|
|||||
UN Performance Problems UN Management Accountability Struggles Where is the Rule of Law? Inadequate UN Oversight Recent Developments
|
|
Sexual harassment of
women (and subsequently other types of harassment) have emerged as major
personnel issues during the late 1980s and early 1990s. The UN has once again been "behind
the curve" in responding to this problem. However, in the early
1990s, the UN experienced a very
major and widely-publicized sexual harassment case, and lesser ones, in
which the "barons" proved to be stubbornly defensive and unresponsive, and
the Secretariat leadership promptly rallied to support them. Staff efforts
within the personnel and "internal justice" systems had little or no
success, as the Administration took no action and the Panels on
Discrimination and Other Grievances, already weakening, were unable to
handle this new challenge. An
example of staff concerns about sexual harassment, and evidence that the
UN leadership was (and apparently still is, see below) almost totally
unable to respond properly and forcefully to those concerns, is
illustrated by an incident in Geneva in 1994: "The United Nations Wednesday
denied reports that it briefly suspended a senior official earlier this
year for sexually harassing up to 10 women
. after a disciplinary
committee inquiry into sexual harassment allegations by 10 secretaries
. The United Nations refuses to
disclose [such records, which] underscores the difficulty individual
workers have in pursuing formal complaints when they believe they have
been treated wrongly. Secrecy laws at the United Nations
cover a broad spectrum of regulations but there are no specific guidelines
for what will be made public and what will be kept under lock and
key. U.N. staff are not allowed to
speak to the press on [work-related matters] for example, nor are they
allowed to start any legal proceedings in court without the permission of
the Secretary-General.
. Even if a senior official is
brought to trial, he or she cannot be forced to testify because of
diplomatic immunity. Most
senior U.N. officials enjoy the protective blanket of immunity which can
only be revoked by the U. N.
Secretary-General. 'It's an old boy's club and when
you have reached the diplomatic level, they all protect each other', said
one secretary who requested anonymity.'" "U.N.
denies sexual harassment", UPN, May 19, 1994.
Only
when a determined staff member won a high-profile case in New York in the
early 1990s, with much outside help, and womens' groups and staff
representatives applied determined pressure, did the situation finally
begin to change, at least on a policy level. In
1995 a New York joint task force was formed. It began by examining the rather
toothless Secretariat policies that had been established in 1992 to deal
with sexual harassment in the work place. Given the low incidence of
reported harassment, it decided to make a survey of all
staff members of the UN at major duty stations. The effort was described as a
"benchmark setting exercise" not only for the UN, but also, much more
grandly, "for the public and private sectors of the international
community." Its findings were
to be used to strengthen the standards by which UN staff define
unacceptable behaviour and harassment in their
workplace. "Promotion of equal
treatment of men and women in the Secretariat," UN document ST/SGB/253 of
19 October 1992,
Procedures for dealing with
sexual harassment," UN document ST/AI/379 of 29 October 1992,
and "Banishing all harassment
from the workplace", Secretariat News (New York), July-August
1996, p. 11.
At
the same time, the UN's top manager, reflecting on the case of the very
senior manager who had lost his job in the high-profile scandal, stated
that: "It is a simple truth
that we cannot have a collegial, productive atmosphere when any form of
harassment takes place, and it simply will not be tolerated." "Connor warns of hard times
ahead if states won't pay," Diplomatic World Bulletin (New York), September 25-October 2,
1995, p. 13.
As the head of OHRM firmly described the
effort in late 1995 when the survey work drew to a close: "Harassment: we need to properly define it, recognize
its many faces and forms, capture them and bury them all deep. It has no
place in the United Nations." "Banishing all
harassment from the workplace", Secretariat News
(New York), July-August 1996, p. 11.
