TyroCity: International Organizations

Introduction to International Financial Institute

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

An international financial institute, World Bank provides developing countries with loans for capital programmes. The bank sets its objective to reduce poverty in these countries. By law, all of its decisions must be guided by a commitment to promote foreign investment, international trade and facilitate capital investment.

In IBRD (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development) and the IDA (International Development Association) are two institutions shaping up World Bank which is how it differs from the World Bank Group. The World Bank Group comprises of three more institutions in IFC (International Finance Corporation), MIGA (Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency), and ICSID (International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes).

Conclusion of The League of Nations

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

According to most of the thinkers, existence of League Of Nations was at wrong time.

Then, all the nations was indulge in the concept of narrow nationalism and sovereignty. Situation would have been much more different had except the concept of Internationalism.

Principles of the United Nations

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

The following are the principles of United Nations.

All Member States have sovereign equality.
All Member States must obey the Charter.
Countries must try to settle their differences by peaceful means.
Countries must avoid using force or threatening to use force.
The UN may not interfere in the domestic affairs of any country.
Countries should try to assist the United Nations.

Background to the International Court of Justice

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

The International Court of Justice commonly referred to as the World Court or ICJ is the primary judicial organ of the United Nations. It is based in the Peace Palace in The Hague, the Netherlands. Its main functions are to settle legal disputes submitted to it by states and to provide advisory opinions on legal questions submitted to it by duly authorized international organs, agencies, and the UN General Assembly.

Activities

Established in 1945 by the UN Charter, the Court began work in 1946 as the successor to the Permanent Court of International Justice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice, similar to that of its predecessor, is the main constitutional document constituting and regulating the Court.[2] The Court’s workload covers a wide range of judicial activity. To date, the ICJ has dealt with relatively few cases. However, since the 1980s there has been a clear increase in willingness to use the Court, especially among developing countries. After the court ruled that the U.S.’s covert war against Nicaragua was in violation of international law (Nicaragua v. United States), the United States withdrew from compulsory jurisdiction in 1986. The United States accepts the court’s jurisdiction only on a case-by-case basis.[3] Chapter XIV of the United Nations Charter authorizes the UN Security Council to enforce World Court rulings. However, such enforcement is subject to the veto power of the five permanent members of the Council.

ICJ’s Contribution in Development of International Law

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

Article 94 establishes the duty of all UN members to comply with decisions of the Court involving them. If parties do not comply, the issue may be taken before the Security Council for enforcement action. There are obvious problems with such a method of enforcement. If the judgment is against one of the permanent five members of the Security Council or its allies, any resolution on enforcement would then be vetoed. This occurred, for example, after the Nicaragua case, when Nicaragua brought the issue of the U.S.’s non-compliance with the Court’s decision before the Security Council.[5] Furthermore, if the Security Council refuses to enforce a judgment against any other state, there is no method of forcing the state to comply. Furthermore, the most effective form to take action for the Security Council, coercive action under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, can be justified only if international peace and security are at stake. The Security Council has never done this so far.

The relationship between the ICJ and the Security Council, and the separation of their powers, was considered by the Court in 1992 in the Pan Am case. The Court had to consider an application from Libya for the order of provisional measures to protect its rights, which, it alleged, were being infringed by the threat of economic sanctions by the United Kingdom and United States. The problem was that these sanctions had been authorized by the Security Council, which resulted with a potential conflict between the Chapter VII functions of the Security Council and the judicial function of the Court. The Court decided, by eleven votes to five, that it could not order the requested provisional measures because the rights claimed by Libya, even if legitimate under theMontreal Convention, prima facie could not be regarded as appropriate since the action was ordered by the Security Council. In accordance with Article 103 of the UN Charter, obligations under the Charter took precedence over other treaty obligations. Nevertheless the Court declared the application admissible in 1998.[20] A decision on the merits has not been given since the parties (United Kingdom, United States and Libya) settled the case out of court in 2003.

There was a marked reluctance on the part of a majority of the Court to become involved in a dispute in such a way as to bring it potentially into conflict with the Council. The Court stated in theNicaragua case that there is no necessary inconsistency between action by the Security Council and adjudication by the ICJ. However, where there is room for conflict, the balance appears to be in favor of the Security Council.

Should either party fail “to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court”, the Security Council may be called upon to “make recommendations or decide upon measures” if the Security Council deems such actions necessary. In practice, the Court’s powers have been limited by the unwillingness of the losing party to abide by the Court’s ruling, and by the Security Council’s unwillingness to impose consequences. However, in theory, “so far as the parties to the case are concerned, a judgment of the Court is binding, final and without appeal,” and “by signing the Charter, a State Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with any decision of the International Court of Justice in a case to which it is a party.”

For example, the United States had previously accepted the Court’s compulsory jurisdiction upon its creation in 1946, but in Nicaragua v. United States withdrew its acceptance following the Court’s judgment in 1984 that called on the U.S. to “cease and to refrain” from the “unlawful use of force” against the government of Nicaragua. The Court ruled (with only the American judge dissenting) that the United States was “in breach of its obligation under the Treaty of Friendship with Nicaragua not to use force against Nicaragua” and ordered the United States to pay war reparations.

Examples of contentious cases

A complaint by the United States in 1980 that Iran was detaining American diplomats in Tehran in violation of international law.[21]
A dispute between Tunisia and Libya over the delimitation of the continental shelf between them.[22]
A complaint by Pakistan on behalf of the people of Kashmir over oppression against India and charged it with State terrorism directly continuing violations of the international law.
A dispute over the course of the maritime boundary dividing the U.S. and Canada in the Gulf of Maine area.[23]
A complaint by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia against the member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization regarding their actions in the Kosovo War. This was denied on 15 December 2004 due to lack of jurisdiction, because the FRY was not a party to the ICJ statute at the time it made the application.[24]
A complaint by the Republic of Macedonia (former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) that Greece is, by vetoing their accession to NATO, in violation of the Interim Accord of 13 September 1995[25] between the two countries, was decided in favor of Macedonia on 5 December 2011.[26]

Generally, the Court has been most successful resolving border delineation and the use of oceans and waterways. While the Court has, in some instances, resolved claims by one State espoused on behalf of its nationals, the Court has generally refrained from hearing contentious cases that are political in nature, due in part to its lack of enforcement mechanism and its lack of compulsory jurisdiction. The Court has generally found it did not have jurisdiction to hear cases involving the use of force.

