DAILY PRESS BRIEFING BY THE OFFICE OF THE SPOKESMAN FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

DAILY PRESS BRIEFING BY THE OFFICE OF THE SPOKESMAN FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

Following is a near-verbatim transcript of today’s noon briefing by Fred Eckhard, Spokesman for the Secretary-General.

Good afternoon.

**Lebanon

Right now, Peter Fitzgerald, the head of the team that went to Lebanon to examine the circumstances, causes and consequences of the killing of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, is presenting his team’s report to the Secretary-General.  The Secretary-General will transmit that report, with an accompanying cover letter, to the President of the Security Council, possibly later today.

**United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

We have another shortlist for you.  Under the new senior recruitment procedures, the Secretary-General has today decided on the shortlist for the incoming United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

The following candidates will be called for interview in the next few weeks:  Emma Bonino of Italy, Member of the European Parliament, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Committee on Budget, Subcommittee on Human Rights; Hans Dahlgren of Sweden, State Secretary for Foreign Affairs; Gareth Evans of Australia, President and Chief Executive of the Brussels-based International Crisis Group; António Guterres of Portugal, former Prime Minister; Søren Jessen-Petersen of Denmark, the Special Representative and Head of the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo; Bernard Kouchner of France, former Minister of Health and former Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Kosovo; Kamel Morjane of Tunisia, the Assistant High Commissioner for Refugees; and Mark Verwilghen of Belgium, Minister of Economy, Energy, Foreign Trade and Scientific Politics.

The criteria that these candidates will be evaluated against at interview will include:  strong diplomatic, political and fund-raising skills; thorough knowledge of refugee issues, including basic refugee law and debates about forced migration and internally displaced persons; proven skills in the management of complex organizations; a leader who will unflinchingly champion the cause of refugees, understand and respect basic refugee law and the rapidly evolving debates about voluntary and forced migration and internally displaced persons; and possesses the communication and coalition-building skills to create consensus and stimulate effective campaigns.  Finally, fluency in English required.  French is highly desirable.  Other United Nations language would be an asset.

The views of the refugee community on the candidates will be sought informally.  The candidates will then be interviewed by a panel of senior management officials, who will refer the finalists to the Secretary-General and the Deputy Secretary-General for final interview.  The Secretary-General will then forward his nominee to the General Assembly.

The Secretary-General feels that this is a very strong shortlist of candidates and looks forward to selecting the right person for the position.

**Report on Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by UN Peacekeeping Personnel

This morning, the United Nations released the report of the Secretary-General’s adviser on sexual exploitation and abuse by United Nations peacekeeping personnel, Prince Zeid Ra’ad Zeid Al-Hussein, the Permanent Representative from Jordan.

In a statement, the full text of which we have upstairs, the Secretary-General says that acts of sexual exploitation and abuse are abhorrent, and a violation of the fundamental duty of care that all United Nations peacekeeping personnel owe to the local population they are sent to serve.

He noted that the report issued today makes a number of concrete recommendations, including the standardization of rules against sexual exploitation and abuse for all categories of peacekeeping personnel; the provision of a professional investigative capacity for all missions; and the strengthening of individual accountability, including financial, and, where appropriate, criminal accountability.

The Secretary-General calls upon Member States to act with determination and due haste to provide the necessary resources to put in place the important changes that are required.

Prince Zeid will appear at the noon briefing to speak about the report on Monday, 4 April.  And if you have any questions about the report, please get in touch with my Office about getting more details from the Department of Peacekeeping Operations.

Copies of the report are available in my Office.

**Security Council –- Middle East

There are many obstacles and challenges to the Middle East peace process, but the deadlock has been broken.  That’s what Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Kieran Prendergast told the Security Council in its open meeting on the Middle East this morning.

He said that the Secretary-General had met with the parties this month during his visit to Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory.  The Secretary-General was left with the strong impression of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s determination to proceed with the disengagement plan, even in the face of serious domestic opposition.  Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas assured the United Nations that the Palestinian Authority would cooperate fully in preparations for the withdrawal.

