enjoy as part of your ACUNS membership
quarterly Newsletter issue 4 > 2017
domesticating sustainable development goals (SDGs) in africa
special feature:
the potential of a global public lottery for better global governance
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association
connect with us
Q > contents quarterly
feature one
Domesticating sustainable development goals (SDGs) in africa | 3 Hopestone Kayiska Chavula | UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
special feature
the potential of a global public lottery for better global governance | 5 Kuzi Charamba | One Earth Future’s Shared Resources program
feature two
Report of the special rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association | 7 Annalisa Ciampi | UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; Professor of International Law, University of Verona; and Visiting Professor of European Human Rights Law at the Monash University (Prato Centre, in Italy).
Photo: www.luiss.edu
plenary sessions include: Plenary I Push and Pull: Understanding and addressing the root causes of mass displacement and migration
Plenary II State Responsibilities, Human Vulnerabilities: Mitigating the consequences of mass displacement and migration Plenary III The UDHR at 70: The UN system, human rights and global governance
human rights, migration, and global governance 2018 acuns annual meeting
Thursday – Saturday > July 12–14, 2018 LUISS University, Rome, Italy Hosted by Libera Università Internazionale degli Studi Sociali Guido Carli
welcome to acuns
starting point secretariat staff
Expansive growth and learning opportunities arrive by way of enriching our cultural network
Executive Director, ACUNS Associate Professor, Wilfrid Laurier University T > 226.772.3167 E > aedgar@wlu.ca
Co-ordinator T > 226.772.3142 F > 226.772.0016 E > bburns@wlu.ca
Gwenith Cross, Program Support T > 226.772.3121 E > gcross@acuns.org
Board members 2017-2018
ACUNS is governed by an international Board of Directors: Chair: Lorraine Elliott, Australian National University Chair Elect: Roger Coate, Georgia College Vice Chair: Charlotte Ku, Texas A&M University School of Law Vice Chair: Kurt Mills, University of Glasgow Ingvild Bode, University of Kent Stephen Browne, Graduate Institute, Geneva Eunsook Chung, Sejong Institute Annalisa Ciampi, University of Verona Cristián Gimenez Corte, Universidad Nacional del Litoral Mary Farrell, University of Plymouth Otto Spijkers, Utrecht University
quarterly newsletter
news & opinions
The best way to predict the future is to create it. Peter Drucker
Alistair Edgar
Brenda Burns,
up2date
Dr. Alistair Edgar, ACUNS
This week as I am preparing my brief commentary for the final Newsletter of 2017, we are hosting the next Secretariat team here at the Balsillie School of International Affairs in Waterloo, Canada. Mike Hardy, Math Noortmann, and Thea Gibbs from the Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations (CTPSR), Coventry University, are here to discuss governance, administration, and other related issues as we work together to ensure a transition that will be not just ‘smooth’ or ‘seamless’ but dynamic and energizing for ACUNS. Over the next 6–8 months, we will introduce more about the work of the CTPSR team, with Math fully taking over the role of Executive Director of ACUNS in July 2018. As a reminder, additional details about the transition can be found here: http://acuns.org/next-host/ In the meantime, we are continuing to build our Annual Meeting for July 2018 in Rome, and we are reaching out to keynote and plenary speakers who we hope to confirm and add to the program in the near future. Please keep an eye out for additions, and of course please submit your Workshop Panel and Paper proposals as soon as you have them ready: http://acuns.org/am2018/ Ten days ago I had the privilege and pleasure of attending the Annual Convention of the Mexican International Affairs Association, held at Universidad del Mar, in Huatulco. There were three days of excellent discussions, and I had the opportunity to connect for the first time with many scholars who I hope might consider also choosing to join ACUNS and add their voices into our network. We will be exploring avenues to build on our co-operation with the Association, as Mexican scholars were critical partners in the Council—the event was hosted and supported by Professor Modesto Seara Vázquez, a veteran of the Council from its earliest days who you may have heard interviewed by Margaret Karns in a recent ‘ACUNS at 30’ podcast: http://acuns.org/acuns-at-30-karns-seara-vazquez/ Next week, I will join Sukehiro Hasegawa, who directs our ACUNS Liaison Office in Tokyo, http://acuns.org/tokyo-liaison-office/ for the 17th East Asian Seminar on the United Nations System that will bring together UN scholars from the UN studies associations of Japan, China and South Korea. I am—at time of writing, it still is in the future—looking forward to seeing again those scholars who I have come to know increasingly well over the past several years, and also to meeting new participants in this very welcome regional gathering. Here again, Math Noortmann will join us as part of our transition work. Join us in Rome, in July 2018—and perhaps before then, I will meet with many of you at other events and conferences, including in San Francisco for the meeting of that ‘other’ association!
Publisher: Alistair Edgar, Executive Director, ACUNS
AC U N S S ecre tariat
Issue 4 > 2017
Editors: Brenda Burns, Co-ordinator, ACUNS Gwenith Cross, Program Support, ACUNS
Academic Council on the United Nations System (ACUNS) Quarterly Newsletter is published four times a year with the support of the Department of Communications, Public Affairs & Marketing (CPAM) at Wilfrid Laurier University.
