Inter-Parliamentary Union and Its Role

Inter-Parliamentary Union and Its Role in Enhancing International Law Legal Status of the Inter-Parliamentary Union The Development of the International Institutions The Public International Unions The Private International Unions Historical background of the IPU Brief Overview of the IPU Statutes (Assemblies and Committees, Members, Functions, Goals and Activities) The Relationship between the IPU and the United Nations Beneficial Cooperation between the IPU and the United Nations (Common Goals, Agenda and Concerns) The Importance of the Recognition of the IPU Contribution The Role the IPU Played in Implementing Decisions taken by the Assembly of the United Nations and the Implementation of the Millennium Development Goals The UN as a Framework of International Machinery for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes What Role can the IPU Play in This Field? Chapter Summary Chapter III.

The IPU Role in the Settlement of International Disputes by Peaceful Means General Introduction: The role of the IPU in providing a forum for dialogue and peaceful resolution of conflicts Methods of Peaceful Settlement and Role Played by the IPU Negotiation, Mediation and Good Offices Reconciliation Chapter Summary Chapter IV.

The IPU and the Protection of Human Rights The Role of Parliamentarians in the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights General Human Rights Human Rights of Parliamentarians Women's Rights and Participation of Women in Political Life The IPU and the Beijing Process The Case of the Saudi Delegation Chapter V.

Conclusion Dissection and Critical Evaluation of the IPU Work Future Directions in IPU Jurisprudence Conclusion List of Abbreviations IPU: Inter-Parliamentary Union UN: United Nations The Inter-Parliamentary Union and its Role in Enhancing International Law You are here, if I read the times aright, in the fullest sense as the accredited representatives of your fellow countrymen and women, and in this capacity you are entitled to express, with an authority attaching to no other assembly in the world, the conscience, the reason, and the sentiments of a large and not the least influential portion of the human race...

- Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, prime minister of Great Britain, addressing the Conference of the Inter-Parliamentary Union in 1906 at London Introduction Chapter I. Legal Status of the Inter-Parliamentary Union The Development of the International Institutions. While the relevance and importance of international institutions has grown in recent years as the world has experienced the powerful effects of globalization, but the history of such organizations is truly ancient.

Indeed, ever since mankind first established cities and engaged in trade with their neighbors, the need for international institutions of some sort to mediate conflicts and resolve differences has been clear and the need has been met in one fashion or another throughout the millenia. According to Reuter (1961), "There was a system of international law in ancient civilisations and also within the great exotic civilisations of America and Asia.

In some cases international relations were limited to indirect contact; but in others foreign peoples were able to enter into direct relationships with each other" (p. 35). In this regard, Reuter adds that, "Primitive and even old-established cities have generally been hostile to foreigners, but in all ages traders have been treated favourably for the sake of trade which neither the seas nor deserts prevented" (1961 p. 35). This author also notes that today, "International organisations are formed as soon as international societies have their own organs and through them become groups.

This definition rests on the sociological ideas in the Introduction; it stresses one fundamental point: the emergence of separate organs, independent of the States. But this notion only gradually emerged in international practice, after great obstacles and setbacks" (Reuter 1961 p. 205).

By any measure, primitive people did in fact have a difficult time making a living and conducting international commerce during a period when transportation and communications were limited, but the need for international unions grew as a concomitant to the introduction of innovations in these areas through the years and these issues are discussed further below. The Public International Unions. In those fields where co-operation between governments became imperative, there developed the public international unions; these were, in fact, an essay into international organisation in the administrative sphere.

The transition from private to public organisations was gradual, and no generally accepted definition of the public international union has ever been reached. 3 In general, however, they were permanent associations of governments or administrations (i.e. postal or railway administrations), based upon a treaty of a multilateral rather than a bilateral type and with some definite criterion of purpose (Bowett, 1970). In the field of communications, the Congress of Vienna of 1815 established the Rhine Commission, invested with considerable powers.

The Commission had power to amend the Reeglement (though not the Convention) and had, in addition to this legislative power, a judicial power in its capacity as a court of appeal from the local courts in each littoral State established for the purpose of implementing the Convention and the Reglement. Each littoral State had one vote within the Commission, and, whilst equality and unanimity were the normal rule, in certain administrative matters voting power varied with the length of the river bank of the member State.

The European Commission for the Danube, established in 1856, similarly had administrative and legislative functions. Its budget came from tolls levied on river traffic, it frequently resorted to a majority vote, and the members of the Commission enjoyed diplomatic immunities. An "International Commission" for the Danube, with competence over the Upper Danube, was established after 1919 (Bowett, 1970). Other international commissions existed for the Elbe (1821), the Douro (1835), the Po (1849) and the Pruth (1866); however, none of these were comparable in importance and power with the Rhine and the Danube (Bowett, 1970).

Another means of transport that was susceptible to international administration was the railroads which resulted in a number of international conferences; in response, the International Union of Railway Freight Transportation was established in 1890 which essentially eliminated the complete independence of the national administrations (Bowett, 1970). Although it possessed an Administrative Bureau, this agency did not have any legislative power besides the conference of member States meeting at regular intervals. It should be pointed out as well that the Bureau had power to arbitrate over disputes.

Other unions, dealing with various aspects of rail communications, have been established and, in the European Conference on Time Tables (1923), there assembled delegates of States, of railway and steamship administrations, and of Pullman and air companies (Bowett, 1970). The advent of wireless telegraphy similarly brought forth problems which called for international control, and in 1865 the International Telegraphic Union was established with a permanent bureau.

The Conference of the Union had power to alter the Reglement (though not the Convention), and admitted representatives of private telegraph companies but without the right to vote. In 1906 the Radiotelegraphic Union was established, modelled on the Telegraphic Union and using the same permanent bureau (Bowett, 1970). The Universal Postal Union, established in 1874, provided for a five-yearly congress of plenipotentiaries, a conference of delegates of administrations, and a permanent international bureau.

This combination of a diplomatic conference with a conference of postal administrations was not successful, and the latter ceased to meet. The conference had power to amend either Convention or Reglement and frequently used the majority vote.

Moreover, in order to eliminate the need for a formal conference for any and every amendment, the practice developed whereby the Bureau would circulate proposals for amendment by post and, depending on the amendment, a notification of acceptance by either two-thirds or a simple majority would make the amendment binding on all members; this was a marked departure from the requirement of specific consent in the traditional "political" conference of States.

The postal administrations of colonies and dependencies acquired separate representation and, in the case of the British Empire, did not always vote with the Mother Country. The financing of the permanent bureau was by a technique, now common, of dividing members into seven classes and varying the contribution according to the class (Bowett, 1970). In the field of health, since disease was no respecter of the national boundaries, much could be accomplished by international co-operation.

After a number of conferences, sanitary councils on which several States were represented were set up at Constantinople, Tangiers, Teheran and Alexandria. The first was unsuccessful, being frustrated by Great Power rivalry. The last affords an example of moderate success, for with a staff of eighty-seven international health officers it regulated shipping and enforced quarantine regulations, having power to fine for the breach of those regulations.

In 1903, the International Office of Public Health was established in Paris, with a much wider competence, and can be regarded as the predecessor of the World Health Organisation (Bowett, 1970). In the economic field the Metric Union (1875), the International Copyright Union (1886), the International Sugar Union (1902) and the International Institute of Agriculture (1905) are good examples of the scope of the types of activities engaged in by these early public international unions (Bowett, 1970).

For example, Bowett reports that "The Sugar Union had a permanent commission which, by majority vote, could order a change in municipal legislation which, for example, granted unfair bounties or imposed unfair tariffs -- a remarkable abandonment of sovereignty" (p. 8). Likewise, the Institute of Agriculture required a quorum of two-thirds of its members for voting purposes and for the balancing of votes according to the size of the budgetary contributions (Bowett, 1970).

