[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 136 (Monday, September 26, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 26, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
 UNDER SECRETARY GENERAL FOR INTERNAL OVERSIGHT SERVICES AT THE UNITED 
                                NATIONS

  Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I rise today to once again applaud the 
efforts of the United Nations in their long, hard effort to create a 
position for an office of inspector general to be known as the Under 
Secretary General for Internal Oversight Services at the United 
Nations.
  I have long advocated such an office as an essential element to 
restoring trust in the administration of U.N. matters, and met at the 
United Nations last spring with Ambassador Albright, U.N. Secretary 
General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, and a number of other interested 
Ambassadors from around the world.
  A few weeks ago I spoke about the final resolution to create this 
office which passed the General Assembly on July 29. I had asked the 
General Accounting Office [GAO] to take a look at it, and they found 
that, while it went a long way in setting up the office, questions 
remained regarding important issues such as funding, staffing and 
hiring authority, and whistleblower protection. At that point GAO 
determined, and I agreed, that the way these issues would be handled in 
the implementing regulations, as they should be, would be key.
  I am pleased to say that these concerns were fully addressed to my 
satisfaction in the implementing regulations released by the Secretary 
General on Thursday, September 8. Again, I asked GAO to take a look at 
those regulations to confirm this. They agreed that these binding 
regulations will foster the operational independence that an office 
such as this requires to be able to function effectively.
  That element of independence, of reporting not only to the Secretary 
General, but also to the members of the General Assembly, is crucial to 
a successful IG operation, as we have found in our own U.S. Government 
in reporting not only to an agency or department head, but also to the 
appropriate committee of jurisdiction in the Congress.
  Also, there will be a separate line item in the Secretary General's 
budget for this office. While the current request is for $11.4 million 
for 2 years, there is general agreement that this is totally inadequate 
to fund such an office. Therefore, the Secretary General has asked for 
a 21 percent increase in funding for the next biennium. This is the 
largest increase requested for any section of the budget.
  Additionally, the IG will have independent authority to hire and fire 
his staff. In fact, Ambassador Karl Theodor Paschke, who will take his 
position as the first Undersecretary General for Internal Oversight 
Services on November 15, is already in the process of reviewing the 
contracts of the current employees of the Office of Inspections and 
Investigations [OII], the young predecessor office to the Office of 
Internal Oversight Services [OIOS]. I was pleased to learn that 
Ambassador Paschke does not feel obligated to retain staff with whom he 
is not comfortable, thereby giving him the authority to create his own 
staffing table. It is also my understanding that our own GAO will be 
involved in the training of the new staff of this office.
  Finally, the issue of whistleblower protection has been resolved 
favorably; if a U.N. employee makes an accusation of improper conduct, 
his or her confidentiality will be protected. False accusations made 
willfully or knowingly will be treated as cases of misconduct 
themselves. Such matters will be dealt with through the administrative 
process already in place at the United Nations; however, this process 
is currently undergoing intense revision to deal with broader 
situations and sanctions for misconduct.
  The only reservation raised by GAO was the possible reluctance of 
U.N. employees to come forward with allegations of misconduct if 
``willful disregard of the truth'' is not clearly defined. While this 
is a valid point, this office is still in its infancy, and I am willing 
to give it a chance to get up and running before further scrutinizing 
procedures and safeguards. However, this is one of the items I will 
keep on my checklist for that time.
  In accordance with the provisions of Public Law 103-236, the Foreign 
Relations Authorization Act for fiscal year 1994 and 1995, the 
certification to release the remaining 10 percent of the U.S. 
contribution to the United Nations has been made. I am pleased to say 
that I wholeheartedly support the certification.
  I look forward to watching this office as it develops into one as 
effective as those of our own, and I further anticipate the beginning 
of the term of Ambassador Paschke.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 2-page letter from 
GAO be placed in the Record following my remarks.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

         General Accounting Office, National Security and 
           International Affairs Division,
                               Washington, DC, September 23, 1994.
     Hon. John Glenn,
     U.S. Senate.
       Dear Senator Glenn: This letter responds to your request 
     that we evaluate the U.N. Secretary-General's September 7, 
     1994, procedures for implementing the Office of Internal 
     Oversight Services (OIOS). You asked that we determine 
     whether the procedures address gaps in the July 29, 1994, 
     General Assembly's resolution establishing the Office. We 
     previously provided you with our comments on that resolution 
     in a letter dated August 8, 1994. We had concluded that if 
     properly implemented, the resolution allows OIOS the 
     operational independence to perform functions similar to 
     those performed by Inspectors General, as established under 
     the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended.
       Our letter also noted that the President could not certify 
     that requirements of section 401(b) of the Foreign Relations 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 had been met 
     unless several of actions required in the resolution were 
     completed before September 30, 1994. These included (1) the 
     appointment of an Under Secretary General for Internal 
     Oversight Services with requisite qualifications and approval 
     by the General Assembly; (2) the issuance of procedures to 
     ensure compliance with recommendations of the Office; and (3) 
     the issuance of procedures to protect the identity of, and to 
     prevent reprisals against, any staff members making a 
     complaint or disclosing information, or cooperating in any 
     investigation or inspection by the Office.
       The appointment process was completed on July 29, 1994, 
     when the U.N. General Assembly approved the appointment of 
     Ambassador Karl Paschke, a German national, as Under 
     Secretary General for Internal Oversight Services. According 
     to the State Department, Ambassador Paschke has the requisite 
     credentials to fulfill the legislative requirement. We found 
     that the Secretary-General's implementing procedures provide 
     regulations to ensure that OIOS is operationally independent. 
     The Secretary-General's procedures address compliance with 
     OIOS recommendations under the section entitled 
     ``Implementation of Recommendations.'' Program managers are 
     instructed to ensure prompt compliance with final 
     recommendations and report to OIOS, on a quarterly basis, on 
     the status of implementation. The Under-Secretary General 
     responsible for the program area is to monitor the program 
     manger's implementation of corrective action. In addition the 
     procedures require investigations to be conducted with 
     respect for the individual rights of staff and strict regard 
     for fairness and due process. Further, confidential 
     suggestions and/or information may be used only in official 
     reports, without directly or indirectly naming people 
     involved or implicated. The procedures also enhance the 
     operational independence of the Office by including controls 
     that enable the Under Secretary-General to hire and fire 
     personnel and a separately identified line item for the OIOS 
     budget.
       Finally, we note one area of the procedures that may have 
     an unintended consequence. Since the procedures do not 
     clearly define ``willful disregard of the truth'' people with 
     information about possible waste, fraud, or abuse may be 
     inhibited from coming forward lest they be accused of making 
     false reports. This cautionary note may prove unnecessary; 
     however, we believe the process should be revisited in the 
     future to determine whether changes are called for.
       If you have any questions concerning this letter, please do 
     not hesitate to call me on (202) 512-2800.
           Sincerely yours,

                                                  Neal Curtin,

                                            (for Frank C. Conahan,
     Assistant Comptroller General).

                          ____________________