PDA

View Full Version : UN staff to vote on no-confidence motion against Annan


SecretAgentMan
11-19-2004, 06:23 PM
http://onfinite.com/libraries/165839/f3d.jpg
UN staff are expected to make an unprecedented vote of no confidence in Secretary-General Kofi Annan, union sources say, after a series of scandals tainted his term in charge of the world body.

The UN staff union, in what officials said was the first vote of its kind in the almost 60-year history of the United Nations, was set to approve a resolution withdrawing support for Annan and senior UN management.

Annan has been in the line of fire over a series of scandals including controversy about a UN aid program that investigators say allowed deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to embezzle billions of dollars.

Staffers said the trigger for the no-confidence measure was an announcement this week that Annan had pardoned the UN's top oversight official, who was facing allegations of favouritism and sexual harassment.

The union had requested a formal probe into the official, Dileep Nair, after employees accused him of harassing staff and violating UN rules on the hiring and promotion of workers.

Top UN spokesman Fred Eckhard announced on Tuesday that Nair had been exonerated by Annan "after a thorough review" by the UN's senior official in charge of management, Catherine Bertini.

Annan underlined that he "had every confidence" in Nair, Eckhard said, but UN employees ridiculed the decision and claimed that investigators had not questioned the staff union, which first raised the complaints in April.

"This was a whitewash, pure and simple," Guy Candusso, a senior member of the staff union, told AFP.

Candusso noted that Eckhard's declaration to the press had said that "no further action was necessary in the matter."

But in a letter sent to the union, a copy of which was obtained by AFP, Annan's chief of staff Iqbal Riza said Nair had been "advised that he should exercise caution" in future to "minimize the risk of negative perception."

In a resolution set to be adopted on Friday, the union said Riza's statement "substantiates the contention of the staff that there was impropriety" and that there exists "a lack of integrity, particularly at the higher levels of the organisation."

The draft resolution, also obtained by AFP, calls on the union president to "convey this vote of no confidence to the secretary general."

Staffers who asked not to be named, afraid that speaking out could damage their future in the United Nations, said the Nair decision was an example of corruption by Annan and his senior staff.

They noted that Riza, UN undersecretary general for information Shashi Tharoor and other top officials had served directly under Annan at least since 1994, when he was head of UN peacekeeping operations.

At the time, the United Nations was widely criticized for failing to stop the Rwanda genocide that left 800,000 people dead, even though UN peacekeepers were on the ground -- a catastrophe for which Annan has publicly apologized.

Annan could not be reached for immediate comment. He is currently in Africa on a mission aimed at ending the long-running civil war in Sudan.

But he faces unprecedented calls to resign over the burgeoning scandal about "oil-for-food," a UN aid scheme that US investigators say allowed Saddam to siphon off billions of dollars.

The program has tainted UN officials like Benon Sevan, who oversaw the operation and is now accused of pocketing Saddam's money in exchange for turning a blind eye to the Iraqi dictator's abuses.

Annan stands accused of obstructing US investigators, especially since his hand-picked official Paul Volcker this week rejected calls from the US Senate to turn over documents from the program and waive UN staff immunity.

Eckhard, his spokesman, on Thursday said that Annan is expected to serve out his term, which ends in 2006.

Veteran UN staff said this was the first time that employees had risen up to make a vote of no confidence in a sitting secretary general.

"Kofi Annan is surrounded by corruption, a gang of criminals responsible for some of the worst things that happened to mankind in the 20th century," said one angry staffer, referring to the Rwanda massacres.

"It's possible that he doesn't know directly what has gone on," said the employee, who has worked for the United Nations for two decades. "But that's no excuse."
Yahoo! News (sg.news.yahoo.com/041119/1/3onv4.htm)l


About time! Kofi Annan is such a slimy, corrupt piece of trash!

Agent Day
11-19-2004, 07:07 PM
Its Incredible that an Organization of Peace can be filled with so much corpution and scandle

It shows whats truely wrong with our world and how Peace will never be achieved.

silverbulletkc
11-19-2004, 07:45 PM
There's peace in the world, just not the kind we, or everybody wants.

es347fan
11-19-2004, 09:39 PM
The UN is a joke, and a bad one at that. Let them set up headquarters in the most poverty stricken countries, where they might really do some good, not in the most fabuolus city in the world, where the delegates are an ongoing problem in so many ways. The organization has lost its' focus. Now they're finally admitting that rampant corruption might exist -- given the quality of the delegates, we're supposed to be surprised?

DaveTooner
11-19-2004, 11:38 PM
... And we can hear a pin drop over in the liberal peanut gallery...

Imagineer
11-20-2004, 01:16 AM
The U.N. is about as effective as the League of Nations was in the 1930's. It was another well meaning but ineffective attempt to negotiate world peace instead of fighting wars. It was pretty useless in trying to mediate the ongoing disputes over reparations for WW I and the Japanese invasion of China. World War II was the end of it, and saw the establishment of a new body with more enforcement power by the authorized use of force against those who would defy the U.N.
Now the U.N. isn't working out so well. It badly needs major reform. Among other things, if it is to function it needs it's own military force. I also think the headquarters should be moved to Jerusalem, and the city declared to be part of no nation. That might solve a major sticking in that area.

DaveTooner
11-20-2004, 11:01 AM
How could the UN ever possibly work when we have morally bankrupt dictators in high positions there?

trunkks
11-20-2004, 04:53 PM
thi s are vote fro m the USA because thejy dont like the UN. the USA think the UN interfère with the USA begin the war. they try to destroy UN because the USA dont like world gouvernement

HaVoK
11-20-2004, 05:13 PM
The UN is a corrupt organization. Plain and simple. Try opening your eyes and seeing whats going on instead of simply blaming the US for everything thats not right with the world.

Darth Be'lal
11-20-2004, 06:13 PM
Call it yet another chance to make the U.N. relevent. Especially after this oil for food scandal Kofi and the boys are hip deep in.

I still say they should play the theme from the Mos Eisly Cantina everytime there is news from the U.N. is broadcast.

Yep, the U.N., a retched hive of scum and villainly. We must be cautious!

DaveTooner
11-21-2004, 12:27 PM
the USA dont like world gouvernement

You got that right, buddy. We are a sovereign nation and do not want a world government.

trunkks
11-21-2004, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by DaveTooner
You got that right, buddy. We are a sovereign nation and do not want a world government.

if USA dont like world gouvernement then why do many American industrie move to China and other countrys

es347fan
11-21-2004, 05:55 PM
Profit

HaVoK
11-21-2004, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by trunkks
if USA dont like world gouvernement then why do many American industrie move to China and other countrys Corporate America would set up shop in the middle of a cesspool if they could save a buck doing it. Corporate America holds no allegience to the Red, White, and Blue........only to the green of the dollar.

SecretAgentMan
11-22-2004, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by trunkks
thi s are vote fro m the USA because thejy dont like the UN. the USA think the UN interfère with the USA begin the war. they try to destroy UN because the USA dont like world gouvernement

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

English?

SecretAgentMan
11-22-2004, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by trunkks
if USA dont like world gouvernement then why do many American industrie move to China and other countrys

What does that have to do with world government? We just like to save a buck.

"A penny saved, is a penny earned."
-Ben Franklin