TyroCity: International Organizations

Introduction to ILO

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Who we are
ILO Tripartite constituents

The International Labour Organization (ILO) is the only tripartite U.N. agency with government, employer, and worker representatives. This tripartite structure makes the ILO a unique forum in which the governments and the social partners of the economy of its 183 Member States can freely and openly debate and elaborate labour standards and policies.

International Labour Office
The International Labour Office is the permanent secretariat of the International Labour Organization. It is the focal point for International Labour Organization’s overall activities, which it prepares under the scrutiny of the Governing Body and under the leadership of the Director-General.

The Office employs some 2,700 officials from over 150 nations at its headquarters in Geneva, and in around 40 field offices around the world. Among these officials, 900 work in technical cooperation programmes and projects.

The Office also contains a research and documentation centre.

ILO Director-General
A new Director-General is elected every five years by the Governing Body. Subject to the instructions of the Governing Body, the Director-General is responsible for the efficient conduct of the International Labour Office and other duties as may be assigned.

The current Director General, Mr. Juan Somavia was elected to serve as the ninth Director-General of the ILO by the Governing Body on 23 March 1998. His term of office began on 4 March 1999, when he became the first representative from the Southern hemisphere to head the Organization. Mr. Somavia was re-elected for a second five-year term in March 2003 and for a third term on 18 November 2008.

ILO Administrative Tribunal
The Tribunal examines employment-related complaints from officials of the International Labour Office and of the other international organizations that have recognized its jurisdiction.

The Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization is the heir of the Administrative Tribunal of the League of Nations, which was competent from 1927 to 1946 to hear complaints against the Secretariat of the League of Nations and against the International Labour Office. Since 1947 the Tribunal has heard complaints from serving and former officials of the International Labour Office and of the other international organizations that have recognized its jurisdiction. It is currently open to approximately 46,000 international civil servants who are serving or former officials of some sixty organizations.

The Tribunal is composed of seven judges who must be of different nationalities, as was the case for the Administrative Tribunal of the League of Nations. They are appointed by the International Labour Conference on a recommendation of the Governing Body of the International Labour Office for a renewable period of 3 years.

The Tribunal meets twice a year, in spring and autumn, for a period of 3 weeks, at the headquarters of the ILO in Geneva. At each session it delivers approximately fifty judgments.

The Tribunal is serviced by a Registry, comprising a Registrar and a small team of legal officers. The Registry’s secretariat receives the documents submitted in the course of the proceedings and replies to requests for information.

ILO Centres and Institutes
The ILO is a major resource centre for information, analysis and guidance on the world of work. Research accompanies and reinforces all of the Organization’s standard-setting and technical cooperation activities and the ILO is universally regarded as an authoritative source of knowledge on the world of work. Its institutes and Centres are specialized departments of the Organization which provide specialized support for ILO’s offices and constituents.

International Institute for Labour Studies
The ILO International Institute for Labour Studies in Geneva promotes policy research and public discussion on emerging issues of concern to the ILO and its constituents – labour, business and government.

The organizing theme of the Institute’s programmes is the notion of “decent work”. The Institute’s programmes seek to contribute to the development of the analytical and empirical foundations of decent work and a broader understanding of the policy instruments necessary to implement it in practice.

The Institute provides:

International research programmes and networks linking academics with business, labour, and government practitioners, to explore emerging policy issues of potential relevance for the ILO and contribute to policy formulation.
Educational programmes to assist trade unions, employers’ organizations and labour administrations in developing their institutional capacities for research, analysis, and policy formulation in the economic and social fields.

The Institute’s means of action include research, workshops and seminars, internship programmes, a visiting scholar programme and publications. The Institute’s programmes draw upon the ILO’s operational experience, its field structure and its unique global databases on development policy and social legislation in over 170 countries.

International Training Centre of the ILO
As skilled human resources are central to the pursuit of decent work, in 1965, the ILO established its training arm in Turin, Italy, to assist countries in their social and economic development through training. Working in close partnership with regional and national training institutions, the Centre contributes to disseminating the ILO’s principles and policies, and to strengthening the capacity of national institutions to implement relevant programmes, in line with its strategic objectives.

It offers training/learning opportunities and related services to decision makers, managers, practitioners and trainers from governments, workers’ organizations, employers’ organizations and their partner institutions. It has partnerships with regional and national training institutions and its services are available to the United Nations system as a whole, including ILO staff.

To date, over 90,000 women and men from 170 nations have benefited from its services since it opened in 1965. The annual number of activities exceeds 300 standard courses, customized learning events, comprehensive training projects, advisory services, and training material design and production. Around half the activities take place on-campus and the rest in the field. Besides group training, the Centre organizes, on request, learning programmes for individuals who are placed in public and private institutions and organizations. Increasingly, it uses information technology, including the Internet, to offer distance learning and tutoring services.

Course calendar for the International Training Centre, Turin
The Inter-American Centre for Knowledge Development in Vocational Training (OIT/CINTERFOR)

The Inter-American Centre for Knowledge Development in Vocational Training (ILO/Cinterfor) is a technical service of the ILO, with the mission of the development of a permanent learning and horizontal cooperation community among the national organizations in charge of vocational training. It works as the core of a system integrated by vocational training-related institutions and organisations belonging to ILO Member States in the world.

International Occupational Safety and Health Information Centre (CIS)

CIS is the knowledge management arm of SafeWork of the International Labour Organization (ILO). Its goal is to ensure that workers and everyone concerned with their protection have access to the facts they need to prevent occupational injuries and diseases. The network of CIS Centres contributes to the exchange of information among persons responsible for the establishment and implementation of national policies and programmes.

CIS continuously monitors world literature on occupational safety and health through its contacts with publishers and with about 150 centres at the national and regional level around the world. In addition to covering up-to-date OSH literature, CIS also provides a basic reference service to its worldwide users by delivering information on conferences and educational opportunities in the OSH field, as well as in maintaining directories of various kinds.

CIS was founded in 1959 as a joint endeavour of the ILO, the International Social Security Association (ISSA), the European Coal and Steel Community (one of the predecessors of the European Union) and occupational safety and health institutions in 11 European countries. Very quickly, the CIS network of centres expanded to include members from other continents, and by now it has grown to cover 110 countries all over the world.

Mission and objectives

The primary goal of the ILO today is to promote opportunities for women and men to obtain decent and productive work, in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity.” - Juan Somavia, ILO Director-General

The International Labour Organization (ILO) is devoted to promoting social justice and internationally recognized human and labour rights, pursuing its founding mission that labour peace is essential to prosperity. Today, the ILO helps advance the creation of decent work and the economic and working conditions that give working people and business people a stake in lasting peace, prosperity and progress. Its tripartite structure provides a unique platform for promoting decent work for all women and men. Its main aims are to promote rights at work, encourage decent employment opportunities, enhance social protection and strengthen dialogue on work-related issues.

The ILO has four strategic objectives

Promote and realize standards and fundamental principles and rights at work
Create greater opportunities for women and men to decent employment and income
Enhance the coverage and effectiveness of social protection for all
Strengthen tripartism and social dialogue

In support of its goals, the ILO offers unmatched expertise and knowledge about the world of work, acquired over more than 90 years of responding to the needs of people everywhere for decent work, livelihoods and dignity. It serves its tripartite constituents – and society as a whole – in a variety of ways, including:

Formulation of international policies and programmes to promote basic human rights, improve working and living conditions, and enhance employment opportunities
Creation of international labour standards backed by a unique system to supervise their application
An extensive programme of international technical cooperation formulated and implemented in an active partnership with constituents, to help countries put these policies into practice in an effective manner
Training, education and research activities to help advance all of these efforts

Decent work agenda

Promoting Decent work for all

Work is central to people’s well-being. In addition to providing income, work can pave the way for broader social and economic advancement, strengthening individuals, their families and communities. Such progress, however, hinges on work that is decent. Decent work sums up the aspirations of people in their working lives.

