The UN General Assembly, Over Burdened with Repetitive Resolutions, Aims at Revitalization

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

The UN General Assembly in session. Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elias

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 21 2025 (IPS) – The 193-member General Assembly (GA), the UN’s highest policy-making body, has long been the repository for scores of long-winded outdated resolutions accumulated over several decades– and lying in cold storage.

As part of the proposed restructuring of the United Nations, which is facing a severe liquidity crisis, there is now a move to streamline and revitalize the General Assembly which has been mired in a bureaucratic backlog.

The President of the General Assembly (PGA), Annalena Baerbock, has called on each Main Committee to review its working methods and propose concrete measures to enhance efficiency, including:

• Merging similar agenda items to avoid repetition;
• Reducing the frequency, length and number of resolutions;
• Using biennial or triennial cycles where appropriate;
• Limiting explanations of vote to five minutes; and
• Simplifying adoption procedures — one gavel, one decision, all texts.

These recommendations, mostly spelled out in a recent resolution, would help re-shape the General Assembly to respond to global challenges with agility and coherence. But unless these reforms are implemented, they remain just words on paper, just another resolution.

“Business as usual will not suffice. We need fewer repetitive resolutions, shorter debates, and smarter scheduling. No more ‘resolutions for resolutions’ sake,” the PGA said.

“We cannot preach on Sunday that we need fewer resolutions, then proceed to submit one for consideration on Monday. And this is, unfortunately, taking place”, she warned.

Dr Palitha Kohona, a former Chief of the UN Treaty Section and one-time Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations, told IPS the UN is burdened under a heavy baggage of resolutions piled up over 80 years.

“Many are no longer relevant, others are superfluous, and some repetitive. Given its current perilous financial situation, it would be appropriate for each department and office to review rigorously the resolutions under their purview and identify those that could be terminated.”

This, he said, may be done through an omnibus resolution. Some might require delicate negotiations with member states which might claim ownership to resolutions that they had proposed. Sensitively, handled, this could deliver considerable financial and staffing dividends.

New resolutions, he pointed out, should be vetted carefully to avoid redundancies. UN staff could proactively assist in this process. Even where resolutions are to be implemented within existing resource allocations, there will be some cost involved, including time.

Where a proposed resolution could not be implemented due to resource constraints, it should be vetoed from the beginning, said Dr Kohona, who until recently, was Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China.

Action officers should be located or moved to an office where a resolution is most likely to be implemented and it would be most effective. For example, the responsibility for implementing UNDP-related resolutions should be allocated to Nairobi, he proposed. Peacekeeping should also be moved to Nairobi as most peacekeeping now happens in Africa, he declared.

Baerbock said: “We have seen the Main Committees put forward resolutions for three-day conferences, with no budget attached, fully aware of the fiscal situation we are debating at the same moment. We have seen over 160 sides events during High-Level Week, despite the call for less, or the call by some, for no side events at all”.

“And we have seen, already, three or four high-level meetings submitted for consideration for the 81st High-Level Week (next year), with four for each of the 82nd and 83rd, despite the decision of this Assembly – so by all of us – to limit this to a maximum of three.”

“While we all want to protect the things we care about, each of us must make concessions in this time of reform”, she declared.

Dr. Purnima Mane, a former Deputy Executive Director (Programme) and UN Assistant-Secretary-General (ASG) at the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), told IPS the major ongoing effort to review the working methods of each of the Committees of the UN GA and enhance their efficiency is certainly laudable.

It is a golden opportunity to challenge some of the so-called ‘givens’ of the ways in which the GA functions and focus on what matters in a streamlined fashion.

The currently proposed solutions however are somewhat peripheral even if they indicate a desire for change. One of the major problems faced by the Committees is the range of issues taken on without clear prioritization including a lack of focus on neglected, key issues. And the absence of a sense of urgency, she pointed out

“The suggestions offered touch on enhancing efficiency of working but avoid tougher issues perhaps due to lack of time and sometimes will on the part of some members to take the risk of proposing solutions which might necessitate dismantling of well-entrenched methods of working”.

