VIGENTE: FORMAS AGRAVADAS DE LA TRATA DE PERSONAS

To be sure, contemporary globalisation has faced an urgent need for much more transnational regulatory authority, and the widening scope of global governance observed within the past half- century is expected to continue into the future. With such fragmented authority at local, regional and global levels, a democracy gap in international institutions has increased and thus demands for democratic participation in and public accountability of global regulatory institutions will remain strong. Yet thus far no global-scale regulatory agency, namely within the United Nations, which is the largest international decision-making body, has shown any sign of including a parliamentary dimension to it, although there are approximately 45 parliamentary assemblies established only at the regional level, such as the Andean Parliament, the MERCOSUR Parliament or Pan-African Parliament of the African Union, the parliamentary assemblies of NATO, of the Council of Europe, and of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) or the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly.

To identify specific causes of why a global parliament has not come into being despite so many criticisms and an increase in calls for the need for an international legislature, I used three

49 different theoretical frameworks – constructivism, realism and neoliberal institutionalism to explore the factors that have had an effect on the progress of democratising international organisations by means of the application of the parliamentary principle of democracy. As a first step, according to the norm dynamics of constructivism, I devised a hypothesis, “Convergence (Divergence) among norm entrepreneurs (potential epistemic communities) around the causal beliefs of the democratic deficit problem of international organisations will decrease (increase) the global democratic deficit and thus make the creation of an international parliamentary assembly more (less) likely”.

Before testing this hypothesis, I distinguished three inter-related political concepts of democracy, from which I defined what constitutes a global democratic gap: that is, Power (Authority), Accountability and Legitimacy. Elections, democratic (citizen) representation and transparency gained through oversight by democratically elected officials are claimed within the general context of the existing literature to be the most pertinent to the foundational normative commitments of democracy, especially at the national level. In this regard, I chose the accountability and input legitimacy (as opposed to output legitimacy that concerns substantive outcomes rather than processes) as a criterion for assessing whether potential epistemic communities converge around causal beliefs about a democratic deficit in international organisations, having observed that they seem to have all agreed upon the concerns about the problem and the need for launching a UN Parliamentary Assembly. Upon closely examining 154 quotes in total spoken by 111 professionals, experts, intellectuals, Speakers of Parliament, Members of Parliament and Presidents of regional and international organisations, 95% of them have the same cause and effect relationships, converging around the fact that the lack of accountability and input legitimacy has actually caused the problem.

In addition, realism and neoliberal institutionalism can be used as a supplement to explain why a global parliament has not realized yet, albeit widespread agreement among almost all members of epistemic communities about norms. As for realism, power inequalities among Member States might be a hindrance to the spread of the norm in question, while neoliberal institutionalism suggests that competing norms within the organisation between a solidarist vision (placing more emphasis on individual human rights) versus a plauralist order (focusing on the protection of

50 democracy through the affirmation of sovereignty) also serve as a stumbling block. On a similar note, not only is the UN reform overwhelmingly possessed with an underrepsentation issue in the UNSC and an unfair exercise of power by a few industrialised states, namely P5 Members with veto power, but also the IPU, which is the sole organisation that represents the legislative branch of governments on a global scale, is driven by an ambitious plan to play a leading role in embodying the parliamentary vision for international cooperation, instead of assuming a secondary role supporting the UN or its parliamentary organ in the future, which may replace the IPU’s functions.

If a longer-term process of building a global political community should finally come to an end, we can draw on the lesson of the European Parliament, recommending that a UN legislature could start with a consultative Parliamentary Assembly consisting of representatives chosen by the national parliaments and would be gradually expanded to become a directly-elected body. The first stage of this two-phased process will allow a UN Parliamentary Assembly to be created easily and inexpensively so that it can provide at least a valid democratic link between the UN and the global citizens through their representatives in the national parliaments for the time being. But these complex procedures are essentially beyond the scope of this paper and subject to further research.

Appendix:

Composition of Members of Potential Epistemic Communities mentioned in the Pre-1950-2014 Selected Quotes on Global Democracy and a World Parliament

51

List of Abbreviations

UNPA: United Nations Parliamentary Assembly MPs: Members of Parliament

52 WB: World

IMF: International Monetary Fund

OECD: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development P5: Five permanent members

UNSC: UN Security Council G8: Group of 8

R2P: Responsibility to Protect IPU: Inter-Parliamentary Union

CEUNPA: Campaign for a UN Parliamentary Assembly

References

A United Nations Parliamentary Assembly: An Idea whose Time Has Come. (Robert Sheppard Literary Blog & World Literature Forum). Retrieved on 24 November 2013 from https://robertalexandersheppard.wordpress.com/2013/11/24/a-united-nations-

53 Andreas Bummel. (2010). The Composition of a Parliamentary Assembly at the United Nations.

A Background Paper for the Committee for a Democratic U.N. Retrieved from http://www.kdun.org/resources/2010seats_en.pdf

Andreas Bummel. (2013). The Democratic Deficit of the G-20, the G-20 Speakers Forum, and a Global Parliamentary Assembly. Campaign for a United Nations. Retrieved on 3 April 2013 http://blog.unpacampaign.org/2013/04/the-democratic-deficit-of-the-g-20/

Azman, K. D. (2011). The problem of “democratic deficit” in the European Union. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(5), 242-250.

Born, H., & Hänggi, H. (2004). The ‘Double Democratic Deficit’: Parliamentary Accountability and the Use of Force Under International Auspices. PERSPECTIVES, 95.