A 1997 circular distributed the questionnaire to
staff, noting that harassment is "an abuse of power" that generally yields
feelings of powerlessness, and that to create an optimun work
environment: "
it is an organizational responsibility to [install]
policies and programmes
to ensure that harassment will not be tolerated and that, if it does
occur, it will be dealt with promptly and effectively.
the results of the survey will be utilized to reexamine and revise
mechanisms for dealing with harassment
and build
the fullest understanding of harassment
issues and commitment at all levels to ensuring that harassment will not
be tolerated in any form in the United Nations workplace." "United Nations
harassment survey," UN document IC/Geneva/4346, 7
July 1997. The staff rules were duly revised in 1998 to state
that: "Any form of
discrimination or harassment, including sexual or gender harassment, as
well as physical or verbal abuse at the workplace or in connection with
work, is prohibited." UN Staff Rule 101.2,
Specific instances of prohibited conduct, part (d), in "Status, basic rights and
duties of United Nations staff members", ST/SGB/2002/13 of 1 November
2002. Despite this strong language, however, serious and
ugly workplace harassment -- both spontaneous actions and wilful
misuse of laws, regulations, policies, and power -- seems to continue
unabated in the UN Secretariat. As in so many other areas, the eventual
statement of a firm UN policy, if not followed by implementation,
enforcement, and sanctions, is only a set of empty words. [In 2000, as
discussed below, the Secretariat did announce another worldwide survey,
this time of "work/life" issues, to create new policies which, it blithely
stated, "will continue to promote optimal performance by all staff
members."] Especially in light of Mr. Paschke's adventurous
attempt [and resounding failure] at the OIOS in 1995 to curtail the
baronial tradition of UN jobs for "friends and lovers," the continuing
non-accountability of UN managers and the lack of any follow-up reporting
make it unclear whether the blunt new anti-harassment rules are being
applied and UN harassment problems reduced. Regrettably, it seems more
likely that the above staff rule will be used only to punish a staff
member who reacts to stress in an abusive workplace with an explosion of
angry language (this has happened), rather than to punish a UN manager who
precipitates such an explosion, or a baron who insists on sexual favors as
a condition of job retention or advancement (these seem never to have
happened).
Things were then rather quiet on the UN
anti-harassment front for several years. However, this probably only
reflects the inability of (and staff mistrust of) the "internal justice"
system, or of OHRM, or of the strongly-stated UN policies to resolve and
provide redress for sexual harassment, particularly when committed by
those who are in power positions throughout the Organization. After all
the discussions, promises, and frustrations of more than a decade of
efforts, the issue fell back into the doldrums. However, in mid-2004, several sexual harassment
allegations against very high-level UN officials emerged. A May 2004
article from Geneva disclosed that: "Ruud Lubbers, the
high commissioner for refugees [UNHCR]
confirmed
a sexual harassment
complaint filed against him by a staff member. Lubbers, 65, a former
Dutch prime minister, denied the allegations.
The woman
said the
incident occurred at the end of a meeting as she, Lubbers and five male
staff members were leaving the room. The woman told other staff members that
she was "shocked and horrified," associates said. Lubbers said Dileep
Nair, chief of the [OIOS} had told him of the complaint
filed
four
months after the alleged harassment took place. Two UN investigators
were sent
to Geneva by OIOS
" Fiona Fleck,
"Harassment complaint lodged against UN official", International Herald Tribune, May 19, 2004.
The case was updated in July 2004, when Mr. Lubbers
took the initiative: "[He] has written a
staff member who formally accused him of sexual harassment, asking that
she drop the case and promising to protect her from reprisals, people
familiar with the case said. The charge has been
under investigation by [the OIOS]. [In late May Mr.
Lubbers] circulated an e-mail message among his staff acknowledging that
he was under investigation
The people familiar
with the case said that after the woman complained to associates that
Lubbers 'grabbed her from behind', four more women staff members told UN
investigators of similar treatment.
[Lubbers received]
the investigators' final report in June
[which was] in New York awaiting
official action. In the May 28 staff
message, Lubbers acknowledged an incident with the
staffer but disputed
its interpretation as abuse.
he concluded, 'I'm really sorry for
that.'
Lubber's letter to
the complainant
which she forwarded to the UN in New York as evidence of
possible intimidation -- prompted an internal memo from Mr. Annan's office
noting that UN investigators should be allowed [to investigate] without
any outside interference
The memo gives
assurances [that no action or reprisal is taken against any staff
cooperating with the investigation.]" Fiona Fleck and Warren Hoge, "UN official is said to ask for dropping of sex case", International Herald Tribune, May 19, 2004.