Law applied

When deciding cases, the Court applies international law as summarised in Article 38 of the ICJ Statute provides that in arriving at its decisions the Court shall apply international conventions, international custom, and the “general principles of law recognized by civilized nations”. It may also refer to academic writing (“the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations”) and previous judicial decisions to help interpret the law, although the Court is not formally bound by its previous decisions under the doctrine of stare decisis. Article 59 makes clear that the common law notion of precedent or stare decisis does not apply to the decisions of the ICJ. The Court’s decision binds only the parties to that particular controversy. Under 38(1)(d), however, the Court may consider its own previous decisions.

If the parties agree, they may also grant the Court the liberty to decide ex aequo et bono (“in justice and fairness”),[27] granting the ICJ the freedom to make an equitable decision based on what is fair under the circumstances. This provision has not been used in the Court’s history. So far the International Court of Justice has dealt with about 130 cases.

Procedure

The ICJ is vested with the power to make its own rules. Court procedure is set out in Rules of Court of the International Court of Justice 1978 (as amended on 29 September 2005).[9]

Cases before the ICJ will follow a standard pattern. The case is lodged by the applicant who files a written memorial setting out the basis of the Court’s jurisdiction and the merits of its claim. The respondent may accept the Court’s jurisdiction and file its own memorial on the merits of the case.

Preliminary objections

A respondent who does not wish to submit to the jurisdiction of the Court may raise Preliminary Objections. Any such objections must be ruled upon before the Court can address the merits of the applicant’s claim. Often a separate public hearing is held on the Preliminary Objections and the Court will render a judgment. Respondents normally file Preliminary Objections to the jurisdiction of the Court and/or the admissibility of the case. Inadmissibility refers to a range of arguments about factors the Court should take into account in deciding jurisdiction; for example, that the issue is not justiciable or that it is not a “legal dispute”.

In addition, objections may be made because all necessary parties are not before the Court. If the case necessarily requires the Court to rule on the rights and obligations of a state that has not consented to the Court’s jurisdiction, the Court will not proceed to issue a judgment on the merits. If the Court decides it has jurisdiction and the case is admissible, the respondent will then be required to file a Memorial addressing the merits of the applicant’s claim. Once all written arguments are filed, the Court will hold a public hearing on the merits.

Once a case has been filed, any party (but usually the Applicant) may seek an order from the Court to protect the status quo pending the hearing of the case. Such orders are known as Provisional (or Interim) Measures and are analogous to interlocutory injunctions in United States law. Article 41 of the statute allows the Court to make such orders. The Court must be satisfied to have prima facie jurisdiction to hear the merits of the case before granting provisional measures.

Applications to intervene

In cases where a third state’s interests are affected, that state may be permitted to intervene in the case, and participate as a full party. Under Article 62, a state “with an interest of a legal nature” may apply; however, it is within the Court’s discretion whether or not to allow the intervention. Intervention applications are rare — the first successful application occurred in 1991.

Judgment and remedies

Once deliberation has taken place, the Court will issue a majority opinion. Individual judges may issue separate opinions (if they agree with the outcome reached in the judgment of the court but differ in their reasoning) or dissenting opinions (if they disagree with the majority). No appeal is possible, though any party may ask for the court to clarify if there is a dispute as to the meaning or scope of the court’s judgment.

Criticisms

The International Court has been criticized with respect to its rulings, its procedures, and its authority. As with United Nations criticisms as a whole, many of these criticisms refer more to the general authority assigned to the body by member states through its charter than to specific problems with the composition of judges or their rulings. Major criticisms include:

“Compulsory” jurisdiction is limited to cases where both parties have agreed to submit to its decision, and, as such, instances of aggression tend to be automatically escalated to and adjudicated by the Security Council. According to the sovereignty principle of international law, no nation is superior nor inferior against another. Therefore there is no entity that could force the states into practice of the law or punish the states in case any violation of international law occurs. Therefore, due to the absence of binding force, although there are 191 member states of the ICJ, the members do not necessarily have to accept the jurisdiction. Moreover, the membership of the UN and ICJ does not give the automatic jurisdiction over the member states, but it’s the consent of each states to follow the jurisdiction that matters.
Organizations, private enterprises, and individuals cannot have their cases taken to the International Court, such as to appeal a national supreme court’s ruling. U.N. agencies likewise cannot bring up a case except in advisory opinions (a process initiated by the court and non-binding). Only the states can bring the cases and become the defendants of the cases. This also means that the potential victims of crimes against humanity, such as minor ethnic groups or indigenous peoples.
Other existing international thematic courts, such as the ICC, are not under the umbrella of the International Court. Unlike ICJ, international thematic courts like ICC work independently from United Nations. Such dualistic structure between various international courts sometimes makes it hard for the courts to engage in effective and collective jurisdiction.
The International Court does not enjoy a full separation of powers, with permanent members of the Security Council being able to veto enforcement of even cases to which they consented in advance to be bound.[29] Because the jurisdiction does not have binding force itself, in many cases the instances of aggression are adjudicated by Security Council by adopting a resolution, etc.. Therefore it is very likely for the member states of Security Council to avoid the responsibility brought up by International Court of Justice, as shown in the example of Nicaragua v. United States

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

About UNDP

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

For the first time in history, the world may see the end of extreme poverty—as soon as the next generation. But worrisome gaps and risks remain. Stark inequalities persist, and many of those who have escaped poverty are vulnerable to setbacks. As one of the world’s largest multilateral development agencies, present in over 170 countries and territories, UNDP is on the frontlines of anticipating, understanding and acting on today’s opportunities and risks. Our 2014-2017 Strategic Plan articulates our vision. We help countries eradicate extreme poverty, and roll back inequalities and exclusion. We act on three fronts to achieve development that is sustainable, inclusive and resilient. First, UNDP encourages a shift to sustainability, where economic growth benefits poor and marginalized groups, and avoids irreversible environmental damage. Second, we support democratic systems to become inclusive and accountable, and able to meet expectations for participation, services and security. Third, we back efforts to systematically identify and prevent big risks to development, and to help countries and communities with quick recovery, and greater resilience to crisis.

UNDP has nearly 50 years of experience leading the UN’s development work, providing knowledge, practical expertise, and a legacy of trust. Partnership has always been at the core of what we do, but now, more than ever, we are fostering South-South cooperation among developing countries—they have learned many useful lessons through experience. Countries that are already developed also have deep reservoirs of expertise. The imperative is to help link many sources of knowledge and widen the circle of opportunity for all. Through 2015, one of UNDP’s primary responsibilities is supporting countries to make a final, accelerated push to reach the Millennium Development Goals, both in our own programmes and through our leadership of the UN development system. We are also closely engaged in deliberations on a new post-2015 development agenda; our Strategic Plan already aligns with its general directions. We see a more sustainable, inclusive and resilient world within reach, and are fully committed to our role in achieving it.

