Contents:

1. The organizer: Montreal International Forum /FIM ……………… 1

2. General impressions & topics ……………………………………….. 1

3. Track summaries …………………………………………………….. 3

1. The organizer: Forum International Montreal /FIM

The main organizer of the event, FIM /Montreal International Forum, was established in 1998 in Montreal as a global alliance of various individuals and organizations. By statute, the majority of FIM Board members are from the South. It aims to provide a neutral setting for an annual forum and biennial conference for reflection and active learning about the interaction between civil society and the multilateral system. In so doing, the Forum attempts to draw lessons from NGO experiences that can strengthen the voice and participation of civil society actors in the multilateral system.

Following discussions with the Ford Foundation FIM also agreed to undertake a project with the objective of helping to develop dialogue between global civil society and the G8. In approving the project, FIM identified some conditions such as: FIM would not present itself as a gatekeeper of global civil society, and it did not wish, in any manner, to confer legitimacy upon the G8 as a global governance mechanism. A report on FIM’s G8 initiative and a related meeting held in May 2002 can be found at: www.fimcivilsociety.org/nouv_anglais_text.html

The first FIM Forum was held in 1999 and it analysed the role of NGOs in relation to the Commission on Sustainable Development, ECOSOC, UNAIDS, the WB, the WTO and the establishment of the International Criminal Court whereas the following year’s Forum focused on issues of Human Security. The summary reports of these forums are available on the net (see the FIM homepages: www.fimcivilsociety.org). In 2001 no Forum was held. Another FIM Forum will be arranged next year, but as of now, the theme for this event remains unclear. For more information see the FIM homepages http://www.fimcivilsociety.org

Key objectives of G02 (as stated by the organizers)

• To raise awareness and deepen understanding of democratic global governance
• To explore cutting-edge, innovative and constructive policy options on how to build more democratic global governance
• To bring together practitioners and thinkers for sharing, bridge-building and learning across sectors: civil society , the UN , International Financial Institutions, governments, parliamentarians, the global corporate community, academia and the media
• To develop action strategies by civil society actors
• To identify innovative proposals which will strengthen cross-sectoral collaboration in support of democratization

This year’s forum brought together some 500 participants. Despite the rather ambitious and extensive agenda the conference offered little new. Many participants actually complained about the forum being TOO civil, slightly elitist and occasionally even boring. However, the conference did provide opportunities for participation and some of the smaller-scale interactive sessions and workshops succeeded quite well in enabling lively discussion and exchange. Sessions summarizing and bringing together the discussions taking place under various different tracks (nine altogether; see below for summaries) were good and helped in creating a bigger and a more coherent picture of the results achieved. Most of the points raised and challenges identified highlighted the timeliness and relevance of the recently released NIGD publications, (which, as a matter of fact, were very much in demand during the conference). In these publications, NIGD not only presents a vision of how to democratise global governance, but also puts forward a strategy of how to reform or develop these initiatives further and in what order.

According to John Langmore, the director of the ILO New York Office, some GO2 feedback will be provided for the ILO Commission on the Social Dimensions of Globalization whereas, aside for some personal linkages, it seems that the Forum has at least no formal linkages to the World Social Forum nor to the conferences organized by the Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt (www.globalisationdebate.be). The WSF was, however, repeatedly mentioned as a future platform with great potential by various speakers. The main difference between the WSF and GO2 is that the WSF is a platform reserved solely for the civil society whereas CO2 attempts more to promote a dialogue between the civil society and politicians. However, interestingly, at WSF III (taking place in January 2003 in Porto Alegre, Brazil) there will also be a new type of event called "Round tables for nogotiation and confrontation" to which politicians are invited.

One issue that kept surfacing throughout the conference was the importance of a diversity of voices, of institutional pluralism, of strong promotion of multilateralism and of finding ways to strengthen the transnational civil society. Although most speakers recognized the importance of consensus building, of activists groups talking in one voice, they emphasized that this should not take place at the expense of diversity.

Another remark often made was that many people in the Third World aren’t truly a part of the global civil society, sometimes not even of their own civil society. It was also asked who has the legitimacy to represent civil society and why? The importance of the US civil society and the need to build critical alliances between US-based and other civil society groups was recognized (as one participant noted, the US national security strategy might in practice be more important than the UN Millenium Development Goals /MDG’s). Also, it was agreed that more effort has to be put into bringing in community people and local authorities. All in all, strengthening of cross-sectoral linkages and networking was considered of prime importance as was continuous education.

