he world is facing a polycrisis. Spreading wars, the threat of nuclear conflagration, rising repression, climate change, and searing economic inequality threaten to unravel centuries of human progress.
Why have things gone so wrong? From our perspective, the problem lies in the failure of global governance institutions. The UN and the International Monetary Fund–World Bank are out of touch with people’s needs and aspirations because they privilege state interests determined by political and economic elites. People around the world feel they have little say in how international decisions are made.
To pull us out of the polycrisis, global governance institutions need to urgently create better avenues for peoples' participation and oversight. Here, we present a handful of key reforms to democratize the UN and international financial institutions in the spirit of the opening words of the UN Charter which begins with the words, “We the Peoples.”
First, the UN needs a Citizens Initiative to create pathways for people to influence its most powerful bodies: the General Assembly and Security Council.
A citizens initiative would be the most direct means of enabling people to shape decisions at the UN. Currently, government representatives raise concerns to the UN for consideration and action. That means the UN only deals with the issues filtered through the prism of national interests determined by who controls the government of the day. But state interests don’t always align with people’s needs, and issues such as conflict, climate change or migration transcend borders.
The European Union has a Citizen’s Initiative which gives people the right to bring a legislative proposal before the European Commission. Proponents of such an initiative at the UN call for a minimum of 5 million signatures by people across multiple countries to bring an issue up for discussion.
In these times of rising authoritarianism and populism, the UN also needs a Parliamentary Assembly to enable directly elected people’s representatives to have a say in international decision making.
The problem with current voting patterns at UN bodies like the General Assembly and Human Rights Council is that diplomats representing countries mostly answer to their political executive rather than their country’s people. That leads to skewed–and often hypocrisy filled–voting patterns on crucial issues like the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Israel’s war in Gaza.
A parallel Parliamentary Assembly would thus bring people’s voices to the UN without existing bureaucratic filters.
The Campaign for a UN Parliamentary Assembly recommends starting with a consultative body to gain buy–in and legitimacy, before eventually becoming a world parliament alongside the General Assembly to issue binding decisions.
While a Citizens Initiative and Parliamentary Assembly represent significant upgrades to the current system, there are less radical reforms to increase people’s participation and oversight too. Chief among these is the appointment of a UN civil society envoy, which is one of the five demands of the UNMute Civil Society initiative.
Civil society organizations often speak for people’s interests, especially in countries where governments clamp down on civic space. But activists have long viewed UN decision–making as remote and inaccessible, full of bureaucracy with little transparency.
A designated envoy could champion our access in ways large and small by ensuring consistency across agencies and offices and by enhancing UN outreach to civil society.
Another key reform which would reduce state power at the UN in favor of people is weakening or eliminating the Security Council veto, either through voluntary relinquishment of veto powers or by allowing a General Assembly override.
Arbitrarily exercised by permanent members China, France, Russia, UK, and the U.S., the veto has become an obstacle to international cooperation, allowing the states that emerged victorious after World War Two to shield themselves or their allies from accountability for violating international norms. While veto reform would not directly give people a say at the Security Council, it would make it much harder for country representatives to back globally unpopular actions.
Like the UN, global financial institutions, especially the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, need crucial reforms to serve people around the world instead of a few powerful states. One place to start would be to diversify these institutions’ leadership beyond Europe and the US.
Turning these recommendations into reality will not be easy, but there’s a chance this year to make progress. In September, the UN will hold the Summit of the Future, described as a “once in a generation opportunity” to reform the global governance system. UN leadership and Summit co–facilitators Germany and Namibia should prioritize placing bold reform ideas like the ones above on the agenda.
Of course, it’s entirely possible that the Summit of the Future will fall victim to bureaucratic wrangling and the blatant assertion of national interests already impeding the multilateral system. But amid a polycrisis of global governance, the Summit is this year’s best chance to enable people, not just states, to make their voices heard at the UN.
a global affairs media network
The global polycrisis, empowerment, and governance reforms
The UN General Assembly Hall. Tiwana argues the UN should be influenced by people as much as by governments. Photo by Dano on Flickr under CC BY 2.0 DEED.
