Non-Governmental Organizations: some new (very muscular) kids on the block

Non-Governmental Organizations (“NGOs”)[1] play an increasingly important role in the moulding of new international policies and their influence has grown dramatically in the last couple of decades[2]. The activity of NGOs has also become ever more international in nature,[3] as globalization has both created and revealed international issues which require the attention of the international community. Increasing international awareness of fields like human rights and environment, the establishment of powerful international organizations such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) together with improvements in sectors such as telecommunication and transportation, have all joined together and have turned the activities of international NGOs into living reality. Although not yet fully recognized as subjects of international law[4], NGOs are considered today as new emerging players in the contemporary international legal system[5].

The rising influence of NGOs brings about many questions and debates, mostly concerning democracy and representation. I would however, like to focus on another problem, one which is less of legal nature and more related to narrative, power and appearance. I would like to refer in this post to the fact that NGOs reputation as objective, impartial “watchdogs” may be improperly used by political actors and other agenda driven bodies. Political agendas, in my view, are not “wrong” and should not be excluded from the activity of NGOs. Politics and agendas are a legitimate part of the public sphere, and it would be quite naïve to expect their complete absence when topics such as human rights and environment are on the table. It could however, be very deceiving when one attempts to promote a certain agenda while simultaneously wearing the “NGO costume”, one of allegedly impartial do-gooder, ‘politics aside’ source of information.

Unlike lobby groups, NGOs enjoy certain status and reputation of impartiality. When a certain NGO publishes reports, its ‘non-governmental / neutral’ appearance gives the impression that its interests and motives are non-political and that the benefit of the public as a whole – and that alone – is its sole motivation[6]. A big part of NGOs’ persuasive powers relies on this narrative and consequently reports made by NGOs are often cited as indisputable sources of truth, both by politicians and academics.

But politics can often be found in the activity of NGOs, whether where the organization’s raison d’être is touched by politics, or where the people behind the NGO have driven it into the political sphere[7]. In either case, the NGOs’ appearance of impartiality may be misleading and serve as a cover for politically driven agendas. The United Nations has recognized the danger in such political motivated NGOs and stated in its UN rules that any “politically motivated acts against Member States of the United Nations” may serve as ground for revoking NGOs’ consultative status within the United Nations.[8] The activity of these NGOs are not banned, but their consultative value is recognized as low.

One name that is usually being mentioned in such discussion is that of George Soros, a billionaire, “businessman, philanthropist, and political activist”[9]. Mr Soros has publicly declared that defeating former president George W. Bush was the “central focus of my life,” “a matter of life and death.”[10] Mr Soros supports NGOs heavily, and on some occasions this support has been viewed as politically motivated.[11] When recalling a meeting with representatives of a certain NGO, Mr. Soros was quoted as saying “they were ready to kiss me”.[12] In my view, his potential influence on fund thirsty NGOs can be quite evident. Mr Soros is supporting many different NGOs (including research NGOs) through the Soros Foundations, though for the sake of fairness, it should be added that a highly respected employee of such supported research NGOs claims that Mr Soros has never attempted to influence NGOs research in any manner. It should also be added (inter alia for the sake of my own legal defence) that I do not accuse Mr Soros of any such influence, but rather that I am just trying to explain that politics, agendas and NGOs may be interlinked and that when relying on NGOs findings and reports, one should be aware of such connection. I only argue that we should be entitled to know.

I suggest here a two-folded process. First, I argue that a “fair discloser” process, not unlike the one used for judges and arbitrators, should take place. I contend that NGOs should reveal any appearance of political connections, the professional affiliation of their key members or main donors, lists of donors (including names and sums of money donated), attach a “fair discloser” page on their website, or in short, reveal any information that prima facia may be relevant for the public’s judgement of their findings. NGOs do supply us with their own interpretation of factual events and we, their audience and clients, should be able to apply our best judgement concerning the picture presented to us.

The Second stage I propose here relates to “enforcement”. I argue that there should be some supervisory mechanism that will reveal this prima facia information when such is not voluntarily disclosed. Why should the World Trade Organization (WTO) be subjected to close scrutiny by so many NGOs and Greenpeace to none? This is especially true as NGOs are becoming so powerful. With regard to the identity of the “enforcer”, who will be a better “watchdog” for NGOs activity than the watchdogs themselves? It is my hope than, that objective NGOs will rise up to the challenge and enforce higher standards of transparency.

Nothing in this post is written in order to throw mud in the face of NGOs; rather, the opposite is true. NGOs are important (even crucial) for any sort of development, and their work makes the world a better place to live in. However, I think that the NGO is a new powerful player in the international arena and that we should accordingly give it the attention it deserves.

[2] Vaughn Lowe, International Law (New York: OUP, 2007) [Lowe] at 17; Peter J. Spiro, “Non-Governmental Organizations and Civil Society”, in D. Bodansky, J. Brunnee & E. Hey, The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law (New York: OUP, 2007) 771 [Spiro].

[3] Steve Charnovitz, “Non-governmental organizations and international law” (2005) 100 American Journal of International Law 348 [Charnovitz] at 350.

[4] Anthony Aust, Handbook of International Law (Cambridge: CUP, 2005) [Aust] at 14-15. It should be noted that the term “subjects of international law” is changing and States are no longer considered as the only subjects of international law (see in Martin Dixon, International Law (New York: OUP, 2007) 113), and NGOs may join this list of subjects in the future. Some organizations such as the World Health Organization apparently already consider NGOs as subjects of international law, see online: WHO http://www.who.int/trade/distance_learning/gpgh/gpgh7/en/index3.html

[5] Lowe, supra note 2 at 17.

[6] See more on this issue at Robert C. Blitt, “Who will watch the watchdog?: International Human Rights Nongovernmental Organizations and the case for Regulation” (2004) 10 Buffalo Human Rights Law Review 261 [Blitt].

[7] See for example <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/opinion/20bernstein.html>. See also article and especially readers’ comments on this very tragic episode concerning “Rights and Democracy”: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/rights-groups-staff-demand-resignation-of-chair/article1429192/; See also John Bolton, “Should we take global governance seriously?” (2000) 1 Chicago Journal of International Law 205at 211.

[8] Article para 57 (a) of Resolution 1996/31, “Consultative relationship between the United Nations and non-governemtnal organizations”, the UN Economic and Social Council, July 25 1996, online: UN <http://www.un.org/documents/ecosoc/res/1996/eres1996-31.htm>; Charnovitz, supra note 3 at 359.

[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros

[10] http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost/access/443611991.html?FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Nov+11,+2003&author=Laura+Blumenfeld&pub=The+Washington+Post&edition=&startpage=A.03&desc=Soros’s+Deep+Pockets+vs.+Bush;+Financier+Contributes+$5+Million+More+in+Effort+to+Oust+President also available at http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2003%20News%20archives/November/13%20n/Soros’s%20Deep%20Pockets%20vs%20Bush%20Financier%20Contributes%20$5%20Million%20More%20in%20Effort%20to%20Oust%20President.htm

[11] See for example http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080201849.html

[12] See Supra note 10.

Share/Bookmark