Another case had
arisen during the same time period in New York, involving another very
high UN official who is, interestingly, also a key participant in the
investigation of the Lubbers case: "The United Nation's
anti-corruption department has been rocked by accusations that the office
itself is corrupt. The head of the
[OIOS]
, Dileep Nair, has been accused of promoting and recruiting
people in ways that are not consistent with U. N. rules and
regulations.
Also, a senior investigator has been suspended and there have been
accusations of financial and sexual misconduct. The scrutiny of Nair
and his division comes at a delicate time, as the United Nations is under
intense scrutiny for alleged abuse of the Iraqi oil-for-food program. Nair has been accused
of covering up abuses [in that]
program.
Other allegations of
impropriety include charges that some inside the OIOS received financial
kickbacks in return for promoting people and that some people were
promoted in exchange for sexual favors." Jonathan Hunt, Watching the UN's watchdog", Fox News, June 16, 2004.
An
article from Mr. Nair's home country, Singapore, reported further
that: "There are
allegations that some inside OIOS received financial and sexual favors in
return for promoting people. The United Nations
Staff Union has asked UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to establish an
independent investigation of the OIOS, alleging that personnel decisions
made by Mr. Nair
'violated the rights of staff members.'
The union has also
expressed concern over the possibility that Mr. Nair suspended Mr.
Francois Pascal, a senior investigator in his organisation, 'because he
was making waves over controversial recruitment and promotion decisions
Nair had made.' Mr. Annan -- who
handpicked the Singaporean for the job four years ago -- has asked Mr.
Nair for an explanation. Fox News reported
that Mr. Nair, currently on sick leave, denied all the allegations made
against him. He stressed that he
had done nothing wrong and would step down if the investigations found
problems in the OIOS. Said Mr. Nair: 'That goes
without question because that would mean my integrity is impugned and the
only thing I work upon in this office is integrity and the credibility
that people have in this office
'" Lee Ching Wern,
"S'porean UN anti-graft unit chief under probe", Secretary-General Annan decided the Lubbers case in
July 2004, which subsequently had some significant reverberations. "One of the UN's most
senior figures has been cleared of sexual harassment by Secretary-General
Kofi Annan.
Mr. Annan found that
the complaint against [High Commissioner for Refugees Ruud Lubbers] 'could
not be sustained by the evidence,' [a UN spokesman] said. However, Mr. Annan
said in a letter to staff of the [UNHCR] that he had written to Mr.
Lubbers 'conveying in the strongest terms my concerns about the incident
which gave rise to the complaint.' The secretary-general
said the letter also expressed concern 'about subsequent events during the
investigation, some of which may have been construed as likely to
influence the course of the investigation.' Mr. Annan's spokesman said
the matter was now 'considered closed' and that efforts were being made to
'rebuild trust and confidence' among UNHCR staff.'" "Lubbers cleared of UN sex claim", BBC NEWS, July 15, 2004.
"A senior UN official
[Ruud Lubbers] was cleared of sexual harassment earlier this year because
the secretary general rejected the verdict of an internal watchdog.
But a revised report
issued by UN watchdogs on Thursday revealed that investigators supported
the allegation
[and recommended appropriate action.]. Mr. Annan refused to
take action, saying the allegations were 'not sustainable.'
Despite the
recommendation, Mr. Annan dismissed the complaint, but instead wrote to
Mr. Lubbers stressing his concerns 'in the strongest terms.' UN spokesman Fred
Eckhard attempted to explain the secretary-general's verdict on Thursday,
asserting that Mr. Annan decided the allegations were unsustainable after
seeking legal advice on the matter. 'He did not say there
was no evidence.
He said he found the evidence unsustainable on a legal basis', Mr.
Eckhard said. The disclosure that
the OIOS ruled against Mr. Lubbers was made public when 'technical
reasons' meant that details of the case were included in a version of the
watchdog's annual report. An original version
did not include details of the case against Mr. Lubbers
In May Mr. Lubbers
acknowledged making a 'friendly gesture' which was misunderstood by the
woman. He denied allegations
of improper conduct." "Kofi Annan 'vetoed UN sex claim'", BBC News, October 28, 2004.
