If democracy is dead in Antionio Guterres’ UN – then where can it thrive? by Michelle Rockcliffe

By Michelle Rockcliffe, UN Staff Pension Committee Participants Representative.

The events of the last few weeks in decision-making in the UN Staff Pension Committee and the UN Staff Union/NY are proof that democracy is on life support given that it has been the United Nations which has touted and taught its benefits around the world.

What is more concerning is that when staff of the United Nations violate the UN Staff Rules in terms of the UN Charter, and Code of Ethics, which call for integrity, probity, impartiality, ethics and compliance with national laws pertaining to corruption, it appears that these staff may be given some sort of assurance that their jobs would remain safe and that there be no consequences, no disciplinary action, regardless of whether it is an ethical matter or whether fraud by the staff has been investigated, proven and even reported to the General Assembly.

CASE 1 – UNITED NATIONS STAFF PENSION COMMITTEE DECISIONS

The United Nation Staff Pension Committee is a tripartite group made up of elected representatives of the General Assembly (GA), the Secretary-General (SG)-appointed representatives and Participants’ Representatives (UNPRs) elected by the active staff of UN Secretariat, Funds and Programmes.

For example, at its 337th meeting on 27th May 2021 of the United Nation Staff Pension Committee – based on the suggestion of a GA representative - decided by consensus (there were no objections among the committee members themselves), that the UNSPC would support the Participants’ Representatives proposals from 2018 and 2019 and that the UNSPC should present to the 69th Session of the Pension Board the proposal for provisional payments to former participants or survivors who had not received their entitlement in 3 months after the due date.

To the dismay of the UN Participants’ Representatives when the delayed draft proposal was received from the Chair, an SG representative on 17 June, 3 working days before a deadline, instead of a “proposal to pay”, the proposal had been changed to a “feasibility study”. It should be noted that this was the third distinct time in 4 years that GA and SG representatives had reneged on the decision and allowed the Pension Administration to talk them out of payments due by saying it was “too much work”.

The final paper reneging on the decision was posted to the portal of the Pension Board on 29th June showing in effect that there was no consensus.

There is even concern among UNPRs that even when minutes are received for review sometimes months later, that decisions have been changed from time to time, especially when there has been disagreement about taking away disability benefits, from disabled orphans, or retirees who by definition of Article 33 remain disabled.

These acts are being committed at the highest levels of the organization – with impunity - and are the opposite of the fiduciary duty that is owed to beneficiaries of the UNJSPF.

CASE 2 – the UNITED NATION STAFF UNION in NEW YORK

Twice in the last two councils, 45th and 46th, we have seen blatant actions of individuals such as fraud in the case of the 2nd Vice President of the 45th Council and what appears to be ongoing collusion and possible fraud among the UNSU Executive Board, Chair, Polling Officers and Arbitration committee to overturn a vote, gerrymandering to increase by 1200 the number of votes by DSS, election rigging by holding unlawful meetings to change term limits during the election process.

It would appear that several officials in Mr. Guterres’ administration are playing a facilitating part in these matters.

It is still fresh in the minds of staff the standoff caused when the 2013 to 2017 Ban-Ki-Moon’s administration refused to provide the lists of staff members so that the UNSU could hold elections. This was “cleaned-up” just in time for Guterres’ first appointment. But now it seems as though his administration too sees the benefit of union-busting – right at a time with the President of the host country has given Unions back their rightful place in negotiation with respect to the welfare and the conditions of service of workers

This is mind-boggling, and even though these events seem to be a reflection of the world around us, isn’t the United Nations supposed to lead by example in these areas? What is Mr. Guterres and his administration going to do about this reputational and unethical mess?

UN Staff Pension Committee elections begin today! Vote for Ian, Mary, Ibrahima, Abolade, Egor, and Solomon! 24 June 2021

Elections begin today. Active UN staff: Vote for the representatives to the UN Staff Pension Committee with the experience, commitment, integrity -- and proven track record -- to fight for ALL our interests. Vote for Ian, Mary, Ibrahima, Abolade, Egor, and Solomon!

UN Staff Pension Committee elections: Democracy on the ropes, 21 June 2021.

(Plus read what's behind the emergency staff union meeting called for tomorrow, 22 June. More manipulation.) 

