The
United Nations Human Rights Council,
created in 2006 to replace the
controversial Human Rights Commission, has taken a small but interesting step towards remedying
the "democratic deficit" in international organizations. Under the Council's
Resolution 5/1,
non-governmental organizations and other civil society stakeholders (including individuals) may nominate candidates for Special Rapporteur, Independent Expert, and Working Group positions (collectively labelled
Special Procedures - Mandate Holders). With
fourteen vacancies coming up in March 2008, ranging from the Special Rapporteur on the right to food to the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution, and child pornography, now is the time to send in your
nominations! In all seriousness, if we define democracy as participation, this is not an enormous step, especially given that once a "public list" of candidates is compiled, a
"consultative group" will then propose a short list of candidates with the highest qualifications -- giving due consideration to the exclusion of nominated candidates from the public list, mind you -- to the President. The President, in turn, will look to these recommendations as well as "broad consultations" before creating a final list of proposed candidates to be considered and appointed by the Council. Phew.
A lot of bureaucracy -- but how much democracy? I suppose it depends how wedded we are to the participatory definition of democracy. Can the goals of participation -- representation and engagement or buy-in -- be met through other means than a popular vote? And are there other definitions of democracy that might encompass this careful consultation process with stakeholders and experts? As a proceduralist, my concern is with the lack of formal mechanisms to ensure that various voices are heard, which stakes the success of the process on the good faith of the actors therein; always, in my mind, a risk. But in the end, I think even this small step towards including non-state actors in the process should be celebrated as an advance for democracy-building in international organizations.
The United Nations Human Rights Council, created in 2006 to replace the controversial Human Rights Commission, has taken a small but interesting step towards remedying the "democratic deficit" in international organizations. Under the Council's Resolution 5/1, non-governmental organizations and other civil society stakeholders (including individuals) may nominate candidates for Special Rapporteur, Independent Expert, and Working Group positions (collectively labelled Special Procedures - Mandate Holders). With fourteen vacancies coming up in March 2008, ranging from the Special Rapporteur on the right to food to the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution, and child pornography, now is the time to send in your nominations! In all seriousness, if we define democracy as participation, this is not an enormous step, especially given that once a "public list" of candidates is compiled, a 
"consultative group" will then propose a short list of candidates with the highest qualifications -- giving due consideration to the exclusion of nominated candidates from the public list, mind you -- to the President. The President, in turn, will look to these recommendations as well as "broad consultations" before creating a final list of proposed candidates to be considered and appointed by the Council. Phew. A lot of bureaucracy -- but how much democracy? I suppose it depends how wedded we are to the participatory definition of democracy. Can the goals of participation -- representation and engagement or buy-in -- be met through other means than a popular vote? And are there other definitions of democracy that might encompass this careful consultation process with stakeholders and experts? As a proceduralist, my concern is with the lack of formal mechanisms to ensure that various voices are heard, which stakes the success of the process on the good faith of the actors therein; always, in my mind, a risk. But in the end, I think even this small step towards including non-state actors in the process should be celebrated as an advance for democracy-building in international organizations.