At the same time, Prendergast stressed the United Nations’ concern over Israel’s failure thus far to dismantle settlement outposts and freeze settlement expansion.  He noted the unofficial reports of a government decision to approve the building of at least 3,500 new settlement housing units this year, and added that the “Road Map” states clearly that Israel should dismantle outposts and freeze settlement activity.

Prendergast also discussed the situation in Lebanon, expressing pleasure that, to date, all demonstrations in Beirut have occurred in a calm and orderly manner without major incidents.  We have his remarks upstairs.  The Council is currently holding consultations, also on the Middle East.

**Security Council

The Security Council this morning unanimously extended the mandate of the United Nations Mission in Afghanistan by one year.

This afternoon at 4:15, the Council members meet with the troop-contributing countries for the United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire.  The Council will hold consultations on Sudan after that, and they are expected to discuss draft resolutions before the Council, on which they may vote afterward.

**Côte d’Ivoire

Progress in Côte d’Ivoire’s peace process has been limited since last November, and the protracted delays are dangerous, the Secretary-General warns, in his latest report to the Security Council on that country.  Côte d’Ivoire, he says, remains effectively divided, despite the laudable efforts of South African President Thabo Mbeki on behalf of the African Union.

The Secretary-General renews his appeal to President Laurent Gbagbo, the Forces Nouvelles and the leaders of all Ivorian political movements to carry out the African Union’s plan of action without further delay.  Failure to do so, he says, increases the possibility of renewed hostilities.  He also warns that time is rapidly running out for holding presidential and parliamentary elections, which are scheduled to take place within the next seven months.

The Secretary-General asks the Security Council to approve additional military, civilian police and civilian resources to the United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire, as he requested last year.  Meanwhile, he recommends that the peacekeeping mission’s mandate be extended for another year, until 4 April 2006.

**United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees -- Tsunami

Following discussions with the Indonesian Government, the United Nations refugee agency, or UNHCR, will phase out its presence in Indonesia’s Aceh province by tomorrow.  UNHCR understands Indonesia’s desire to review the large humanitarian effort in Aceh, as the country moves from emergency relief to long-term reconstruction.  And UNHCR remains ready to support future reconstruction efforts in Aceh if its help is requested by the Government.

With a mandate for protecting refugees fleeing violence and persecution, UNHCR doesn’t normally respond to natural disasters, and its programme in Aceh was unprecedented.  We have a press release on that upstairs.

**Tuberculosis

Today is World Tuberculosis Day, and the Secretary-General has issued a message, noting that, even though tuberculosis is both preventable and curable, it kills 5,000 people a day.  He also said the international community must provide greater support to the caregivers who help locate and treat those afflicted by the disease.

Meanwhile, the World Health Organization (WHO) today released a report saying that, although the battle against tuberculosis is being successfully fought in most areas of the world, the disease has reached alarming proportions in Africa, with a growing number of tuberculosis cases and deaths linked to HIV.  We have the full text of the Secretary-General’s message, as well as a press release from WHO in my Office.

**United Nations Holiday

Tomorrow is an official United Nations holiday.  We will not be here.  The lights will be out.  The Building will be closed.  It’s the Christian holiday Good Friday, and we will see you then on Monday.

And to help you with your United Nations coverage next week, we have the Week Ahead for you in my Office.

That’s it.  Maggie?

**Questions and Answers

Question:  Why did your Office not “squawk” that the [report on sexual exploitation and abuse by UN peacekeeping personnel] was available last night when you were distributing it to news organizations?  Why did your Office today cancel the interviews that Prince Zeid Ra’ad Zeid Al-Hussein (Permanent Representative from Jordan) had set up with some of us weeks ago?  I find this to be interference, a slippery slope and unacceptable.

Spokesman:  First of all, I’m not aware that Prince Zeid cancelled any interviews.

Question:  He said he did it on a recommendation from the Spokesman’s Office.  Is that not you?

Spokesman:  The recommendation from the Spokesman’s Office through the Peacekeeping Department to Prince Zeid was that he not do individual interviews without briefing the entire press corps.  When I learned that he had started doing interviews yesterday afternoon, on the instructions of the Peacekeeping Department, I had told all of you at noon that he would not be speaking to the press until he had completed briefing Member States on 4 April; I didn’t think that was fair to the press corps as a whole.