The ILO has developed an agenda for the community of work. It provides support through integrated Decent Work Country Programmes developed in coordination with its constituents. Putting the Decent Work Agenda into practice is achieved through the implementation of the ILO’s four strategic objectives, with gender equality as a crosscutting objective:

Creating Jobs – an economy that generates opportunities for investment, entrepreneurship, skills development, job creation and sustainable livelihoods.
Guaranteeing rights at work – to obtain recognition and respect for the rights of workers. All workers, and in particular disadvantaged or poor workers, need representation, participation, and laws that work for their interests.
Extending social protection – to promote both inclusion and productivity by ensuring that women and men enjoy working conditions that are safe, allow adequate free time and rest, take into account family and social values, provide for adequate compensation in case of lost or reduced income and permit access to adequate healthcare.
Promoting social dialogue – Involving strong and independent workers’ and employers’ organizations is central to increasing productivity, avoiding disputes at work, and building cohesive societies.

An ILO concept, an international consensus
The Decent Work concept was formulated by the ILO’s constituents – governments and employers and workers – as a means to identify the Organization’s major priorities. It is based on the understanding that work is a source of personal dignity, family stability, peace in the community, democracies that deliver for people, and economic growth that expands opportunities for productive jobs and enterprise development.

Decent Work reflects priorities on the social, economic and political agenda of countries and the international system. In a relatively short time this concept has forged an international consensus among governments, employers, workers and civil society that productive employment and Decent Work are key elements to achieving a fair globalization, reducing poverty and achieving equitable, inclusive, and sustainable development.

Making Decent Work a global goal and a national reality

The overall goal of Decent Work is to effect positive change in people’s lives at the national and local levels. The ILO provides support through integrated Decent Work Country Programmes developed in coordination with ILO constituents. They define the priorities and the targets within national development frameworks and aim to tackle major Decent Work deficits through efficient programmes that embrace each of the strategic objectives.

The ILO operates with other partners within and beyond the UN family to provide in-depth expertise and key policy instruments for the design and implementation of these programmes. It also provides support for building the institutions needed to carry them forward and for measuring progress. The balance within these programmes differs from country to country, reflecting their needs, resources and priorities.

Progress also requires action at the global level. The Decent Work agenda offers a basis for a more just and sustainable framework for global development. The ILO works to develop “decent work”-oriented approaches to economic and social policy in partnership with the principal institutions and actors of the multilateral system and the global economy.

Support of military dictatorships

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

The role of the Bretton Woods institutions has been controversial since the late Cold War period, due to claims that the IMF policy makers supported anti-communist military dictatorships friendly to American and European corporations. Critics also claim that the IMF is generally apathetic or hostile to their views of human rights, and labor rights. The controversy has helped spark the Anti-globalization movement. Arguments in favor of the IMF say that economic stability is a precursor to democracy; however, critics highlight various examples in which democratized countries fell after receiving IMF loans.

In the 1960s, the IMF and the World Bank supported the government of Brazil’s military dictator Castello Branco with tens of millions of dollars of loans and credit that were denied to previous democratically elected governments.

Countries that were or are under a military dictatorship whilst being members of the IMF/World Bank (support from various sources in $Billion):

Support of military dictatorships

Support of military dictatorships
Country indebted to IMF/World Bank	Dictator	In power	*Debt %^[^{clarification needed}*^] at start of dictatorship**	Debt % at end of dictatorship	Country debts in 1996	Dictator debts generated $ billion	Dictator generated debt % of total debt
Argentina	Military dictatorship	1976 - 1983	9.3	48.9	93.8	39.6	42%
Bolivia	Military dictatorship	1962 - 1980	0	2.7	5.2	2.7	52%
Brazil	Military dictatorship	1964 - 1985	5.1	105.1	179	100	56%
Chile	Augusto Pinochet	1973 - 1989	5.2	18	27.4	12.8	47%
El Salvador	Military dictatorship	1979 - 1994	0.9	2.2	2.2	1.3	59%
Ethiopia	Mengistu Haile Mariam	1977 - 1991	0.5	4.2	10	3.7	37%
Haiti	Jean-Claude Duvalier	1971 - 1986	0	0.7	0.9	0.7	78%
Indonesia	Suharto	1967 - 1998	3	129	129	126	98%
Kenya	Moi	1979 - 2002	2.7	6.9	6.9	4.2	61%
Liberia	Doe	1979 - 1990	0.6	1.9	2.1	1.3	62%
Malawi	Banda	1964 - 1994	0.1	2	2.3	1.9	83%
Nigeria	Buhari/Babangida/Abacha	1984 - 1998	17.8	31.4	31.4	13.6	43%
Pakistan	Zia-ul Haq	1977 - 1988	7.6	17
Pakistan	Pervez Musharraf	1999 - 2008
Paraguay	Stroessner	1954 - 1989	0.1	2.4	2.1	2.3	96%
Philippines	Marcos	1965 - 1986	1.5	28.3	41.2	26.8	65%
Somalia	Siad Barre	1969 - 1991	0	2.4	2.6	2.4	92%
Sudan	Nimeiry/al-Mahdi	1969 - present	0.3	17	17	16.7	98%
Thailand	Military dictatorship	1950 - 1983	0	13.9	90.8	13.9	15%
Zaire/Democratic Republic of the Congo	Mobutu	1965 - 1997	0.3	12.8	12.8	12.5	98%

Notes: Debt at takeover by dictatorship; earliest data published by the World Bank is for 1970. Debt at end of dictatorship (or 1996, most recent date for World Bank data).

Effectiveness

Two criticisms from economists have been that financial aid is always bound to so-called “Conditionalities”, including Structural Adjustment Programs (SAP). It is claimed that conditionalities (economic performance targets established as a precondition for IMF loans) retard social stability and hence inhibit the stated goals of the IMF, while Structural Adjustment Programs lead to an increase in poverty in recipient countries.

The IMF sometimes advocates “austerity programmes,” increasing taxes even when the economy is weak, in order to generate government revenue and bring budgets closer to a balance, thus reducing budget deficits. Countries are often advised to lower their corporate tax rate. These policies were criticized by Joseph E. Stiglitz, former chief economist and Senior Vice President at the World Bank, in his book Globalization and Its Discontents. He argued that by converting to a more Monetarist approach, the fund no longer had a valid purpose, as it was designed to provide funds for countries to carry out Keynesian reflations, and that the IMF “was not participating in a conspiracy, but it was reflecting the interests and ideology of the Western financial community”.

Argentina, which had been considered by the IMF to be a model country in its compliance to policy proposals by the Bretton Woods institutions, experienced a catastrophic economic crisis in 2001, which some believe to have been caused by IMF-induced budget restrictions — which undercut the government’s ability to sustain national infrastructure even in crucial areas such as health, education, and security — and privatization of strategically vital national Others attribute the crisis to Argentina’s misdesigned fiscal federalism, which caused subnational spending to increase rapidly. The crisis added to widespread hatred of this institution in Argentina and other South American countries, with many blaming the IMF for the region’s economic problems. The current — as of early 2006 — trend towards moderate left-wing governments in the region and a growing concern with the development of a regional economic policy largely independent of big business pressures has been ascribed to this crisis.

