The decidedly disgraced former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Rajendra Pachauri, of whom one can only say that he must be a very slow learner – and a man of ever-changing stories – appears to have been off gallivanting around the globe, again. In no small measure, thanks to the co-operation and/or the blindness (you may take your pick!) of the IPCC’s “parent”, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).
You see, the UNEP also happens to be the “parent” of a little-known (if not completely unheard of) organization known as the International Ecosystem Management Partnership (IEMP) – at least according to their letterhead, which appears on a few pertinent documents, including an August 12 letter inviting Pachauri to a gathering of the IEMP in China – followed by his attendance at a gathering of an equally obscure Japanese organization, MUNIKATA (see p. 9 of .pdf) on Aug. 29 in Tokyo. He was there in March of 2014, as well:
From the “set of professional events and meetings” of the China gathering of the IEMP, one also learns that yet another IPCC-nik, Dr. Qin Dahe, who happens to serve (along with Thomas Stocker) as a Co-Chair of the IPCC’s Working Group I (WGI) was scheduled to have breakfast with Pachauri on Aug. 23 (see p. 7 of pdf).
Sorry, there’s no indication what the menu might have been at this Aug. 23 breakfast. In the absence of any information to the contrary, perhaps the purpose of this meeting was for Pachauri, a railroad engineer, to let Qin Dahe – a real scientist – know that he’s no longer the Chair of the IPCC. It’s certainly within the realm of possibility that the WGI Co-Chair didn’t get the memo sometime prior to March 5, 2015 when it was reported that:
Pachauri had conveyed in a letter to the UN Secretary General his decision to step down from his post some months before the completion of his term. He had served as IPCC chair for 13 years and had shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former US Vice President Al Gore for work on climate issues.
The UN Panel on climate change had also said that it cannot ignore the allegations against Pachauri but stressed that the organisation is in good hands and well prepared for the future as it seeks to focus on involving developing countries more closely in its work.
In fact – particularly in light of the above – after reviewing the rest of this “set of professional events and meetings”, I couldn’t find any item which could not have been dealt with by the WGI Co-Chair, all by himself!
As for the UNEP and the board of TERI (Pachauri’s purported “employer”) those powers that be should be utterly ashamed of themselves!
Not only have they disregarded poor ol’ Pachauri’s claimed inability to function more than “two hours per day”, by sending him on a flight that will last at least seven hours, but also subjecting him to what must surely be a gruelling schedule of “meetings” – at which, as noted above, his presence is far from necessary – for such an old man.
And I’m still very much in the dark regarding what appears to me to be an – albeit somewhat selective – cumbersome, lumbering process on the part of the court system in India. They have a law on the books regarding sexual harassment; yet from everything I’ve seen, to date, the courts seem to go out of their way to kowtow to a defendant’s ever-changing story.
YMMV, but I have great difficulty comprehending how they can respond so quickly to a defendant’s travel request; yet take so very long before actually adjudicating (in this instance, until December 8 of who knows what year?!) on the same defendant’s “recycled” whine – in effect an attempt to gag the press – regarding coverage of his self-serving antics and acrobatics.
Then again, it could well be December 8 of this year … which just happens to fall a few days prior to the end of COP21 in Paris. How very coincidental and convenient, eh?! Any bets on how many more “travel” requests from Pachauri will be submitted and approved in very short order between now and then?!
But far more importantly, what steps is the Delhi court taking to protect the interests of the complainant, a recipient of Pachauri’s unwanted attentions and multiple documented missives of the electronic kind – who long ago submitted her evidence, which has been confirmed during the course of the police investigations?