So I lodged a compliant.  I did not ask him to cancel his interviews, although I suppose that may have been implicit in my message.  But it just seems to me unfair:  If he said he was not going to speak to the press and he wasn’t going to brief the entire press that he should do individual interviews.  That’s all.  I was trying to get the whole press corps treated fairly.

Question:  I really appreciate what you were trying to do, but in the future, if the Prince or anyone else –- I know each case is different -– gives the gist and all the main points of a report in interviews, we should not be held to any embargo whatsoever and I’ll be the first one to break it. 

Spokesman:  On that subject, I had no idea how many interviews he had done or what he had said in those interviews.

Question:  I thing that Peacekeeping should be hearing this -- and it should go in the note -- that they’ve lost a lot of us.

Spokesman: I’ve already sent them a note.  I realize that this was very awkward for all of you and if your interview was cancelled, I apologize.

Question:  Why did the Prince not come here?  I know you briefly touched on the fact that he had to brief Member States, but I don’t understand why he would speak to people individually and not hold a press conference like hundreds of others who had prepared a report.  Doesn’t the Secretary-General’s Office have the capability of saying “this is how we’re going to handle a particular situation”?  I thought that was why [Chief of Staff] Mark Malloch Brown was brought on.

Spokesman:  Well, [Prince Zeid] is a Permanent Representative.  It’s not like he’s a member of the Secretariat.  But I gave a very strong recommendation that he speak to the entire press corps if he was even considering doing any individual interviews, because I have always espoused a policy for this Office that we not play favourites, that we not give to some journalists what we aren’t ready to give to all.  And I communicated those views through the Peacekeeping Department.

The Peacekeeping Department called me late last night to say that it was their mistake and that they apologized.  But I told them this morning what Evelyn [Leopold-Reuters] just said, that they’ve got a lot of angry reporters here and that they’ve lost some ground.

Question:  I can’t recommend this on camera, but I think that everybody should find something else to do on 4 April and that would be the only way that people learn.  I think that briefing should be cancelled.  (Another correspondent agreed.)

Spokesman:  I’ll convey that to the Peacekeeping Department.

Question:  [Prince Zeid] has briefed heads of Missions and the European Union, and [by 4 April] he will have had distributed the report to the Security Council.  So, a week later, it’s no longer newsworthy.

Spokesman:  I realize that.

Question:  Do you have any response to the latest development in Kyrgyzstan –- the President and the Prime Minister have both resigned and the opposition has come to power.

Spokesman:  All I can say is that the Secretary-General is following closely the developments in Kyrgyzstan that have taken a dramatic turn in the past 24 hours, as you have just indicated.  He appeals to everyone in Kyrgyzstan to try to maintain public order and observe fully human rights, and he also urges all concerned to try to resolve this current crisis through peaceful means.

Question:  In response to the Secretary-General’s decision to reimburse Benon Sevan’s legal fees, the Permanent Representative of Iraq to the United Nations issues a statement, saying that the misappropriation of Iraqi money is scandalous.  He points out in his statement that nowhere does resolution 986 (1995) allow for the use of such funds to investigate alleged corrupt practices.  My question, then, is how or under which authority does the Secretary-General decide the payment of the legal fees for investigation of a staff member could be taken from the [so called 2.2] account?

Spokesman:  Mark Malloch Brown went over this so extensively yesterday that I can’t imagine anything that I could say that would add to what he said.  So, I would refer you to his briefing of yesterday.

Question:  He didn’t give a very convincing answer...

Spokesman:  If he didn’t convince you, then certainly I can’t convince you.

Question:  Then, could you tell if any other monies from this account are being used for any other purposes?  How is the rest of the money being used?

Spokesman:  We have also set aside money from the “2.2 account” for the possible claims of those injured in the [19 August 2003] Baghdad bombing -– not the Secretariat staff, but the oil-for-food programme staff.  Most of those claims are being settled under our “Malicious Acts” insurance, but several people will require very long-term care, and we’re not sure the insurance is going to cover all of that.  These are Iraqis, as well as international, staff, and so we have set aside $14 million as a contingency as we assess long-term care.