Another barrier, she said, might be concerns about potential difficulties that are likely to be experienced in getting agreement on these methods and more so the possibility of limited involvement by member states in their implementation.

“Perhaps starting small and identifying possibly achievable objectives for how the committees are run and managed might be a good beginning, but without the commitment of member States to the issues being prioritized and to implement the resolutions being proposed, all this change and effort is unlikely to achieve any benefits, including saving of resources”, she said.

Reducing agenda items and avoiding repetitive resolutions and endless debates are all a good start but it requires the will of the member states to implement these resolutions, once passed, she added.

And while the will to implement is understood as a given, in reality that is exactly where the problem sometimes lies. How to encourage and ensure implementation is really the true challenge, said Dr Mane, a former President and CEO of Pathfinder International.

Andreas Bummel, co-founder and Executive Director of Democracy Without Borders, told IPS ironically, the issue of revitalizing the General Assembly itself has become a ritualistic item.

“Tackling the number of annual resolutions and avoiding useless repetition year after year is a no-brainer. This should have been implemented long ago. But deeper changes are needed”.

For instance, he said, there needs to be continuity and institutional memory in the office of the President of the General Assembly. It should be a two-year tenure and receive proper funding.

Further, by creating a Parliamentary Assembly, the instrument of Citizens’ Initiative and Citizens’ Assemblies, the General Assembly can become a center of innovation and inclusion for the entire UN system. This should be on the agenda.

Use or not use at your discretion. The final two sentences are the most important as far as I am concerned, declared Bummel.

Meanwhile, revitalization is also being extended to the Office of the President of the General Assembly (OPGA).

The 80th session, Baerbock said, benefited from an early, seamless handover from the 79th — allowing us to hit the ground running. Yet the volume of work remains immense.

“Our High-Level Week featured over seven major meetings in just a few days;
The remainder of the session will see nearly twenty intergovernmental processes and multiple mandated High-Level Meetings; And the total number of resolutions has barely changed — many nearly identical to those of past sessions.”

But this is not sustainable, she said. And it’s contradicting the call from smaller missions that they cannot be in three meetings at the same time.

Transitions matter. Preparation matters. “We must ensure each presidency is set up for success”.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Global South Can Rebalance Climate Agenda in Belém, Says Gambian Negotiator

Posted on by admin

Active Citizens, Africa, Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Climate Change Justice, COP30, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, International Justice, Latin America & the Caribbean, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

COP30


COP30 negotiator Malang Sambou Manneh believes the method of countering growth in fossil fuel development lies in technology. Showcasing alternatives that work provides the opportunity for the global South to take the lead and present best practices in renewables.

Climate change is a significant contributor to water insecurity in Africa. Water stress and hazards, like withering droughts, are hitting African communities, economies, and ecosystems hard. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Climate change is a significant contributor to water insecurity in Africa. Water stress and hazards, like withering droughts, are hitting African communities, economies, and ecosystems hard. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

NAIROBI, Oct 14 2025 (IPS) – The Gambia’s lead negotiator on mitigation believes that COP30 presents a unique opportunity to rebalance global climate leadership.

“This COP cannot be shrouded in vagueness. Too much is now at stake,” Malang Sambou Manneh says in an interview with IPS ahead of the climate negotiations. He identified a wide range of issues that are expected to define COP30 climate talks.

The global community will shortly descend on the Amazon rainforest, the world’s largest intact forest, home to more than 24 million people in Brazil alone, including hundreds of thousands of Indigenous Peoples. Here, delegates will come face-to-face with the realities of climate change and see what is at stake.

Malang Sambou Manneh

Malang Sambou Manneh.

COP30, the UN’s annual climate conference, or the Conference of Parties, will take place from November 10-21, 2025 in the Amazonian city of Belém, Brazil and promises to be people-centered and inclusive. But with fragmented and fragile geopolitics, negotiations for the best climate deal will not be easy.