Africa

Expanding democracy and some of the world’s fastest growing economies are the hallmarks of a new African era. Yet sobering challenges remain, including sharpening disparities between those who benefit from growth and transformation, and those who do not. UNDP helps reduce exclusion, especially for the poorest people, by working to open opportunities—such as to vote, find a job, and access basic, highquality services.

Plans to end poverty in Niger

One of the world’s most impoverished countries, Niger confronts regular droughts and food crises. A better future—and the lives of its people—depend on skillful, stable management of fragile resources. UNDP has backed a national development plan that gives a central role to effective governance in delivering services and solutions to the problems Nigeriens face. This emphasis helped convince international donors to close the plan’s nearly $5 billion funding gap. Among other recent signs of progress: a major programme targeting food security and accelerated actions to achieve the MDGs have boosted irrigated agriculture and reduced malnutrition.

Asia and the Pacific

Asia-Pacific is the world’s fastest growing region as its economic miracle continues to unfold. But this success, while laudable, is vulnerable. Economic growth has not produced enough decent jobs, for example, and natural disasters are more likely to strike here than anywhere else. UNDP helps countries protect and extend development gains.

Recovery and resilience in the Philippines

When Typhoon Haiyan slammed into the Philippines, it became the strongest recorded storm ever to hit land. More than 6,000 people perished; over 14 million suffered losses in one of the country’s poorest areas. UNDP took immediate action to help restore essential infrastructure, livelihoods and public services—65,000 people earned income clearing debris, including from 1,000 kilometres of roads. We also aided national and local governments to manage the response, and, as one of the best precautions against future severe storms, to initiate disaster risk and response mechanisms.

Arab States

The Arab States stand at a crossroads between progress and crisis. UNDP recognizes the region’s many vulnerabilities, and in the face of these, aims to reduce risks and build resilience. Our support includes measures to improve struggling economies, mitigate fallout from instability, and encourage governance that meets expectations for representation and responsive public services.

An inclusive transition in Tunisia

The 2014 passage of Tunisia’s Constitution was a triumph after months of intensive bargaining. It quickly became known for its landmark human rights protections. UNDP helped make the process inclusive through mass public consultations: 80 members of Parliament met with over 6,000 Tunisians citizens in all 24 provinces. Training for over 200 civil society groups facilitated engagement with another 24,000 people. Political leaders agreed that these contributions, amid national transition, were instrumental in forging a consensus that will define the future of the country.

Europe and the CIS

Despite economic crisis, many countries in Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States have kept their development on track. But progress has been uneven, with living standards for some groups failing to meet their aspirations. UNDP helps countries pursue development responsive to all citizens, with a sustainable balancing of human and environmental priorities.

Green energy in Kazakhstan

Renewable energy was once a hard sell in Kazakhstan, with its huge fossil fuel reserves. But long-term UNDP advocacy has prompted an embrace of a greener economy. By 2050, half the country’s energy must come from alternative sources; recent changes in national legislation will expedite new investments in renewables. UNDP has helped develop a nascent wind energy industry with enormous potential, and encouraged efforts to green transportation and buildings. Energy efficiency is now central to the $5.8 billion National Programme on the Modernization of Housing and Municipal Infrastructure.

Latin America and the Caribbean

A decade of progress has transformed Latin America and the Caribbean. Still, growth and the reduction of inequalities are slowing, and opportunities are not equal for all groups such as women, youth, and people of African and indigenous descent. UNDP assists countries to probe and cut the roots of persistent disparities. We encourage broad, meaningful participation in development choices as key to both prosperity and stability.

Pathways to peace in El Salvador

Criminal gangs have given El Salvador some of the world’s highest homicide rates. This plague of violence has complex roots encompassing poverty, scarce jobs, social fragmentation and a history of brutal conflict. UNDP supports solutions on many levels, both to stop crime and open doors to productive development. With our assistance, the national Government has adopted its first policy on justice, security and a peaceful coexistence. New systems track crime statistics, and guns laws have been tightened. Job programmes reach at-risk youth, helping them see that a safe, more hopeful life lies within reach.

Common Wealth of Nations

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

The Commonwealth of Nations, normally referred to as the Commonwealth and formerly known as the British Commonwealth, is an intergovernmental organization of 54 independent member states. All members except Mozambique and Rwanda were part of the British Empire, out of which the Commonwealth developed. The member states cooperate within a framework of common values and goals, as outlined in the Singapore Declaration. These include the promotion of democracy, human rights, good governance, the rule of law, individual liberty, egalitarianism, free trade, multilateralism and world peace.[1] The Commonwealth is not a political union, but an intergovernmental organisation in which countries with diverse social, political and economic backgrounds are regarded as equal in status.

Activities of the Commonwealth are carried out through the permanent Commonwealth Secretariat, headed by the secretary-general, and biennialmeetings of Commonwealth Heads of Government. The symbol of their free association is the Head of the Commonwealth, currently held by Queen Elizabeth II. Elizabeth II is also monarch, separately and independently, of 16 Commonwealth members, which are known as the “Commonwealth realms”. The Commonwealth is a forum for a number of non-governmental organisations, collectively known as the Commonwealth Family, which are fostered through the intergovernmental Commonwealth Foundation. The Commonwealth Games, the Commonwealth’s most visible activity,[2] are a product of one of these organisations. These organisations strengthen the shared culture of the Commonwealth, which extends through common sports, literary heritage, and political and legal practices.[3] Reflecting this, diplomatic missions between Commonwealth countries are designated as high commissions rather than embassies.

History

Origin

In 1884, while visiting Australia, Lord Rosebery described the changing British Empire, as some of its colonies became more independent, as a “Commonwealth of Nations”. Conferences of British and colonial prime ministers occurred periodically from the first one in 1887, leading to the creation of the Imperial Conferences in 1911. The Commonwealth developed from the Imperial Conferences. A specific proposal was presented byJan Christiaan Smuts in 1917 when he coined the term “the British Commonwealth of Nations” and envisioned the “future constitutional relations and readjustments in essence” at the all-important Versailles Conference of 1919 by delegates from the dominions as well as Britain. The term first received imperial statutory recognition in the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921.