 Elections currently underway for UN participant representatives to the UN Staff Pension Committee are turning out to be a toxic stew of interference by the UN administration/Pension Board, discrimination against some candidates, manipulative behavior by a candidate, and combined forces that appear determined to disregard transparency and democracy. 

 Indeed, democratic principles and values have been under assault on a global scale during Covid-19, and now elements in the UN appear to be jumping on board this dangerous trend. 

Interference 

 In a bold move to interfere in the elections, the UN administration is funding the elections and tried and failed to block Pension Fund staff from running. Discrimination The polling officers thwarted this attempt to rig the elections by deciding to respect Fund rules instead, but the residue remains. 

They haven’t lifted the prohibition in their rules of campaigning against candidates who are Fund staff using Fund facilities or computers, while other candidates are allowed to use official facilities and computers. Membership in the Fund is mandatory for all staff members. 

Running for election to the Pension Board is an official activity; therefore, no candidate can legally be denied the use of official facilities or computers for campaign purposes. 

 And, there is no such restriction on other candidates' use of official facilities, computers, mailing lists or broadcasts for campaigning purposes, which makes this rule discriminatory. 

Manipulation 

 Then there’s the outgoing president of the UN Staff Union New York. She pushed just before the end of her term to move the New York union from the CCISUA staff union federation to UNISERV, where in a quid pro quo, she was immediately appointed vice-president of the federation. 

She also received UNISERV’s unconditional support for her candidacy to the UN Staff Pension Committee, despite having no pension experience. Every tenet of democracy appears to have been jettisoned in this gambit to move the New York union to UNISERV. 

Reportedly, when three separate votes failed to achieve a two-thirds majority, the Staff Council chair decided, contrary to the statutes, to overturn the decision and count abstentions as votes in favor. In what appears to be the latest ruse, an Emergency Staff Union New York was just called for tomorrow, 22 June, aimed at changing union statutes to allow current officers whose terms have expired, including the president, to run in upcoming elections! 

 *See response below to the call for an Emergency Staff Union meeting from Yogesh Sakhardande, candidate for leadership of the 47th Staff Council. 

Non-transparency 

 In a shameful display of non-transparency and undemocratic tactics, the administrator of a Facebook group called UN Pictures, also the UNISERV president, has posted a photo of the slate of candidates that includes the new UNISERV VP as the group’s photo, while refusing to allow campaign posts by other candidates. 

 The UN polling officers have cried foul about this seeming endorsement of a slate on behalf of one of the UN unions, instead of clarifying that it’s the personal preference of the group administrator. They have asked, to no avail, that social media groups allow all candidates to post on their sites. Democracy under attack 

 Whither democracy in the UN, the international organization that touts democracy around the world?

 In the simplest terms “democracy” means rule by the people, the ability of people to have a say in decisions and hold decision-makers to account.

 According to the Democracy Index 2020, “70 per cent of countries reported a drop in their democracy score in 2020 compared to 2019. Paramount among democratic principles and values that came under attack during Covid 19 were civil liberties, freedom of expression, accountability, and women’s equality. 

 Despite doing more than any other international organization to promote democracy around the world, the UN itself is far from being a bastion of democracy. 

 Consider the undemocratic and unrepresentative Security Council; or the closed-door white smoke process by which the UN Secretary-General, the ninth man in the UN’s 75 year history, recently re-elected to a second term; or the British colonial civil service that was the model for the UN Secretariat and its rigid staff hierarchy. 

 Now the UN appears to be getting on board with the global assault on democracy. 

Undemocratic Pension Board 

 Now, consider the undemocratic Pension Board with its imbalance of seats and voting rights, and its sustained attempts to resist reforms while intimidating and muzzling whistleblowers among the current UN participant representatives. 

Collusion 

 Finally, consider the UNSU NY president supporting the UN administration/Pension Board’s efforts by denying the UN participant representatives access to the Staff Union broadcast system to keep their constituents informed of pension activities, and then jockeying to unseat them in the upcoming elections. 

 Protect our Fund by voting for representatives who’ll fight for all our interests 

The UN Pension Fund as a defined benefit system is a dying breed. It cannot be taken for granted. Ignorance, self-interest, raw ambition and autocracy are active threats to our Fund. 

 These elections are crucial. Active UN staff, who are eligible to vote in this election must recognize the real risks of losing the gains of recent years in transparency, integrity, and efficiency and vote for those who are experienced, committed and with a proven track record of fighting for all our interests! 

