Controversial Issues in the NGO Committee - Research Paper Example

?NGO Controversial Issues Introduction The United Nations has experienced numerous controversies concerning its relationship with non-governmental organizations. This is owing to significant challenges and influences that member nations have in regard to bias for and against certain NGOs. In addition, they arise owing to the different stances held by different organizations and member nations raising issues of competence and appropriateness for a given organization to be selected in a consultancy position, and enjoy the benefit emanating from the status. This paper seeks to explain the different controversies arising concerning the given factors and some of their effects. Consultative status NGOs, otherwise known as non-governmental organizations or civil society organizations, have been in existence for a long time. As a result, their needs have received recognition by intergovernmental organizations such as the United Nations. Therefore, they have been consulted since the inception of the United Nations under its original name, the League of Nations. Their consultative status was included in the United Nations charter under the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). Moreover, the goal of this council was to consult with non-governmental organizations on matters that concerned them creating an opportunity for the consultative status of NGOs. There are numerous NGOs with the consultative status at present, demarcating high placement status of NGO.1 However, controversy has rocked the placement of NGOs into this bracket of consultancy owing to the fact that the NGOs apply to be included in the consulting committees. The first significant controversial issue is the importance attached to NGOs due to their integration across the board in almost the entire United Nations system.2 This is owing to the fact that the UN is becoming highly dependent on NGOs to conduct field services and implement the resolutions that the UN passes. Despite the benefits it poses, this dependence shows the unbecoming nature of the UN in delegating responsibilities. The other issue concerning consultancy status is the impact that NGOs have on political outcomes.3 This is because for NGOs to advance that which they stand for, they require access to influential figures such as state delegates who hold the power to advance their objectives. Therefore, granting access to these influential leaders affects policymaking. Still, on consultancy, political interests influence the NGOs selected to have the status, sometimes. This is because the Committee on NGOs makes recommendation on which NGOs should take up a position, but the final decision is made by the ECOSOC. This brings up controversy due to the criteria used in making the final decision, based on either merit or political interests. For example, some members of ECOSOC have successfully stopped the approval of NGOs that have beliefs that go against the stances of the countries as seen in the cases of China and Cuba against the NGO, A Woman’s Voice International.4 In addition, there is the issue of separatism that is plied on some NGOs owing to political interests of some countries. Such include the Kurdish Human Rights Project that was branded as a separatist movement that did not stand for the needs of the people but instead was a political movement.5 In the application, the NGO withdrew owing to the fact that some members hold such prejudices and thus do not grant fair hearings in the application of consultancy status. Moreover, some NGOs raise controversy by going against the UN charter that allows them to be in the consultancy position they enjoy. This is by questioning the sovereignty of some nations or having ulterior motives concerning their application for the consultancy status. However, some nations bear the punishment of going against the UN charter in spite of not violating the rules that put them in the consultative position just as seen in the case of the Kurdish Human Rights Project.6 This means that most of the controversy found in the NGO committee is largely political and that any organization that happens to criticize or bear a stance going against that of member countries suffers punitive measures. This is by intimidating the NGOs or revoking the consultative status or denying new member bearing the belief membership.7 As a result, this proves how controversial membership of the NGO committee and attainment of consultancy status is. ECOSOC The ECOSOC, which stands for the Economic and Social Council, was created in 1945 and has a number of roles that are crucial to the running of the UN. To gain approval for participating in the consultative process with ECOSOC, any given NGO must meet a given criteria that is set by ECOSOC.8 In addition, there exist special consultative statuses for groups that have special competences in specified areas that are covered by ECOSOC. The other two organizations of NGO consultancy in ECOSOC are those of general and roster duty. In this case, roster duty applies only to those NGOs that do not qualify for general and special consultancy.9 However, in the carrying out of its duties, controversies have cropped up relating to the approval and disapproval of NGOs into consultancy status. This is because it is made up of 54 government members that each has their own agendas and set of values they stand for.10 In selecting the NGOs to approve, ECOSOC at times shows bias concerning the stance of the countries against that of the NGOs, which may be against their own ones. As a result, decision making sometimes is based on political interests, as mentioned earlier. In addition, due to the bias, there is no existence of a higher authority or framework to overturn any denial or suspension issued by ECOSOC.11 Therefore, the ECOSOC does what is in the interest of its own countries and not the good of the rest of the world as represented by the NGOs. In addition, the ECOSOC has made controversial decisions concerning issues relating to terrorism. This is owing to counter terrorism measure adopted in 2006 that affected human rights and the role of