In the Balfour Declaration at the 1926 Imperial Conference, Britain and its dominions agreed they were “equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another in any aspect of their domestic or external affairs, though united by common allegiance to the Crown, and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations”. These aspects to the relationship were formalized by the Statute of Westminster in 1931. The statute applied to Canada without the need for ratification, but Australia, New Zealand, and Newfoundland had to ratify the statute for it to take effect. Newfoundland never did, as on 16 February 1934, with the consent of its parliament, the Government of Newfoundland voluntarily ended, and governance reverted to direct control from London. Newfoundland later joined Canada as its tenth province in 1949. Australia and New Zealand ratified the Statute in 1942 and 1947 respectively.

Remaining members gain independence

After World War II ended, the British Empire was gradually dismantled to the 14 British overseas territories still held by the United Kingdom. In April 1949, following the London Declaration, the word “British” was dropped from the title of the Commonwealth to reflect its changing nature. Burma (also known as Myanmar, 1948) and Aden (1967) are the only states that were British colonies at the time of the war not to have joined the Commonwealth upon independence. Former British protectorates and mandates that did not become members of the Commonwealth are Egypt (independent in 1922), Iraq (1932), Transjordan (1946), British Palestine (part of which became the state of Israel in 1948), Sudan (1956), British Somaliland (which united with the former Italian Somaliland in 1960 to form Somalia), Kuwait (1961), Bahrain (1971), Oman (1971), Qatar (1971), and the United Arab Emirates (1971).

Members with heads of state other than the Sovereign

The issue of countries with constitutional structures not based on a shared Crown but that wanted to remain members of the Commonwealth came to a head in 1948 with passage of the Republic of Ireland Act 1948, in which Ireland renounced the sovereignty of the Crown and thus left the Commonwealth. The Ireland Act 1949 passed by the Parliament of Westminster offered citizens of the Republic of Ireland a status similar to that of citizens of the Commonwealth in UK law. The issue was resolved in April 1949 at a Commonwealth prime ministers’ meeting in London. Under the London Declaration, India agreed that, when it became a republic in January 1950, it would accept the British Sovereign as a “symbol of the free association of its independent member nations and as such the Head of the Commonwealth”. Upon hearing this, King George VI told the Indian politician Krishna Menon: “So, I’ve become ‘as such'”.

The other Commonwealth countries recognized India’s continuing membership of the association. At Pakistan’s insistence, India was not regarded as an exceptional case and it was assumed that other states would be accorded the same treatment as India.

The London Declaration is often seen as marking the beginning of the modern Commonwealth. Following India’s precedent, other nations became republics, or constitutional monarchies with their own monarchs, while some countries retained the same monarch as the United Kingdom, but their monarchies developed differently and soon became fully independent of the British monarchy. The monarch of each Commonwealth realm, whilst the same person, is regarded as a separate legal personality for each realm.

New Commonwealth

As the Commonwealth grew, Britain and the pre-1945 dominions became informally known as the “Old Commonwealth”, and planners in the interwar period, like Lord Davies, who had also taken “a prominent part in building up the League of Nations Union” in the United Kingdom, in 1932 founded the New Commonwealth Movement, of which Winston Churchill was the president. The New Commonwealth was a society aimed at creation of an international air force to be the arm of the League of Nations, to allow nations to disarm and safeguard the peace. Some of these ideas were reflected in the United Nations Charter, drafted in Dumbarton Oaks (21 August to 7 October 1944) and San Francisco (25 April to 26 June 1945).

The term “New Commonwealth” has also sometimes been used in the United Kingdom (especially in the 1960s and 1970s) to refer to recently decolonized countries, which are predominantly non-white and developing. It was often used in debates about immigration from these countries.

Objectives and activities

The Commonwealth’s objectives were first outlined in the 1971 Singapore Declaration, which committed the Commonwealth to the institution of world peace; promotion of representative democracy and individual liberty; the pursuit of equality and opposition to racism; the fight against poverty, ignorance, and disease; and free trade. To these were added opposition to discrimination on the basis of gender by the Lusaka Declaration of 1979, and environmental sustainability by the Langkawi Declaration of 1989. These objectives were reinforced by the Harare Declaration in 1991.

The Commonwealth’s current highest-priority aims are on the promotion of democracy and development, as outlined in the 2003 Aso Rock Declaration, which built on those in Singapore and Harare and clarified their terms of reference, stating, “We are committed to democracy, good governance, human rights, gender equality, and a more equitable sharing of the benefits of globalization.” The Commonwealth website lists its areas of work as: Democracy, Economics, Education, Gender, Governance, Human Rights, Law, Small States, Sport, Sustainability, and Youth.

The Commonwealth has long been distinctive as an international forum where developed economies (such as the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Singapore, and New Zealand) and many of the world’s poorer countries seek to reach agreement by consensus. This aim has sometimes been difficult to achieve, as when disagreements over Rhodesia in the late 1960s and 1970s and over apartheid in South Africa in the 1980s led to a cooling of relations between the United Kingdom and African members.

Through a separate voluntary fund, Commonwealth governments support the Commonwealth Youth Program, a division of the Secretariat with offices in Gulu (Uganda), Lusaka (Zambia), Chandigarh (India), Georgetown (Guyana) and Honiara (Solomon Islands).

Structure

Head of the Commonwealth

Under that formula of the London Declaration, Queen Elizabeth II is the Head of the Commonwealth, a title that is currently individually shared with that of Commonwealth realms. However, when the monarch dies the successor to the crown does not automatically become Head of the Commonwealth. The position is symbolic, representing the free association of independent members. Sixteen members of the Commonwealth, known as Commonwealth realms, recognize the Queen as their head of state. The majority of members (33) are republics, and five have monarchs of different royal houses.

Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting

The main decision-making forum of the organization is the biennial Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), where Commonwealth Heads of Government, including (amongst others) Prime Ministers and Presidents, assemble for several days to discuss matters of mutual interest. CHOGM is the successor to the Meetings of Commonwealth Prime Ministers and earlier Imperial Conferences and Colonial Conferences dating back to 1887. There are also regular meetings of finance ministers, law ministers, health ministers, etc. Members in Arrears, as Special Members before them, are not invited to send representatives to either ministerial meetings or CHOGMs.

The head of government hosting the CHOGM is called the Commonwealth Chairperson-in-Office and retains the position until the following CHOGM. After the most recent CHOGM, in Perth, Western Australia, in October 2011, Australia’s then-prime minister, Julia Gillard, became Chairperson-in-Office. In 2013, CHOGM will be held in Colombo, Sri Lanka, from 10–17 November. Sri Lanka’s president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, will become the Chairperson-in-Office and will continue to hold the title until the next CHOGM in Mauritius in 2015.