Contributing Writers: Hopestone Kayiska Chavula, Kuzi Charamba, Annalisa Ciampi, Alistair Edgar, Brenda Burns and Gwenith Cross
Wilfrid Laurier University 75 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2L 3C5
We welcome and encourage your feedback. Opinions expressed in ACUNS Quarterly Newsletter do not necessarily reflect those of the editor, ACUNS or the host institution.
Imagery: Thinkstock.com
© ACUNS 2017. All rights reserved.
T > 226.772.3142 F > 226.772.0016
Design: Dawn Wharnsby, CPAM
Send address changes and feedback to: Gwenith Cross, Program Support, ACUNS E > gcross@acuns.org T > 226.772.3121
A C U N S q uar t erl y ne w sle t t er > issue 4 > 2 0 1 7
acuns . or g 2
designing and shaping a pathway
feature one
Feature story > h o p e s to n e k ay i s k a c h av u l a macroeconomic policy division, UN economic commission for africa (UNeca)
domesticATING sustainable development goals (SDGs) in africa
SDGs and Agenda 2063 goals
The integrated nature of the SDGs provides a foundation and promise for inclusive growth in Africa: from the elimination of poverty and hunger, to quality basic services, infrastructure, industry, technology, and urbanization, to environmental sustainability, peace and security. The lessons from implementing policies towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have created a solid foundation and underlay the importance of global and regional development frameworks in shaping governments, civil society, and development partners’ efforts towards common goals for promoting economic development and countries’ transformation. The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in September 2015 followed the adoption of the Africa’s Agenda 2063 in January of the same year, signaling a two-pronged transition at both the global and regional levels. The transition from the MDGs to Agenda 2030 occurred at a global level and the transition from the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD)—the continent’s premier development framework aimed primarily at poverty alleviation and promotion of economic growth and sustainable development—to Agenda 2063 at the continent-level (AU, ECA, AfDB, and UNDP, 2016).1 Both agendas are deemed instrumental in designing and shaping the continent’s development pathway in the foreseeable future, particularly in relation to its aspirations for sustainable and inclusive economic growth, poverty eradication, and structural transformation. Agenda 2030 and Agenda 2063 are underpinned by an extensive consultation process and share common aspirations of structural transformation and sustainable development; however, the two Agendas are not identical. For both, implementation requires effective advocacy work, coherent integration into countries’ national development plans, and effective monitoring and evaluation frameworks.
1 AU (African Union), ECA (Economic Commission for Africa), AfDB (African Development Bank) and UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) (2016). MDGs to Agenda 2063/SDGs - Transition Report 2016. UNECA, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
3
agenda 2063 is a strategic framework
for the socio-economic transformation of the continent over the next 50 years building on, and seeking to accelerate, the implementation of past and existing continental initiatives for growth and sustainable development.
it espouses structural transformation and people-centred development, underpinned by strengthened productive capacities, especially in agriculture, industry and science technology, and innovation (AU, 2015)
SDGs
—a component of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development—are anchored by the key objective of achieving inclusive growth and development, and promoting progress on the three dimensions of sustainable development; economic, social, and environmental.2 Agenda 2063 is a strategic framework for the socio-economic transformation of the continent over the next 50 years building on, and seeking to accelerate, the implementation of past and existing continental initiatives for growth and sustainable development.3 The agenda is driven by a vision of an integrated, prosperous and peaceful Africa, driven by its own citizens and representing a dynamic force in the international arena. It espouses structural transformation and people-centered development, underpinned by strengthened productive capacities, especially in agriculture, industry and science technology, and innovation (AU, 2015).
range of stakeholders including governments, civil society, academia, etc. ECA and its development partners played a significant role in all these processes including the identification of Africa’s priorities for Agenda 2030, which ultimately resulted from the CAP. Through the negotiations, Africa ensured that many of the priorities identified in CAP were taken into consideration by the SDGs. It is important to note that at the continental level, Agenda 2063 spells out Africa’s development aspirations and goals which emanate from the CAP, most of which extend beyond the SDGs. This outcome was the result of Africa’s active, and by all indications, successful engagement in the intergovernmental negotiations on the post-2015 development agenda.
The Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) in collaboration with its development partners African Union (AU) and the African Development Bank (AfDB) played a significant role in Africa’s proactive contribution to Agenda 2030 by formulating a Common African Position (CAP) on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, which was preceded by broad consultations across the continent. The process led to the development of the only document that represented a united African voice in the formulation of SDGs. Consequently, there is a high degree of convergence between the continent’s priorities as stipulated by the Agenda 2063 and the SDGs.