 VOTE FOR IAN, MARY, IBRAHIMA, ABOLADE, EGOR, AND SOLOMON! 

 *"MORE SHAMELESS ATTEMPTS BY UNION LEADERSHIP TO RIG NY UNSU ELECTIONS BY CHANGING TERM LIMITS MIDSTREAM 

 Dear Colleague, 

 Vote NO. This is not a resolution adopted by the Council but by individuals attempting to retain power. By now you must have read a Staff Union Broadcast calling you to an Emergency General Meeting tomorrow 22nd June 2021. 

Staff Representatives have been hearing from colleagues and as one long-serving staff member wrote “This is the most outrageous case of election rigging I have ever seen.” 

Rigging of elections is a crime in any democracy, it violates UN Staff Rules and our UNSU Statutes and Regulations, both of which espouse democratic principles. Indeed it appears that current leadership is attempting to destroy our Union on its way out of office, by delaying elections and the start of the 47th Council. 

This is currently disenfranchising you, hundreds if not thousands of staff in unrepresented Units whose newly elected representatives cannot be lawfully seated at the Council until the election is complete. Not only is this move clearly unethical but additionally the UNSU regulations appear to have been violated. 

 Nowhere in the world are the rules of an election changed in the middle of the election. i. Once the Polling Officers announce the election – the rules cannot be changed. ii. Any new rules cannot be retroactive or “immediate” because in this case immediate is in the middle of an election for which rules were already distributed and most of representatives already chosen. 

This shameful act violates Article 5.11 of the Regulations which states that 

 i. The Emergency General Meeting must be in the “interests of the Union” and that means the staff members and not to further the interests of individuals - in this case the First and Second Vice Presidents of the Union and possibly the President herself. 

 ii. We have not received any proof that 300 members of the Union have requested this emergency meeting.

 iii. There was no decision for this Emergency Meeting by the Council

 iv. The fact that the Chairperson is “out of the office” is also interesting since he is apparently convening this meeting. The position paper put forward by Union President while drawing attention to the inadequacies of our Statutes failed to inform you of the following. 

 From 2017 to 2019 the current First Vice President led a group of Staff Representatives in an effort to draft amendments to the Statutes and regulations spending hundreds of hours on this task.

 At the beginning of the 46th Council Staff Representatives met to “finalize” the document, however due to the restrictions that would be placed on the current leadership the revised statutes were never brought to the staff-at-large.  

This amendment could have been made during the last two years. Over the last several months the leadership of the UNSU/NY has put the Council and this Union through the mill and left the staff in a precarious position – all in the interest of retaining power. 

April – unlawfully changing a vote so as to change affiliation of the Union from CCISUA to join UNISERV - [in Arbitration] Gerrymandering the Apportionment – A referendum was later held but without informing staff about the details Unlawfully attempting to change the information session last week to a General Meeting – it appears this was the reason. 

 Protect yourself, decry this shameful and corrupt act and save our Union from being destroyed in order for this leadership to stay in power. Rigging of elections is a crime in any jurisdiction and these actions will be pursued to the fullest extent. 

 Signed, 

Yogesh Sakhardande Candidate for Leadership of the 47th Council"

UN Staff Pension Committee: Elect knowledge, experience and integrity: vote for Ian, Mary, Ibrahima, Abolade, Egor and Solomon! 16 June 2021

  

Elections for UN Participant Representatives to the Pension Board will take place in June according to a four-year election cycle. As with everything related to the UN Pension Fund, it’s heavily politicized.

 

These are crucial elections. The UN Participant Representatives (four members and two alternates; one retired some time ago) have done their work of representing 85,000 UN staff in the common system (active staff) while advocating for the interests of UN retirees who have been failed by our purported and self-interested representatives, FAFICS (the Federation of Associations of Former International Civil Servants).

 

Three current candidates for election, Ian Richards (UN Geneva), Ibrahima  Faye (UNJSPF), and Mary Abu-Rakabeh (UNICEF) are incumbent UN Participant Representatives running for re-election. 

All Fund members -- active UN staff and retirees --owe a debt of gratitude to the UN Participant Representatives and to Aissatou Ndiaye and Michelle Rockcliffe who are not running for re-election. 

For the past  four years, this group of UN Participant Representatives has fought courageously and effectively against strong and determined opposition from other board members, to bring transparency, integrity and improved management to both sides of our Fund – benefits and investments.  