While this analysis of these early forms of public international unions is not complete, it does suggest that they were beginning to identify the wide range of interests involved in modern international commerce and what was required to mediate disputes rather than war over them.

According to Bowett (1970), despite the growing body of research into the history and purpose of international public unions, the authorities have not reached a consensus on their classification; however, the constitutional developments and innovations made by the public unions are important considerations for policymakers today because they presaged those made by contemporary inter-governmental organizations (Bowett, 1970).

In the first instance, the trend towards permanence of association was distinct, no matter whether it was in the form of permanent deliberative or legislative organs working with administrative organs (i.e., the Metric Union, Telegraphic Union, the UPU, and so forth) or of periodic conferences operating within the framework of a permanent bureau such as the Industrial Property or Railway Freight Transportation (Bowett, 1970).

The departures from the unanimity rule are of equal significance, Bowett suggests, especially when taken together with the assignation of legislative powers as in the Rhine Commission. Furthermore, it is also important to note the tendency to distinguish the Convention, embodying general rules, from the Reglement, which contained the detailed implementation of those rules and permitted amendment by a much simpler process.

The representation of interests other than those of States, whether they be dependent territories, private companies or associations, and with or without the right to vote, injected a realism and degree of practicality which was of the utmost significance for future development (Bowett, 1970). According to this author, the approaches of weighted voting and of proportionate budgetary contributions pointed the way to the solution of extremely difficult problems to which the principle of the equality of States provided no effective answer.

The author adds that, "The outstanding problem was one of co-ordination of the activities of the many unions, and at this juncture one may profitably pass to the attempt by the League of Nations to secure some form of overall direction and co-ordinating authority" (Bowett, 1970 p. 8). According to Feldman (2005), today, "The nation-state is frequently cast as an entity in crisis, as a relic that cannot withstand the shock of globalization.

Its viability and legitimacy are threatened by instant global communications, push-button investment strategies, outsourced manufacturing, increased international migration, and vociferous national minorities. Europeans, in particular, have challenged the nation-state through the deepening and widening of the European Union (EU)" (p. 214). Not surprisingly, then, a number of public international unions such as the European Parliament (EP) have emerged in recent years in response to the growing need for mediation and peaceful cooperation among the 200 or so nations of the world.

The European Parliament is a legislative assembly of the European Union (EU); launched in 1958 as the "Common Assembly," the European Parliament was originally comprised of representatives who were selected by the national parliaments of EU member countries (European Parliament, 2006). In 1979, though, members of the EP were elected by direct universal suffrage to terms of five years; today, membership in the European Parliament exceeds 700 members (European Parliament, 2006).

Like in other representative legislative bodies around the world, the number of members in the EP per country differs depending on the respective population of the member country; for instance, today Germany has 99 members, the most of any country, but tiny Malta just has five members (European Parliament, 2006). Members sit in political, rather than national, groups. Transnational groups include the Party of European Socialists, the European People's Party, and the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party. The Parliament meets annually for about 12 one-week plenary sessions in Strasbourg, France.

Most other work (e.g., committee meetings) takes place in Brussels. The Bureau, which is responsible for the Parliament's budgetary, administrative, and organizational matters, is headed by a president and 14 vice presidents who are elected from among Parliament members to terms of 30 months. The Parliament is subdivided into 17 specialized committees, including those on foreign affairs, budgets, agriculture, economic and monetary affairs, employment, women's rights, citizens' freedoms and rights, the environment, and regional affairs. Temporary committees also are established on occasion to address issues of particular concern.

The Parliament is assisted in its work by a Secretariat, which spends much of its time translating and interpreting between the European Union's 20 official languages (European Parliament, 2006). The European Parliament was originally a consultative body only; however, the organization's powers have increased in some areas as a concomitant to the "Europeanization" process.

For instance, this Parliament now exercises veto power in most areas relating to economic integration and budgetary policy; in some areas of significant concern to members (e.g., agriculture and tax harmonization), the Parliament's role is less pronounced (European Parliament, 2006). In addition, the organization also serves as a democratic check on other EU institutions; for example, the EP must approve and is empowered to remove the president, the primary EU executive, of one of the EU's four major governing bodies: the Commission.

The Parliament also has the power to censure the Commission with a two-thirds vote of its members, thereby forcing the Commission to resign. While such a censure has never been voted, the entire Commission resigned rather than face such a motion in 1999 (European Parliament, 2006). Private International Unions. The Industrial Revolution and innovations in communication, transportation and other technologies gave rise to the need for specific types of private international unions to help mediate various types of conflicts that were beginning to emerge in this dynamic international environment.

In this regard, Bowett (1970) notes that, "The nineteenth century saw, therefore, an impressive development of associations or unions, international in character, between groups other than governments. This was followed by similar developments between governments themselves in the administrative rather than the political field" (p. 4). This author adds that These unions or associations sprang from the realisation by nongovernmental bodies, whether private individuals or corporate associations, that their interests had an international character which demanded the furtherance of those interests via a permanent international association with like bodies in other countries.

The World Anti-Slavery Convention of 1840 was perhaps the first of these "private" conferences, many of which led to the establishment of some permanent machinery of association. Between 1840 and the beginning of the First World War something like 400 permanent associations or unions came into existence (Bowett, 1970).

The variety of interests that became represented by these types of unions include these importance examples: The International Committee of the Red Cross (1863); The Inter-Parliamentary Union (1869); The International Law Association (1873); The International Dental Federation (1900); The International Literary and Artistic Association (1878); and, The International Chamber of Commerce (1919) (Bowett, 1970). The rapid growth of these private unions created the need for an oversight agency and in 1910, the Union of International Associations was created to help coordinate their activities and to codify the conditions of their respective memberships.

While all of these organizations had unique interests and priorities, they all shared some commonalities, including the following: They all possessed a permanent organ; The object of each union must be of interest to all some nations and not ones of profit; and, Membership should be open to individuals or groups from different countries (Bowett, 1970). From the constitutional perspective, these private international unions possessed several other interesting characteristics; for example, they all emphasized the need for permanent, as opposed to ad hoc, association and for periodic, regular meetings.

In addition, Bowett notes that a number of these unions established a small but permanent secretariat. According to this author: Many [private international unions] demonstrated by their membership the artificiality of a rigid distinction between 'public' and 'private' unions based upon function; membership sometimes comprised States, municipal authorities, national groups and societies and private individuals.

Today, bodies like the International Council of Scientific Unions, the International Commission for the Scientific Exploration of the Mediterranean Sea, the International Statistical Institute, and the International Hospital Federation demonstrate the co-operation of States and individuals within the same association. (Bowett, 1970 p. 5.) According to Bowett, in many cases, the activities of these private unions emphasized he need for State action.

The author notes that, "In some cases this was brought about by treaty, and the work of the International Committee of the Red Cross in promoting the Geneva Conventions of 1864, 1906, 1926 and 1949, or that of the International Maritime Committee in promoting the Conventions on the Safety of Life at Sea of 1914 and 1929 are good illustrations of this" (p. 5).

Other examples of the success of the private unions caused the establishment of a public union in the same field; not surprisingly, private activity was in the vanguard of this movement and State activity followed (Bowett, 1970). In this regard, the International Congress of Weights, Measures and Moneys in 1867 was the predecessor of the Metric Union, the International Association of the Legal Protection of Labour that of the ILO, and the International Literary and Artistic Association that of the International Bureau of Literary and Artistic Property (Bowett, 1970).

Historical Background of the IPU. The IPU is the international organization of Parliaments of sovereign States (Article 1 of the Statutes of the Inter-Parliamentary Union). The organization was established in 1889 (What is the IPU?, 2006). The IPU can trace its origins to the first conference of parliamentarians of 1889; this original meeting was intended to promote the concept of peace and international arbitration and gave rise to a permanent organization that was established in 1894 (Owen, 1996).