Another example of where IMF Structural Adjustment Programmes aggravated the problem was in Kenya. Before the IMF got involved in the country, the Kenyan central bank oversaw all currency movements in and out of the country. The IMF mandated that the Kenyan central bank had to allow easier currency movement. However, the adjustment resulted in very little foreign investment, but allowed Kamlesh Manusuklal Damji Pattni, with the help of corrupt government officials, to siphon off billions of Kenyan shillings in what came to be known as the Goldenberg scandal, leaving the country worse off than it was before the IMF reforms were implemented.[citation needed] In an interview, the former Romanian Prime Minister Tăriceanu stated that “Since 2005, IMF is constantly making mistakes when it appreciates the country’s economic performances”.

Overall, the IMF success record is perceived as limited.[citation needed] While it was created to help stabilize the global economy, since 1980 critics claim over 100 countries (or reputedly most of the Fund’s membership) have experienced a banking collapse that they claim have reduced GDP by four percent or more, far more than at any time in Post-Depression history.[citation needed] The considerable delay in the IMF’s response to any crisis, and the fact that it tends to only respond to them (or even create them) rather than prevent them, has led many economists to argue for reform. In 2006, an IMF reform agenda called the Medium Term Strategy was widely endorsed by the institution’s member countries. The agenda includes changes in IMF governance to enhance the role of developing countries in the institution’s decision-making process and steps to deepen the effectiveness of its core mandate, which is known as economic surveillance or helping member countries adopt macroeconomic policies that will sustain global growth and reduce poverty. On June 15, 2007, the Executive Board of the IMF adopted the 2007 Decision on Bilateral Surveillance, a landmark measure that replaced a 30-year-old decision of the Fund’s member countries on how the IMF should analyze economic outcomes at the country level.

Impact on access to food

A number of civil society organizations have criticized the IMF’s policies for their impact on people’s access to food, particularly in developing countries. In October 2008, former US President Bill Clinton joined this chorus in a speech to the United Nations World Food Day, which criticized the World Bank and IMF for their policies on food and agriculture:

We need the World Bank, the IMF, all the big foundations, and all the governments to admit that, for 30 years, we all blew it, including me when I was President. We were wrong to believe that food was like some other product in international trade, and we all have to go back to a more responsible and sustainable form of agriculture.

— Former US President Bill Clinton, Speech at United Nations World Food Day, October 16, 2008.

Impact on public health

In 2008, a study by analysts from Cambridge and Yale universities published on the open-access Public Library of Science concluded that strict conditions on the international loans by the IMF resulted in thousands of deaths in Eastern Europe by tuberculosis as public health care had to be weakened. In the 21 countries to which the IMF had given loans, tuberculosis deaths rose by 16.6%.
In 2009, a book by Rick Rowden titled, The Deadly Ideas of Neoliberalism: How the IMF has Undermined Public Health and the Fight Against Aids, claimed that the IMF’s monetarist approach towards prioritizing price stability (low inflation) and fiscal restraint (low budget deficits) was unnecessarily restrictive and has prevented developing countries from being able to scale up long-term public investment as a percent of GDP in the underlying public health infrastructure. The book claimed the consequences have been chronically underfunded public health systems, leading to dilapidated health infrastructure, inadequate numbers of health personnel, and demoralizing working conditions that have fueled the “push factors” driving the brain drain of nurses migrating from poor countries to rich ones, all of which has undermined public health systems and the fight against HIV/AIDS in developing countries.

Impact on environment

IMF policies have been repeatedly criticized for making it difficult for indebted countries to avoid ecosystem-damaging projects that generate cash flow, in particular oil, coal and forest-destroying lumber and agriculture projects. Ecuador for example had to defy IMF advice repeatedly in order to pursue the protection of its rain forests, though paradoxically this need was cited in IMF argument to support that country. The IMF acknowledged this paradox in a March 2010 staff position report which proposed the IMF Green Fund, a mechanism to issue Special Drawing Rights directly to pay for climate harm prevention and potentially other ecological protection as pursued generally by other environmental finance.

While the response to these moves was generally positive possibly because ecological protection and energy and infrastructure transformation are more politically neutral than pressures to change social policy. Some experts voiced concern that the IMF was not representative, and that the IMF proposals to generate only 200 billion dollars/year by 2020 with the SDRs as seed funds, did not go far enough to undo the general incentive to pursue destructive projects inherent in the world commodity trading and banking systems – criticisms often levelled at the WTO and large global banking institutions.

In the context of the May 2010 European banking crisis, some observers also noted that Spain and California, two troubled economies within Europe and the US respectively, and also Germany, the primary and politically most fragile supporter of a Euro currency bailout would benefit from IMF recognition of their leadership in green technology, and directly from Green-Fund generated demand for their exports, which might also improve their credit standing with international bankers.

Criticism from free-market advocates

Typically the IMF and its supporters advocate a monetarist approach. As such, adherents of supply-side economics generally find themselves in open disagreement with the IMF. The IMF frequently advocates currency devaluation, criticized by proponents of supply-side economics as inflationary. Secondly they link higher taxes under “austerity programmes” with economic contraction.

Currency devaluation is recommended by the IMF to the governments of poor nations with struggling economies. Some economists claim these IMF policies are destructive to economic prosperity.
Complaints have also been directed toward the International Monetary Fund gold reserve being undervalued. At its inception in 1945, the IMF pegged gold at US$35 per Troy ounce of gold. In 1973, the administration of US President Richard Nixon lifted the fixed asset value of gold in favor of a world market price. This need to lift the fixed asset value of gold had largely come about because Petrodollars outside the United States were worth more than could be backed by the gold at Fort Knox under the fixed exchange rate system. Following this, the fixed exchange rates of currencies tied to gold were switched to a floating rate, also based on market price and exchange. The fixed rate system had only served to limit the nominal amount of assistance the organization could provide to debt-ridden countries.

Managing director

Historically the IMF’s managing director has been European and the president of the World Bank has been from the United States. However, this standard is increasingly being questioned and competition for these two posts may soon open up to include other qualified candidates from any part of the world. Executive Directors, who confirm the managing director, are voted in by Finance Ministers from countries they represent. The First Deputy Managing Director of the IMF, the second-in-command, has traditionally been (and is today) an American.

The IMF is for the most part controlled by the major Western Powers, with voting rights on the Executive board based on a quota derived from the relative size of a country in the global economy. Critics claim that the board rarely votes and passes issues contradicting the will of the US or Europeans, which combined represent the largest bloc of shareholders in the Fund. On the other hand, Executive Directors that represent emerging and developing countries have many times strongly defended the group of nations in their constituency. Alexandre Kafka, who represented several Latin American countries for 32 years as Executive Director (including 21 as the dean of the Board, is a prime example.

Rodrigo Rato became the ninth Managing Director of the IMF on June 7, 2004 and resigned his post at the end of October 2007.
EU ministers agreed on the candidacy of Dominique Strauss-Kahn as managing director of the IMF at the Economic and Financial Affairs Council meeting in Brussels on July 10, 2007. On September 28, 2007, the International Monetary Fund’s 24 executive directors elected Mr. Strauss-Kahn as new managing director, with broad support including from the United States and the 27-nation European Union. Strauss-Kahn succeeded Spain’s Rodrigo de Rato, who retired on October 31, 2007.The only other nominee was Josef Tošovský, a late candidate proposed by Russia. Strauss-Kahn said: “I am determined to pursue without delay the reforms needed for the IMF to make financial stability serve the international community, while fostering growth and employment.”

Dates	Name	Nationality
May 6, 1946 – May 5, 1951	Camille Gutt	Belgium
August 3, 1951 – October 3, 1956	Ivar Rooth	Sweden
November 21, 1956 – May 5, 1963	Per Jacobsson	Sweden
September 1, 1963 – August 31, 1973	Pierre-Paul Schweitzer	France
September 1, 1973 – June 16, 1978	Johannes Witteveen	Netherlands
June 17, 1978 – January 15, 1987	Jacques de Larosière	France
January 16, 1987 – February 14, 2000	Michel Camdessus	France
May 1, 2000 – March 4, 2004	Horst Köhler	Germany
June 7, 2004 – October 31, 2007	Rodrigo Rato	Spain
November 1, 2007 – present	Dominique Strauss-Kahn	France

In the media

Life and Debt, a documentary film, deals with the IMF’s policies’ influence on Jamaica and its economy from a critical point of view.

