• Forging effective delivery of services to increase human development
• Avoiding the dominance of local élites
• Ensuring resources match delegation of responsibility

6. The main recommendations and proposals relate to:

• Creating an enabling environment for decentralization to succeed, including government policies and attitudes about local governments
• Creating carefully crafted new institutional structures that go beyond the common "business-as-usual" approach and alleviate the resistance of existing institutions to change can help
• Ensuring broad participation of civil society and private actors
• Creating space for innovation and local leadership
• Being aware of the danger of fragmentation, and remembering that decentralization is only the starting point
• Providing appropriate technical assistance, training, capacity building and information
• Integrating key components of local governance and service delivery systems rather than focusing on single dimensions

7. There is a global trend towards democracy although regression to authoritarian tendencies cannot be excluded, and whilst the procedural tenets of democracy are clearly proliferating, the substance of democracy does not necessarily always follow. This brings the issue of how the international community can effectively and efficiently support countries to establish and consolidate democratic regimes. Moreover, there is also the question of which type of democracy to choose for a particular country and the implications of adopting mixed democratic models. To a large degree, democracy and human are indivisible. However, to counter optimism in the effects of democracy it can be observed that democracy and human rights do not necessarily or automatically always develop in parallel, both theoretically and in practice. Indeed, according to the tradition of liberal democracy, it could be argued that some human rights exist to actually counteract or restrain majoritarian democracy, by indicating that certain issues – such as personal privacy and minority protection – should not be subject to majority legislation. Finally, by focusing on market efficiency as well as on the welfare of all the people, globalization brings new challenges as well as opportunities.

8. The main challenges involve:

• Assisting transition and consolidation of new democracies
• Understanding the implications of different types of democracy through empirical research
• Ensuring the efficient delivery of expected goods and services by the new democratic regimes
• Ensuring minority rights by effectively avoiding the tyranny of the majority in elections
• Improving accountability and responsibility of democratically elected governments

9. The main recommendations and proposals relate to:

• Supporting, financially and technically, the various pillars of democratization processes: the rule of law and the judicial system, the legislatures, in addition to assisting the conducting of elections
• Avoiding pressures for premature elections; favor instead bottom-up approaches
• Supporting institution-building actions
• Carrying out periodic assessments/audits on the performance of "democratic" institutions through national and international entities as well as the observance of the most fundamental human rights, including minority rights

• Creating a democratic political culture through education
• Strengthening networks of various national actors
• Providing comparative information on models and systems options

10. International law plays an important role in the future of the United Nations Organization. As a treaty, not only does the Charter belong to the realm of international law, but it also draws on the legal discipline to fulfill one of its main functions - the peaceful settlement of disputes - through arbitration and judicial settlement. Also, the Charter has been instrumental in encouraging the progressive development of international law and its codification. Analyzing the achievements and limitations of the main judicial organs within the United Nations – the International Court of Justice, the United Nations Administrative Tribunal and the International Criminal Tribunals – as well as the work of the International Law Commission creates an opportunity for improving their coherence and efficiency.

11. The main challenges involve:

• Finding coherence and improving coordination in view of the proliferation of international legal jurisdictions over the past years
• Ensuring that all countries abide by international law equally, irrespective of their power
• Ensuring that the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and Former Yugoslavia have the necessary resources to fulfill their mandates
• Improving cooperation between member States and the Tribunals in carrying out the arrest in accordance with the decision of their respective prosecutors

12. The main recommendations and proposals relate to:

• Linking the nationality of the judges to State acceptance of compulsory jurisdiction – only judges who are nationals of States having accepted the compulsory jurisdiction would be entitled for nomination at the International Court of Justice
• Limiting the power of veto of permanent members of the Security Council to ensure consistent enforcement of the judgments of the International Court of Justice
• Expanding the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice to non-state actors, such as international governmental and non-governmental organizations, political entities, transnational companies and individuals
• Establishing at the International Court of Justice smaller subordinated Chambers to improve efficiency
• Empowering the International Court of Justice to review the interpretation and application of international law by other jurisdictions
• Allowing the United Nations Secretary-General to request an Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice

• Making the United Nations Administrative Tribunal easily accessible to UN staff members working in cities other than New York by, for example, adopting a circuit court system

• Making the proceedings and decisions of the UN Administrative Tribunal more accessible to the public
• Calling for member States to be generous in their contributions to support the work of the International Criminal Tribunals as well as to cooperate fully with arrest orders
• Mandating the International Law Commission to draft an international criminal code to be applied by these tribunals as well as the recently created International Criminal Court
• Improving the efficiency of the International Law Commission – the General Assembly should request the ILC to review its topics and establish a time-schedule for addressing them
• Establishing closer links between the ILC and other UN standard-setting organs, such as the Human Rights Commission and the Disarmament Conference

13. While the promotion and codification of human rights is undoubtedly one of the most important achievements of the United Nations, the start of the new millenium constitutes an excellent opportunity to reflect on how to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the United Nations human rights system in an increasingly globalized world. Globalization is not only about market economies; it is also a multi-dimensional process, in which human rights should play a fundamental role.