 

https://www.passblue.com/2020/12/23/the-un-pension-funds-latest-flareups-and-hazards-to-whistleblowers/

Not surprisingly, elements of the Fund management and Board leadership who labored unsuccessfully to deny two of them seats on the Board after the last election, and have consistently worked to intimidate and muzzle them, are working behind the scenes to rig the elections, including by trying to deny eligibility to Fund staff, a move that was thwarted by a recent decision of the polling officers..

 

http://unpension.blogspot.com/2021/06/un-pension-fund-polling-officers.html.

 

It’s important that active staff, in voting for their representatives on the UN Staff Pension Committee, keep their sights on the politics motivating the flurry of candidates, including the current UN Staff Union president, pushing to place themselves ahead of the slate that includes these experienced, trustworthy and committed incumbents.

 

There’s a lot at stake, as evidenced by a glaring break with tradition,  a sign of its determination to influence the election for its own self-interest, in which the UN administration is reportedly paying for the election, which has normally been funded by the UN Staff Unions.

 

Members of the New York Staff Union leadership, in solidarity with UN management, have also labored long and hard to oppose the current UN Participant Representatives, including  last year denying them  access to the Staff Union Broadcast system to report to their constituents on Fund activities.

 

Now a slate of incumbents including the outgoing president of the New York Staff Union, who recently led a successful effort to remove the New York Staff Union from the umbrella of CCISUA to UNISERV, is being touted as the pension champion of field staff, in a brazen move to pit one group of staff against another and in a bid to wield power in an area where she has zero experience.

 

There’s much at stake in this election to a body that has oversight of the life savings of the some  212,000 members of the fund, both active staff and retirees. The gains in transparency and efficiency in the operations of our Fund, largely due to the efforts to the UN Participant Representatives, serial audits by the UN internal oversight office (OIOS), and resulting General Assembly reforms, must be built on, solidified and increased, not reversed!

It’s critical that Fund members who are eligible to vote, active UN staff, not confuse raw ambition and self-interest with knowledge,  integrity, and experience. 

Vote for the slate of Ian, Ian, Mary, Ibrahima, Abolade, Egor and Solomon. They’ll work for ALL our interests!

 

UN Pension Fund elections: Vote for this slate!Ian, Mary, Ibrahima, Abolade, Egor, and Solomon and protect our defined benefit pensions, 15 June 2021

 I fully and strongly support and am reposting here Lowell Flanders' statement in FCUNS Facebook group regarding the people we need on the UN Staff Pension Committee:

"VOTE FOR THIS SLATE!

I don't get to vote in this election because I am a retiree and not a serving staff member, but I would urge every staff member who can vote to vote for this slate of candidates, because they have the experience and knowledge to protect the Pension Fund for both serving staff and retirees. Ian, Ibrahima, and Mary, who are current Participant Reps on the Pension Board have actively worked to defend our interests as retirees, even though that is not their specific remit. We retirees are supposed to be represented by FAFICS, but if you have any idea what the position of FAFICS is on any given issue, such as the Mosaic Report or financial derivatives, please let us all know, because it is a well kept secret. We need representatives on the Pension Board who are not afraid to stand up to the big wigs and say what has to be said. You can't send people to the Pension Board who have no prior experience with pension issues - they'll be eaten alive.Vote for the candidates who will protect your interests!" -- Lowell Flanders

Regional Pension Sessions: Global Staff Association with UN Participant Representatives to the UN Pension Committee, 15 TO 22 June 2021

 PENSION SESSIONS

GLOBAL STAFF ASSOCIATION WITH UN PARTICIPANT REPRESENTATIVES TO THE UN PENSION COMMITTEE

15 to 22 June 2021

*Note: tomorrow's event, Tuesday, 15 June, is also for staff in New York.

"Dear Colleagues, 

The Global Staff Association, in collaboration with the UN Participants’ Representatives to the UN Pension Committee, is pleased to invite you to the planned Pension Sessions, focusing on entitlements and benefits. This is your opportunity to get to know more, ask your questions and get the answers you want.

Below is the schedule planned per region, to give the opportunity to address issues and interact with your representatives. Each session will be facilitated by the Regional Staff Association Chairperson and is open to all UN colleagues. Please feel free to circulate and share the link with colleagues in all UN agencies. 

REGION

DATE

Time (NY Time EST)

Link to join meeting

FLORENCE, GENEVA, COPENHAGEN, BUDAPEST

15 June

8:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.