The Debt of Dictators explores the lending of billions of dollars by the IMF, World Bank multinational banks and other international financial institutions to brutal dictators throughout the world. (see IMF/World Bank support of military dictatorships)

Causes of Failure of League of Nations

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

League Of Nations was created after WWI and was first comprehensive organization which came into existence on Jan.10 1920. with hopes that this organization may provide a forum to nations where they can settle out their disputes at International level and can prevent world from another war.

The success of League of Nations can be judge on the basis of its handling disputes and international conflicts incidents. The authenticity of any organization can be checked by its utility of solving political and social issues.

During 1920’s League provided a useful but modest addition to international diplomacy where round of negotiations and diplomatic relations develop. Stress was made on sitting together of nations for the settlement of disputes. Security was provided to frontiers and problems of Disarmaments was solved.
but unfortunately League was helping and solving matters of minor states because of influence of BIG POWERS on world League failed to implement its will on them which gave a true picture of its contradiction of covenant.

League failed in its main object of maintaining peace in the world . Inspite of its efforts for two decades , the whole world was involved in a war in 1939. By that time , the machinery of the League Of Nations had completely broken down.

The failure of League Of Nations can be attributed to many causes.
They are :

1. Absence Of Great Powers:

It was unfortunate that the covenant of the League of Nations was made a part parcel of the peace settlement. It would have been better if it had kept separate. There were many states which consider the Treaty Of Versailles as a treaty of revenge, and were not prepared to ratify the same. By not retifying the treaty , they refused to be the members of the League.
The absence of the great powers from the international organization weakened her and was partly responsible for its ultimate failure.

Japan , Germany and Italy also left the League and their defection must have weakened the League.

2. Domination Of France and England:

It was felt that the League Of Nations was dominated by England and France and consequently the other states began to loose their confidence in that organization.

3. Rise Of Dictatorship:

The rise of dictatorship in Italy, Japan and Germany also weakened the chances of success of the League of Nations .
Japan was determined to acquire fresh territories and her unscrupulous patriotism threw to the winds of all principles of international law and morality. If the League was to prepared to condone her fault of conquering Manchuria . She was to prepared to give up her membership of the League and that is exactly what she actually did.

When League decided to take action against Italy on account for her aggression in Abyssinia , Italy left the League.
In the wake up spreading dictatorship states continued to be the members of the League so long as their national interest were not in any way endangered and sacrificed.

4. Limitations Of Legal Methods:

The League Of Nations demonstrated the limitations of the legal methods.

The League was fairly efficient in structure and probably would have worked if there had existed a realization of a community of interest.

Law grows out of public opinion can not operate in disjunction with it. In the case of League law proposed and opinion disposed.

5. Loss Of Faith In League:

Small nations lost their faith in the effectiveness of The League to save them from any aggression.

The principle of collective security was not applied in actual practice. Each state decided to follow her own policy , the principle of security weakened and thus there was nothing to check the aggressive policy of Hitler.

6. Constitutional Defect:

The League Of Nations failed because of certain constitutional defects. In the cases of disputes brought before the council of the League under Article 11, decisions of the council had to be unanimous in order to adjudge a nation guilty of having violated the covenant by resort to war or unjustifiable aggression, In Article 15. If the decisions were not unanimous verdict under Article 11, the disputing parties were free to resume the hostilities after a period of 3 months. By allowing exceptions, the covenant seemed to assumed that was remained the normal solution of international disputes.

7. Narrow Nationalism:

Narrow nationalism was still the dominant among the peoples of the world. France was increasingly concerned with her national security , while Great Britain considered that problem less urgent than promoting commerce by fostering international trade. Japan intoxicated by her emergence as a world power , while Italy was desperate to redress her damage . Germany was indulge to retain her national prestige even at the cost of an aggressive military adventure.

8. Lack Of Mutual Co-Operation:

The member of the league lack mutual co-operation which is always essential for the success of an organization.
For France the League was an instrument for providing her security from Germany.

On the other hand Great Britain wanted League protecting her imperialist interest .

Hitler found League a great hurdle on the way of rise of Germany.

9. Separate Lines Of Thoughts:

The League was the offspring of a marriage of two separate lines of thoughts.

In one of these which were developed my Mr. Taft and others in the U.S. The stress was on organized forces. There has to be “League of enforced peace”

On the other hand the British attitude was extremely hesitant in its approach to the nation’s enforced peace.

If the fourteen points of Woodrow Wilson are consulted we find that a general association of nation is projected “ for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity”

In its proposal the world peace is not mentioned and international co-operation is restricted to one limited object.
These two inconsistent principles were incorporated in the fabric of the League itself and no wonder it failed.

10. Manchurian Crisis:

On the night of Sep. 18-19, 1931 some Japanese soldiers making an attempt to blow off the railway line near Mukdan. Japan took full advantage of this minor incident and on the 18th Sep.1931 She invaded Manchuria and also occupied all Japanese cities north of Mukdan.

League of Nations failed to implement sanctions on Japan and on March 27 , 1933 Japan decided to withdraw her membership of League of Nation.

Composition of the International Court of Justice

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

The ICJ is composed of fifteen judges elected to nine year terms by the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council from a list of persons nominated by the national groups in the Permanent Court of Arbitration. The election process is set out in Articles 4–19 of the ICJ statute. Elections are staggered with five judges elected every three years, in order to ensure continuity within the court.

Should a judge die in office, the practice has generally been to elect a judge of the same nationality to complete the term. No two may be nationals of the same country. According to Article 9, the membership of the Court is supposed to represent the “main forms of civilization and of the principal legal systems of the world”. Essentially, this has meant common law, civil law and socialist law (now post-communist law). Since its creation, four of the five permanent members of the Security Council (France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) have always had a judge on the Court. The exception was China (the Republic of China until 1971, the People’s Republic of China from 1971 onwards), which did not have a judge on the Court from 1967–1985, because it did not put forward a candidate. The rule on a geopolitical composition of the bench exists despite the fact that there is no provision for it in the Statute of the ICJ.

Article 6 of the Statute provides that all judges should be “elected regardless of their nationality among persons of high moral character”, who are either qualified for the highest judicial office in their home states or known as lawyers with sufficient competence in international law. Judicial independence is dealt with specifically in Articles 16–18. Judges of the ICJ are not able to hold any other post, nor act as counsel. In practice the Members of the Court have their own interpretation of these rules. This allows them to be involved in outside arbitration and hold professional posts as long as there is no conflict of interest. A judge can be dismissed only by a unanimous vote of other members of the Court.[4] Despite these provisions, the independence of ICJ judges has been questioned. For example, during the Nicaragua Case, the USA issued a communiqué suggesting that it could not present sensitive material to the Court because of the presence of judges from Eastern bloc states.[5]

Judges may deliver joint judgments or give their own separate opinions. Decisions and Advisory Opinions are by majority and, in the event of an equal division, the President’s vote becomes decisive.[6] Judges may also deliver separate dissenting opinions.

Ad hoc judges

Article 31 of the statute sets out a procedure whereby ad hoc judges sit on contentious cases before the Court. This system allows any party to a contentious case to nominate a judge of their choosing. It is possible that as many as seventeen judges may sit on one case.