Sambou, a lead climate negotiator who has attended all COPs, says a unified global South is up to the task.

He particularly stressed the need for an unwavering “focus on mitigation or actions to reduce or prevent greenhouse gas emissions.” Stating that the Mitigation Work Programme is critical, as it is a process established by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at COP26 to urgently scale up the ambition and implementation of efforts to mitigate climate change globally.

Sambou spoke about how COP30 differs from previous conferences, expectations from the global South, fossils fuels and climate financing, stressing that “as it was in Azerbaijan for COP29, Belem will be a ‘finance COP’ because climate financing is still the major hurdle. Negotiations will be tough, but I foresee a better outcome this time round.”

The Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T is expected to be released soon, outlining a framework by the COP 29 and COP 30 Presidencies for scaling climate finance for developing countries to at least USD 1.3 trillion annually by 2035.

Unlike previous conferences, COP30 focuses on closing the ambition gap identified by the Global Stocktake, a periodic review that enables countries and other stakeholders, such as the private sector, to take inventory to assess the world’s collective progress in meeting its climate goals.

The first stocktake was completed at COP28 in 2023, revealing that current efforts are insufficient and the world is not on track to meet the Paris Agreement. But while the Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty on climate change, set off on a high singular note when it entered into force in November 2016, that unity is today far from guaranteed.

Malang Sambou Manneh with She-Climate Fellows. Credit: Clean Earth Gambia/Facebook

Malang Sambou Manneh with She-Climate Fellows. Credit: Clean Earth Gambia/Facebook

Unlocking high-impact and sustainable climate action opportunities amidst geopolitical turbulence was always going to be difficult. Not only did President Donald Trump pull the United States out of the Paris Agreement, but he is now reenergized against climate programs and robustly in support of fossil fuels—and there are those who are listening to his message.

Sambou says while this stance “could impact the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy, many more countries are in favor of renewable energy than against.”

“But energy issues are complex because fossil fuels have been a way of life for centuries, and developed countries leveraged fossil fuels to accelerate development. And then, developing countries also started discovering their oil and gas, but they are not to touch it to accelerate their own development and must instead shift to renewables. It is a complex situation.”

Ilham Aliyev, the President of Azerbaijan, famously described oil as a “gift from God” at COP29 to defend his country’s reliance on fossil fuels despite climate change concerns. This statement highlights the complexity of the situation, especially since it came only a year after the landmark COP28 hard-won UAE Consensus included the first explicit reference to “transitioning away from all fossil fuels in energy systems” in a COP agreement.

As a negotiator, Sambou says he is very much alive to these dynamics but advises that the global community “will not successfully counter fossil fuels by saying they are bad and harmful; we should do so through technology. By showcasing alternatives that work. This is an opportunity for the global South to take the lead and present best practices in renewables.”

And it seems there is evidence for his optimism. A recent report shows the uptake of renewables overtaking coal generation for the first time on record in the first half of 2025 and solar and wind outpacing the growth in demand.

This time around, the global south has its work cut out, as it will be expected to step up and provide much-needed leadership as Western leaders retreat to address pressing problems at home, defined by escalating economic crises, immigration issues, conflict, and social unrest.

It is in the developing world’s leadership that Sambou sees the opportunities—especially as scientific evidence mounts on the impacts of the climate crisis.

The World Meteorological Organization projects a continuation of record-high global temperatures, increasing climate risks and potentially marking the first five-year period, 2025-2029.

Sambou says all is not lost in light of the new and ambitious national climate action plans or the Nationally Determined Contributions.

This past September marked the deadline for a new set of these contributions, which will guide the COP30 talks. Every five years, the signatory governments to the Paris Agreement are requested to submit new national climate plans detailing more ambitious greenhouse gas emission reduction and adaptation goals.

“Ambition has never been a problem; it is the lack of implementation that remains a most pressing issue. Action plans cannot be implemented without financing. This is why the ongoing political fragmentation is concerning, for if there was ever a time to stand unified, it is now. The survival of humanity depends on it,” he emphasizes.