Commonwealth Secretariat

The Commonwealth Secretariat, established in 1965, is the main intergovernmental agency of the Commonwealth, facilitating consultation and cooperation among member governments and countries. It is responsible to member governments collectively. The Commonwealth of Nations is represented in the United Nations General Assembly by the Secretariat, as an observer.

The Secretariat organizes Commonwealth summits, meetings of ministers, consultative meetings and technical discussions; it assists policy development and provides policy advice, and facilitates multilateral communication among the member governments. It also provides technical assistance to help governments in the social and economic development of their countries and in support of the Commonwealth’s fundamental political values.

The Secretariat is headed by the Commonwealth secretary-general who is elected by Commonwealth heads of government for no more than two four-year terms. The secretary-general and two deputy secretaries-general direct the divisions of the Secretariat. The present secretary-general is Kamalesh Sharma, from India, who took office on 1 April 2008, succeeding Don McKinnon of New Zealand (2000–2008), and was re-elected in 2011 to his second term in 2012. The first secretary-general was Arnold Smith of Canada (1965–75), followed by Sir Shridath Ramphal of Guyana (1975–90) and Emeka Anyaoku of Nigeria (1990–99).

Membership

Membership criteria

The criteria for membership of the Commonwealth of Nations have developed over time from a series of separate documents. The Statute of Westminster 1931, as a fundamental founding document of the organization, laid out that membership required dominion hood. The 1949 London Declaration ended this, allowing republican and indigenous monarchic members on the condition that they recognized the British monarch as the “Head of the Commonwealth”. In the wake of the wave of decolonization in the 1960s, these constitutional principles were augmented by political, economic, and social principles. The first of these was set out in 1961, when it was decided that respect for racial equality would be a requirement for membership, leading directly to the withdrawal of South Africa’s re-application (which they were required to make under the formula of the London Declaration upon becoming a republic). The 14 points of the 1971 Singapore Declaration dedicated all members to the principles of world peace, liberty, human rights, equality, and free trade.

These criteria were unenforceable for two decades, until, in 1991, the Harare Declaration was issued, dedicating the leaders to applying the Singapore principles to the completion of decolonization, the end of the Cold War, and the end of apartheid in South Africa. The mechanisms by which these principles would be applied were created, and the manner clarified, by the 1995 Millbrook Commonwealth Action Program, which created the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), which has the power to rule on whether members meet the requirements for membership under the Harare Declaration. Also in 1995, an Inter-Governmental Group was created to finalize and codify the full requirements for membership. Upon reporting in 1997, as adopted under the Edinburgh Declaration, the Inter-Governmental Group ruled that any future members would have to have a direct constitutional link with an existing member.

In addition to this new rule, the former rules were consolidated into a single document. These requirements are that members must accept and comply with the Harare principles, be fully sovereign states, recognize the monarch of the Commonwealth realms as the Head of the Commonwealth, accept the English language as the means of Commonwealth communication, and respect the wishes of the general population with regard to Commonwealth membership. These requirements had undergone review, and a report on potential amendments was presented by the Committee on Commonwealth Membership at the 2007 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. New members were not admitted at this meeting, though applications for admission were considered at the 2009 CHOGM.

New members must “as a general rule” have a direct constitutional link to an existing member. In most cases, this is due to being a former colony of the United Kingdom, but some have links to other countries, either exclusively or more directly (e.g. Samoa to New Zealand, Papua New Guinea to Australia, and Namibia to South Africa). The first member to be admitted without having any constitutional link to the British Empire or a Commonwealth member was Mozambique, a former Portuguese colony, in 1995 following its first democratic elections and South Africa’s re-admission in 1994. Mozambique’s controversial entry led to the Edinburgh Declaration and the current membership guidelines. In 2009, Rwanda became the second Commonwealth member admitted not to have any such constitutional links. It was a Belgian trust territory that had been a German colony until World War I. Consideration for its admission was considered an “exceptional circumstance” by the Commonwealth Secretariat.

Members

The Commonwealth comprises 54 countries (including one currently suspended member), across all six inhabited continents. The members have a combined population of 2.1 billion people, almost a third of the world population, of which 1.17 billion live in India and 94% live in Asia and Africa combined. After India, the next-largest Commonwealth countries by population are Pakistan (176 million), Bangladesh (156 million),

Nigeria (154 million), the United Kingdom (61 million) and South Africa (49 million). Tuvalu is the smallest member, with about 10,000 people.

The land area of the Commonwealth nations is about 31,500,000 km2 (12,200,000 sq mi), or about 21% of the total world land area. The three largest Commonwealth nations by area are Canada at 9,984,670 km2 (3,855,100 sq mi), Australia at 7,617,930 km2 (2,941,300 sq mi), and India at 3,287,263 km2 (1,269,219 sq mi). The Commonwealth members have a combined gross domestic product of over $10 trillion, 65% of which is accounted for by the four largest economies: the United Kingdom ($2.2 trillion), India ($1.7 trillion), Canada ($1.5 trillion) and Australia ($1.4 trillion).

The status of “Member in Arrears” is used to denote those that are in arrears in paying subscription dues. The status was originally known as “special membership”, but was renamed on the Committee on Commonwealth Membership’s recommendation. There are currently no Members in Arrears. The most recent Member in Arrears, Nauru, returned to full membership in June 2011. Nauru has alternated between special and full membership since joining the Commonwealth, depending on its financial situation.

Applicants

South Sudan has applied to join the Commonwealth.

Andrew Roberts, the British author of A History of the English-Speaking Peoples since 1900, has written: “We should think carefully about what the Commonwealth means before we allow just anyone to join. It should mean a connection with the British Crown however historical, and an appreciation of the political culture of the English-speaking peoples. And that seems to be lacking in every country [that would like to join] apart from Israel.”[40] In 2006, Commonwealth Secretary-General Don McKinnon said: “Many people have assumed an interest from Israel, but there has been no formal approach.”

Other eligible applicants could be any of the remaining inhabited British overseas territories, Crown dependencies, Australian external territories and Associated States of New Zealand if they become fully independent.[41] Many such jurisdictions are already directly represented within the Commonwealth, particularly through the Commonwealth Family.

At the time of the Suez Crisis in 1956, in the face of colonial unrest and international tensions, French Prime Minister Guy Mollet proposed to British Prime Minister Anthony Eden that their two countries be joined in a “union”. When that proposal was turned down, Mollet suggested that France be allowed to join the Commonwealth, with “a common citizenship arrangement on the Irish basis.”

In 1957, after both proposals had been rejected, France signed the Treaty of Rome with West Germany and the other founding nations of the Common Market, later to become the European Union, which the United Kingdom joined in 1973. Malta and Cyprus, also Commonwealth members, joined in 2004.