This system may seem strange when compared with domestic court processes, but its purpose is to encourage states to submit cases to the Court. For example, if a state knows it will have a judicial officer who can participate in deliberation and offer other judges local knowledge and an understanding of the state’s perspective, that state may be more willing to submit to the Court’s jurisdiction. Although this system does not sit well with the judicial nature of the body, it is usually of little practical consequence. Ad hoc judges usually (but not always) vote in favor of the state that appointed them and thus cancel each other out. [7]

Chambers

Generally, the Court sits as full bench, but in the last fifteen years it has on occasion sat as a chamber. Articles 26–29 of the statute allow the Court to form smaller chambers, usually 3 or 5 judges, to hear cases. Two types of chambers are contemplated by Article 26: firstly, chambers for special categories of cases, and second, the formation of ad hoc chambers to hear particular disputes. In 1993 a special chamber was established, under Article 26(1) of the ICJ statute, to deal specifically with environmental matters (although this chamber has never been used).

Ad hoc chambers are more frequently convened. For example, chambers were used to hear the Gulf of Maine Case (Canada/USA).[8] In that case, the parties made clear they would withdraw the case unless the Court appointed judges to the chamber who were acceptable to the parties. Judgments of chambers may have less authority than full Court judgments, or may diminish the proper interpretation of universal international law informed by a variety of cultural and legal perspectives. On the other hand, the use of chambers might encourage greater recourse to the Court and thus enhance international dispute resolution.[9]

Current composition

As of 27 April 2012, the composition of the Court is as follows:[10]

Members of IMF

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Membership Qualifications

The application will be considered first by the IMF’s Executive Board. After its consideration, the Executive Board will submit a report to the Board of Governors of the IMF with recommendations in the form of a “Membership Resolution”. These recommendations cover the amount of quota in the IMF, the form of payment of the subscription, and other customary terms and conditions of membership. After the Board of Governors has adopted the “Membership Resolution,” the applicant state needs to take the legal steps required under its own law to enable it to sign the IMF’s Articles of Agreement and to fulfill the obligations of IMF membership.

Similarly, any member country can withdraw from the Fund, although that is rare. For example, in April 2007, the president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa announced the expulsion of the World Bank representative in the country. A few days later, at the end of April, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez announced that the country would withdraw from the IMF and the World Bank. Chavez dubbed both organizations as “the tools of the empire” that “serve the interests of the North”. As of June 2009, both countries remain as members of both organizations. Venezuela was forced to back down because a withdrawal would have triggered default clauses in the country’s sovereign bonds.

A member’s quota in the IMF determines the amount of its subscription, its voting weight, its access to IMF financing, and its allocation of Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). A member state cannot unilaterally increase its quota—increases must be approved by the Executive Board of IMF and are linked to formulas that include many variables such as the size of a country in the world economy. For example, in 2001, the People’s Republic of China was prevented from increasing its quota as high as it wished, ensuring it remained at the level of the smallest G7 economy (Canada).
In September 2005, the IMF’s member countries agreed to the first round of ad hoc quota increases for four countries, including China. On March 28, 2008, the IMF’s Executive Board ended a period of extensive discussion and negotiation over a major package of reforms to enhance the institution’s governance that would shift quota and voting shares from advanced to emerging markets and developing countries. Under existing arrangements, the industrialised countries(including Mexico) hold 57 per cent of the IMF votes. But the financial crisis has tilted control away from heavily indebted mature economies, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, in favour of the fast-growing, cash-rich, so-called “BRIC” economies of Brazil, Russia, India and China.
Since the United States has by far the largest share of votes (approx. 17%) amongst IMF members (see table below), it has little to lose relative to European nations. At the 2009 G-20 Pittsburgh summit, the US raised the possibility that some European countries would reduce their votes in favour of increasing the votes for emerging economies. However, both France and Britain were particularly reluctant as an increase in China’s votes would mean China now has more votes than the UK and France. At a subsequent IMF meeting in Istanbul, the same month as the Pittsburgh Summit, IMF managing director Jean Claude Trichet then highlighted that “If we don’t correct them, we’ll have the recipe for the next major crisis.” Citing the seriousness of the issue to be tackled.

Members’ quotas and voting power, and board of governors

Major decisions require an 85% supermajority. The United States has always been the only country able to block a supermajority on its own. The following table shows the top 20 member countries in terms of voting power (2,220,817 votes in total). The 27 member states of the European Union have a combined vote of 710,786 (32.07%).

On October 23, 2010, the Ministers of Finance of G-20, governing most of the IMF member quotas, agreed to reform IMF and shift about 6% of the voting shares to major developing nations and countries with emerging markets.

Members’ quotas and voting power, and board of governors

Members' quotas and voting power, and board of governors
IMF member country	Quota: millions of SDRs	Quota: percentage of total	Governor	Alternate Governor	Votes: number	Votes: percentage of total
United States	37,149.3	17.09	Timothy F. Geithner	Ben Bernanke	371,743	16.74
Japan	13,312.8	6.12	Yoshihiko Noda	Masaaki Shirakawa	133,378	6.01
Germany	13,008.2	5.98	Axel A. Weber	Wolfgang Schäuble	130,332	5.87
United Kingdom	10,738.5	4.94	George Osborne	Mervyn King	107,635	4.85
France	10,738.5	4.94	Christine Lagarde	Christian Noyer	107,635	4.85
China	8,090.1	3.72	Zhou Xiaochuan	Yi Gang	81,151	3.65
Italy	7,055.5	3.24	Giulio Tremonti	Mario Draghi	70,805	3.19
Saudi Arabia	6,985.5	3.21	Ibrahim A. Al-Assaf	Hamad Al-Sayari	70,105	3.16
Canada	6,369.2	2.93	Jim Flaherty	Mark Carney	63,942	2.88
Russia	5,945.4	2.73	Aleksei Kudrin	Sergey Ignatyev	59,704	2.69
Netherlands	5,162.4	2.37	Nout Wellink	L.B.J. van Geest	51,874	2.34
Belgium	4,605.2	2.12	Guy Quaden	Jean-Pierre Arnoldi	46,302	2.08
India	4,158.2	1.91	Pranab Mukherjee	Duvvuri Subbarao	41,832	1.88
Switzerland	3,458.5	1.59	Jean-Pierre Roth	Hans-Rudolf Merz	34,835	1.57
Australia	3,236.4	1.49	Wayne Swan	Ken Henry	32,614	1.47
Mexico	3,152.8	1.45	Agustín Carstens	Guillermo Ortiz	31,778	1.43
Spain	3,048.9	1.40	Elena Salgado	Miguel Fernández Ordóñez	30,739	1.38
Brazil	3,036.1	1.40	Guido Mantega	Henrique Meirelles	30,611	1.38
South Korea	2,927.3	1.35	Okyu Kwon	Seong Tae Lee	29,523	1.33
Venezuela	2,659.1	1.22	Gastón Parra Luzardo	Rodrigo Cabeza Morales	26,841	1.21
remaining 166 countries	62,593.8	28.79	respective	respective	667,438	30.05

Assistance and reforms

The primary mission of the IMF is to provide financial assistance to countries that experience serious financial and economic difficulties using funds deposited with the IMF from the institution’s 187 member countries. Member states with balance of payments problems, which often arise from these difficulties, may request loans to help fill gaps between what countries earn and/or are able to borrow from other official lenders and what countries must spend to operate, including to cover the cost of importing basic goods and services. In return, countries are usually required to launch certain reforms, which have often been dubbed the “Washington Consensus”. These reforms are thought to be beneficial to countries with fixed exchange rate policies that may engage in fiscal, monetary, and political practices which may lead to the crisis itself. For example, nations with severe budget deficits, rampant inflation, strict price controls, or significantly over-valued or under-valued currencies run the risk of facing balance of payment crises. Thus, the structural adjustment programs are at least ostensibly intended to ensure that the IMF is actually helping to prevent financial crises rather than merely funding financial recklessness.