The summit marking the Golden Jubilee of the Organization of African Unity (OAU)/African Union was held in May 2013 and led to the formation of AU’s Agenda 2063. ECA was among the five organizations tasked by this AU Summit on the occasion to prepare a 50-year continental agenda through a people-driven process. The continent re-dedicated herself to the attainment of the Pan African Vision of an integrated, prosperous, and peaceful Africa, driven by its own citizens on the global arena.3 After the adoption of the Agenda 2063 Framework Document by the Summit in January 2015, it directed the AUC to prepare the First Ten-Year Implementation Plan of Agenda 2063 (2013–2023). This plan, the first in a series of five ten-year plans over the fifty year horizon, was adopted by the Summit in June 2015 as a basis for the preparation of medium term development plans of member States of the Union, the Regional Economic Communities, and the AU Organs.6
ECA played a significant role in ensuring that most of Africa’s priorities took the SDGs into consideration. This approach began with the formation of CAP on the post-2015 development agenda. Its formation followed a decision at the AU Summit for African development institutions to identify Africa’s priorities for the post2015 agenda through a consultative process. Africa is the continent with the most pressing development challenges that require global attention, yet Africa had not been fully and effectively consulted in the preparation and formulation of MDGs.4 CAP was developed through a consultative process that had begun in 2011 and involved a wide
As one of the programs pertaining to the implementation of the Agenda 2063 goals, ECA is at the forefront of developing an integrated toolkit, the Integrated Planning and Reporting Toolkit (IPRT), to harmonize the domestication of the SDGs and Agenda 2063 in the countries’ national planning frameworks and to reduce the transaction costs of reporting on both strategies. The tool is designed to help in aligning Agenda 2030/SDGs and Agenda 2063 goals with a country’s national planning framework. It also includes a module that facilitates tracking of a country’s performance towards the achievement of both agendas’ goals both at national and sectoral levels. The tool has Continued on page 9 >
2 United
Nations (2016). The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2016. Department of Social Affairs. New York.
3 Some
of the past and current initiatives it builds on include: the Lagos Plan of Action, The Abuja Treaty, The Minimum Integration Programme, the Programme for Infrastructural Development in Africa (PIDA), the Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP), The New partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), Regional Plans and Programmes and National Plans. It is also built on national, regional, continental best practices in its formulation. 4 AU
(2014). “African Common Position on the Post-2015 Development Agenda.” Adddis Ababa, Ethiopia.
5 AUC
(African Union Commission) (2015). “Agenda 2063, The Framework Document: The Africa we want”. AUC, Addis Ababa.
6 The
AU has put in place many important organs, such as the Pan-African Parliament; the African Court of Justice; the Commission on Human and Peoples Rights; the Peace and Security Council; and the Economic, Social, and Cultural Council.
A C U N S q uar t erl y ne w sle t t er > issue 4 > 2 0 1 7
acuns . or g 4
the potential of a
global public lottery for better global governance
SPECIAL FEATURE
The idea of an engaged global demos is ripe. Globalization processes have facilitated an unprecedented level of connectivity among groups and individuals. Nevertheless, our systems of global governance suffer from fundamental limitations: its institutions, events, and fora, ranging from the United Nations, to Davos, and the Financial Stability Board, are exclusive and elitist, lacking in transparency and accountability. There is a democratic deficit in that individuals have limited, if any, ability to engage in the decision-making processes that determine the allocation of scarce resources to address issues of global concern. This deficiency in an age of unprecedented interconnectivity underscores the necessity of reimagining an alternative system that responds more directly and explicitly to the shared concerns and realities of individuals both locally and globally. This is a thought piece that presents a potential avenue towards an inclusive and effective conception of global governance—one that incorporates a greater number of individuals and social groups into decision-making processes, and also provides them with the means to act upon and effect those collective decisions, funded through a global public lottery. the challenges of global governance Governance is defined as “the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and co-operative action may be taken. It includes formal institutions and regimes empowered to enforce compliance, as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either have agreed to or perceive to be in their interest.”1 The notion of global governance is an application of this definition that is meant to be in response to and in service of concerns whose resolution could be better achieved by actions that transcend states’ territorial borders and their regulatory institutions. The problem is that there is an acute lack of representation, transparency, and accountability in those processes. Individuals and social groups who are impacted by global phenomena—such as climate change, conflict, and migration—are limited in their ability to share their lived experiences and constructively engage in responses to these phenomena. Such a governance system is a cause for concern for multiple reasons. The first concern is representation. Global governance processes typically are engaged in by state actors and state-based institutions, transnational enterprises, and civil society organizations. While this spread of actors often is thought to provide adequate representation of
the various voices, it falls short. National citizens are rarely offered the opportunity to express their opinions through their state representatives at negotiating tables; transnational enterprises work primarily in the service of their shareholders; and civil society organizations, while operating in the service of members around the world, are limited in the issue areas that they may address, where and how they can do so, and often are beholden to the direction of their financiers. Global governance, as it is currently formulated, is a more progressive form of decision-making on a global space than what previously existed. But much more could be done to increase the range of voices in this process and to be more inclusive, both procedurally and substantively. The second concern with current global governance processes is the lack of transparency. It is difficult to know what is discussed, where the cleavages among decision-makers lie, and how decisions are reached when these take place in corridors and behind closed doors. This remains as true at the United Nations as it is in national politics and financial agencies. These decisions, however, impact us all. Consequently, there is a need and a practical interest to promote greater transparency and to ensure that the diverse stakeholder interests that are invested in this process can appreciate the complexity of the challenges under discussion and have an avenue to engage constructively in that process. The third concern is the matter of accountability, or its failure. Once the actors that participate in these global governance fora agree upon actions to address shared concerns, it can be difficult
> Kuzi charamba project manager, shared resources program, one earth future
there is a disconnect in the way that our global governance system responds to local experiences and global realities.
