Global Community Earth  Government
Global Citizens Rights, Responsibility and  Accountability Act
Table of Contents Criteria to obtain the Global Community citizenship Scale of Human and Earth Rights Main Index of the Act
Global Law Activities of the Global Community Welcome to the Global Governments website The   Global Constitution  Main Index Global Dialogue 2006 Main Index Statement of rights, responsibilities, and accountabilities of the Global Community citizens

Global Citizens Rights, Responsibility and Accountability Act
by Germain Dufour
President
Global Community Earth Government (GCEG)
Politics and Justice without borders
GCEG’s commitment to the Global Community to make government and global citizens responsible and accountable
February 26, 2006



1.     Introduction
2.     Global Community
     2.1    Definition and global concepts    
     2.2    Establishment of global communities    
3.     Global politics
4.     Global Community Earth Government (GCEG)
5.     Global citizenship criteria
6.     Statement of rights, responsibilities, and accountabilities of the Global Community citizens
7.     Scale of Human and Earth Rights
8.     The Global Constitution
9.     Global citizens responsibility and accountability
9.1    Public accountability of autonomous public organizations
9.2    Ideas about accountability
9.3     Conflicts within components of accountability
9.4     Role of the Secretary of the Global Council
9.5     Recommendations to modernize the Secretary’s role, and reinforce the integrity of the centre
9.6     Responsibility, accountability and the role of Deputy Ministers in the GCEG
9.7     Ministerial responsibility and the Global Financial Administration Act: the constitutional obligation to account for GCEG spending
9.8     The fundamental principles underlying responsible global parliamentary government
9.9     The evolving nature of GCEG
9.10     Factors that have affected and altered the nature of government and governance in the world over the last 150 years
9.11     Political actors versus professional actors
9.12     The relationship between the exempt staff serving the President and the public servants
9.13     The interface between political actors and professional actors
9.14     The multiple responsibilities and accountabilities of Deputy Ministers
9.15     Mechanisms for political and professional financial accountability
9.16     The Global Parliament procedure and merits
9.17     The responsibilities of an accounting officer
9.18     The roles and accountabilities of Deputy Ministers/Accounting Officers
9.19     Ministerial responsibility and the Global Financial Administration Act: the Constitutional obligation to account for GCEG spending
9.20     Ministerial responsibility in GCEG
9.21     The constitutional basis of global ministerial responsibility
9.22     The statutory basis of financial accountability
9.23     Responsibility, accountability, liability
9.24     Recent statements on responsibility and accountability
9.25     Accountability of Deputy Ministers
9.26     Deputy Ministers’ direct accountability
9.27     Deputy Ministers’ indirect accountability
9.28     Conflict resulting from Deputy Ministers’ accountabilities
9.29     The problem known as “regulation within government”
9.30     Alternative patterns of governance and accountability
9.31     What might be the best model of policy administration?
9.32     Performance management
9.33     The Global Community interest

10.     More responsible actions to improve the system of government
10.1    List "A"
10.2    End the influence of money in global politics
10.3    Toughen the Lobbyists Registration Act
10.4    Ban secret donations to political candidates
10.5    Make qualified government appointments
10.6    Clean up government polling and advertising
10.7    Clean up the procurement of government contracts
10.8    Provide real protection for whistleblowers
10.9    Ensure truth in budgeting with a Global Parliamentary Budget Office
10.10    Strengthen the power of the Auditor General
10.11    Strengthen the role of the GCEG Ethics Commissioner
10.12    Strengthen Access to Information legislation
10.13    Strengthen auditing and accountability within departments
11.     Corporate global citizens responsibility and accountability
12.     Corporate global citizens ethics
13.     Preventive actions against polluters
14.     Business and trade responsibility and accountability: new way of doing business and trade for everyone





Introduction  ]



2.1    Definition and global concepts
Chapter 4     GCEG concepts and universal values
 ]
                Chapter 4.1     The Glass Bubble concepts of "a Global Community" and "the Global Community"
Article 1:    The Glass Bubble concepts
Article 2:    Definition of the Global Community
                Chapter 4.2     Universal Values
Article 1:    Social Universal Values are meant to bring together the billions of people around the world for the good of all humanity
                Chapter 4.3     Global Ethics
Article 2:    Global ethics must always be grounded in realities.
                Chapter 4.4     Global Sustainability
                                     Chapter 4.4.1     Definition and graphical representation of global sustainability
Article 1:    Definition of sustainable development.
                                     Chapter 4.4.2     Fulfilling the requirements of global sustainability
Article 1:    Essential elements of an adequate global sustainability
Article 2:    Scale of Good Practices
Article 3:    Implementing economic activity that can advance sustainability
Article 4:    Implementing various conservation strategies
Article 5:    Assessing using a combined social and economic accounting system
Article 6:    Creating tests for sustainability
Article 7:    Making forest management to include getting more value out of the wood
Article 8:    Requiring formal impact assessment for all major projects
                                     Chapter 4.4.3     Developing a scale of values and designing and testing quality indicators
Article 1:    Developing a scale of values and designing and testing quality indicators
                                     Chapter 4.4.4     The Global Community Overall Picture
Article 1:    The Global Community Overall Picture
Article 2:    Measurement of the Gross Sustainable Development Product (GSDP)
Article 3:    Valuation in terms of money accounts for some non-market values



2.2     The establishment of Global Communities
Chapter 5     The establishment of Global Communities
 ]
Article 1:    Principles
Article 2:    Birth right of Global Community citizens of electing representatives democratically
Article 3:    Complying with the "Belief, Values, Principles and Aspirations of the Global Community and Earth Government"
Article 4:    Formation of global communities
Article 5:    Portal of the Global Community
Article 6:    Portal of the Global Community of North America
Article 7:    Portal of other global communities



4.0     Global Community Earth Government (GCEG)
What GCEG represents, its "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations"
 ]



5.0     Criteria to obtain the Global Community Citizenship

Chapter 6     Earth Government Global Community Citizenship
 ]
Article 1:    Global Community citizenship of Earth Government
Article 2:    Global Community Citizenship
Article 3:    Who can have a Global Community Citizenship?
                Chapter 6.2     Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship
Article 1:    Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship
                Chapter 6.3     Statement of rights, responsibilities and accountabilities of Global Community citizens
                                    Chapter 6.3.1     Statement
Article 1:    Statement of Rights, Responsibilities and Accountabilities of a Person, 'a Global Community' and 'the Global Community'
Article 2:    The Statement includes rights, responsibilities and accountabilities
                                     Chapter 6.3.2     Rights, responsibilities and accountabilities
Article 1:     Proper governance of Earth
Article 2:     The quality of Earth governance
Article 3:     The most fundamental community right
Article 4:     Justice is without borders
Article 5:     State governments keep their status and privileges
Article 6:     Vision of Earth Government
Article 7:     Earth governance is a balance
Article 8:     The rights of states to self-determination in the global context
Article 9:     The principle of non-intervention in domestic affairs
Article 10:     Global co-operation
Article 11:     Good Earth management
Article 12:     The spiritual belief, universal values, principles and aspirations of Earth Government
Article 13:     Human and Earth Rights


7.     Scale of Human and Earth Rights
Chapter 10     Scale of Human and Earth Rights
 ]
Article 1:    Decision-making process subjected to Earth Government "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations" and to the Scale of Human and Earth Rights
Article 2:    Field of application of Earth Government law
Article 3:    Scope and interpretation of rights and principles
Article 4:    Level of protection
Article 5:    Prohibition of abuse of rights
Article 6:    Fundamental rights
Article 7:    To change the ways of doing things, and our ways of doing business, of Global Community citizens
                Chapter 10.2     Change our ways of doing things, and our ways of doing business, as per the Scale of Human and Earth Rights
Article 1:    The new way of doing things and business on the planet
Article 2:    The Scale is the primary guide for the decision-making process
Article 3:    Scale of Human and Earth Rights
               Chapter 10.3     Section  1.    Ecological rights and the protection of the global life-support systems
Article 1:    It is a crime against humanity and all life on Earth not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol
Article 2:    Related aspects of the global life-support systems
Article 3:    Fresh water and clean air are primordial human rights
Article 4:    The global economy does not crush and destroy local economies
Article 5:    Ecological Integrity
Article 6:    Technologies which must be eliminated and prohibited because of hazards and dangers to life
Article 7:    Everyone has the right to life
Article 8:    Conservation of natural resources
Article 9:    The rights that the Global Community has in protecting the global life-support systems
Article 10:    To build a sustainable global community
Article 11:    Every individual, family, organization, and community has a vital role to play
                Chapter 10.4     Section  2.    Primordial human rights
                                     Chapter 10.4.1     Primordial human rights
Article 1:    Primordial human rights
Article 2:    Primordial human rights and ecological rights are the most important rights on the Scale
Article 3:    A global strategy to reinforce primordial human rights
Article 4:    Security cannot be achieved through the military
Article 5:    The production and trade in arms should be listed as a criminal act against humanity
Article 6:    We propose a world population of 500 million people
Article 7:    Policies to control our population growth
Article 8:    Policies to decrease world population
                                     Chapter 10.4.2     Respect and Care for the Community of Life
Article 1:    Respect and Care for the Community of Life
                                     Chapter 10.4.3     Human Dignity
Article 1:    Human dignity
Article 2:    Right to life
Article 3:    Right to the integrity of the person
Article 4:    Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
Article 5:    Prohibition of slavery and forced labour
                                     Chapter 10.4.4     Freedoms
Article 1:    Right to liberty and security
Article 2:    Respect for private and family life
Article 3:    Protection of personal data
Article 4:    Right to marry and right to found a family
Article 5:    Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
Article 6:    Freedom of expression and information
Article 7:    Freedom of assembly and of association
Article 8:    Freedom of the arts and sciences
Article 9:    Right to education
Article 10:    Freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work
Article 11:    Freedom to conduct a business
Article 12:    Right to property
Article 13:    Right to asylum Article 14:    Protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition
                                     Chapter 10.4.5     Equality
Article 1:    Equality before the law
Article 2:    Non-discrimination
Article 3:    Cultural, religious and linguistic diversity
Article 4:    Equality between men and women
Article 5:    The rights of the child
Article 6:    The rights of the elderly
Article 7:    Integration of persons with disabilities
                                     Chapter 10.4.6     Solidarity
Article 1:    Workers' right to information and consultation within the undertaking
Article 2:    Right of collective bargaining and action
Article 3:    Right of access to placement services
Article 4:    Protection in the event of unjustified dismissal
Article 5:    Fair and just working conditions
Article 6:    Prohibition of child labour and protection of young people at work
Article 7:    Family and professional life
Article 8:    Social security and social assistance
Article 9:    Health care
Article 10:    Access to services of general economic interest
Article 11:    Environmental protection
Article 12:    Consumer protection
                                     Chapter 10.4.7     Universal health care, education, retirement security and employment services to every Global Community citizen
Article 1:    Universal services
                                     Chapter 10.4.8     The immediate formation of the Earth Ministry of Health
Article 1:    The immediate formation of the Earth Ministry of Health
                                     Chapter 10.4.9     Legal rights
Article 1: Everyone has the right to security of person
Article 2: No one shall be held in slavery
Article 3: No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
Article 4: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile
Article 5:  Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence
Article 6: Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution
Article 7: Well-being
               Chapter 10.5     Section  3.    The ecological rights, the protection of the global life-support systems and the primordial human rights of future generations
Article 1:    All rights of Sections 1 and 2 apply to future generations
Article 2:    Earth Government protects rights of future generations
               Chapter 10.6     Section  4.    Community rights, rights of direct democracy, the right that the greatest number of people has by virtue of its number (50% plus one) and after voting representatives democratically
                                     Chapter 10.6.1     Rights of Global Community citizens
Article 1:      Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at elections to the Global Parliament
Article 2:    Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal elections
Article 3:    Right to good administration
Article 4:    Right of access to documents
Article 5:    Global Ombudsperson
Article 6:    Right to petition
Article 7:    Freedom of movement and of residence
Article 8:    Diplomatic and consular protection
                                    Chapter 10.6.2     Justice
Article 1:    Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial
Article 2:    Presumption of innocence and right of defence
Article 3:    Principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties
Article 4:    Right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence
Article 5:    A sense of belonging given to the Global Community
Article 6:       Directive Principles for Global Community citizens
                                    Chapter 10.6.3     Rights of direct democracy
Article 1:    Rights of direct democracy
               Chapter 10.7     Section  5.    Economic (business and consumer rights, and their responsibilities and accountabilities) and social rights (civil and political rights)
                                    Chapter 10.7.1     Economic (business and consumer rights, and their responsibilities and accountabilities)
Article 1:     A democratically planned global economy is needed to eradicate poverty in the world
Article 2:     Corporations that they take responsibility on behalf of society
Article 3:     The quality of Earth governance is reflected in each local community worldwide
Article 4:     To make a business even better
Article 5:       Scientists, tehnologists, technicians, engineers and all professionals to find sound solutions to human needs
Article 6:       Science has a responsibility for the well-being of humanity
Article 7:      Science, technology and engineering are major forces of socio-economic change
Article 8:      Public funding should be directed towards very specific research projects related to the life-support system of the planet
Article 9:       Science, technology and engineering to state ethical responsibilties and become a voice to present and future generations
Article 10:     Prohibiting all acts, research projects, technology development, which do not conform to the ideas of humanity
Article 11:       A set of rules to balance consumption, consumer rights and responsibilities
Article 12:     Democracy is not to be enforced by anyone and to anyone or to any global community
Article 13:    The role of families has impacts on sustainable consumption and development
Article 14:    Universal quality of life values which lead to 'human betterment' or the improvement of the human condition
Article 15:     Trade laws to facilitate cross border transactions
Article 16:     Social justice is a universal value
                                     Chapter 10.7.2     Social rights (civil and political rights)
Article 1:     Social justice
Article 2:      Socially responsible use of science and technology
Article 3:      Civil and social rights and freedoms
Article 4:     Democratic rights, and equality rights
                Chapter 10.8     Section  6.    Cultural and religious rights
Article 1:    Cultural and religious differences can promote human and Earth rights 
Article 2:    Encouragement for cultural diversity
Article 3:    Freedom for peaceful self-determination for minorities, refugees and dissenters
Article 4:    Freedom to profess, practice and promote religious or religious beliefs or no religion or religious belief
Article 5:    Fundamental freedoms, and language rights
Article 6:    Right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community
Article 7:    Freedom of thought and conscience
Article 8:    A crime against the natural world is a sin
Article 9:    The special responsibility that falls to all Global Community citizens
Article 10:    God's sacred Earth is the moral assignment of our time
Article 11:    Ecological Affirmations of Faith
Article 12:    Eco-justice



Back to top of page


Introduction


The peoples of all Nations, in creating an ever closer Earth Government among them, are resolved to share a peaceful future based on common values. Conscious of its spiritual and moral heritage, Earth Government is founded on the indivisible, universal values of human dignity, freedom, equality and solidarity; it is based on the principles of democracy and the rule of law. It places the individual at the heart of its activities, by establishing the Global Community citizenship of Earth Government and by creating an era of freedom, security and justice.

Earth Government contributes to the preservation and to the development of these common values while respecting the diversity of the cultures and traditions of the peoples of all Nations as well as the national identities of Member Nations and the organisation of their public authorities at national, regional and local levels; it seeks to promote balanced and sustainable development and ensures free movement of persons, goods, services and capital, and the freedom of establishment. To this end, it is necessary to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights in the light of changes in society, social progress and scientific and technological developments by making those rights more visible in this Constitution.

The Global Constitution reaffirms, with due regard for the powers and tasks of Earth Government and the principle of subsidiarity, the rights as they result, in particular, from the constitutional traditions and international obligations common to Member Nations, the Scale of Social Values, or Scale of Human and Earth Rights, adopted by Earth Government and by the Global Council of all Nations and the case law of the Earth Court of Justice of Earth Government and of the Global Court of Human and Earth Rights. Enjoyment of these rights entails responsibilities and duties with regard to other persons, to the human community and to future generations. Earth Government therefore recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out hereafter.

We the Peoples of the Global Community are reaffirming faith in the fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and smalll. We the Peoples implies every individual on Earth. Earth management and good governance is now a priority and a duty of every responsible person on Earth. The Global Community has taken action by calling the Divine Will into our lives and following its guidance. Divine Will is now a part of the Soul of Humanity to be used for the higher purpose of good and Life's evolution. We will learn to serve humanity and radiate the Will of God to others. We will establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and we promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.

The spiritual belief, universal values, principles and aspirations of the Global Community will be attained by:

*     practicing tolerance and living together in peace and harmony with one another as neighbours,
*     promoting the economic and social advancement of all peoples,
*     maintaining peace and security in the world by using negotiations and peaceful means,
*     finding unity in diversity with all Life,
*     establishing the respect for the life-support system of the planet,
*     keeping Earth healthy, productive and hospitable for all people and living things, and
*     applying the principle that when there is a need to find a solution to a problem or a concern, a sound solution would be to choose a measure or conduct an action, if possible, which causes reversible damage as opposed to a measure or an action causing an irreversible loss.

Realizing that:

*    the Global Community today has come to a turning point in history, and that we are on the threshold of new global order leading to an era of peace, prosperity, justice and harmony;

*    there is an interdependence of people, nations and all life;

*    humanity's abuse of science and technology has brought the Global Community to the brink of disaster through the production of weaponry of mass destruction and to the brink of ecological and social catastrophe;

*    the traditional concept of security through military defense is a total illusion both for the present and for future generations;

*    misery and conflicts has caused an ever increasing disparity between rich and poor;

*    we, as Peoples, are conscious of our obligation to posterity to save the Global Community from imminent and total annihilation;

*    the Global Community is One despite the existence of diverse nations, races, creeds, ideologies and cultures,

*    the principle of unity in diversity is the basis for a new age when war shall be outlawed and peace prevail; when the earth's total resources shall be equitably used for human welfare; and when basic human and Earth rights, responsibilities and accountabilities shall be shared by all without discrimination; and

*    the greatest hope for the survival of life on Earth is the establishment of a democratic Earth Government.

We, citizens of the Global Community, hereby resolve to establish a federation of all nations, Earth Government, to govern in accordance with this Global Constitution.

The purposes of Earth Government for the Global Community are to:

1.     maintain international peace and security in conformity with the principles of justice and global law;

2.     promote friendly relations among nations, individuals and communities based on:

*     respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of Peoples; and

*     symbiotical relationships;

3.     promote global co-operation to:

*     find sound solutions to economic, social, cultural, humanitarian, local and global community problems; and

*     establish respect for human and Earth rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.


4.     be a home and a global community centre to all nations, people and local communities and help them harmonize their actions to achieve their common goals.

5.     promote worldwide awareness of:

a)     the "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations" of Earth Government, which constitute the Preamble and Chapter 1 to Chapter 10 inclusive;
b)     global symbiotical relationships amongst people, institutions, cities, provinces and nations of the world, and between Earth Government and all nations, and in the business sector, which constitute Chapters 20.24 and 23.3.2;
c)     global societal sustainability, which constitutes Chapter 4.4 of this Constitution;
d)     good Earth governance and management, which constitute Chapter 6.3.2 of this Constitution;
e)     the Scale of Human and Earth Rights, which constitutes Chapter 10 of this Constitution;
f)     the Statement of Rights, Responsibilities and Accountabilities of a Person and of the Global Community, which constitutes Chapter 6.3 of this Constitution;
g)     the Criteria to obtain the Global Community Citizenship, which constitutes Chapters 6.1 and 6.2 of this Constitution;
h)     consistency between the different policies and activities of Earth Government, which constitutes Chapter 15 of this Constitution; and
i)     a global market without borders in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capitals is ensured in accordance with this Constitution, which constitutes Chapter 16 of this Constitution;
j)     the new ways of doing business in the world, which constitutes Chapters 16 and 17;
k)     the Celebration of Life Day on May 26 of each year, which constitutes Chapter 20.7 of this Constitution;
l)     the finding of an Earth flag, which constitutes Chapter 20.8 of this Constitution;
m)     the ECO Award, which constitutes Chapter 20.9 of this Constitution;
n)     the Portal of the Global Community, which constitutes Chapter 20.10 of this Constitution; and
o)     the concept of a Global Dialogue, which constitutes Chapter 20.11 of this Constitution.

Earth Government shall reinforce humanity's new vision of the world throughout the millennium.



Vision of the  Global  Community in year 2024


Humanity's new vision of the world is about seeing human activities on the planet through:

a)     the Scale of Human and Earth Rights;

b)     the Statement of Rights, Responsibilities and Accountabilities of a person and the Global Community; and

c)     building global symbiotical relationships between people, institutions, cities, provinces and nations of the world.