According to Oudenaren (1991), "International contacts among parliamentarians first were institutionalized in 1889, with the founding in Paris of the Inter-Parliamentary Conference for International Arbitration. In 1899 the organization changed its name to the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) to reflect its broadening interests, but arbitration remained a prime concern" (p. 116). The encyclopedic entry for the organization reports that, "The Inter-Parliamentary Union is an international organization established in 1889 by William Randal Cremer (United Kingdom) and Frederic Passy (France). It was the first permanent forum for political multilateral negotiations" (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2006).

According to an early description of the history of the IPU provided by Harley (1931): The Inter-Parliamentary Union, first hinted at as early as 1830 by English and American friends of peace, was definitely suggested in 1870 immediately after the Franco-Prussian War by an Austrian deputy, Baron of Walterskirchen. The success of the Alabama arbitration stimulated ideas of peace and arbitration. The first effective efforts to create the Union were those of William Randal Cremer of the British House of Commons, co-operating consistently with Frederic Passy of the French Chamber of Deputies.

On October 31, 1888, a small meeting was held in the Grand Hotel at Paris. There were nine British and twenty-five French parliamentarians present, the principal idea emphasized being arbitration treaties between the United States, France, and Great Britain.

This small meeting passed the following resolution which gave birth to the Inter-Parliamentary Union: 'Another meeting, to which shall be admitted, not only members of the three Parliaments named above (American, British, and French), but also members of other Parliaments, who have made themselves known by their devotion to the same ideas, shall take place next year, in order to complete the work begun at this first conference.' (cited in Harley, 1931 p.

317) The Inter-Parliamentary Union was subsequently launched the following year on June 29 and 30, 1889, during the World's Exhibition at Paris, with 96 parliamentarians being present at the meetings, which were presided over by Frederic Passy (Harley, 1931). The IPU was originally established for individual parliamentarians; however, over time, the organization has transformed into an international organization of the Parliaments of sovereign States and today, 143 national parliaments are members of the IPU, and seven regional parliamentary assemblies are associate members (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2006).

Some key figures who have served with the IPU have received eight Nobel Peace Prizes: 1901: Frederic Passy (France); 1902: Albert Gobat (Switzerland); 1903: William Randal Cremer (United Kingdom); 1908: Frederic Bajer (Denmark); 1909: August Marie Francois Beernaert (Belgium); 1913: Henri La Fontaine (Belgium); 1921: Christian Lange (Norway); and, 1927: Ferdinand Buisson (France) (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2006). According to Schmeckebier (1935), the purpose of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, as codified in its statutes, is as follows: Article 1.

The aim of the Inter-Parliamentary Union is to unite in common action the members of all parliaments, constituted into national groups, in order to secure the co-operation of their respective states in the firm establishment and the democratic development of the work of international peace and cooperation between nations by means of a universal organization of nations. Its object is also to study all questions of an international character suitable for settlement by parliamentary action. (cited in Schmeckebier, 1935 p.

233) The Union is composed of the national groups of the several parliaments which adhere to the organization, and the delegates to the conferences are elected by each national group. The number of delegates, each of whom has a vote, is determined by population, each country having a basic representation of five delegates, with additional delegates according to a sliding scale, which ranges from one extra delegate for countries of less than one million population to 23 extra delegates for countries of 300 to 350 million population (Schmeckebier, 1935).

Besides the foregoing representation, groups that are comprised of 50% or more of the members of the lower house of parliament are also entitled to extra votes, as follows: Groups that are comprised of at least 50% of the members are entitled to one extra vote; Those consisting of at least 60% to two extra votes; Those consisting of at least 75% to three extra votes; and, Those consisting of 90% to four extra votes (Schmeckebier, 1935).

Prior to each conference, the Council of the Union notifies each group regarding the number of votes to which it is entitled. The general management of the affairs of the Union is the responsibility of the Inter-Parliamentary Council, consisting of two members of each group. The Council fixes the agenda of the conferences, appoints the Secretary-General, and takes any action that may be necessary between conferences.

This group meets annually, or on the call of its president; the Council has an executive committee of five members belonging to different groups, which has the immediate supervision of the Inter-Parliamentary Bureau, and which exercises such other powers as may be delegated to it by the Council (Schmeckebier, 1935). During the intervals between conferences, the administrative and executive organ is the Inter-Parliamentary Bureau, which now has its office at Geneva, Switzerland (Schmeckebier, 1935).

Today, the IPU both supports and shares the efforts of the United Nations; furthermore, the IPU works in close cooperation with this international agency (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2006). In recent years, the IPU has also cooperated with regional inter-parliamentary organizations, as well as with international intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations that share the same ideals and missions (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2006). More than a hundred-forty national parliaments currently have members in the IPU; of these, seven regional parliamentary assemblies are Associate Members.

Most members are affiliated to one of the six geopolitical groups that are currently active in the IPU (What is the IPU?, 2006). Funding for the IPU is provided by its members out of public funds; budget totals for the organization for 2006 were 10.5 million Swiss Francs; the organization is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland (What is the IPU?, 2006). Today, the IPU sponsors conferences every 2 years for 600 parliamentarians from different nations to help develop personal contact and debate international issues.

In addition, IPU conferences routinely adopt resolutions on international security, development, health, population, the environment, human rights, international humanitarian law, and conflict zones such as the former Yugoslavia and the Middle East. IPU members then submit these resolutions to their national parliaments or assemblies, and work for their implementation (Owen, 1996). The IPU also organises conferences on specific themes such as the role of parliaments in protecting human rights, the North-South dialogue in the post Cold war era, and science and technology for sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific.

In addition, the IPU campaigns for an increased number of female deputies in national parliaments, with a plan of action intended to redress the current imbalance, under which only ten percent of legislators are women (Owen, 1996). Brief Overview of the IPU Statutes (Assemblies and Committees, Members, Functions, Goals and Activities). The assemblies conducted by the IPU are held twice each year and represent the IPU's most visible form of activity.

Assemblies meet in the spring and in autumn and are held each time in a different country; larger assemblies are conducted during the spring sessions and are attended by approximately 700 representatives and the smaller one in autumn by 500 representatives (IPU, 2006). The Governing Council of the IPU together with the Union's four Plenary Study Committees assemble in conjunction with assemblies; likewise, the Association of Secretaries General of Parliaments (ASGP) also meets during these IPU assemblies (IPU, 2006).

According to its organizational Web site at http://www.ipu.org/strct-e/lstconf.htm,"The IPU Assembly (formerly known as the Inter-Parliamentary Conference) is the principal statutory body that expresses the views of the Inter-Parliamentary Union on political issues. It brings together parliamentarians to study international problems and make recommendations for action" (Statutory Assemblies, 2006 p. 1).

In addition, the IPU Assembly operates pursuant to its promulgated Rules and participation of observers in IPU Assemblies is regulated by Practical modalities of the rights and responsibilities of observers; the majority of the IPU Assembly's members are affiliated to one of the six geopolitical groups that are currently active in the IPU (Statutory Assemblies, 2006).

Delegations attending IPU Assemblies customarily consist of members of parliament from all parties; in addition, the Assembly meets twice a year (in the spring and autumn), with each meeting being held in a different country in an effort to provide all participants with the opportunity to review these issues first-hand in different national settings (Statutory Assemblies, 2006).

According to the report, "National Parliaments, International Potential" (2000), the Inter-Parliamentary Union held its first Conference of Presiding Officers of National Parliaments at the UN Headquarters during the period August 30 to September 1, 2000; this conference was convened on the eve of the Millennium Assembly and according to its Secretary-General, Anders Johnsson, the IPU Conference promulgated an important message at the time: "Parliaments embody the sovereignty of the people and can, in all legitimacy, contribute to expressing the will of the State in international spheres.

It is the first important step on the long road towards a more democratic international order" ("National Parliaments, International Potential," 2000 p. 25). At the conference, the attendees adopted a final Declaration known as "The Parliamentary vision for international cooperation at the dawn of the third millennium" that called on all parliaments around the world to provide a parliamentary dimension to international cooperation and to work more closely with the United Nations system ("National Parliaments, International Potential," 2000).