to trace the impact of their initiatives and to hold the actors to account for any inefficiencies or ineffectiveness. Individuals as taxpayers, for example, are represented by their state officials, just one voice at the negotiating table. A continuing dialogue between individuals and their state representatives on what was agreed and how they are working to implement or abide by their agreement, still is needed. While the UN may tout the Millennium Development Goals as a success, the vast majority of people likely do not know exactly what was sought, what their government did, and whether it was achieved—or how and why the efforts fell short, and by how much. Finally, current global governance processes promote profound asymmetries of information. Despite living in the ‘information age’, data and information still are concentrated within the grasp of a few actors. Reports and statistics, if not confidential, are produced in a manner that is inaccessible to a broader class of individuals.2 This has the effect of limiting the extent to which individuals beyond the actors present at global governance fora can participate meaningfully in the discussions that shape policy. There is a disconnect in the way that our global governance system responds to local experiences and global realities. Yet, it is hard to imagine a scenario in which the current predominant actors of global governance fora would allow for the participation of more people, let alone to grant or to cede to them any portion of the decision-making power and influence that they enjoy. If those actors will neither retreat nor cede decision-making power, then one useful Continued on page 9 >
1 The Commission on Global Governance, Our Global Neighbourhood, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995, p. 4. 2 A World Bank study found that nearly one-third of their reports had never been downloaded and that another 40 per cent
5
acuns . or g
of their reports had been downloaded fewer than 100 times. See Christopher Ingram, “The solutions to all our problems may be buried in PDFs that nobody reads”, The Washington Post, 8 May 2014.
acuns annual meeting call for papers - workshop panels
AM18
12-14 july, 2018 LUISS University | Rome, Italy For Secretary-General António Guterres, who was the High Commissioner for Refugees for a decade (2005–2015) before being elected to lead the UN, one of the most pressing issues currently facing the world body is the large-scale voluntary and involuntary (forced) movement of people across borders. While 2018 marks the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, political, economic, and environmental dysfunction and collapse in their own countries has driven a record high number of people to seek a safer or better life elsewhere. Equally present especially in the West, have been counter-reactions to immigration based on political, social, economic, and security concerns. One reason the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union, with Prime Minister Theresa May triggering “Brexit”, is because of voters’ concerns over the perceived threat of uncontrollable migration. President Trump likewise won office in the US election in part by appealing to many American voters’ fears of immigrants – whether from Mexico (the ‘wall’) or from conflict zones such as Syria. The global governance and human rights issues in this contemporary era are manifest and complex. The Sustainable Development Goals will be impossible to achieve in the context of state failure, political conflicts, major climate disruptions, and mass population displacements. The rights of citizens also must be balanced against the rights of those fleeing persecution and desperation; more often, the latter are disregarded as populist movements refocus national discourses away from cosmopolitan ideals. These complex ‘wicked problems’ present severe contemporary challenges for the institutions, as well as the idea (and ideals), of global governance. The full text of the Call for Papers is available at acuns.org/am2018/
Annual Meeting theme
Applicat ion P rocedure
human rights, migration, and global governance The Academic Council on the United Nations System (ACUNS) is now accepting workshop paper and panel proposals for presentation at 2018 Annual Meeting. Proposals on the Annual Meeting theme— “Human Rights, Migration and Global Governance”—and on the subthemes and issues raised in this introductory note, in addition to other topics relating to the UN system and the broader mandate of the Council, will be considered. Current ACUNS members in good standing (including new or newly-renewed members) will be given priority consideration for their proposals, but non-members are welcome to submit proposals. The deadline for uploading your proposals is Monday, February 5, 2018.
Submissions: To submit an individual proposal or a full panel proposal, you will be required to upload full contact information, the paper/panel title(s), abstract(s) of no more than 200 words, biographical note(s) of no more than 200 words, and biographical notes of no more than 250 words. Proposals:
All proposals will be evaluated immediately after the submission deadline, and notifications will be sent as soon as possible thereafter.
Registration: Once your proposal is accepted you are required to register for the 2018 Annual Meeting at acuns.org/am2018/
Questions? > Please contact the ACUNS Secretariat at admin@acuns.org or 226.772.3121 For general questions about the Council and its activities, please contact: Dr. Alistair D. Edgar, Executive Director, ACUNS, Wilfrid Laurier University
Information about registration fees is available online at
acuns.org
T 226.772.3167 E aedgar@wlu.ca
A C U N S S ecre t aria t > Wilfrid Laurier University, 75 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3C5 > T 226.772.3121 > F 226.772.0016 acuns . org
A C U N S q uar t erl y ne w sle t t er > issue 4 > 2 0 1 7
acuns . or g 6
upholding the mandate for action
feature two
> Ann a l i s a C i a m p i UN Special Rapporteur; Professor of international law, University of verona; visiting professor of european human rights law at the monash university (Prato centre, Italy)
special report
report
of the special rapporteur
on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association 1 Note by the Secretary-General The Secretary-General has the honour to transmit to the General Assembly the report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, Annalisa Ciampi, submitted in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 32/32. Summary At its thirty-fourth session, the Human Rights Council appointed Annalisa Ciampi as Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; she formally took up her role on 1 May 2017. In the present report, the Special Rapporteur outlines her vision of the mandate established by the Council in its resolution 15/21, building on the work of the previous mandate holder.