Although Alfredo Sfeir-Younis, the World Bank Special Representative to the WTO and the UN, spoke on behalf of pluralism, new multilateralism and complementarity of mandates and structures his message was received with what can best be called polite doubt. There was fear that the transnational corporations (TNC’s) get over-represented and that the opening up of spaces might prove problematic keeping in mind the big business’ (superior) capacity to take over. Many also questioned the power of the UN in relation to WTO and the TNC’s and its ability to face the challenge. In this unipolar world, what are the UN’s actual chances of influencing? What is the UN going to do to engage in the Cancun WTO meeting? How will the UN plan to counterbalance WTO rules? What could be the role of civil society to engage in the UN action for promoting peaceful conflict resolution? Some suggested that, from Porto Alegre to Cancun 5^th ministerial, we need to criticize and emphasize the link between unfair trade, terrorism and war on Iraq. A strong labour and human rights framework was considered necessary in bringing the trade bodies accountable to human rights. It was also recognized that un-complying member governments are undermining the forces of the UN and that the civil society has the responsibility to pressure the governments to act responsibly.

What is noteworthy here is that these very same questions, priorities and conclusions that were raised and expressed during this conference keep surfacing in all fora dealing with the problematics and issues related to globalization. In this context no deeper analysis was made of how those various proposals and conclusions reached (in the tracks) are related to one another. Stating a common goal can only take us so far. Without concrete steps, strong commitment and clearly defined responsibilities these ideas remain nothing but fancy words.

3. Track summaries

Track descriptions and post GO2 track reports are also available at: www.fimcivilsociety.org/gO2/english/index.html

Civil Society, the UN and Democratizing Global Governance: Overcoming the forces undermining UN authority

The main speaker in the opening plenary, Nitin Desai, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, emphasized the importance of the interface between global society and the formal structures of decision-making and the remarkable potential for chance it provides. Desai listed three changes moving international stage beyond the nation state level: 1) TNC’s as a dominant force; 2) the growing importance of networks of global civil society; and 3) growing emergence of shared values. He recognized that national action cannot be effective unless it also operates on the global sphere and believed that projecting the national concerns in the international sphere helps produce the emergence of a global conscience.

Desai recognized that the UN exists at the hinge of the old state-state world order, but reminded the participants that the UN Summits in the 1990’s were a move towards open diplomacy as they brought in the civil society organisations and provided them with a new kind of platform. The UN, the states and the civil society are all vital in working on the issues of importance but also the TNC’s must be a part of the solution and feel ownership in the process. According to Desai the main challenges we face are: how to we make the interstate system more democratic?; How to facilitate and strengthen the civil society organizations?; How to engage the legislators better?

John Langmore, the Director of the ILO New York Office, recognized that there are severe in-systemic imbalances, and talked extensively on the need for more cooperation on the creation of global taxes and on the need to reduce opportunities to tax avoidance. Langmore supported the establishment of the ITO and showed interest in the Draft Treaty on a Currency Transactions Tax (of which he received a copy).

Five challenges were identified:

1) To build democratic governance we need to work at multiple levels (not solely the UN or the WTO etc) – how do we build coalitions across sectors to advocate those reforms?

2) UN reform and core institutions: inclusiveness and representativity, including excluded voices

3) The implementation and vertical integration of decisions taken through the MDGs and as a result of the series of UN conferences in the 1990’s: civil society needs to put effort into this and this must translate into efforts

4) National and regional efforts in building multistakeholder approach. Local actors as new actors in the global scene.

5) Horizontal integration: citizen diplomacy, learning from our experiences

Policy options: Macro "policy" nexus meeting the challenge to human rights and environmental agreements from the trade, investments and private property agreements. Gaining a clear recognition of the priority of environmental and human rights law.

Action strategy: Learning from and building on our success in citizen diplomacy in strategic areas (i.e. International Criminal Court, Biosafety protocol). It can change the world and challenge unilateral power.

Critical alliance: Developing collaborative responses to the corporate challenge to democracy at all levels from local school, to electoral system, to the negotiations in the WTO on services (GATS)

Track 2 /Human Rights & Global Governance

There’s a need to build on a human rights framework that would give a global platform for action.

Despite past success and advances in building norms and standards, and following the events of September 11, commitment to global human rights framework has been ebbing and there’s a need to become more rigorous in the face of movement towards terror. Human rights have remained a mere rhetoric and the human rights regime and the trade regime are at present working too separately. A culture of human rights needs to be strengthened in domestic, regional and global level.

Policy options: Civil Society organizations will work to ensure that the international trade regime and its rules are brought in conformity with international human rights regime and its corresponding conventions

Action strategy: civil society organizations will redouble our efforts to ensure universal ratification of the Rome Statute, uphold the integrity of this Statute and encourage domestic compliance by States. We will engage in work to increase public awareness and support for this International Criminal Court and cooperate in bringing cases of egregious crimes before it.

Critical alliance: Civil society organizations commit to work cooperatively among ourselves and with like minded states to ensure that human rights and democracy constitutes the core of the definition and plan of action of global governance. Civil society organizationss undertake to mobilize our energies and resources to build a global coalition and work proactively across sectors, gender, ages, races, religions and regions for a comprehensive an internationally recognised definition of terrorism.

Track 3 /Parlamentarians

If the parlamentarians are out, civil society has to come in…

Imaginative solutions, complementarity and international cooperation between parlamentarians at different levels was called for. It was also considered important that the civil society and parlamentarians work together to address new realities through trans-sectoral collaboration for democracy. The parlamentarians need to realise their global role. The national level simply isn’t enough any longer.

