Alan Blythe walks the floor as an enforcer. Ostensible staff representative Ibrahima Faye, once a victim as noted, without name by OIOS, now urges other staff not to speak to the press, not to speak of OIOS, to cover up. Bernard Cocheme has long been aware of all of this, and has done nothing. Wednesday, however, he will be expected to explain. And for time thereafter...

At UN Pension Fund, Cocheme Spins Staff Twice in Two Days, As Scrutiny Closes In

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN

UNITED NATIONS, February 22 -- As questions mount about the UN Pension Fund's inaction on a UN investigative report completed nearly a year ago, CEO Bernard Cocheme has taken to the bully pulpit. On February 21 at a Town Hall meeting, Cocheme derived this investigative series and propounded a counter-history of the Fund. This was followed by a mass email on February 22, ostensibly what Cocheme said at the February 15 Audit Committee meeting which the press was not allowed to attend or even question Committee members afterwards.

            Cocheme's story is that the Office of Internal Oversight Services report of investigation was only done because he requested it. But the OIOS report itself makes clear that the trigger was two staff members' October 4, 2005 eight-paragraph "memorandum to several high-ranking UN officials, including the Under-Secretary-General" of OIOS, Inga-Britt Ahlenius.

            The resulting report of investigation specifically calls for action to be taken on Dulcie Bull and Paul Dooley, for their roles in the award of no-bid contracts to a company called Sprig, Ltd, openly run by Mr. Dooley's ex-boss at New York Guardian Mortgage Company, Gerard Bodell. [That the ownership connections to Sprig may run deeper yet is a matter yet to be reported on.]

            On February 22, Mr. Cocheme claimed that he has spoken with OIOS, which has agreed that despite the plain language of the investigative report, no action was or is needed on Ms. Bull or Mr. Dooley, just the formation of another in-house advisory committee. With this claim, Mr. Cocheme is directly contradicting a statement issued by the Office of the Spokesman for the Secretary-General, which we will now quote in full:

Subj: Your question on OIOS and the Pension Fund 

Date: 2/8/2007 2:48:05 PM Eastern Standard Time

From: Farhan Haq [at] un.org

To: Inner City Press

In March 2006, the OIOS completed an investigation into allegations of possible conflict of interest, favoritism and mismanagement at the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund. Based upon the evidence adduced, OIOS concluded that several staff members - including two Senior UNJSPF staff - have acted improperly in connection to contracts for information technology services awarded to a consultant retained by UNJSPF.

OIOS issued several recommendations in this case, including that UNJSPF management take appropriate action against its two staff. The Chief Executive Officer of UNJSPF informed OIOS that he disagrees with the findings and recommendations of the report of investigation - as regards the actions of his staff - and advised that he "intends to take no action" with regard to them. OIOS advised him that pursuant to its mandate, it will report his response to the General Assembly.

Pursuant to General Assembly resolution 59/272, the report is available to Member States upon request. It has already been released, in redacted form, to two Member States who have requested it.

            Mr. Cocheme's spin does not appear to hold up.  It is time for Mr. Cocheme to take questions on the matter, rather than one-way mass emails to staff.

Inga-Britt Ahlenius: Cocheme says she gave OK for inaction

    The OIOS report called for action on three officials: Dulcie Bull and Paul Dooley of the Pension Fund, and Sanjaya Bahel of the UN's Procurement Section. The first two continue untouched and with impunity at the Pension Fund, while Mr. Bahel has been indicted and faces trial. In Cocheme-logic, if an advisory committee had been set up for Bahel, he too could still be teaching workshops about procurement.

            Meanwhile at the Pension Fund, new video surveillance camera are being installed. Dulcie Bull herself is out this week, attributing this to back trouble. She has nearly dodged the bullet. She has told staff that she intends to retire next year, but will not return, at least not for long, to the UK. Her associate Norah Fitzgerald, known to some as Mother Superior, for two days last week stopped answering her phone. At least as to the Press, Bernard Cocheme long ago stopped answering...

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service.

            Copyright 2006 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com -