as
a consequence of, and in line with, the vision outlined in section III the present section details the Special Rapporteur’s specific plan of action and the methodology of her work. Considering the wealth of thematic research and recommendations produced in the first six years of the mandate, it is of utmost importance for the Special Rapporteur to increase the visibility of and disseminate this work, together with her future work, as broadly and widely as possible, so that it is known and used both internationally and at the national level to advance the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association. Another defining feature of her work will be strategic litigation in national, regional and international courts. The Special Rapporteur considers that litigating in cases that raise issues of freedom of peaceful association and of assembly before national, regional and international courts not only fully complements the advocacy and policy work associated with her mandate, but also will be key to building State practice, alongside and in addition to thematic reports, country visits, communications and awareness-raising. In the following paragraphs, the Special Rapporteur details how she intends to exploit the full potential of the tools within the purview of special procedures mandate holders, in addition to developing new, innovative tools.
1 This is an extract from the complete report which can be downloaded on the UN-OHCR website at http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?m=189
7
thematic reports
are soft law instruments whereby mandate holders contribute to the effectiveness and progressive development of international law. For the purpose of enhancing the visibility of her mandate, the Special Rapporteur intends to strengthen the content of the mandate website. She also intends to develop additional user-friendly tools to help the general public to better understand the findings and recommendations. The Special Rapporteur considers reports, especially thematic reports, to be of the utmost importance, not merely rhetorical exercises. Thematic reports are soft law instruments whereby mandate holders contribute to the effectiveness and progressive development of international law. For thematic reports to be relevant and not dead letters, they need to be firmly based on State practice and on the practice of other relevant international actors. To that end, the Special Rapporteur will seek the views of a broad range of diverse voices from all relevant stakeholders, including regional and subregional mechanisms. This will be done, inter alia, through calls for submissions and consultations. A total of 117 Member States and one non-member observer State have extended a standing invitation to thematic special procedures mandate holders. The Special Rapporteur will work in close cooperation with the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review to ensure that all Member States extend a standing invitation to mandate holders. She will also endeavour to ensure that each standing invitation corresponds to an actual request for a country visit by the mandate holder. A number of requests have already been sent to Member States, so that an invitation can be extended to the Special Rapporteur.2 She will reiterate those requests. She will also ensure that all Member States are given an opportunity to cooperate with her and thereby to engage in the work of the Human Rights Council, including States that have thus far failed, or have not been given the opportunity, to do so. Communications and press releases are formidable tools in the hands of mandate holders. The Special Rapporteur intends to continue to use communications, in the form of letters of allegation and urgent appeal letters, to bring to the attention of States and the international community alleged violations of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association with regard to individual cases and practices, as well as draft legislation and policies, which may restrict those rights in ways incompatible with international human rights norms and standards.
In the first few months of her work, she has already engaged in fruitful discussions with other relevant mandate holders on how to streamline communications and make them more effective. She will pay particular attention to the follow-up to her communications. The media will be accessed and used whenever it is truly believed that drawing public attention to specific situations has a reasonable prospect of either improving the promotion and protection of the freedom of peaceful assembly and of association for the people on the ground or of preventing their violation. The Special Rapporteur will continue to cooperate with civil society and nongovernmental organizations that have been working closely with the previous mandate holder, with a view to deepening and further developing existing partnerships. Efforts have already been made to open new channels of cooperation with other international, regional, national and local actors, including academic and research organizations, business networks and numerous other stakeholders. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, litigating in national, regional and international courts is essential to building international practice, which is exactly the practice that is needed to contribute to the emergence and definition of standards, the assessment of compliance therewith and the promotion of their implementation. She will therefore strive to participate in litigation, mainly, but not exclusively, as amicus curiae, legal expert and third party intervenor, in cases where the rights to freedom of peaceful association and of assembly are at stake. Therefore, and as part of her working methods, the Special Rapporteur sees it as part of her duty to take part in strategic litigation cases before national, regional and international courts where issues relating to freedom of peaceful association and of assembly come to the fore. Accordingly, she is seeking engagement for litigation. In order to raise awareness among relevant stakeholders and the public at large, the Special Rapporteur seeks the cooperation of professional associations, non-governmental organizations and their networks, as well as other relevant stakeholders and any other parties who have knowledge of cases involving assembly and association issues. A call for submission to that effect can be found on the mandate website.3