NGOs in protecting the interest of people. The other controversial issue is that of the vetting process and the submission of information. This is because all information provided to the ECOSOC is submitted by the individual NGO and is thus unverifiable.12 Therefore, there is no independent investigation conducted by the ECOSOC or the NGO committee to ascertain the information or guidelines set by the UN charter are followed accordingly. This creates a contentious issue as it makes the vetting process unfair and may lock out qualified NGOs. Veto powers Countries that are charged with vetoing policies within the UN have been the topic of substantial controversies relating to NGOs. This is following the authority they have and the significant failure they are involved in. For example, the five countries: China, France, UK, Russia and the USA, have been elected, at various times in the history of the UN, to veto for their own interests against the better counsel offered by NGOs.13 This is because the five countries view some recommendations by NGOs as violating their own interests in various parts of the world. This has brought up controversy concerning morality of following logical reasoning of NGOs in protecting the interests and well-being of the people on the ground. Countries holding veto power have on numerous occasions chosen to disregard the opinion offered by NGOs and protect their own political and economic interests. In addition, due to the veto power held by these countries, controversial issues have come up owing to the fact that as long these countries wield this power, justice cannot be served.14 In relation to this, these countries wield arbitrary power and are unwilling to comply with any of the United Nations resolutions and world treaties, as well as jurisdiction of international courts. Therefore, NGOs are of the opinion that as long as these countries hold this power, and they remain the world’s greatest weapon producers, the job that NGOs attempt to do will never be resolved. This is because the rule of law and democracy are threatened and this is particularly so in the most recent events taking place in Syria, where to curb the violence, only two countries vetoed sanctions against the regime perpetrating it.15 Additionally, another controversy is that of the stances taken by NGOs and the veto powers. This is in the form of policies dealing with disarmament projects, where NGOs call for all manner of arms, be it small arms or nuclear arms to be rid from the community.16 The conflicting issue is that it is these veto powers that hold the larger stakes in manufacturing these arms and in research involving nuclear bombs. However, countries that do not hold veto powers have a better chance of cooperating with NGOs, and thus no controversial issues have risen in their regard. Discrimination In addition, there is the approval issue that affects NGOs that fight for rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals.17 Most of the NGOs discriminated against by the UN, particularly ECOSOC, are above following the fact that they do not necessarily share the stance that the member countries of the ECOSOC and the NGO committee do. For example, due to the nature of groups that advocate freedom of expression and address the issue of terrorism, they are often labeled as separatist groups.18 This is an outright discrimination against a group that represents the needs of the society, and denying them access to influential policy makers capable of turning around the fortunes of their people. Moreover, not only does the UN and NGO relationship raise simple controversies, but also complex ones involving diplomatic rows. This is in the form of NGOs empowered by the UN to spread hatred among Semitic communities in the world.19 The other NGO discrimination issue is that of political correctness based on the members of ECOSOC. This is evidenced by practices engaged in some countries in approving NGOs for the consultative status in that as long as some of the leaders of an NGO are known to have political opinions that are in opposition to some countries, they stand a chance to lose out.20 The above is in spite of some of the ECOSOC members challenging opinions placed, which creates a highly contentious issue affecting the world and the UN as well. In addition to discrimination, some organizations are discriminated against owing to their origin and country of foundation. This is because countries from the third world are encouraged to join the consultative status rather than those from well-off countries.21 This denies countries with access to resources an opportunity to influence the world and effect changes. Concerning separatist issues, some have also faced punitive measures based on their beliefs. For example, those that do not follow the United Nations Charter are stripped of their consultancy status despite the charter having arbitrary interpretation. Conclusion Various controversies and controversial issues have marred the functioning of the United Nations in relation to NGOs. As a result, the UN has come under scrutiny of the public resulting from how they treat NGOs. Works Cited Aston, Jurij. The United Nations Committee on Non-governmental Organizations: Guarding the Entrance to a Politically Divided House. 2001. Web. 8 Jul. 2012. . Bayefsky, Anne. The UN-GO Connection: Spreading the Message of Hate and Terrorism. Bostrom, Lisa. Controversial Issues in the NGO Committee. August 2011. Web. 8 Jul. 2012. . Deen, Thalif. “‘Small-five’ Challenge ‘Big Five’ Over Veto Powers.” 2012. Web. 8 Jul. 2012. . Hartwick, Jeffrey. Non-Governmental Organizations at United Nations-Sponsored World Conferences: A Framework for Participation Reform. 2003. Web. 8 Jul. 2012. . United Nations. DPI/NGO Conference Calls on Governments, International Organizations to Create Effective Arms Trade Treaty, Nuclear-Weapon-Free World. 2009. Web. 7 Jul. 2012. http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2009/ngo682.doc.htm. UN-NGO Report. June 12, 2006. Web. 8 Jul. 2012. . Zettler, Angela. NGO Participation at the United Nations: Barriers and Solutions. December 2009. Web. 8 Jul. 2012. . Read More