For the first time in human history, and the first time this millennium, humanity has proposed a benchmark:

*     formation of global ministries in all important aspects of our lives
*     getting ride of corruption at all levels of government
*     the establishment of Global Police to fight against the growing threat to the security of all Peoples, and to fight against global crimes
*     the Scale of Human and Earth Rights as a replacement to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
*     Statement of Rights, Responsibilities and Accountabilities of a person belonging to 'a global community' and to 'the Global Community'
*     an evolved global democracy based on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the Global Constitution
*     a central organization for Earth management, the restoration of the planet and Earth governance: the Global Community Assessment Centre (GCAC)
*     the Earth Court of Justice to deal with all aspects of governance and management of the Earth
*     a new impetus given to the way of doing business and trade
*     more new, diversified (geographical, economical, political, social, business, religious) symbiotical relationships between nations, communities, businesses, for the good and well-being of all
*     proposal to reform the United Nations, NATO, World Trade Organization, World Bank, IMF, E.U., NAFTA, FTAA, and to centralize them under Earth Government, and these organizations will be asked to pay a global tax to be administered by Earth Government
*     the Peace Movement of the Global Community and shelving of the war industry from humanity
*     a global regulatory framework for capitals and corporations that emphasizes global corporate ethics, corporate social responsibility, protection of human and Earth rights, the environment, community and family aspects, safe working conditions, fair wages and sustainable consumption aspects
*     the ruling by the Earth Court of Justice of the abolishment of the debt of the poor or developing nations as it is really a form of global tax to be paid annually by the rich or industrialized nations to the developing nations
*     establishing freshwater and clean air as primordial human rights
















Back to top of page




Chapter I     What Earth Government represents, its "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations"
The Preamble and Chapter 1 to Chapter 10 inclusive reflect the "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations" of Earth Government.
Article 1:    Establishment of Earth Government
1.     Reflecting the will of the Global Community citizens and all Nations to build a common future, this Global Constitution establishes Earth Government, on which Member Nations confer competences to attain objectives they have in common. Earth Government shall coordinate the policies by which Member Nations aim to achieve these objectives.
2.     Earth Government shall be open to all Member Nations which respect its values and are committed to promoting them together.


3.     Earth Government was first thought out by the Founding Members of the Global Community.
The Global Community organization was first discussed in a report on global changes published in 1990 by Germain Dufour. The report contained 450 policies (workable sound solutions) on sustainable development, and was presented to the United Nations, the Government of Canada, the provincial government of Alberta and several non-profit organizations and scientists. Historically, the Earth Community Organization (ECO) was called the Global Community organization. The name was changed during the August 2000 Global Dialogue. Thereafter, we used both names as meaning the same organization. The Global Community means the Earth Community Organization and vice versa. The idea of organizing an international conference and calling it a Global Dialogue first originated in 1990 and was thought out by the Global Community also making its first beginning. From that year on, Global Community WebNet Ltd. has operated its business under the name of the Global Community and is still doing now. The business owns copyrights on all materials produced during every Global Dialogue since 1990.

All Participants of Global Dialogue 2000, the World Congress on Managing and Measuring Sustainable Development - Global Community Action 1 have been given a lifetime membership of the Global Community organization.

This is the founding group of the Global Community organization, Earth Community Organization, Global Community Earth Government, the Global Dialogue concept, and the global community concepts and universal values. Along with the new Participants to Global Dialogue 2005, this is also the founding group of this Global Constitution. The list of all Founding Members was shown in Chapter XXVII.
4.     Throughout this Global Constitution, the expressions 'Earth Government', 'Global Community Earth Government' and 'GCEG' were used to mean the same organization. These expressions represent the same entity and legal personality and, therefore, were used interchangeably.

Article 2:    Earth Government's values
Earth Government is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, liberty, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human and Earth rights. These values are common to Member Nations in a society of pluralism, tolerance, justice, solidarity and non-discrimination. These values along with the "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations" of Earth Government, are meant to give global citizens a sense of direction.
Article 3:    Earth Government's objectives
1.     Earth Government's aim is to:
1.1     promote peace, its values and the well-being of its Peoples;
1.2     protect the global life-support systems by:

*     good governance and management
*     governing keeping in mind:
a)     the Scale of Human and Earth Rights;
b)     the Statement of Rights, Responsibilities and Accountabilities of a person and of the Global Community;
c)     the criteria to obtain the Global Community citizenship; and
d)     primordial human and Earth rights of Global Community citizens;

2.     Earth Government shall offer its Global Community citizens freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, and a single market for trade where competition is free and undistorted.
3.     Earth Government shall work for the global sustainability of all Nations based on balanced economic growth, a social market economy, highly competitive and aiming at full employment and social progress, and with a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment. It shall promote scientific and technological advance. It shall combat social exclusion and discrimination, and shall promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of children's rights. It shall promote economic, social and territorial cohesion, and solidarity among Member Nations. Earth Government shall respect its rich cultural and linguistic diversity, and shall ensure that global s cultural heritage is safeguarded and enhanced.
4.     In its relations with the Global Community, Earth Government shall uphold and promote its values and interests. It shall contribute to peace, security, the sustainability of the Global Community, solidarity and mutual respect among Peoples, free and fair trade, eradication of poverty and protection of human rights and in particular children's rights, as well as to strict observance and development of global law of this Global Constitution.
5.     These objectives shall be pursued by appropriate means, depending on the extent to which the relevant competences are attributed to the Earth Government in this Global Constitution.
Article 4:    Fundamental freedoms and non-discrimination
1.     Free movement of persons, goods, services and capital, and freedom of establishment shall be guaranteed within and by Earth Government, in accordance with the provisions of this Global Constitution.
2.     In the field of application of the Constitution, and without prejudice to any of its specific provisions, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited.
Article 5:    Symbiotical relationships between Earth Government and Member Nations
1.     Earth Government shall respect the national identities of Member Nations, inherent in their fundamental structures, political and constitutional, inclusive of regional and local self-government. It shall respect their essential Nation functions, including those for ensuring the territorial integrity of the Nation, and for maintaining law and order and safeguarding internal security.
2.     Following the principle of loyal cooperation, Earth Government and Member Nations shall, in full mutual respect, assist each other in carrying out tasks which flow from this Global Constitution. Member Nations shall facilitate the achievement of Earth Government's tasks and refrain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives set out in this Constitution.
3.     Earth Government shall seek to establish symbiotical relationships with Member Nations.
Article 6:     Legal personality of Earth Government, Global Community Earth Government, GCEG
Earth Government, Global Community Earth Government, and GCEG shall have legal personality. These expressions represent the same entity and legal personality and, therefore, were used interchangeably. They are being expressed throughout this Constitution, and by the Global Community.



Back to top of page




Chapter IV     Global Community concepts and universal values
Chapter 4.1     The Glass Bubble concepts of "a Global Community" and "the Global Community"
Article 1:    The Glass Bubble concepts
The Glass Bubble concept was designed to illustrate the concepts of 'a global community' and "the Global Community". It is an imaginary space enclosed in a glass bubble. Inside this is everything a person can see: above to the clouds, below into the waters of a lake or in the earth, to the horizons in front, in back, and on the sides. Every creature, every plant, every person, every structure that is visible to him(her) is part of this "global community."

Look up, look down, to the right, to the left, in front and behind you. Imagine all this space is inside a giant clear glass bubble. This is "a global community."

Wherever you go, you are inside a "global community". Every thing, every living creature there, interacts one upon the other. Influences inter-weave and are responsible for causes and effects. Worlds within worlds orbiting in and out of one another's space, having their being.

Your presence has influence on everything else inside your immediate global community. To interact knowledgeably within one's global community has to be learned. All life forms interact and depend upon other life forms for survival. Ignorance of nature's law causes such damage, and working in harmony with nature produces such good results.

Your presence has influence on everything else inside your immediate global community.

Learn to be aware of that and act accordingly, to create good or destroy, to help or to hurt. Your choice.

Now let us explore this Global Community that we have visited and discover why each member is important ~ each bird, each tree, each little animal, each insect, plant and human being ~ and how all work together to create a good place to live.

You walk like a giant in this Global Community. To all the tiny members you are so big, so powerful, even scary…

You can make or break their world. But by knowing their needs, and taking care, you can help your whole Global Community be a good one.

From the experience in your life and local community tell us:

*    Why are you important to this "Global Community"?
*    Why is it important to you?
*    What do you like about it?
*    What bothers you about it?
*    Anything need to be done?
*    What is really good there?
*     What is very very important?
*     What is not so important?
*     What is not good?
*     What is needed to keep the good things?
*     What could make them even better?
*     What could you do to keep the good things good?
*     Could they help get rid of bad things?
*     What unimportant things need to go?
*     How could you help get rid of these things?

to sustain the Global Community, humanity and all life.

Let each child be aware he either grows up to be a person who helps or a person who destroys.
Each child makes his own choice. He creates his own future in this way. He becomes a responsible citizen.

This may or may not inspire some sort of creative project of what "could be" to aid this Global Community to remain healthy.

To interact knowledgeably within one's global community has to be taught ~ especially to urban children. It has to be brought to them very clearly all life forms interact and depend upon other life forms for survival. They need to know "reasons why" ignorance of nature's law causes such damage, and why working in harmony with nature produces such good results.

The concept of the Glass Bubble can be extended to include the planet Earth and all the "global communities" contained therein.
Article 2:    Definition of the Global Community

the Global Community: order and hope within chaos
-    we are now, and we are the future   -

The following definition of the Global Community is appropriate:

"The Global Community is defined as being all that exits or occurs at any location at any time between the Ozone layer above and the core of the planet below."

Article 2:    The Global Community concept and the Global Governments Federation
The Global Community concept is an important concept and particularly useful in the context of the Global Governments Federation. A community is not about a piece of land you acquired by force or otherwise. One could think of a typical community of a million people that does not have to be bounded by a geographical or political border. It can be a million people living in many different locations all over the world. The Global Community is thus more fluid and dynamic. We need to let go the archaic ways of seeing a community as the street where I live and contained by a border. Many conflicts and wars will be avoided by seeing ourselves as people with a heart, a mind and a Soul, and as part of a community with the same. The Global Community is this great, wide, wonderful world made of all these diverse global communities.

To become a member of the Global Community you can be:

*     a person
*     a global community
*     an institution
*     a town, city or province
*     a state or a nation
*     a business
*     an NGO
*     a group of people who decided to unite for the better of everyone participating in the relationship
*     an international organization

Any of these groups can formed together a global symbiotical relationship.

A global symbiotical relationship between two or more nations, or between two or more global communities, can have trade as the major aspect of the relationship or it can have as many other aspects as agreed by the people involved. The fundamental criteria is that a relationship is created for the good of all groups participating in the relationship and for the good of humanity, all life on Earth. The relationship allows a global equitable and peaceful development.

This is the basic concept that is allowing us to group Member Nations from different parts of the world. For example, the Global Government of North America can be made of willing Member Nations such as Canada, the United States, Mexico, Great britain, Israel, the Territories, and include the North Pole region (Politics and Justice without borders: Global Government of North America
).

The old concept of a community being the street where we live in and surrounded by a definite geographical and political boundary has originated during the Roman Empire period. An entire new system of values was then created to make things work for the Roman Empire. Humanity has lived with this concept over two thousand years. Peoples from all over the world are ready to kill anyone challenging their border. They say that this is their land, their property, their 'things'. This archaic concept is endangering humanity and its survival. The Roman Empire has gone but its culture is still affecting us today. Other world government models use the old concept as a basis for development. They are obviously wrong. The Earth Federation is an example of a world government model using the old concept We need to let go the old way of thinking. We need to learn of the new concept, and how it can make things work in the world. Soon humanity will be populated with 10 billion human beings. We are people, not a piece of land. Earth does not belong to anyone. Land does not belong to anyone. It never did and never will. We can only say we manage the land we live on. The old world government models aim at forcing people to live in a specific (magna) region. That is wrong!

Our young people today share their thoughts and feelings with their 'virtual friends' half way around the globe. No border or 'magna region' is big enough to hold them back. Already they have a sense of what it takes to live in a group, to think alike. The seeds of global co-operation are in healthy grounds. From the poorest of them to the richest is created a unique bound, a symbiotical relationship.

Chapter 4.2     Universal Values
Article 1:    Social Universal Values are meant to bring together the billions of people around the world for the good of all humanity
Social Universal Values are meant to bring together the billions of people around the world for the good of all humanity. These values are the common grounds to start a new global dialogue. East and West talking; capitalism and communism, all different political and social philosophies and structures reaching to one another, compromising, changing, letting go old ways that dont work, creating new ways that do, and finding what is very important to ensure a sound future for Earth. All peoples on Earth will now join forces to bring forth a sustainable global society embracing universal values related to human and Earth rights, economic and social justice, respect of nature, peace, responsibility to one another, and the protection and management of the Earth. Everyone shares responsibility for the present and future well-being of life within the Global Community.

The following universal values are now an integral part of Earth Government.
a.     Working together to keep our planet healthy, productive and hospitable for all people and living things. This requires quality symbiotical relationships and responsibility to one-self and others, and dealing wisely with consumption, work, finances, health, resources, community living, family, life purpose, wildlife and the Earth.
b.     We are committed to be responsible to ourselves and to one another, and to sustaining Earth. The key is personal responsibility and accountability. Therefore the individual is the important element, one who takes responsibility for his/her community. As previously defined, an 'individual' here may either be a person, a corporation, a NGO, a local community, a group of people, organizations, businesses, a nation, or a government.
c.     Apply a wellness approach in dealing with physical well-being. There is a multitude of influences shaping family life and its well-being. Wellness is a concept related to physical well-being. It is a new health paradigm replacing the old model of doctors, drugs, and treating symptoms. Spiritual well-being deals with mental, emotional and spiritual as well as physical health. Instead of blaming the doctor for an illness and expecting insurance companies and government to pick up the health care tab, a wellness approach places personal responsibility as part of the solution.
d.     All cultures and nations value the family as an important social unit. The family is the basic social unit of the Global Community.
e.     The Global Community is becoming pluralistic. Recognition and respect of this pluralism is a necessity for the survival of mankind. The history of humanity has always been that of an increasingly more complex interrelationship between its members. Clans to tribes, to nations, to empires, and to today's economic and political alliances. Societies have become global and communications have made us all 'neighbours'. Massive migrations within and among countries have contributed to increasing contacts between human beings of different origins, religions, ideologies, and moral-value systems.
f.     Earth Government recognizes that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. Freedom is both a principle and a value. It is because human beings are free that they are subject of law and are creators and holders of rights. Freedom and human rights are therefore basic to each other. Equality and freedom are therefore accepted and enshrined as universal values by which Earth Government shall govern its affairs. As universal values they are concerned with our ability to decide, to choose values and to participate in the making of laws, and they are dependent on the recognition of other people. These values forbid any form of discrimination on the grounds of race, nationality, sex, religion, age or mother tongue. By accepting both values of freedom and equality we can achieve justice. One can be answerable for one's actions in a 'just' way only if judgements are given in the framework of democratically established laws and courts. Social justice is another universal value to which Earth Government aspires and accepts as a universal value. Social justice consists in sharing wealth with a view to greater equality and the equal recognition of each individual's merits. Human and Earth rights and democracy are closely intertwined. Respect for human and Earth rights and fundamental freedoms is one of the characteristics of a democracy. The typical fundamental freedoms of a democracy (freedom of expression, thought, assembly, and association) are themselves part of human and Earth rights. These freedoms can exist everywhere.
g.     An adequate level of health care is a universal value as well as a human right. We expect adequate universal health services to be accessible, affordable, compassionate and socially acceptable. Earth Government is proposing that every individual of a society is co-responsible for helping in implementing and managing health programmes along with the government and the public institutions.
h.     There are universal quality of life values which lead to "human betterment" or the improvement of the human condition. In addition to the value of species survival (human and other living organisms), they include: adequate resources, justice and equality, freedom, and peace or balance of power. A better quality of life for all people of the Global Community is a goal for all of us and one of our universal values.
i.     For a community to be sustainable there has to be a general social and economical well-being throughout the community. Health is the basic building block of this well-being. Health is a complex state involving mental, emotional, physical, spiritual, social and economical well-being. Health promotion generates living and working conditions that are safe, stimulating, satisfying and enjoyable. To reach a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, a community must be able to identify and to realize aspirations, to satisfy needs, and to change with the environment. The overall guiding principle for the community is the need to encourage reciprocal maintenance, to take care of each other and the environment. The important part of the thinking in both community health and ecological sustainability is the need to find a sense of community as a crucial aspect of a healthy individual development.
j.     The Global Constitution is a declaration by every human being to the commitment of responsibility to themselves and to one another, and to sustaining Earth. The key is participation in the sustainable development process, personal responsibility and accountability. Therefore the individual is the important element, one who takes responsibility for his/her community. As previously defined, an 'individual' here may either be a person, a corporation, a NGO, a local community, a group of people, organizations, businesses, a nation, or a government. We are all working together to keep our planet healthy, productive and hospitable for all people and living things. This requires quality symbiotical relationships and responsibility to one-self and others, and dealing wisely with consumption, work, finances, health, resources, community living, family, life purpose, wildlife and the Earth. We are also all accountable to others about our actions and the things we do throughout our lives.
k.     The Global Constitution is an acceptance and commitment about peace, freedom, social and economic well-being, ecological protection, global ethics and spiritual values; it also recognizes the interactions between aspects included in the major quality systems such as: economic, environmental, social, and the availability of resources.
l.     Responsibility and accountability are universal values. Every individual on Earth is responsible and accountable for their action(s).

Chapter 4.3     Global Ethics
Article 1:    Global ethics must always be grounded in realities.

1.     As a business you may:

a)     be a corporate Knight
b)     be a socially responsible investor
c)     have taken the challenge of a more integrated approach to corporate responsibility by placing environmental and community-based objectives and measures onto the decision-making table alongside with the strategic business planning and operational factors that impact your bottom-line results
d)    provide not only competitive return to your shareholders but you also operate your business in light of environmental and social contributions, and you have understood the interdependence between financial performance, environmental performance and commitment to the community
e)     have taken a full life-cycle approach to integrate and balance environmental and economic decisions for major projects
f)     have an active Environmental, Health and Safety Committee and integrated codes of conduct, policies, standards and operating procedures to reflect your corporate responsibility management
g)     have scored high on categories such as:

* environmental performance
* product safety
* business practices
* help small business in the least developed countries
* commitment to the community
* abolition of child labour
* eliminate discrimination in respect of employment and occupation
* employee relations and diversity
* effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining
* corporate governance
* share performance
* global corporate responsibility
* against corruption in all its forms, including extortion and bribery
* health, safety and security
Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship (CCGCC)

* provided help to combat diseases such as AIDS
* uphold the freedom of association
* audits and inspections
* emergency preparedness
* corporate global ethical values
* ensured decent working conditions
* implemented no-bribe policies
* standards of honesty, integrity and ethical behaviour
* elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labour
* in line with the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the Charter of Global Community
h)     support a balance and responsible approach that promotes action on the issue of climate change as well as all other issues related to the global life-support systems:

* global warming
* Ozone layer
* wastes of all kind including nuclear and release of radiation
* climate change
* species of the fauna and flora becoming extinct
* losses of forest cover and of biological diversity
* the capacity for photosynthesis
* the water cycle
* food production systems
* genetic resources
* chemicals produced for human use and not found in nature and, eventually, reaching the environment with impacts on Earth's waters, soils, air, and ecology


Now is time to reach a higher level of protection to life on Earth. We all need this for the survival of our species. We can help you integrate and balance global life-support systems protection, global community participation, and economic decisions into your operations and products. We want to help you be an active corporate member of the Global Community. Apply to us to be a global corporate citizen of the Global Community. A Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship is a unique way to show the world that your ways of doing business are best for the Global Community.

You can obtain the citizenship after accepting the Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship and following an assessment of your business. The process shown here is now standardized to all applicants. You are then asked to operate your business as per the values of the citizenship.

The Global Community proposes to corporations that they take responsibility on behalf of society and people, and that they should pay more attention to human and Earth rights, working conditions and getting ride of corruption in the world of business and trade. We have developed a criteria, and we ask you to turn it into practice. Governments should encourage enterprises to use the criteria both by legal and moral means. At first, the criteria should be adopted in key areas such as procurement, facilities management, investment management, and human resources. Corporations want to be seen as good corporate leaders and have a stronger form of accountability. Business and trade will prosper after stronger common bonds and values have been established. Adopting the criteria will have a beneficial impact on future returns, and share price performance. Sign-up to obtain your Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship (CCGCC) to show the world your ways of doing business are best for the Global Community. Obtaining the CCGCC shall help businesses to be part of the solution to the challenges of globalisation. In this way, the private sector in partnership with the civil society can help realize a vision: allowing a global equitable and peaceful development and a more stable and inclusive global economy.