Moreover, while various professional associations and non-governmental organizations will be able and willing to provide support on a case-by-case basis, the Special Rapporteur seeks specialized human resources to establish a legal clinic to provide the legal research and drafting services needed for the preparatory work for the actual filing of amicus curiae briefings and expert opinions. Information on activities carried out in this context will also be made available through the Special Rapporteur’s website. The Special Rapporteur is aware of her responsibility as a mandate holder vis-à -vis the Human Rights Council in determining whether and how the Council should respond to a situation of concern in accordance with objective and human rights-based criteria such as those elaborated in joint statements delivered at the Council, for example, those made by Ireland at its thirty-second session, by Maldives at its twentieth session and, most recently, by the Netherlands at its thirty-fifth. That responsibility is one that she takes very seriously when she recommends that the Council consider action to prevent, respond to or address violations and to assist in the de-escalation of a situation of concern. More generally, her mandate has an important prevention and early warning role to play in the discharge of the responsibility to protect, as it is uniquely placed to collect a wealth of information on issues linked to the freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, including gaps in protection, swiftly deteriorating situations and the scale, the nature and patterns of violations. The Special Rapporteur will, when necessary, call the attention of the relevant bodies, including the Security Council, to such situations and request that they address, and take immediate action in response to, the risks and violations identified. The Special Rapporteur will continue to work with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the rights to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, with whom there already exists a well-established pattern of close cooperation. At the same time, she will engage with other relevant mandate holders with a view to coordinating efforts, while avoiding overlapping and duplication of work. Expanding civic space is part of the global vision of OHCHR and is likely to remain so for the coming four years (2018–2021). She will, Continued on page 10 >
2 See the web page on country visits, which contains lists of requests sent, invitations received and visits conducted by the Special Rapporteur, available from www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Assembly Association/Pages/CountryVisits.aspx. 3 See
www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/AssemblyAssociation/Pages/StrategicLitigationNational RegionalInternationalCourts.aspx.
acuns . or g 8
Domesticating sustainable development goals (SDGs) in africa
the potential of a global public lottery for better global governance
Continued from page 4 >
Continued from page 5 >
already been used in aligning these agendas’ goals based on Ethiopia’s Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP-II). ECA used the IPRT to identify the extent to which the SDGs at the three levels (goals, targets and indicators) are mainstreamed in the GTP-II, and the findings show strong alignment of Ethiopia’s five-year development plan with the SDGs.7
response should be to compete—to create a system of governance that can empower a broader range of peoples and individuals.
The overall objective of ECA’s program of work has included the promotion of inclusive and sustainable economic and social development in support of accelerating Africa’s structural transformation in line with the priorities and vision articulated in Agenda 2063 and the global agendas.8 To achieve this objective, ECA has focused strategically on areas that would make a significant contribution towards the achievement of the Agenda 2063 and Agenda 2030 goals. This is along thematic areas which broadly reflect Africa’s development priorities to overcome existing and emerging development challenges with a view to achieving inclusive and transformative development. The nine identified focus areas based on thematic or sectoral priorities deemed key to the transformation of Africa are: Macroeconomic policy; Regional integration and trade; Innovations, technologies and management of Africa’s natural resources; Statistics; Capacity development; Gender and women in development; Subregional activities for development; Development planning and administration; and Social development policy. Special efforts have been made to ensure that the gender mainstreaming strategy is reflected throughout the different areas of focus. It is clear that almost all of these issues are at the center of the two agendas’ goals and priorities, and ECA has been conducting a lot of policy advice-related work activities in these areas.
* Dr. Hopestone Kayiska Chavula is a qualified Economist and Computer Scientist. He holds a Doctor of Philosophy degree (PhD) in Economics, Master of Arts (MA) degree in Economics and a Bachelor of Social Sciences (BSoc) degree majoring Economics and Computer Sciences. He is currently an Economic Affairs Officer with the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) in Addis Ababa Ethiopia under the Macroeconomic Policy Division (MPD). Previously, he was an Economist for the ICT, Science and Technology Division (ISTD) of UNECA, and a Lecturer in Economics at Chancellor College, University of Malawi. He has also been a Project Manager for the monitoring of the country’s progress towards the MDGs at the Malawi National Statistical Office (NSO), as well as a Development Consultant and IT Specialist.
My proposal is bold: to create a parallel, alternative system of governance that allows for the direct participation of individuals in the allocation of resources on a global scale towards the resolution of shared concerns, which would be funded through a global public lottery. The global public lottery would serve as a fund to address shared concerns that are nominated and decided upon by a global collective of individuals. As with other lotteries, it would be established as a system in which individuals can be incentivized to participate in the hope of winning a tremendous amount of money, while at the same time raising significant funds towards addressing shared concerns—in this case, such as those identified in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. The lottery could be hosted on an online platform that, while selling tickets to participants, invites or directs individuals and organizations to engage in a discursive forum about global issues of concern, the impacts that they have, and how we could address them. Aided by empirical quantitative and qualitative data, the platform could facilitate an exchange of information, perspectives, and lived realities; it would serve as an opportunity to express manifestations of shared problems; and provide an occasion to highlight the complexity and magnitude of the shared problems that we all face. It would provide a means to address in part, the current asymmetries of information and to foster the development of a much more informed global demos.