(The relevant OIOS report paragraph (with the phrase
that was finally added back shown in italics) read as follows.) "In May 2004, OIOS
conducted an investigation into a report received from a female staff
member of UNHCR who alleged that she had been sexually harassed by the
High Commissioner and, in two separate but related incidents, had been
subsequently harassed by a senior manager of UNHCR. OIOS submitted a report to the Secretary-General
supporting the allegations and recommended that appropriate actions be
taken accordingly. The Secretary-General reviewed the
report and the responses of the High Commissioner and the senior manager
to the report, and decided that the complaints could not be substantiated
by the evidence and therefore closed the matter." "Report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services" Note by the Secretary-General", UN document A/59/359 of 13 September 2004, para. 87. [Note: the OIOS
report had been held up by someone for a month with an altered version
stating instead that "OIOS submitted a report to
the Secretary-General on the allegations." ]
The lawyer for the
[UN] staff member who brought sexual harassment charges [at UNHCR]
has
said that [Secretary-General Annans admission]
of having overruled his
own investigators in clearing [Ruud] Lubbers would spur an appeal
the admission that
UN investigators had found the womans complaint valid and had recommended
punishment emerged this past week in the [OIOS] annual report
[which
restored this damning disclosure in a last-minute restoration]
A senior UN official
had said earlier that if the claims against Lubbers were found to be true,
he would be obliged to resign.
When he cleared
Lubbers of the formal charges in July, Annan
did not reveal the negative
findings of his own investigators
and said that the complaint against
Lubbers could not be sustained.
[The lawyer, Edward
Patrick] Flaherty, argued that the doctored document strengthened his
clients case
This demonstrates
that there are two sets of [UN] rules
Flaherty said. One for the
protected class and one for the rest. Mr. Lubbers is part of the protected
class. My
client is not. The appeal also cites
12 instances of Lubbers alleged attempts to intimidate the complainant
Fiona Fleck and Warren Hoge, Appeal is expected in UN sex case: Lawyer cites Annans overruling of his own investigators, International Herald Tribune, November 1, 2004.
This case was particularly serious not just
because the Secretary-General "exonerated" Mr. Lubbers despite findings by
an OIOS investigation which supported the allegations and recommended
corrective action. In fact, in a behind-the-scenes
struggle, the release of the entire annual OIOS report to the General
Assembly was held up for more than a month in a dispute about how to
report the case.
The report was finally issued with mention of the OIOS conclusions,
but it seems to IO Watch to be the exception which proves the rule. The OIOS
finally and clearly urged firm action against an abusive senior official,
but someone then attempted to rewrite the OIOS report, and a lengthy standoff
ensued. As already noted, a senior official had
said earlier that if the claims against Lubbers were found to be true he
would have to resign, and the relevant UN staff rules could not be more
clear, when they state decisively that: "Any form of discrimination or
harassment, including sexual or gender harassment, as well as
physical or verbal abuse at the workplace or in connection with work, is prohibited."
[emphasis added] UN Staff Rule 101.2,
Specific instances of prohibited conduct, part (d), in "Status, basic rights and
duties of United Nations staff members", ST/SGB/2002/13 of 1 November
2002. This exoneration of Mr. Lubbers was quite disturbing
to staff representatives and to many others. It supports
clearly the idea that the UN "old boy" network takes care of its own, even
when they violate a very specific staff rule prohibition. At least Mr.
Nair, in this case, attempted to make an in-depth analysis and establish
accountability and proper sanctions. However, in February 2005 the Lubbers case returned
with a vengeance, thanks to a newspaper which would not let the situation
pass quietly by. "UN Secretary General
Kofi Annan increased pressure on the United Nations' top refugee official,
Ruud Lubbers, to resign Friday as new allegations of sexual harassment by
the former Dutch prime minister emerged from an internal investigation
into misconduct. The
[OIOS] report
described a 'pattern of sexual harassment' against female employees by
Lubbers
and charged
[him] of abusing his authority with 'intense,
pervasive and intimidating attempts to influence the outcome of this
investigation.'