2.     Earth Government found a way of dealing with globalization: global ethics. In the past, corporations ruled without checks and balances. Now, global ethics will be a basic minimum to do business, and there will be checks and balances. Our judgement will be based on global ethics. Global ethics must always be grounded in realities. But realities are changing constantly and are different in different places. We live in a world that makes progress toward democracy. Ethics and morality exist only when human beings can act freely. In our free society, rights are tied to responsibilities. Corporations are committed to improvement in business performance and want to be seen as 'good corporate citizens' on a local and a global scale. Corporations have social responsibilities as they are an integral part of society. Global ethics recalls that those realities, on which others build upon, have to be protected first. Earth Government has found that universal values and human rights as described above were the foundation of global ethics.
3.     The Global Community has now at hand the method and framework to conduct societal checks and balances of a global sustainable development. A more balance world economy will result of annual checks and balances. Corporations will take their social responsibilities and become involved in designing, monitoring, and implementing these checks and balances. Several corporations have already done so. Results will be taken into account in the evaluation of sustainable development. Corporations are required to expand their responsibilities to include human rights, the environment, community and family aspects, safe working conditions, fair wages and sustainable consumption aspects.

Glass Bubble concept of a global community

Every Global Community citizen is part of the solution to the challenges of globalisation. In this way, the private sector in partnership with the civil society can help realize a common vision: allowing a global equitable and peaceful development and a more stable and inclusive global economy.


Chapter 4.4     Global Sustainability
Chapter 4.4.1     Definition and graphical representation of global sustainability
Article 1:    Definition of sustainable development.

The technical definition being "a sound balance among the interactions of the impacts (positive and/or negative), or stresses, on the four major quality systems: People, Economic Development, Environment and Availability of Resources," and

The none-technical definition being "a sound balance among the interactions designed to create a healthy economic growth, preserve environmental quality, make a wise use of our resources, and enhance social benefits."

When there is a need to find a solution to a problem or a concern, a sound solution would be to choose a measure or conduct an action, if possible, which causes reversible damage as opposed to a measure or an action causing an irreversible loss. Earth Government can help you to realize your actions by coordinating efforts efficiently together.

The following graphics was designed to illustrate the meaning of sustainable development and other global concepts. It is the basis for understanding:
 

a)   the Global Community concepts
b)    that Earth is a spiritual Being, a part of the Soul of Humanity
c)    interactions between the four major quality systems (small circles, not to scale) shown here
d)   that the ecosystem and life-support system of the planet (the large circle around the planet) are much more important for all of humanity and other lifeforms
e)    the reason for developing and implementing the Scale of Human and Earth Rights
f)    the search of sound solutions and therefore a sound balance amongst interactions
g)    the measurement and evaluation of the impact equation
h)    the development and use of indicators and indices
i)   the reason for creating Earth Government
j)    Earth management and good governance

Chapter 4.4.2     Fulfilling the requirements of global sustainability

Article 1:    Essential elements of an adequate global sustainability
We will fulfill the requirements for a global sustainable development by using essential elements of an adequate urban and rural development:

a)     suitable community facilities and services;
b)     decent housing and health care;
c)     personal security from crime;
d)     educational and cultural opportunities;
e)     family stability;
f)     efficient and safe transportation;
g)     land planning;
h)     an atmosphere of social justice;
i)     aesthetic satisfaction;
j)     responsive government subject to community participation in decision-making;
k)     energy conservation and energy efficiency are part of the decision-making process and made part of the community design;
l)     the application of the 4 Rs is integrated in the community design;
m)     community businesses, working areas, play areas, social and cultural areas, education areas, and training areas;
n)     the use of renewable energy sources, central heating where possible, and cogeneration of electricity are made part of the community design when possible;
o)     the form of community development integrates concepts such as cooperation, trust, interdependence, stewardship, and mutual responsibility;
p)     promote self-sufficiency in all areas such as energy, garbage, food and sewage disposal; and
q)     rely on locally-produced goods.

Article 2:    Scale of Good Practices
A Scale of Good Practices is developed with respect to the Scale of Human and Earth Rights, and it is developed not only from what it means to fulfill the requirements of a global sustainable development but also from the perspective of keeping us all healthy and sustaining Earth to make it happen. Health is created and lived by people within a global community: where they work, learn, play, and love. Health is a complex state involving mental, emotional, physical, spiritual, economical and social well-being. Each community can develop its own ideas of what a healthy community is by looking at its own situation, and finding its own solutions. Health promotion generates living and working conditions that are safe, stimulating, satisfying and enjoyable. To reach a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, a community must be able to identify and to realize aspirations, to satisfy needs, and to change with the environment. The overall guiding principle for the global community is the need to encourage reciprocal maintenance, to take care of each other and the environment. The important part of the thinking in both community health and ecological sustainability is the need to find a sense of global community as a crucial aspect of healthy individual development.

Article 3:    Implementing economic activity that can advance sustainability
We will fulfill the requirements for a global sustainable development by implementing economic activity that can advance sustainability by:

a)     reducing per capita consumption of energy and resources;
b)     reducing energy and resource content per unit of output;
c)     reducing waste discharges per unit of output and in total;
d)     decreasing wastage of natural resources during harvesting and processing, thus increasing the amount put to productive use.

Article 4:    Implementing various conservation strategies
We will fulfill the requirements for a global sustainable development by implementing various conservation strategies such as:

a)     the maintenance of ecological succession, soil regeneration and protection, the recycling of nutrients and the cleansing of air and water;
b)     the preservation of biological diversity, which forms the basis of life on Earth and assures our foods, many medicines and industrial products;
c)     the sustainable use of ecosystems and species such as fish, wildlife, forests, agricultural soils and grazing lands so that harvests do not exceed rates of regeneration required to meet future needs;
d)     the use of non-renewable resources in a manner that will lead to an economy that is sustainable in the long term. This will require the development of renewable substitutes;
e)     the reduction in soil erosion by changing farming practices.

Article 5:    Assessing using a combined social and economic accounting system
We will fulfill the requirements for a global sustainable development by developing a combined social and economic accounting system that covers not only the conventional economic indicators (GDP, GNP, etc.) but also such matters as soil depletion, forest degeneration, the costs of restoring a damaged environment and the effects of economic activity on health.

Article 6:    Creating tests for sustainability
We will fulfill the requirements for a global sustainable development by creating tests for sustainability:

a)     the amount of arable land and forest that is being lost;
b)     the amount of silt in rivers coming from eroded farm fields;
c)     the loss of large numbers and even whole species of wildlife;
d)     the positive and negative impact of process and products on health;
e)     the impact of development on the stock of non-renewable resources such as oil, gas, metals and minerals;
f)     the impact of waste products;
g)     the ability of new proposals to implement cleaner and more resource-efficient techniques and technologies.
Article 7:    Making forest management to include getting more value out of the wood
We will fulfill the requirements for a global sustainable development by being committed to make forest management to include getting more value out of the wood. This means wasting less of the trees that are cut and making better use of what are now considered non-commercial tree speices.
Article 8:    Requiring formal impact assessment for all major projects
We will fulfill the requirements for a global sustainable development by requiring formal Impact Assessment for all major projects so as to predict the sustainability of these developments and determine whether impacts can be mitigated.

Chapter 4.4.3     Developing a scale of values and designing and testing quality indicators
Article 1:    Developing a scale of values and designing and testing quality indicators
Developing a scale of values and designing and testing quality indicators is the most important task. The Gross Environmental Sustainable Development Index (GESDI) is quantitatively describing quality indicators rather than merely measuring different variables. GESDI includes all possible aspects, all physical, biological, health, social and cultural components which routinely influences the lives of individuals and communities. If we are to achieve effective evaluation of quality, comprehensive data are needed about the status and changes of the variables. Optimally, these data may be organized in terms of indices that in some fashion aggregate relevant data. These indices are in turn used to predict the impact of public and private actions, assess conditions and trends, and determine the effectiveness of programs in all areas. For instance, reliable data are needed to evaluate the effects of human activities on the environment and to determine what possible actions that can be done to ameliorate the adverse effects. The quality of urban environment constitutes a major test of the level of the well-being of a nation as a society. Essential elements of an adequate urban environment include the following parts:

* Health care system, * Educational system, * Seniors'care, * Food chain, nutrition, * Population growth, * Farming communities, * Parks, * Psychological, biological, genetics and evolution, * Spiritual pathways, * Entertainment, * Quality of life, customs and beliefs, information access, communication, aesthetics * Decent housing, suitable community services, * Pollution, waste, * An atmosphere of social justice, * Family stability, * Religion, * Infrastructures and facilities, land planning, * Juvenile crimes, gangs, drugs, illiteracy, * Socio-cultural and political influences, multi-culturalism, laws, * Anthropological, Aboriginals, Natives issues.

Knowing what are the important elements of a global sustainable development allows us to structure indicators into major areas such as demographic data; the economic data of the individual, family, and household; the status of the region's economy; housing, community facilities, and aesthetic quality; social quality.

An other indicator was developed to measure the costs of development: the Gross Sustainable Development Product (GSDP). The GSDP is defined as the total value of production within a region over a specified period of time. It is measured using market prices for goods and services transactions in the economy. The GSDP is designed to replace the Gross Development Product (GDP) as the primary indicator of the economic performance of a nation.

The GSDP takes into accounts:

a)     the economic impacts of environmental and health degradation or improvement, resource depletion or findings of new stocks, and depreciation or appreciation of stocks;
b)     the impact of people activity on the environment, the availability of resources, and economic development;
c)     the "quality" of the four major quality systems and the impacts of changes in these systems on national income and wealth;
d)     global concerns and their impacts on the economy;
e)     the welfare, economic development and quality of life of future generations;
f)     expenditures on pollution abatement and clean-ups, people health, floods, vehicle accidents, and on any negative impact costs;
g)     the status of each resource and the stocks and productive capacities of exploited populations and ecosystems, and make sure that those capacities are sustained and replenished after use; and
h)     the depreciation or appreciation of natural assets, the depletion and degradation of natural resources and the environment, ecological processes and biological diversity, the costs of rectifying unmitigated environmental damage, the values of natural resources, capital stocks, the impacts of degradation or improvement, social costs, health costs, environmental clean-up costs, and the costs of the environment, economic growth, and resources uses to current and future generations and to a nation’s income.

Chapter 4.4.4     The Global Community Overall Picture
Article 1:    The Global Community Overall Picture

Within each Global Ministry there is a section about the 'Global Community Overall Picture' which describes the situation in all nations of the world and we divided the world in different regions: North America, Central America and the Caribbean, South America, Africa, Europe, Asia, South-East Asia, Middle-East, and Oceania. Each global ministry has a description of what is happening in the different regions. There are actual facts about what is happening in the world about all issues we have discussed during global dialogues in years 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2005. Issues of future global dialogues are also included in this project. Our work is too create a plausible scenario(s) of what the world is now and what it could be between now and a not-so-distant future. Hundreds of indicators were designed to assess the world situation in all aspects. Some of the very important aspects were listed here. The measurements of the GESDI and the GSDP take into account all aspects.
Land and nations
Water and nations
Clean air and nations
Food supplies
Our overpopulated planet
Status of primordial human rights
Status of community and social rights
Status of cultural rights
Status of religious rights
Status of civil and political rights
Status of business and consumer rights
Article 2:    Measurement of the Gross Sustainable Development Product (GSDP)
The measurement of GSDP shows that consumption levels can be maintained without depleting and depreciating the quality and quantity of services. It indicates the solutions to the problems as well as the directions to take, such as:
a)     invest in technology, R & D, to increase the end-use efficiency;
b)     increase productivity;
c)     modify social, educational programs and services;
d)     slow down or increase economic growth;
e)     remediate components of the four major quality systems; and
f)     rectify present shortcomings of income and wealth accounts.
The measurement of GSDP also gives a proper and sound signal to the public, government and industry about the rate and direction of economic growth; it identifies environmental, health, and social quality; it identifies sustainable and unsustainable levels of resource and environmental uses; it measures the success or failure of sustainable development policies and practices; and it identifies resource scarcity. Values obtained enable us to make meaningful comparisons of sustainable development between cities, provinces, nations over the entire planet.

A status report of all physical accounts show the physical state and availability of resources and the state of the environment. Examples of the physical stock accounts are:

• minerals    • oil, gas and coal    • forests     • wildlife    • agricultural    • soils    • fish    • protected wilderness areas    • flow rate of water

Article 3:    Valuation in terms of money accounts for some non-market values
Valuation in terms of money accounts is difficult for some non-market values such as:

* aesthetic satisfaction     * air quality     * water quality     * soil carrying capacity and productivity     * acid rain deposition     * biodiversity     * wilderness and protected areas     * land productivity

GESDI can be obtained for these quality indicators that are difficult to give a money value to. Both the GESDI and GSDP are measured together and tell us about the quality and cost of development, locally and globally.

Measurements of GESDI and GSDP provide insights for the discussion of issues such as :

a)     Is the actual rate of development too slow or too fast?
b)     Are People aspects being stressed too far?
c)     Are resources and the environment managed in a sustainable manner?
d)     What forms of community and home designs promote sustainability?
e)     In what ways should social, educational, and health programs and services be modified?
f)     Is this generation leaving to the future generation a world that is at least as diverse and productive as the one it inherited?
g)     What improvements can be brought up to the quality of development?


Back to top of page




Chapter V     The establishment of Global Communities
Article 1:    Principles
The Global Community and its membership, in pursuit of the Purposes stated earlier in the Preamble, shall conduct actions in accordance with the following Principles:

1.     The Global Community shall establish local communities of one million people each for a total of about 7,000 elected representatives throughout the world; the number of representatives will change according to the change in Earth's population; the election of representatives shall follow a democratic process properly supervised;

2.     The Global Community is based on the principle of the equality of all its elected, nominated or appointed representatives;

3.     All Members shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Constitution;

4.     International disputes shall be resolved peacefully with no threat to international peace, security and justice;

5.     International relations shall refrain from using threat or force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any national government;

6.     The Global Community shall not intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any national government;

7.     The use of armed forces against any national government is prohibited. When there is a need to find a solution to a problem or a concern, a sound solution would be to choose a measure or conduct an action, if possible, which causes reversible damage as opposed to a measure or an action causing an irreversible loss. This Principle applies to all disputes and conflicts.

8.     The Scale of Human and Earth Rights shall be used as guiding light for the decision-making process; and

9.     The Statement of Rights, Rersponsibilities and Accountabilities of a Person and of the Global Community shall also be used as a guiding light for the decision-making process.

Article 2:    Birth right of Global Community citizens of electing representatives democratically

Everyone is part of the Global Community by birth and therefore everyone has a right to vote. It is our birth right of electing a democratic government to manage Earth: the rights to vote and elect our representatives. Everyone should be given a chance to vote. Decisions will be made democratically.
Article 3:    Complying with the "Belief, Values, Principles and Aspirations of the Global Community and Earth Government".
Every member shall uphold the Global Constitution and comply with these "Belief, Values, Principles and Aspirations of the Global Community and Earth Government". The Preamble and Chapters 1 to 10 of this Constitution describe these "Belief, Values, Principles and Aspirations of the Global Community and Earth Government"

1.     Membership in the Global Community is open to any person (group, NGO, state, businesses, city, Member Nation, or any global citizen) which accept the obligations contained in the present Constitution and are able and willing to carry out these obligations.

2.     The admission of any such global community to membership in the Global Community will be effected by a decision of the Earth Executive Council.

Article 4:    Formation of global communities

Article 5:    Portal of the Global Community
Global Community Earth Government Main Index of the Global Community Portal of the Global Community
Earth Governance and Management
Global Sustainability

The information gateway empowering the movement for the protection of the
global life-support systems
Global life-support systems

Portal of the Global Community of North America Portal of the Global Community of North America


The original and best Global Community portal - with search engine, links to sites and news, press releases, letters, reports, action alert, educational and training programs, scientific evaluations, business assesments and support, workshops and global dialogues and more!


Article 6:    Portal of the Global Community of North America Portal of the Global Community of North America
Welcome to the Portal of the Global Community of North America
Global  Government  of  North  America ] Global Governments  Federation ] Global  Community  Earth  Government ] Activities of the Global Community ] Portal of the Global Community ] Global Constitution ] Global Exhibition ] People participation ] Citizenship ]

Welcome to the Portal of the Global Community of North America. Portal of the Global Community of North America
This is the Portal for all Citizens of the North American Community. Let us build up our Community. Get involve with issues. Promote a program or a project. Tell us what you think. Tell us what you want.

Article 7:    Portal of other global communities
We invite all Nations of the world to participate in the development of global communities everywhere.
Back to top of page




Chapter VI     Earth Government Global Community Citizenship
Chapter 6.1     Criteria for becoming Global Community citizens
Article 1:    Global Community citizenship of Earth Government
1.     Every national of a Member Nation shall be a global citizen of Earth Government. Global Community citizenship of Earth Government shall be additional to national citizenship; it shall not replace it.
2.     Global Community citizens of Earth Government shall enjoy the rights and be subject to the duties provided for in this Global Constitution. They shall have:
a)    the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member Nations;
b)    the right to vote and to stand as candidates in elections to the Global Parliament and in municipal elections in their Member Nation of residence, under the same conditions as nationals of that Nation; and
c)    the right to enjoy, in the territory of a third country in which Member Nation of which they are nationals is not represented, the protection of the diplomatic and consular authorities of any Member Nation on the same conditions as the nationals of that Nation;
d)    the right to petition Global Parliament , to apply to the global Ombudspersons, and to address the Institutions and Advisory Bodies of Earth Government in any of the Constitution's languages and to obtain a reply in the same language.
3.     These rights shall be exercised in accordance with the conditions and limits defined by this Constitution and by the measures adopted to give it effect.
Article 2:    Global Community Citizenship
All peoples on Earth have been wondering what will it take to create and obtain a global community citizenship that is based on fundamental principles and values of the Global Community. Now is time to enact your dream! It is time because humanity has no time to waste as we have done in the past. It is time to be what we are meant to become to save us and all life along with us. It is time to be citizens of the Earth. It is time to gather our forces and to stand for our global values, the only humane values that can save humanity and life on the planet from extinction.
Article 3:    Who can have a Global Community Citizenship?


You may be eligible to become a citizen of the Global Community. To become a citizen of the Global Community you may be a person and a person may be:
*     a global community,
*     an institution,
*     a town, city or province,
*     a national government,
*     a business,
*     an NGO,
*     a group of people who decided to unite for the better of everyone participating in the relationship,
*     an international organization, or
*     a Member Nation.
The Global Community Citizenship is given to anyone who accepts the Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship as a way of life. It is time now to take the oath of global community citizenship. We all belong to this greater whole, the Earth, the only known place in the universe we can call our home.
Chapter 6.2     Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship
Article 1:    Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship
To obtain the Global Community Citizenship, you are required to comply with the "Belief, Values, Principles and Aspirations of the Global Community and Earth Government" as described in the Preamble and in Chapters 1 to 7 inclusive of this Constitution. Before you make your decision, we are asking you to read very carefully the Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship, make sure you understand every part of the criteria, and then make the oath of belonging to the Global Community, the human family, Earth Community and Earth Government. You do not need to let go the citizenship you already have. No! You can still be a citizen of any nation on Earth. The nation you belong to can be called 'a global community'. But you are a better human being as you belong also to the Global Community, and you have now higher values to live a life, to sustain yourself and all life on the planet. You have become a person with a heart, a mind and Soul of the same as that of the Global Community.
1.     Acceptance of the Statement of Rights, Responsibilities and Accountabilities of a Person, 'a Global Community' and 'the Global Community'.
We need to take this stand for the survival of our species.
2.     Acceptance of the concept of 'a global community'.
The concept of 'a global community' is part of the Glass Bubble concept of a global community. The concept was first researched and developed by the Global Community.
3.     Acceptance of the Scale of Human and Earth Rights.
To determine rights requires an understanding of needs and reponsibilities and their importance. The Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the Global Constitution were researched and developed by the Global Community to guide us in continuing this process. The Scale shows social values in order of importance and so will help us understand the rights and responsibilities of global communities.
4.     Acceptance of the Global Constitution.
The Global Constitution is a declaration of interdependence and responsibility and an urgent call to build a global symbiotical relationship between nations for sustainable development. It is a commitment to Life and its evolution to bring humanity to God. The Global Community has focused people aspirations toward a unique goal: humanity survival now and in the future along with all Life on Earth.
5.     Acceptance of your birth right of electing a democratic government to manage Earth.
The political system of an individual country does not have to be a democracy. Political rights of a country belong to that country alone. Democracy is not to be enforced by anyone and to anyone or to any global community. Every global community can and should choose the political system of their choice with the understanding of the importance of such a right on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. On the other hand, representatives to Earth Government must be elected democratically in every part of the world. An individual country may have any political system at home but the government of that country will have to ensure (and allow verification by Earth Government) that representatives to Earth Government have been elected democratically. This way, every person in the world can claim the birth right of electing a democratic government to manage Earth: the rights to vote and elect representatives to form Earth Government.
6.     Acceptance of the Earth Court of Justice as the highest Court on Earth.
The Global Community is promoting the settling of disputes between nations through the process of the Earth Court of Justice. Justice withour borders! The Earth Court of Justice will hear cases involving crimes related to the global ministries. It will have the power to rule on cases involving crimes related to each one of the ministries.