Imagine an exchange among farmers in the Asia Pacific, East African, and North American regions who are able to finally discuss the different manifestations and impacts of climate change on their livelihoods from the threat of floods, to hurricanes, and droughts. And then equipped with new perspectives, individuals would be able to cast a vote on which issue, over a given time period or at a particular point in time, is most important to them. The winning issue would have a fund of monies available for allocation to address it after the lottery is held, perhaps through organizations and enterprising individuals with innovative solutions. I recognize that there are many questions about how this could be achieved, but my principal aim with this short space is to present an imaginative idea about a potential avenue towards the democratization of global governance. As such, I can only conclude on the merits of the idea and not its specifics.3 The dialogue spurred by this lottery and its platform could be the genesis of a new model to generate and express a shared culture and humanity—an emboldened and engaged global demos that realizes the opportunity to meet, connect, and collaborate through networks. But more importantly, it could become a new model through which that demos could play a greater role in the allocation of their resources towards their issues of shared concerns. And then perhaps, we may be able to break the adage that seems to characterize the stasis of international institution reform. * Kuzi Charamba is a Project Manager for One Earth Future’s Shared Resources program. The program focuses on conflict prevention in extractive industries around the world by enhancing local community participation in natural resource governance. Mr. Charamba provides strategic advice for program development and manages the research program.
3 That said, emergent blockchain technology seems apt to this task because of its ability to allow decentralized
application without a trusted central party. While still in its infancy, blockchain technology is touted for its ability to coordinate and collaborate directly with other individuals and to effect change using the purchasing power of cryptoassets without having to rely on intermediaries such as states, corporations, or civil society organizations – the predominant actors of global governance.
seeking nominations: acuns board of directors
Nominate or be nominated. AS OF JULY 2018 four positions are open on the ACUNS Board of Directors. Board members will serve from 2018 – 2021. ACUNS members are invited to nominate qualified individuals, including themselves, for these positions. All nominees should be members of ACUNS. Please send nominations with: • Curriculum vitae • Bio (300-500 words) • A short supporting statement outlining what the nominee will bring to ACUNS.
TO NOMINATE
7 T. Federe (2016). “Developing a toolkit to support implementation of SDGs and Agenda 2063 in Africa.” A report submitted to the Economic Commission for Africa.
> All nominations will be accepted from January 1, 2018 to March 31, 2018. Nominations should be sent to bburns@wlu.ca.
8 United Nations (2014). “Proposed strategic framework for the period 2016–2017”. United Nations, New York.
Questions? Please email admin@acuns.org or call (1) 226.772.3121
9
acuns . or g
A C U N S S ecre t aria t > Wilfrid Laurier University, 75 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3C5
member publications
MPub
How to Do Things with International Law
Dangerous Diplomacy: Bureaucracy, Power Politics, and the Role of the UN Secretariat in Rwanda
Ian Hurd | Princeton University Press, 2017
Herman T. Salton | Oxford University Press, 2017
Conventionally understood as a set of limits on state behavior, the “rule of law” in world politics is widely assumed to serve as a progressive contribution to a just, stable, and predictable world. In How to Do Things with International Law, Ian Hurd challenges this received wisdom. Bringing the study of law and legality together with power, politics, and legitimation, he illustrates the complex politics of the international rule of law. Hurd draws on a series of timely case studies involving recent legal arguments over war, torture, and drones to demonstrate that international law not only domesticates state power but also serves as a permissive and even empowering source of legitimation for state action—including violence and torture. Rather than a civilizing force that holds the promise of universal peace, international law is a deeply politicized set of practices driven by the pursuit of particular interests and desires. The disputes so common in world politics over what law permits and what it forbids are, therefore, fights over the legitimating effect of legality.
Dangerous Diplomacy reassesses the role of the UN Secretariat during the Rwandan genocide. With the help of new sources, including the personal diaries and private papers of the late Sir Marrack Goulding—an Under-Secretary-General from 1988 to 1997 and the second highest-ranking UN official during the genocide— the book situates the Rwanda operation within the context of bureaucratic and power-political friction existing at UN Headquarters in the early 1990s. The book shows how this confrontation led to a lack of coordination between key UN departments on issues as diverse as reconnaissance, intelligence, and crisis management. Yet Dangerous Diplomacy goes beyond these institutional pathologies and identifies the conceptual origins of the Rwanda failure in the gray area that separates peacebuilding and peacekeeping. The difficulty of separating these two UN functions explains why six decades after the birth of the UN, it has still not been possible to demarcate the precise roles of some key UN departments.
A reconsideration of the rule of law in world politics and its relationship to state power, How to Do Things with International Law examines how and why governments use and manipulate international law in foreign policy.