Annan had previously
rejected the report's findings and closed the case
But Annan's closest
aides have grown increasingly concerned that the allegationa are
undercutting the organizations's efforts to restore its battered
reputation. The United Nations
has been confronting several crippling scandals, including revelations of
corruption in the U.N. administered oil-for-food program and charges of
widespread sexual abuse of women and children by U.N. peacekeepers in
Congo.
The sexual harassment
investigation was launched in May 2004.
[It] turned up instances of
sexual harassment by four other women
The women, who said they feared
'retaliation and public humiliation,' declined to file formal complaints
against Lubbers." Colum Lynch, "U.N. report alleges sexual harassment by official", Washington Post, February 19, 2005. "Ruud Lubbers told
Secretary General Kofi Annan on Sunday that he was resigning as the high
commissioner for refugees because of a lack of confidence in him over
sexual harassment charges. 'The complaint of
sexual harassment could not be substantiated', Lubbers wrote [in his
letter of resignation.]
[Earlier], Annan said
there were insufficient grounds to dismiss him. But on Friday, Annan
consulted lawyers, clearly angered at the resurgence of sexual harassment
allegations after a newspaper report that included graphic details.
[The] article
appeared in the London newspaper The
Independent citing previously unpublished details from the UN report
last summer that confirmed the sexual harassment charges.
Diplomats at the
United Nations said
Lubbers
had fought the charges with a battery of
prominent lawyers and that Annan, consulting employment lawyers outside
the United Nations, was advised that Lubbers would win a legal test." "Embattled Lubbers resigns UN
post", Associated Press, Warren Hoge, in the International Herald Tribune, February 21, 2005.
"Ruud Lubbers
yesterday resigned as head of the [UNHCR] after a British newspaper
published details of an internal investigation upholding allegations made
against him for sexual harassment.
But in yesterday's
bitterly worded resignation letter addressed to [Kofi] Annan, Mr. Lubbers
accused the UN secretary general of bowing to media pressure amid the
oil-for-food and other scandals.
On Friday Mr. Lubbers
had claimed that the staff in Geneva would be devastated if he
resigned.
He even claimed they wanted him to stay on longer than his current
term, and roundly criticized the investigation into the allegations of
sexual misconduct." Frances Williams, Mark Turner,
and Ian Bickerton, "Lubbers quits after harassment probe published", Financial Times (UK), February 21, 2005.
"The resignation of
Ruud Lubbers
over allegations of sexually inappropriate behaviour
brought sighs of relief yesterday from UN officials in New York. After allegations
surfaced last year, Mr. Lubbers mounted a vigorous defence. Mr. Annan chose to
issue a stern warning but take no further action. Since then,
the UN has struggled to convince an increasingly skeptical audience that
it is serious about addressing mismanagement. [In New York this
past week, Mr. Lubbers]
gave an extraordinarily defiant press
conference. His position became
untenable and disciplinary action was threatened. He
resigned. Yesterday UN
officials were wishing the affair could have been dealt with sooner. 'The mistake
was that it was treated as a legal problem when it was a management
problem,' one said. But it is also clear
that
something of a revolution is also needed. For a start, [UN
senior officials] believe that the UN can no longer hand out 'jobs for the
boys'
behind closed doors.
According to [an
adviser to Mr. Annan], the UN faces 'a real crisis
an architectural
crisis.'
The next seven months will determine whether the edifice can be
refurbished or comes crashing down." Mark Turner, "UN reformists see
opportunity for change as Lubbers leaves", Financial Times (UK), February 22, 2005. The mess of the Lubbers case was in fact quite
predictable. An international law firm made a detailed study of UN sexual
harassment policy in May 2001 which was quite critical of UN
implementation of that policy. The above developments indicate that the
Secretariat has still not corrected the problems that it identified. The
report found that: "The
UN Sexual Harassment Policy, although in some respects
reading well on the surface, is
deficient when measured against standards presently
applicable under
host country [US] law. It is not enough to simply have a
written policy which prohibits sexual harassment and purports to provide a
mechanism for making and resolving complaints
the
UN Policy is remarkable for its complete failure to mention
retaliation. In addition, it [seems to
involve]
disciplinary procedures which are confusing, cumbersome,
bureaucratic and painfully slow. Moreover,
because the investigation and determination procedures are adversary in
nature and the basis of determinations apparently kept secret, it seems
inevitable that employees perceive the process as being unfair and many
actions as being retaliatory.