“Rather than just setting new goals in Belém, this time around, we are better off pushing for a few scalable solutions, commitments that we can firmly hold ourselves accountable to, than 200 pages of outcomes that will never properly translate into climate action.”

Despite many competing challenges and a step forward, two steps backwards here and there, from the heart of the Amazon rainforest, COP30’s emphasis on the critical role of tropical forests and nature-based solutions is expected to significantly drive action for environmental and economic growth.

Note: This interview is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

From Algorithms to Accountability: What Global AI Governance Should Look Like

Posted on by admin

Artificial Intelligence, Civil Society, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is a specialized agency of the United Nations. Credit: ITU/Rowan Farrell

 
Artificial intelligence holds vast potential but poses grave risks, if left unregulated, UN Secretary-General António Guterres told the Security Council on September 24.

ABUJA, Nigeria, Oct 14 2025 (IPS) – Recent research from Stanford’s Institute for Human-Centered AI warns that bias in artificial intelligence remains deeply rooted even in models designed to avoid it and can worsen as models grow. From bias in hiring of men over women for leadership roles, to misclassification of darker-skinned individuals as criminals, the stakes are high.

Yet it’s simply not attainable for annual dialogues and multilateral processes as recently provisioned for in Resolution A/RES/79/325 for the UN to keep up to pace with AI technological developments and the cost of this is high.

Hence for accountability purposes and to increase the cost of failure, why not give Tech Companies whose operations are now state-like, participatory roles at the UNGA?

When AI Gets It Wrong: 2024’s Most Telling Cases

In one of the most significant AI discrimination cases moving through the courts, the plaintiff alleges that Workday’s popular artificial intelligence (AI)-based applicant recommendation system violated federal antidiscrimination laws because it had a disparate impact on job applicants based on race, age, and disability.

Judge Rita F. Lin of the US District Court for the Northern District of California ruled in July 2024 that Workday could be an agent of the employers using its tools, which subjects it to liability under federal anti-discrimination laws. This landmark decision means that AI vendors, not just employers, can be held directly responsible for discriminatory outcomes.

In another case, the University of Washington researchers found significant racial, gender, and intersectional bias in how three state-of-the-art large language models ranked resumes. The models favored white-associated names over equally qualified candidates with names associated with other racial groups.

In 2024, a University of Washington study investigated gender and racial bias in resume-screening AI tools. The researchers tested a large language model’s responses to identical resumes, varying only the names to suggest different racial and gender identities.

The financial impact is staggering.

A 2024 DataRobot survey of over 350 companies revealed: 62% lost revenue due to AI systems that made biased decisions, proving that discriminatory AI isn’t just a moral failure—it’s a business disaster. It’s too soon for an innovation to result in such losses.

Time is running out.

A 2024 Stanford analysis of vision-language models found that increasing training data from 400 million to 2 billion images made larger models up to 69% more likely to label Black and Latino men as criminals. In large language models, implicit bias testing showed consistent stereotypes: women were more often linked to humanities over STEM, men were favored for leadership roles, and negative terms were disproportionately associated with Black individuals.

The UN needs to take action now before these predictions turn into reality. And frankly, the UN cannot keep up with the pace of these developments.

What the UN Can—and Must—Do

To prevent AI discrimination, the UN must lead by example and work with governments, tech companies, and civil society to establish global guardrails for ethical AI.

Here’s what that could look like:

Working with Tech Companies: Technology companies have become the new states and should be treated as such. They should be invited to the UN table and granted participatory privileges that both ensure and enforce accountability.

This would help guarantee that the pace of technological development—and its impacts—is self-reported before UN-appointed Scientific Panels reconvene. As many experts have noted, the intervals between these annual convenings are already long enough for major innovations to slip past oversight.

Developing Clear Guidelines: The UN should push for global standards on ethical AI, building on UNESCO’s Recommendation and OHCHR’s findings. These should include rules for inclusive data collection, transparency, and human oversight.