Some of the salient proclamations from the Declaration follow: We, Speakers and Presiding Officers of Parliaments,.. pledge our commitment to international cooperation, with a stronger United Nations at its core. We resolve to ensure that our parliaments contribute more substantively to this cooperation by making the voice of the peoples heard, thereby introducing a more manifestly democratic dimension into international decision-making and cooperation. States must ensure that their conduct conforms to international law, especially human rights and international humanitarian law.

Respect for the instruments of international humanitarian law is essential and we will continue to work for the establishment of an International Criminal Court that is non-discriminatory and universal. Peace based on solid and sincere foundations requires a more just world, and we firmly believe that all future action must seek to ensure sustainable economic and social development that is people-centred. We must work to create national and international conditions conducive to social development, social integration, the eradication of poverty and the reduction of unemployment.

W]e must not meet our own needs at the expense of future generations. In conformity with the conclusions of the Earth Summit, the world must pay particular attention to water, energy and transport issues, to ways of integrating environmental costs and benefits into business, and to the impact of the state of the environment on the overall economy. Increased trade, new technology, growing foreign investment and expanding information-sharing are fuelling economic growth and human progress.

However, these developments have benefited the developed nations more than developing countries and the latter are experiencing serious problems in implementing international trade agreements. There is a need to ensure that the opportunities and benefits of globalization are shared more widely and that the right to development is respected. We reaffirm our adherence to the purposes and principles set out in the UN Charter and in the international instruments adopted since the founding of the world body.

We are convinced that the UN is needed more than ever before and must remain the cornerstone of strong and effective global cooperation. We rededicate ourselves to strengthening the world organization and urge members to provide it with the necessary human and financial resources.

We call upon all parliaments and their world organization -- the Inter-Parliamentary Union-to provide a parliamentary dimension to international cooperation...." To provide the parliamentary dimension, parliaments and their members must assume increased responsibility in international relations, play a more active role at the national, regional and global levels, and generally reinforce parliamentary diplomacy...." ("National Parliaments, International Potential," 2000).

Today, the IPU Assembly maintains three plenary Standing Committees that operate pursuant to their own Rules to assist the Assembly in its work; these three Standing Committees are the (a) Committee on Peace and International Security; (b) Committee on Sustainable Development, Finance and Trade; and, - Committee on Democracy and Human Rights.

The general theme of the assembly's most recent meeting was "Promoting democracy and helping to build democratic institutions"; this assembly took place on the mornings and afternoons of 8, 9 and 11 May, 2006 and focused on the global political, economic and social situation. Delegations from the parliaments of 118 countries participated in the work of the Assembly; out of a total of 1,066 delegates who attended the Assembly, 602 were members of national parliaments; these parliamentarians included 33 Speakers, 30 Deputy Speakers and 170 women parliamentarians (28.41%) (114th IPU Assembly, 2006).

The meeting included 104 speakers from 98 delegations who participated in the debate, which was chaired by the President of the Assembly. According to the IPU's report from its 114th IPU Assembly (Nairobi, 7-12 May 2006), "During the sittings, the President invited the Vice-Presidents, who were members of the delegations of Algeria, Argentina, Benin, Burundi, Monaco, New Zealand and Pakistan, to replace him in the chair (114th IPU Assembly, 2006 p. 4). Chapter II.

The Relationship between the IPU and the United Nations Beneficial Cooperation between the IPU and the United Nations (Common Goals, Agenda and Concerns). Over the last decade, the IPU has been working closely with the United Nations to enhance the parliamentary dimension of international cooperation.

A key event in this new partnership took place in August 2000, when the IPU organized the Conference of Presiding Officers of National Parliaments at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, just a few days prior to the Millennium Summit of Heads of State and Government (Overview, 2006).

The Conference, organized with the full support of the United Nations, concluded with a Declaration entitled, "The Parliamentary Vision for International Cooperation at the Dawn of the Third Millennium." Based on this Declaration, the Presiding Officers of the world's parliaments committed themselves and their institutions to join forces with the United Nations to help address the tremendous challenges facing the world community: the achievement of international peace and security, democracy, respect for human rights, sustainable development and social progress (Overview, 2006).

From their perspective, the Heads of State and of Government gathering at their 2000 Summit issued a Millennium Declaration, discussed further below, in which they called inter alia on the United Nations to work with national parliaments, through the IPU, in the pursuit of peace and security, economic and social development, international law and human rights, and democracy and gender issues (Overview, 2006). These initiatives are relatively recent, of course, but the impetus for them can be traced to the foundation of these international organizations.

According to a former UN secretary/general: Let us indeed never forget that the United Nations was born, 50 years ago, out of the will of a small number of individuals to view the world as a whole, to mobilise the international community in the service of the great objectives of progress and peace, and to disseminate democratic ideals world-wide.

In this respect, the Inter-Parliamentary Union is certainly the most advanced institutional forum of international democratic co-operation...in a sense it is undoubtedly the first institution to have introduced the democratic imperative into the international legal order. Quite naturally, therefore, the Inter-Parliamentary Union is today in the front line of the struggle being waged by international institutions to meet this new aspiration to freedom and democracy that is rising up from so many peoples and so many nations. As such, you are the privileged partners of the United Nations..

(emphasis added) (Boutros-Ghali, cited in Graham, 1999 p. 253). The events of September 11, 2001, the prosecution of shooting wars on two fronts in the Middle East and the recent violence between Israel and Hezbollah all point to the need for international organizations that are capable of effective interventions and mediation between interests that may be enormously divergent. In this regard, the IPU and the UN represent the world's best bet today for a peaceful resolution to these complex and emotional debates surrounding these issues.

This point is not lost on the UN delegates and IPU parliamentarians either. For example, a recent declaration from the UN calls for change and political action to achieve the Millennium Development Goals and to identify additional financial resources for development. According to a statement by Anders B.

Johnsson, Secretary General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union at the High-level Plenary Meeting of the United Nations General Assembly held in New York on September16, 2005, the declaration also calls for the conclusion of a comprehensive treaty on terrorism with a clear definition of terrorism, and real advances in nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation and arms control issues. The text is blunt and to the point concerning the importance and urgency of the issues facing mankind today: Frankly speaking, the stakes here are too high for the present impasse to be allowed to continue.

The text also reaffirms that the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all are essential to development, peace and security. The Speakers of Parliament want to see a stronger United Nations. They call on States, including their parliaments, to demonstrate leadership and political will to provide the United Nations with more efficient mechanisms, appropriate human and financial resources and real management reform (emphasi added). (Johnsson, 2005 p.

3) Clearly, then, there is a growing need for effective and timely initiatives by international mediators that can help stem the tendency of states to act in a belligerent and preemptive manner rather than attempt a negotiated settlement to their respective grievances. To this end, the importance of the recognition of the contribution of the IPU to the process must be taken into account, and these issues are discussed further below. The Importance of the Recognition of the IPU Contribution.

Besides the political contribution that the IPU makes to the United Nations through its statements and resolutions, the two organizations work closely together to advance specific issues through many joint activities, publications and meetings. In addition to the United Nations proper, the IPU cooperates with a growing body of United Nations specialised agencies and programmes to focus more effectively on a number of critical subject areas. These include democracy and human rights, women's issues, child protection, HIV / AIDS, trade and sustainable development (Overview, 2006).

In recognition of the important contribution that parliaments have made and will continue to make to the work of the United Nations - both by providing direct input and by helping implement global commitments, translating them into national legislation and policies - in November 2002 the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution granting observer status to the IPU. In the same spirit, a resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the IPU allowed for circulation of official IPU documents in the General Assembly.