Suspension

In recent years, the Commonwealth has suspended several members “from the Councils of the Commonwealth” for “serious or persistent violations” of the Harare Declaration, particularly in abrogating their responsibility to have democratic government. This is done by the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), which meets regularly to address potential breaches of the Harare Declaration. Suspended members are not represented at meetings of Commonwealth leaders and ministers, although they remain members of the organization. Currently, there is one suspended member, Fiji.

Nigeria was suspended between 11 November 1995 and 29 May 1999, following its execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa on the eve of the 1995 CHOGM. Pakistan was the second country to be suspended, on 18 October 1999, following the military coup by Pervez Musharraf. The Commonwealth’s longest suspension came to an end on 22 May 2004, when Pakistan’s suspension was lifted following the restoration of the country’s constitution. Pakistan was suspended for a second time, far more briefly, for six months from 22 November 2007, when Musharraf called a state of emergency. Zimbabwe was suspended in 2002 over concerns with the electoral and land reform policies of Robert Mugabe’s ZANU-PF government, before it withdrew from the organization in 2003.

Fiji, which was not a member of the Commonwealth between 1987 and 1997 as a result of two coups d’état, has been suspended twice, with the first imposed from 6 June 2000 to 20 December 2001 after another coup.[52] Fiji has been suspended again since 8 December 2006, following the most recent coup. At first, the suspension applied only to membership on the Councils of the Commonwealth. After failing to meet a Commonwealth deadline for setting a date for national elections by 2010, Fiji was “fully suspended” on 1 September 2009. The Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, Kamalesh Sharma, confirmed that full suspension meant that Fiji would be excluded from Commonwealth meetings, sporting events and the technical assistance program (with an exception for assistance in re-establishing democracy). Sharma also stated that Fiji would remain a member of the Commonwealth during its suspension, but would be excluded from emblematic representation by the secretariat.

Termination of membership

As membership is purely voluntary, member governments can choose at any time to leave the Commonwealth. Pakistan left on 30 January 1972 in protest at the Commonwealth’s recognition of breakaway Bangladesh, but rejoined on 2 August 1989. Zimbabwe’s membership was suspended in 2002 on the grounds of alleged human rights violations and deliberate misgovernment, and Zimbabwe’s government terminated its membership in 2003.

Although heads of government have the power to suspend member states from active participation, the Commonwealth has no provision for the expulsion of members. Until 2007, Commonwealth realms that became republics automatically ceased to be members, until (like India in 1950) they obtained the permission of other members to remain in the organization. This policy has been changed, so if any current Commonwealth realms were to become republics, they would not have to go through this process. Ireland left the Commonwealth when it declared itself a republic, on 18 April 1949, after enacting the Republic of Ireland Act 1948.

South Africa was prevented from continuing as a member after it became a republic in 1961, due to hostility from many members, particularly those in Africa and Asia as well as Canada, to its policy of apartheid. The South African government withdrew its application to remain in the organization as a republic when it became clear at the 1961 Meeting of Commonwealth Prime Ministers that any such application would be rejected. South Africa was re-admitted to the Commonwealth in 1994, following the end of apartheid earlier that year.

The declaration of a republic in Fiji in 1987, after military coups designed to deny Indo-Fijians political power, was not accompanied by an application to remain. Commonwealth membership was held to have lapsed until 1997, after discriminatory provisions in the republican constitution were repealed and reapplication for membership made.

The Transfer of sovereignty over Hong Kong in 1997 ended the colony’s ties to the Commonwealth through the United Kingdom. The government of Hong Kong, as a special administrative region of China, did not pursue membership. Hong Kong SAR has nevertheless continued to participate in some of the organizations of the Commonwealth family, such as the Commonwealth Lawyers Association, the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, the Association of Commonwealth Universities and the Commonwealth Association of Legislative Counsel.

Commonwealth Family

Commonwealth countries share many links outside government, with over a hundred Commonwealth-wide non-governmental organizations, notably for sport, culture, education, law and charity. The Association of Commonwealth Universities is an important vehicle for academic links, particularly through scholarships, principally the Commonwealth Scholarship, for students to study in universities in other Commonwealth countries. There are also many non-official associations that bring together individuals who work within the spheres of law and government, such as the Commonwealth Lawyers Association and the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.

Commonwealth Foundation

The Commonwealth Foundation is an intergovernmental organization, resourced by and reporting to Commonwealth governments, and guided by Commonwealth values and priorities. Its mandate is to strengthen civil society in the achievement of Commonwealth priorities: democracy and good governance, respect for human rights and gender equality, poverty eradication and sustainable, people-centered and sustainable development, and to promote arts and culture.

The Foundation was established by the Heads of Government in 1965. Admittance is open to all members of the Commonwealth and in December 2008 stood at 46 out of the 54 member countries. Associate Membership, which is open to associated states or overseas territories of member governments, has been granted to Gibraltar. 2005 saw celebrations for the Foundation’s 40th Anniversary. The Foundation is headquartered in Marlborough House, Pall Mall, London. Regular liaison and cooperation between the Secretariat and the Foundation is in place.

The Foundation continues to serve the broad purposes for which it was established as written in the Memorandum of Understanding.

Commonwealth Games

The Commonwealth Games, a multi-sport event, is held every four years; the 2010 Commonwealth Games were held in New Delhi, India in 2010, and the next in Glasgow, Scotland in 2014. As well as the usual athletic disciplines, as at the Summer Olympic Games, the games include sports particularly popular in the Commonwealth, such as bowls, netball, and rugby sevens. Started in 1930 as the Empire Games, the games were founded on the Olympic model of amateurism, but were deliberately designed to be, as they are still renowned for being “the Friendly Games”, with the goal of promoting relations between Commonwealth countries and celebrating their shared sporting and cultural heritage.

The Games are the Commonwealth’s most visible activity, and interest in the operation of the Commonwealth increases greatly when the Games are held. There is controversy over whether the Games – and sport generally – should be involved in the Commonwealth’s wider political concerns. The 1977 Gleneagles Agreement was signed to commit Commonwealth countries to combat apartheid through discouraging sporting contact with South Africa (which was not then a member), whilst the 1986 Games were boycotted by most African, Asian, and Caribbean countries for the failure of other countries to enforce the Gleneagles Agreement.

Commonwealth War Graves Commission

The Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC) is responsible for maintaining the war graves of 1.7 million service personnel that died in the First and Second World Wars fighting for Commonwealth member states. Founded in 1917, the Commission has constructed 2,500 war cemeteries, and maintains individual graves at another 20,000 sites around the world. The vast majority of the latter are civilian cemeteries in the United Kingdom. In 1998, the CWGC made the records of its buried online to facilitate easier searching.