14. The main challenges the United Nations face in promoting human rights involve:

• Enhancing the social dimension of globalization since globalization is not only about the market and consumption
• Ensuring better integration between human rights and economics (international financial institutions and transnational corporations)
• Countering the isolationism, exceptionalism and unilateralism of the United States foreign policy in regard to human rights

15. The main recommendations and proposals relate to:

• Improving the partnership between the United Nations and transnational corporations for the protection of human rights standards around the world
• Encouraging international financial institutions to embrace human rights standards in their agenda

• Ensuring observance/paying attention to economic, social and cultural human rights as much as to political and civil rights

• Establishing a ‘human dignity regime’ which consolidates refugee, humanitarian and human rights protection
• Continuing to observe/monitor/promote human rights in the field and improve coordination among the several programmes and agencies
• Requiring States to report on measures taken to seriously teach human rights and international humanitarian law to military personnel so as to improve the treatment of civilians in armed conflicts
• Establishing a compulsory funding mechanism for the implementation of human rights activities which is equitable
• Continuing with conferences and other forms of education leading to the creation of a human rights culture

16. The notion of global public goods appears to acquire particular importance in view of globalization. Defined as the public goods whose benefits extend across borders, generations and population groups, global public goods risk being under-provided in the absence of any recourse to an international collective-action mechanism or institution. This highlights the need to achieve greater balance in the world between the activities of private and the public actors.

17. The main challenges in providing global public goods involve:

• Promoting the concept and understanding of common public goods among national governments
• Involving governments in the promotion of the provision of global public goods with a long-term vision of national and global interests; mechanisms should be developed for equitable cost-sharing and avoidance of the phenomenon of free-rides in this regard

• Strengthening the participation of NGOs, especially those from developing countries, so the international policy agenda reflects the concerns of poor and marginalized actors

• Encouraging the accessibility of global public goods for all (eg. internet is a global public good, but is not accessible for all)
• Creating incentives for the production of global public goods

18. The main recommendations and proposals relate to:

• Enhancing the understanding of global public goods by creating a global public goods knowledge bank managed by the United Nations
• Creating a global trusteeship council under the framework of the General Assembly to give early warning about global public goods and promote their production
• Continuing to promote cooperation mechanisms as well as carry out world conferences to achieve consensus on the common public goods
• Promoting participatory policy-making where the United Nations becomes a multi-actor venue (NGOs, business, media, grass-roots activists) or even a tripartite body (States, business and civil society)
• Changing the composition of member-state delegations in such a way that the United Nations becomes more of an inter-parliamentary body

19. Changing ideas about international development, new conceptions of governance and commercial reasons are all contributing factors to the rise of civil society on the international landscape. The rhetoric of partnership and participation in promoting sustainable development has come to stay, definitely placing civil society at the center of decision-making and problem-solving at the global level. Accompanying such a transformation, a range of new challenges is facing both the United Nations and non-state actors in global governance.

20. The main challenges involve:

• Ensuring NGOs and Community Based Organizations become legitimate, accountable, and representative
• Connecting coherently the local and the global - Linking, coherently, different levels of activity at the local, national, regional and global. Avoiding tendency by some NGOs to focus on global advocacy to the exclusion of the national-level processes

• Supporting civic groups to move from "conversion strategies" (the traditional view of advocacy) to "engagement strategies" (aim to support a process of dialogue)

21. The main recommendations and proposals relate to:

• Encouraging civic groups to spend more time and resources in building constituencies for international cooperation
• Supporting civic groups so they can develop a range of new skills and competencies in learning, bridging, communications and mediations
• Generating "safe space" in which civic groups, governments and business exchange ideas/dialogue about global governance issues
• Encouraging the broadest possible range of civic organizations to participate by providing additional support for Southern or Third World groups/restricting the number of northern groups
• Creating independent funds to finance NGOs’ activities

22. Interviewing some 57,000 adults from 60 different countries between August and October 1999 on topics related to people’s basic values and issues such as democracy, the United Nations, human rights, women’s rights, environment, and religion, the survey – the world’s largest ever undertaken – revealed a remarkable similarity across cultures and nations. Among the most thought-provoking findings, the following are highlighted:

