 | This article'slead sectionmay be too short to adequatelysummarize the key points. Please consider expanding the lead toprovide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the article.(January 2026) |
 | |
| Abbreviation | UNPA |
|---|---|
| Type | Proposed Organ of theUnited Nations |
| Legal status | Proposed |
TheUnited Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA) is a proposedparliamentary body within theUnited Nations (UN) system.
TheCampaign for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (CUNPA) was launched in 2007 byDemocracy Without Borders[1] (formerly Committee for a Democratic UN). As of December 2025, the campaign has received the support of over 1,800members of parliament from 138 countries.[2][3][4]
Proposals for a parliamentary assembly within global organizations date back to at least the 1920s, when the founders of theLeague of Nations considered plans to include a people's assembly as part of the League's structure.[5]
In 1945, British politicianErnest Bevin proposed a people's world assembly, saying in theBritish House of Commons that, "There should be a study of a house directly elected by the people of the world to whom the nations are accountable."[6]
On 16 October 1945, before theUN Charter had entered into force, retiredU.S. Supreme Court JusticeOwen J. Roberts and formerNew Hampshire GovernorRobert P. Bass held a conference inDublin, New Hampshire, which passed the Dublin Declaration. It stated that the UN Charter was inadequate to preserve peace and proposed the transformation of theUN General Assembly into aworld legislature, suggesting "Such a government should be based upon a constitution under which all peoples and nations will participate upon a basis of balanced representation which will take account of natural and industrial resources and other factors as well as population. It cannot be based on treaties in which the states act and vote as states".[7]
In the post-Cold War era, several factors contributed to a more favorable environment for UNPA proposals.[8] ATrilateral Commission report notes that the shift from a world led by the two rivalSoviet- andU.S.-led blocs meant a general diffusion of power. Growth of economic interdependence, proliferation of transnational actors, nationalism in weak states, spread of technology, and an increasing number of issues (such as global environmental problems andweapons of mass destruction containment) that are both domestic and international have generated a stronger incentive to develop international cooperation than ever before.[9]
In 2003,Freedom House counted 121 electoral democracies, compared to 66 in 1987[10] and 30 in 1975 (although, by the mid-2000s, the trend appeared to have stagnated).[11]
In early 1993, theHouse of Commons of Canada Standing Committee on External Affairs and International Trade presented a report stating, "By way of building the public and political constituency for the United Nations, the Committee recommends that Canada support the development of a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly."[12] TheCampaign for a Democratic United Nations (CAMDUN), theInternational Network for a United Nations Second Assembly (INFUSA), and the Global People's Assembly Movement (GPAM), began circulating UNPA proposals around 1995, and other organizations, such asOne World Trust, began publishing analyses of how to proceed in the current political situation.[13][14][15]
TheWorld Trade Organization and similar organizations prompted concern among some observers as they seemed to be gaining more influence and control over trade disputes, yet were not accountable to the people;[16]U.S. PresidentBill Clinton argued, "We must insist that international trade organizations be open to public scrutiny instead of mysterious, secret things subject to wild criticism."[17] A "new diplomacy" seemed to be taking shape in whichNGOs and governments cooperated to create new global institutions such as theInternational Criminal Court.[18]
On 8 February 2005, on the initiative of the Committee for a Democratic UN (todayDemocracy Without Borders), 108 Swiss Parliamentarians signed an open letter to theSecretary-General calling for the establishment of just such a body.[19] On 14 May 2005, the Congress of theLiberal International issued a resolution stating that "the Liberal International calls on the member states of the United Nations to enter into deliberations on the establishment of a Parliamentary Assembly at the United Nations."[20] On 9 June 2005, theEuropean Parliament issued a resolution that contained an item stating that Eurostar "calls for the establishment of a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA) within the UN System, which would increase the democratic profile and internal democratic process of the organization and allowworld civil society to be directly associated in thedecision-making process; states that the Parliamentary Assembly should be vested with genuine rights of information, participation and control, and should be able to adopt recommendations directed at the UN General Assembly; [...]"[21] In 2006,Citizens for a United Nations People's Assembly circulated a petition to UN Secretary-GeneralKofi Annan to "convene a High Level Panel to determine the steps required for the establishment of a Peoples' Parliamentary Assembly within the United Nations Organization"[22]