Please click this URL to join. https://unicef.zoom.us/j/99077617203

Passcode: 981499

ECARO & MENA

16 June

8:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.

Please click this URL to join. https://unicef.zoom.us/j/95470331364

Passcode: 673583

EAPRO & ROSA

17 June

05:30 a.m. – 07:30 a.m.

Please click this URL to join the meeting https://unicef.zoom.us/j/93957008756

Passcode: 808530

New York & LACRO 

18 June

8:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.

Please click this URL to join. https://unicef.zoom.us/j/96889544466

Passcode: 542646

ESARO

21 June

8:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.

Please click this URL to join. https://unicef.zoom.us/j/98478236495

Passcode: 094070

WCARO

22 June

8:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.

Please click this URL to join. https://unicef.zoom.us/j/99649945708

Passcode: 491430

Looking forward to interacting with you and answering your queries. 

Best regards,

Noma Owens-Ibie

Chairperson, Global Staff Association"

Financial Derivatives: A Ticking Time Bomb for the UN Joint Staff Pension Fund? By Lowell Flanders, 10 June 2021

By Lowell Flanders*

 

 

In his book “The Devil’s Derivatives,” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2011) Nicholas Dunbar explains that in the early 1980’s the US and the UK produced most of their wealth from manufacturing actual products. A decade later the financial services industry was dominant in both countries. “The value of the financial assets held by banks, hedge funds, and other institutions” far exceeded, “the actual producing power,” of both economies and could be “measured in multiples of GDP.” The enormous wealth these people “generated and pocketed, fundamentally and irrevocably changed the world’s financial system, and very nearly destroyed it,” through the misuse of financial derivatives and other non-traditional investment strategies.   

 

Warren Buffet, the “Oracle of Omaha,” one of the world’s wealthiest investors, was more direct. In the 2002, he called "Derivatives … financial weapons of mass destruction, carrying dangers that, while now latent, are potentially lethal." In his 2008 annual letter, Buffet said: "Derivatives are dangerous. They have dramatically increased the leverage and risks in our financial system. They have made it almost impossible for investors to understand and analyze our largest commercial banks and investment banks."

 

We witnessed the mass destruction caused when the market for mortgage derivatives exploded in 2008. The crisis was the worst U.S. economic disaster since the Great Depression. In the United States, the stock market tanked, wiping out nearly $8 trillion in value between late 2007 and 2009. Unemployment climbed, peaking at 10 percent in October 2009. Americans, alone, lost $9.8 trillion in wealth as their home values plummeted and their retirement accounts vaporized.

 

In all, the Great Recession led to a loss of more than $2 trillion in global economic growth, or a drop of nearly 4 percent, between the pre-recession peak in the second quarter of 2008 and the low hit in the first quarter of 2009, according to Moody’s Analytics.

 

But what are derivatives and why should UN Pension Fund participants and beneficiaries care about these obscure and little understood (at least by most of us) financial instruments? First the why and then the what.  

 

Why Should UN Pension Fund Participants and Beneficiaries Care about Derivatives?    

Why should we care? Because, derivatives and other “alternative” financial instruments are coming to a Pension Fund near you. The Secretary-General of the UN, who has fiduciary responsibility for investments of UNJSPF, in his report to the 75^th Session of the General Assembly, called “Investments of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund and measures undertaken to increase the diversification of the Fund,” (A/C.5/75/2) endorses a series of measures that will significantly alter the risk profile of the UN Joint Staff Pension Fund. Based on the Fund’s updated investment policy statement of August 2019, the SG indicates “that the Investment Management Division, may use exchange-traded futures, swaps and foreign exchange forwards (all derivatives) for the purposes of increasing the efficiency and lowering the transaction cost of implementing various investment strategies, as well as for risk management and hedging purposes.” In addition, “the Office may establish securities lending programmes and enter into repurchase transactions.”  It is noted however that, “the use of such instruments would require the Fund to conduct margin trading,” or leveraging which requires borrowed money. 

The Secretary-General then goes on to ask the GA for authority “to engage in borrowing for the limited purpose of performing such transactions and to the extent that such borrowing is required as an adjunct to the securities and instruments otherwise traded or used by the Fund and only for the Fund itself. In that regard, please note that any exposure of the Fund resulting from such borrowing would be adequately covered and collateralized by the assets of the Fund.” Please also note that any losses caused by this type of borrowing would be charged off to the assets held as collateral for the loans, meaning direct loss to the participants and beneficiaries of the Pension Fund.   