6.     Statement of rights, responsibilities, and accountabilities of the Global Community citizens
Chapter 6.3     Statement of rights, responsibilities and accountabilities of Global Community citizens
(see webpage
http://globalcommunitywebnet.com/global06/statement.htm for more info on Statement)
Chapter 6.3.1     Statement
Article 1:    Statement of Rights, Responsibilities and Accountabilities of a Person, 'a Global Community' and 'the Global Community'
Ever since the early 1990s, the Global Community has researched and developed the concept of 'a global community'. It has since been made a part of the foundation of the Global Community and is thought as the way of life of the future. The concept is also in the statement of rights, responsibilities and accountabilities of a person belonging to 'a global community' and to 'the Global Community', the human family.
That is, the statement is about to take a stand:
a)     I am not just a woman, I am a person, I am citizen of a global community,
b)     I am not just a man, I am a person, I am citizen of a global community,
c)     We are responsible, accountable and equal persons in every way, and we will manage wisely our population and Earth, and
d)     We are citizens of the Global Community, the Earth Community, the human family.
We need to take this stand for the survival of our species.
Article 2:    The Statement includes rights, responsibilities and accountabilities
A)   Rights, responsibilities and accountabilities of a person in ' a global community '
B)   Rights, responsibilities and accountabilities of a person in ' the Global Community '
C)   Rights, responsibilities and accountabilities of ' a global community '
D)   Rights, responsibilities and accountabilities of ' the Global Community '

The Statement of Rights, Responsibilities and Accountabilities of a Person, 'a Global Community' and 'the Global Community', the human family, was not, at first, meant to replace the Universal Declaration of Human and Earth Rights developed by the Global Community. But the Declaration becomes redundant. Only the statement was necessary. Even the Universal Declaration of Human Rights becomes redundant here. The introduction of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been a great step in humanity's evolution to better itself. But now is time to leave it behind and reach to our next step, that is a social scale of values, the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights causes confusion in the world between nations. The reason why it causes confusion is that it needs to be improved. A lot! The West cannot understand many of the things that other nations do and other nations do not understand the West Way of Life. Why? Because the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not so universal after all. And because it does not have a scale of social values.

Certainly a more concise description of the rights, responsibilities and accountabilities of a person and of 'a global community' and that of 'the Global Community' is required at this time. Each person of 'the Global Community' is important, and we all work together to create a good place to live. Now is time to assign rights, responsibilities and accountabilities to global communities. What rights, responsibilities and accountabilities should be assigned to 'a global community' and to the Global Community? What rights, responsibilities and accountabilities to assign to a person in global communities?

The statement of rights of a person and of the Global Community can be integrated into our lives by taking a stand on values. The Global Community is asking all nations to adopt and entrench this statement into your way of life and State Constitution. Make it acceptable to your society. Educate children of it.

It is understood that whenever a person is given a right or a responsibility then 'a global community' and 'the Global Community' give the right or responsiblity to that person. Similarly, whenever a right or a responsibility is given to 'a global community' or to 'the Global Community' then the rights, responsibilities and accountabilities of a person are readjusted accordingly.


Chapter 6.3.2     Rights, responsibilities and accountabilities
Article 1:     Proper governance of Earth
Proper governance of Earth is the most importance function of the Global Community and Earth Government. We define Earth governance as the traditions and institutions by which authority in a country is exercised for the common good. This includes:

(i)     the process by which those in authority are selected, monitored and replaced,
(ii)     the capacity of the government to effectively manage its resources and implement sound policies with respect to the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the belief, values, principles and aspirations of the Global Community,
(iii)     the respect of citizens and the state for the institutions that govern economic, environment, Earth resources, and social interactions among them,
(iv)     the freedom of global citizens to find new ways for the common good, and
(v)     the acceptance of responsibility and accountability for our ways.


Article 2:     The quality of Earth governance
The quality of Earth governance is reflected in each local community worldwide. Earth Government shall show leadership by creating a global civil ethic within the Global Community. The Global Constitution describes all values needed for good global governance: mutual respect, tolerance, respect for life, justice for all everywhere, integrity, and caring. The Scale of Human and Earth Rights has become an inner truth and the benchmark of the millennium in how everyone sees all values. The Scale encompasses the right of all people to:

a)     the preservation of ethnicity,
b)     equitable treatment, including gender equity,
c)     security,
d)     protection against corruption and the military,
e)     earn a fair living, have shelter and provide for their own welfare and that of their family,
f)     peace and stability,
g)     universal value systems,
h)     participation in governance at all levels,
i)     access the Earth Court of Justice for redress of gross injustices, and
j)     equal access to information

Article 3:     The most fundamental community right
The Global Constitution is itself a statement for the fundamental rights of all Global Community citizens, ensuring the rights of minorities, one vote per million people from each state government. When member nations vote during any meeting they are given the right of one vote per million people in their individual country. That is the most fundamental community right, the right of the greatest number of people, 50% plus one, and that is the 'new democracy' of Earth Government.
Article 4:     Justice is without borders
Governance of the Earth will make the rule of arbitrary power--economic (WTO, FTA, NAFTA, EU), monetary (IMF, WB) political, or military (NATO)-- subjected to the rule of global law within Earth Government. Justice is for everyone and is everywhere, a universal constant. Justice is without borders.
Article 5:     State governments keep their status and privileges
Earth Government has no intention of changing the status and privileges of state governments. In fact, state governments become primary members of the Earth Government. Global governance can only be effective within the framework of a world government or world federalism. There is no such thing as good global governance through the work of a few international organizations such as the WTO, the EU, or NATO. Earth governance does not imply a lost of state sovereignty and territorial integrity. A nation government exists within the framework of an effective Earth Government protecting common global values and humanity heritage. Earth governance gives a new meaning to the notions of territoriality, and non-intervention in a state way of life, and it is about protecting the cultural heritage of a state. Diversity of cultural and ethnic groups is an important aspect of Earth governance.
Article 6:     Vision of Earth Government
Earth Government allows people to take control of their own lives. Earth Government was built from a grassroots process with a vision for humanity that is challenging every person on Earth as well as nation governments. Earth Government has a vision of the people working together building a new civilization including a healthy and rewarding future for the next generations. Global cooperation brings people together for a common future for the good of all.
Article 7:     Earth governance is a balance
Earth governance is a balance between the rights of states with rights of people, and the interests of nations with the interests of the Global Community, the human family, the global civil society.
Article 8:     The rights of states to self-determination in the global context
Earth governance is about the rights of states to self-determination in the global context of Earth Government rather than the traditional context of a world of separate states.
Article 9:     The principle of non-intervention in domestic affairs
Although Earth Government ensures state governments that it will obey the principle of non-intervention in domestic affairs, it will also stand for the rights and interests of the people within individual states in which the security of people is extensively endangered. A global consensus to that effect will be agreed upon by all nation states.
Article 10:     Global co-operation
Effective Earth governance requires a greater understanding of what it means to live in a more crowded, interdependent humanity with finite resources and more pollution threatening the global life-support systems. The Global Community has no other choice but to work together at all levels. The collective power is needed to create a better world.
Article 11:     Good Earth management
We the Peoples of the Global Community are reaffirming faith in the fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and smalll. We the Peoples implies every individual on Earth. Earth management is now a priority and a duty of every responsible person on Earth. The Global Community has taken action by calling the Divine Will into our lives and following its guidance. Divine Will is now a part of the Soul of Humanity to be used for the higher purpose of good and Life's evolution. We will learn to serve humanity and radiate the Will of God to others. We will establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and we promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.
Article 12:     The spiritual belief, universal values, principles and aspirations of Earth Government
The spiritual belief, universal values, principles and aspirations of Earth Government will be attained by:
a)     practicing tolerance and living together in peace and harmony with one another as neighbours,
b)     promoting the economic and social advancement of all peoples,
c)     maintaining peace and security in the world by using negotiations and peaceful means,
d)     finding unity in diversity with all Life,
e)     establishing the respect for the life-support system of the planet,
f)     creating activities guided by the Soul of Humanity,
g)     keeping Earth healthy, productive and hospitable for all people and living things, and
h)     applying the principle that when there is a need to find a solution to a problem or a concern, a sound solution would be to choose a measure or conduct an action, if possible, which causes reversible damage as opposed to a measure or an action causing an irreversible loss.
i)     The Global Constitution is a declaration of interdependence and responsibility and an urgent call to build a global symbiotical relationship for sustainable development. It is a commitment to Life and its evolution to bring humanity to God. Earth Government has focused people aspirations toward a unique goal: humanity survival now and in the future along with all Life on Earth.
j)     The "Belief, Values, Principles and Aspirations of Earth Government" described in of this Constitution are closely interrelated. Together they provide a conception of sustainable development and set forth fundamental guidelines for achieving it; they were drawn from international law, science, philosophy, and religion. k)     The goal of sustainable development is full human development and ecological protection. The Constitution recognizes that humanity's environmental, economic, social, cultural, ethical, spiritual problems and aspirations are interconnected. It affirms the need for holistic thinking and collaborative, integrated problem solving. Sustainable development requires such an approach. It is about freedom, justice, participation, and peace as well as environmental protection and economic well-being.
l)     The Divine Will was drawn to humanity and is now a part of the Soul of Humanity. The goals of the Divine Will are to enable each one of us to create the higher purpose of humanity, evolve spiritually, serve the greater plan of humanity and evolution of all Life. As never before in history, common destiny beckons us to seek a new beginning. Such renewal is the promise of these "Belief, Values, Principles and Aspirations of Earth Government". To fulfill this promise, we must commit ourselves to adopt and promote the values and objectives of this Constitution. This requires a change of mind and heart. It requires a new sense of global interdependence and universal responsibility. We must imaginatively develop and apply the vision of a sustainable way of life locally, nationally, regionally, and globally. Our cultural diversity is a precious heritage and different cultures will find their own distinctive ways to realize the vision. We must deepen and expand the global dialogue that generated this Constitution, for we have much to learn from the ongoing collaborative search for truth and wisdom.
m)     Life often involves tensions between important values. This can mean difficult choices. However, we must find ways to harmonize diversity with unity, the exercise of freedom with the common good, short-term objectives with long-term goals. Every individual, family, organization, and community has a vital role to play. The arts, sciences, religions, educational institutions, media, businesses, nongovernmental organizations, and governments are all called to offer creative leadership. The cooperation of government, global civil society, and business is essential for effective governance.
n)     In order to build a sustainable global community, each individual, each local community, and national governments of the world must initiate their commitment to Earth Government, fulfill their obligations under existing international agreements, and support the implementation of this Constitution principles with an international legally binding instrument on environment and development.
o)     Let ours be a time remembered for the awakening of a new reverence for Life, the firm resolve to achieve sustainability, the quickening of the struggle for justice and peace, and the joyful celebration of life. Our expanding consciousness will blend with that of the Soul of Humanity.
p)     Humanity welcomes the "Belief, Values, Principles and Aspirations of Earth Government" with Faith in the Divine Will and without fears such as the fear of change. Humanity seeks meaningfull experiences and embraces the future for the better. Divine Will brings forth a sustainable global society embracing universal values related to human rights, economic and social justice, respect of nature, peace, responsibility to one another, and the protection and management of the Earth. Everyone on Earth shares responsibility for the present and future well-being of Life within Earth Government.

Article 13:     Human and Earth Rights
It is understood that whenever a person is given a right or a responsibility then 'a global community' and 'the Global Community' give the right or responsiblity to that person. Similarly, whenever a right or a responsibility is given to 'a global community' or to 'the Global Community' then the rights and responsiblities of a person are readjusted accordingly.

Priliminary list of human and Earth rights:
1.     A member of a global community has the right to life.
2.     A member of a global community has the right to security of person.
3.     No one shall be held in slavery.
4.     No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
5.     No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
6.     A member of a global community has the right to freedom of movement and residence.
7.     A member of a global community has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.

8. Family aspects
(1)     A member of a global community has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2)     Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
(3)     Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(4)     Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(5)     The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
9.     Freedom aspect
A member of a global community has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
10.     Social duties
(1)     A member of a global community has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2)     In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, a member of a global community shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
11.     A member of a global community has the right to a nationality.
12.     Property ownership
(1)     A member of a global community has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2)     No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
13.     A member of a global community has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
14.     A member of a global community has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
15.     A member of a global community has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
16.     A member of a global community, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the Global Community and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
17.     Employment
(1)     A member of a global community has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2)     A member of a global community, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3)     A member of a global community who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4)     A member of a global community has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
18.     A member of a global community has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.
19.     Education
(1)     A member of a global community has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2)     Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
(3)     Education is one of the most effective catalysts for change. Society should undertake to educate the people of today to change their ways and the younger generations to have respect for nature. In forest regions, the young people should receive knowledge about the biological, social and economic values of forests. Environmental conservation should be conferred as much importance as math, physics and history in school curricula. Workers should be taught to use technology to enhance forest ecosystems instead of destroying them and for reforestation and afforestation projects. Human ideologies require modification. Anthropocentrism needs to give way to ecocentrism as the dominant view of the world. If humans are able to see themselves as part of nature, they will also respect forests as living communities, not just resources to be exploited. Perhaps forests need to be perceived as a non-renewable resource.
20.     A member of a global community has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the Global Community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
21.     A member of a global community is entitled of:
1.     conscience and religion
2.     thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communications
3.     peaceful assembly association
22.     A member of a global community is entitled of democratic rights:
1.     right to vote
2.     maximum duration and sitting of legislative bodies
23.     A member of a global community is entitled of mobility rights:
1.     the right to move to and live in any province
2.     the right to pursue a livelihood in any province
24.     A member of a global community is entitled of legal rights:
(1)     life, liberty, and security of the person
(2)     security against unreasonable search and seizure
(3)     no arbitrary detention or imprisonment
(4)     be informed promptly for the reasons for any arrest or detention
(5)     retain and instruct counsel on arrest
(6)     trial within a reasonable time by an impartial tribunal
(7)     the presumption of innocence
(8)     no self-incrimination
(9)     no cruel and unusual punishment
(10)     the right to a court-appointed interpreter
25.     A member of a global community is entitled of equality rights:
1.     equal treatment before and under the law
2.     equal benefit and protection of the law without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability
26.     A member of a global community is entitled of language rights:
1.     the official languages
2.     minority language education rights in certain circumstances
27.     The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
28.    No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
29.     A member of a global community is entitled to a social and international order.
30.     Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the Global Community for the maintenance of peace.
31.     Earth Government also believes that the Earth Court of Justice is the only higher Court to decide about global problems and their solutions, to discriminate and to prosecute on the basis of the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and on the basis of the "Belief, Values, Principles and Aspirations of Earth Government".
32.    Earth Government found that an adequate level of health care is a universal value as well as a human right. We expect adequate health services to be accessible, affordable, compassionate and socially acceptable. We believe that every individual of a society is co-responsible for helping in implementing and managing health programmes along with the government and the public institutions.
33.    Earth Government calls upon all nations and global communities to publicize the text of the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories.
34.    Earth Government recognizes the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family as the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world, Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings and everyone should enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people.
35.     Human and Earth rights should be protected by the rule of law.
36.     Earth Government proclaims the Scale of Human and Earth Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every global community, every organ of society, keeping this Scale constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of global communities themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.
37.     All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
38.     Legal rights
Every member of a global community has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
(1)    Every member of a global community is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
(2)     Every member of a global community charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(3)     No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
(4)     No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Every member of a global community has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
39.     Every member of a global community has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
40.     Every member of a global community has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
41.     Every member of a global community has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
42.     No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
43. Cultural rights
(1)     Every member of a global community has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2)     Every member of a global community has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
44.     Every member of a global community is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms can be fully realized.
45.     The Earth Court of Justice will hear cases involving crimes related to the global ministries. It will have the power to rule on cases involving crimes related to each one of the ministries.
46.     It is a crime against humanity and all life on Earth not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. It is a terrible crime against the global life-support systems, against the very existence of the next generations. On the Scale of Human and Earth Rights the crime is of maximum importance.
47.     Prosecuting criminals on the basis of universal jurisdiction regardless of a territorial or nationality nexus required a solid commitment of political will from national governments and the Global Community. Once in effect, the Earth Court of Justice will become the principal judicial organ of Earth Government. The Court will have a dual role: to settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted to it by national governments, local communities, and in some special cases by corporations, non-government-organizations and citizens, and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized organs and agencies.
48.     We are all members of the Global Community. We all have the duty to protect the rights and welfare of all species and all people. No humans have the right to encroach on the ecological space of other species and other people, or treat them with cruelty and violence.
49.     All species, humans and cultures have intrinsic worth. They are subjects, not objects of manipulation or ownership. No humans have the right to own other species, other people or the knowledge of other cultures through patents and other intellectual property rights.
50.     Defending biological and cultural diversity is a duty of all people. Diversity is an end in itself, a value, a source of richness both material and cultural.
51.     All members of the Global Community including all humans have the right to sustenance -- to food and water, to safe and clean habitat, to security of ecological space. These rights are natural rights, they are birthrights given by the fact of existence on earth and are best protected through community rights and commons. They are not given by states or corporations, nor can they be extinguished by state or corporate action. No state or corporation has the right to erode or undermine these natural rights or enclose the commons that sustain all through privatisation or monopoly control.