Question:  Fred, we really didn’t get an answer from Mr. Malloch Brown yesterday...

Spokesman:  If you didn’t get it from him, you’re not going to get it from me.  It’s as simple as that.

Question:  But just understand the rational as to why...

Spokesman:  I understand everything you’re saying and everything you said yesterday.  But if you didn’t get it from him, you’re not going to get it from me.

Question:  Can we please get it from him then, or from some authority that can explain what’s going on?

Spokesman:  He gave you everything he has to say.  He was here for 50 minutes yesterday.  He has nothing further to add.

Question:  Right.  But he did not answer a specific question that was put to him by journalists, so...

Spokesman:  He did the best to answer all your questions.  I can’t do any better than he did yesterday.

Question:  I just wanted to suggest that this rule that you’re proposing that either everyone be briefed or no one just doesn’t work...

Spokesman:  It’s not something I’m proposing; it’s something that I have strongly stood for and fought for in the Secretariat since 1997 when I took over as Chief Spokesman.

Question:  I understand that, but there are simply some cases where journalists are following stories and others aren’t.  There are clear cases that some journalists report on the UN every day and are here all the time.  You know who the journalists are who consistently cover this place.  It’s clear as day.  Some of them are in this room right now.  So, to suggest some strange rule that somehow the entire UN press corps –- which everybody knows consists of a lot of people who don’t seem to be doing a lot of reporting at all -– must have access or nobody has access is crazy.  I don’t know any other organization that operates that way.

Spokesman:  You may call it crazy.  It’s my policy.  The Secretary-General accepts it.  With a report as important as Prince Zeid’s, to say that he will talk to a few journalists who call him up or with whom he initiates contact and not give a formal press conference in this room to any member of the UN press corps that wants to hear it, is unfair in my view, and it’s not they way I intend to conduct the press business of the United Nations.

Question:  I just have a suggestion to follow up on that, because I’d assume you want the solutions to the problems to get as much coverage as the problems themselves.  Two things:  We begged for this not to happen on Thursday because everything is happening today.  And if you have to drop one story, it’s going to be the one that doesn’t have a face behind it.  Brief everybody.  That’s great.  But if the reason that he’s not briefing us until 4 April is because he has to brief the troop contributors first, why not brief the troop contributors before the report is released.  And since he’s had major consultations with them anyway, and since the story is gong to be in the press today because the report has been released, I can’t imagine that they (troop contributors) would be surprised with the story out before 4 April.

Spokesman:  We gave that same advice to the Peacekeeping Department:  don’t do it on this day because too many other things are happening, don’t put out the report until 4 April when the consultations have concluded.  We made all those suggestions.  I cannot speak for them and tell you why they decided to do it their way, but I think that your reaction today and yesterday will help them learn a lesson.

Question:  I’d like to follow up on the Malloch Brown press conference.  I, for one, had many more questions I was unable to ask.  Even though he was here 50 minutes, I think you cut off the questions to early.  He is rather long-winded and off the point most of the time.  I think you said there were at least six more people that had questions.  So can we do something?  Can we get him back?  Or can we get the Under Secretary-General for Legal Affairs to answer questions about this subject, because there are issues that have not been addressed by the UN?

Spokesman:  I will relay that to him.

Question:  On the content of the peacekeeping report, what specific steps can and will the Secretary-General take to implement the proposals, which are pretty wide-ranging and may have some opposition?

Spokesman:  Anything that he can do within his power as Chief Administrator he will do.  And anything that requires Member States’ cooperation -- particularly involving the role of Prince Zeid in negotiating with the troop contributors to take action such as the courts martial in the country recommendation -- he will do.  The whole point of Prince Zeid negotiating so long and so thoroughly with troop contributors was to establish a consensus that they needed to join this process and cooperate with it.

Question:  Fred, I have one more question on the legal fees.  When Mr. Malloch Brown came down yesterday, he admitted that the written statement was inaccurate in the wake of Mr. Volcker’s comments on it all.  Now we don’t know what is accurate and what is not.  As you’ve done in other cases, can you put out a revised statement that is authoritative and accurate.

