International governmental organizations (IGOs) are organizations made up of a collection of sovereign states. They are mainly established by treaties and are aimed at pushing the collective agenda of all member states. An example of such an entity is the European Union (EU). On the other hand, non-governmental organizations are private entities that influence both domestic and international social, economic, and religious issues. Members of NGOs are not limited to states, individuals, or multinational companies. The role and place of both IGOs and NGOs have been on the limelight since 1945 when NGOs where granted international personality through the provision of article 71 of the UN Charter (Alihusain, 2009). Both organizations incorporate several methods to ensure the promotion of international laws and norms and safeguard against their breach.
In the case of non-supportive countries, non-governmental organization use various means to enforce the compliance of those states. NGOs use coercion whereby they force states to comply with international provisions through sanctions. Besides, NGOs can restructure non-complying state’s preferences through use of rewards and punishments. Through use of rewards and punitive measures such as reduction of grants NGOs can influence states to ratify international treaties. Lastly, non-governmental organizations are fundamental in establishing regularized international procedures to create a leveled field within the community of nations to encourage countries to ratify the international laws and practices.
This whitepaper makes recommendations aimed at increasing the efficacy of the organization’s activities in addressing the problem of lack of state compliance to international mores. It also focuses on how soft laws such as state declarations and resolutions can be used to coerce the states into ratifying international rules. Also, the organizations can play a watchdog role to ensure that the laws are ratified and implemented according to the respective international conventions.
The NGO I work for is faced with the challenge of how to encourage the state to comply with international regulations. The state is a member of the United Nations and a signatory to the UN Charter. However, it has consciously and continuously refused to ratify important international law treaties. I have researched numerous scholarly books and articles on the role of IGOs and NGOs and how they can influence states to ratify international conventions to complete this paper. Additionally, I have used the United Nations Charter and various treaties and conventions to support my ideas.
The Problem and Its Importance
The state has not ratified a number of treaties that are of significant importance to the protection of fundamental human rights, guarantee, and respect for the rule of law and good governance. The conventions include the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights. The main cause for the state’s refusal to ratify the treaties is its intention to carry on with its wanton violation of human rights and bad governance. The people that have been affected by the state’s actions the most are political dissidents and opponents to the ruling elite, who have been brutalized and subjected to untold torture. Besides, the minority communities are discriminated against in terms of the distribution of national resources and opportunities. The common citizen is also on the receiving end of the government’s infringement on basic human rights protected by international laws.
Perspectives and Solutions
A number of approaches have been helpful in the analysis of my organization’s approaches to the problem. The first one is the national/domestic approach: The state is at the mercy of a tyrannical leadership that is keen on remaining in power for as long as possible. It has infringed on the human rights of its citizens to intimidate them into acquiescence. Furthermore, freedom of the media, speech, and expression has been denied and those who try oppose the status quo of oppression and sycophancy are termed as enemies of the state and punished. I believe the state has refused to ratify international laws to preserve the status quo.
The second one is international approach. The state has refused to ratify all important treaties on good governance, human rights, and observance of the rule of law, which is a flagrant violation of Chapter 2 of the United Nations Charter, which holds that all members of the United Nation should assist any action commended by the community of states. I, therefore, hold that the state’s activities are unlawful and illegal.
The third is progressive/development approach. The state, through its stonewalling actions, is stymieing progressive development in the country. Most states have or are in the process of cutting ties with the state due to its violation of human rights, bad governance, and lack of respect for the rule of law. The bad economy, inadequate of foreign aid, strained trade relations increased poverty levels in the country. This approach focuses on the negative impact of the state’s refusal to ratify relevant international treaties.
The above approaches are different points of view through which I have tried to explain the organization’s problem, which is the state’s refusal to ratify international rules and its impacts in the country.
Some solutions can be taken to remedy the mentioned problem. Foremost, soft laws can be ratified to coerce ratification. The organization should focus on seeking undertakings, declaration, and resolutions to ratify the needed international laws from the non-complying state. Though the soft laws lack legal backing, they have persuasive backing that can be used pressurize the state to draft the needed policies (Charnovitz, 2006, p. 357). The state has in the past showed willingness to comply with international norms that limit its responsibilities. Therefore, these soft laws may provide the legal foundations for future ratification of international laws. Secondly, international lobbying can be pursued. This approach is key in rallying the international community to take action against the state, including sanctions and blockades, to pressurize the state to ratify international norms (Cáceres, 2012, p. 81). This method has achieved massive success in various states. For example, in 1992, Kenya was threatened with economic sanctions to ratify international laws to allow for multiparty democracy. This approach was successful in forcing the government to re-introduce multiparty elections in Kenya.
The third approach is consultative co-operation. The involvement of the organization in the process of drafting international standards and advocating for a leveled ground for all parties involved is important in raising the state’s confidence in the impartiality of the laws. Consultative co-operation between states and NGOs has also been tried and tested and proven to be important in the safeguarding of human rights and civil liberties. Therefore, through a constructed consultative process, the state can be implored upon to ratify international rules.
Alihusain, Charles. “The Influence of NGOs on International Law.” Peace Palace Library, November 9, 2010. https://www.peacepalacelibrary.nl/2010/11/the-influence-of-ngos-on-international-law/
Cáceres, Sigfrido Burgos. “NGOs, IGOs, and International law: Gaining Credibility and Legitimacy through Lobbying and Results.” Geo. J. Int’l Aff. Vol. 13, 2012, p. 79, https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/geojaf13&div=14&id=&page=
Charnovitz, Steve. “Nongovernmental Organizations and International Law.” American Journal of International Law vol. 100, no. 2, 2006, pp. 348-372, http://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1446&context=faculty_publications