Back to top of page






Scale of Human and Earth Rights



The scale of social values

Chapter X     Scale of Human and Earth Rights

Chapter 10.1     General provisions governing the interpretation and application of the Global Constitution
Article 1:    Decision-making process subjected to Earth Government "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations" and to the Scale of Human and Earth Rights
Decision made by all Earth Government Bodies and Institutions, including Global Parliament, the Earth Executive Council, the Earth Court of Justice, and all other organs of Earth Government, are subjected to the Earth Government "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations" described in the Preamble and in Chapters 1 to 10 inclusive and by the Scale of Human and Earth Rights.
Article 2:    Field of application of Earth Government law
1.     The provisions of this Constitution are addressed to the Institutions, bodies and agencies of Earth Government with due regard for the principle of subsidiarity and to Member Nations only when they are implementing Earth Government law. They shall therefore respect the rights, observe the principles and promote the application thereof in accordance with their respective powers and respecting the limits of the powers of Earth Government as conferred on it in the other Parts of the Constitution.
2.     This Constitution does not extend the field of application of Earth Government law beyond the powers of Earth Government or establish any new power or task for Earth Government, or modify powers and tasks defined in the other Parts of the Global Constitution.
Article 3:    Scope and interpretation of rights and principles
1.     Any limitation on the exercise of the rights and freedoms recognised by this Constitution must be provided for by law and respect the essence of those rights and freedoms. Subject to the principle of proportionality, limitations may be made only if they are necessary and genuinely meet objectives of general interest recognised by Earth Government or the need to protect the rights and freedoms of others.
2.     Rights recognised by this Constitution for which provision is made in other Parts of the Global Constitution shall be exercised under the conditions and within the limits defined by these relevant Parts
3.     Insofar as this Constitution contains rights which correspond to rights guaranteed by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the meaning and scope of those rights shall be the same as those laid down by the said Convention. This provision shall not prevent Earth Government law providing more extensive protection.
4.     Insofar as this Constitution recognises fundamental rights as they result from the constitutional traditions common to Member Nations, those rights shall be interpreted in harmony with those traditions.
5.     The provisions of this Constitution which contain principles may be implemented by legislative and executive acts taken by Institutions and bodies of the Earth Government, and by acts of Member Nations when they are implementing Earth Government law, in the exercise of their respective powers. They shall be judicially cognisable only in the interpretation of such acts and in the ruling on their legality.
6.     Full account shall be taken of national laws and practices as specified in this Constitution.
7.     All rights recognized by this Constitution, including those rights which correspond to rights guaranteed by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and any other national government rights, shall be subjected to "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations" and to the Scale of Human and Earth Rights.
Article 4:    Level of protection
Nothing in this Constitution shall be interpreted as restricting or adversely affecting human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognised, in their respective fields of application, by Earth Government law and international law and by international agreements to which Earth Government or all Member Nations are party, including the global Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and by Member Nations' constitutions. The Scale of Human and Earth Rights shall be the scale of social values from which all rights are given proper importance.
Article 5:    Prohibition of abuse of rights
Nothing in this Constitution shall be interpreted as implying any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms recognised in this Constitution or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for herein.
Article 6:    Fundamental rights
The inhabitants and citizens of Earth who are within the federation of all nations shall have certain inalienable rights defined hereunder. It shall be mandatory for the Global Parliament, the Earth Executive Council , and all organs and agencies of Earth Government to honor, implement and enforce these rights, as well as for the national governments of all member nations in the federation of all nations to do likewise. Individuals or groups suffering violation or neglect of such rights shall have full recourse through the Global Community Ombudspersons, the Agency of the Global Police and the Global Courts for redress of grievances. The inalienable rights shall include the following:
1.   Equal rights for all global citizens of the Global Community, with no discrimination on grounds of race, color, caste, nationality, sex, religion, political affiliation, property, or social status.
2.   Equal protection and application of global legislation and global laws for all global citizens of the Global Community.  
Article 7:    To change the ways of doing things, and our ways of doing business in the world, of Global Community citizens
Earth Government shall seek to change the ways of doing things and of doing business of all Global Community citizens as per:
a)     the "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations" of Earth Government, which constitute the Preamble and Chapter 1 to Chapter 10 inclusive;
b)     global symbiotical relationships amongst people, institutions, cities, provinces and nations of the world, and between Earth Government and all nations, and in the business sector, which constitute Chapter 7, and Chapters 20.24 and 23.3.2;
c)     global societal sustainability, which constitutes Chapter 4.4 of this Constitution;
d)     good Earth governance and management, which constitute Chapter 6.3.2 of this Constitution;
e)     the Scale of Human and Earth Rights, which constitutes Chapter 10 of this Constitution;
f)     the Statement of Rights, Responsibilities and Accountabilities of a Person and of the Global Community, which constitutes Chapter 6.3 of this Constitution;
g)     the Criteria to obtain the Global Community Citizenship, which constitutes Chapters 6.1 and 6.2 of this Constitution;
h)     consistency between the different policies and activities of Earth Government, which constitutes Chapter 15 of this Constitution; and
i)     a global market without borders in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capitals is ensured in accordance with this Constitution, which constitutes Chapter 16 of this Constitution;
j)     the new ways of doing business in the world, which constitutes Chapters 16 and 17;
k)     the Celebration of Life Day on May 26 of each year, which constitutes Chapter 20.7 of this Constitution;
l)     the finding of an Earth flag, which constitutes Chapter 20.8 of this Constitution;
m)     the ECO Award, which constitutes Chapter 20.9 of this Constitution;
n)     the Portal of the Global Community, which constitutes Chapter 20.10 of this Constitution; and
o)     the concept of a Global Dialogue, which constitutes Chapter 20.11 of this Constitution.
Chapter 10.2     Change our ways of doing things, and our ways of doing business, as per the Scale of Human and Earth Rights
Article 1:    The new way of doing things and business on the planet
All Earth Government Bodies and Institutions shall accept Earth Government "Beliefs, Values, Principles and Aspirations" and the Scale of Human and Earth Rights as the guiding light for decision-making and as the new way of doing things on the planet. Article 100 gives more information about where in this Constitution was shown details concerning the new ways of doing business.
Article 2:    The Scale is the primary guide for the decision-making process.
More importance is given to the sections higher on the Scale, and the Scale is the primary guide for the decision-making process.
The Global Community believes that the introduction of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been a great step in humanity's evolution to better itself. But now is time to leave it behind and reach to our next step, that is, the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights resides in the fact that it gives equal emphasis to cultural rights, economic and social rights, and civil and political rights.  The Global Community asks how meaningful is the right to life or to participation in political life if the ecological base (the base of life) and the global life-support systems are seriously threatened:

*    wilderness is vastly disappearing; species of the fauna and flora becoming extinct
*    fisheries are out of control and will cease to be a part of our diet within a few decades;
*    the global Oxygen supply in the air we breathe is dangerously affected by both the burning of petroleum products and deforestation; our ways of life affect the capacity for photosynthesis;
*    losses of forest cover and of biological diversity;
*    climate change affects everyone and everything;
*    the ozone layer is dangerously damaged by man-made chemicals;
*    global warming causes major local and global problems and forces the climate to change;
*    our drinking (fresh) water is becoming more polluted and the increase in population requires much more fresh unpolluted water; our ways of life affect dangerously the water cycle;
*    clean air no longer exists; air contains chemicals affecting life all over the planet;
*    farmers do not generally engage on their own in investment in soil conservation and despite all other efforts the world is losing its best soils; global food production systems should be made to feed people as oppose to be competing for money;
*    everyone wants to consume more products and thus use more of Earth essential resources which are becoming much harder to obtain and create more pollution and wastes, and no one seems to know what to do with wastes; wastes of all kind including nuclear and release of radiation;
*    wars destroy not only human lives and community infrastructures but also other lifeforms and the environment; wars feed the economies of war makers, weapons manufacturers, and predator nations in control of the last 100 hundred years left of oil supplies in the world; and
*    chemicals produced for human use and not found in nature and, eventually, reaching the environment with impacts on Earth's waters, soils, air, and ecology.
Earth Government found evident that the ecological base is the essential prerequisite for the effectiveness and exercise of all rights recognized for human beings. The stewardship of the ecological base has to be given priority before the fulfilment of various economic and social wishes. Demands resulting from the socio-economic system of a particular country have to find their limits in the protection of the global ecosystem. Vital interests of future generations have to be considered as having priority before less vital interests of the present generation. Supply chains have to be designed in a way, that the goods can enter after usage or consumption into natural or industrial recycling processes. If serious damages to persons, animals, plants and the ecosystem cannot be excluded, an action or pattern of behaviour should be refrained from. A measure for supplying goods or services should choose a path which entails the least possible impact on the ecological and social system concerned. This way functioning proven systems will not be disturbed, and  unnecessary risks will not be taken. Supply strategies consuming less resources should have preference before those enhancing more resource consumption. When there is a need to find a solution to a problem or a concern,  a sound solution would be to choose a measure or conduct an action, if possible, which causes reversible damage as opposed to a measure or an action causing an irreversible loss.
Article 3:    Scale of Human and Earth Rights
The Scale of Human and Earth Rights contains six (6) sections. Section 1 has more importance than all other sections below, and so on.

Concerning sections 1, 2, and 3, it shall be Earth Government highest priority to guarantee these rights to Member Nations and to have proper lesgislation and implement and enforce global law as it applies.

Section  1.    Ecological rights and the protection of the global life-support systems

Section  2.    Primordial human rights

It is made clear how little importance was given to Sections 1,2,3, and 4 of the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. And it is made clear how urgent it is to replace both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Charters from all nations by the Scale of Human and Earth Rights.


  • safety and security
  • have shelter
  • 'clean' energy
  • a 'clean' and healthy environment
  • drink fresh water
  • breath clean air
  • eat a balance diet and
  • basic clothing.

Section  3.    The ecological rights, the protection of the global life-support systems and the primordial human rights of future generations

Concerning Sections 4, 5 and 6, it shall be the aim of Earth Government to secure these other rights for all global citizens within the federation of all nations, but without immediate guarantee of universal achievement and enforcement. These rights are defined as Directive Principles, obligating the Earth Government to pursue every reasonable means for universal realization and implementation.

Section  4.    Community rights, rights of direct democracy, the right that the greatest number of people has by virtue of its number (50% plus one) and after voting representatives democratically

Section  5.    Economic rights (business and consumer rights, and their responsibilities and accountabilities) and social rights (civil and political rights)

Section  6.    Cultural rights and religious rights

The following table is a comparison of the importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Scale. It is made clear how little importance was given to Sections 1,2,3, and 4 of the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. And it is made clear how urgent it is to replace both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Charters from all nations by the Scale of Human and Earth Rights.

Importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights
The total degree of importance due to the Universal Declaration.
Scale Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Total degree of importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Section 1 parts of Article 3; 1% importance
1% importance
Section 2 parts of Articles 3,4,5,9,13,14,25; 35% importance
35%
Section 3 no Articles; 0%
0%
Section 4 parts of Articles 16,18,21,29; 5%
5%
Section 5 parts of Articles 15,17,20,21,22,23,24,28; 100%
100%
Section 6 parts of articles 26,27; 70%
70%


Here is how the degree of importance was obtained. For instance in Section 1 it was found that parts of Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was included as promoting very softly the protection of human life but was not promoting at all the protection of the global life-support systems. Section 1 on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights promotes both the protection of human life and the global life-support systems. No key rights were found in the Universal Declaration that would promote in any way the protection of human life and that of the global life-support systems. And it is a failure of the Universal Declaration to be in line with the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. As a result of this failure, a 1% combine importance was recorded in the table. What this means? It means that the Universal Declaration does not give any importance to human life and the protection of the global life-support systems. These results are consistent and in agreement with the fact that democracy hardly survive an overpopulation such as is seen in the world. What happens to the idea of the dignity of the human species if this population growth continues at its present rate? It will be completely destroyed. Democracy cannot survive overpopulation. Human dignity cannot survive overpopulation. Convenience and decency cannot survive overpopulation. As you put more and more people onto the world, the value of life not only declines, it disappears. It doesn't matter if someone dies, the more people there are, the less one person matters. It would be preferable to split a large population into smaller populations.


Chapter 10.3     Section  1.    Ecological rights and the protection of the global life-support systems
Article 1:    It is a crime against humanity and all life on Earth not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.
It is a crime against humanity and all life on Earth not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. It is a terrible crime against the global life-support systems, against the very existence of the next generations. On the Scale of Human and Earth Rights the crime is of maximum importance.
Article 2:    Related aspects of the global life-support systems
There are many related aspects of the global life-support systems that is affected by an overpopulated planet:
*      global warming
*      Ozone layer;
*      wastes of all kind including nuclear and release of radiation;
*      climate change;
*      species of the fauna and flora becoming extinct;
*      losses of forest cover and of biological diversity;
*      the capacity for photosynthesis;
*      the water cycle;
*      food production systems;
*      genetic resources; and
*      chemicals produced for human use and not found in nature and, eventually, reaching the environment with impacts on Earth's waters, soils, air, and ecology.


Article 3:    Fresh water and clean air are primordial human rights
The existing and future uses of water are constantly challenged; balancing supply and demand is made even harder by the amounts of pollution found in the air, land and waters. A large part of our body is made of water, and we cannot live without water; therefore water is a primordial human right by our very nature. In order to avoid conflicts and wars over drinking freshwater, freshwater has been categorized as a primordial human right. Industrial pollution plays a major role in the deterioration of nature but this time the level of pollution is above the carrying capacity of the ecosystem. Pollution also affects significantly human health and all lifeforms on Earth. Every person needs Oxygen to live so clean air is certainly also a primordial human right by our very nature.
Article 4:    The global economy does not crush and destroy local economies
Conservation of the earth's resources and creation of sustainable and satisfying livelihoods is most caringly, creatively and efficiently and equitably achieved at the local level in a global community. Localization of economics is social and ecological imperative. Only goods and services that cannot be produced locally, using local resources, local knowledge should be produced non-locally and traded long distance. Earth democracy of the Global Community is based on vibrant, resilient local economies, which support national and global economies. The global economy does not crush and destroy local economies.

Article 5:    Ecological Integrity
A)     Protect and restore the integrity of Earth's ecological systems, with special concern for biological diversity and the natural processes that sustain life
a.     Adopt at all levels sustainable development plans and regulations that make environmental conservation and rehabilitation integral to all development initiatives.
b.     Establish and safeguard viable nature and biosphere reserves, including wild lands and marine areas, to protect Earth's life support systems, maintain biodiversity, and preserve our natural heritage.
c.     Promote the recovery of endangered species and ecosystems.
d.     Control and eradicate non-native or genetically modified organisms harmful to native species and the environment, and prevent introduction of such harmful organisms.
e.     Manage the use of renewable resources such as water, soil, forest products, and marine life in ways that do not exceed rates of regeneration and that protect the health of ecosystems.
f.     Manage the extraction and use of non-renewable resources such as minerals and fossil fuels in ways that minimize depletion and cause no serious environmental damage.
B)     Prevent harm as the best method of environmental protection and, when knowledge is limited, apply a precautionary approach
a.     Take action to avoid the possibility of serious or irreversible environmental harm even when scientific knowledge is incomplete or inconclusive.
b.     Place the burden of proof on those who argue that a proposed activity will not cause significant harm, and make the responsible parties liable for environmental harm.
c.     Ensure that decision making addresses the cumulative, long-term, indirect, long distance, and global consequences of human activities.
d.     Prevent pollution of any part of the environment and allow no build-up of radioactive, toxic, or other hazardous substances.
e.     Avoid military activities damaging to the environment.
C)     Adopt patterns of production, consumption, and reproduction that safeguard Earth's regenerative capacities, human rights, and community well-being
a.     Reduce, reuse, and recycle the materials used in production and consumption systems, and ensure that residual waste can be assimilated by ecological systems.
b.     Act with restraint and efficiency when using energy, and rely increasingly on renewable energy sources such as solar and wind.
c.     Promote the development, adoption, and equitable transfer of environmentally sound technologies.
d.     Internalize the full environmental and social costs of goods and services in the selling price, and enable consumers to identify products that meet the highest social and environmental standards.
e.     Ensure universal access to health care that fosters reproductive health and responsible reproduction.
f.     Adopt lifestyles that emphasize the quality of life and material sufficiency in a finite world.
D)     Advance the study of ecological sustainability and promote the open exchange and wide application of the knowledge acquired
a.     Support international scientific and technical cooperation on sustainability, with special attention to the needs of developing nations.
b.     Recognize and preserve the traditional knowledge and spiritual wisdom in all cultures that contribute to environmental protection and human well-being.
c.     Ensure that information of vital importance to human health and environmental protection, including genetic information, remains available in the public domain.
Article 6:    Technologies which must be eliminated and prohibited because of hazards and dangers to life
Implementation of intensive programs to discover, develop and institute safe alternatives and practical substitutions for technologies which must be eliminated and prohibited because of hazards and dangers to life.
Article 7:    Everyone has the right to life
*     Rapid elimination of and prohibitions against technological hazards and man-made environmental disturbances which are found to create dangers to life on Earth.
*     Protection for everyone against the hazards and perils of technological innovations and developments.
*     Protection of the natural environment which is the common heritage of humanity against pollution, ecological disruption or damage which could imperil life or lower the quality of life.
Article 8:    Conservation of natural resources
Conservation of those natural resources of Earth which are limited so that present and future generations may continue to enjoy life on the planet Earth.
Article 9:    The rights that the Global Community has in protecting the global life-support systems
Earth rights are ecological rights and the rights that the Global Community has in protecting the global life-support systems. Earth rights are those rights that demonstrate the connection between human well-being and a sound environment. They include individuals and global communities human rights and the rights to a clean environment, and participation in development decisions. We define ecological rights as those rights of the ecosystem of the Earth beyond human purpose. They are those rights that protect and preserve the ecological heritage of the Earth for future generations. The biggest challenge for social democracy today is to articulate coherent policies based on a unifying vision for society.

The major problems to address include:

A.     the enormous worldwide wealth gap and the underlying concentration of land and natural resource ownership and control;
B.     the privatized monetary structures; and
C.     building global governance institutions and financing governance and development in such a way as to divert funds from military industrial profits and into social development and environmental restoration.

We need a basic clarification of First Principles on the concept of "ownership", starting with the principle that the land and natural resources of the planet are a common heritage and belong equally as a birthright to everyone. Products and services created by individuals are properly viewed as private property. Products and services created by groups of individuals are properly viewed as collective property.

We can hatch many birds out of one egg when we shift public finance OFF OF private property and ONTO common heritage property. From the local to the global level we need to shift taxes off of labor and productive capital and onto land and natural resource rents. In other words, we need to privatize labor (wages) and socialize rent (the value of surface land and natural resources). This public finance shift will promote the cooperatization of the ownership of capital in a gradual way with minimal government control of the production and exchange of individual and collective wealth. Natural monopolies (infrastructure, energy, public transportation) should be owned and/or controlled or regulated by government at the most local level that is practical.

The levels of this public finance shift can be delineated thusly: municipalities and localities to collect the surface land rents within their jurisdiction. Regional governing bodies to collect resource rents for forest lands, mineral, oil and water resources; the global level needs a Global Resource Agency to collect user fees for transnational commons such as satellite geostationary orbits, royalties on minerals mined or fish caught in international waters and the use of the electromagnetic spectrum.

An added benefit of this form of public finance is that it provides a peaceful way to address conflicts over land and natural resources. Resource rents should be collected and equitably distributed and utilized for the benefit of all, either in financing social services and/or in direct citizen dividends in equal amount to all individuals.

A portion of revenues could pass from the lower to the higher governance levels or vice versa as needed to ensure a just development pattern worldwide and needed environmental restoration.

In the area of monetary policy we need seignorage reform, which means that money should be issued as spending by governments, not as debt by private banking institutions. We also need guaranteed economic freedoms to create local and regional currencies on a democratic and transparent basis.

Policies for securing earth rights are:

1.     It is better to tax "bads" rather than "goods". Governments have long used selective taxation to discourage use of alcohol and cigarettes, while unprocessed food and children¹s clothing remain tax-free. It is best to continue this tradition with selective "eco-sin taxes" to discourage a wide range of grey products and lifestyles. At the same time, taxes would be eliminated on green products and lifestyles. People should be able to avoid taxation by choosing green products and lifestyles.

2.    Taxes should be designed to conserve resources and energy. Rather than taxing jobs and profits, taxes should be moved to resource use and energy consumption to reward conservation. The community should benefit from the use of commonly held resources. Using resources is a privilege, not a right, and the user should pay for the privilege. Resources must also be shared with future generations and other species.

3.     Taxes should be designed to increase employment. Moving taxes onto resources and land use and off of incomes will make people less expensive to employ. Products produced by green production methods, which tends to use fewer resources and less energy will avoid taxation. As energy costs rise, the price of labour becomes more economical, and green products which tend to encourage value-added processes, will provide more high quality, skilled jobs than resource intensive products.

4.     Distributive taxes are preferable to re-distributive taxes. If wealth is distributed more fairly in the first place less re-distribution will be necessary. Eliminating consumption taxes will eliminate the only tax the poor must pay. By moving taxes on to resource use and land, the poor, who generally own less land and use fewer resources, will avoid taxation, thus requiring less redistribution. Taxing land but not the use of land, will reduce taxation on higher density housing, lowering housing costs for low-income citizens, thus reducing another need for re-distribution.

5.     Resource taxes should be assessed as early as possible. Resources should be taxed before entering the manufacturing process in order to green all aspects of the manufacturing process from extraction to the finished product. Increasing taxes on resource and energy use will encourage resource and energy efficiency, innovation, reuse, repair, recycling, and used material recovery.

6.     Taxing unearned income is preferable to taxing earned income. The tax shift to resource use and community-generated land values will distribute income more fairly without dependence on income and business taxation to redistribute income. Taxing unearned income (resources, land) and not earned income (jobs, profits) will reduce the rich-poor gap since the rich are always in a better position to capture unearned or windfall income by their ability to hold assets that they do not have to consume.

7.     Green tax shifting is revenue-neutral, not a tax break or tax grab. The taxes paid by businesses and individuals collectively will not change, but greener businesses and consumers will reduce their taxes. Grey businesses and consumers will pay higher taxes. Studies have shown that 50% of businesses and consumers will be unaffected or only slightly affected by tax shifting, roughly one quarter will realize tax reductions one quarter will be taxed more.

8.     Resource use and community-generated land value taxation are fairer. Resource use and land taxes are much simpler to collect and harder to evade than taxes on income and business profits. Since there are far fewer points of taxation than with traditional tax sources, a move to resource use and land taxation will reduce the size of the underground economy. The difficulty of evading these taxes will reduce the problem of overseas tax havens.

9.     Green taxation increases international competitiveness. Eliminating taxes on domestic labour will reduce labour costs in Ontario and therefore reduce out-sourcing by businesses seeking cheap labour in other countries or provinces.

10.     Pay for what you take, not for what you make. Businesses should not be taxed for hiring people or for earning a profit, but should be charged for using resources and polluting the planet. People should not be taxed for earning an income or purchasing products but should be charged for the value of land they own and the resources used in the products they buy. Resource use and polluting are privileges not rights, and businesses and consumers should pay for these privileges.

11.     Taxing community-generated land values is beneficial. Since the community around it, not its owner, creates the value of land, the community should receive the benefits it has created. The owner is entitled to a fair profit but not to a windfall profit that rightfully belongs to the community that generated the wealth in the first place. Under LVT the specific use of the land will not be taxed, only the land itself, within the existing zoning. Community-generated land value taxation encourages the efficient use of land, reduces sprawl, reduces speculation, tends to reduce land prices and improves land use patterns.