This arrangement allows the IPU to make a more direct political contribution to the United Nations through the many resolutions and declarations adopted at IPU Assemblies and specialised meetings (Overview, 2006). Since then, the IPU has been working to bring the voice of parliaments to the United Nations General Assembly and its subsidiary bodies. The IPU holds regular Parliamentary Hearings at the United Nations, as well as other specialized gatherings on the occasion of United Nations regular meetings and ad hoc international conferences.

The IPU will hold a Second World Conference of Speakers of Parliament in September 2005 at the United Nations Headquarters to follow up on the first Speakers Conference, held in 2000. In addition, the Committee for a Democratic UN and the German Bundestag have even expressed interest in the possibility of transforming the IPU into a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2006).

Finally, it will also serve as an opportunity to help further define and structure the working relationship between parliaments and the United Nations in years to come; moreover, the Conference will evaluate the work of the parliamentary community to help advance the Millennium Development Goals and other key objectives of the United Nations which are discussed further below (Overview, 2006). The Role the IPU Played in Implementing Decisions taken by the Assembly of the United Nations and the Implementation of the Millennium Development Goals.

According to the UN, the eight specific Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) range from cutting extreme poverty by 50% to decreasing the incidence of HIV / AIDS and providing universal primary education by the target date of 2015; these goals provide the framework in which all of the world's nations and all the world's leading development institutions have agreed to participate (Millennium Development Indicators, 2006). Likewise, the IPU reports that: The IPU and the UN are working together to implement their policy objectives through many joint activities.

These involve not only the United Nations proper, but also a growing number of United Nations specialised agencies and programmes. The partnership between the IPU and the United Nations has focused particularly on such priority areas as democracy, including strengthening of parliaments, human rights, women's issues, and child protection, and also HIV / AIDS, trade and sustainable development. ("Issues, activities and partners," 2006 p.

3) Over the years the IPU has developed a close relationship with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) that aims at strengthening parliamentary institutions in a number of countries, and particularly those in post-conflict situations. Recent initiatives intended to help guide and support viable and effective parliaments have included activities in Albania, the province of Kosovo, Uruguay, Equatorial Guinea, and Timor-Leste; furthermore, additional projects are expected to be set up in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka (Issues, activities and partners," 2006).

The IPU and UN have also cooperated on the following primary goals in recent years: Human rights. The IPU also works closely with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) through the production of joint publications and seminars, with the aim of making parliamentarians more aware of the international human rights norms that should guide much of their legislative action at the national level. Women.

Much of the IPU's work in this domain aims at building a stronger partnership between men and women in politics and, more generally, in advancing the objectives of the 1995 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action.

To increase the effectiveness and global reach of this work, the IPU is developing a strong partnership with the United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (UNDAW), with which it has worked already on two major publications and the organisation of specialised seminars and panel discussions held during the sessions of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women.

Several regional seminars, such as those on engendering the budgetary process, have also been supported by UNDP, the United Nations Developpment Fund for Women (UNIFEM) and the World Bank Institute. The IPU also assists the United Nations by providing up-to-date statistical information on women in elected office. Children. The IPU works in partnership with the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), with many joint projects already completed and many more on the drawing board, in order to help establish a culture of child protection through legislation, budgetary allocations, and legal norms.

A seminal event in establishing the IPU-UNICEF partnership was the jointly organised Parliamentary Forum on Children during the 2002 United Nations General Assembly Special Session on Children. The IPU and UNICEF have since been working on a comprehensive programme of activities which include the production of joint publications and the organisation of specialised panels during IPU statutory Assemblies. Recent panel discussions have dealt with the issues of trafficking and sexual exploitation of children, child labour, and female genital mutilation (FGM). HIV / AIDS.

Given the tremendous threat posed by HIV / AIDS to the lives of tens of millions of affected individuals, and the consequent social, economic, and political instability in poor countries with a high concentration of cases, the IPU is increasing its work in cooperation with the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV / AIDS (UNAIDS) to mobilise parliaments to take the legislative action required to implement both preventive and treatment measures.

Having already published together a unique product for parliamentarians, the two organisations are now working together on the creation of a Committee on AIDS as a specialised body of the IPU. This new body will pave the way for the creation of a global information clearinghouse linking parliaments and their specialised committees and stimulating exchange of good legislative practices. It will also foster the production of parliamentary newsletters and other information tools to be used by parliamentarians around the world. Sustainable Development and Trade.

Based on the importance of international commerce in creating the resources needed for development, the IPU has established - together with the European Parliament - a Parliamentary Conference on the WTO. The conference, which meets regularly, provides a major opportunity for parliamentarians to put forward their input into trade negotiations while also bringing about greater transparency to such negotiations and to the workings of the WTO itself. Global Issues.

In an effort to help resolve global problems as climate change, desertification, and many other items on Agenda 21 (for sustainable development), over the years the IPU has established a number of specialized meetings in coordination with the United Nations or related agencies (the Secretariat of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification).

A key partnership is being forged with the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) for the establishment of a joint five-year programme of activities aimed at building the capacities of parliaments to interpret and implement international environmental agreements. The programme will consist of training workshops, an online information facility, thematic parliamentary workshops, and the publication of specialised handbooks to help parliamentarians develop practical solutions to the many issues in the field of sustainable development ((Issues, activities and partners," 2006).

The UN as a Framework of International Machinery for the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes. Today, as never before, the United Nations is confronted with increasing demands for collective intervention at a period in the organization's history that is being increasingly characterized by a declining confidence in the organization's abilities to perform its peacekeeping function effectively.

Moreover, the UN has been faced with diminishing financial support by some leading industrialized countries, particularly the United Kingdom and the United States, and there are some growing concerns about the political agenda being espoused by a supposedly neutral international agency that is supposed to be above such considerations. For example, according to Swigert (2004), today, the United States pays the largest share of the costs of UN peacekeeping (currently 27.1%), and "as the number and scope of operations goes up, that means costs are going up for the U.S.

taxpayers" (Swigert, 2004, p. 2). As a result, donor nations are increasingly questioning the appropriateness of the UN as a framework in which to develop a sustainable peacekeeping and ultimately peacebuilding mechanism in the 21st century. According to Bowett (1970), "The [UN General] Assembly is a deliberative organ which proceeds via recommendation rather than binding decision; any attempt to draw analogies with a national assembly, parliament or legislature, is apt to be dangerous unless this fundamental difference in powers is grasped - the Assembly cannot legislate for the member States" (emphasis added) (p. 42).

Although the UN retains the significant political, moral and persuasive effect that accompanies any Assembly recommendation, generally speaking, these proclamations have no legally binding effect on the members (Bowett, 1970). The creation of the United Nations in 1945 was fueled by the notion that the UN Security Council would play a central role in the maintenance or restoration of international peace and security; in this regard, UN Member States agreed in Article 24 of the Charter to assign the Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security (Bowett, 1970).

The specific powers which the Charter gives the Council to achieve this objective are contained in Chapter VII (Article 24(2) of the UN Charter). Chapter VII gives the Council certain prerogatives: the sole authority to determine when a threat to, or breach of, the peace has occurred; 4 the authority to order provisional measures; and the authority to order enforcement measures to be taken against a State, that is to impose economic and military sanctions against a State or entities within a State (Bowett, 1970).

It must also been kept in mind that even a delegation of powers does not involve the complete transfer of a specific power. As a result, any organ of an international organization which delegates a power does not prima facie denude itself of the right to exercise the power. This has two consequences: The delegation of power can always be revoked by the delegating organ; and, When an organ delegates a power then it retains the right to exercize that power (Sarooshi, 2000 p. 7).

Therefore, it is possible for a delegating authority to exercise its power concurrently with the delegate while the delegation exists. In cases where this occurs, any decisions taken by the principal organ in the exercise of the power in question prevails over any decisions taken by the delegate in the exercise of the delegated power. This flows from the authority and control which a UN principal organ possesses over the exercise of its delegated powers.