In April 2007, international NGOs launched theInternational Campaign for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly, the principal current movement for the establishment of a UNPA.[23] Its secretariat is led byDemocracy Without Borders.[24] Over 150 civil society groups and nearly 1,500 parliamentarians are part of the Campaign.[25] As of June 2017, thousands of signatories from over 150 countries have endorsed CUNPA's appeal, including parliamentarians, civil society leaders, leading academics, and others such as former UN Secretary-GeneralBoutros Boutros-Ghali, former President of the Pan-African ParliamentGertrude Mongella, actressEmma Thompson, author SirArthur C. Clarke, and former NASA astronautEdgar Mitchell.[26][neutrality isdisputed]
On 25 September 2007, the statement by H.E. Mr.José Sócrates, Prime Minister of Portugal, onbehalf of the European Union, at the United Nations 62nd Session of the General Assembly, General Debate, stated, "We remain committed to the reform of its main bodies in order to enhance the Organization's representativity, transparency and effectiveness."[27] On 24 October 2007, thePan African Parliament unanimously adopted a resolution calling for the establishment of a Parliamentary Assembly at the United Nations, noting, "in contrast to regional international bodies such as theAfrican Union, the European Union, the Council of Europe, orMercosur, the United Nations and its specialized organizations is one of the last international fora lacking an integrated and institutionalized Parliamentary Assembly."[28][29] So far, four international conferences of CUNPA have taken place.[23]
One of the most influential and well-known pro-UN organizations,UNA-USA, has been on both sides of the issue. In 2003, UNA-USA's executive director of policy studies, Jeffrey Laurenti, wrote an article, "An Idea Whose Time Has Not Come", arguing that there were important unresolved issues of inclusivity, authority, and efficiency with the UNPA.[30] UNA's position seemed to reverse in November 2006, when the 38th plenary session of theWorld Federation of United Nations Associations issued a resolution stating that it "Supports the establishment of a United Nations parliamentary Assembly as a consultative body within the United Nations system as a voice of the citizens; Calls upon the governments of the United Nations member states, parliamentarians and civil society representatives to jointly examine possible steps and options to create a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly."[31]
| Name | 1st session | Direct el. | N. |
| Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe | 1949 | N/A | |
| European Parliament | 1952 | 1979 | |
| Assembly of WEU | 1955 | N/A | |
| NATO Parliamentary Assembly | 1955 | N/A | [32] |
| Parliamentary Assembly of OSCE | 1992 | N/A | [33] |
| Arab Parliament | 2001 | N/A | |
| Pan African Parliament | 2004 | N/A | [34] |
| Mercosur Parliament | 2007 | N/A | [35] |
The post-World War II years, particularly the 1980s and 1990s, saw tremendous growth inparliamentary assemblies, with more than 40 established since 1949. About 42% of the world's parliamentary assemblies are formally affiliated with anintergovernmental organization; 32% are informally affiliated; and 26% are unaffiliated. The spread in parliamentary assemblies was spurred by acceptance ofa parliamentary system as a means of legitimizing decisions; initiatives for intergovernmental cooperation reaching a point at which stronger parliamentary backing was needed; and regional integration. However, many global organizations, such as the UN and WTO, still lack a parliamentary assembly and "have been heavily criticized for what is supposed to be an institutional deficit."[36]
2010s
In February 2010, an international conference of current and former judges from the highest courts of more than 30 countries was held inLucknow, India. The judges adopted a resolution calling for changes to theUnited Nations Charter and for the creation of a global parliamentary body that would represent citizens more directly at the international level.[37]
In 2013, theEast African Legislative Assembly passed a resolution in support of creating a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA). The assembly encouraged the East African Community to take the lead in developing a shared African position on the proposal. Supporters argued that a UNPA could make the United Nations more open, accountable, and effective by giving elected representatives a formal role in its work. The resolution was introduced by Mike Sebalu and supported by several other assembly members.[38]
In a related effort, theCommission on Global Security, Justice and Governance called for the creation of a United Nations Parliamentary Network. The commission was chaired by former United States Secretary of StateMadeleine Albright and former Nigerian foreign minister Ibrahim Gambari. It described the proposed network as a way to increase public understanding and involvement in global decision-making by giving national legislators a stronger voice in international institutions.[39] The commission suggested that the network could follow existing models that already link parliamentarians to major global organizations such as theWorld Bank, theInternational Monetary Fund, and theWorld Trade Organization.[40]
