The U.N. and the UNDP

A U.N. official has found evidence that the U.N. Development Program (UNDP) retaliated against an employee who exposed wrongdoing involving the agency’s programs in North Korea. Unfortunately, the UNDP has refused a request from the U.N. ethics chief to submit to a formal investigation.

The General Assembly resolution that led to the formation of the UN Ethics Office – Resolution 60/1, paragraph 161 (d) – stressed that a “system-wide code of ethics” should be adopted for the organization and that an ethics office should be created “with independent status” to enforce it. Nevertheless, the UNDP appears to feel justified in rejecting orders from the Ethics Office. The Ethics Office is in charge of administering the whistleblower protection policy and should have jurisdiction over this case.

Christopher Burnham, the former U.N. under-secretary for management of the United Nations, has stated that the whistleblower policy applied to UNDP staff members. "I wrote the whistleblower law, I know the whistleblower law, and Artjon Shkurtaj is a whistleblower," Burnham told the AP.

GAP also helped write this whistleblower rule, and we too believe that it was intended to apply to all the U.N. Funds and Programmes. Why else would it say “The Secretary-General, for the purpose of ensuring that the Organization functions in an open, transparent and fair manner, with the objective of enhancing protection for individuals who report misconduct or cooperate with duly authorized audits or investigations, and in accordance with paragraph 161 (d) of General Assembly resolution 60/1, promulgates the following…”

GAP put out a statement on the front page of its Web site here.

It appears that this mindset may be contagious, as now the UNOPS (Office of Project Services) is claiming exemption from some of the ethics guidelines.