Spokesman:  I will relay that to Mr. Malloch Brown, as well.

Question:  On the question of the 2.2 per cent account.  I understand the Iraqi Ambassador has requested that some of these funds be recognized as payment of the arrears that Iraq owes to the United Nations.  Is there a reaction to that proposal?

Spokesman:  I’m not aware of that issue.  I’ll have to see.  [He later said that would be a matter for the Security Council to decide.]

Correspondent:  I saw it in the papers today. 

Spokesman:  Richard?

Question:  All right, just a couple of quickies.  One, the Secretary-General’s report –- the next train wreck ahead on Lebanon.  Are the odds in favour of it coming out today, or will there be a weekend nightmare looming.  And I have a follow-up on other related things.  I know this is not under your control.  What do you know?

Spokesman:  I honestly can’t say.  I think our intention is to send it to the Security Council in the course of this afternoon.

Question:  Dileep Nair.  Mark Malloch Brown.  What was the decision -- Mark Malloch Brown said a decision has been made.  Was it to reopen -– to formally confirm the case, the investigation with him, the meeting has taken place.  What’s new on the future of Dileep Nair?

Spokesman:  They did not give me a readout of that meeting, which I think was supposed to happen at 11:30.  But our intention was, once that meeting took place, was to inform you of what our decision was.  And that’s still our intention.  So, I hope to be able to do so very shortly after this briefing.

Correspondent:  I also agree with Mark and you on these issues.  And the whole thing is transparency.  This whole talk about getting out in public and helping the peacekeepers.  That is what really the tragedy is.  I think that should be part of the Secretary-General’s reform report, on how reports and how they’re communicated is almost more important than a lot of other things in the whole bunch of words that [inaudible].

Spokesman:  Yes, Jonathan?

Question:  Could you remind us exactly what the meeting with Dileep Nair is about today.  Just a little background about that.

Spokesman:  The Secretary-General received from the Staff Union, at our request, written charges that they were levelling against Dileep Nair, or his Office.  We were to review that list and decide whether it was justified.  We felt it was justified to reopen the investigation.  You’ll recall that, on the basis of some earlier charges they made, we looked into those charges and decided that some things couldn’t be acted upon, because the allegations were made by anonymous people and so on.

Anyway, the Staff Union came back with a written list.  It was reviewed by the personnel department in the presence of the Staff Union representative.  It went to Mark Malloch Brown for a decision and he made a decision.  Dileep Nair, who was out of the country at the time, said that he would like to speak to the Secretary-General before that decision was announced.  So that meeting, last I heard, was scheduled for 11:30 this morning, and we intended, once that meeting was over, to tell you what Mark Malloch Brown and the Secretary-General’s decision was as far as reopening the case or not.  So, that’s what I hope we’ll be able to announce shortly after this briefing.

Question:  Is it true that up until now, the case has not been reopened, because my understanding was they [inaudible] a decision to impose a written remand on him, after the case had been reopened.  Is that not the case?

Spokesman:  My understanding is the decision to be taken by the Secretary-General on a recommendation of Mark Malloch Brown was whether or not to reopen the investigation.

Raghida?

Question:  Yes, since this is a session of complaints on the record.  I’d like you to take it to the 38^th floor that we are absolutely upset and angry and we demand some respect for our deadlines, when we have London deadlines and when a story is as huge as the story on Lebanon.  So, this has been a habit that there’s a lot of disrespect for our deadlines as a tradition.  But at least, when it is such a huge story, we would appreciate that we’re not dealt out of the story, as has been the case quite often.  So, I’d like to take this complaint to you personally, and to Mark Malloch Brown and to the Secretary-General.

Spokesman:  In all fairness to the Secretary-General, we were very aware of your deadlines, and we did want to present it to you, if at all possible, before your deadlines, which I realize are before noon.  But the issues in this case were, I think, larger than your deadlines and that’s the reason we postponed the release of the report.  But it will come out...