The GA in its resolution 75/246. “United Nations pension system,” took note of “proposal of the Pension Board “to engage, for the first time, in a range of derivative instruments available to the Fund, to effectively manage the Fund’s investments and address the increasing complexity of the global capital markets environment, and in this context requests the Secretary-General to submit more detailed proposals to the General Assembly at its seventy-sixth session, including information on the use of derivative instruments, engagement in margin trading and participation in securities lending, as well as compliance measures, with a view to ensuring strict adherence to the existing policies and accountability framework and a cost-effective investment strategy, and authorizes the Secretary-General to conduct margin trading for the limited purpose set out in paragraphs 43 and 44 of his report on a trial basis for two years.”

The GA also requested “the Secretary-General to report on the use of these expanded investment strategies, including … their impact on the diversification of the Fund, in the context of his next report on the investments of the Fund, and to review the use of these expanded investment strategies and to report thereon to the General Assembly at its seventy-seventh session in order to determine whether to continue these strategies.” 

UN Pension Fund: Polling Officers' decision thwarts attempts to rig upcoming elections, 4 June 2021

LAW AND COMMON SENSE PREVAIL!

Quote: "The Polling Officers do not feel it is within their mandate to override prior decisions of the United Nations Appeals Tribunal or the deferrals of a decision meant to be made by the General Assembly. As a result, the names of staff members of the Pension Fund shall not be excluded from the ballot in the 2021 election of participants’ representatives on the United Nations Staff Pension Committee." 

The Polling Officers' decision, in effect, thwarts efforts by some members of the Fund and Pension Board leadership, who have tried for years to muzzle the UN Participants to the Board,  to rig the upcoming election. P.S. Whether or not the petition helped, the fact remains that  “sunlight is the best disinfectant”. Thank you, to all who signed!

  

UNITED NATIONS STAFF PENSION COMMITTEE

POLLING OFFICERS OF THE 2021 ELECTION

 

Ref.: PO/2021/03 Date: 3 June 2021 

To: Members of the Pension Board of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund 

From: Polling Officers, 2021 election of participants’ representatives on the United Nations Staff Pension Committee 

ELECTION OF PARTICIPANTS’ REPRESENTATIVES ON THE UNITED NATIONS STAFF PENSION COMMITTEE 

Memorandum Annex 

cc: Martha Helena Lopez, Assistant Secretary-General for Human Resources, Department of Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance

Dulcie Mapondera, Chief, Legal and Compliance Unit of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund

Katia Tabourian, Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary-General, Office of Human Resources, Department of Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance

Elected leadership of the staff members of the United Nations Secretariat and separately administered associations, staff unions and councils: 

o Mark Polane (UNISERV, UNFSU)
o Stephen Towler (UNISERV, UNFSU) o Guy Avognon (CCISUA, UNHCR)
o Joseph Baricako (CCISUA, ECA)
o Philip Migire (CCISUA, UNON)
o Tanya Quinn-Maguire (FICSA)
o Cosimo Melpignano (FICSA) 

 

MEMORANDUM FROM THE POLLING OFFICERS OF THE 2021 ELECTION TO THE MEMBERS OF THE PENSION BOARD OF THE
UNITED NATIONS JOINT STAFF PENSION FUND 

On 14 April 2021, the various United Nations staff unions and associations were asked to provide volunteers to act as Polling Officers for a global process to elect participants’ representatives to the United Nations Staff Pension Committee. The request was issued seven (7) days prior to the expiration of the term of the current Committee members on 21 April. 

On 16 April, the names of eight volunteers selected by the representatives of the staff of the United Nations Secretariat provided from among the Polling Officers who were currently working, or had recently worked, on other elections were forwarded to the Assistant Secretary-General for Human Resources, Department of Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance, also a member of the Pension Board. The team of Polling Officers was thus considered to have been “nominated by the United Nations Secretariat and separately administered associations/staff unions/councils to independently conduct objective, impartial and neutral elections for the United Nations Staff Pension Committee and publish the results thereof”. The Polling Officers were expected to “find a way to convene a preparatory meeting without any outside intervention, to ensure their full independence” and to “conduct a professional, fair and independent election for the benefit of everyone”. 