Brühl, T., & Rittberger, V. (2001). From international to global governance: Actors, collective decision-making, and the United Nations in the world of the twenty-first century. Global governance and the United Nations system, 1-47. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.

Bull, H. (1977). The Anarchical society: A Study of Order in World Politics. Palgrave Macmillan. Bummel, A. (2010). The composition of a parliamentary assembly at the United Nations. Lulu.

com.

Christiano, T. (2010). Democratic legitimacy and international institutions.

Cutler, R. (2013). International Parliamentary Institutions as Organizations. Journal of International Organizations Studies, 4, 104-126.

Dahl, R. A. (1999). Can international organizations be democratic? A sceptic’s view. Democracy’s edges, 19-36.

Falk, R., & Strauss, A. (2001). Toward global parliament. Foreign Affairs, 212-220.

Finnemore, M., and Sikkink, K. (1998). International Norm Dynamics and Political Change, International Organization, 54(4), 887-917.

Gartzke, E., & Naoi, M. (2011). Multilateralism and Democracy: A Dissent Regarding Keohane, Macedo, and Moravcsik. International Organization, 65(03), 589-598.

54 Gravelle, T. (2011, September). Global Public Opinion Toward the United Nations: Insights

from the Gallup World Poll. In Annual Conference of the International Studies Association, Montréal.

Habegger, B. (2010). Democratic accountability of international organizations: Parliamentary control within the Council of Europe and the OSCE and the prospects for the United Nations. Cooperation and Conflict, 45(2), 186-204.

Heinrich, D. (2010). The case for a United Nations parliamentary assembly. Lulu. com.

IPU Committee rejects idea of a UN Parliamentary Assembly. (Campaign for a United Nations). Retrieved on 23 March 2010 from http://en.unpacampaign.org/news/486.php

Joseph E. Schwartzberg. (2012). Creating a World Parliamentary Assembly: An Evolutionary Journey. The Committee for a Democratic U.N. Retrieved from http://www.kdun.org/resources/201206js.pdf

Keohane, R. O. (2006). Accountability in World Politics. Scandinavian Political Studies, 29(2), 75-87.

Keohane, R. O. (2015). Nominal democracy? Prospects for democratic global governance. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 13(2), 343-353.

Keohane, R. O. Global Governance and Democratic Accountability.

Keohane, R. O., Macedo, S., & Moravcsik, A. (2009). Democracy-enhancing multilateralism. International organization, 63(01), 1-31.

Koenig-Archibugi, M. (2011). Is global democracy possible? European journal of international relations, 17(3), 519-542.

Koslowski, R., & Kratochwil, F. V. (1994). Understanding change in international politics: the Soviet empire's demise and the international system. International Organization, 48(02), 215-247.

Krajewski, M. (2010). Legitimizing global economic governance through transnational parliamentarization: The parliamentary dimensions of the WTO and the World Bank. Levi, L., Finizio, G., & Vallinoto, N. (2014). The Democratization of International Institutions.

First International Democracy (London: Routledge).

Mendlovitz, S. H., & Walker, B. (2003). A Reader on Second Assembly & Parliamentary Proposals. New York: Centre for UN Reform Education.

Moravcsik, A. (2004). Is there a ‘democratic deficit’ in world politics? A framework for analysis. Government and Opposition, 39(2), 336-363.

55 Osman Sabri Kiratli. (2013). Democratic Deficit Critiques and the Non-Role of Epistemic

Communities in the European. Union. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(12) [Special Issue – June 2013], 229-237.

Reinold, Theresa (2010) The Responsibility to Protect - Much Ado About Nothing? Review of International Studies 36, 55 – 78.

Robert Kuttner. (7 October 2014). Global Governance of Capital: A Challenge for Democracy. (Demos). Retrieved from http://www.demos.org/publication/global-governance-capital- challenge-democracy

Roberto Palea. (July 2014). Democracy in International Organizations. (The Federalist Debate Book ReviewYear XXVII, Number 2). Retrieved from http://www.federalist- debate.org/index.php/current/item/919-democracy-in-international-organizations

Šabič, Z. (2008). Building democratic and responsible global governance: the role of international parliamentary institutions. Parliamentary Affairs, 61(2), 255-271.

Schwartzberg, J. E. (2012). Creating a World Parliamentary Assembly: An Evolutionary Journey. Lulu. com.

Stutzer, A., & Frey, B. S. (2004). Making international organizations more democratic. Review of law & economics, 1(3), 305-330.

The Establishment of a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly and the Inter-Parliamentary Union. (Campaign for a United Nations). Retrieved on November 2008 from http://www.unpacampaign.org/documents/en/200812ipu_unpa.pdf

The EU's role in the G20 (2015) - European Parliament – Europa (The European Union's Role in International Economic Fora, Study for the ECON Committee). Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/542207/IPOL_STU(2015)54 2207_EN.pdf

United Nations Retains Strong Global Image. (17 September 2013). Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project- United-Nations-Report-FINAL-9-17-132.pdf

Vaughne Miller & Jon Lunn. (2014). The European Union: a democratic institution? - Research Paper 14/25. Retrieved on 29 April 2014 from

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP14-25/RP14-25.pdf

Walt, S. M. (1998). International relations: One world, Many theories. Foreign policy, 29-46. Wheatley, S. (2010). The democratic legitimacy of international law. Bloomsbury Publishing

56 Woods, N. (2003). Holding intergovernmental institutions to account. Ethics & International

Affairs, 17(01), 69-80.