12.     Taxes should encourage local, sustainable, value-added production over imports. Culturally unique products and services will be valued by green tax reform over mass production. The sale price should include the true costs of products, services and distances traveled, and should be designed to encourage local, sustainable production.

13.     Taxes should break up monopolies. The most important monopolies are resource monopolies and land monopolies. When a person or a business has control or exclusive rights over large amounts of a resource or large amounts of land, this person or business reaps windfall profits, which is unjust. These resources and this land belong to the community and if individuals are granted access to it they should pay a fair price for this privilege or right. Land Value Taxation aims to ensure that the wealth created by usage of land and resources that rightfully belong to the community accrue back to that community.

14.     Taxes should be applied only once. Rather than taxing the same wealth repeatedly through personal income, business income, sales, re-sale, interest, capital gains, property transfer, inheritance, taxation should only impact the use of a resource and the ownership of land on a sustained basis (ie property tax on site value).

15.     MINIMIZING INCOME TAXES

a)     Moving taxes off of incomes and onto resource use and community-generated land value is critical in order to achieve and maintain a green economy and society.

b)     Traditionally governments tax the component of production in least supply. In the first half of the 20th century labour was scarce and resources and land were plentiful and indeed considered infinite, so it made sense for government to tax incomes and not resource use or land. Now, however, resources and land are scarce and labour is plentiful, so governments should modernize the tax structure by switching the source of taxation away from incomes and onto resources use and land.

c)     Income taxes are a regressive tax since they tax a "good" not a "bad". Since jobs are desirable we should not tax employment. Income taxes are a disincentive to employment since they make people expensive to employ. Employers often avoid taxation by employing fewer people and opting instead for energy-intensive, chemical-intensive and resource-intensive production. Conversely, taxing resource and land lightly sends the message that these community-held resources are unimportant and may be squandered by anyone without consequences.

d)     It is claimed that income taxes help reduce economic inequity among people. This is untrue since employers simply pass on the extra payroll deduction to consumers. The amount of income tax paid is irrelevant to labour negotiations, since bargaining is based on net pay, not gross pay. In determining an employee's worth, the employer simply calculates the gross amount based on take-home pay. Salaries of high worth employees and CEOs are simply raised to the level necessary to ensure net pay reaches the desired level.

e)     In contrast the rich-poor gap will be narrowed more effectively by moving taxes off of incomes and onto resource and land use, since wealthier people who choose to spend their money on grey products and lifestyles will be taxed more while people with lower incomes will be able to avoid taxation by living green. In addition, replacing income taxes with green taxes would help conserve resources, save energy, foster value-added and labour intensive production (ie. more jobs), and reduce pollution.

16.     MINIMIZING BUSINESS TAXES

a)     Neither the right wing call for corporate tax cuts nor the left-wing mantra of increased corporate taxes will engender a transition to a just or green society. Reducing or increasing taxes on corporate profits is green-neutral (taxes which neither encourage nor discourage greening the planet). If the goal is for businesses to succeed and employ people, it makes no sense to apply business taxes or payroll deductions.

b)     Moving taxes off of profits and employment and onto the resources, land and pollution will speed progress toward a green industrial economy. Recourse use and pollution are privileges not rights, and businesses should pay for these privileges. While business people would prefer not to pollute the planet or squander resources, the present tax structure gives them little choice. Businesses usually follow the path of least tax resistance and will readily go green if tax incentives pointed the way.

c)     Green production means more jobs, resource conservation, and less pollution. Ecological fiscal reform and green tax shifting are revenue neutral; the collective tax burden paid by business is unchanged, but it will reward businesses that go green and discourage businesses that remain grey.

17.     PHASE OUT CONSUMPTION TAXES

a)     Sales taxes are unhelpful in moving to a green society since socially useful and ecologically sound products are taxed equally to socially or ecologically detrimental products. To reduce consumption of resources, taxes should be applied early in the manufacturing process in order to green all aspects of the manufacturing process. Taxing early will dramatically reduce the ticket price of green products and raise the price of grey products, positively influencing consumer behaviour. Taxing early will encourage resource and energy efficiency, innovation, reuse, repair, recycling, and used material recovery.

b)     Sales taxes are regressive since they discourage people from making both green and grey purchases, thus damaging the economy and killing jobs. As well sales taxes are often unfairly evaded by the underground economy, while resource use, pollution and land rent levies, by contrast, are simpler to apply and more difficult to evade.

18.     RESOURCE USE TAXATION

a)     Income taxes, consumptions taxes, and taxes on profits are all green-neutral, ie. green jobs, green purchases and green profits are taxed at the same rate as grey jobs, grey purchases and grey profits. By contrast, resources taxes levied early in the production process foster conservation, efficiencies, innovation, value-added production, and labour-intensive production. Local sustainable production, short run niche production, and skilled trades and crafts receive a bias since the full costs of transportation and mass production are internalized.

b)     Taxing resources minimizes waste and pollution thus reducing the load on government for health care costs, waste disposal costs, transportation infrastructure, and pollution cleanup costs. The market will drive resource and energy conservation without government micro-management.

c)     Resource taxation would focus on a small number of key local resources and a small number of imported resources

Article 10:    To build a sustainable global community
In order to build a sustainable global community, each individual, each local community, and national governments of the world must initiate their commitment to the Global Community, fulfill their obligations under existing international agreements, and support the implementation of Constitution principles with an international legally binding instrument on environment and development.
Article 11:    Every individual, family, organization, and community has a vital role to play
Life often involves tensions between important values. This can mean difficult choices. However, we must find ways to harmonize diversity with unity, the exercise of freedom with the common good, short-term objectives with long-term goals. Every individual, family, organization, and community has a vital role to play. The arts, sciences, religions, educational institutions, media, businesses, nongovernmental organizations, and governments are all called to offer creative leadership. The partnership of government, civil society, and business is essential for effective governance. In order to build a sustainable global community, each individual, each local community, and national governments of the world must initiate their commitment to the Global Community, fulfill their obligations under existing international agreements, and support the implementation of Global Constitution principles with an international legally binding instrument on environment and development.

Chapter 10.4     Section  2.    Primordial human rights
Chapter 10.4.1     Primordial human rights
Article 1:    Primordial human rights
Human rights represent an ideal and a supreme goal which can give meaning to life in society. Throughout the history of humanity, the rights of human beings have been defined and enshrined with reference to the values of the dignity of each individual and of freedom, equality and justice. These values are universal. The Global Community has accepted and enshrined them into its own ways of behaving and dealing with all peoples. Cultures and societies differ so much that their expression takes varying forms, but diversity does not affect the foundation of inalienable values constituted by human and Earth rights. Each individual is recognized as a representative of humankind. Human dignity resides in each of us, and this dignity must be recognized and respected by all.

How meaningful is the right to life or to participation in political life if poverty, gender inequality, destitution and epidemics prevent individuals from enjoying freedom of movement, freedom to vote, to marry and so on? The economic and social rights are the essential prerequisite for the effectiveness and exercise of all other rights (other than ecological rights) recognized for human beings. The developing countries are having a harder time than others to achieve the exercise of these rights on a lasting basis, with the problems of economic globalization presenting new challenges. We must therefore beware of enforcing economic rights alone to the detriment of individual civil rights and the rights of all individuals to decide their own fate and the future of their country, their political rights. The universality of human rights recognizes the right of all individuals to participate in the cultural life of their community and of other country, to receive education and training, and to be informed.

Primordial human rights are necessarily human needs but not all human needs are primordial human rights. To determine rights requires an understanding of needs and reponsibilities and their importance.

On the Scale of Human and Earth Rights, Primordial Human Rights are those that individuals have by virtue of their very existence as human beings. They are very specific primordial human needs. First there are the material needs, the requisites for a dignified life and truly the primordial human rights:
  • safety and security
  • eat a balance diet
  • 'clean' energy
  • a 'clean' and healthy environment
  • drink fresh water
  • breath clean air
  • basic clothing and
  • have shelter.

Then there are the nonmaterial needs which can evolve, and are flexible and adaptive:
  • social justice
  • basic health care
  • communications facilities in the community
  • well-rounded education
  • cultural protection
  • spiritual and religious acceptance and
  • human and Earth rights

Primordial human rights are:
a)     an assurance for everyone of adequate housing, of adequate and nutritious food supplies, of safe and adequate water supplies, of pure air with protection of oxygen supplies and the ozone layer, and in general for the continuance of an environment which can sustain healthy living for all.
b)     Safety of property from arbitrary seizure; protection against exercise of the power of eminent domain without reasonable compensation.
c)     Prohibition against private armies and paramilitary organizations as being threats to the common peace and safety.
d)     Prohibition against slavery, peonage, involuntary servitude, and conscription of labor.
e)     Prohibition against military conscription.
f)     Safety of person from arbitrary or unreasonable arrest, detention, exile, search or seizure; requirement of warrants for searches and arrests.
g)     Prohibition against physical or psychological duress or torture during any period of investigation, arrest, detention or imprisonment, and against cruel or unusual punishment.

Article 2:    Primordial human rights and ecological rights are the most important rights on the Scale
Primordial human rights are separate categories from those of ecological rights, community rights, the right of the greatest number of people, economic rights, social rights, cultural rights and religious rights. Ecological and primordial human rights are the only rights that have existed unchanged throughout the evolutionary origin of our species. Any major change would have threatened our very existence. All other human rights listed here are rights created by human beings and can be changed depending of new circumstances; they are not stagnant but are rather flexible and adaptive, and they can evolve. Ecological and primordial human rights of this generation and of future generations are therefore much more important than any other human rights existing now and in the future.
Article 3:    A global strategy to reinforce primordial human rights
Earth Government has developed a global strategy to reinforce primordial human rights. Recommendations to that effect are:
*     provision of minimal standards of health, education, and housing worldwide
*     reduce inequality in access to work opportunities
*     care for the quality of life of the people
*     all nations must ratify an agreement to form Global Parliament and the Earth Court of Justice
*     increase global cooperation between nations to deal with terrorism in a more selective, targeted way
*     help the Earth Community promote and implement its global civic ethic program worldwide
*     allow our volunteers perform their global ethical management tasks during conflict resolution
*     emphasise social responsibility of corporations in the whole cycle of their products or services
*     expand coordination and global cooperation among nations, agencies, and NGOs, regarding information, early warning, apprehension, and punishment of terrorists through the Earth Court of Justice. The Court will create an environment for transparent Justice.
*     when there is massive damage done to a country that is abhorent to most countries of the world then the Earth Court of Justice will find it justified to go after the suspected criminals wherever they may be hiding
Article 4:    Security cannot be achieved through the military
The world is too crowded and too small nowadays! And weapons too lethal! So security cannot be achieved through the military. The only job the military should be asked to do today is to protect the global life-support systems. These systems have the highest priority on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and are certainly more important than any of the other rights on the Scale including security. Simply because without life there is no other right possible. Without Oxygen there is no life! Without clean water there is no life! So protect life on Earth at all costs. Wars are the biggest threat to life and the ecosystem of the planet.
Article 5:    The production and trade in arms should be listed as a criminal act against humanity
The production and trade in arms should be listed as a criminal act against humanity; this global ministry, the Ministry of Global Security and Peace, shall introduce a Convention on the curtailment of the arms trade, a provision for a mandatory Arms Register and the prohibition of the financing or subsidy of arms exports by governments.
Article 6:    We propose a world population of 500 million people
In general, populations of all lifeforms grow exponentially that is by a steady proportion of whatever was there before. When there is no practical limit on resource then populations usually grow maximally and the only limit is that of the reproductive capacity of the female animal. About 10,000 years ago, human beings were obliged to commit themselves more or less fully to agriculture and the human population was 5 to 10 million. After only 8,000 years of large-scale agriculture, the human population was 100 to 300 million. After this time, the exponential growth of the population entered its rapid phase. The billion mark was passed by 1800 A.D. By year 2000, the human population exceeded 6 billion. Thus agriculture allowed a thousand-fold increase in numbers over a period of 10,000 years.

In practical sense, agriculture cannot feed a human population that has grown beyond the capacity limit. We must ask ourselves whether we can stop the growth by means that are voluntary and benign, or whether the eventual environmental restraint will be out of our hands. At some questionable time in our future we will find that our soil will no longer have the nutrients it needs to produce quality food. For some time we may counter this problem by fresh weathering of rock. Not for long! The loss of lifeforms on Earth will be permanent.

We need to form a global ministry dealing only about agriculture and the protection of our soils. All nations will be part of the ministry. We have to design systems of food production that meet our own needs, and also leave room for these other lifeforms we want to take along with us. Western agriculture is designed in the end to maximize profit. As a primordial human right, the prime concern of the human species is to feed people. Therefore we have to do things differently. We will have to produce less livestock as we effectively double the population we need to feed: ourselves, plus the livestock that is supposed to be feeding us. We also have to apportion the land surface of the whole world more efficiently, using some for highhly intensive food production (which makes use of less land), some for extensive agriculture (combining food production with wildlife conservation) and designing some specifically as wilderness areas with global corridors between them.

Obviously something has to be done! Earth Government proposes a tight global policy, benignly implemented, or it will be very nasty indeed. In practice, a human population of 10 to 12 billion would be too uncomfortably high and would add a high strain on world resources. What kind of world population would be reasonable? What goal should we aim at? A population should be small enough to be sustainable indefinitely and still allow plenty of leeway for ourselves and other lifeforms. It should also be large enough to allow the formation of healthy civilizations.

We propose a world population of 500 million. It would take a thousand years to reach our goal of a population of 500 million. To achieve our goal will require from each and every one of us a stand on the rights and on belonging to the Global Community, the human family. If our population was to decrease as projected here then what other major global problems would be managed automatically?

This question is really saying that the overpopulation is the cause of several major global problems such as:

*      lack of resources
*      poverty
*      wars
*      climate change
*      damage to the global life-support systems
*      a lesser quality of life
*      threat to security
*      lack of good quality soils for agriculture
*      polluted air, water and land
*      overcrowed cities
*      weapons and war products and equipment able to spark global wars
*      widespread drug, human and Earth rights abuse, more old and new diseases out of control
Article 7:    Policies to control our population growth
Perhaps the most important step towards achieving global sustainability now and for future generations is to control our population growth. World overpopulation is now at the turning point and requires from each and every one of us making a commitment to a statement of rights, responsibilities and accountabilities, and of belonging to the Global Community, the human family. Humanity has to regulate its population by means that are voluntary and benign and has to take along with a fair proportion of other lifeforms. Proper Earth management will certainly be a necessary tool to achieve our goal. If not there will be a collapse of humanity and of the environment. From now on every global decision has tremendous consequences on our future. Comprehensive population policies are an essential element in a world development strategy that combines access to reproductive health services, to education and economic opportunities, to improved energy and natural resource technologies, and to healthyer models of consumption and the "good life."
Article 8:    Policies to decrease world population
  • delay reproduction until later in life
    Delaying reproduction is important in influencing population growth rates. Over a period of 60 years, if people delay reproduction until they are 30 years old, you would have only two generations, while if you do not delay reproduction you would have three generations (one generation every 20 years).
  • spread your children farther apart
  • to have fewer children overall
  • government commitment to decreasing population growth
    Create policies that help decreasing the number of children being born. Policies such as income tax deductions for dependent children and maternity and paternity leaves are essentially pronatalist and should be eliminated.
  • programs that are locally designed and that include information on family planning and access to contraceptives
  • educational programs that emphasize the connection between family planning and social good
  • The vast disparities in reproductive health worldwide and the greater vulnerability of the poor to reproductive risk point to several steps all governments can take, with the support of other sectors, to improve the health of women and their families:

    • Give women more life choices. The low social and economic status of women and girls sets the stage for poor reproductive health
    • Invest in reproductive health care
    • Encourage delays in the onset of sexual activity and first births
    • Help couples prevent and manage unwanted childbearing
    • Ensure universal access to maternal health care
    • Support new reproductive health technologies
    • Increase efforts to address the HIV pandemic
    • Involve communities in evaluating and implementing programs
    • Develop partnerships with the private sector, policymakers and aid donors to broaden support for reproductive health

    • Measure Progress

    More and more young people on every continent want to start bearing children later in life and to have smaller families than at any time in history. Likewise, in greater proportions than ever, women and girls in particular want to go to school and to college, and they want to find fulfilling and well-paid employment. Helping people in every country obtain the information and services they need to put these ambitions into effect is all that can be done, and all that needs to be done, to bring world population growth to a stable landing in the new century.

    Chapter 10.4.2     Respect and Care for the Community of Life
    Article 1:    Respect and Care for the Community of Life
    A)     Respect Earth and life in all its diversity

    a.     Recognize that all beings are interdependent and every form of life has value regardless of its worth to human beings.
    b.     Affirm faith in the inherent dignity of all human beings and in the intellectual, artistic, ethical, and spiritual potential of humanity.

    B)     Care for the community of life with understanding, compassion, and love
    a.     Accept that with the right to own, manage, and use natural resources comes the duty to prevent environmental harm and to protect the rights of people.
    b.     Affirm that with increased freedom, knowledge, and power comes increased responsibility to promote the common good.

    C)     Build democratic societies that are just, participatory, sustainable, and peaceful

    a.     Ensure that communities at all levels guarantee human rights and fundamental freedoms and provide everyone an opportunity to realize his or her full potential.
    b.     Promote social and economic justice, enabling all to achieve a secure and meaningful livelihood that is ecologically responsible.

    D)     Secure Earth's bounty and beauty for present and future generations

    a.     Recognize that the freedom of action of each generation is qualified by the needs of future generations.
    b.     Transmit to future generations values, traditions, and institutions that support the long-term flourishing of Earth's human and ecological communities.

    Chapter 10.4.3     Human Dignity
    Article 1:    Human dignity
    Human dignity is inviolable. It must be respected and protected.
    Article 2:    Right to life
    1.     Everyone has the right to life.
    2.     No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.
    Article 3:    Right to the integrity of the person
    1.     Everyone has the right to respect for his or her physical and mental integrity.
    2.     In the fields of medicine and biology, the following must be respected in particular:   
    (a) the free and informed consent of the person concerned, according to the procedures laid down by law,
    (b) the prohibition of eugenic practices, in particular those aiming at the selection of persons,
    (c) the prohibition on making the human body and its parts as such a source of financial gain,
    (d) the prohibition of the reproductive cloning of human beings.
    Article 4:    Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
    No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
    Article 5:    Prohibition of slavery and forced labour
    1.     No one shall be held in slavery or servitude.
    2.     No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour.
    3.     Trafficking in human beings is prohibited.

