Congressman Gregory Meeks of New York in an Oct. 21 statement bestowed unreserved praise on World Bank president Jim Yong Kim, stunning Black staffers at the World Bank who find these undeserved accolades groundless hyperbole at best, or an unqualified endorsement of the systemic dehumanization of African American staff and other people of color at worst.
Were African American staffers at the World Bank, as they have been for the past 70 years, slighted and again rendered invisible?
In his press release, Meeks announced that a high-level delegation from the Congressional Black Caucus, co-led by the good congressman and Congresswoman Gwen Moore of Wisconsin, discussed the Bank’s institutionalized racial discrimination. The meeting was attended by the chairman of the august Caucus, Congressman G. K. Butterfield.
“President Kim’s passionate commitment to mission is remarkable,” Meeks wrote. “I commend his understanding of the connection between having a diverse team and the success of the organization. I also applaud his successful efforts to increase diversity in the senior executive position throughout the institution.”
The congressman’s upbeat commendation was echoed by Congresswoman Moore. But was her assessment borne out by the reality at the Bank?
The results of the 2015 World Bank Staff Engagement Survey paint a starkly contradictory picture. Only 6 percent of the general staff participating in the survey “strongly agreed” that Kim’s administration “is taking action to improve diversity and inclusion.” Had the survey been restricted to Black staff, the 6 percent figure probably would have dropped to an infinitesimally smaller number, closer to zero.
The World Bank’s own 1998 report acknowledges that the Congressional Black Caucus has pressed the Bank since 1978 to address its endemic racism. The 1998 report documented that Blacks were “rated inferior” and segregated by the institution. The bank’s 2015 diversity report found that Black employees still “referred to their assignment as kind of apartheid.”
On a sliding scale of one to 6, with one representing a racist institution and 6 reflecting an anti-racist institution, the study found the bank “hovering between 2 and 3.” It noted that institutions occupying rated as a 2 “see racial differences as deficit.” Moreover, the report highlighted that the institution “is not open to those who question the status quo” and found the bank “lacking accountability to discriminated groups.”
Because the World Bank enjoys immunity from U.S. laws, the only legal avenue open to staff claiming discrimination is the World Bank Administrative Tribunal, an internal “court” that serves as an instrument of control for management to tamp down or silence racial dissent. Since its establishment in 1980, the Tribunal has summarily rejected all racial discrimination claims. This, in an institution that admits “Black staff members face inequitable treatment because of the color of their skin and the problem is serious.”
In one case, a Black Tribunal judge wrote a statement of apology to a victim of racial discrimination to whom he had denied justice. The judge admitted that he did not agree with the Tribunal’s judgment. Nonetheless, he still voted to summarily dismiss the case, writing that he “did not find it fit to dissent. I was not yet ready for such a momentous step.” Ostensibly, the momentous step was voting his conscience against the Tribunal’s policy of rejecting racial discrimination cases.
In reaction, the aggrieved staff member filed an appeal with the Tribunal to contest the violation of his due process rights, noting that the judge had failed to perform his judicial duties with the fidelity required of his position. President Kim’s administration filed a motion to dismiss the staff member’s appeal, arguing that “Allegations of due process violations by the Tribunal are not cognizable” under the Bank’s internal justice system. In May, the Tribunal accepted the Bank’s argument and summarily dismissed the appeal.
Although he is well aware of this case, Kim is vehemently opposed to resolving it or discussing any request about an alternative access to justice. His administration has gone as far as providing financial incentives to one of the leaders of the D.C. Civil Rights Coalition to persuade that individual to drop the Coalition’s demand for access to justice for Blacks at the World Bank. This is an unprecedented step in the bank’s 70-year history.
Another first for President Kim is his administration’s tampering with the bank’s diversity data to mitigate the seriousness of the problem. The bank’s former Director of Diversity, who served four presidents including President Kim, is on the record as stating: “The data is fudged now for obfuscation whereas it had been scrubbed for transparency, accuracy, depth and rigor. Now it is toyed with and massaged for optics. So sad…”
The visiting Congressional dignitaries may wonder why leaders of the Black affinity groups attending the high-level meeting acquiesced. Their silence proves an important point: President Kim’s unorthodox public relations charm offensive has successfully overwhelmed the senses of outsiders, and is matched in degree by the ruthless campaign of fear he wages. That campaign has at best silenced his internal critics, or at worst forced vulnerable World Bank staff to praise his leadership.
The “culture of fear pervades the World Bank Group” was decried in the Staff Association’s “Open Letter to President Kim,” released three weeks before the Congressional dignitaries visited the World Bank.
When it comes to the current state of racial affairs in the World Bank, the reality is best described in a revealing article in the Jan. 14 issue of the AFRO titled, “From 12 Years a Slave to Selma to Obama.” The author, an African American staff member who used a pseudonym to avoid retaliation, noted that institutional racism has “gotten worse under President Kim.” She concluded her article by declaring: “As an American citizen, a descendent of slaves, and as a current victim of institutional discrimination, I demand that my government accord me access to justice now, not some time in the future.”
This month, another well-documented article titled “World Bank Tribunal Rules a Black Man Has No Rights to His Identity,” provided a compelling picture of the Tribunal’s racist jurisprudence. The article noted that “the last time a Black man was stripped of his inalienable rights to his identity in the U.S. was during the institution of slavery.”
Currently, there are two U.S. Appropriations Acts, signed into law in 2012 and 2014, which require the World Bank to grant its staff access to justice through external arbitration or face the loss of U.S. funding. The laws were carefully crafted to avoid undermining the Bank’s longstanding immunity from U.S. courts. Two World Bank Committees have made similar recommendations in the past. Nonetheless, President Kim emphatically said “no.”
Far from facing a reduction in U.S. funding, President Kim is asking the US government to increase its financial support. As noted in the Oct. 4 issue of the Financial Times, he has the support of President Obama’s administration.
Because Congress controls the U.S. purse strings, President Kim needs the support of the Congressional Black Caucus, particularly those who are members of the House Financial Services Committee. The timing of the Congressional Black Caucus’s meeting, co-led by senior members of the Financial Services Committee, is most disturbing given that African Americans are the most blatantly underrepresented group—even among Americans.
Even more disturbing is the delegation’s praise for President Kim, who has yet to demonstrate that equality before the law is an inalienable birth right for all staff, not a matter of presidential largesse or discretion.
Dr, Martin Luther King fought and died so that African Americans would gain equality under the laws affecting every aspect of their lives, most importantly in securing justice—economic, political, and social. We should not tolerate it when President Kim reduces the significance of Dr. Martin Luther King by making Dr. King’s life’s work only about fighting for job opportunities.
Rewarding the World Bank with additional funding before it honors the inalienable due process rights of its African American and other Black staff would be tantamount to betraying and dishonoring America’s civil rights heroes, who died fighting for recognition of their full humanity under the law.