As a result, practice in this area has seen the General Assembly change the way a power which it delegated to the Secretary-General is being exercised: either by deciding certain questions itself or by subsequently assigning the exercise of decision to some other body, such as the International Civil Service Commission. Consequently, the delegation of power by a principal organ does not preclude that organ from later exercising its power in a manner which is contrary to how the delegate has exercised the power.

In fact this authority and control which the delegator exercises over the decisions of its delegate is, as explained below in the context of the Security Council, an essential requirement for the delegation of extensive discretionary powers to be lawful (Sarooshi, 2000 p. 8). Generally speaking, in spite of the absence of a specific notion of peacekeeping in its charter, Chapter 6 of the UN Charter provides for the peaceful settlement of disputes through the intervention of the Security Council through such means as negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and judicial decisions (The United Nations, 2006).

In addition, the UN Security Council is authorized to investigate any dispute or situation to determine whether it is likely to endanger international peace and security; during any point of the dispute or conflict, the council is also authorized to recommend that appropriate procedures or methods of adjustment be employed, and, if the parties fail to settle the dispute by such or other peaceful means, the council may then recommend terms of settlement (The United Nations, 2006).

Further, although Chapter 6 of the UN Charter specifically establishes the incremental steps by which such recommendations may be forthcoming during international conflicts, the goal of collective security, whereby aggression against one member is met with resistance by all, is the basis for Chapter 7 of the UN Charter; in addition, Chapter 7 authorizes the UN Security Council to order coercive measures that can range from diplomatic, economic, and military sanctions to the use of armed force in those cases where attempts at a peaceful settlement have failed (The United Nations, 2006).

According to Armstrong et al. (2005), "Chapter VII of the UN Charter is often called the enforcement Chapter. The activity that it authorizes is clearly of that kind, and elsewhere in the Chapter (in Article 2.7) reference is made to 'enforcement measures' being taken under it" (p. 103). Likewise, Armstrong et al.

(2005) report that there are some important and distinct differences in the concepts of peacekeeping and the imposition of a collective international community's will on others, particularly as they relate to the manner in which these initiatives are based on national self-interests of the individual participants. These authors report that, "Peace enforcement differs from collective security inasmuch as the latter applies force partially - against an identified aggressor.

By contrast, peace enforcement continues to emphasis the key peacekeeping principle of impartiality, but, in so doing, shifts the emphasis from impartiality towards disputants, towards impartiality in the execution of the mandate" (emphasis in original) (Armstrong et al., 2005 p. 103). The attitudinal differences between peacekeeping, peace enforcement and collective security are set out in Table 1 below. Table 1. Differences between peacekeeping, peace enforcement and collective security.

Peacekeeping Peace enforcement Collective security Impartial towards all disputants Impartial in executing mandate Partial against identified aggressor Consent essential Consent desirable but not necessary Consent irrelevant Lightly armed Armed Fully Armed Force used only in self-defense Force used for self-defense and to ensure execution of mandate Full use of force against aggressor Mostly UN operations Mostly non-UN operations; authority delegated to states, coalitions of states, regional organizations or alliances. In theory conducted by the army under direction of Military Staff Committee.

So far, invariably non-UN operations, but with authority delegated by the UN to the group of states making up the force. Source: Armstrong et al., 2005, p. 104. While armed interventions were seldom used during the Cold War period, the post-Cold War period has witnessed an enormous increase in the number of requests to the UN for peacekeeping and related activities; further, new threats to international peace and security are also continuing to emerge in the international community, including AIDS and international terrorism (The United Nations, 2006).

The net impact of these shifts in perception and responsibility was a "gradual recognition that in some circumstances, it might be desirable to go beyond traditional peacekeeping to an appreciably tougher stance" (Armstrong et al., 2005, p. 102). This "tougher stance" has historically fallen to the UN Security Council to determine the most appropriate course of action in a given set of circumstances. The UN's peacekeeping, peacemaking, and peace-building activities have suffered from serious logistical and financial difficulties.

As more missions are undertaken, the costs and controversies associated with them have multiplied dramatically. Although the UN reimburses countries for the use of equipment, these payments have been limited because of the failure of many member states to pay their UN dues. Furthermore, the agency's efforts have not always been well received.

For example, according to Werner's report, "UN Looks to Move from Peacekeeping to Peacebuilding" (2005), the ethnic violence that has rocked Rwanda in recent years has taken an enormous toll in human lives and the UN has been unable to cope with the massive scope of the violence involved: "Two years into a fragile peace deal that had brought relative calm to Rwanda, the country's president, Juvenal Habyarimana, was flying home from a peace conference when his Falcon 50 jet was shot out of the sky," Werner notes.

"The ensuing genocidal slaughter of 1994 brought the shortcomings of UN peacekeeping missions into sharp relief" (pp. 1-2). The ethnic violence that occurred during the brief period following Habyarimana's assassination was proximately caused by the Hutus taking advantage of the opportunity to attack their historic Tutsi rivals and the resulting violence caused at least 800,000 deaths; furthermore, Werner adds that, "United Nations peacekeepers were often caught in the middle of the fighting and offered little aid for the civilian Tutsi who were rounded up and killed" (p. 3).

The potential for the same types of genocide that characterized the 20th century will undoubtedly continue as long as there are ethnic and cultural differences at play in the world, which is of course to say forever. Therefore, the need for an international organ that has the capability, resources and wherewithal to serve as intermediators for members of the international community is great, and the IPU can help, and these issues are discussed further below.

What role can the IPU play in this field? Because the IPU is a representative body comprised of parliamentary representatives from around the world, it is not a redundant body for the UN but rather a more accessible organization that has proclaimed as it primary mission the peaceful resolution of such conflicts as the need arises.

In this regard, the structure, facilities, experience and expertise brought to the negotiating table by representatives of the IPU can serve as invaluable resources for those states seeking a peaceful solution to complicated problems, and these issues are discussed further in the following chapter. Chapter Summary. This chapter provided a discussion concerning the Relationship between the IPU and the United Nations, including the various advantages to be realized through beneficial cooperation between the IPU and the United Nations including common goals, agendas and mutual concerns.

This chapter also presented arguments in support of the importance of the recognition of the IPU contribution to the process, and the role the IPU played recently and continues to play in the implementation of the decisions taken by the Assembly of the United Nations and the implementation of the Millennium Development goals. Finally, a discussion of the UN as a viable framework for the peaceful settlement of disputes was followed by a brief discussion of what role the IPU is capable of playing in this field. Chapter III.

The IPU Role in the Settlement of International Disputes by Peaceful Means General Introduction: The role of the IPU in providing a forum for dialogue and peaceful resolution of conflicts. As a mediator of conflicts within the international community, the IPU is well situated to assist in a wide range of areas today; in fact, the IPU's original objective was the arbitration of conflicts (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2006). To date, the IPU has played an important part in establishing the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague.

Over time, its mission has evolved towards the promotion of democracy and inter-parliamentary dialogue. The IPU has worked for establishment of institutions at the inter-governmental level, including the United Nations, an organization with which it cooperates.

The IPU has permanent observer status at the United Nations (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2006) with a stated mission to, "Unite world legislators in common action to secure the full participation of their countries in establishing and strengthening democratic representative institutions throughout the world, and to promote international peace and co-operation in support of the objectives of the United Nations" (Owens 1996, p. 51). According to Hathway (2002), the issue of compliance with international law was not adequately addressed by the extant literature concerning both international law and international relations scholarship.

This author notes that a number of legal scholars have reviewed and articulated the rules of state international behavior, which were generally taken as a given that the rules would have some level of impact on the outcome of international conflicts (Hathway, 2002). International relations scholars," he adds, "for their part, had little interest in international law.