• A significant consensus on what matters most in life – "to have a happy family" and "good health" – as well as on what matters less in life – "being faithful to my religion" and "to have a good standard of living"
• Significant concern on two issues – the current state of the environment and the need to protect human rights – and the fact that governments are doing too little to address these problems
• Partly as a corollary of the above, the most important roles of the United Nations were regarded as being: to protect human rights and to give humanitarian aid in times of natural and man-made disasters
• A great level of dissatisfaction with the way democracy works in our societies, even when they are considered to be democratic – there is a sense of impotence in view of the inefficient, unresponsive and unjust ways in which governance takes place
• A relatively high level of satisfaction with the United Nations performance, including in countries where there was intervention

Although a paper on the concept of governance was not commissioned, the group nevertheless discussed various aspects of global governance as they considered the papers, and towards the end of their meetings there was some further general discussion of the concept. The idea that global governance is holistic in nature, but nevertheless is not one thing nor does it manifest itself at only one level, had a degree of concurrence. Global governance was considered to be multi-dimensional in that it has economic, political, cultural and security aspects, and that it links together global civil society, the global public, the State, and economic actors including the market. Its manifestations are both formal and informal and concern global public goods, global problems and their manifestation at all levels, not only at the global level but also at the regional and local level. It is about the generation of, and the response to, shared values which give rise to a process to identify issues, form an agenda, arrive at an outcome, and make arrangements to implement it.

The group in general started from the premise that in the context of globalization, the local is the only level at which action can be taken effectively. However, there was general agreement that in governance there would be movement in all directions: building up, building down, and building across. Governance therefore has many loci from the global to the local. There was general support for the notion of subsidiarity but an awareness of the dangers of fragmentation and anarchy. An illustration of this multi-dimensional model of governance was that which prevails in the European Union where there is a process of building up to the joint management of pooled sovereignty which is based on a number of treaties from the Treaty of Rome to that of Amsterdam. This process does not have a federal aspect. There is no transfer of sovereignty to another body; merely the pooling of the sovereignty and arrangements for its joint management. On the other hand there is building down to a number of regions, some of which are of an historic nature such as Catalonia, others of which are of more recent provenance, such as Nord-Pas de Calais. There is also the development of transnational ties - for example in the Erasmus/Socrates programme for the exchange of staff and students and research programmes in universities. Further there is the building of ties beyond the boundaries of the EU with agreements such as that of Lomé with the ACP countries.

However, the group was not primarily concerned with conceptual matters and it spent a good deal of time discussing the empirical research presented by the Gallup International Millennium Survey. This was a major survey involving some 60,000 respondents at a cost, out of Gallup's own resources, of some 3 million Euro. Although there were some significant problems with its methodology nevertheless this is as global a survey of public opinion as has ever been achieved dealing with a wide range of questions. The United Nations Charter begins with the phrase "We the peoples ….." but that phrase is surely economical with the truth since it should really read "We the governments of the Member States of the United Nations…..". It is in this context that the survey is fascinating because for the first time it is possible to have some idea of what 'we the peoples' might actually think. In its discussions of the survey the group concentrated on three questions.

The first question was that of human rights and basic shared values. The survey revealed that there was a very high degree of shared values, thus giving the lie to the cultural relativist approach to human rights. The evidence was clear that there are universal shared values giving rise to a common conception of basic human rights. Moreover insofar as the questions asked on the United Nations are concerned, it was very evident that the first wish of the peoples, if not of their governments, was that the United Nations should make its highest priority the promotion of human rights. But the survey also revealed that economic growth and standard of living were not the top priority of respondents all over the world, and here there is a message for the international financial institutions, the UN agencies and ECOSOC. More important than economic growth and standards of living were health, the family, freedom, and the possibility to live in peace. One finding that was particularly interesting related to liberal democracies in developed countries. Although the respondents thought that elections were fair, they also thought that their countries were not governed by the will of the people. In other words the institutions are judged to be democratic, but the people do not feel empowered.

The group spent a good deal of time discussing the question of democracy. There was a general disdain for one-day democracy, i.e. democracy only on an election day. Furthermore, concern was expressed about the possibility of the tyranny of the majority, particularly if that could threaten the human rights of minorities. Indeed there was a belief that human rights should be entrenched and not be subject to majority rule. Consideration was also given to the problem of dealing with miscreant states and those within which there was a democratic regression, either through a coup d'état or through a more insidious undermining of the bases of democracy. On the whole the group favored a response based on carrots rather than one based on sticks. They were also very aware of the need to balance the civil, economic and political aspects of freedom in a democracy. The formula between the three would not be fixed for any one time or for any one state, and a number of variations were to be anticipated.