The ‘Failure’ of the League of Nations and the Beginnings of the UN

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

Usually, historical comparisons between the League of Nations and its successor the United Nations emphasize the contrasts between the two organizations rather than their similarities. This tendency is understandable when viewed from the perspective of 1945 when the UN came into existence. The view of the League held almost universally at that time was one of weakness and failure. The League had not performed the function that it had been created for: the prevention of a second world war. Now, in the aftermath of that conflict a new organization was being forged to
succeed where its discredited predecessor had failed. This negative attitude towards the League was natural, but it was also driven by political calculation. In order to sell the idea that the League of Nations should actually have a successor to a skeptical, war-hardened world, the United Nations had to be presented as something new and historically unique. It could not be allowed to carry the taint of failure that too close an association with the League would have placed on it. Yet in reality the League of Nations provided the blueprint for the new institution. The organization of the United Nations, its broad political structure and of course its fundamental raison d’être within the international system, were all essentially drawn from the template of the League.

League of Nations: Global organization formed after the First World War which was the precursor to the United Nations; became largely irrelevant in the larger currents of international relations after the mid-1930s and was formally wound up in 1946.

A new world order?

The League of Nations, whatever its ultimate fate, had been a profoundly innovative, indeed radical, departure in international relations. This was a reality which only came to be properly acknowledged at the end of the century of the League’s creation; for succeeding decades after its disappearance the League continued to be regarded in the popular memory as a by-word for empty rhetoric and diplomatic hypocrisy. Despite this, it eventually provided the model not just for the United Nations but for almost all of the major inter-governmental organizations whose growth was to be such a prominent feature of twentieth-century international politics. The League’s basic organization, consisting of an ‘executive’ Council of the big powers and a ‘parliamentary’ Assembly of all its country members, both managed by an international civil service, was in essence a bold transposition of national constitutional arrangements to the international environment. Like many seminal ideas, of course, this approach to the organization of international institutions has come with familiarity to be seen as something obvious and routine. But in the context of a post-First World War world where there was a natural tendency to look backwards to the pre-catastrophic certainties of the nineteenth century, the League had set out a truly novel manifesto for a new international politics. The fundamental logic of the League’s structure, once the shock of the new had been absorbed, became so deeply embedded in the political consciousness that any successor organization would naturally tend towards the same basic architecture. The purposes of the League, or at any rate those envisioned by its American planners and their supporters, were also startlingly new. Responsibility for the security and defense of all member countries was, as far as possible, to be removed from those countries themselves. The fears and insecurities which had generated the arms races and aggressive alliances that evidently lay at the root of the catastrophe of 1914–18 would be alleviated by the construction of nothing less than a new world order. National security and therefore international security would now, the visionaries of the League proposed, become the collective responsibility of the world community working through the structures of its new global organisation. Again, this new ‘multilateralism’ was both strikingly bold and somehow obvious, and the basic idea outlived the League itself.

Inter-governmentalism: International organization based on institutions within which states cooperate without surrendering significant parts of their national sovereignty; the UN is in most respects an intergovernmental organization but the collective security articles of its Charter do involve some significant qualifications of sovereignty.

Multilateralism: Commitment to collective, institutional responses to international challenges through the UN or other organisations (rather than unilateral ones by individual states).

Managing Post-war adjustment

During its first decade the League of Nations made a hugely valuable contribution to the management of the post-war international system. Throughout the 1920s it provided mediation in border disputes at various times between such neighbors as Finland and Sweden, Yugoslavia and Albania, and Hungary and Czechoslovakia. It had also initiated what were in effect international peacekeeping operations. One such force was deployed in the disputed Saar territory between France and Germany. In the aftermath of the war the predominantly German Saar was removed from Berlin’s control and ‘internationalised’ pending a future act of self-determination. This arrangement was itself an achievement for the new international values represented by the League. Initially, France had intended simply to annex the heavily industrialised territory as both punishment and reparation for the damage inflicted on its own industry by Germany’s war of aggression. Instead the French government was prevailed on to accept the economic benefits of the Saar but with the territory placed under a League of Nations administration until 1935. At that date permanent sovereignty over the Saar would be determined by a popular vote of its inhabitants. This was in effect the precursor to the UN’s provision of temporary administrations in such disputed regions as West New Guinea in the 1960s and East Timor and Kosovo at the end of the century. Intriguingly, though, in the case of the Saar the ‘final status’ options included the future government of the territory by the League of Nations itself in perpetuity, a radical choice never offered subsequently by the UN. In the event, the 1935 plebiscite – policed by a peacekeeping force composed of British, Italian, Dutch and Swedish troops – resulted in an overwhelming vote for a return to German sovereignty [Doc. 1, p. 116]. Almost one in ten of those voting, however, would have preferred to remain ‘citizens of the League’. An international administration and security force also controlled Danzig (the modern-day Polish city of Gdansk) which was removed from German administration and declared a Free City, a status it maintained until it was forcibly reintegrated into Germany by the Nazis in 1939. Elsewhere the League or other multinational agencies supervised and policed with international forces plebiscites designed to settle fraught post-war border issues on the basis of national self-determination (Walters, 1960). The League also brought a new moral sensibility to the question of colonialism when, instead of the colonies of the defeated powers in 1918 simply being transferred to the victors, they were made the responsibility of the League which ‘mandated’ their administration and responsibility for their eventual self-determination to appropriate member states. This system was not without its difficulties, and in a number of cases led directly or indirectly to United Nations peace operations later in the century. This was the case in South West Africa (Namibia) which was mandated from Germany to South Africa, and in both Rwanda and Burundi which passed from German imperial rule to be mandated to Belgium. Nevertheless, the new system (inherited as ‘Trusteeship’ by the United Nations), marked a clear advance on the post-conflict values of the past.

Plebiscite: Popular vote (or referendum) often used to establish the political future of a designated territory (thus embodying the principle of self-determination).

Mandate system: League of Nations innovation whereby the colonies of the defeated powers in the First World War were ‘mandated’ to the victors not as acquisitions but as responsibilities to be prepared for self determination; replaced by the UN Trusteeship system.

