nav search
Data Center Software Security Transformation DevOps Business Personal Tech Science Emergent Tech Bootnotes BOFH

back to article
Secret UN report finds WIPO chief 'broke procurement rules'

Silver badge

Diplomats and lawyers are increasingly frustrated

Every cloud has a silver lining.

11
1
g e

"refusal to protect whistle-blowers"

Ah, is it ironic that irony is lost on the USA?

Irony++ ? Irony^2 ?

11
0
Silver badge

Re: "refusal to protect whistle-blowers"

∫ i di (lim → ∞)

6
0
Bronze badge

Re: Irony++ ? Irony^2 ?

Irony mining

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Dirty work

Noting the annoying no comment policy of principals here, though all claim to adore transparency of course, allow me to try to annoy them back with a few irresponsible wild speculations. Maybe I can stimulate a denial?

Gurry takes line ' oh it's all a conspiracy against me. At worst I overruled a procurement procedure in the interest of the organization. But if some member states wish me to quit, well fine, I just want my salary for the rest of my term (c. $ 1.5m).' His famous generosity with jobs, offices etc means quite a few ambassadors actually want him to stay.

The USA, however, is pushed by Congress, and aware also that the fiefdoms aka UN agencies are getting ever more like anarchy. It considers making an example of Gurry pour encourager les autres and prosecuting him. Because: first... on the procurement he is plainly admitted guilty (And there is of course a question whether someone benefited. No answer yet does not remove the question why would he do it. Is he an IT expert? No) oh, and didn't he summarily dismiss someone for failing to withdraw from a procurement procedure in a conflict of interest situation 2years ago? Second... On the DNA, no rock hard "evidence" maybe, but a large pile of of "reason to believe", as probably the other 997 pages of the report makes it clear.

However, Gurry has a friend in Switzerland. The Swiss police should not have tested the DNA of people with diplomatic immunity, and nor got involved in the cover up afterwards. Probably only did it on instruction of their government. If 'no evidence', then evidently the Swiss declined to cooperate with the investigation and reveal who delivered the DNA.

Protection of Swiss, I speculate, may connect with why ambassador Duque has avoided releasing full report, and why Gurry feels confident of his big pay off, and why more western countries are not calling for Gurry's head. They certainly were not shy speaking up when they turned against DG Kamil 'now when was my birthday?' Idris ten years ago. Yet Idris was a baby in a wood compared with Gurry.

All pure speculation, as I said. So please don't threaten me with a lawsuit Mr Director-General.

2
0
Silver badge

Immunity

"Swiss police should not have tested the DNA of people with diplomatic immunity"

Gurry presumably waived their immunity as WIPO officials, which he has the right to do. I'm not saying that was ethical, but then he stands accused of unethical behaviour.

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Dirty work

"The Swiss police should not have tested the DNA of people with diplomatic immunity, and nor got involved in the cover up afterwards"

My experience and observation is that conspiracies almost never occur in in the leadup to an event of spectacular stupidity but frequently manifest afterwards as people close ranks and try to protect their jobs.

It's likely the Swiss police took the complaints at face value and only discovered staff had diplomatic immunity later on, at which point they had a serious "oh shit" moment on their hands.

0
0
Bronze badge
Coat

So that old hymn was prophetic:

"WIPO mine eyes and see snot."

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Most of the world shrugs (even if their state owned media covered this story). Why? Because they accept corruption, don't really care about the rule of law, often put their family/tribe first and wonder why they live in a sh1thole.

3
0
Silver badge
FAIL

This happens because the UN's most important agency is...

The seldom-discussed but omnipresent International Horsetrading Agency, where country A wants control of WIPO, and in return supports Country B's, C's and D's candidates for their share of the UN trough, and those countries in turn support country A's candidate, and nobody dares do something about how WIPO is run, because it would open their own patronage positions in other UN agencies up to scrutiny and possible loss.

0
0

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing