Scapegoating at the United Nations: The Joseph Stephanides Case

By Victor Comras

The United Nations Spokesman announced this afternoon that UN Secretary General Kofi Annan had "summarily dismissed Joseph Stephanides for serious misconduct." The Secretary General's decision is based on the finding that Stephanides divulged information to the United Kingdom's UN Mission concerning the bidding process for the contract for verification of humanitarian goods imported by Iraq under the oil for food program. The charge stems from the Volcker Commission's first interim report. Nowhere in that report, however, is any allegation that Stephanides acted for personal motives or for personal benefit. In fact, the Interim Reports goes to great lengths to explain that Stephanides actions were part of a much larger effort by key Security Council member countries and senior members of the Secretariat, for political reasons, to divvy up responsibilities for monitoring key aspects of the oil for food program. Stephanides, then a minor working level UN official, acted with the full knowledge and consent of these players. Yet, his is the first, and, so far the only, head to role in the oil for food scandal. There is something wrong here. It starts with the basic fairness of the process under which Stephanides was charged, suspended, and dismissed. It continues with the total disregard of his response to the charges, which was supported by several outside credible sources, including key members of the UK mission; and it relates to the harsh punishment inflicted which, in Stephanides case, clearly exceeds the dimensions of the faults he is charged with. In fact, the whole bidding process, which he is accused of having tainted, was ultimately abandoned by the Security Council. Those in the know knew that it was only a charade in the first place. The key players intended all along that the various functions would be divided. Once the French bank, BNP, had been selected to administer the escrow account, there was no way that another French Company, Veritas (which had submitted the lowest bid) would be given the verification contract. Lloyd's Register had the support of the UK, the US and other key Security Council players. Stephanides was asked to help make that happen, and he did.

Place what Stephanides did, and was charged with, against account in the Volcker second interim report concerning Kofi Annan's son's relationship with Cotecna, which was in plain display before his father, and one can only wonder about the standards of fairness being applied here. In the end one must conclude that Stephanides is being used as a scapegoat to show that the UN means business in dealing with the Oil for Food Scandal so long as it doesnt taint or touch the top floor management. For more details on the Stephanides Case and the selection of Lloyd's Register see my February 10 Blog

TrackBack