In July 2018, theEuropean Parliament adopted a recommendation to theEuropean Council endorsing a proposal for the establishment of UNPA.[41]
Supporters[42] have set forth possible UNPA implementations, including promulgation of a new treaty; creation of a UNPA as a subsidiary body of the UN General Assembly; and evolution of a UNPA from theInter-Parliamentary Union or anothernon-governmental organization. Several proposals for apportionment of votes have been raised to address disparities in population and economic power of UN members. CUNPA advocates initially gave the UNPA advisory powers and gradually increased its authority over the UN system.[citation needed]
Amending the UN Charter, possibly through a Charter Review Conference underArticle 109 of the UN Charter, is a commonly cited possibility, including byLouis Sohn andGrenville Clark in their 1958 bookWorld Peace Through World Law.[43][44] According to Pat Orvis of theForeign Policy Association, this path is difficult because it requires ratification by two-thirds of UN members, including all five permanent members of theSecurity Council.[45] There have been only five amendments to the UN Charter since 1945, and none of them were done through the Article 109 process,[46] though one was to Article 109 itself.[47][clarification needed]
TheWorld Federalist Movement-Canada asserts that theGeneral Assembly has the authority to establish the UNPA as a subsidiary body of the UN General Assembly underArticle 22 of the UN Charter.[48][better source needed]Erskine Childers andSir Brian Urquhart endorsed this approach in their 1994 book,Renewing the United Nations System. The Committee for a Democratic UN recommended the establishment of UNPA by Article 22 or a transformation of theInter-Parliamentary Union in its report,Developing International Democracy, authored byAndreas Bummel, co-founder and director of the UNPA campaign.[49] In 2006, theCouncil of Europe passed a resolution noting, "A decisive step towards the development of a UN parliamentary dimension could be the establishment of an experimental parliamentary committee with consultative functions for General Assembly committees."[50]
Parliamentarians for Global Action have suggested a non-governmental organization of democratically elected legislators, which they claimed would have the advantage of not requiring the cooperation of national governments or world parliamentary organizations with dictatorial members, so only democratic legislators, parliaments, and countries would be represented.[51] Dieter Heinrich critiqued this approach by saying, "If it did succeed on any scale, it would divert resources from pressuring governments on thousands of specific issues, which citizens are good at, into the operation of a pan-global institutional structure, which citizens' groups are ill-equipped to do...And the resulting assembly would always be of doubtful legitimacy (who does it represent?) and unlikely value as an evolutionary starting point for a real-world parliament."[52]
Andrew Strauss of theOne World Trust has put forward establishing a new, stand-alone treaty, which he claims would require as few as 20 or 30 economically and geographically diverse countries to establish a UNPA, which could expand as more countries ratified the treaty.[14] Strauss notes that this is the method by which most international bodies, such as theWorld Health Organization,International Labour Organization, andInternational Criminal Court, were founded.[14] José Enrique Alvarez, Professor of International Law atNew York University School of Law, suggests this route would begin via a conference ofplenipotentiaries to draft the treaty, which would then need to beratified by each country.[53]
TheInter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) is a body that was grantedobserver status in 2002.[54] The IPU's Second World Conference of Speakers of Parliament adopted a resolution stating, "We would greatly welcome more substantive interaction and coordination with the United Nations, and call upon the world body to resort more frequently to the political and technical expertise which the IPU, together with its Member Parliaments, can provide."[55] Moreover, a 2005 article by IPU Secretary-GeneralAnders B. Johnsson stated that, "It makes little practical or political sense to set up a separate parliamentary assembly alongside the existing governmental General Assembly."[56] TheInter-Parliamentary Union has sometimes supported a reestablished IPU as a substitute for a UNPA, saying, "The Union had the necessary experience, and further bureaucracy should be avoided."[57] Many national parliaments, however, are currently not members of the IPU.[58]
The CUNPA proposes that the UNPA begin as a consultative body whose powers could be augmented as it evolved into a directly elected assembly: "Step by step, it should be provided with genuine rights of information, participation and control vis-à-vis the UN and the organizations of the UN system."[59] An article in theAsian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal notes that precedents for this idea include theBritish Parliament,French Estates-General,U.S. Congress, and theEuropean Parliament, which are all systems in which, over time, power shifted to directly elected officials: "In the past, fledgling democracy has always had to compromise with the realities of power and evolve step-by-step, where possible.