In general the group put more emphasis on the development of a democratic political culture than on that of a democratic system. The system would follow the development of the culture and even if there was some regression in the system from time to time, if the basic democratic political culture was in place, then democracy would be able to withstand an element of regression. There was also a tendency to see a democratic political culture in general functional terms related to the question of how to make authorities responsible for their actions, how to make them responsive to their constituencies and how to enhance a sense of participation and a quality of transparency. It was these functional questions rather than particular structures which the group thought to be of greater fundamental importance.

In consideration of the relationship between civil society and governance at the global level, a number of suggestions were made which sought to enhance enfranchisement and empowerment. In particular there were six suggestions which arose out of various papers. Firstly, in discussion of the legal institutions the view was expressed that the International Court of Justice should be developed into a Court of the World Community which would be open to a wider range of actors. It had to develop and enhance capacity for soft law. Moreover the view was expressed that it was better to develop law at whatever level was most propitious and then to worry about the question of coherence of legal systems later.

The second suggestion was that international institutions, and particularly those of the United Nations system, develop web sites. This would enable a more direct contact with the people thereby bypassing governments. Electronic communication in both directions could therefore enhance the degree of participation in the institutions of global governance.

The group was particularly concerned with the evolution of norms and the setting of standards in a wide variety of domains. There was also a belief that the role of observers to check such implementation and the application of such norms and standards was a more efficient one than is often believed, particularly in a long term context. Indeed it was felt that over time such observers could develop significant power. The implementation of systems of monitoring and supervision was therefore supported.

A fourth topic, on which the group spent a significant amount of time, was the proposal that a human dignity regime could be established on the spot at a local level in many cases where human rights were under threat, or where there was a disaster of a human or natural sort. This would involve the working together of the High Commissioner for Refugees, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, UNICEF, World Food Programme and other UN Agencies. However, the view was also expressed that there was a danger of politicization associated with many conflict situations particularly if the Agencies were associated with enforcement measures, and especially enforcement measures by actors other than the United Nations, such as NATO. This process could lead to a delegitimizing of the United Nations and make it more difficult for the Agencies then to operate in areas under the control of deviant actors where a fortiori there may be many victims who require the help of the Agencies.

The group also considered the United Nations system in terms of its potentiality for governance. They made the suggestion that there could be an Assembly of Parliamentarians parallel to the General Assembly and this would have the advantage that the members of national parliaments could become a support group for, or would certainly become knowledgeable about, the United Nations and its programmes within national political systems. Here again the power of governments would be bypassed or complemented by another channel of communication. The group also believed that the many Global Conferences and Follow-up Conferences were an important systemic strength because they were the easiest way for civil society to become part of the United Nations system and thereby enhance its role in global governance.

Finally the group also considered the question of global public goods and 'bads', and in this regard suggested the establishment of a Global Trusteeship Council (a regime to maintain global public goods) under the General Assembly echoing a suggestion of the Secretary-General. There was also consideration of the problem of free riders making use of global public goods. The point, however, was made that over time actors would come to acknowledge that a proper consideration of self-interest included an element of community interest because, if the big do not pay their community dues, then community institutions will collapse which will not be to the benefit of the big actors. Whereas if the small do not pay their contributions, they will be excluded from the institutions of the community interest to their loss. However, this learning process would take time and was likely to give rise to a system of crises as part of the learning process.

The general tenor of the group's views was that the United Nations should be made a safe place for civil society. It was readily acknowledged that the United Nations system was not the agent of global governance but could be seen as part of the process of global governance, but only on the condition that it opened its door more widely to civil society. The warning was also voiced that the United Nations must not take itself for granted as the leading actor in the question of global governance because others had a great deal to contribute to the process. Moreover the process was also evident at all levels including the State and regional levels and especially locally. Thus the United Nations should always ask itself where its comparative advantage lies in a particular area and having identified it, it is to that comparative advantage that its best efforts should be directed.

Shabbir Cheema, UNDP

Sakuntala Kadirgamar-Rajasingham, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance

René Spogárd and Meril James, Gallup International

Yozo Yokota, The University of Tokyo

David Forsythe, University of Nebraska

Inge Kaul, UNDP

Michael Edwards, Senior Civil Society Specialist, The World Bank

Christine Chinkin, London School of Economics and Political Science

Hiroko Akizuki, Faculty of International Relations, Asia University

Tetsuya Yamada, Japan Institute of International Affairs

Samuel Makinda, Murdoch University, Australia

Paul Oquist, Regional Programme on Governance in Asia and the Pacific

Yasutami Shinomura, Graduate School of Policy Science, Saitama University

top