The World Health Organization: Achievements and Failures Yves Beigbeder | Routledge, 2018
International Organizations: Politics, Law, Practice, Third Edition Ian Hurd | Cambridge University Press: 2017 Now in its third edition, this leading undergraduate textbook has been revised and updated throughout to take account of recent developments in world politics. Concise and engagingly written, the book is core reading for courses on international organizations, international law and politics, and global governance. Unlike other textbooks in the field, it takes readers behind the scenes of the world’s most important international institutions to explore their legal authority and the political controversies that they generate. It presents chapter-length case studies of the world’s leading international organizations, with attention to the legal, political, and practical aspects. The new edition adds depth to the discussion of international relations theory and features new case material on Brexit, the Argentine sovereign debt, the Syrian war, the cholera epidemic in Haiti, and more.
report of the special rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association Continued from page 8 > therefore, work closely with the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, treaty bodies, other Human Rights Council mechanisms and the United Nations system in general to contribute to an increase in global civic space, the creation of a safe and enabling environment for civil society and the promotion and protection of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association worldwide. The Special Rapporteur will cooperate with international organizations both inside and outside the United Nations system, in particular ILO, while being mindful of paragraph 5(g) of Human Rights Council resolution 15/21, according to which her tasks include undertaking activities “such that the present mandate will not include those matters of specific competence of the International Labour Organization and its specialized supervisory mechanisms and procedures with respect to employers’ and workers’ rights to freedom
The World Health Organization (WHO) is undergoing a crisis of credibility and challenge. Having been subjected to a severe financial crisis and criticisms of its management of pandemics such as the H1N1 flu case and the outbreak of Ebola, with a new Director-General at its helm, it is an ideal time to review the WHO’s past and current achievements including on-going operations and reported failures. Whilst time is given to recurrent attacks on WHO performance, it is balanced by also highlighting the WHO’s leadership, its member states, and its influence on other actors, NGOs and business. As such, this study reviews the WHO’s actions in the most visible programmes such as SARS, H1N1, Ebola and also smallpox, malaria, onchocerciasis, polio and AIDS. The author also discusses the desirable balance between operational and normative functions and proposals for reform of the Organization.
S e e m o r e B o o k s b y M e m b e r s a t acuns . o r g
of association, with a view to avoiding any duplication”. Consultation and coordination with regional human rights organizations worldwide and national human rights mechanisms are equally essential to the success of the mandate. Lastly, but not least importantly, the support and collaboration of Member States remain key for any effort by the Special Rapporteur to make a difference. The Special Rapporteur restates her commitment to engaging in constructive dialogue with government representatives and to strengthening their engagement with the Human Rights Council and its mechanisms, including but in no way limited to, the Governments that have traditionally supported the mandate.
A C U N S q uar t erl y ne w sle t t er > issue 4 > 2 0 1 7
» The success of the mandate on the rights
to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, just as that of any other mandate, cannot be measured in terms of resolutions adopted, reports presented, dialogues held or initiatives promoted.
» The mandate presents a unique opportunity
» The Special Rapporteur recommends that
This section contains a very simple, straightforward conclusion about what remains to be done by an independent expert, considering the numerous guiding principles and recommendations that have already been put forward in this area.
In conclusion
and challenge to explore and identify specific solutions and to mobilize public opinion and support in order to promote and protect civic space both nationally and globally. The Special Rapporteur will seek out and provide for such opportunities and challenges, to the very best of her knowledge, ability and future efforts.
States and all international actors and relevant stakeholders make full use of the mandate. The mandate is a service, and the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are essential for democracy and constitute an indispensable condition for sustainable development.
acuns . or g 1 0
2018 membership form individual annual membership o New
o Renewal
1
M E M B E R I N F O R M AT I O N
Prefix: o Dr.
o Mr.
o Ms.
o Mrs.
o Miss
First Name: ___________________________________________ Last Name: ___________________________________________ Mailing Address: o (Home) o (Work) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ City: _________________________________________________ State/Province: _______________________________________ Postal Code/Zip Code: ___________________________________ Country: _____________________________________________ E-mail (required for e-access): __________________________________________________________________________________ Telephone: ____________________________________________ o (Home) o (Work) o (Mobile)
o I would like to receive the ACUNS e-update and receive free monthly updates on the latest news, events and activities o I would like to receive information on ACUNS events & activities in Vienna o I would like to receive information on ACUNS events in New York
2 M E M B E R S H I P TY P E Institutional Memberships also are available at acuns.org ACUNS memberships are based on the January to December calendar year. If you join mid-year, you will receive back issues of Global Governance and the ACUNS quarterly newsletter. If you have any questions regarding joining mid-year, please contact the Secretariat at admin@acuns.org. Please note that membership fees are in U.S. Funds.
o $450 (Extended 5-year Term) o $75 (Up to $40,000 income)
o $165 (Sponsoring)* o $55 (Retired)
o $100 (Over $40,000 income) o $55 (Student)
*In addition to your own, sponsor a new one-year membership for a person from a developing country.
RETURN PAYMENT TO: ACUNS Secretariat Wilfrid Laurier University 75 University Avenue West Waterloo, ON N2L 3C5 Canada
3 P A Y M E N T O P T I O N S o VISA o MASTERCARD
o Enclosed Check (drawn on a US or Canadian Bank)
Card No: ____ ____ ____ ____ / ____ ____ ____ ____ / ____ ____ ____ ____ / ____ ____ ____ ____ Expiration Date: ____ ____ / ____ ____ Signature:___________________________________________
OR Fax: (1) 226.772.0016
> For more information, please email admin@acuns.org or call (1) 226.772.3121
Email us to find out how to become an institutional member at admin@acuns.org
renew your membership or become a member online at
acuns . or g