Midtveisevaluering: Accountability Mechanisms of International Organizations
Stipendiat Stian Øby Johansen ved Nordisk institutt for sjørett, Senter for europarett, presenterer tirsdag 21. april sitt doktorgradsprosjekt med arbeidstittelen "Accountability Mechanisms of International Organizations: Providing justice when the rights of individuals are violated?"
Kommentator: Professor Dr. Jan Wouters, Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies.
For disposisjon og tekstutkast, kontakt Stian Øby Johansen.
Accountability Mechanisms of International Organizations:
Providing justice when the rights of individuals are violated?
One of the most pervasive trends in international relations after the second world war is the proliferation of international organizations (IOs). Today there are literally hundreds of IOs, and states increasingly bestow sovereign powers upon them in order to solve transnational problems and provide global public goods. As IOs are becoming increasingly powerful, they are also more likely to violate the rights of individuals in the course of their activities.
My PhD thesis will study the procedural mechanisms available to individuals who wish to hold IOs to account. The central normative argument of my thesis is that IOs should be held to account through effective accountability mechanisms, where individuals may obtain useful remedies when their rights are violated. Certain normative standards for sufficient accountability mechanisms will be identified in this introductory, normative part of the thesis.
In the main part of my thesis I will survey the accountability mechanisms that individuals presently have access to when their rights are violated by IOs. In doing so, I will distinguish between four forms of power that IOs make use of in order to affect individuals:
- Supranational powers (e.g. international legislation w/direct effect, territorial administration).
- Operative powers (e.g. peacekeeping, naval anti-piracy operations).
- Indirect powers (e.g. targeted sanctions, international legislation w/o direct effect).
- Advisory and non-binding forms of power (e.g. technical advice, loan conditionality).
The main difference between these forms is the amount of assistance needed from member states in order for the organization to actually affect individuals. For each form of power I will use case studies – some based on real events, and some hypothetical – to illustrate the need for accountability and, more importantly for the purposes of my thesis, the availability and efficiency of accountability mechanisms. The assessment of the applicable accountability mechanisms is conducted in light of standards identified in the first, normative part of my thesis.
Finally, I will end the thesis with a discussion of the overall state of the accountability mechanisms of IOs. This final part will also contain some policy suggestions as to how some of the weaknesses and “accountability gaps” identified in the main part may be fixed.