December
1998, Vol. 2, No 4
The
Copenhagen World Summit on Social Development proposed, and
the UN General Assembly agreed, that there should be a Special
Session of the General Assembly in the year 2000 to review implementation
of the Summit commitments and to facilitate further implementation.
The Special Session will take place on June 26-30, 2000
in Geneva.
It has been emphasised repeatedly by the UN
that the Special Session will not renegotiate the Copenhagen agreements.
It is intended, instead, to focus on receiving reports on progress
with implementation and to identify ways in which further progress
can be made. It is proposed that reports on implementation will
be received from governments, UN agencies and other international
institutions.
Preparations for the Special Session, popularly
referred to as Copenhagen + 5, will also include publication by
the UN of research and policy proposals from commissioned experts
and expert meetings on key policy issues. It is likely that reports
and proposals will also be received from regional reviews which
the Summit proposed should be conducted every two years by high-level
meetings of governments. Reviews were convened in 1997 by the
relevant UN regional commissions for the Asia Pacific and Latin
American and Caribbean regions, and further reviews are scheduled
in those regions for 1999 (Asia-Pacific) and 2000 (Latin America
and Caribbean) respectively. Sub-regional reviews are scheduled
to be held in Africa during 1999.
ICSW involvement
Since the Summit in 1995, the International
Council on Social Welfare (ICSW) has organised about 15 regional
and global forums for our members and other civil society organisations
in order to review implementation and pursue further action. This
has included global forums before each of the annual meetings
of the UN Commission for Social Development, and regional forums
before each of the reviews convened by the UN regional commissions.
Some of these forums have been organised in partnership with another
global or regional organisation.
In 1996, ICSW commenced publication of this
quarterly magazine, Social Development Review, which
contains information and ideas from around the world on implementation
of the Copenhagen commitments. We have also published a booklet
entitled The Copenhagen Consensus, which briefly
summarises the principal commitments in the 120 pages or so of
agreements made at the Summit.
In mid-1998, ICSW commenced a two-year Copenhagen
Project aimed at helping our members and other civil society organisations
to become actively involved in the Copenhagen + 5 review process.
The Project will include at least 15 global and regional forums
of which three (in Paris, Amman and Guatemala City) have already
been held in 1998.
The Copenhagen Project will also include publication
of research and policy papers on key issues, continued publication
of the Social Development Review, and financial
support for representatives of civil society organisations to
attend the UN preparatory meetings at global and regional levels
and the Special Session itself. The Project has already attracted
substantial financial support from the British, Canadian, Danish
and Dutch governments, as well as from the United Nations Development
Programme and other donors, such as the Friedrich Ebert Foundation.
Some suggestions
A number of suggestions about preparations
for the Special Session may be made in the light of experience
in preparations for the Copenhagen Summit and its aftermath within
the UN system, as well as comments by people who were closely
involved in other processes, such as the five-year review of the
Rio Earth Summit in June 1998.
First,
it is crucial that the Special Session honours the promise that
it will not renegotiate or polish the wording of the Copenhagen
commitments. Its principal outcome should be a brief statement
consisting primarily of specific decisions about action involving
the UN system itself, and specific recommendations about action
by other actors. The initial draft of this statement could be
prepared by an independent expert consultant on the basis of guidelines
adopted at the meeting of the Preparatory Committee in May 1999.
It could then be fully analysed and discussed before being considered
at the final meeting of the Preparatory Committee in April 2000
and redrafted for submission to the Special Session in June 2000.
Second,
the Special Session should focus especially but not exclusively
on initiatives which would substantially improve the extent to
which international economic, political and legal environments
are conducive to social development and sustainable economic development.
This includes measures which we have identified in previous issues
of this magazine, relating to international financial markets,
taxation, the Economic and Social Council system, the Bretton
Woods institutions, and recognition of economic, social and cultural
rights.
Third, special
emphasis should be placed on identifying action which can be adopted
or facilitated at the regional level. This would be assisted if
the system of regular biennial reviews at regional level was firmly
established around the world before the Special Session and if
each region developed a Regional Agenda for implementing the Copenhagen
commitments. In addition, the emerging regional groupings of government
should be encouraged to contribute to preparations for the Special
Session and to implementing its outcome and to become more closely
involved in the ongoing processes of the UN system.
Fourth,
the need to focus the Special Session on specific and effective
action to address a few priority issues could be assisted greatly
if a small group of eminent persons was established to prepare
a brief list of recommendations about what those issues and actions
should be. The group would need to be small, independent and of
the highest calibre in order to facilitate a speedy, forthright
and authoritative report.
Fifth,
many proposals which are developed or promoted during the preparations
may be pursued and acted upon more effectively through other forums
and processes rather than at the Special Session itself. This
does not mean that they should be excluded entirely from consideration
during the preparations, where they can be refined and promoted
to some extent, but rather that they should not necessarily be
insisted upon for inclusion in the principal statement of the
Special Session.
Sixth,
the principal statement approved by the Special Session could
be accompanied by an extensive summary by the UN secretariat of
information and proposals which have been contributed during preparations
and are referred by the Special Session for consideration by other
specified organisations and processes. This would enable the principal
statement to remain brief and focussed on concrete action to address
top priorities, while ensuring that progress in relation to other
issues and proposals is also facilitated.
Seventh,
the Copenhagen process should draw upon and interact with the
five-year reviews of the 1994 Cairo Conference on Population and
Development and the 1995 Beijing Conference on Women. This should
include identifying a few common priority actions to be pursued
through each process but avoiding excessive duplication and multiplication
which would weaken the emphasis on those key issues for which
the Copenhagen process is especially appropriate and which are
less likely to be given high priority elsewhere. The same applies
to interaction with processes relating to the Millennium Session
of the General Assembly scheduled for the latter part of 2000,
and the special civil society forums which are likely to precede
that Millennium Session.
Eighth,
in seeking to enhance their influence on the preparatory process,
civil society organisations could usefully place more emphasis
on being given timely opportunities to see and make detailed comments
on key drafts for negotiation at intergovernmental working groups
rather than focussing principally on being allowed to make brief
set-piece addresses to plenary sessions. This would be facilitated
if some informal coordination of priorities and activities occurred
between a few leading groupings of civil society organisations
which are involved in the preparatory meetings. But it is unlikely
to be desirable or practicable to seek, or assert, a single representative
structure or policy statement on behalf of all civil society organisations.
Past attempts to do so – sometimes at the urging of governments
– have often led to serious delay, divisiveness or diffusion of
focus. On the other hand, less ambitious or coercive approaches
can often achieve a sufficient degree of convergence and synergy
in lobbying of governmental representatives.
ICSW looks forward to working with a wide range
of civil society organisations, governmental organisations, and
individuals to ensure that the Copenhagen + 5 process achieves
concrete and substantial progress in the fight against poverty,
unemployment and social exclusion.
 JULIAN DISNEY
President
International Council on Social Welfare
|
|
