UNITED NATIONS – After months of denials, the United Nations admitted yesterday that, in an exception to its own rules, it has paid for the legal defense of Benon Sevan. The U.N.’s own investigation panel denounced Mr. Sevan for his central role in the oil-for-food scandal that has engulfed the world body.

Questions regarding whether the U.N. would cover Mr. Sevan’s legal fees were raised soon after the name of the oil-for-food program chief appeared on a list published by the Iraqi newspaper al-Mada shortly after the start of the Iraq war. The newspaper accused world diplomats, businessmen, and U.N. officials of accepting bribes from Saddam Hussein in the form of oil allocations.

Up until late last week, the U.N. said it had not paid any of Mr. Sevan’s legal fees. But yesterday, U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard told The New York Sun that the U.N. had been paying his legal bills up until last month.

Mr. Eckhard refused to disclose the sum paid, saying that the legal bills submitted by Mr. Sevan “will be reviewed” by U.N. legal experts, indicating that the exact figure may change. Sources who refused to be named told the Sun, however, that the costs exceed $300,000. Mr. Eckhard did not address the source of the payment to Mr. Sevan’s legal team, which could come from an account financed by Iraqi oil revenues or from U.N. funds. Congress is investigating the oil-for-food scandal.

“On the advice of the [U.N.’s] office of legal affairs,” Mr. Eckhard said in a statement, “Benon Sevan’s request last year for support of his legal costs incurred in responding to [Paul Volcker’s independent committee] was agreed to.”

This was done “on an exceptional basis,” the statement acknowledged, “because of Mr. Sevan’s central role and the fact that the allegations dealt with the conduct of his official responsibilities. To facilitate his cooperation, it was felt there was a need to ensure that he could represent himself effectively and deal with the extensive enquiries of the panel.”

The payments to Mr. Sevan’s lawyers, Mr. Eckhard said, were stopped in February, when the U.N. was embarrassed by the findings of a committee nominated by Secretary-General Annan to investigate the scandal. The committee confirmed that Mr. Sevan had solicited oil allocations from Iraq and that Saddam Hussein’s regime believed it was “buying influence” inside the U.N. with the allocations.

In February, Mr. Volcker reported that his panel’s “most disturbing finding” involved Mr. Sevan, who had “placed himself in a grave and continuing conflict-of-interest situation.” After that, Mr. Eckhard’s statement said, Mr. Sevan “was informed that the U.N. was immediately terminating any further support for his legal costs.”

Mr. Sevan’s lawyer, Eric Lewis, said that Mr. Volcker’s report turned his client into a scapegoat. Mr. Lewis did not return telephone and e-mail requests yesterday for comment. A spokesperson for the Volcker committee declined comment as well. Sources told the Sun that the committee was unaware of the U.N. payments.

The new development in the scandal occurred as Mr. Annan presented an ambitious reform plan for the world body, which he hoped to have in place in six months. While some diplomats complained that Mr. Annan’s proposals catered too much to America, U.S officials were quick to contest his proposal for the Security Council, made in light of the impasse over the 2003 Iraq War. “We’re skeptical that any kind of resolution on the use of force would be helpful,” State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said yesterday.

Arab states object to defining terrorism as basis for a proposed convention on terrorism. “Terrorism and the right to resist foreign occupation should not be confused,” Algeria’s U.N. ambassador, Abdallah Baali, told the Sun.

Mr. Annan denied that his reform plan was intended as a distraction from scandals. “Obviously we have had a lot of criticism lately, particularly in this country,” Mr. Annan told reporters yesterday. “But we have important work to do, and we have carried on with that.” His drive for U.N. reform, he insisted, began “long before the criticism you refer to emerged.”

Mr. Annan called 2004 “a terrible year.” The organization was attacked for managing a peacekeeping force that exploited teen prostitutes in Africa, failing to combat genocide in Sudan, and was besieged by internal scandals.

U.N officials distanced themselves from Mr. Sevan, even as the former Annan confidant continued to demand that they cover his legal fees. The retired Mr. Sevan remains a U.N. employee, with a symbolic $1-a-year salary, to make himself available for questioning by an independent committee headed by Mr. Volcker.

Next Tuesday, Mr. Volcker’s oil-for-food panel will present a new interim report, which is expected to extensively detail the relations Mr. Annan’s son Kojo had with the program, a spokesperson for the panel told the Sun yesterday.