we believe
that the [UN
policy] would not meet [US] current standards for an effective anti-sexual
harassment policy.
the 'four P's' are either not sufficiently present or
are lacking entirely, i.e., Policy in writing, Prompt investigation,
Protection of the victim, Punishment of the
harasser." "Report commenting on United Nations sexual harassment policy", Chadbourne & Park LLP, New York, March 2001, to be found at www.un.org/staff/panelofcounsel/shrep.htm.
[emphasis added]
Perhaps, as in the high-profile case of the early
1990s, the above events of 2004 might eventually revive some attention to
the serious and long-standing problems of actually taking systematic
action to combat sexual and other harassment in the UN Secretariat. And
perhaps this time the UN might implement some reliable, prompt, and
transparent procedures and processes; provide serious anti-harassment
leadership (including from the General Assembly); and make a firm
commitment to provide real redress and protection for abused staff, in
order to ensure that such abuses are, indeed, "prohibited." The past record gives strong reason for skepticism.
But it seems that, this time, the harassment cases occurred in conjunction
with other serious scandals in the UN's "annus horribilis" of 2004 (and
now 2005) they may not be as easily swept under the rug in the future for the many other sexual harassment
cases which surely lie just below the surface in the UN Secretariat. One
harsh example is illustrated by a recent article: "
When I worked in Liberia in the mid-Nineties a new [UN] chief
administrative officer
[arrived and moved aggressively] for a 15 percent
kickback on everything we purchased. [He also tried to force many]
of his young 'local
staff' to sleep with him
I
was the human rights lawyer and these girls would come to my office in
tears asking for help. I wrote memo after memo of complaint to
my chain of command, but no one ever did anything. When I
visited the UN [personnel] office in New York to complain personally, they
laughed at my naοve outrage: 'It happens all the time in the field', they
said.
'There's nothing we can do.'
That CAO had been knocking around West Africa for
years, always mired in corruption, never disciplined
- during which time
the head of personnel was Kofi Annan. [The CAO]
was eventually indicted by
US federal prosecutors in New York for $1.5 million of fraudulent
kickbacks
He has since died.] What kind of leadership would tolerate this conduct 10
years ago?
Precisely the same leadership that [has now]
permitted the
oil-for-food scandal and the sex-for-food scandal." Kenneth Cain, "How many more must die before Kofi
quits?", The Observer (UK), April 2, 2005. [Note: Mr. Cain is a former UN human rights lawyer who
served in U.N. peacekeeping operations in Somalia, Rwanda, Haiti and
Liberia.]
"Imagine if U.S. troops
were accused of sexually exploiting children in impoverished nations
a U.S. Cabinet Secretary were
accused of groping a female subordinate, [but then exonerated]
by the
president
. [an agency head]
and the president's
own offspring stood accused of complicity in [a massive embezzlement
racket]
[These things
happened in the UN this year.] Where's the
outrage?
Why didn't the mainstream
devote more attention
to these scandals? Far from demanding high-level resignations, they are
circling the wagons. The U.N.'s friends
are doing
no favors with this knee-jerk defense. Even [Kofi]
Annan recognizes [the problems with his 1997 and 2002 management reform
attempts, and reports on Rwanda, Bosnia, and general peacekeeping
failures.]
[Yet] all the reformistas' efforts founder on the rocks of
apathy and inertia.
Most of the U.N.'s 191 member states
[and] 49,000
employees
have other priorities. Flawed as it is, the
UN does some useful things
Leaving the U.N.
is unrealistic. But it will
never live up to the grandiose expectations of its starry-eyed supporters,
unless they get mad enough to demand real change. So far there's
no sign of that happening." Max Boot, "Why U.N.
stays mired in its defects: Start with too-friendly media, apathy and
members' entrenched interests", Los Angeles
Times, December 9, 2004. "
[Secretary-General Kofi] Annan is doing the right thing by planning
further management changes
Major shakeups are needed in critical areas
like peacekeeping and refugee assistance.