The centrality in international relations of realist thinking, which accepted the view that nation-states operated "in a tenuous net of breakable obligations," discouraged careful examination of the role of transnational institutions and hence of international law" (Hathway, 2002 p. 1935). According to Reuter (1961), the requirements for an entity to become the "subject of international law" also means that it has: Rights and duties which are directly defined and enforceable by international law; The capacity to participate in some measure in formulating the rules of international public law.

The subjects of international public law are States and any other entities the States may recognise as subjects. Based on the foregoing, Reuter maintains that, today: States are not only the original subjects of international law, but in present-day international relations they are still the principal subjects; Within certain limits and under certain conditions States have recognised international organisations as subjects of international law. These organisations are therefore subjects of international law only by derivation.

International organisations may conclude agreements which are regulated by international law, recognise the existence of a custom, and present claims under international law.

They possess the two essential characteristics of subjects of international law: they have rights and duties defined and sanctioned by international law and they take part in making the rules of international public law; The subjects of international law vary in their nature; the International Court of Justice has said categorically that, "The subjects of law in any legal system are not necessarily identical in their nature or in the extent of their rights; their nature depends upon the needs of the community" (cited in Reuter, 1961 p.

86); International rules can easily define the rights and duties of individuals. Rules to this effect have existed for a long time and are becoming increasingly common (Reuter, 1961, pp. 85-6). Methods of Peaceful Settlement and Role Played by the IPU. Today, the IPU is the focal point for world-wide parliamentary dialogue and works for peace and co-operation among peoples and for the firm establishment of representative democracy.

To that end, the IPU: Fosters contacts, co-ordination, and the exchange of experience among parliaments and parliamentarians of all countries; Considers questions of international interest and concern and expresses its views on such issues in order to bring about action by parliaments and parliamentarians; Contributes to the defence and promotion of human rights -- an essential factor of parliamentary democracy and development; and, Contributes to better knowledge of the working of representative institutions and to the strengthening and development of their means of action (What is the IPU?, 2006).

From Reuter's (1961), perspective, "International law is defined in terms of the subjects of international public law: international law is then 'the body of rules which governs intercourse between the subjects of international public law" (p. 85). Negotiation, Mediation and Good Offices. In some cases, states that find themselves at odds over economic, political or social issues may simply need an objective forum in which to have their sides heard in an open and forthright manner.

In this regard, the IPU is well poised to provide its good offices to belligerents and others who may find themselves without other recourse besides armed conflict. Today, the importance of this resource cannot be overstated; the growing nuclear threats represented by North Korea, Iran, Israel (which may already have the Bomb, who knows for sure?), and non-state actors means that there is no longer any room for false starts in many diplomatic settings and the need for such objective mediators is greater today than ever before in history.

Because there are always at least two sides (and frequently more in the international arena), objectivity becomes an increasingly scarce commodity in conflict resolution, negotiation and mediation initiatives. By all accounts, the individual members of any agency tasked with mediating an international conflict will take to the table their own individual and unique worldview, which will undoubtedly be colored by their own respective cultural and religious views.

This point is made by Avruch, Black and Scimecca (1991) who emphasize the importance of respecting individual cultural differences in such conflict resolution settings, and making every effort to restore all parties to their respective status prior to the conflict. According to these authors, this level of conflict resolution may set aside assigning blame or responsibility for the issue under consideration until other, more appropriate international bodies can take over subsequent negotiations.

For example, "This means that the resolution of a conflict ought to be made in such a way that the disputants can be restored to appropriate relations. The acceptability of a solution may take precedence over assessing actual responsibility for the initial breach in the relationship, and the solution itself must reaffirm those appropriate status relations" (Avruch et al., 1991 p. 116). Reconciliation.

The definition of "reconciliation" provided by Black's Law Dictionary (1990) suggests that there is more involved in the peaceful resolution of international conflicts than a mere cessation of armed hostilities: "Reconciliation," they say, is "the renewal of amicable relations between two persons who had been at enmity or variance; usually implying forgiveness of injuries on one or both sides" (p. 1273).

Clearly, then, because there is more involved in any negotiated settlement than simply arriving at a consensus, the need for reconciliation among international actors that may harbor long-term hostilities based on any number of reasons is more important today than ever. This point is made by Bar-Simon-Tov (2004), who reports that, "Reconciliation is probably the most important condition for shifting the current peace toward stable peace.

Only reconciliation can build mutual trust and provide mutual assurances for maintaining peace in [the Middle East]." Nevertheless, "Reconciliation is probably the most difficult condition because it asks for a deep cognitive change, a real change of beliefs, ideology, and emotions not only among the ruling elites but also among most if not all sectors of both societies [that is, Israel and Egypt]" (Bar-Siman-Tov, 2004 p. 4).

Although the concept of reconciliation has long been familiar to researchers and practitioners, only in the last decade has it emerged as a specific area of interest in peace studies. It evolved from the understanding that there is a need to study the conditions for stabilizing peace after the resolution of domestic or international conflicts.

Both scholars and practitioners realize that although conflict resolution terminates a conflict, it does not necessarily stabilize the peace or prevent the emergence of a new conflict in the future, which may even lead to renewed violence (Bar-Siman-Tov, 2004). When the sides still encounter severe difficulty in overcoming the builtup bitterness and grievances of a protracted conflict, and in altering their hostile perceptions and mutual fears, they may fail to stabilize peace relations.

Reconciliation is therefore a crucial factor in stabilizing peace after the resolution of an international conflict and in transforming the relations between former enemies. Reconciliation, then, goes beyond conflict resolution and addresses the cognitive and emotional barriers to normalization and stabilization of peace relations. In its simplest form, reconciliation means restoring friendship and harmony between the rival sides after conflict resolution, or transforming relations of hostility and resentment to friendly and harmonious ones.

The growing body of literature on reconciliation does not refer to international conflicts but rather to conflicts ranging from family to intercommunal and ethnic ones and civil wars. Reconciliation may take place within divided societies or within one country after interethnic, interracial, or interreligious conflicts, which tend to be protracted, zero-sum conflicts, involve extensive violence, cost many casualties, and accumulate animosity and hatred ().

According to this author, "Reconciliation is not necessary for ending all international conflicts but probably only for conflicts that are protracted and zero-sum, and thus similar to internal conflicts and civil wars. The historical record shows that reconciliation proved necessary for stabilizing peace relations between Germany and France, Germany and Poland, and Germany and the Czech Republic; probably it will also be required in the Arab-Israeli conflict, particularly the Israeli-Palestinian conflict" (Bar-Simon-Tov, 2004 p. 4).

A number of studies to date have indicated that different conditions that the sides need to fulfill so as to facilitate the reconciliation process during the post-peace agreement period, in which reconciliation is urgently required. Whereas the liberal approach in international relations emphasizes the need to accelerate the security, economic, and political cooperation between the sides, thereby enabling the peace to spill over from the ruling elites to all sectors of the population, the social psychological approach stresses the cognitive and emotional aspects of reconciliation (Bar-Simon-Tov, 2004).

From the perspective of a social psychological approach, the reconciliation process should openly address painful questions of past conflict so as to build a foundation for normal peace relations.

This may require unilateral or mutual willingness to apologize for previous transgressions, unilateral or mutual forgiveness, an offer of appropriate compensation, a mutual perception of a just peace agreement (that is, one that is responsive to the needs and fears of both sides), mutual satisfaction with the peace agreement and with the development of the relations, mutual acceptance and respect for each other's national identity, internalization of the peace values, and a willingness to open a new chapter in the relationship (Bar-Simon-Tov, 2004).

Because reconciliation is a mutual and consensual process, it cannot be imposed by one side or even by an external side (that is, a mediator). The process is likely to develop naturally and slowly, with direction or intervention by the leadership, who must be accountable for its role if the process is to succeed. Both sides' leaders should act simultaneously and jointly in encouraging the internalization of the peace relations and their spillover to all domains of life and all sectors of the society (Bar-Simon-Tov, 2004 p. 5). Chapter Summary.