    Chapter 10.4.4     Freedoms
    Article 1:    Right to liberty and security
    Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.
    Article 2:    Respect for private and family life
    Everyone has the right to respect for his or her private and family life, home and communications.
    Article 3:    Protection of personal data
    1.     Everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her.
    2.     Such data must be processed fairly for specified purposes and on the basis of the consent of the person concerned or some other legitimate basis laid down by law. Everyone has the right of access to data which has been collected concerning him or her, and the right to have it rectified.
    3.     Compliance with these rules shall be subject to control by an independent authority.
    Article 4:    Right to marry and right to found a family
    The right to marry and the right to found a family shall be guaranteed in accordance with the national laws governing the exercise of these rights.
    Article 5:    Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
    1.     Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right includes freedom to change religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or in private, to manifest religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.
    2.     The right to conscientious objection is recognised, in accordance with the national laws governing the exercise of this right.
    Article 6:    Freedom of expression and information
    1.     Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
    2.     The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected.
    Article 7:    Freedom of assembly and of association
    1.     Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association at all levels, in particular in political, trade Earth Government and civic matters, which implies the right of everyone to form and to join trade Earth Governments for the protection of his or her interests.
    2.     Political parties at Earth Government level contribute to expressing the political will of the Global Community citizens of Earth Government.
    Article 8:    Freedom of the arts and sciences
    The arts and scientific research shall be free of constraint. Academic freedom shall be respected.
    Article 9:    Right to education
    1.     Everyone has the right to education and to have access to vocational and continuing training.
    2.     This right includes the possibility to receive free compulsory education.
    3.     The freedom to found educational establishments with due respect for democratic principles and the right of parents to ensure the education and teaching of their children in conformity with their religious, philosophical and pedagogical convictions shall be respected, in accordance with the national laws governing the exercise of such freedom and right.
    Article 10:    Freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work
    1.     Everyone has the right to engage in work and to pursue a freely chosen or accepted occupation.
    2.     Every citizen of Earth Government has the freedom to seek employment, to work, to exercise the right of establishment and to provide services in any Member Nation.
    3.     Nationals of third countries who are authorised to work in the territories of Member Nations are entitled to working conditions equivalent to those of Global Community citizens of Earth Government.
    Article 11:    Freedom to conduct a business
    The freedom to conduct a business in accordance with Earth Government law and national laws and practices is recognised.
    Article 12:    Right to property
    1.     Everyone has the right to own, use, dispose of and bequeath his or her lawfully acquired possessions. No one may be deprived of his or her possessions, except in the public interest and in the cases and under the conditions provided for by law, subject to fair compensation being paid in good time for their loss. The use of property may be regulated by law insofar as is necessary for the general interest.
    2.     Intellectual property shall be protected.
    Article 13:    Right to asylum
    The right to asylum shall be guaranteed with due respect for the rules of the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 and the Protocol of 31 January 1967 relating to the status of refugees and in accordance with the Constitution.
    Article 14:    Protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition
    1.     Collective expulsions are prohibited.
    2.     No one may be removed, expelled or extradited to a Nation where there is a serious risk that he or she would be subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

    Chapter 10.4.5     Equality
    Article 1:    Equality before the law
    Everyone is equal before the law.
    Article 2:    Non-discrimination
    1.     Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited.
    2.     Within the scope of application of the Constitution and without prejudice to any of its specific provisions, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited.
    Article 3:    Cultural, religious and linguistic diversity
    Earth Government shall respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity.
    Article 4:    Equality between men and women
    Equality between men and women must be ensured in all areas, including employment, work and pay. The principle of equality shall not prevent the maintenance or adoption of measures providing for specific advantages in favour of the under-represented sex.
    Article 5:    The rights of the child
    1.     Children shall have the right to such protection and care as is necessary for their well-being. They may express their views freely. Such views shall be taken into consideration on matters which concern them in accordance with their age and maturity.
    2.     In all actions relating to children, whether taken by public authorities or private Institutions, the child's best interests must be a primary consideration.
    3.     Every child shall have the right to maintain on a regular basis a personal relationship and direct contact with both his or her parents, unless that is contrary to his or her interests.
    Article 6:    The rights of the elderly
    Earth Government recognises and respects the rights of the elderly to lead a life of dignity and independence and to participate in social and cultural life.
    Article 7:    Integration of persons with disabilities
    Earth Government recognises and respects the right of persons with disabilities to benefit from measures designed to ensure their independence, social and occupational integration and participation in the life of the community.
    Chapter 10.4.6     Solidarity
    Article 1:    Workers' right to information and consultation within the undertaking
    Workers or their representatives must, at the appropriate levels, be guaranteed information and consultation in good time in the cases and under the conditions provided for by Earth Government law and national laws and practices.
    Article 2:    Right of collective bargaining and action
    Workers and employers, or their respective organisations, have, in accordance with Earth Government law and national laws and practices, the right to negotiate and conclude collective agreements at the appropriate levels and, in cases of conflicts of interest, to take collective action to defend their interests, including strike action.
    Article 3:    Right of access to placement services
    Everyone has the right of access to a free placement service.
    Article 4:    Protection in the event of unjustified dismissal
    Every worker has the right to protection against unjustified dismissal, in accordance with Earth Government law and national laws and practices.
    Article 5:    Fair and just working conditions
    1.     Every worker has the right to working conditions which respect his or her health, safety and dignity.
    2.     Every worker has the right to limitation of maximum working hours, to daily and weekly rest periods and to an annual period of paid leave.
    Article 6:    Prohibition of child labour and protection of young people at work
    The employment of children is prohibited. The minimum age of admission to employment may not be lower than the minimum school-leaving age, without prejudice to such rules as may be more favourable to young people and except for limited derogations. Young people admitted to work must have working conditions appropriate to their age and be protected against economic exploitation and any work likely to harm their safety, health or physical, mental, moral or social development or to interfere with their education.
    Article 7:    Family and professional life
    1.     The family shall enjoy legal, economic and social protection.
    2.     To reconcile family and professional life, everyone shall have the right to protection from dismissal for a reason connected with maternity and the right to paid maternity leave and to parental leave following the birth or adoption of a child.
    Article 8:    Social security and social assistance
    1.     Earth Government recognises and respects the entitlement to social security benefits and social services providing protection in cases such as maternity, illness, industrial accidents, dependency or old age, and in the case of loss of employment, in accordance with the rules laid down by Earth Government law and national laws and practices.
    2.     Everyone residing and moving legally within Earth Government is entitled to social security benefits and social advantages in accordance with Earth Government law and national laws and practices.
    3.     In order to combat social exclusion and poverty, Earth Government recognises and respects the right to social and housing assistance so as to ensure a decent existence for all those who lack sufficient resources, in accordance with the rules laid down by Earth Government law and national laws and practices.
    Article 9:    Health care
    Everyone has the right of access to preventive health care and the right to benefit from medical treatment under the conditions established by national laws and practices. A high level of human health protection shall be ensured in the definition and implementation of all Earth Government policies and activities.
    Article 10:    Access to services of general economic interest
    Earth Government recognises and respects access to services of general economic interest as provided for in national laws and practices, in accordance with the Constitution, in order to promote the social and territorial cohesion of Earth Government.
    Article 11:    Environmental protection
    A high level of environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment must be integrated into the policies of Earth Government and ensured in accordance with the principle of sustainable development.
    Article 12:    Consumer protection
    Earth Government policies shall ensure a high level of consumer protection.
    Chapter 10.4.7     Universal health care, education, retirement security and employment services to every Global Community citizen
    Article 1:    Universal services
    Implemented through the Global Community with built-in mechanisms for optimum input and oversight guaranteed to all member-states, the Global Community offers a practicable starting point for achieving:
    (a)     a healthful, sustainable environment for every global community citizen,
    (b)     universal health care, publicly supported,
    (c)     education for all based upon individual capability,
    (d)     creative/productive employment for every global community citizen, and
    (e)     post-retirement security.

    This effort will lead over time to an escalation of human values and symbiotical relationships transcending money centered economics.
    Chapter 10.4.8     The immediate formation of the Earth Ministry of Health
    Article 1:    The immediate formation of the Earth Ministry of Health
    Earth Government is calling for the immediate formation of the Earth Ministry of Health. The globalization of trade, the extensive mouvement of people all over the world, the increase of poverty and diseases in developing countries and all over the world, have caused pathogens and exotic diseases to migrate over enormous distances and now, are an increasing threat to local ecosystems and communities, economies and health of every human being and all life. The Global Community, the Human Family, is calling this threat of the upmost importance and must be dealt with immediately by every nation. We must manage health in the world. We are calling for the immediate creation of the Earth Ministry of Health.

    Formation of a Global Ministry of Environmental Health
    1.     Must be non-profit, grassroots, and at community level.
    2.     Finances: drug companies and governments.
    3.    Global Declaration
    a)    very strict and mandatory
    b)    all nations participate
    c)    scientists and professionals in the fields who have dedicated their lives to environmental health
    d)    humanitarians
    Chapter 10.4.9     Legal rights
    Article 1: Everyone has the right to security of person.
    Article 2: No one shall be held in slavery.
    Article 3: No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
    Article 4: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
    Article 5:  Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence.
    Article 6: Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
    Article 7: Well-being
    (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
    2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

    Chapter 10.5     Section  3.    The ecological rights, the protection of the global life-support systems and the primordial human rights of future generations
    Article 1:    All rights of Sections 1 and 2 apply to future generations.
    Article 2:    Earth Government protects rights of future generations
    Earth Government shall protect the ecological rights, the global life-support systems and the primordial human rights of future generations. Global Parliament shall make legislation to that effect.

    The Global Community was built from a grassroots process with a vision for humanity that is challenging every person on Earth as well as nation governments, and has a vision of the people working together building a new civilization including a healthy and rewarding future for the next generations. Global cooperation brings people together for a common future for the good of all.


    Chapter 10.6     Section  4.    Community rights, rights of direct democracy, and the right that the greatest number of people has by virtue of its number (50% plus one) and after voting representatives democratically
    Chapter 10.6.1     Rights of Global Community citizens
    Article 1:    Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at elections to the Global Parliament
    1.     Every citizen of Earth Government has the right to vote and to stand as a candidate at elections to the Global Parliament in Member Nation in which he or she resides, under the same conditions as nationals of that Nation.
    2.     Members of the Global Parliament shall be elected by direct universal suffrage in a free and secret ballot.
    Article 2:    Right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal elections
    Every citizen of Earth Government has the right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal elections in Member Nation in which he or she resides under the same conditions as nationals of that Nation.
    Article 3:    Right to good administration
    1.     Every person has the right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the Institutions, bodies and agencies of Earth Government.
    2.     This right includes:
    (a)     the right of every person to be heard, before any individual measure which would affect him or her adversely is taken;
    (b)     the right of every person to have access to his or her file, while respecting the legitimate interests of confidentiality and of professional and business secrecy;
    (c)     the obligation of the administration to give reasons for its decisions.
    3.     Every person has the right to have Earth Government make good any damage caused by its Institutions or by its servants in the performance of their duties, in accordance with the general principles common to the laws of Member Nations.
    4.     Every person may write to the Institutions of Earth Government in one of the languages of the Constitution and must have an answer in the same language.
    Article 4:    Right of access to documents
    Any citizen of Earth Government, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member Nation, has a right of access to documents of the Institutions, bodies and agencies of Earth Government, in whatever form they are produced.
    Article 5:    Global Ombudsperson
    Any citizen of Earth Government and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member Nation has the right to refer to the global Ombudsperson cases of maladministration in the activities of the Institutions, bodies or agencies of Earth Government, with the exception of the global Court of Justice and the High Court acting in their judicial role.
    Article 6:    Right to petition
    Any citizen of Earth Government and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member Nation has the right to petition Global Parliament .
    Article 7:    Freedom of movement and of residence
    1.     Every citizen of Earth Government has the right to move and reside freely within the territory of Member Nations.
    2.     Freedom of movement and residence may be granted, in accordance with the Constitution, to nationals of third countries legally resident in the territory of a Member Nation.
    Article 8:    Diplomatic and consular protection
    Every citizen of Earth Government shall, in the territory of a third country in which Member Nation of which he or she is a national is not represented, be entitled to protection by the diplomatic or consular authorities of any Member Nation, on the same conditions as the nationals of that Member Nation.
    Chapter 10.6.2     Justice
    Article 1:    Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial
    Everyone whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by the law of Earth Government are violated has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal in compliance with the conditions laid down in this Article. Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law. Everyone shall have the possibility of being advised, defended and represented. Legal aid shall be made available to those who lack sufficient resources insofar as such aid is necessary to ensure effective access to justice.
    Article 2:    Presumption of innocence and right of defence
    1.     Everyone who has been charged shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.
    2.     Respect for the rights of the defence of anyone who has been charged shall be guaranteed.
    Article 3:    Principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties
    1.     No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence under national law or international law at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than that which was applicable at the time the criminal offence was committed. If, subsequent to the Global Judiciary of a criminal offence, the law provides for a lighter penalty, that penalty shall be applicable.
    2.     This Article shall not prejudice the trial and punishment of any person for any act or omission which, at the time when it was committed, was criminal according to the general principles recognised by the community of nations.
    3.     The severity of penalties must not be disproportionate to the criminal offence.
    Article 4:    Right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence
    No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again in criminal proceedings for an offence for which he or she has already been finally acquitted or convicted within Earth Government in accordance with the law.
    Article 5:    A sense of belonging given to the Global Community
    Earth Government shall create a sense of belonging given to the Global Community for all global citizens.
    Article 6:    Directive Principles for Global Community citizens
    It shall be the aim of Earth Government to secure certain other rights for all inhabitants within the federation of all nations, but without immediate guarantee of universal achievement and enforcement. These rights are defined as Directive Principles, obligating Earth Government to pursue every reasonable means for universal realization and implementation.
    a)     Prohibition against the death penalty.
    b)     Freedom for change of residence to anywhere on Earth conditioned by provisions for temporary sanctuaries in events of large numbers of refugees, stateless persons, or mass migrations.
    c)     Full access to information and to the accumulated knowledge of the human race.
    d)     Free and adequate public education available to everyone, extending to the pre-university level; Equal opportunities for elementary and higher education for all persons; equal opportunity for continued education for all persons throughout life; the right of any person or parent to choose a private educational institution at any time.
    e)     Free and adequate public health services and medical care available to everyone throughout life under conditions of free choice.
    f)     Equal opportunity for useful employment for everyone, with wages or remuneration sufficient to assure human dignity.
    g)     Freedom for investigation, research and reporting.
    h)     Freedom to travel without passport or visas or other forms of registration used to limit travel between, among or within nations.
    i)     Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
    j)     Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
    k)     The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
    l)     Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
    m)     The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
    n)     Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
    o)     In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

    Chapter 10.6.3     Rights of direct democracy
    Article 1:    Rights of direct democracy
    As defined in Article 10 of Chapter 9, direct democracy is a community right. Direct democracy is important to sustain life on the planet but its position on the Scale gives it its overall importance.

    Direct democracy is the right of global citizens to hold referendums on any issue -- and to veto legislation.

    Direct Democracy implies that:
    *     Global Citizens are willing and able to participate fully in the decision making process on issues that most affect them.
    *     Global Citizens should have full access to information on global affairs, and the conduct of global business should be open and transparent, with a well-developed global-wide communication system.
    *     Global Parliament should always recognize that it is accountable to Global Citizens.
    *     Direct democracy will encourage global citizen input into global policy, and enable Global Citizens to participate more actively in global affairs.
    *     Direct democracy will raise the level of public awareness and encourage debate of key global issues.
    *     Global Parliament can exercise the leadership necessary to become a model of effective “direct democracy” for all global communities.
    *     A direct democracy global law gives Global Citizens and Global Parliament an effective and orderly way of addressing contentious issues.
    *     A direct democracy global law strengthens the hand of Global Parliament by providing additional credibility in dealing with senior governments and non-elected bodies.
    *     A direct democracy bylaw shows that Global Parliament has faith in its Global Citizens. Thus, Global Parliament in turn earns increased respect from Global Citizens.
    *     Direct democracy does not mean government by referendum. Almost all Global Parliament decisions would continue to be made as they are now with the usual consultative processes. Few issues would be important and contentious enough to prompt referenda.


    'Direct democracy' is very much like a voting system based on 'proportional representation'. There are many different aspects of 'direct democracy'. For instance, in a single riding there may be as many as 8 seats and and several candidates running. Parties offer voters a slate of local candidates. Voters can rank candidates of the same party, but may also choose to give support to candidates of different parties. Voters rank as many or as few candidates as they wish. Voters can rank any number of candidates without fear their vote will be wasted by selecting unpopular candidates. A voter’s rankings will be considered in order until that voter’s ballot can be used. When your number one choice is eliminated for lack of support your number two becomes your first choice. When a voter’s ballot is used in support of a given candidate, but that candidate has a surplus of votes, a ballot’s unused portion will be transferred to the voter’s next choice until a ballot’s full value has been used. Most votes will count, little fear of wasting one’s vote, no fear of vote splitting. No need to support a candidate or party you don’t really want for fear of helping elect those you like even less. You can vote authentically. This is freedom for voters. This is how democracy is supposed to work. This voting system empowers voters more than parties because votes are for candidates not for parties. Also, candidate selection will take place at the local riding level, not at party head office. Most importantly, voters will rank candidates of the same party as well as candidates of different parties. It maximizes choice for voters. Competition is not just between candidates of different parties but also between candidates of the same party. This voting system is also a measure of independence from party control and that will make a very significant contribution to greater accountability in government. It will yield a legislature that mirrors the political, social, ethnic, and geographic diversity of a population. Electing candidates in multi-member ridings ensures a broader range of political interests and issues will be represented than is possible under any other system. Preferential voting induces a politics of cooperation, consensus, and civility.

    Direct democracy comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein all citizens can directly participate in the political decision-making process. Some proposed systems would give people both legislative and executive powers, but most extant systems allow input into the legislative process only. Direct democracy in its traditional form is rule by the people through referenda. The people are given the right to pass laws, veto laws and withdraw support from a representative (if the system has representatives) at any time.

    Direct democracy in its modern sense is characterized by three pillars:

    *     Initiative
    *     Referendum including binding referenda
    *     Recall

    The second pillar can include the ability to hold a binding referendum on whether a given law should be scrapped. This effectively grants the populace a veto on government legislation. The third pillar gives the people the right to recall elected officials by petition and referendum.

    In Canada, the use of citizens' assemblies (also known as an estates-general in the province of Quebec), involving citizen bodies chosen at random, is growing and avoids the disadvantages of older, more plebiscitary forms of direct democracy. The province of British Columbia recently set up a Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform in which members were chosen at random for each riding. The citizens' assembly has just recommended the province use Single Transferable Voting (STV) to elect the provincial legislature. In a referendum conducted on May 17, 2005, 57% of the voters approved by this new system of voting.

    Chapter 10.7     Section  5.    Economic (business and consumer rights, and their responsibilities and accountabilities) and social rights (civil and political rights)
    Chapter 10.7.1     Economic (business and consumer rights, and their responsibilities and accountabilities)
    Article 1:     A democratically planned global economy is needed to eradicate poverty in the world
    A)     Eradicate poverty as an ethical, social, and environmental imperative

    a.     Guarantee the right to potable water, clean air, food security, uncontaminated soil, shelter, and safe sanitation, allocating the national and international resources required.
    b.     Empower every human being with the education and resources to secure a sustainable livelihood, and provide social security and safety nets for those who are unable to support themselves.
    c.     Recognize the ignored, protect the vulnerable, serve those who suffer, and enable them to develop their capacities and to pursue their aspirations.

    B)     Ensure that economic activities and institutions at all levels promote human development in an equitable and sustainable manner

    a.     Promote the equitable distribution of wealth within nations and among nations.
    b.     Enhance the intellectual, financial, technical, and social resources of developing nations, and relieve them of onerous international debt.
    c.     Ensure that all trade supports sustainable resource use, environmental protection, and progressive labor standards.
    d.     Require multinational corporations and international financial organizations to act transparently in the public good, and hold them accountable for the consequences of their activities.

    C)     Affirm gender equality and equity as prerequisites to sustainable development and ensure universal access to education, health care, and economic opportunity

    a.     Secure the human rights of women and girls and end all violence against them.
    b.     Promote the active participation of women in all aspects of economic, political, civil, social, and cultural life as full and equal partners, decision makers, leaders, and beneficiaries.
    c.     Strengthen families and ensure the safety and loving nurture of all family members.

    D)     Uphold the right of all, without discrimination, to a natural and social environment supportive of human dignity, bodily health, and spiritual well-being, with special attention to the rights of indigenous peoples and minorities

    a.     Eliminate discrimination in all its forms, such as that based on race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religion, language, and national, ethnic or social origin.
    b.     Affirm the right of indigenous peoples to their spirituality, knowledge, lands and resources and to their related practice of sustainable livelihoods.
    c.     Honor and support the young people of our communities, enabling them to fulfill their essential role in creating sustainable societies.
    d.     Protect and restore outstanding places of cultural and spiritual significance.

    Article 2:     Corporations that they take responsibility on behalf of society
    Earth Government proposes to corporations that they take responsibility on behalf of society and people, and that they should pay more attention to human and Earth rights, working conditions and getting ride of corruption in the world of business and trade. Earth Government has developed a criteria, the Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship, for businesses and ask everyone to turn it into practice. Governments should encourage enterprises to use the criteria both by legal and moral means. At first, the criteria should be adopted in key areas such as procurement, facilities management, investment management, and human resources. Corporations want to be seen as good corporate leaders and have a stronger form of accountability. Business and trade will prosper after stronger common bonds and values have been established. Adopting the criteria will have a beneficial impact on future returns, and share price performance. Complying with the Criteria will help businesses to be part of the solution to the challenges of globalisation. In this way, the private sector in partnership with the civil society can help realize a vision: allowing a global equitable and peaceful development and a more stable and inclusive global economy.

    There is a need to have a sense of direction or proper guidance for projects and programs. On reviewing a development projects, the Global Community investigate the development proposal. Some of the questions to be asked include:

    Is the project one which affects, or is affected by the natural environments?
    Is the projects one which has the potential to affect land, water, air?
    Does the project affect commerce, employment, industry, lifestyles, etc.?
    Is the project one which affects existing public facilities, public services, utilities, institutions?
    Is the project one which affects the local tax base, property values, minority group, special interest groups, traffic?
    Is the project one which affects the community character and stability?
    Is there an anticipated organized opposition to the proposal?
    Does the project significantly affect historic and conservation lands?
    Will the project have impacts which have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment?
    Will the environmental effects of the project cause substantial adverse effects on human beings?
    Are the development and the existing habitats compatible? If "YES", what conservation methods will be necessary to protect the habitats?
    if the developer described conservation methods that will be used to protect sensitive habitats, are they likely to be successful?
    Are the claims of the developer with respect to these conservation methods realistic?
    If the development and habitats are not compatible, what communities will be at risk from:

    1. physical destruction;
    2. changes in groundwater level;
    3. change in quality of standing or flowing water, Oxygen content, salinity, turbidity, flow rate and temperature;
    4. chemical pollution change in sitting;
    5. air pollution; dust depositing;
    6. changes in nutrient status of habitats;

    In each of the above cases, what is the local, regional and national status of any habitats at risk?
    What dependent communities will be at risk?