Correspondent:  If I may just say something here.  First of all, it was announced that it would be on Thursday and when you have the Secretary-General’s schedule receiving the report from Fitzgerald at 12:00, that means there was already no respect for our deadlines, as if our public opinion doesn’t matter to the United Nations.  And secondly, when this comes out in the afternoon, it kills the story for us.  So, I don’t know, when we have an office all year long here, and there’s a story.  We’re covering the United Nations every day.  And when there’s a story of that magnitude and you deal us out of it, whether us or our competitor [inaudible], it is just not right.

Question:  I would also ask the question about why there’s a delay.  I mean, is Kofi Annan going to change the Fitzgerald report, or what other explanation could there be for having a delay in transmitting the report to the Security Council?

Spokesman:  The Secretary-General just wanted a little more time to prepare the ground for this report.

Question:  What does it mean “preparing the ground”?

Spokesman:  You can just imagine what it means.

Correspondent:  No, I can’t imagine.

Spokesman:  I’m not going to give you anything more specific than that.

Question:  Is he going to change the substance?  Or is he busy with other matters related to the report of Volcker?

Spokesman:  His sole focus all morning was this report.

Question:  Fred, on the question of trying to make sure it’s accessible to everybody at the same time.  I obviously understand that you’re trying to do the right thing by everybody, and that’s acceptable.  But it’s also a question of what the reality is.  And I’m just wondering, if this is the case, does that mean no more private interviews for anybody ever?  No requests for private interviews on a story? 

Spokesman:  No, absolutely not.

Question:  But in this case, and I do understand what you trying to do.  And I think it is in one way laudable.  But, on the other hand, a number of private interviews were cancelled at your urging.  I’m wondering, what is the rule here?  Because if several people followed up something specifically for a private interview, in this case it was cancelled, why does that mean that in other cases when people want something as a private interview, that’s allowed?  I’m just trying to understand.  Is there a consistent rule that’s being applied here, or is it on a case-by-case basis?

Spokesman:  In this case, I was just trying to understand clearly what the situation was.  I was told by the Peacekeeping Department that the Prince did not want to speak to the press until he had finished his consultations.  And then I gave that information to you at yesterday’s noon briefing.  In the course of the afternoon, I found out he was doing interviews.  So I said, how does that square with what I was told earlier, and that I had told you, that he didn’t want to speak to the press?  So it appeared that he wanted to speak to some of the press, and I said the Secretary-General’s policy on press relations is, you speak to all of the press or none on something important like this. 

Following a general briefing, if he wants to give interviews to this one or that one within the limits of his time, that’s, of course, his prerogative.  But he’s giving the basic message to everyone at the same time.

Question:  If that’s the policy I understand that policy, but in that case, that would suggest that the Secretary-General, during important times, would never give an individual interview.

Correspondent:  No, Mark.  I think you’re missing the point.  You can get all the interviews you want, you try to get all the reports you can find.  You just then don’t embargo it for everyone else.  It’s the embargo on that report after he gives an interview that was the problem.

Spokesman:  Richard?

Question:  On a totally different note, does the United Nations have any comment on the report that $500,000 was stolen or misused by Ethiopian-Eritrea United Nations Mission peacekeeping soldiers with phone bills, credit cards, that kind of fraud not in the Prince’s report.

Spokesman:  That was something that our auditors reported on Monday.  In the start-up phase of the peacekeeping mission, I don’t quite understand the details of it, but it was something like, if you made a phone call of less than a minute you didn’t have to pay for it.  Unfortunately, for the peacekeepers who were making 59-second phone calls by the thousands they had to put their pin numbers in.  So, we were able to trace all the calls backs to the contingents and we have billed contingents so far for $364,000 of the $503,000 worth of calls that were made, and we are continuing the recovery effort.

Question:  Back to oil-for-food, was there any consideration of the request for the Secretary-General to be here around Tuesday afternoon?  Has there been any timetable established for a mechanism for a response to the Volcker report?

Spokesman:  Not yet.  I don’t think we know how we would respond until we see what’s in it.  We will obviously be responding to you in some way, but we first want to see what’s in the report, and decide the most appropriate way to respond.

Question:  What time is he coming today?  Is he coming to the stakeout today?

Spokesman:  I don’t know.  I don’t know his plan for this afternoon or whether he would come to the stakeout if indeed he goes to the Security Council meeting.  I don’t think that decision has been taken yet.