Promoting Inclusive Participation: The people building and regulating AI must reflect the diversity of the world. The UN should set up a Global South AI Equity Fund to provide resources for local experts to review and assess tools such as LinkedIn’s NFC passport verification.

Working with Africa’s Smart Africa Alliance, the goal would be to create standards together that make sure AI is designed to benefit communities that have been hit hardest by biased systems. This means including voices from the Global South, women, people of color, and other underrepresented groups in AI policy conversations.

Requiring Human Rights Impact Assessments: Just like we assess the environmental impact of new projects, we should assess the human rights impact of new AI systems—before they are rolled out.

Holding Developers Accountable: When AI systems cause harm, there must be accountability. This includes legal remedies for those who are unfairly treated by AI. The UN should create an AI Accountability Tribunal within the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to look into cases where AI systems cause discrimination.

This tribunal should have the authority to issue penalties, such as suspending UN partnerships with companies that violate these standards, including cases like Workday.

Support Digital Literacy and Rights Education: Policy makers and citizens need to understand how AI works and how it might impact their rights. The UN can help promote digital literacy globally so that people can push back against unfair systems.

Lastly, there has to be Mandates for intersectional or Multiple Discriminations Audits: AI systems should be required to go through intersectional audits that check for combined biases, such as those linked to race, disability, and gender. The UN should also provide funding to organizations to create open-source audit tools that can be used worldwide.

The Road Ahead

AI is not inherently good or bad. It is a tool, and like any tool, its impact depends on how we use it. If we are not careful, AI could lengthen problem-solving time, deepen existing inequalities, and create new forms of discrimination that are harder to detect and harder to fix.

But if we take action now—if we put human rights at the center of AI development—we can build systems that uplift, rather than exclude.

The UN General Assembly meetings may have concluded for this year, the era of ethical AI has not. The United Nations remains the organization with the credibility, the platform, and the moral duty to lead this charge. The future of AI—and the future of human dignity—may depend on it.

Chimdi Chukwukere is an advocate for digital justice. His work explores the intersection of technology, governance, Big Tech, sovereignty and social justice. He holds a Masters in Diplomacy and International Relations from Seton Hall University and has been published at Inter Press Service, Politics Today, International Policy Digest, and the Diplomatic Envoy.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Abusive Governments Set to Win Seats in Human Rights Council

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

NEW YORK, Oct 10 2025 (IPS) – Egypt and Vietnam are on track to secure seats on the United Nations Human Rights Council despite being woefully unfit for membership. The UN General Assembly will elect members to the UN’s premier rights body in a noncompetitive vote on October 14, 2025.

These 2 countries are among 14 member states seeking three-year terms on the 47-nation Human Right Council starting in January 2026. Vietnam, currently a Council member, is seeking re-election.

“Noncompetitive UN votes permit abusive governments like Egypt and Vietnam to become Human Rights Council members, threatening to make a mockery of the Council,” said Louis Charbonneau, UN director at Human Rights Watch. “UN member states should stop handing Council seats on a silver platter to serial rights violators.”

Egypt, along with Angola, Mauritius, and South Africa are running for four African seats. India, Iraq, and Pakistan are joining Vietnam for the four Asian seats. For Latin America and the Caribbean, Chile, and Ecuador are unopposed for two seats.

In the Western group, Italy and the United Kingdom are running for two available seats, while Estonia and Slovenia are candidates for two seats for Central and Eastern Europe.

General Assembly Resolution 60/251, which created the Human Rights Council in 2006, urges states voting for members to “take into account the contribution of candidates to the promotion and protection of human rights.” Council members are required to “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights” at home and abroad and to “fully cooperate with the Council.”

Candidates only need a simple majority in the secret-ballot vote in the 193-nation General Assembly to secure a seat on the Human Rights Council. That makes it highly unlikely that any of the candidates will not be elected. Nevertheless, UN member states should not cast votes for abusive governments that are demonstrably unqualified for Council membership.