The breakdown of the collective idea

Despite these bright prospects, a fatal fissure quickly opened at the heart of the new institutionalism. The United States – in the person of President Woodrow Wilson – had driven the planning of the League as part of the Versailles Treaty negotiations. Ultimately, however, the US Congress refused to ratify American membership. As a result, responsibility for the direction of the new organisation passed from those whose vision had guided its construction to the more diplomatically conservative Europeans like Britain and France. In time it became clear that the nature of international relations in the 1920s would be in sharp contrast with that of the following decade. By the early 1930s the international environment had begun to change. The ‘posttraumatic’ calm of the immediate post-war years now gave way to a new instability. Territorial and ideological revisionism on the part of states which for various reasons rejected the post-Versailles status quo challenged the principles of the League whose origins were inextricably tied to that settlement. It seemed that the ‘successes’ of the League in soothing the international system of the 1920s perhaps had more to do with the character of the system than the actions of the organisation. And, it must be said, the League itself, or at least its leading members, bore some responsibility for the emerging tensions within the system. Not only had the League of Nations been born of the Versailles treaty, which had become an object of hate for some and disappointment for others, but in its first years it had denied membership to a number of key powers, most importantly Germany and the Soviet Union. Their eventual admission could not eradicate their sense of exclusion from the system which the League sought to manage. In this deteriorating climate the capacity of the League to translate collective security from theory into a practical tool of international relations was now put under severe test. It was a test that the organisation – or more correctly the dominant powers within it – ultimately failed. The League’s collective security plans were outlined in article 10 of its Covenant, its basic constitutional document [Doc. 2, p. 117]. Joint measures were to be taken to preserve the territorial integrity of member states ‘against external aggression’. Tellingly, however, the actual means by which this was to be done were left vague. The League Council had the responsibility to advise on methods to be employed when necessary. The strongest instrument of enforcement which members were supposedly required to apply on the ‘direction’ of the Council was economic sanctions. The Council might ‘recommend’ military action but members were under no obligation to comply, according to article 16 of the Covenant (Archer, 2001). On the rare occasions when economic sanctions were implemented by the League, many members simply declined to participate in them. In this way Italy’s aggression against the African state of Abyssinia (Ethiopia) in 1935 went effectively unpunished. A range of sanctions were agreed belatedly, but they were disregarded by member states which for political or economic reasons did not wish to confront the Fascist regime in Rome (Armstrong, 1982). Earlier, in 1931, the League had been even more passive in the face of Japan’s naked aggression against China in Manchuria. For the big European powers in the League Council this conflict in a remote part of Asia was simply not important enough in the calculation of their own national interests to justify any robust action. In both these cases the central weakness in the concept of collective security in a world of sovereign states was exposed. However high-minded and idealistic the original conception of the League presented by Woodrow Wilson at Versailles, older and harsher realities governed the behaviour of the states which now dominated the institution (Williams, 2007). States like Britain and France had traditionally conducted their foreign policies on the basis of narrowly defined national interests. The calculation of these interests rarely went beyond considerations of the physical security of the state and its economic well-being (Bennett, 1994). In this sense the international system of the 1930s was, as international relations theorists would put it, highly ‘realist’ and ‘state-centric’. The more generous vision of national interest as best safeguarded by a just and secure global system – the conception at the heart of collective security thinking – simply did not progress during the life of the League. In the dangerous international conditions of the 1930s the League retreated from the ethical high ground it originally tried to occupy. The terrible fate of China at the hands of Japan featured hardly at all when the powers which made up the League Council made their separate calculations of national interests. Italy, being closer to the centre of a still predominantly European international system, was more problematic – but not much. As a result, in the second half of the 1930s as the world stumbled towards another general war the League became marginalised in global politics. National security remained, as it always had been, the responsibility of the individual state and its alliance partners. Once again a cycle of world conflict would precede a new attempt to reconstruct international security on a multilateral basis. As we have emphasised already, though, the new project did not begin from a tabula rasa. The model and the experience of the League was there to be drawn on, even if those utilising it for the new body were reluctant to acknowledge the fact (Northedge, 1985).

Collective security: The multilateral maintenance of international security (based on the United Nations or other international body) rather than by sectional actions on the part of individual states or competing military alliances.

Abyssinia: Older name of present-day Ethiopia; invaded by Italy in 1935.

History of UNICEF

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

1946: Food to Europe
After World War II, European children face famine and disease. UNICEF is created in December 1946 by the United Nations to provide food, clothing and health care to them

1953: UNICEF becomes permanent part of the UN
The UN General Assembly extends UNICEF’s mandate indefinitely. UNICEF begins a successful global campaign against yaws, a disfiguring disease affecting millions of children, and one that can be cured with penicillin.

1954: Danny Kaye
The movie star Danny Kaye becomes UNICEF’s “Ambassador at Large.” His film Assignment Children, about UNICEF’s work in Asia, is seen by more than 100 million people.

1959: Declaration of the Rights of the Child
The UN General Assembly adopts the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, which defines children’s rights to protection, education, health care, shelter and good nutrition.

1961: Education
Following more than a decade of focus on child health issues, UNICEF expands its interests to address the needs of the whole child. Thus begins an abiding concern with education, starting with support to teacher training and classroom equipment in newly independent countries.

1965: Nobel Peace Prize
UNICEF is awarded the 1965 Nobel Peace Prize “for the promotion of brotherhood among nations.”

1979: International Year of the Child
Marked by celebrations around the world, people and organizations reaffirm their commitment to children’s rights

1981: Breastfeeding Code approved
The World Health Assembly adopts the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in order to encourage breastfeeding, and in so doing diminish the threats to infant health.

1982: Child Survival and Development Revolution
UNICEF launches a drive to save the lives of millions of children each year. The ‘revolution’ is based on four simple, low-cost techniques: growth monitoring, oral rehydration therapy, breastfeeding and immunization.

1987: Landmark UNICEF study
UNICEF’s study Adjustment with a Human Face prompts a global debate on how to protect children and women from the malign effects of the economic adjustments and reforms taken to reduce national debt in poor countries.

1989: Convention on the Rights of the Child
The Convention is adopted by the UN General Assembly. It enters into force in September 1990. It becomes the most widely- and rapidly-accepted human rights treaty in history

1990: World Summit for Children
An unprecedented summit of Heads of State and Government at the United Nations in New York City sets 10-year goals for children’s health, nutrition and education.

1996: Children and conflict
War’s effect on children receives serious attention in the Machel Report: The Impact of Armed Conflict on Children, a study supported by UNICEF

1998
United Nations Security Council debates children and conflict
The Council’s first open debate on the subject reflects the strength of international concern over the effects of war on children.

2001: Say Yes for Children campaign launched
The Global Movement for Children begins mobilizing every citizen of every nation to change the world with children. The Say Yes for Children campaign builds on this momentum, with millions of children and adults around the world pledging their support for critical actions to improve children’s lives

2002: Special Session on Children
A landmark Special Session of the UN General Assembly was convened to review progress since the World Summit for Children in 1990 and re-energize global commitment to children’s rights. It was the first such Session devoted exclusively to children and the first to include them as official delegates.

International Organizations

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

The League of Nations

The United Nations

The U.N.O. and the League of Nations

The Commonwealth of Nations - Commonwealth and its relevance today

The International Court of Justice

UNESCO

ILO

IMF

World Bank

Introduction to International Financial Institute

ICAO

UNICEF

WHO

Description of WHO

UNDP

About UNDP

ASEAN

SAARC

WTO

Nepal National Commission for UNESCO (NNCU)

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

After Nepal was admitted to UNESCO on 1 May 1953 a Nepal Interim National Commission for UNESCO was setup under the Chairmanship of the then Minister for Education on the 26th July 1954. The system of making the Education Secretary as the exofficio Secretary General of the Nepal National Commission for UNESCO demonstrates Nepal’s Commitment to UNESCO. The following are the objectives of the Nepal National Commission for UNESCO, which are manifested in its Constitution 1974 (amendment):

To promote the economic social and intellectual development of the Nepalese People through educational, scientific and cultural activities.
To hold or to encourage to hold seminars, talk programmes, conferences and to promote study and research in the field of education, culture, science, mass communication and social service sectors.
To introduce Nepal’s glorious culture through UNESCO to the world community .
To disseminate and publicize UNESCO objectives and programmes to a wider audience.
To extend co-operation to the programmes conducted by UNESCO at the regional and international levels.
To provide support for the implementation of the national as well as regional projects and programmes conducted in co – operation with UNESCO.

The UNESCO Constitution provides the overarching framework to structure the Nepal National Commission for UNESCO.

According to the Constitution the structure or the frame of NATCOM comprises the following:

Commission
Executive Committee, Subject Committees and Special Committees
Secretariat

Field of Actions

Activities organized by the Nepal National Commission for UNESCO in the following UNESCO related sector.