Yes, Ma'am?

Question: I have a question on the shortlist of candidates for UNHCR and UNDP.  I don’t know about the UNHCR list, but as of the UNDP list, it seems that all the shortlist candidates are those candidates who had been nominated by their respective governments.  Mark Malloch Brown and [inaudible] said several times that the Organization would look for independent candidates.  That the shortlist of candidates would not have to be nominated by the governments, and that you would look for individuals in the international system.  It seems to me that that is not the case.

Spokesman:  I think you might have misunderstood.  This is an intergovernmental organization, so the Secretary-General asked all Member States to put forward names.  The purpose of publishing the shortlist is that we can get the reactions of non-governmental organizations and I believe we might also have in the case of one these lists actually solicited, I think it was the High Commissioner for Refugees, solicited suggestions from non-governmental organizations that specialize in refugee work.  But I don’t know whether these six candidates were all nominated exclusively by governments or whether some of them might also have had the support of non-governmental organizations.  I’d have to look.

But certainly the whole process is to get a public reaction while we publish the preliminary list, the shortlist, and while we then evaluate each of the candidates according to the criteria I gave you.

Question:  But they were all nominated by other parties.  You haven’t been –- the Cabinet hasn’t found candidates on its own.

Spokesman:  The idea is that we ask for governments to give us names, and they did.  And I think, on one of these two lists, I’m sorry I don’t know which one, I think we also asked non-governmental organizations to put forward names.  I don’t know if any of those names were submitted or endorsed by the NGOs.

Richard?

Question:  I know you can’t speak for him.  But Mark Malloch Brown was quite positive in saying the Secretary-General will be exonerated or something

Spokesman:  Expects to be...

Question:  Expects to be.  Does he have an inkling on the Volcker report or, as in the Seinfeld episode, that’s a pretty big matzah ball out there four days before the report.

Spokesman:  Mark Malloch Brown just said what the Secretary-General expected to happen and that would be based, of course, on the Secretary-General’s own conscience and what he knows he did and didn’t do in this case.  Of course, it’s really up to Volcker to put forward his findings, but, based on the Secretary-General’s own knowledge of his involvement in this matter, he expects that Mr. Volcker would find nothing against the Secretary-General personally.

Question:  From the information published in the FT (Financial Times) yesterday about the meetings between Mr. Annan and Cotecna executives, can you tell us how long Mr. Annan has known Mr. Massey at Cotecna and during his meeting that took place in his office, it seems that it was around the same period as Kojo Annan was in New York.  Did he in any way facilitate this meeting?

Spokesman:  I don’t know the answer to your first question.  I would assume that the Secretary-General’s son would have nothing to do with the scheduling of official appointments, but I can look into that and let you know definitively one way or another.  Jonathan?  [He later confirmed that Kojo Annan had nothing to do with setting up of this appointment.]

Question:  Mark yesterday was asked a variety of questions which he said he couldn’t answer because he was not Chief of Staff at the time.  Among them were issues about the decision-making with Benon Sevan and the Secretary-General’s decision to support him and his legal fees.  Is there going to be someone who can answer those questions for us?  If Mark can’t answer them, can the Secretary-General talk to us about what he was thinking at the time?

Spokesman:  I don’t know what questions you’re talking about, but Mark Malloch Brown signed the letter to Benon Sevan confirming the previous arrangements made by his predecessor, but also putting possible restrictions on the payment, should he, Benon, be found guilty.  I’m not sure what questions you asked that he could not answer.  If you want to come back with a list, we’ll see if we can answer them, but I think we dealt as fully as we could yesterday with all of your questions, as fully as we could.

Question:  What has the Secretary-General said since Mark Malloch Brown’s press conference yesterday.  Obviously, he’s had time to digest what was said at yesterday’s briefing.  Does he have any positions he’d like to share with us about this whole investigation and Mr. Volcker’s report?

Spokesman:  No, not at all.  We’re just waiting for the Volcker report on Tuesday, and that will be probably the next time the Secretary-General will have anything to say about this issue.

Thank you very much.

* *** *