Policy options: Encouraging the establishment of a new international parliamentary forum.

Action strategy: Civil society cooperating with its parliament in a manner that is both respectful and non-complacent. Civil society must urge and support parliaments to adapt to new realities.

Critical alliance: We need to establish new fora where legitimate stakeholders can respectfully express and listen to each other’s points of view.

Track 4 / Trade, equity and democratic governance

There’s a serious democratic deficit, the breadth of which has not yet been quite fully realised. Capitalism has become a lawgiver and liberalization has been furthered to the detriment of parliamentary democracy. And yet the state has never been as powerful as now, stretching its limits of legality, but at the same time corroding legitimacy. Liberalization uses the state to get rid of the state and to effectively globalize the capitalist economy. There’s a need to regain the political sphere usurped by the economy. Dispute settlement system needs to devolve authority away from the WTO towards the democratically established laws of national states and local authorities.

Policy option: The UN human rights body of law and institutions to constitute the highest authority in the global system to which the WTO and other trade bodies must be held accountable

Action strategy: Civil society groups should document the practices of transnational corporations’ violations of the full spectrum of human rights law (including right to development) while restructuring markets for labour, goods and services through model fair trade systems.

Critical alliance: Convening local and regional gatherings of a wide spectrum of civil society representatives (farmers, women’s groups, indigenous peoples, environmentalists, consumers, fishers, religious and cultural groups etc), local authorities, parlamentarians, and ministers to build consensus positions towards trade policy that is consistent with human rights.

Track 5 / Global Corporations

Policy options: Disseminating information on scale, scope and nature of global corporations among local bodies and community activists, educating people.

Action strategy: Monitoring global standards on labour, environment, sourcing, disclosure and marketing across countries of the North and the South of global corporations.

Critical alliance: Promoting North-South coalitions of shareholders, consumers, workers and community leaders to influence global corporations, and their local subsidiaries, to follow regulations and policies of national governments and international agencies.

Track 6 /Local government

Local governments organizing internationally as new actors in the global sphere.

Policy options: Bringing close the citizens and their government by achieving a responsible decentralization of authority in favour of local government

Action strategy: Civil society organizations recognizing and reinforcing the democratic and participatory management at local government level and thus contributing to the sustainable development

Critical alliance: The essential participation of women in local government should be encouraged and supported by all those involved

Track 7 /Transnational civil society

How do we ensure having a process that’s interactive and inclusively participatory to civil society?

How do we develop our skills in developing alliances? How to prepare for global processes?

How do we balance the need for common strategy and diversity of strategies?

Policy options: Policy campaign based on new framework that integrates across many citizen movements and issues

Action strategy: Transnational advocacy on global issues that is grounded in demonstrable links and consultations with the most affected constituencies.

Critical alliance: Build alliances across sectors and regions of all forces that oppose unilateralism and strengthen multilateralism and the rule of law (e.g. between US-based and international opponents of US unilateralism)

Track 8 / Non-dominant groups

English language dominates the international fora and forms an obstacle to equal participation. Is it necessary to speak English in order to have effective representation at the global level? The track attempted to define the problem and to find potential solutions. (Results/summary not available at the time).

Track 9 / Financial flows: ungoverned? Ungovernable?

Policy option: Introduction of capital controls and related domestic financial regulation. Introduction of an international bankruptcy framework for sovereign governments, one that would discipline reckless lenders and borrowers. The introduction of a Tobin Tax to limit and discipline financial speculation.

(Also, reorienting economies away from international level to national and increasing collaboration between those civil society groups who working on the IMF, WB and the WTO.)

Foreign Debt: A Global Political Problem – ideas for a global solution:

What level of debt can a country sustain and afford while at the same time achieving Millenium Development Goals and sustainability? Debtors’ right not to be forced to comply with a contract which drives him to an inhumane situation should be recognized. The Brady Plan, HIPC etc. have not been effective enough. There’s a need for integral solutions based on state law and human rights with just and transparent processes, and for an international tribune (introducing a minimum state law?). Arbitration should be institutionalised, and debt should not be used as a tool for political pressure. The civil societies from the South and the North should work together.

Some steps toward an integral global procedure:

• Sovereignty in turning to arbitration (for ex. presenting a case to the UN)
• Audit of the debt (eliminate illegal, corrupt and un-payable debt such as debt taken during the apartheid period etc)
• Creation of an emergency fund and a legal framework to impede speculative pressures
• Clear fiscal parameters so that debt servicing does not affect social investment nor development potential
• Generate payment capacity for debt servicing
• Contingency clauses
• Participation of civil society representatives in the process
• Rethink and restructure the IMF and the WB
• Dissolve the Paris Club
• Deflate the financial bubble
• Capital controls (Tobin Tax)
• Eliminate fiscal paradises 

Laura Nisula, NIGD, e mail: lnisula@yahoo.com