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s government has continued wholesale repression, systematically detaining and punishing peaceful critics and activists, and effectively criminalizing peaceful dissent. Government security forces have committed serious human rights abuses with near-absolute impunity. These include killing hundreds of largely peaceful protesters and widespread, systematic torture of detainees, which most likely amount to crimes against humanity.

The government also tries to prevent its own citizens from engaging with the Geneva-based Human Rights Council, and punishes those who engage with brutal reprisals. It ignores UN experts’ requests to visit the country.

The ruling Communist Party of Vietnam maintains a monopoly on political power and allows no challenge to its leadership. Basic rights are severely restricted, including freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly, association, and religion. Rights activists and bloggers face police intimidation, harassment, restricted movement, and arbitrary arrest and detention.

Mauritius and the UK, among the countries running. signed a treaty that recognizes Mauritius’ sovereignty over the Chagos islands but fails to address the ongoing crimes against humanity against Chagossians and their right of return to all the islands.

The UK forcibly displaced the Chagossian people between 1965 and 1973 to allow the US to build a military base. Mauritius and the UK should comply with their international rights obligations, including Chagossians’ right of return and should provide an effective remedy and reparations.

Angolan President João Lourenço has pledged to protect human rights, though Angolan security forces have used excessive force against political activists and peaceful protesters. South Africa has taken strong stances for accountability on Palestine and other issues. It should be similarly robust with rights violations by Russia and China.

The Bharatiya Janata Party government in India led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi has refused access to UN experts. Modi’s party leaders and supporters repeatedly vilify and attack Muslims and Christians with impunity, while the authorities often punish those who protest this campaign of Hindu majoritarianism.

Pakistan should cease the use of draconian counterterrorism and sedition laws to intimidate peaceful critics, and repeal its blasphemy laws. The government should prosecute those responsible for incitement and attacks on minorities and marginalized communities.

In 2024, Iraq passed a law criminalizing same-sex relations and transgender expression. Violence and discrimination against LGBT people are rampant, for which no one is held to account. Iraqi authorities have increasingly repressed activists and journalists.

In Ecuador, the government has attacked judicial independence and security forces have committed serious human rights violations since President Daniel Noboa declared an “internal armed conflict” in January 2024.

In Chile, President Gabriel Boric’s administration has played a leading role in speaking out on human rights violations around the world. Human rights challenges, including racism and abuses against migrants, remain a problem in the country, however.

In the UK, the authorities should end their crackdown on freedom of assembly. Many peaceful protesters in support of Palestinians or action on climate change have been arrested and some imprisoned after demonstrating.

Italy should stop criminalizing and obstructing sea rescues and enabling Libyan forces to intercept migrants and refugees and take them back to Libya, where they face arbitrary detention and grave abuses. Italy also failed to comply with a 2025 International Criminal Court arrest warrant by sending a wanted suspect back to Libya instead of to The Hague.

The Human Rights Council has played a crucial role in investigating abuses in Syria, Myanmar, North Korea, Russia, Ukraine, Israel/Palestine, and elsewhere. It recently established an investigation into serious crimes in Afghanistan by all parties—past and present —and extended its fact-finding mission for Sudan. Other countries and situations need scrutiny.

Council members should press for investigations of abuses by major powers, such as China’s crimes against humanity against Uyghurs and others in Xinjiang, and take up extrajudicial killings by the US of alleged narcotics traffickers on sea vessels.

For Council investigations to be credible, it needs financing. It is critical for countries to pay their assessed UN dues while boosting voluntary contributions. This will ensure that independent human rights investigations do not become casualties of the UN’s financial crisis resulting from the Trump administration halting virtually all payments to the UN and China and others paying late.

“The Human Rights Council has been able to save countless lives by carrying out numerous human rights investigations that deter governments and armed groups from committing abuses,” Charbonneau said. “All governments should recognize that it’s in their interests to promptly pay their UN dues so the rights Council can do its job.”