This chapter provided an analysis of the IPU's increasing important role in the settlement of international disputes by peaceful means, including a general introduction that described the IPU's role in providing a forum for dialogue and peaceful resolution of conflicts. A discussion of the various methods used for the peaceful settlement of conflicts and the role played by the IPU was followed by an assessment of how negotiations, mediations and the good offices of the various bodies of the IPU could be put to good effect in this regard.

Finally, this chapter presented a definition of reconciliation and what factors can reasonably be expected to be involved in cross-cultural negotiations. Chapter IV. The IPU and the Protection of Human Rights The Role of Parliamentarians in the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights. The research thus far has clearly shown that the IPU is well situated to help communicate the priorities and goals of the UN and other international bodies to the various representatives that comprise its membership, but this unfortunately does not necessarily communicate into successful outcomes.

In this regard, Rich (2003) suggests that, "While judging the quality of each nation's democracy is best conducted by internal actors, analysing issues such as longevity, resilience, participation and institutional integrity can provide a pointer" (p. 10).

Therefore, given its centrality, neutrality and declared objectivity within the international community, the IPU parliamentarians can provide the oversight and impetus for ensuring that those international public and private organizations dedicated to improving the human rights of the people of the world at least have a fighting chance at success, and these issues are discussed further below. General Human Rights.

In their book, Negotiating Culture and Human Rights, Bell, Nathan and Peleg (2001) report that, "The devastating human atrocities of World War II produced a major international commitment to the concept and practice of 'universal human rights'" (p. 3). This commitment was codified in 1948 when the United Nations adopted the "Universal Declaration on Human Rights" and the "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide" (Bell et al., 2001).

While these documents were negotiated among most of the then-existing states, from all regions of the world, the following decades were characterized by conflictual approaches to rights, with Western states supporting civic, political, and individual rights, and Socialist states championing socioeconomic and collective rights. Since the end of the Cold War, there has been a sharpening international conflict among governments over human rights.

In this regard, Bell and his colleagues add that, "While many formerly communist Eastern European nations have adopted a position sympathetic to civic and political rights of individuals, many governments in the developing world remain uneasy with, and on occasion even resentful of, what they perceive as Western triumphalism, interventionism, and cultural imperialism in the area of rights" (p. 3). Human Rights of Parliamentarians.

According to the IPU's information page on "Committees and Working Groups" (2006), members of the Committee on Human Rights of Parliamentarians serve five-year terms and are elected in a personal capacity in such a way as to ensure that all the world's different civilizations and political systems are represented.

In his book, The Times Guide to World Organisations: Their Role & Reach in the New World Order, Owen (1996) reports that besides its other stated missions, the IPU also investigates cases of members of parliament imprisoned without trial, forced into exile, or otherwise suppressed. In this regard Owen adds that membership of the IPU is suspended when a parliament is dissolved by unconstitutional means.

"Since the IPU Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians was set up in 1976," Owens says, "it has examined over 700 cases of detained deputies, and has succeeded in obtaining their release in 95 per cent of cases" (p. 51). During its 1994 Conference the IPU condemned the violations of MPs' rights in ten countries: Bulgaria, Colombia, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Burma, Senegal, Togo, Turkey and Uzbekistan.

The IPU's Human Rights of Parliamentarians has also assisted in monitoring free elections in formerly authoritarian countries by providing observers, and by providing advice to parliaments in new or restored democracies through its Technical Co-operation Programme. This organ of the IPU publishes the World Directory of Parliaments, an annual Chronicle of Parliamentary Elections, and a quarterly, the Inter-Parliamentary Bulletin (Owen, 1996). Women's Rights and Participation of Women in Political Life.

According to Rich (2003), "An informed electorate, in which civil society organisations are active, alongside an independent and competent judiciary, upholding the rule of law, comprise the bedrock on which the other institutions of state stand. The leadership of those institutions should have a clear understanding of their respective roles and the limits of their responsibilities" (p. 10).

In this regard, a good reflection of the fact that the world is changing where women are concerned is the dramatic increase in the percentage of women who are enfranchised as well as members of parliament in countries around the world. For example, the data provided by the Inter-parliamentary Union estimates that in 1987, women comprised just 9% of the membership of the world's parliaments; however, by 2002, this figure increased to 14% (Inglehart, 2002).

The progress to date, though, has been mixed with much more progress being accomplished in some regions of the world than in others. For example, Inglehart notes that in the Nordic countries in 2001, 43% of the members of the lower house were women; by contrast, in Arabic-speaking countries, less than 5% of the elected representatives were women (Inglehart, 2002). While women are remain seriously underrepresented in most countries, they are experiencing positive changes, which theoretically should shift the aspiration-adjustment balance in a positive direction (Inglehart, 2002).

According to a current female member of the IPU, Faure (2003), one of the fundamental symbols of democratic freedom today is the right to take part in the management of public affairs by freely expressing one's will through the election ballot or by offering one's services as a representative of that public will. "Today, almost everywhere in the world," she advises, "all individuals who have reached voting age and against whom no legal action is pending, whether men or women, may vote or run as candidates in a legislative election.

But what seems obvious today has not always been so" (p. 481). In reality, the vast majority of the world's population only obtained the right to vote during the 20th century, and even then only after significant social and racial prejudices had been overcome. In this regard, Faure adds that, "Women had to combat additional prejudices based on sex, which was the reason why, in the 55 countries considered here, they acquired electoral rights long after men did and only after a long and bitter struggle" (p. 481).

Today, the IPU sponsors a wide range of initiatives designed to improve the position and lives of women around the world. According to "Gender Partnership: What the IPU Is Doing" (2006), "In September 1997, in Cairo, the IPU Council adopted the Universal Declaration on Democracy and urged Governments and Parliaments throughout the world to be guided by its content" (p. 2).

The Declaration proclaims in part that, "The achievement of democracy presupposes a genuine partnership between men and women in the conduct of the affairs of society in which they work in equality and complementarity, drawing mutual enrichment from their differences" ("Gender Partnership: What the IPU Is Doing," 2006 p. 3). This proclamation was certainly timely, but the Coucil had been on the record for sometime already along these lines.

For example, in April 1992, in Yaounde, the IPU Council had previously proclaimed its support for women around the world: "The concept of democracy will only assume true and dynamic significance when political policies and national legislation are decided upon jointly by men and women with equitable regard for the interests and aptitudes of both halves of the population" ("Gender Partnership: What the IPU Is Doing," 2006 p. 3). The IPU and the Beijing Process.

The following so-called "Twelve suggestions for parliamentary follow-up to Beijing+5," were recently discussed at the Tripartite Consultation on "Democracy through partnership between men and women," organized by the IPU in cooperation with the United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women, on the occasion of the Beijing+5 Special session of the United Nations General Assembly. Since its promulgation, the document has been promoted by the IPU.

The "Twelve Suggestions" are intended to support governmental efforts to implement the Beijing Platform for Action, and include the following measures and actions: Governments should formally refer to parliament the Beijing Platform for Action, the Outcome of the Special Session of the General Assembly and, as appropriate, the conclusions of the preparatory regional meetings of the Session. Governments and parliaments should take further sustained action to strengthen and develop the legal framework conducive to the implementation of gender equality provisions in all fields.

Particular attention should be given to the repealing of discriminatory legislation, in accordance with the definition of discrimination contained in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Beijing Platform for Action. Parliaments should vote the appropriations required to implement administrative initiatives aimed at gender equality. In particular, adequate resources in national budgets for national machinery for the advancement of gender equality should be put in place to enable them to implement their mandates.

Governments should systematically include a gender perspective in their budgetary proposals. Similarly, mechanisms for a parliamentary reading of the budget from a gender perspective should be systematically developed. Action should be taken to ensure that the Beijing commitments are referred, as appropriate, to all parliamentary committees concerned. One way of ensuring the monitoring of progress in implementing the Beijing commitments of the Beijing Platform for Action may be.