E-MAIL THIS LINK
To: 

UN challenges U.S. Congress on oil, food probe
The Soap Opera continues.
The United Nations won the firstround of a skirmish against the U.S. Congress on Monday when a federal judge temporarily blocked a former investigator from distributing documents on the oil-for-food program for Iraq. U.S. District Judge Ricardo Urbina in Washington issued a 10-day restraining order against the investigator, Robert Parton, a former FBI agent, so both sides could have time to resolve the issue.

The restraining order was sought by Paul Volcker, head of a U.N.-appointed Independent Inquiry Committee (ICC) investigating fraud in the $67 billion humanitarian program. Parton resigned from the Volcker probe, saying he believed the committee's last report was not tough enough on U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan. On Thursday he turned over documents from the IIC to the U.S. House of Representatives International Relations Committee, led by Illinois Republican Henry Hyde. The suit seeks to force Parton to return the documents and not comply with subpoenas from two other congressional committees. Susan Ringler, counsel for the IIC, said in a supporting brief that the documents could "pose a grave risk to the safety of Iraqi witnesses, who if their names are disclosed, fear for their lives and the lives of their families."
This is not the reason so why are they so keen to get the documents back? I have to conclude they contain significant new evidence of wrongdoing.
A UN agency worrying about the lives of ordinary Iraqis? There's a first ...
But the U.N. complaint puts the inquiry committee on a collision course with the U.S. Congress where Republican legislators accuse the IIC of undue secrecy and Volcker says he has to protect the credibility of his investigation.
Credibility through secrecy, thats a new one.
I hadn't thought that Mr. Volcker needed the money, but I can't think of another reason why he got involved in this sordid affair ...
Lanny Davis, Parton's lawyer, said, that his client provided information to congress because he was forced to do so by a subpoena and would comply with the court's ruling. Parton, in his own statement, said he kept copies of "certain materials relating to the areas of the investigation for which I was responsible because of my concern that the investigative process and conclusions were flawed."
A damming statement if I ever heard one.
In the court documents, the U.N. brief said Parton had agreed, in writing to respect the confidentiality of the investigation, which he then violated. "In fact, however, Mr. Parton appears to have unlawfully removed large quantities of Independent Inquiry Committee materials," the U.N. complaint said.
Unlawfully? In which juristiction was this law enacted and by which elected representatives? If a US juristiction then thats up to a judge to decide. The UN has no laws, so it can't under a UN law.
An agreement is an agreement, however, and one that a US court (bound by law) will enforce. I sure hope Congressman Hyde can work a copying machine ...
Volcker on Friday offered a compromise to Congressional committees to allow Parton to give a one-off public statement. providing the materials were returned.
Don't sound like much of a deal.
Volcker, who will give a final report this summer, released an interim report on March 29 that said there was no evidence Annan had interfered in the awarding of a lucrative contract in Iraq to the Swiss firm Cotecna, which employed his son Kojo. But it said the secretary-general was lax in not investigating the possible conflict of interest when U.N. officials closed the probe after only 24 hours. "That non-finding is hardly an endorsement or exoneration," Volcker said, adding that, "On the basis of the facts reported, others may, and have, drawn other inferences."

Parton, however, said he disagreed with "the path the ICC chose to take." He said the documents allowed him to "be in a position to defend myself against risks that I knew existed as a result of the IIC Committee's actions."
A curious statement. Was he being set up somehow, in order to keep him quiet about things he knew?
Posted by: phil_b 2005-05-10
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=118792