UN chief Antonio Guterres Photograph:( AFP )
The United Nations pushes member countries to promote free speech, expression, and the right of assembly. But as an organisation it is restricting its own staff from exercising the same fundamental rights
A major row over the gag order issued earlier this year can derail the celebration of the 75th-anniversary of the United Nations on October 24.
The United Nations was created when countries came together after World War Two to prevent another such conflict and to replace an ineffective League of Nations.
On June 26, 1945, representatives of 50 countries met in San Francisco at the United Nations Conference on International Organization to draw up the United Nations Charter. Those delegates deliberated on the basis of proposals worked out by the representatives of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States at Dumbarton Oaks, United States in August-October 1944. The Charter then came into force on October 24, 1945.
The United Nations' past has been as fraught as its present and future seems to be. It was hamstrung during the Cold War by superpower rivalry, leading it to near inertia as the United States, former the Soviet Union, and China either threatened to or did, veto resolution after resolution.
In the 90s its reputation was badly damaged by its apparent helplessness to end to the conflict in former Yugoslavia -- let alone manage a successful peacekeeping and humanitarian operation.
In the summer of 2020, as anti-racism demonstrations spread around the globe in response to the murder of George Floyd, UN civil servants who wanted to show solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement were up in arms about instructions from the UN ethics office telling personnel to steer clear of public demonstrations, even in their free time.
The directive, which was initially endorsed by the UN chief Antonio Guterres expressly banned participation in the protests.
Guterres then reversed course, assuring UN employees at a hastily arranged town hall meeting in June that they could take part, as long as they didn’t wave the UN flag. In a letter to staff on June 9, Guterres insisted that “there is no ban on personal expressions of solidarity or acts of peaceful civic engagement, provided they are carried out in an entirely private capacity.”
But his statement didn’t put the matter to rest—or give an explicit green light to UN staffers to participate in political demonstrations, UN officials contend. Staffers at an organization founded to advance fundamental human rights and freedoms now wonder if they can even advocate for those rights, or if they’re going to be gagged to avoid courting public controversy.
On June 22, less than two weeks after Guterres sent the letter, the UN Development Program reissued its own gag order. “The international, impartial nature of your role limits your freedom to publicly express views on controversial matters,” the UNDP’s Code of Ethics document, which was revised this year, states. “For example, you cannot take part in political demonstrations, or wear politically-themed clothing or buttons. You may not publicly criticize governments, or run for or hold political office at any level while working for UNDP.”
The internal debate over the UN response to the Black Lives Matter movement raises difficult questions about the rights of international civil servants to express support for core UN values, including the promotion of equality and human rights, if they are viewed as controversial by member states. It also places the UN leadership in the awkward position of urging countries around the world to promote free expression and assembly, while restraining their own staff from exercising those same rights.
The UN development agency—which relies on the cooperation of foreign governments to carry out its work—has been among the UN’s most risk-averse entities, seeking to avoid offending member states at almost any cost. But the guidance did not sit well with some UNDP staffers, who argued that it didn’t comply with the policy laid out by Guterres.
Niall McCann, an Irish national who works in UNDP’s Brussels office, filed a complaint against UNDP’s administrator and ethics office with the development agency’s internal Office of Audit and Investigations, and he requested an investigation into the matter. The ban on participation in demonstrations, McCann wrote, constituted an “abuse of authority.”
“This assertion directly contradicts the UN Secretary-General, who specifically commented on this matter, in the context of the ongoing Black Lives Matter protest movement in the United States,” he wrote in the complaint, which was reviewed by Foreign Policy. McCann argued that there was no legal basis for the protest prohibition, insisting that it is not expressly banned by the key directives governing staff conduct: the UN Standards of Conduct for the International Civil Service or the Staff Regulations and Rules of the United Nations.
He also accused UNDP’s ethics chief, Peter Liria, of seeking to “muzzle UNDP staff standing up against racism.”
Several leaders have called for a reform of the United Nations and in particular the 15-member Security Council, arguing it was unfair that the United States, Russia, China, France and Britain were the only permanent veto-wielding powers.
With barely days left for the United Nations Day, the world body finds itself in an awkward spot.
The United Nations pushes member countries to promote free speech, expression, and the right of assembly. But as an organisation it is restricting its own staff from exercising the same fundamental rights.