According to the World Bank ethics committee report, the most serious transgression by Paul Wolfowitz was defending himself.
At the surface is Wolfowitz's role in arranging a job transfer and pay raise for his longtime companion, Shaha Riza, who worked in the bank's Middle East department at the time he took over as President. The World Bank ethics committee decided that situation presented a conflict of interest, and that a transfer for Riza should be arranged.
It was a task from which Wolfowitz had asked to be recused, but his request was denied. But after instructing him to take charge of the situation personally, the committee said he should have delegated it and that the raise given Riza was excessive.
The Washington Post seems to be on the side of the bank. In its description of events it presents Wolfowitz as seeking to place blame on others.
Wolfowitz effectively blamed Riza for his predicament as well, saying that her "intractable position" in demanding a salary increase as compensation for her career disruption forced him to grant one to pre-empt a lawsuit.
But according to the bank's investigating committee, the real sin is that Wolfowitz has defended himself.
The report reserved its sharpest judgment for the public struggle Wolfowitz has waged to save his job in recent weeks, criticizing the bank's probe in the press.
"It has turned an internal governance matter into an ugly public relations campaign," the report said, asserting that in unleashing "public attacks," Wolfowitz "denigrates the very institution he was selected to lead."
How unforgivable that public charges of corruption and nepotism weren't refuted with a little more discretion.
Comments