Commonwealth war cemeteries often feature similar horticulture and architecture, with larger cemeteries being home to a Cross of Sacrifice and Stone of Remembrance. The CWGC is notable for marking the graves identically, regardless of the rank, country of origin, race, or religion of the buried. It is funded by voluntary agreement by six Commonwealth members, in proportion to the nationality of the casualties in the graves maintained, with three-quarters of the funding coming from the UK.

Commonwealth of Learning

The Commonwealth of Learning (COL) is an intergovernmental organization created by the Heads of Government to encourage the development and sharing of open learning/distance education knowledge, resources and technologies. COL is helping developing nations improve access to quality education and training.

Sport

Due to the legacy of British colonial rule, many Commonwealth nations play similar sports that are considered quintessentially “British” in character, including cricket, rugby, and netball. This has led to the development of friendly national rivalries between the main sporting nations that have often defined their relations with each another. Indeed, said rivalries preserved close ties by providing a constant in international relationships, even as the Empire transformed into the Commonwealth. Externally, playing these sports is seen to be a sign of sharing a certain Commonwealth culture; the adoption of cricket at schools in Rwanda is seen as symbolic of the country’s move towards Commonwealth membership.

Besides the Commonwealth Games, other sporting competitions are organized on a Commonwealth basis, through championship tournaments such as the Commonwealth Judo Championships, Commonwealth Rowing Championships, Commonwealth Sailing Championships, Shooting Championships and Commonwealth Pool Lifesaving Championships. The Commonwealth Boxing Council has long maintained Commonwealth titles for the best boxers in the Commonwealth.

Commonwealth citizenship

In recognition of their shared heritage and culture, Commonwealth countries are not considered to be “foreign” to each other. When engaging bilaterally with one another, Commonwealth governments exchange High Commissioners instead of ambassadors. Between two Commonwealth realms, they represent the Head of Government rather than the Head of State. Outside of bilateralism, however, some Commonwealth states do consider other members to be foreign for certain purposes. For example, the High Court of Australia ruled, in Sue v Hill, that the United Kingdom is a foreign power for the purposes of Section 44 of the Constitution of Australia.

In addition, some members treat resident citizens of other Commonwealth countries preferentially to citizens of non-Commonwealth countries. Britain and several others, mostly in the Caribbean, grant the right to vote to Commonwealth citizens who reside in those countries. Some states, such as Canada and New Zealand, have abolished such preferences. In non-Commonwealth countries in which their own country is not represented, Commonwealth citizens may seek consular assistance at the British embassy.

Crisis over human rights and democracy

In recent years, the Commonwealth has been accused of not being vocal enough on its core values. Allegations of a leaked memo from the Secretary General instructing staff not to speak out on human rights were published in October 2010.

The Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting 2011 considered a report by an Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group panel which asserted that the organization had lost its relevance and was decaying due the lack of a mechanism to censure member countries when they violated human rights or democratic norms. The panel made 106 “urgent” recommendations including the adoption of a Charter of the Commonwealth, the creation of a new commissioner on the rule of law, democracy and human rights to track persistent human rights abuses and allegations of political repression by Commonwealth member states, recommendations for the repeal of laws against homosexuality in 41 Commonwealth states and a ban on “forced marriage.” The failure to release the report, or accept its recommendations for reforms in the area of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, was decried as a “disgrace” by former British Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, a member of the EPG, who told a press conference: “The Commonwealth faces a very significant problem. It’s not a problem of hostility or antagonism, it’s more of a problem of indifference. Its purpose is being questioned, its relevance is being questioned and part of that is because its commitment to enforce the values for which it stands is becoming ambiguous in the eyes of many member states. The Commonwealth is not a private club of the governments or the secretariat. It belongs to the people of the Commonwealth.”

In the end, two-thirds of the EPG’s 106 urgently recommended reforms were referred to study groups, an act described by one EPG member as having them “kicked into the long grass”. There was no agreement to create the recommended position of human rights commissioner; instead a ministerial management group was empowered with enforcement: the group includes alleged human rights offenders. It was agreed to develop a charter of values for the Commonwealth without any decision on how compliance with its principles would be enforced.

How ICAO works?

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

The constitution of ICAO is the Convention on International Civil Aviation, drawn up by a conference in Chicago in November and December 1944, and to which each ICAO Contracting State is a party. According to the terms of the Convention, the Organization is made up of an Assembly, a Council of limited membership with various subordinate bodies and a Secretariat. The chief officers are the President of the Council and the Secretary General.

The Assembly, composed of representatives from all Contracting States, is the sovereign body of ICAO. It meets every three years, reviewing in detail the work of the Organization and setting policy for the coming years. It also votes a triennial budget.

The Council, the governing body which is elected by the Assembly for a three-year term, is composed of 36 States. The Assembly chooses the Council Member States under three headings: States of chief importance in air transport, States which make the largest contribution to the provision of facilities for air navigation, and States whose designation will ensure that all major areas of the world are represented. As the governing body, the Council gives continuing direction to the work of ICAO. It is in the Council that Standards and Recommended Practices are adopted and incorporated as Annexes to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. The Council is assisted by the Air Navigation Commission (technical matters), the Air Transport Committee (economic matters), the Committee on Joint Support of Air Navigation Services and the Finance Committee.

The Secretariat, headed by a Secretary General, is divided into five main divisions: the Air Navigation Bureau, the Air Transport Bureau, the Technical Co-operation Bureau, the Legal Bureau, and the Bureau of Administration and Services. In order that the work of the Secretariat shall reflect a truly international approach, professional personnel are recruited on a broad geographical basis.

ICAO works in close co-operation with other members of the United Nations family such as the World Meteorological Organization, the International Telecommunication Union, the Universal Postal Union, the World Health Organization and the International Maritime Organization. Non-governmental organizations which also participate in ICAO’s work include the International Air Transport Association, the Airports Council International, the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations, and the International Council of Aircraft Owner and Pilot Associations.

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

Who UNICEF is?

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

UNICEF is the driving force that helps build a world where the rights of every child are realized. We have the global authority to influence decision-makers, and the variety of partners at grassroots level to turn the most innovative ideas into reality. That makes us unique among world organizations, and unique among those working with the young.

We believe that nurturing and caring for children are the cornerstones of human progress. UNICEF was created with this purpose in mind – to work with others to overcome the obstacles that poverty, violence, disease and discrimination place in a child’s path. We believe that we can, together, advance the cause of humanity.