This is often accomplished in the form of a 'non-democratic' additional house in the parliamentary structure. Thus, in Britain, the necessity of compromise of the 'common people' with the powers and interests of the armed and titled nobility necessitated a bicameral system incorporating theHouse of Lords, as well as theHouse of Commons. The French Estates-General included similar power blocs as 'estates' or functional separate houses, and the United States Senate reflected a necessary compromise of the interests of less populous states, hesitant to subject themselves to 'democratic inundation' by the more populous states."[60]
World federalists often point out that a democratic union of peoples, rather than governments, is suggested by the opening words of thePreamble to the United Nations Charter, "We the peoples ..."[61] This sentiment was expressed byTheo van Boven, who said, "A more democratic United Nations as envisaged by the campaign for a UN Parliament will strengthen the legitimacy of We the peoples of the United Nations in whose name the UN Charter was proclaimed."[62] According to the Committee for a Democratic UN, "The UNPA concept is the first step towards a democratic world parliament".[63] World federalists typically view an empowered democratic assembly as a means of preventing war by providing everyone a peaceful means of pursuing their political objectives.[64]Walter Cronkite, for instance, said, "Within the next few years, we must change the basic structure of our global community from the present anarchic system of war and ever more destructive weaponry to a new system governed by a democratic UN federation."[65][neutrality isdisputed][relevant?]
However, there is some opposition to the idea of an empowered global parliament. A 2007BBC poll of approximately 12,000 respondents asked, "How likely would you be to support a Global Parliament, where votes are based on country population sizes, and the global parliament is able to make binding policies?" Of those polled, 19.1% responded "Very unlikely–it is a bad idea"; 14.9% responded "Quite unlikely–but it might work"; 23.1% said "Quite likely–but with reservations"; and 14.4% said "Very likely–it is a good idea". The poll was broken out by country, and the U.S. and Australia showed the strongest opposition.[66] Potential challenges to the UNPA are political organizations such as theU.S. Constitution Party[67] and politicians such as2008 U.S. presidential candidateRon Paul, who favorwithdrawal from the United Nations and other multilateral organizations altogether due tosovereignty concerns.[68]Canadian Action Party leaderConnie Fogal also opposes the UNPA, saying, "It is very revealing to see theNDP and theGreens as part of and promoting this...Further, the European assembly has proven to be a rubber-stamping mechanism of bureaucratic decisions. This is not democracy."[69] In addition, aCivicus article warns, "With an unexpected backlash againstcivil society in the offing (despite the good efforts of theUN General Assembly President,Jan Eliasson, to reverse the trend), citizen participation at the UN is diminishing quickly. It would be safe to assume that Member States as a whole are not in the mood to consider a Parliamentary Assembly at this time."[54]
Herbert W. Briggs points out that while a UNPA could be established as a UNGA subsidiary body without any changes tointernational law, granting it the power to pass binding legislation would require a UN Charter amendment or a new treaty. The UNGA plays a role in admitting, suspending, and expelling UN members, approving the budget, and electing members to other UN bodies, but its powers as outlined inChapter IV of the UN Charter are mostly advisory in nature. These include the power to "discuss," "make recommendations," "consider," "call the attention of the Security Council to situations," "initiate studies," "receive...reports," etc., as well as "establish such subsidiary organs as it deems necessary for the performance of its functions." The Charter contains no provision allowing the UNGA to delegate any powers it does not itself possess. And whileArticle 25 states, "The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council," there is no requirement that members abide by the recommendations of the UNGA.[70] On the other hand, Article 13(1)(a) of the Charter tasks the UNGA with "encouraging the progressive development of international law and its codification."
According toOscar Schachter, there is some question as to whether the traditional international lawmaking process of state-by-state treaty ratification is adequate today: "The traditional case-by-case process ofcustomary law cannot meet the necessity for common action to deal with the numerous problems raised by technological developments, demographic and environmental impacts, changing attitudes as to social justice, or the many requirements of international business. While multilateral treaties can deal with all of these matters, the treaty processes are often complicated and slow, whereas UN resolutions can be more readily attained."[71] TheLaw of the Sea is an example of an agreement that has been ratified by the majority of the world's countries for decades and still has not been passed in the U.S. (although theCato Institute views the delay as a good thing).[72]George Monbiot argues, "The absence of an international legislature undermines the authority of an international judiciary (such as the proposed criminal court). Judges presiding over the war-crimes tribunals at the Hague and inArusha have been forced, in effect, to make up the law as they go along."[73]
Proposals to give the UNGA legislative power–including the "binding triad" idea, which would have made UNGA resolutions binding if passed by countries constituting a supermajority of the world's states, population, and economic production–have made little headway.[74] According to Heinrich, once the UNPA is established, it will be easier to gather support for empowering it. The assembly's own members can be expected to play a major role in pushing for its evolution by seeking a UN Charter amendment to make it a "principal organ" in parallel with the General Assembly. With their political know-how, their access to the highest levels of their national governments, and their credibility with the world public and the media, the politicians in the UN Parliamentary Assembly can be expected to become a strong and persistent political force for organizing the assembly's eventual transformation.[52]
Proponents claim that one of the primary purposes of creating a UNPA is to enhance UN accountability and legitimacy. TheUnited Nations System spent more than $1.8 billion of public money in 2005,[75] and its own auditors have pointed out that it lacks adequate internal controls to protect against waste, fraud, and mismanagement.[76] Strauss asserts that by holding hearings, issuing reports, and passing resolutions, the UNPA could exercise oversight over other UN bodies.[14] In a September 2007 press release,MEPGraham Watson expressed his hope that "in an era where the UN's mandate has grown exponentially, the UNPA would act as a watchdog on its activities, monitoring its decision-making deadlines, its accountability and transparency".[16] London MayorKen Livingstone promised that, "a more democratic United Nations as envisaged by this campaign will strengthen the accountability and legitimacy of the UN."[62] ThePan African Parliament's resolution mirrored this sentiment: "If democratization is a major means to legitimize and improve national governance, it is also the most reliable way to legitimize and improve international organizations, making it more open and responsive by increasing participation."[29]
Former Canadian SenatorDouglas Roche,O.C., argues in his bookThe Case for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly that an indirectly elected UNPA consisting of delegates appointed by national parliaments creates additionalchecks and balances by providing oversight by a parliamentary body that would be independent of member nations' executive branches. It would open up the global policymaking process to a larger group of elected officials by shifting some power from the relatively small executive branches of countries to the larger legislative branches. According to Roche,globalization has tended to increase the power of the executive branch while marginalizing the legislative branch; for instance, U.S. Presidents sinceGeorge H. W. Bush have been given fast-track authority to negotiate trade agreements, subject to a "yea or nay" scrutiny by theU.S. Congress on the negotiated deal.[77]
AProperty and Environment Research Center report argues that changes in theOrganization for Economic Co-operation and Development are another example of how international regulation removes checks and balances between the branches of government: "The OECD was created by a1961 treaty, ratified by the U.S. Senate, to help achieve economic growth. In April 1998, a ministerial meeting reinterpreted the treaty, adding social and environmental considerations to the economic ones. The United States executive branch agreed to the changes, but the Senate had no opportunity to debate this treaty, even though it differed significantly from the 1961 treaty. The executive branch had essentially negotiated a new deal without Senate approval."[78] World Federalist Canada Briefing Paper No. 30, however, suggests that UNPA proposals may spark opposition from the executive branches that stand to lose power: "Experience has shown that civil servants and diplomats working in national foreign ministries are less likely to support or see the need for a UNPA. They view the UN as a forum for discussion among sovereign states; whatever action the UN takes is a result of bargaining and compromise among member states".[79]
A significant practical obstacle to a completely democratically elected and representative UNPA is that, in contrast to the situation in which the European Parliament functions, a significant number of UN members, including populous countries such as China, are not electoral democracies.[80] In the past, bodies such as theUnited Nations Commission on Human Rights were criticized for being dominated by abusive regimes.[81] If UNPA representatives were to be drawn from member nations' parliaments, it could create legitimacy concerns since some national legislatures are regarded as arubber stamp for the rulers' decrees.[82]
Some global parliament proponents, such as Prof. Lucio Levi, propose starting a federation limited to democracies: "Though the democratization of states all over the world hasn’t been completed, this does not preclude starting the democratization of the UN. Six Western European countries founded the European Community, starting its democratization without waiting for the democratization of the institutions of all the European states."[83] UNA-USA's Jeff Laurenti notes the problems associated with excluding undemocratic countries from membership: "It is one thing to deny membership to a few small 'rogue' dictatorships. It is quite another to exclude China, the vast majority of Arab countries, and two-thirds of Africa, and imagine that the resulting body can have a formal consultative or oversight role with United Nations agencies, be part of UN-sponsored negotiations on multilateral conventions (the real work of international legislating), or pass on the resolutions of UN political bodies."[30]
UNPA proponents frequently counter by pointing out that most of the world's countries are democratic.[77]
Heinrich argues, "It is essential that the salary and travel costs of UN parliamentarians should be paid by the institution of the UN Parliamentary Assembly from its own budget (which would be part of the UN budget), and not by the national governments individually. This is both to assure the independence of the UNPA politicians in their service to the UN and to assure equality of participation."[52]Article 17 of the UN Charter stipulates, "The expenses of the Organization shall be borne by the Members as apportioned by the General Assembly." Thus, unless funded by private donors (as the land forUN headquarters was in 1946),[84] presumably the UNPA would be funded like the rest of the UN system, with larger economies such as the U.S. paying larger shares of the contributions. This disparity might be offset by weighting members' votes according to theirgross national product or their contributions to the UN system.[60] AVancouver Sun article notes, "Another point of opposition would involve the notion of adding bureaucracy and complexity to the UN. The estimated cost of the new outfit runs $140 million to $280 million a year."[85]
A 1993Parliamentarians for Global Action survey showed that a substantial majority of parliamentary respondents thought that the public would support the idea of a UN Parliamentary Assembly. Still, they were less sure the public would be prepared to finance it. The analysis pointed out, "The possibility of a greater financial burden to support an enlarged UN is unlikely to evoke support unless it can be demonstrated that the return on investment is significant. Citizens are often known to express lofty globalist sentiments when questioned on general principles, and to surrender them when costs or trade offs are concerned."[86] A 1995United Nations University report claimed, "it is difficult to see how the Parliamentary Assembly would be able to pay for the salaries and travel of what could be over 1,000 representatives; this proposal could increase the duplication and waste that already exist within multilateral bodies."[87]
A UNPA might begin as aninter-parliamentary institution–an assembly of parliamentarians from their respective countries' legislatures–and then change to a directly elected body. This would be similar to the evolution of the European Parliament. Beginning with the European Common Assembly's founding in 1952,MEPs were appointed by each of the Member States' national parliaments; in 1979, direct election was instituted.[88] Canadian diplomat and politicianDouglas Roche, in his bookThe Case for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly, analyses the tradeoffs between the two choices.[77] Roche explains that a UNPA based on existing parliamentarians may be easier to establish, because it avoids several hurdles, such as decisions on electoral cycles, a universally acceptable electoral body, legitimacy of elections, and so on: "A body comprising national parliamentarians has the 'stamp of approval' built-in. National parliamentarians can claim electoral legitimacy in their own right. Admittedly, the credibility of domestic franchising can be called into question, but the trend toward democracy has been strengthening rapidly."[77]
National parliamentarians also usually have staff and money, which could ease the funding issues associated with forming a new world parliamentary assembly. Delegates to a directly elected UNPA, on the other hand, would have more time to devote to the global assembly, since its members would not be occupied with duties relating to their membership in their national legislature.[77] Heinrich points out strategic advantages of an indirectly elected UNPA: "Another advantage to basing representation in a UN Parliamentary Assembly on national parliaments is that it may engage parliamentarians as allies in the cause of getting the assembly established, and, later, helping to build the political will for its evolution. The experience of being a UN parliamentarian will galvanize many of these politicians into going home as advocates for the UN, including the need for strengthening and democratizing the UN Parliamentary Assembly itself."[52]
Heinrich also notes the possibility that national parliaments could appoint citizen representatives to the UNPA, similar to how theU.S. Electoral College officially selects the president. This would be a stopgap solution until direct election became possible. Yet it would still ensure that citizens would be electing citizens (albeit indirectly), rather than the executive appointing officials, to the UNPA.[52]
| System | Brazil | Indon. | U.S. | India | China |
| Schwartzberg's weighted voting | 1.91% | 1.38% | 9.07% | 5.96% | 7.67% |
| Provisional People's Assembly method | 2.22% | [i]1.71% | 6.15% | 5.64% | [ii]3.25% |
| One person, one vote | 2.78% | 3.50% | 4.36% | 17.35% | 18.58% |
| Penrose method | 1.84% | 2.05% | 2.34% | 4.60% | 4.89% |
| Weighting bynominal GDP | 3.04% | 1.15% | 22.45% | 2.65% | 13.40% |
| One state, one vote | 0.52% | 0.52% | 0.52% | 0.52% | 0.52% |
A global parliamentary assembly could be structured to give populous states greater influence. Theone state, one vote rule of the UN General Assembly gives small states a disproportionate amount of influence over the UN system in respect to their population. InEntitlement quotients as a vehicle for United Nations reform,University of Minnesota professor emeritusJoseph E. Schwartzberg notes, "The sixty-four least populous members–enough to block a two-thirds majority vote–comprise less than one percent of the world's total population, and in theory, the 127 least populous members, accounting for barely eight percent of humanity, are enough to provide the two-thirds majority needed to pass a substantive resolution."[89] He continues this point in his essay,Overcoming Practical Difficulties in Creating a World Parliamentary Assembly:[90]
[...] the disparities in populations among members of the UN are so much greater than those of units represented in any national legislature as to make a second house analogous to theU.S. Senate an impractical recommendation. To comprehend this point, note thatCalifornia, the most populous state in the United States, has 69 times the population ofWyoming the least populous state, whereas [the People's Republic of China], the most populous member of the UN, has more than 100,000 times the population ofNauru orTuvalu, the two least populous members (each with barely more 10,000 inhabitants). While California has 52 seats in theHouse of Representatives, compared to Wyoming’s one, both have two seats in the Senate. But who would argue that Nauru should have as much power ... as China?
There are several alternate proposals for the apportionment of votes among member nations:
Schwartzberg's weighted voting formula takes into account population (the democratic/demographic principle), contribution to the UN budget (the economic principle), and share of the total membership. The idea of weighting countries' votes according to their financial contribution to the organization is not unprecedented, as theWorld Bank,International Monetary Fund, and otherBretton Woods institutions use this method.[91]
The Provisional People's Assembly's methodology gives each nation Population Seats based on a calculation that combines thePenrose method, which takes thesquare root of the millions of inhabitants of each country, Economic Seats equal to its portion of the world's totalgross domestic product, and classification as Free, Partially Free, or Unfree byFreedom House.[92]
Underone person, one vote, each country's number of votes is directly proportional to its population. This would be similar to howU.S. states are represented in theUnited States House of Representatives. InThe Future of Sovereignty – Rethinking a Key Concept of International Relations, Hasenclever et al. sum up the advantages and disadvantages of this system: "In a strict meaning of democracy based on individuals as subjects, every person's vote would have to have the same weight. However, none of the known proposals supports such a strict interpretation, because the inequality among the states' voting powers would be extreme with only four countries [sic] – China, India, the United States, and the former USSR – disposing of an absolute majority."[93]
A directly elected UNPA might have common election standards similar to the European Parliament. TheEuropean Parliament has adopted certain minimum requirements, such asproportional representation, that each member country must abide by to be represented.[94] Schwartzberg proposes a professionalelection commission "to ensure that assembly elections are carried out, to the maximum extent, on a level playing field". Under Schwartzberg's proposal, the commission would have several powers, including the authority to establish rules of fairness, determine in advance whether fairness criteria were being met, and foreclose polling where those criteria were not met. He proposes criteria that an election must meet to be considered valid, such as minimum participation rates that initially could be set as low as 20%, and gradually increased.[95]
Global governance and identity | |
|---|---|
| Proposals | |
| Theories | |
| Organisations | |
| Provisional government | |
