Analysis WIPO's Gurry should welcome an independent investigation of his deputy's allegations against him 11 May 14

RE: WIPO's Gurry should welcome an independent investigation of his deputy's allegations against him

To be fair, Joff, Gene Quinn did not merely link to Pooley's complaint. While a number of us in the blogging and journalistic sphere have a copy of the document, it is not publicly available, and it is pretty clear that it was leaked to Gene. You cannot simply 'link' to it, any more than I could. You need to publish it, and that is where you get into trouble!

I have made no secret of the fact that I believe this witch-hunt quite likely has its origins in domestic US political unrest about WIPO's role in providing technical assistance to North Korea and Iran, and forming closer ties with Russia and China (http://blog.patentology.com.au/2014/04/us-still-seething-over-wipo-computers.html). It would therefore be equally legitimate for an independent journalist to ask who leaked the Pooley document to Quinn, and why.

If the content of the document is untrue, then Gurry is within his rights to use defamation laws to restrict its publication and distribution. I agree that there is a clear public interest in having all of this resolved through an independent inquiry. The question is, with all of this political intrigue, how would we know that it was truly independent? We should hardly be surprised that South Korea is the country now joining the fray, if 'support' for North Korea is one of the major motivating factors behind all this. Given recent agitation along the North/South border, maintaining the relationship with the US must currently be a priority for Seoul.

The United Nations has been a hotbed of manipulation and skullduggery pretty much since its inception. We should not be surprised that WIPO is not immune from this. Transparency would be great. But this is not just about transparency over Gurry's actions. Pooley's motivations, and the role of the US in the whole affair, should also be put under the microscope.

RE: WIPO's Gurry should welcome an independent investigation of his deputy's allegations against him

Mark - thanks for your comments. In my eyes an independent and transparent investigation would be one conducted by someone whose appointment has been agreed by all the key players - including Francis Gurry - and whose remit has been similarly agreed. Potentially, part of the remit could be the investigation of how and why Pooley's allegations were made in the first place. You could be right that this is just a political stitch-up, but until everything is looked into we will not know. And I think Gurry deserves and should welcome the opportunity to put his case.

I profoundly disagree that Gurry and WIPO should have the right to threaten legal action and criminal prosecution against bloggers/reporters who merely publish/link to the allegations made by Pooley. They may be untrue, they may be scurrilous, but they have been made, on the record, by a senior member of the organisation Gurry runs. For me, that is the story right now - not who leaked the accusations in the first place. If others wish to pursue the leaker, that is up to them. For me, one of the most important jobs of a journalist (not sure about bloggers specifically) is to shine a light on stuff that is happening behind closed doors. After all, WIPO is a UN body, mostly funded by IP owners. They have a right to hold those who take their money, and whose wages they pay, to account. They can only do that if they have as clear a picture as possible of what is happening.