We advocate for measures to give children the best start in life, because proper care at the youngest age forms the strongest foundation for a person’s future.

We promote girls’ education – ensuring that they complete primary education as a minimum – because it benefits all children, both girls and boys. Girls who are educated grow up to become better thinkers, better citizens, and better parents to their own children.

We act so that all children are immunized against common childhood diseases, and are well nourished, because it is wrong for a child to suffer or die from a preventable illness.

We work to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS among young people because it is right to keep them from harm and enable them to protect others. We help children and families affected by HIV/AIDS to live their lives with dignity.

We involve everyone in creating protective environments for children. We are present to relieve suffering during emergencies, and wherever children are threatened, because no child should be exposed to violence, abuse or exploitation.

UNICEF upholds the Convention on the Rights of the Child. We work to assure equality for those who are discriminated against, girls and women in particular. We work for the Millennium Development Goals and for the progress promised in the United Nations Charter. We strive for peace and security. We work to hold everyone accountable to the promises made for children.

We are part of the Global Movement for Children – a broad coalition dedicated to improving the life of every child. Through this movement, and events such as the United Nations Special Session on Children, we encourage young people to speak out and participate in the decisions that affect their lives.

We work in 190 countries through country programs and National Committees. We are UNICEF, the United Nations Children’s Fund.

Introduction to International Monetary Fund

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

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is the intergovernmental organization that oversees the global financial system by following the macroeconomic policies of its member countries, in particular those with an impact on exchange rate and the balance of payments. It is an organization formed with a stated objective of stabilizing international exchange rates and facilitating development through the enforcement of liberalising economic policies on other countries as a condition for loans, restructuring or aid. It also offers loans with varying levels of conditionality, mainly to poorer countries. Its headquarters are in Washington, D.C., United States. The IMF’s relatively high influence in world affairs and development has drawn heavy criticism from some sources.

Organization and Purpose

The International Monetary Fund was conceived in July 1944 originally with 45 members and came into existence in December 1945 when 29 countries signed the agreement, with a goal to stabilize exchange rates and assist the reconstruction of the world’s international payment system. Countries contributed to a pool which could be borrowed from, on a temporary basis, by countries with payment imbalances (Condon, 2007). The IMF was important when it was first created because it helped the world stabilize the economic system. The IMF works to improve the economies of its member countries. The IMF describes itself as “an organization of 187 countries (as of July 2010), working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty”.

Membership

IMF member states not accepting the obligations of Article VIII, Sections 2, 3, and 4

Members of the IMF are 186 of the UN members.

Former members are: Cuba (left in 1964), Taiwan (expelled in 1980 due to political reasons),

The other non-members are: North Korea, Andorra, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Nauru, Vatican City and the rest of the states with limited recognition.

All member states participate directly in the IMF. Member states are represented on a 24-member Executive Board (five Executive Directors are appointed by the five members with the largest quotas, nineteen Executive Directors are elected by the remaining members), and all members appoint a Governor to the IMF’s Board of Governors.

All members of the IMF are also IBRD members, and vice versa.

History

The International Monetary Fund was conceived in July 1944 during the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference. The representatives of 45 governments met in the Mount Washington Hotel in the area of Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, United States, with the delegates to the conference agreeing on a framework for international economic cooperation. The IMF was formally organized on December 27, 1945, when the first 29 countries signed its Articles of Agreement. The statutory purposes of the IMF today are the same as when they were formulated in 1943 (see #Assistance and reforms).

The IMF’s influence in the global economy steadily increased as it accumulated more members. The number of IMF member countries has more than quadrupled from the 44 states involved in its establishment, reflecting in particular the attainment of political independence by many developing countries and more recently the collapse of the Soviet bloc. The expansion of the IMF’s membership, together with the changes in the world economy, have required the IMF to adapt in a variety of ways to continue serving its purposes effectively.

In 2008, faced with a shortfall in revenue, the International Monetary Fund’s executive board agreed to sell part of the IMF’s gold reserves. On April 27, 2008, IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn welcomed the board’s decision of April 7, 2008 to propose a new framework for the fund, designed to close a projected $400 million budget deficit over the next few years. The budget proposal includes sharp spending cuts of $100 million until 2011 that will include up to 380 staff dismissals.

At the 2009 G-20 London summit, it was decided that the IMF would require additional financial resources to meet prospective needs of its member countries during the ongoing global financial crisis. As part of that decision, the G-20 leaders pledged to increase the IMF’s supplemental cash tenfold to $500 billion, and to allocate to member countries another $250 billion via Special Drawing Rights.

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.[16] As of August 2010 Romania ($13.9 billion), Ukraine ($12.66 billion), Hungary ($11.7 billion) and Greece ($30 billion) are the largest borrowers of the fund.

Data dissemination systems

IMF Data dissemination Systems participants:

IMF member using SDDS
IMF member, using GDDS
IMF member, not using any of the DDSystems
non-IMF entity using SDDS
non-IMF entity using GDDS
no interaction with the IMF

In 1995, the International Monetary Fund began work on data dissemination standards with the view of guiding IMF member countries to disseminate their economic and financial data to the public. The International Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFC) endorsed the guidelines for the dissemination standards and they were split into two tiers: The General Data Dissemination System (GDDS) and the Special Data Dissemination Standard (SDDS).
The International Monetary Fund executive board approved the SDDS and GDDS in 1996 and 1997 respectively and subsequent amendments were published in a revised “Guide to the General Data Dissemination System”. The system is aimed primarily at statisticians and aims to improve many aspects of statistical systems in a country. It is also part of the World Bank Millennium Development Goals and Poverty Reduction Strategic Papers.

The IMF established a system and standard to guide members in the dissemination to the public of their economic and financial data. Currently there are two such systems: General Data Dissemination System (GDDS) and its superset Special Data Dissemination System (SDDS), for those member countries having or seeking access to international capital markets.

The primary objective of the GDDS is to encourage IMF member countries to build a framework to improve data quality and increase statistical capacity building. This will involve the preparation of meta data describing current statistical collection practices and setting improvement plans. Upon building a framework, a country can evaluate statistical needs, set priorities in improving the timeliness, transparency, reliability and accessibility of financial and economic data.

Some countries initially used the GDDS, but lately upgraded to SDDS.

Some entities that are not themselves IMF members also contribute statistical data to the systems:

Palestinian Authority – GDDS
Hong Kong – SDDS
European Union institutions:
- the European Central Bank for the Eurozone – SDDS
- Eurostat for the whole EU – SDDS, thus providing data from Cyprus (not using any DDSystem on its own) and Malta (using only GDDS on its own)