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Civil Society on the Edge

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Gina Romero is UN Special Rapporteur for the rights to freedom of assembly and of association.

Credit: UN Web TV

BOGOTA, Colombia, Oct 9 2025 (IPS) – The collapse of aid architecture is one of the greatest dangers for civic space. This shift is not accidental but systemic, reflecting deliberate policy choices – not only by the US but accelerated by its decisions- that prioritize security agendas over human rights and solidarity.

Aid cuts, securitization, and geopolitical rivalries have led to the defunding of grassroots organizations, especially those led by women, LGBTQI groups, and marginalized communities. As a result, associations that once filled critical gaps are disappearing. These dynamics as existential because without resources, protections, and solidarity, civil society cannot survive—let alone flourish.

This is the center of my more recent report, that will be presented at the UN General Assembly on October 16th.

Civil society’s weakening has direct consequences for human rights protection and democratic participation. Without independent associations, accountability mechanisms collapse, and corruption flourishes. The report highlights that marginalized groups are disproportionately affected, as grassroots organizations are often their only safety net. The dismantling of solidarity also jeopardizes progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

For example, women’s organizations that once advanced gender equality and access to reproductive health are closing. LGBTQI associations providing health services face funding cuts. Environmental defenders, crucial in climate justice, are left exposed.

Thus, the report warns that the rollback of aid and civic freedoms undermines not only democracy but also global commitments to equality and sustainability.

The report makes a call for urgent action to rebuild international solidarity and redesign the architecture of aid in ways that strengthen rather than weaken civic space. The vision is for a people-centered, rights-based, and sustainable system of cooperation. Key elements include:

Guaranteeing equitable access to resources: ensuring groups with high vulnerabilities, have direct and fair access to funding. Includes aid models that channels resources to local civil society, avoiding intermediaries, and simplified bureaucratic procedures.

Repealing restrictive laws and counter-terrorism measures: ending the misuse of security frameworks—such as counter-terrorism and anti-money laundering— and repealing laws that stigmatize NGOs as “foreign agents” or limit their ability to operate freely.

Ensuring meaningful participation of civil society: in multilateral decision-making, as equal partners shaping priorities, including global financing mechanisms and SDG implementation frameworks.

Aligning aid with human rights and civic space protection: Condition aid and credits on compliance with obligations to protect freedoms and rights and promote long-term, flexible funding instead of short-term project-based support.

Protecting digital freedoms and resisting securitization: Safeguarding the use of technologies, including spyware and facial recognition technologies, for association and assembly while preventing its misuse for surveillance and repression.

Reimagining solidarity: Shifting from a charity-based approach to one of global justice and shared responsibility; supporting civil society is not an act of benevolence but a legal and moral obligation under international human rights law.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Multilateralism Minus the People: 80 Years of the UN’s Broken Promise

Posted on by admin

Civil Society, Democracy, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: United Nations

NEW YORK, Sep 30 2025 (IPS) – Last week, the United Nations (UN) marked its 80th anniversary against the backdrop of an unprecedented global crisis. With the highest number of active conflicts since 1946, trust in multilateralism is faltering.

Yet the UN’s founding vision, rooted in the principle of ‘We the Peoples,’ remains as urgent as ever; affirming that peace, human rights, and development cannot be achieved by governments alone. From the very beginning, civil society has been integral to this vision, a role formally recognised in Article 71 of the UN Charter, which underscores the value of NGOs in shaping international agendas.

“Article71: The Economic and Social Council may make suitable arrangements for consultation with non-governmental organisations which are concerned with matters within its competence. Such arrangements may be made with international organisations and, where appropriate, with national organisations after consultation with the Member of the United Nations concerned.”

Yet despite this important provision, multilateral processes have increasingly become state-centric, turning global governance into a top-down exercise detached from the people it is meant to serve.

Excluding civil society and global citizens from policy-making not only produces laws and policies out of touch with local needs but also undermines community-driven practices that are often best placed to identify challenges and craft solutions.

