|
New York: When UN staffers on
peacekeeping missions were accused of misconduct or corruption
over the last couple of years, more than two-thirds of them were
exonerated by the UN’s internal tribunal system, according to
research provided to The Associated Press by a
whistleblower-protection group.
Extensive interviews conducted with current and former UN staffers
in eight peacekeeping forces who lodged complaints against
higher-ups found widespread frustration over “managers who
committed misconduct and were rarely sanctioned,” said the
Washington-based organization, Government Accountability Project
(GAP).
The UN’s tribunal system was reformed under Secretary General Ban
Ki-moon, at the insistence of the General Assembly, in 2009 but
appears to be worse at rooting out mismanagement than the old
procedures, according to the GAP study, which was being released
publicly Friday.
After the reforms adopted higher standards of evidence and proof,
GAP found 19 cases of misconduct allegations against peacekeeping
staff over two years, of which 13 were exonerated — 68 percent.
GAP’s study showed, however, that in a 2 ˝-year period before the
reforms, nine misconduct cases were filed against peacekeeping
staffers and just four were exonerated — a 28.6 dismissal rate.
“Too often, bad apples are getting away with misconduct that they
commit in the peacekeeping missions, at the expense of citizens
across the globe,” GAP international program staffer Shelley
Walden, co-author of the study, said.
The United Nations is pledged to uphold justice worldwide. But as
an international institution, its 75,000 staffers worldwide are
ruled by an internal UN tribunal system that judges complaints of
mismanagement, harassment or corruption. National courts do not
have jurisdiction over UN employment issues.
GAP’s research focused on the problems of whistle-blowers in the
UN system who spoke out against mismanagement, corruption or
harassment that can go as far as death threats and assault.
The most serious crimes are dealt with by having the United
Nations discharge the staffer and send them to their home country
for possible prosecution. This is how the UN handled several
notorious cases of UN peacekeepers accused of rape or soliciting
prostitution in Congo and Haiti.
Ban’s spokesman, Martin Nesirky, said in a statement late Thursday
that the new system in place since 2009 is an important part of
the “architecture” of accountability at the UN and is closely
monitored with the intent of strengthening managerial
accountability.
“The system is still evolving and, as such, it would not be
prudent, at this point, to draw firm conclusions about the
direction of the emerging jurisprudence,” he said in the
statement.
Part of the problem with the 2009 reforms, Walden said, is that it
raised the standard of proof of misconduct, making it harder for
whistle-blowers to make their complaints stick.
A report by Ban to the General Assembly in July verified that,
saying that many cases “failed to meet the higher evidential and
procedural standards” of the new tribunal system.
These also led to long delays in investigating some cases, Ban
said. Some complaints were deemed not credible. And some cases
were not pursued because managerial changes had already been made.
These “factors resulted in cases that were not pursued as
disciplinary matters or closed with no measure,” Ban said.
Walden said that “They are not pursuing as many cases, so the
pendulum has swung back the other way.”
The GAP report said that UN tribunal judges “have been hesitant to
refer cases to the Secretary General for possible action to
enforce accountability.” In almost tribunal 500 cases the GAP
study examined, over a range from disputes over severance pay to
actual threats and assaults, judges had asked Ban for enforcement
only four times, and it was unable to find out if he had actually
taken action in those four cases.
“The secretary-general has not upheld the rule of law within the
organization,” Walden said.
The appeals process “is almost never effective when it is higher
level staff, I think that’s a political problem within the
institution,” George G. Irving, a private attorney who is a
consultant to the UN Staff Union, told the AP. He was one of the
experts interviewed by the GAP study.
“The tone at the top is really a problem — you might get
accountability at the lower levels,” Walden said.
|
Comments
|
Quick links