On 19 April, the Polling Officers were copied on emails requesting their release, “for the necessary time required”, for the purpose of running said election. In attachment was a copy of the current Regulations, Rules and Pension Adjustment System of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (JSPB/G.4/REV.25, of 2021), while the body of the email contained an overview of the make-up of the Committee, on the basis of articles 5 and 6 of the Regulations. A second email was received by all Polling Officers, containing as attachment a copy of the nomination form used by the Polling Officers of the 2017 election and the name of the Human Resources focal point that would be available to provide any necessary assistance with regard to voters and related data required to enable them to participate. 

On 20 April, the Polling Officers met for the first time to discuss the organization of the election. Subsequent to that meeting, one member reached out to the HR focal point to request additional information and guidance. Having been given no additional instructions, the Polling Officers also contacted the previous team of Polling Officers for further advice. 

Between 20 April and 12 May, the Polling Officers met regularly and continued to seek information on and organize the details of the running of the election, decided on key dates, worked with Procurement to identify possible polling companies, requested assistance from the Office of Information and Communication Technology with the resolution of a variety of technical issues and drafted a call for nominations to be circulated on 14 May. We were also informed during that time by the HR focal point of the Pension Board’s express desire that the elections be completed prior to its upcoming meeting in July, with sufficient time to advise and train the new members of the Committee beforehand. 

On 14 May 2021, in accordance with article 6 of the Regulations, Rules and Pension Adjustment System of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund, the Polling Officers forwarded a letter (PO/2021/01) to the assigned HR focal point and requested the circulation of said letter, by which staff members who were participants in the Pension Fund were invited to nominate candidates to stand for election as participants’ representatives on the United Nations Staff Pension Committee. Prior to its circulation, the Polling Officers made certain amendments to the terminology used in their invitation, at the request of the HR focal point, to bring the language into line with that used in the Regulations. 

On 17 May, that email was circulated by various United Nations system-wide Broadcasts to all relevant staff, and re-circulated by several staff union and federation broadcasts, so as to reach the widest possible audience. 

The eligibility requirements listed in that call for nominations were set out in line with the call for nominations from 2017 sent to the Polling Officers as reference material by the assigned HR focal point, and in accordance with the provisions of article 6 (a), as follows: 

All candidates for election must: 

1. (a)  Be staff members who are current participants in the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (see also link to Regulations and Rules in annex I); 
2. (b)  Occupy a post, on a fixed-term, permanent or continuing appointment, in any of the organizations in the United Nations family of organizations participating in the Pension Fund (see annex II); 
3. (c)  Have taken the United Nations oath of office. 

Annex I to the 2021 call for nominations contained the text of article 6 (a)-(c) of the Regulations, as well as a link to the full text of that document. Annex II contained the list of participating United Nations entities served by the United Nations Staff Pension Committee. The remainder of the call for nominations contained preliminary instructions for prospective applicants and nominees, a calendar of proposed key dates and information on how to contact the Polling officers for further information. 

On 17 May, the Polling Officers received an expression of interest from a current staff member of the Pension Fund who was also a current Participant Representative to the Staff Pension Committee. At the Polling Officers’ meeting on 19 May, the issue of the current text of section C.1 was raised and a discussion held on that staff member’s eligibility for election. Given the apparent discord between the 2017 decision by the United Nations Arbitration Tribunal decision allowing such staff members to do so, and declaring that restriction illegal, and the change still seen in the text of section C.1 of successive versions of the Rules of the Procedure of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund since 2018, the Polling Officers could not come to an agreement as to the full meaning and implications of the change. Finding the text of section C.1 to be unclear as to whether “the secretariat of the Fund”, “the Office of Investment Management of the Fund” and “the secretariat of (the United Nations) Staff Pension Committee” represented the entirety of all Pension Fund staff members or a subset thereof, the Polling Officers requested clarification on that matter from both the HR focal point and the legal advisor of the Pension Fund. Organizations charts were provided by the legal advisor, as were the following statements (underline hers): 

