Some of my readers have shared some interesting comments and alarming stories in response to one of my Op-Ed pieces, which was published last week. They revealed the real face of the UN agencies, especially in Pakistan. Atif Rizwan said, “Not new… UN in Pakistan is working like any other corrupt government department”. Azhar Qureshi commented, “UNDP in Pakistan has turned into a dead wood and it is very true that UN Chief has nothing to do to make any difference. It is a pathetic situation. Drastic reforms are required to put the UNDP Pakistan on the track. As I personally know it has become a part of corruption with many government agencies especially Ministry of Climate Change where in collusion with two former secretaries many UN full scale projects were damaged due to massive bad governance and misuse of funds. All corrupts in the system must be publicly hanged like it is being done in China.” Azhar Qureshi narrates a tale of injustice he experienced first-hand, “In 2009, our organization, Eco-Conservation Initiatives (ECI) was engaged by Ministry of Climate Change (MOCC), Government of Pakistan, and the UNDP-Pakistan to develop GEF funded 5-Years national level project titled “Comprehensive reduction and elimination of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in Pakistan” generally known as the POPs Pakistan Project. The total project budget is US$39.3 million. All the expenses incurred related to data collection and preparations of the project were born by ECI at this stage without charging a penny from the MOCC or UNDP. The ECI’s roles were clearly agreed upon and defined in the Project Identification Form (PIF) / Conceptual Framework of the project as indicated on Page Nos 5, 16 & 18 (Annex-I was provided to me as proof). Azhar Qureshi not only approached everyone in the UNDP from Pakistan to its headquarters, but also the Wafaqi Mohtasib and the President of Pakistan as well. Everyone refused to listen, saying “it’s not in our jurisdiction” Soon after, the UNDP-GEF Cell based at MOCC issued the endorsement letter. It clearly indicates that if the project (PIF/conceptual framework) is approved, the main Project Document (ProDoc) will also be prepared and implemented by ECI in collaboration with other partners (Annex-II & III). After approval of the PIF/Conceptual Framework of the project in 2012 by the GEF Council based at Washington DC, the ECI approached MOCC and UNDP-Pakistan in 2013 to prepare the main ProDoc at the second stage of project cycle again on its own costs. Instead, I was personally involved as an individual consultant and Mr Carlo Lupi, an international consultant, in 2014 because UNDP got approval of Proposal Preparation Grant (PPG) from the GEF Secretariat to prepare the main ProDoc and it was mandatory for them to spend this amount. The ECI was duly included in the ProDoc as one of the partners/co-financiers along with eleven other national partners including MOCC and UNDP, as indicated in the ProDoc from Page Nos. 53 to 55 (Annex-IV). I was neither involved in the ProDoc preparation process of my own will or authority, nor was there any understanding that in return, the partner organisation, meaning the ECI will lose all of its rights to be partner in this national level project. Rather, this process was completed by following all the formalities without any declared restrictions on any individual to apply and participate in the competitive process. In my individual capacity, I can work anywhere as individual consultant or partner but since approval of the ProDoc from GEF CEO, I am fighting the case of an organization, in effect, Eco-Conservation Initiatives (ECI) who are one of the main project stakeholders/co-financing partners as clearly indicated with its role in all the project documents. For final approval of the ProDoc from the CEO of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) in the last quarter of 2014, UNDP-Pakistan submitted to them the “Request for CEO Approval”, where ECI was again included as one of the partners amongst 12 partners of the project at Page No.5 & 8 (Annex-V). The project was finally approved and is also uploaded at the GEF website. In April 2015, MOCC and UNDP-Pakistan advertised project staff positions on UNDP website as required by the main approved ProDoc. In the advertised TORs, the position of National Project Manager (NPM) with duly required qualifications of Masters in Environment Management, Chemicals or related fields as indicated in the ProDoc on Page No.75 in Annex-IV were tampered/forged with the Business Administration (BA) as advertised on UNDP website (Annex-VI) to induct a National Project Manager of someone’s personal choice instead of required Masters degree in environment management, chemicals or related fields. Consequently, with pre-planned forgery, a Deputy Secretary who was serving as Director Environment Policy in MOCC with degree of Business Administration (BA) (Annex-VII) was selected and recruited in the project as its National Project Manager by usurping rights of the most relevant candidates with their degrees in Masters of Science in environment management, chemicals or related fields. This is also gross violation of relevant recruitment policies and serious injustice with the qualified candidates who applied for this position. Moreover, induction of project staff from the counterpart agency — the MOCC — is also against the relevant recruitment policies and rules and regulations agreed upon by MOCC and UNDP under their PCOM arrangements. On the abovementioned issue of tampering and forgery, the ECI raised its voice against such illegitimate acts during our meetings with Assistant Country Director UNDP-Pakistan at his office on April 29 and May 4, 2015 followed by several E-mails. However, no heed was paid to the improper recruitment and abuse of authority. The irony of the situation is that MOCC did never formally respond to any of our letters from April 2015 to-date. Instead, the MOCC started project implementation from June 2015 with the support of UNDP Pakistan excluding ECI completely from the project implementation process as a stakeholder. Considering ECI as a partner was out of the question. In addition to this, the ECI repeated requests none of the information about improper staff recruitment, abuse of authority, project steering committee constituted, project action plan developed, stakeholders’ workshops held and number of partners included/excluded has ever been provided to the ECI.” This is not the only strange story of connivance between the UNDP and a ministry of the Pakistan government. I have received several of the same type. Azhar Qureshi not only approached everyone in the UNDP from Pakistan to its headquarters, but also the Wafaqi Mohtasib and the President of Pakistan as well. Everyone refused to listen, saying “it’s not in our jurisdiction”. The ECI-POPs case shows that there is no room for justice when it comes to the embezzlement of millions of US dollars. Now the UNDP has advertised on its website to procure the services of a consultant for the mid-term review the POPs Pakistan project that was never executed in letter and spirit. Soon, the GEF will be provided with a third-party ‘mid-term review’, claiming everything is being done in a satisfactory manner. Here comes the responsibility of the GEF to cross-check the reports and activities of the projects they fund. Even the global funding agencies to the GEF should develop a mechanism to address such complex corruption mechanisms, where the UN agencies and the government departments are in connivance with each other. The writer is an Islamabad-based policy advocacy, strategic communication and outreach expert. He can be reached at devcom.pakistan@gmail.com. He tweets @EmmayeSyed Published in Daily Times, March 29th 2018.