"Yes, the process of appointing the UN SG is blurred, as many other processes within the UN system. I am curious to learn about the selection and appointment processes for the UN program heads, let alone the recent Global Compact board. in
Kassem El-Saddik
DEvCO Group,
Response:
In August 2005 the Secretary-General issued his report on strengthening the accountability of the UN. The report (A/60/312) outlines a new set of procedures for selecting qualified candidates for senior UN positions and is calculated to ensure a more transparent and vigorous process of selection (see paragraphs 53-58, www.un.org/reform/report_on_accountability.pdf).
As explained in the website of the Campaign for a democratic selection of the UN Secretary-General (www.unsgselection.org/content/other-high-level-selection-processes/procedures-for-appointment-of-senior-un-officials/46), the procedure for selecting senior UN officials is as follows: A Senior Appointment Group is established, which is a standing advisory body, to review candidacies and make recommendations. The Chef de Cabinet is then responsible for establishing an interview panel with members from this group. A list of finalists is then submitted to the Secretary-General and the Deputy Secretary-General for final consideration. For senior appointments that involve intergovernmental bodies (UNDP, UNHCR, etc) clear job descriptions and required competencies are established for all posts against which candidates can be judged. Shortlists are then drawn up from a list of nominations submitted by
Regarding the Global Compact (http://www.unglobalcompact.org/), this is a fish of a different colour. The Global Compact is a “voluntary corporate citizenship initiative”. It is not an official body or agency of the United Nations and has no regulatory functions. It is designed to advance principles of corporate citizenship strictly on a voluntary basis and therefore has no enforcement powers, except with regard to the unauthorized use of the UN emblem or the Global Compact’s name and logo; the failure to communicate progress for two consecutive years, and the systematic or egregious abuses of the GC’s overall aims and principles, which may result in a member being declared “inactive” and, in extreme cases, “removed” from the association (www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/gc_integrity_mesures.pdf). To my knowledge, none these very limited enforcement measures have been applied to date with any degree of significance despite various allegations of wrongdoing. To its credit, however, the GC website does list 803 “non-communicating” participants (http://www.unglobalcompact.org/CommunicatingProgress/non_communicating.html?submit_x=page&pc=10&pn=3 )
The Global Compact has so far failed to win the support of large sectors of civil society. Indeed, many UN accredited NGOs are openly skeptical and, while not doubting the Secretary-General’s good intentions in promoting this initiative, some believe that many GC corporations use their association with the UN for public relations purposes only.
Some global NGOs of impeccable credentials, most notably Amnesty International, made a decision early on to join the Global Compact in the belief that they could thereby influence good corporate citizenship. However, Amnesty International and other major civil society organizations within the Global Compact have increasingly voiced serious concerns about the lack of any visible progress.
On
- clear criteria need to be adopted to deal with cases where companies are alleged to breach the Global Compact principles;
- the basic requirement that participating companies report annually on their compliance with the principles must be monitored;
- the Global Compact and participating companies must show leadership on the human rights principles;
- participation by all stakeholders must be guaranteed. (http://web.amnesty.org/pages/ec-gcletter070403-eng)
Later Amnesty International again expressed concerns on three key issues “where we think that further actions are needed to meet the aspirations of the Global Compact and its nine principles.” (http://web.amnesty.org/pages/ec-globalcompact9principles-eng)
And following the UN Global Compact Leaders Summit, held in New York on 24 June 2004, NGOs (Amnesty International; Realizing Rights- Ethical Globalization Initiative; Global Witness; Human Rights First;International Save the Children Alliance and Oxfam International) yet again raised concerns about the impact of the Global Compact and its “failure in encouraging companies to effectively implement the nine principles [now ten] related to human rights, labour rights and the environment.” (http://web.amnesty.org/pages/ec-letter-240604-eng)
Irene Khan, Amnesty International's Secretary General, addressing the
I realize I have not answered your specific question on the recent appointment of the members of the recently instituted Global Compact Board:
According to the Global Compact’s website, www.unglobalcompact.org/NewsAndEvents/news_archives/2006_04_20.html , “The Global Compact Board is a key component of the initiative’s governance framework, which was introduced following a comprehensive review of the initiative conducted in 2004-05 … Operating under the auspices of the Secretary-General, the Board will help ensure the Global Compact’s continuity and facilitate its further growth. It will provide strategic advice for the initiative as a whole and make related recommendations to the UN Global Compact Office, participants and other stakeholders. The Board will also play a role with regard to the implementation of the Compact’s integrity measures. Board members will act as champions of the initiative.
The Global Compact Board will meet once a year, with the inaugural meeting planned for summer 2006 at UN Headquarters in
I have been unable to find any reference to specific procedures followed to appoint the members of the Board. However, the GC website states that “The Secretary-General’s appointments follow a comprehensive consultation process involving all Global Compact stakeholders, including its Local Networks. Each of the appointees has demonstrated a long record of commitment to the Global Compact’s mission and principles and enjoys the support of a regional or constituency group.”
Note that the Board is not supposed to “head the GC endeavors”, as you put it, but merely to provide “strategic advice for the initiative as a whole and make related recommendations to the UN Global Compact Office, participants and other stakeholders.” The Board will also “play a role with regard to the implementation of the Compact’s integrity measures.” The Board members are also called to act as “champions of the initiative.”
Sincerely,
Vicente Garcia-Delgado, CIVICUS UN Representative
Author’s note: For the sake of transparency and full disclosure, CIVICUS’ Secretary-General and CEO, Kumi Naidoo was among those invited to be a member of the Global Compact Board. He respectfully declined the invitation.
(PS: For my own, unfavourable, views on the Global Compact and the reasons therefor, see my columns The UN Global Compact: A big red herring disguised in UN blue?[http://www.civicus.org/new/content/monthcolintro6.htm] and
TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT: Should civil society and the Global Compact live under the same UN roof? [http://www.civicus.org/new/content/monthcolintro7.htm])