• -  In summary, the entities in the UNJSPF covered by Section C.1 of the UNJSPF Rules of Procedure are the Pension Administration/Fund secretariat, which also serves as the Staff Pension Committee secretariat of the UNSPC following approval by the General Assembly in its resolution 75/246 of an amendment to Article 8 of the Fund’s Regulations, the secretariat of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board and the Office of Investment Management. 
• -  There are similar provisions in the rules governing elections for Participants’ Representatives on the staff pension committees of UNJSPF member organizations – for instance the WHO Staff Pension Committee, which restricts staff of the WHO SPC secretariat from being eligible to serve on the WHO Staff Pension Committee and consequently on the Pension Board. 
• -  The General Assembly only approves amendments to the Regulations in accordance with article 49 of the Regulation. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure of the Fund are approved by the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board and submitted to the General Assembly for information in accordance with article 4 (c) of the Regulations, which states that: 

Subject to the provisions of these Regulations, the Board shall adopt its own Rules of Procedure, which shall be reported to the General Assembly and the member organizations. 

• -  The amendment to section C.1 was an amendment of the Rules of Procedure approved by the Board at its 64th session in July 2017 and, in accordance with article 4 (c) of the Regulations, was reported to the General Assembly in annex IX to the Board’s report to the General Assembly (A/72/383). The General Assembly noted the report in its resolution 72/262, section XV, paragraph 1. 

In the meantime, the Polling Officers allowed the candidate to proceed with the nomination process, while advising him of the possibility that he may not be eligible to run. He thereupon provided arguments to the contrary, along with documents purporting to support his position, also citing article 4 (c) of the Regulations, set out above, as well as successive resolutions of the General Assembly deferring a decision to amend article 6 (a). 

On 21 May, in view of the conflict that remained apparent to them between the provisions of article 6 (a) and section C.1, and the recourse by both parties to the same article of the Regulations to support the validity of both, the Polling Officers appealed to the same United Nations Secretariat and separately administered associations/staff unions/councils external that had nominated them to request assistance in the form of external legal advice and arbitration. On 26 May, the Polling Officers were advised that the situation had been referred to an external arbitration committee consisting of former United Nations staff members who were all lawyers with extensive and distinguished legal backgrounds. On 30 May they replied, and, on 31 May, they agreed to discuss the matter with the Polling Officers at a meeting to be held on 2 June and facilitated by the staff union leader that had called them together. 

After extensive discussion, the external legal experts remained unable to decide in favour of the legality of the change made by the Pension Board to its Rules of Procedure and its applicability to the setting out of election criteria that appeared to be in conflict with those set out in the Regulations. The key point remained the interpretation of the phrase “Subject to the provisions of these Regulations” contained in article 4, by which, in their opinion, the terms of the Regulations superseded those of the Rules of Procedure. The arbitration committee members also remarked on the lack of a formal legal framework for the work and mandate of the Polling Officers. At the end of that meeting, the Polling Officers held a second, private meeting to discuss the opinions expressed by the members of the arbitration committee and endeavour to come to their own decision on the matter. The Polling Officers also found it notable that, at no time following the issuance of the call for nominations on 17 May, or the reminders thereof circulated on 28 May and 1 June, did they receive any request by the pension Board to issue a correction or otherwise amend the eligibility criteria set out therein. 

Given the above considerations, the determination of the Polling Officers is therefore as follows: 

• -  Unlike for many staff union elections, there is no legal framework guiding the work of the Polling Officers for the election of participants’ representatives to the Staff Pension Committee. The Polling Officers are not legal experts and do not consider it to be within their mandate to interpret legal documents, only to organize elections and apply the Regulations in effect. 
• -  The phrase “Subject to the provisions of these Regulations, the Board shall adopt its own Rules of Procedure” contained in article 4 (c) appeared to be understood by the legal experts consulted to mean that the Regulations, being adopted by a higher hierarchical body, in the present case the General Assembly, should take precedence over and thus supersede any potentially conflicting provision of the Rules of Procedure that may be adopted by the Board. 
• -  The restriction set out in section C.1 of the Rules of Procedure in annex III appears to conflict with the election criteria set out in article 6 (a) of the Regulations. Although requested to do so by the Board, the General Assembly has not, as yet, adopted any amendment to said article. 
• -  The Polling Officers do not feel it is within their mandate to override prior decisions of the United Nations Appeals Tribunal or the deferrals of a decision meant to be made by the General Assembly. As a result, the names of staff members of the Pension Fund shall not be excluded from the ballot in the 2021 election of participants’ representatives on the United Nations Staff Pension Committee. 

The Polling Officers request that the Pension Board take note of the above decision. The text of the relevant articles and section are set out in the annex hereto.