Originally published on the CGS blog on August 26, 2015.
The United Nations suffers from a severe democratic deficit. Despite the opening words of its Charter, “We the peoples,” ordinary people–the citizens of planet Earth and the proper holders of sovereignty–are subsequently ignored in that document.
To this day, 70 years after the UN’s founding, people other than politicians and diplomats have been denied a voice in planetary governance. Realpolitik, old-fashioned power politics, remains the dominant paradigm. Is it any wonder, then, that decisions of the undemocratic United Nations are increasingly regarded as illegitimate?
Conventional wisdom in the diplomatic community, as well as in mass media and academia, is that the system cannot be fundamentally changed. This is mainly because of the political oligopoly built into the UN Charter, which grants veto power to the five permanent members of the Security Council. None of these unfairly privileged states, supposedly, will ever consent to changes that would infringe on this power. But once you say you can’t, you can’t. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The so-called “experts” sooner or later will be proven incorrect. Roughly half the world’s people already live in countries that are more or less democratically ruled. The hallmark of all such countries is a parliamentary system. Even though the leaders of these countries find it necessary go along with the present undemocratic UN system at the global level, that doesn’t mean they can remain oblivious to the democratic demands of their own people. To attempt to do so runs the risk of their being voted out of power.
Admittedly, the number of politically engaged citizens now clamoring for global democracy is small. However, we live in a world increasingly interconnected by the Internet. It is now possible for powerful ideas to spread rapidly throughout the planet. Democracy is one such powerful idea. It is catchy. Even in autocratically ruled nations, it finds an underground following. And ultimately it will burst its authoritarian bonds.
In fact, while not yet popular in this country, the demand for global democracy is taking root among steadily increasing numbers of political activists. This is especially true in Europe, where the successful implementation of the 28-nation European Parliament has yielded a wide range of continental benefits. While there have also been issues to work out, that is to be expected in any parliamentary system.
Fortunately, the establishment of a UN Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA) would not require Charter amendment, as Article 22 of the present Charter states: “The General Assembly may establish such subsidiary organs as it deems necessary for the performance of its functions.” A UN Parliament could rightfully be considered such a “subsidiary organ.”
Initially, emulating the development of the European Parliament, its powers would be advisory only and its members would be appointed (mainly from the membership of existing national parliaments) rather than directly elected. But, with the accumulation of experience, the UNPA gradually could be granted increasing legislative authority in respect to a set of truly global problems that cannot be adequately addressed by nations acting on their own. Periodic popular elections could be instituted.
From its very inception, however, the UNPA could project the voices of world citizens, not just of governments acting in their own narrow self-interest. While those voices might, at the outset, lack legal authority,they could project the “soft power” of morality. And, in the fullness of time, they could become the irresistible drivers of reform throughout the UN system and, ultimately, of a comprehensive Charter review conference as envisaged in Article 109 of the original UN Charter.
The literature on a UNPA is growing rapidly. My own recent discussion of how it might evolve and how it might function at various stages in its evolution can be found in Transforming the United Nations System: Designs for a Workable World (Chapter 3, “A World Parliamentary Assembly.”)