Education

Education for All (EFA)
School Education
Higher Education
Literacy
Peace Education
Education for Sustainable Development
Education for International Understanding
Gender in Education
ICT in Education

Culture

World Heritage
Cultural Diversity
Tangible Culture
Intangible Culture
Inter Cultural Dialogue

Social Science

Ethics
Human Rights
Poverty Eradication
Democracy

Science

Science and Technology
Science Education
Technology Transfer
Environment
Sustainable Development

Communication and Information

Media Development
Press Freedom
ICT and Mass Communication

The International Court of Justice

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

General Features:

The principal judicial organ of the United Nations. Its seat is at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands).
Began work in 1946, when it replaced the Permanent Court of International Justice.
Operates under a Statute largely similar to that of its predecessor, which is an integral part of the Charter of the United Nations

Functions

To settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted to it by States began work in 1946, when it replaced the Permanent Court of International Justice
To give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized international organs and agencies

Structure

composed of 15 judges elected to nine-year terms of office by the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council
It may not include more than one judge of any nationality
They have international personalities do not represent their governments

Working of the Court

Only States may apply to and appear before the Court
Membership is not conditional to UN membership
The Court is competent to entertain a dispute only if the States concerned have accepted its jurisdiction

The Legal Sources of the Court

international treaties and conventions in force
international custom
the general principles of law
judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists

Criticism of UN

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

There are no Muslim countries in the Security Council.
Africa and Latin America do not have representatives in the Security Council.
Economically powerful states like Japan and Germany are not in the Security Council.
Important states like Brazil, Nigeria, and India want to have a place in the Security Council.
Security Council is composed of the victorious states of the Second World War.

SAARC Charter

International Organizations — Sun, 18 Aug 2013 05:41:42 +0000

We, the Heads of State or Government of BANGLADESH, BHUTAN, INDIA, MALDIVES, NEPAL, PAKISTAN and SRI LANKA;

Desirous of promoting peace, stability, amity and progress in the region through strict adherence to the principles of the UNITED NATIONS CHARTER and NON-ALIGNMENT, particularly respect for the principles of sovereign equality, territorial integrity, national independence, non-use of force and non-interference in the internal affairs of other States and peaceful settlement of all disputes;
Conscious that in an increasingly interdependent world, the objectives of peace, freedom, social justice and economic prosperity are best achieved in the SOUTH ASIAN region by fostering mutual understanding, good neighbourly relations and meaningful cooperation among the Member States which are bound by ties of history and culture;
Aware of the common problems, interests and aspirations of the peoples of SOUTH ASIA and the need for joint action and enhanced cooperation within their respective political and economic systems and cultural traditions;
Convinced that regional cooperation among the countries of SOUTH ASIA is mutually beneficial, desirable and necessary for promoting the welfare and improving the quality of life of the peoples of the region;
Convinced further that economic, social and technical cooperation among the countries of SOUTH ASIA would contribute significantly to national and collective self-reliance;
Recognising that increased cooperation, contacts and exchanges among the countries of the region will contribute to the promotion of friendship and understanding among their peoples;
Recalling the DECLARATION signed by their Foreign Ministers in NEW DELHI on August 2, 1983 and noting the progress achieved in regional cooperation;
Reaffirming their determination to promote such cooperation within an institutional framework;

DO HEREBY AGREE to establish an organisation to be known as SOUTH ASIAN ASSOCIATION FOR REGIONAL COOPERATION hereinafter referred to as the ASSOCIATION, with the following objectives, principles, institutional and financial arrangements:

Objectives

The objectives of the ASSOCIATION shall be:

Article I

to promote the welfare of the peoples of SOUTH ASIA and to improve their quality of life;
to accelerate economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region and to provide all individuals the opportunity to live in dignity and to realise their full potentials;
to promote and strengthen collective self-reliance among the countries of SOUTH ASIA; d) to contribute to mutual trust, understanding and appreciation of one another’s problems;
to promote active collaboration and mutual assistance in the economic, social, cultural, technical and scientific fields;
to strengthen cooperation with other developing countries;
to strengthen cooperation among themselves in international forums on matters of common interests; and
to cooperate with international and regional organisations with similar aims and purposes.

Article II: PRINCIPLES

Cooperation within the framework of the ASSOCIATION shall be based on respect for the principles of sovereign equality, territorial integrity, political independence, non-interference in the internal affairs of other States and mutual benefit.
Such cooperation shall not be a substitute for bilateral and multilateral cooperation but shall complement them.
Such cooperation shall not be inconsistent with bilateral and multilateral obligations.

**Article III: MEETINGS OF THE HEADS OF STATE OR GOVERNMENT

The Heads of State or Government shall meet once a year or more often as and when considered necessary by the Member States.

Article IV: COUNCIL OF MINISTERS

A Council of Ministers consisting of the Foreign Ministers of the Member States shall be established with the following functions:
- formulation of the policies of the ASSOCIATION;
- review of the progress of cooperation under the ASSOCIATION;
- decision on new areas of cooperation;
- establishment of additional mechanism under the ASSOCIATION as deemed necessary;
- decision on other matters of general interest to the ASSOCIATION.
The Council of Ministers shall meet twice a year. Extraordinary session of the Council may be held by agreement among the Member States.

Article V: STANDING COMMITTEE

1.The Standing Committee comprising the Foreign Secretaries shall have the following functions:

overall monitoring and coordination of programme of cooperation;
approval of projects and programmes, and the modalities of their financing;
determination of inter-sectoral priorities;
mobilisation of regional and external resources;
identification of new areas of cooperation based on appropriate studies.

The Standing Committee shall meet as often as deemed necessary.
The Standing Committee shall submit periodic reports to the Council of Ministers and make reference to it as and when necessary for decisions on policy matters.

Article VI: TECHNICAL COMMITTEES

Technical Committees comprising representatives of Member States shall be responsible for the implementation, coordination and monitoring of the programmes in their respective areas of cooperation.
They shall have the following terms of reference:
- determination of the potential and the scope of regional cooperation in agreed areas;
- formulation of programmes and preparation of projects;
- determination of financial implications of sectoral programmes;
- formulation of recommendations regarding apportionment of costs;
- implementation and coordination of sectoral programmes;
- monitoring of progress in implementation.
The Technical Committees shall submit periodic reports to the Standing Committee.
The Chairmanship of the Technical Committees shall normally rotate among Member States in alphabetical order every two years.
The Technical Committees may, inter-alia, use the following mechanisms and modalities, if and when considered necessary:
- meetings of heads of national technical agencies;
- meetings of experts in specific fields;
- contact amongst recognised centres of excellence in the region.

Article VII: ACTION COMMITTEES

The Standing Committee may set up Action Committees comprising Member States concerned with implementation of projects involving more than two but not all Member States.

Article VIII: SECRETARIAT

There shall be a Secretariat of the ASSOCIATION.

Article IX: FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS

1.The contribution of each Member State towards financing of the activities of the ASSOCIATION shall be voluntary.

Each Technical Committee shall make recommendations for the apportionment of costs of implementing the programmes proposed by it.
In case sufficient financial resources cannot be mobilized within the region for funding activities of the ASSOCIATION, external financing from appropriate sources may be mobilized with the approval of or by the Standing Committee.

Article X

General Provisions

Decisions at all levels shall be taken on the basis of unanimity.
Bilateral and contentious issues shall be excluded from the deliberations.

IN FAITH WHEREOF We Have Set Our Hands And Seals Hereunto. DONE In DHAKA, BANGLADESH,On This The Eighth Day Of December Of The Year One Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Five.

Hussain Muhammad Ershad
-PRESIDENT OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF BANGLADESH

Jigme Singye Wangchuk
-KING OF BHUTAN

Rajiv Gandhi
-PRIME MINISTER OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA

Maumoon Abdul Gayoom
-PRESIDENT OF THE REBUPLIC OF MALDIVES

Birendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev
-KING OF NEPAL

Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq
-PRESIDENT OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN

Junius Richard Jayewardene
-PRESIDENT OF DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA