“A Call
for Reform - The Future of the Commonwealth”
A submission to The Commonwealth Eminent
Persons Group by
The Royal Commonwealth
Society of Canada.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary of
Recommendations........................................................................................... 1
The Commonwealth Eminent Persons
Group Mandate.......................................................................... 2
Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 2
Commonwealth Fortitude: Mandate..................................................................................................... 2
Commonwealth Function:
Parliamentary Governance............................................................................ 3
Commonwealth Function: Military
Cooperation..................................................................................... 5
Commonwealth Form: Secretariat........................................................................................................ 5
Commonwealth Form: Monarchy......................................................................................................... 6
Commonwealth Form: Realms............................................................................................................. 7
Commonwealth Fraternity: Civil Society Engagement.......................................................................... 8
Conclusion....................................................................................................................................... 10
Executive Summary of Recommendations
1. The Commonwealth should draft and abide by a
very clear and focused mandate consisting of an international development
objective for member sovereign states.
2. The mandate of the Commonwealth should be
responsible governance, specifically to protect democracy, improve human rights
and resolve conflicts by providing consultation, capacity- building and
accountability resources. The object is to maintain and improve parliamentary
systems of governance.
3. The Commonwealth should investigate means and
options to undertake military cooperation for the maintenance of peace and
security of member states.
4. The Commonwealth Secretariat, as the supporting
mechanism for the international organization, requires restructuring to
properly serve the amended and focused mandate. The restructuring must provide a responsive,
accountable and transparent system of administration. Further, the Secretariat should
have the capacity and independence to hold states to account in furthering or
failing the objects of the organization.
5. The British monarch and her heirs and successors
should be recognized and continue as Head of the Commonwealth.
6. The Commonwealth should establish a “Commonwealth
Realms Governance Forum” consisting of the fifteen non-UK realms, providing for
discussion, best practices and education on governance issues in constitutional
monarchies with a shared monarch.
7. The Royal Commonwealth Society and related
organizations should undertake a clear communications strategy, youth
programming and engagement for civil society, based on a clear and focused
mandate of the international organization.
The
Commonwealth
Eminent Persons Group Mandate
“Change is the Price of Survival.”
Winston Churchill
The Commonwealth is an international organization consisting of fifty-four
countries, spanning every continent and containing a quarter of the world’s governments
and every major world religion. The Commonwealth represents 2 billion people.
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is Head of the Commonwealth and Sovereign of sixteen
member states (the realms).
In 2010, the Commonwealth
appointed an Eminent Persons Group (EPG) to set out decisive recommendations on
how the Commonwealth may fulfil its potential and remain relevant in the 21st
century.[2] To this end,
The Royal Commonwealth Society of Canada respectfully submits a series of proposed
reforms to renew the civil engagement and international activity of the
Commonwealth.
Introduction
“In 1965, when the
Commonwealth Secretariat was being set up, the Commonwealth was working on many
different things, but it was known for only one - fighting racism. It had a clear message the public could
identify with. It needs to find this again and stop trying to compete with much
better funded international organizations.”
Commonwealth CSO Representative.
There is a common
perception that the Commonwealth is insignificant and irrelevant. The
international organization lacks focus, function and perceived relevance. The supporting
civil society groups consist of an aging demographic cohort that may slip
quietly and unnoticed into oblivion. Over the past 60 years, the emergence of
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has threatened the relevance and capacity
of the Commonwealth. This requires
change, specifically a renewed focus, a revitalized “solution”-based
engagement, and re-engagement in civil affairs in keeping with the core values
of the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth, without a clear and distinct meaning and
purpose, will fail to be an effective inter-state organization providing clear
solutions to international problems. This document submits that the
Commonwealth should reform its fortitude, function, form, and fraternity.
Commonwealth Fortitude: Mandate
The Commonwealth, as an intergovernmental
organization, lacks the capacity to communicate a clear solution to
international challenges because it does not contain a clear mandate. A common
language and a common British foundation are not a mandate, but a commonality. Without a clear mandate, the organization
lacks fortitude.
In 1949, the founding
members of the Commonwealth declared the organization was “united as free and
equal members, freely cooperating in the pursuit of peace, liberty and
progress.”[3] In a modern
era of NGOs, competing for relevance (and funding), this founding principle is
vague and unfocused.
Various Commonwealth
declarations have identified the core membership values of the organization,
including the London Declaration,[4] Singapore
Declaration,[5] Harare
Declaration,[6] and ASO Rock
Declaration,[7] all of which focus on governance, democracy and human
rights. In lieu of core programming resolutions, most international meetings
consist of unattainable inspirational declarations covering a long list of
social, economic or security issues.
The Commonwealth was
traditionally a vehicle of financial aid from more developed states to less
developed states on a plethora of social, economic and governance issues.[8] In fact, the list of activities is so diverse it
holds no continuity, focus or raison
d’être aside from fluid member requests. In this function, the Commonwealth
is merely an international organization to voice common objectives.
Despite all the
declarations of values and various aid programming, there is no single mandate
of the Commonwealth. What is the modus operandi of this international
organization in a crowded NGO environment? The Commonwealth needs to focus on
the core issues based the needs of Commonwealth citizens that people can relate
to. In essence, what is the Commonwealth “brand?” A brand is not a product; it
is a solution. As such, what common international solutions are member states attaining?
Recommendation:
That the Commonwealth draft and abide by a very
clear and focused mandate consisting of an international development objective for
membership states.
Commonwealth Function: Parliamentary
Governance
“We would like to see the
Commonwealth assert an even greater role in development, conflict prevention
and building democratic institutions in the coming years. But therein lies a
real choice for the Commonwealth.”-
Britain’s Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs
Peter Kucherepa (RCS member)
in “The Commonwealth at 60: Purposeful
and focused change for common wealth of nations”[9] proposes that the primary function of the
Commonwealth be responsible, accountable and effective government through
parliamentary systems (Westminster-style systems, republics, monarchies,
sultanates) and specifically core activities in developing democratic systems,
protection of human rights and systems of conflict resolution. Commonwealth
activities should be based on consultation, capacity building and
accountability programming.
The first Commonwealth
function is to protect democracy, as clearly enunciated in the Harare and other
Declarations. Governance consultation services would leverage pre-existing
reputable programming such as election monitoring[10] and “Good Offices”[11], providing a neutral, accountable and reputable
source of expertise. Further, there is capacity-building via “legislative best
practices” or “model laws” through the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA),
as it is the largest global pool of parliamentary experts in the world.[12] Lastly, the Commonwealth is well suited for democratic
governance accountability programming through the Commonwealth Ministerial
Action Group (CMAG). It has sought to isolate failed democracies,[13] but has failed in isolating other member
non-democratic states such as Brunei Darussalam. To ensure accountability, the
CMAG must publicly condemn all major offences against the Commonwealth
principles of good governance and provide recommendations for reform.
The second function of the
Commonwealth is to protect human rights. Commonwealth principles clearly
provide an emphasis on human rights.[14] The Commonwealth
Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) is a prime example of
consultation/capacity-building in human rights reforms. Topics include rights to information,
constitutionalism, police reforms, prison reforms and human rights advocacy.[15] In furthering the Harare
Principles, the Secretariat should expand the mandate in assisting in the
development and monitoring of human rights governance institutions, in lieu of
simply advocating and issuing project grants. Lastly, historical Commonwealth
sanctions against apartheid[16] provide precedents for a coordinated approach to
address persistent or serious state violations of the Commonwealth principles.[17]
The third function of the
Commonwealth is to resolve conflicts. Commonwealth states that follow “common
law” effectively gain judicial consultation on the approach, applicability and
development of common law principles.[18] The Commonwealth Magistrates' and Judges' Association
(CMJA) and the Commonwealth Lawyer’s Association’s (CLA) capacity-building
programming includes a three-phase education programme for judicial officers,
This includes the Commonwealth Legal Information Institute and legislative
drafting programs for developing states.[19] The CMJA Latimer House Guidelines on Parliamentary
Supremacy and Judicial Independence provides an effective framework for the
implementation of the Commonwealth fundamental judicial values in transitional
states.[20] The task of translating these principles into
effective accountability measures is incomplete and many aspects are
under-funded and under-represented, lacking resources to effectively impact
states’ development.
In rediscovering the object
of the Commonwealth, it is important to review common values and to leverage
pre-existing comparative advantages and recognized solutions. There is a common
governance structure amongst all member states striving for better national
systems of administration. As such, the Commonwealth should develop
competencies to undertake training and programming to assist states,
transitional states and emerging states into responsible and accountable
parliamentary systems of governance. The Commonwealth solution is responsible
governance. As such, the Commonwealth
should review, rejuvenate or replace programming that does not attain this mandate.
Recommendation:
That the mandate of the Commonwealth be responsible governance, specifically to
protect democracy, improve human rights and resolve conflicts by providing
consultation, capacity building and accountability resources. The object is to maintain
and improve parliamentary systems of governance.
Commonwealth Function: Military
Cooperation
An integral part of good
governance is responsible military engagement; there has been some discussion
on the capacity of military coordination among Commonwealth states.
One example is the creation
of an International Stabilization Force. In principle, if a Commonwealth state
is under imminent threat from hostile forces, the Commonwealth association can,
through established Commonwealth diplomatic channels, coordinate engagement
faster and more efficiently than traditional international organization
options.
There are several other
opportunities for military coordination such as a “Commonwealth Naval Task
Force” (addressing the risk of maritime pirates), a “Commonwealth Defence
College” (training and development), or a “Commonwealth Peace Corps” (peace
monitoring). There are on-going concerns on the applicability of these
submissions in respect to international laws of armed conflict.
Further research is
required on the opportunity of a Commonwealth military coordination and
engagement program.
Recommendation:
That the Commonwealth investigate means and
options to undertake military cooperation for the maintenance of the peace and
security of member states.
The Commonwealth
Form: Secretariat
“We are so terrified of countries walking away. But would a Commonwealth of 33 member states
who all actually adhere to our principles be so much worse than what we have
now?” - Intergovernmental Commonwealth Employee
To what extent will it be prepared
to speak out as an organization against those who violate the principles of
democracy and human rights? And can the Commonwealth expect to live up to the
hopes and expectations of its young people and remain relevant as an
organization unless it does so, without sliding into irrelevance in their
eyes?”- The Rt. Hon. William Hague, MP,
Sydney, Australia, January 19, 2011.
The Commonwealth is made up
of independent, largely democratic countries reflecting the historical
evolution from Empire to self-determination. The Commonwealth Secretariat has
been structured to serve a “moral debt” of various aid development programming
from more developed states to less developed former colonial states. This has
been the perceived benefit of Commonwealth membership.
This “unclear” development
structure (lacking a clear mandate), has adversely made the Secretariat
susceptible to “reactive” short term policy trends and influences. This has led
to the Secretariat’s lacking focus on objectives and thus holding limited
enforcement mechanisms on those objectives. When an organization is limited in
focus, reactive and procedurally unaccountable, the result is “old school”
methodology, limited transparency and high bureaucracy.
The Commonwealth
Secretariat, as the support mechanism for the international organization,
requires restructuring to properly serve the amended and focused mandate. Assuming the object is governance, the
Secretariat requires the effective tools to provide efficient and results-
based programming in governance reform. This requires a dynamic, transparent
and accountable system of administration.
Further, the Secretariat
must possess the independence and capacity to hold members to account and
condemn practices that violate Commonwealth principles, notwithstanding their
state status.[21] Lastly, the Commonwealth Secretariat may service
“candidate member” states that are in governance transition toward Commonwealth
membership. The Secretariat would provide governance-programming to transition states
based on an appropriate membership candidate fee.
Recommendation:
That the Commonwealth Secretariat, as the
supporting mechanism for the international organization, undergo restructuring
to properly serve the amended and focused mandate. The restructuring must provide a responsive,
accountable and transparent system of administration. Further, that the
Secretariat have the capacity and independence to hold states (members and
candidates) to account in furthering or failing the objects of the organization.
Commonwealth Form: The Monarchy
In the London Declaration
of 1949 the Commonwealth leaders agreed, “The British monarch would be a symbol
of the free association of independent countries.” Thus republics could be members with their
own head of state but recognize the monarch as Head of the Commonwealth. Her
Majesty provides form to the Commonwealth.
Queen Elizabeth II is also Sovereign of sixteen Commonwealth countries,
which are called the “realms.”[22]
The Queen is a firm
believer in the value of this free, multiracial, multicultural association of
nations as well as a symbol to citizens of the Commonwealth, including
aboriginal communities. Further, her institutional role provides legitimacy to
systems of governance, an important consideration in Commonwealth governance
issues. Her Majesty is the heart and soul of the Commonwealth.
Her Majesty provides a
vital presence at the Commonwealth including the biennial Heads of Government
Meeting (CHOGM), where she meets with each head of government collectively and
privately and tours the host country.
The Queen attends the annual Commonwealth Day multi-faith observance at
Westminster Abbey and the Commonwealth Secretary-General’s reception. Furthermore, Queen Elizabeth has strengthened
her role as Head of the Commonwealth.
Since 1997 she has personally participated in the opening ceremony of
CHOGM and addressed the participants.
She makes a point of meeting with Commonwealth leaders and diplomats.
She is recognised, by form and function, as the common leader.
Further, her son, the
Prince of Wales, is dedicated to multi-faith, multi-racial harmony. His priorities are also those of the
Commonwealth and he attended the 2007 CHOGM in Kampala, Uganda.
The website of the
Commonwealth Secretariat states that, upon the passing of the Queen, “it will
be up to the Commonwealth heads of government to decide what they want to do
about this symbolic role.”
To lose the Monarch as Head of the Commonwealth would extinguish an important
icon of the values of the Commonwealth.
Without the British monarch
as its head the Commonwealth would lose not only a vital symbol but also the
wealth of experience and wisdom, which only a hereditary monarch acquires
through a lifetime of commitment and service.
Recommendation:
That the British monarch and her heirs and
successors be recognized and continue as Head of the Commonwealth.
Commonwealth Form: Realms
The Queen is Sovereign of
sixteen “realms”. These realms are a
microcosm of the Commonwealth itself – multiracial, multicultural, extremely
varied in size and geographical location. They all function under a
constitutional monarchy in a Westminster-style parliamentary democracy.
Australia and Canada (and to some extent St. Christopher & Nevis) share
another feature: they are federal states
where the monarch has governors who carry out royal functions in the
sub-national units.
It is submitted that
fifteen realms (aside from the U.K) should establish their own forum to share experiences,
views and issues on matters of governance. In Canada, the governor general and
the provincial lieutenant governors meet annually for this purpose; the
governors of the Australian states meet periodically for the same reason. It would be advantageous for the governors
general of the realms to have similar gatherings as a means of professional
development. It would be similarly
useful for the vice-regal staffs at the various Government Houses across the
Commonwealth. To quote a recent thesis
from New Zealand,
Experiences with coups, recalcitrant ministries,
hung parliaments, unclear elections, and many of the other issues all Governors
General might face could be shared and exchanged. Institutional memory could be better
preserved, and national security, democratic stability, and popular respect
could all be enhanced through this resource.[24]
An association should not
limit itself to governors general. Given
that the Crown is an integral part of the governance structure (executive,
legislative and judicial), there is substantial benefit from regular contacts
and forums. Examples of topics are: the
role of the governor general in Parliament (reserve powers of dissolution,
prorogation and dismissal, giving Royal Assent); the role of the governor
general as commander-in-chief of the armed forces; the legal role and judicial
perceptions of the Crown; appointment of governors general; honours of the
Crown[25]; symbols and heraldry; visits of the Sovereign and
Royal Family; the Queen’s role for the realms abroad; inter-realm functions of the
Royal Household; and educating citizens about the Crown.
Such an association would
help clarify the role of the monarchy in the Commonwealth by distinguishing
between the Head of the Commonwealth and the Sovereign of the realms. It would strengthen the bonds between the realms,
contribute to good governance, and enhance the status of the Crown in the realms.
Recommendation:
That the Commonwealth establish a “Commonwealth Realms
Governance Forum” consisting of the fifteen non-UK realms, providing discussion,
best practices and education on governance issues in a shared constitutional monarchy.
Commonwealth
Fraternity: Civil Society Engagement
“The Commonwealth has
nothing to say about issues that matter most to the world. That is why people have nothing to say about
the Commonwealth.” Royal Commonwealth
Society member.
“It is hard to care about something you don’t know about.” Canadian student.
There is a lack of
recognition, public knowledge and support of the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth
lacks an international civil society engagement. The primary reasons for this is
an unclear communication of the form and function of the organization. With the
onset of NGOs with clear mandates, visions and “solutions” to global issues,
the Commonwealth civil society communication has been “lost” in the area of
public policy discussions. The Commonwealth needs reform at all levels: international
organization, civil engagement of the Royal Commonwealth Society (RCS) and
local RCS branches. Notwithstanding structural changes, a new approach is
required to engage the future supporters of the Commonwealth.
Youth Programming
The
RCS has been active in encouraging young people in the 12-30 age group for a
number of years. In an effort to help
steep them in the culture of the Commonwealth, RCS London and the other U.K.
Branches have been keen supporters of Commonwealth Essay contests for
youngsters for several consecutive decades in more than 50 countries. Many award winners have received full
scholarships to Harvard, Oxford and other internationally-recognized
universities. With entrants from all 12
Canadian branches, RCS Canada has been very active in these essay
contests. More recently, RCS London
introduced a more broadly-based youth competition in the areas of music,
painting, film and writing, culminating with an exciting awards banquet in
London.
RCS
Canada remains very active in awarding youth travel bursaries to qualified and
deserving candidates. For example, the
youth sections of the biennial CHOGMs, e.g., Trinidad and Tobago in 2009,
benefited from the bursaries. This
financial support also allowed young men and women to represent RCS Canada at
the International NKABOMs, held since 2002, in Malaysia, Ghana, U.K., Cyprus
and Rwanda.
RCS
Ottawa Branch, with financial aid from the Government of Canada, has been able
to provide an annual week-long opportunity for high school students from all
provinces and territories to assemble in Ottawa for the National Students
Commonwealth Forum (NSCF). The students study the Commonwealth country they
represent to participate in a model CHOGM.
They also meet high commissioners from at least a dozen countries, as
well as members of the House of Commons, the Senate and the judiciary.
RCS Australia Branches have young people as
the mainstay of Commonwealth Day ceremonies, as well as other varied contests
and awards for youth.
A clear message and mandate
of the Commonwealth should be the driving force of youth engagement. A prime example is The Commonwealth of Learning
(COL), well respected in youth engagement with the educational/informational
needs of the Commonwealth.
RCS Branches
The RCS branches must
“renew the ranks” and focus on professionals under sixty years of age. The
“white hair” club based on the nostalgic connection to “Commonwealth subjects”
is not applicable to a younger generation. The younger generations are driven
by social causes, clear values, solutions and results. One must ask why 16, 26 and 36-year-olds
would care about the Commonwealth, how would they “connect/communicate” and
what they could do to participate. This is the new generation of influence.
A renewed vision of
the Commonwealth will provide a clear conduit for communication and ideas
between Commonwealth governing bodies, RCS members and the public. This
requires a major reform on the communications systems (i.e. online
registration, twitter, facebook, smart phone “apps”, YouTube, video seminars),
promotions and activities engaging civil society. Based on the discussion of
organizational focus and mandate reform, there is a persuasive argument that
youth should take part in core Commonwealth activities based on a clear
mandate, such as election monitoring.
Recommendation:
That the Commonwealth, Royal Commonwealth
Society and associated organizations undertake a clear communications strategy,
youth programming and engagement of civil society based on a clear and focused
mandate of the international organization.
Conclusion
“Silence is not an
option.” Commonwealth Eminent Persons
Group.
The Commonwealth holds a
history of continuous renewal since 1949.[26] The first Commonwealth Review of 1963 noted the
Commonwealth was “a child of change” and its consistency in adapting itself to
meet new circumstances, while maintaining common values and objectives.[27] Two generations
later, Dr. Danny Sriskandarajah, Director of the Royal Commonwealth Society,
has again questioned the mandate, meaning and purpose of the modern
Commonwealth.[28]
The 2009 Commonwealth
Conversation states that the strength of the Commonwealth “is a web of informal
ties, shared experiences, language, business links, legal frameworks and
parliamentary systems” and that the Commonwealth needs to embrace these links
and change to today’s modes of operations.
The Royal Commonwealth
Society of Canada has collectively reviewed its cumulative history to provide
core recommendations to the Eminent Persons Group to reform the Commonwealth.
These recommendations are consistent with the core recommendations provided by
the 2010 Commonwealth Conversation.
Although the
recommendations are varied, there are common themes of reform.
The Commonwealth requires a
clear and focused mandate to streamline resources and provide a clear common
solution to members (and future members). Second, a clear mandate will change
the form and function of the organization. A clear mandate must be communicated
without confusion or ambiguity engaging members and media. Lastly, civil society
can connect to a clear mission supported by a dynamic and responsive
Secretariat.
We urge the Eminent Persons
Group not to be shy in recommending to Commonwealth leaders the necessity for
sweeping changes necessary to make the Commonwealth a world leading and
respected institution.
“At the end of the (Commonwealth)
Conversation we are more convinced than ever that
The Commonwealth has all
the ingredients to be a leading, influential and effective international
association of the 21st century.” - Commonwealth Conversation Summary
Recommendations.