. Helping the poor
and desperate
demands strengthening the management of peacekeeping
operations.
Some kind of appalling nadir was reached last month with reports
that members of an international contingent of UN peacekeepers in Congo
had been raping the young girls they had been sent to protect. Annan and his
staff must spare no effort to see that these crimes are prosecuted and
punished Sweeping changes are also
needed at the UN refugee agency
Not only has the current
high commissioner, Ruud Lubbers, performed uninspiringly, but his
relations with his staff have been embittered by a charge of sexual harassment.
Although
the
complainant withdrew formal charges and Lubbers says he intends to finish his term,
which ends in December. He should be asked to leave now. Given the
unremitting hostility of the Bush administration, the survival of the
United Nations as an effective organization cannot be taken for
granted.
Annan will have to challenge the self-protective bureaucracy more
radically than it has ever been challenged." In
May 2005 the Secretariat released a new management reform document for
"real action now" and immediate reform, "particularly in the critical
areas of management, oversight and accountability." With regard to
protection against harassment in the workplace, it stated that: "While the UN has a strict sexual harassment policy in
place, OHRM is now finalizing a new, broader policy to encompass wider
forms of harassment for consultation with the Staff Representative
bodies.
It is also assessing more effective ways of disseminating the
provisions of this new policy. Status: This policy will be
discussed with staff representatives at the next Staff Management
Coordination Committee later this year." "Frιchette unveils UN reforms responding to Volcker
panel's criticisms", UN News Service,
"UN management reforms 2005: Management reform
measures to strengthen accountability, ethical conduct and management
performance",
The UN may have a "strict sexual harassment policy in
place" as the 2005 reform document states, and it is no doubt useful to
broaden it.
But that policy is meaningless if it is not enforced, which seems
very much to be the case in 2004 and 2005, as shown by several key
elements. --
The Secretary-General himself, as discussed above, rejected (and
apparently blocked) OIOS conclusions about harassment in the Lubbers case
at UNHCR, and reversed his decision months later only because of media
pressure and the rapidly-expanding Iraq oil-for-food programme
embarassments (and allegations of harassment also arose in the OIOS
itself). --
There seem to be no factual statistics on UN anti-harassment cases, their
volume, and their outcomes, suggesting that the Lubbers case may be one of
very few, and one which sends a clear message: only with great struggle,
and unpleasantness, and determined media attention, can anything be done
to counter sexual harassment in the UN Secretariat. [Note: the World Bank has provided such detailed
statistics, (i.e., transparency) for years, as shown by the chart at the
end of the first part of the subsection on Investigation efforts: Is the OIOS a fig
leaf? ] --
The UN integrity survey of June 2004 showed clearly that many staff have
severe doubts about the true situation: "A new survey of
[UN integrity perceptions] has found that while structures for
reporting and combating corruption exist, most staff members are
either unaware of how to use them or afraid to do so for fear of high-level
retaliation. 'The UN has a 'phone book' of rules and regulations
which are totally useless as they are never practiced', a staff member
is quoted as saying
[Another says,] 'Senior
leaders caught in serious breaches of ethics should be punished, not
promoted as usual.' The new study['s] ,,, most negative findings have to do with ingrown
leadership and the lack of response to reports of corruption. 'Get rid of the old boy network,' one staff member
[says.]
'That network is wide, tenacious and powerful.
Opposing the network is certainly the end of a UN
career.'" Warren Hoge, "Report criticizes the way UN fights
corruption", International Herald Tribune,
--
And, as the external expert survey made of the UN policy in 2001 (cited
above) underscores, it seems clear that the Secretariat still does not
meet proper standards for such policies -- Policy in writing, Prompt investigation, Protection of
the victim, Punishment of the harasser -- and especially the last
two. The UN presently has a long way to go in order to
convince staff and outside observers that it strictly enforces
anti-harassment measures, no matter how strict the policy words may
be. IO
Watch will follow future developments in this area -- if there are
any. |
|||