April 17, 2024
The world is facing a polycrisis, and that’s because our global governance institutions privilege state interests determined by political and economic elites. To fight the polycrisis, global governance institutions must be influenced not just by states, but by people, writes CIVICUS’ Mandeep Tiwana.
T
he world is facing a polycrisis. Spreading wars, the threat of nuclear conflagration, rising repression, climate change, and searing economic inequality threaten to unravel centuries of human progress.
Why have things gone so wrong? From our perspective, the problem lies in the failure of global governance institutions. The UN and the International Monetary Fund–World Bank are out of touch with people’s needs and aspirations because they privilege state interests determined by political and economic elites. People around the world feel they have little say in how international decisions are made.
To pull us out of the polycrisis, global governance institutions need to urgently create better avenues for peoples' participation and oversight. Here, we present a handful of key reforms to democratize the UN and international financial institutions in the spirit of the opening words of the UN Charter which begins with the words, “We the Peoples.”
First, the UN needs a Citizens Initiative to create pathways for people to influence its most powerful bodies: the General Assembly and Security Council.
A citizens initiative would be the most direct means of enabling people to shape decisions at the UN. Currently, government representatives raise concerns to the UN for consideration and action. That means the UN only deals with the issues filtered through the prism of national interests determined by who controls the government of the day. But state interests don’t always align with people’s needs, and issues such as conflict, climate change or migration transcend borders.
The European Union has a Citizen’s Initiative which gives people the right to bring a legislative proposal before the European Commission. Proponents of such an initiative at the UN call for a minimum of 5 million signatures by people across multiple countries to bring an issue up for discussion.
In these times of rising authoritarianism and populism, the UN also needs a Parliamentary Assembly to enable directly elected people’s representatives to have a say in international decision making.
The problem with current voting patterns at UN bodies like the General Assembly and Human Rights Council is that diplomats representing countries mostly answer to their political executive rather than their country’s people. That leads to skewed–and often hypocrisy filled–voting patterns on crucial issues like the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Israel’s war in Gaza.
A parallel Parliamentary Assembly would thus bring people’s voices to the UN without existing bureaucratic filters.
The Campaign for a UN Parliamentary Assembly recommends starting with a consultative body to gain buy–in and legitimacy, before eventually becoming a world parliament alongside the General Assembly to issue binding decisions.
While a Citizens Initiative and Parliamentary Assembly represent significant upgrades to the current system, there are less radical reforms to increase people’s participation and oversight too. Chief among these is the appointment of a UN civil society envoy, which is one of the five demands of the UNMute Civil Society initiative.
Civil society organizations often speak for people’s interests, especially in countries where governments clamp down on civic space. But activists have long viewed UN decision–making as remote and inaccessible, full of bureaucracy with little transparency.
A designated envoy could champion our access in ways large and small by ensuring consistency across agencies and offices and by enhancing UN outreach to civil society.
Another key reform which would reduce state power at the UN in favor of people is weakening or eliminating the Security Council veto, either through voluntary relinquishment of veto powers or by allowing a General Assembly override.
Arbitrarily exercised by permanent members China, France, Russia, UK, and the U.S., the veto has become an obstacle to international cooperation, allowing the states that emerged victorious after World War Two to shield themselves or their allies from accountability for violating international norms. While veto reform would not directly give people a say at the Security Council, it would make it much harder for country representatives to back globally unpopular actions.
Like the UN, global financial institutions, especially the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, need crucial reforms to serve people around the world instead of a few powerful states. One place to start would be to diversify these institutions’ leadership beyond Europe and the US.
Turning these recommendations into reality will not be easy, but there’s a chance this year to make progress. In September, the UN will hold the Summit of the Future, described as a “once in a generation opportunity” to reform the global governance system. UN leadership and Summit co–facilitators Germany and Namibia should prioritize placing bold reform ideas like the ones above on the agenda.
Of course, it’s entirely possible that the Summit of the Future will fall victim to bureaucratic wrangling and the blatant assertion of national interests already impeding the multilateral system. But amid a polycrisis of global governance, the Summit is this year’s best chance to enable people, not just states, to make their voices heard at the UN.