At worst, silencing those who hold governments accountable empowers authoritarian regimes to flout international law, restrict human rights, and erode the rules-based international order. While the UN may recognise the role of civil society in principle, why does practice remain so distant from this commitment?

One area for reflection is the extent to which international spaces mirror national realities. Many see the multilateral system as an all-powerful body safeguarding humanity from the scourge of war. In reality it is a regrouping of national actors, the same ones responsible for shrinking civic space at home.

According to the CIVICUS Monitor, more than 70 percent of the global population lives in countries where freedoms of expression, association, and assembly are severely restricted. For many human rights defenders (HRDs), even raising their voices at the UN has led to reprisals at home, including surveillance and imprisonment.

By privileging repressive states and sidelining accountability actors, multilateral institutions replicate domestic restrictions globally, leaving abuses unchecked and defenders excluded.

A second challenge is how money dictates priorities. The collapse of the global aid sector has forced many to confront this reality again. The UN is funded largely by member states through mandatory and voluntary contributions. Over time, earmarking of funds and shifting UN priorities have led to chronic underinvestment in human rights.

Today, the human rights pillar receives just five percent of the UN’s regular budget, and with the upcoming UN80 budget cuts, this already underfunded area faces further risk. When human rights are deprioritised through budget cuts and underfunding, the message to member states is clear- resources and political will are better placed elsewhere. This dynamic discourages collaboration with civil society and reinforces their marginalisation.

A third challenge is the unequal access granted to civil society at UN headquarters. Negotiation rooms are closed to most organisations, and draft resolutions are often circulated only among those with close ties to diplomats, leaving others without privileged access unable to provide timely input. Meaningful participation is impossible without timely information.

During high-level weeks in New York, even side event spaces can only be booked through a member state, effectively controlling who speaks and what is discussed. Major processes such as the Summit of the Future or Financing for Development rarely engage civil society at the national level in time to influence outcomes.

Even when hundreds of civil society organisations submit feedback on policy documents, there is little transparency on how their contributions are used. These opaque practices erode trust and leave committed groups questioning whether investing their scarce time and resources in multilateral spaces is worthwhile.

Despite these glaring challenges, which have turned the system into “we the member states,” the UN is not without tools to ensure it is inclusive of the people it was created to serve. First, existing tools such as the UN Guidance Note on the Promotion and Protection of Civic Space provide a clear framework for action through the “three P’s”: participation, protection, and promotion. To move this document beyond paper, the task force assigned to implement it must act urgently.

Accreditation processes may get civil society past the security desk after years of hurdles, but it does not guarantee meaningful engagement. What matters in the long run is meaningful participation across the UN system, not just at headquarters, in order to achieve political and practical impact.

Second, a focus on accountable leadership. When funding is slashed and political will abandoned, the UN inadvertently strengthens authoritarian regimes, enabling them to silence voices, restrict rights, and openly flout international law. This erosion of support for human rights contributes to shrinking civic freedoms worldwide and leaves many losing trust in the multilateral system.

In this context, civil society engagement is not optional, it is key to steering the UN’s future leadership toward defending human rights and global freedoms.

With conversations on the next Secretary-General already gaining momentum, civil society’s role must be a central test for every candidate. Town halls with nominees should be used to demand clear commitments to meaningful participation of civil society, as well as sustained funding and protection for human rights programmes.

This is not about tokenistic symbolism; meaningful civil society engagement is a fundamental condition for development progress, the protection of human rights, and the survival of a rules-based international order- including multilateral organisations like the UN.

As the UN enters its ninth decade, its relevance depends on accountability to the people, not just the states. Civil society must be recognized as independent partners, with their constructive input embedded across decision-making, financing, and oversight. Only by centering people and their rights can the UN restore trust, strengthen multilateralism, and truly fulfill its founding promise: a world grounded in peace, development, and human rights.

Jesselina Rana, a human rights lawyer, is the UN Advisor at CIVICUS’ New York Hub.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source