    The Global Community Assessment Centre (GCAC) guides businesses on how to better integrate the Criteria issues in business. In the context of a healthy world sustainable development, companies shall perform better and increase shareholder value by properly managing risks, anticipating regulatory action or accessing new markets. Tangible results of adopting the Criteria include a better company reflected in its reputation and quality of brands.

    Complying with the Criteria is a tremendous asset to business owners, self-regulatory organizations, investors, brokers, regulators, stock exchanges, accountants, analysts, financial advisers, asset managers, and consultants. It will contribute to strengthen investment markets.

    Article 3:     The quality of Earth governance is reflected in each local community worldwide
    The quality of Earth governance is reflected in each local community worldwide. Earth Government shall show leadership by creating a global civil ethic within our ways of life. This Constitution describes all values needed for good global governance: mutual respect, tolerance, respect for life, justice for all everywhere, integrity, and caring. The Scale of Human and Earth Rights has become an inner truth and the benchmark of the millennium in how everyone sees all values. The Scale encompasses the right of all people to:
    *     the preservation of ethnicity;
    *     equitable treatment, including gender equity;
    *     security;
    *     protection against corruption and the military;
    *     earn a fair living, have shelter and provide for their own welfare and that of their family;
    *     peace and stability;
    *     universal value systems;
    *     participation in governance at all levels;
    *     access the Earth Court of Justice for redress of gross injustices; and
    *     equal access to information


    Article 4:     To make a business even better
    As a business you may:

    a)     be a corporate Knight
    b)     be a socially responsible investor
    c)     have taken the challenge of a more integrated approach to corporate responsibility by placing environmental and community-based objectives and measures onto the decision-making table alongside with the strategic business planning and operational factors that impact your bottom-line results
    d)    provide not only competitive return to your shareholders but you also operate your business in light of environmental and social contributions, and you have understood the interdependence between financial performance, environmental performance and commitment to the community
    e)     have taken a full life-cycle approach to integrate and balance environmental and economic decisions for major projects
    f)     have an active Environmental, Health and Safety Committee and integrated codes of conduct, policies, standards and operating procedures to reflect your corporate responsibility management
    g)     have scored high on categories such as:

    *     environmental performance
    *     product safety
    *     business practices
    *     help small business in the least developed countries
    *     commitment to the community
    *     abolition of child labour
    *     eliminate discrimination in respect of employment and occupation
    *     employee relations and diversity
    *     effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining
    *     corporate governance
    *     share performance
    *     global corporate responsibility
    *     against corruption in all its forms, including extortion and bribery
    *     health, safety and security
    *     provided help to combat diseases such as AIDS
    *     uphold the freedom of association
    *     audits and inspections
    *     emergency preparedness
    *     corporate global ethical values
    *     ensured decent working conditions
    *     implemented no-bribe policies
    *     standards of honesty, integrity and ethical behaviour
    *     elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labour
    *     in line with the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the Global Constitution
    h)     support a balance and responsible approach that promotes action on the issue of climate change as well as all other issues related to the global life-support systems:

    *     global warming
    *     Ozone layer
    *     wastes of all kind including nuclear and release of radiation
    *     climate change
    *     species of the fauna and flora becoming extinct
    *     losses of forest cover and of biological diversity
    *     the capacity for photosynthesis
    *     the water cycle
    *     food production systems
    *     genetic resources
    *     chemicals produced for human use and not found in nature and, eventually, reaching the environment with impacts on Earth's waters, soils, air, and ecology


    Now is time to reach a higher level of protection to life on Earth. We all need this for the survival of our species. Earth Government can help you integrate and balance global life-support systems protection, global community participation, and economic decisions into your operations and products.

    Earth Government wants to help you be an active corporate member of the Global Community, the human family, the Earth Community.

    Apply to us to be a global corporate citizen of the Global Community. Apply to obtain the Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship

    A Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship is a unique way to show the world that your ways of doing business are best for the Global Community.

    You can obtain the citizenship after accepting the Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship and following an assessment of your business. The process shown here is now standardized to all applicants. Earth Government then asked to operate your business as per the values of the citizenship.
    Article 5:    Scientists, tehnologists, technicians, engineers and all professionals to find sound solutions to human needs
    The Global Community has come to realize that peoples live in a world of increasing interdependence and our faith is intrinsically related to the preservation of the global life-support systems for the survival of humanity and all forms of life. Earth Government is calling upon scientists, tehnologists, technicians, engineers and all professionals to:

    a) create positive actions in their own fields to use the knowledge of science in a responsible manner, and
    b) find sound solutions to human needs and to fulfill aspirations without misusing human knowledge.
    Article 6:    Science has a responsibility for the well-being of humanity.
    Science gives a person a set of rules, a way of thinking, a philosophy to look at the physical universe, to observe and analyze it, and to discover its making, its functioning, and its structure. The scientific method is very reassuring to oneself. It gives us the basic reasoning we need in order to make informed and sound policy and management decisions.

    Science has a responsibility for the well-being of humanity. Science is found everywhere in our societies. Because of science, new technologies and techniques were developed and used in the market place. The products of science take important places in all aspects of our lives and actually save lives every second. They make our lives manageable in a million difeerent ways. Science has also played a destructive role in our history and is continuing to do so today. Science, technology and engineering are directly or indirectly responsible for threats to our environment, for wasteful uses of the Earth's resources and for wars and conflicts in the world.
    Article 7:    Science, technology and engineering are major forces of socio-economic change.
    Science, technology and engineering are major forces of socio-economic change. They cause humanity and its social and natural environment to evolve rapidly and, therefore, they carry serious responsibility and accountability. They are no longer regarded as benefactors of humanity. Ethical integrity has declined. In several parts of the world people have become suspicious and are questioning abuses of various kinds. Many scientists and other professionals have shown little regard to ethical problems arising from their work and must become responsible and accountable just like everyone else. There are no exception. We are all asked in helping humanity and all life on Earth from complete extinction. It is a common goal.
    Article 8:    Public funding should be directed towards very specific research projects related to the life-support system of the planet
    Researchers and other professionals receive public funding for finding solutions to problems in society. Public funding should be directed towards very specific research projects related to the life-support system of the planet and to a more sustainable biosphere.
    Article 9:    Science, technology and engineering to state ethical responsibilties and become a voice to present and future generations
    Science, technology and engineering must regain public trust, state ethical responsibilties and become a voice to present and future generations. Continuous discussions are needed on the ethical issues related to science, technology and engineering, their practices and ideologies.

    The public should be informed about research projects and their wider implications. All parties involved should collaborate with the public. Strong legal and moral safeguards must be implemented to discourage unethical practice and the wrongly use of science, technology and engineering for the development and manufacturing of mass destruction weapons, and for experiments which do not respect the dignity of human persons and animals.

    Article 10:    Prohibiting all acts, research projects, technology development, which do not conform to the ideas of humanity.
    Just as for human rights, the respect of the dignity of the human person is at the root of the ethics of science, technology and engineering. The Scale of Human Rights is aimed at prohibiting all acts, research projects, technology development, which do not conform to the ideas of humanity.

    There are many aspects of science, technology and engineering that must be discussed with respect to the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. For instances: cloning of human beings, and prohibiting the making of the human body and its products as a source of financial gain.

    Article 11:    A set of rules to balance consumption, consumer rights and responsibilities
    Globalization is a process interaction which involves growing economic interdependence of countries worldwide with implications and impacts on social, cultural, political, environmental and familial aspects and rights. With the globalization of the economy comes now the task for defining the obligations that go with the rights. This phenomenon is also present in the arena of international finance. In this area, however, the presumed virtues of globalization are far from being materialised. Until now, no orderly or stable financial system has been implemented. Furthermore, the current financial system does not succeed in channelling sufficient funds to finance crucial world problems such as adequate social development in poor countries. We have assigned ourselves the task of defining a set of rules to balance consumption, consumer rights and responsibilities :
    a)     Socially responsible and sustainable to future generations
    b)     In line with the universal values defined in this Constitution
    Article 12:    Democracy is not to be enforced by anyone and to anyone or to any global community
    The political system of an individual country does not have to be a democracy. Political rights of a country belong to that country alone. Democracy is not to be enforced by anyone and to anyone or to any global community. Every Member Nation of Earth Government can and should choose the political system of their choice with the understanding of the importance of such a right on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. On the other hand, representatives to Earth Government must be elected democratically in every part of the world. An individual country may have any political system at home but the government of that country will have to ensure (and allow verification by Earth Government) that representatives to Earth Government have been elected democratically. This way, every person in the world can claim the birth right of electing a democratic government to manage Earth: the rights to vote and elect representatives to form Earth Government.
    Article 13:    The role of families has impacts on sustainable consumption and development
    Global consumption is a very important aspect of a community's needs. Consumers should be concerned with the impact of their decisions on the environment but also on the lives, human and Earth rights and well-being of other people. Since one of the key functions of families as a social institution is to engage in production (selling their labour in return for wages) and consumption (using those wages to buy goods and services), then the role of families has impacts on sustainable consumption and development. This certainly limits the rights of a family and of a community.
    Article 14:    Universal quality of life values which lead to 'human betterment' or the improvement of the human condition
    Just as corporations have social responsibilities and so do consumers in societies. Consumers are socialized to improve the quality of their lives. Quality of life is a multi-dimensional, complex and very subjective concept. For instance, someone who has changed their consumption habits to better ensure that their choices will make a better quality of life for themselves, the environment and future generations, may be seen by others as having a lower or inferior quality of life since they have removed themselves from the materialistic mainstream characteristic of our consumer society. Someone may feel that an absence of violence and abuse in their life leads to a higher quality of living even though they have fewer tangible resources, money, or shelter; peace of mind and freedom from abuse has increased the quality of their daily life relative to what it was like before. There are universal quality of life values which lead to 'human betterment' or the improvement of the human condition. In addition to the value of species survival (human and other living organisms), they include: adequate resources, justice and equality, freedom, and peace or balance of power. A better quality of life for all people of the Global Community is a goal for all of us.
    Article 15:     Trade laws to facilitate cross border transactions
    Consumers' rights impinge on the rights of other humans living in the Global Community. The right to choice is the consumer right that refers to the right to have a range and variety of goods and services at competitive, fair prices and variable, satisfactory quality. In order to assure choice in the developed country markets, governments have implemented trade laws to facilitate cross border transactions and transnational corporations (TNCs) have set up business off shore so they can lessen the cost of the production process. The goods that are available in the developed country markets are provided by slave labour, child labour, sweatshops or in countries that allow the TNCs to forego adhering to pollution or ecological concerns and human rights in pursuit of profit. Labour rights are abused in efforts to earn more profits. This leads to abhorrent working conditions, job insecurity and low living standards (all human rights). Consumers in developed countries have been socialized to want more and more things to consume but have not been socialized to appreciate the impact of their consumption choices on the human rights of other people; that is, they are not being responsible for their decisions.
    Article 16:     Social justice is a universal value
    As universal values, equality, justice and freedoms are concerned with our ability to decide, to choose values and to participate in the making of laws, and they are dependent on the recognition of other people. These values forbid any form of discrimination on the grounds of race, nationality, sex, religion, age or mother tongue. By accepting both values of freedom and equality we can achieve justice. One can be answerable for one's actions in a 'just' way only if judgements are given in the framework of democratically established laws and courts. Social justice is another universal value to which Earth Government aspires and accepts as a universal value. Social justice consists in sharing wealth with a view to greater equality and the equal recognition of each individual's merits. All persons within a given society deserve equal access to goods and services that fulfill basic human needs.

    Chapter 10.7.2     Social rights (civil and political rights)
    Article 1:     Social justice
    The debt of developing countries was really a global tax developed countries had to pay to developing countries The Earth Court of Justice is required to rule that the debt of the poor nations or 'developing nations' to the rich nations was in actuality a form of global tax and therefore the poor or 'developing' nations dont have to pay it back. In fact poor nations should expect way more money as tax by the rich nations and not as loans. The state of the world today is the result of a specific set of interlocking institutions: the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO. These institutions are designed to generate massive wealth for the few and poverty for the rest. The same people who make the decisions in government and corporation make the profit. They create a tight concentration of power. Together they are a form of anti-government whose only goal is profit. The IMF, through Structural Adjustment Programs, now directly runs the economies of over 70 countries. That means that about 1000 economists and bureaucrats control the economic policies for 1.4 billion people in these countries. That is a form of anti-government. The people that profit most from the global economy are white people. The people who are most oppressed by the global economy are people of colour. Racism and sexism have become the norm. The entire planet is in a state of low intensity civil war.The ruling elite profit off of the exploitation of the rest of the world. Earth Government was looking for a method of raising global taxes, of redistributing incomes to the poorest communities, of providing debt-free technical assistance to non-industrial and developing countries to help them out of poverty and to meet environmental and social standards, but there it was all along right on our eyes. The Earth Court of Justice will be asked to decide on the debt be changed into an actual tax to be paid by the rich nations to the poor nations, and to decide on the amount of tax to be paid. Developing nations will then be able to start rebuilding their communities as per the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the Global Constitution. They will not have to satisfy the economic needs and wishes of the rich nations. The Earth Court of Justice will also be asked to rule illegal the activities of the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO unless they become a part of a greater whole such as the Earth Ministry of Financial Institutions, a part of Earth Government. These institutions will be controlled by the greater whole.

    Article 2:    Socially responsible use of science and technology
    Earth Government shall explore ways of encouraging a more socially responsible use of science and technology in a number of fields, including information technology, biotechnology and genetic engineering. It also explores corporate responsibility, often generated in relation to social and environmental issues.
    Article 3:    Civil and social rights and freedoms
    a)     Assure to each child the right to the full realization of his or her potential.
    b)     Social Security for everyone to relieve the hazards of unemployment, sickness, old age, family circumstances, disability, catastrophies of nature, and technological change, and to allow retirement with sufficient lifetime income for living under condi tions of human dignity during older age.
    c)     Equal opportunity for leisure time for everyone; better distribution of the work load of society so that every person may have equitable leisure time opportunities.
    d)     Equal opportunity for everyone to enjoy the benefits of scientific and technological discoveries and developments.
    e)     Freedom of choice in work, occupation, employment or profession.
    f)     Right of privacy of person, family and association; prohibition against surveillance as a means of political control.
    g)     Right to family planning and free public assistance to achieve family planning objectives.
    h)     Right of habeous corpus; no ex-post-facto laws; no double jeopardy; right to refuse self-incrimination or the incrimination of another.
    i)     Freedom of assembly, association, organization, petition and peaceful demonstration.
    j)     Freedom to vote without duress, and freedom for political organization and campaigning without censorship or recrimination.
    k)     Freedom to profess and promote political beliefs or no political beliefs.
    Article 4:    Democratic rights, and equality rights
    a)     Everyone has the right to a nationality;
    b)     Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others;
    c)     No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property;
    d)     Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association;
    e)     No one may be compelled to belong to an association;
    f)     Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives;
    g)     Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country;
    h)     Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality;
    i)     Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment;
    j)     Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work;
    k)     Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and  supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection;
    l)     Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests;
    m)     Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay; and n)     Everyone is entitled to a social and international order.

    Chapter 10.8     Section  6.    Cultural and religious rights
    Article 1:    Cultural and religious differences can promote human and Earth rights
    Traditional customs and standards could burden the sustainability of all life on Earth. They could burden Earth society or any society forever, and holds individuals in a straitjacket. We cannot accept that. No one can! There are choices to be made and you must make them. Cultures can develop and can go on developing. Even religious beliefs may evolve. We are living now and we are able to create these changes. Cultural and religious differences cannot be a reason or an excuse or a pretext for not respecting human and Earth rights including and most importantly the ecological rights. Quite the contrary, all kinds of cultures may promote human and Earth rights. They are different in their achievements, but they are equal in dignity where they are expressions of freedom. At any time or in any given place, men, women and children use their culture to invent new ways of making human and Earth rights a living reality. Diversity enriches us if it respects the dignity of each individual, and if it takes account of human and Earth rights as a whole.

    A sustainable world can be built with the help of a very powerful entity: the human spirit. Community participation generates the energy needed to sustain the planet and all life.



    Religious and environmental communities have formed a powerful alliance for sustainability.


    Intrinsic human cooperation at the core of creative cultural evolution promises to give rise to a new epoch for humanity defined by societal sustainability and lasting world peace. The biological basis for human cooperation and symbiotical relationships both validate and underlie evolutionary panaltruism in and beyond the twenty-first century. Twenty-first century education centered on human empathy and compassion and a terror-free global community by the year 2010 garners important impetus from The Golden Rule principle.

    The Golden Rule principle, also called the Ethic of Reciprocity by theologians, says: "Dont do to others what you wouldn't want done to you." Or treat others the way you would want to be treated. The Golden Rule has a moral aspect found in each religion or faith. It could be used as a global ethic. There are analogues for the golden rule in 13 faiths. These 13 analogue statements are passages found in the scriptures or writings that promote this ethos. Every faith is unanimous of saying that every individual should be treated with the same respect and dignity we all seek for ourselves. As a first step in bringing together religious leaders all around the world, the Global Community is presenting here 13 statements that unify us all in one Golden Rule.

    A new symbiotical relationship between religion and the protection of the global life-support systems has begun to take place all over the world. Religious rituals now support the conservation efforts and play a central role in governing sustainable use of the natural environment.

    Major faiths are issuing declarations, advocating for new national policies, and creating educational activities in support of a sustainable global community. The Global Community is establishing a symbiotical relationship between spirituality and science, between our heart and mind, and God, between religion and the environment.

    The human family is finding its role in the universe, a higher purpose and a meaning. We now can celebrate life.

    A sustainable world can be built with the help of a very powerful entity: the human spirit. Community participation generates the energy needed to sustain the planet and all life. Religious and environmental communities have formed a powerful alliance for sustainability. Our next objective will be to find statements from all religions that promote the respect, stewardship, protection, ethical and moral responsibility to life and of the environment, the Earth global life-support systems, and statements that promote a responsible Earth management. We are also asking for specific statements on environmental conservation such as those expressed by the Islamic religion.

    Societal sustainability in addressing international terrorism and the creation of a democratically planned global economy marshals previously untapped human cooperation, energy, and resources. Investigating, understanding, and eradicating the root causes of international terrorism entails objective analyses of all social dichotomies ranging in realm from religious dogmas, to political ideologies, to economic systems.

    Native Spirituality
    We are as much alive as we keep the Earth alive.
    Chief Dan George

    Sikhism
    I am a stranger to no one; and no one is a stranger to me. Indeed, I am a friend to all.
    Guru Granth Sahib, pg. 1299

    Christianity
    In everything, do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets.
    Jesus, Matthews 7:12

    BaHa'I Faith
    Lay not on any soul a load that you would not wish to be laid upon you, and desire not for anyone the things you would not desire for yourself.
    Baha'ullah, Gleanings

    Judaism
    What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour. This is the whole Torah; all the rest is commentary.
    Hillel, Talmud, Shabbat 31a

    Buddhism
    Treat not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.
    Udana-Varga 5.18

    Islam
    Not one of you truly believes until you wish for others what you wish for yourself.
    The Prophet Muhammad, Hadith

    Taoism
    Regard your neighbour's gain as your own gain, and your neighbour's loss as your own loss.
    T'ai Shang Kan Ying P'ien, 213-218

    Hinduism
    This is the sum of duty: do not do to others what would cause pain if done to you.
    Mahabharata 5:1517

    Confucianism
    One word which sums up the basis of all good conduct...loving kindness. Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself.
    Confucius, Analeets, 15.23

    Jainism
    One should treat all creatures in the world as one would like to be treated.
    Mahavira,Sutrakritanga

    Unitarianism
    We affirm and promote respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.
    Unitarian principle

    Zoroastrianism
    Do not do unto others whatever is injurious to yourself.
    Shayast-na-Shayast, 13.29

    Article 2:    Encouragement for cultural diversity
    Article 3:    Freedom for peaceful self-determination for minorities, refugees and dissenters
    Article 4:    Freedom to profess, practice and promote religious or religious beliefs or no religion or religious belief
    Article 5:    Fundamental freedoms, and language rights
    (1)    Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
    (2)    Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
    (3)    Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

    Article 6:    Right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community
    Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
    Article 7:    Freedom of thought and conscience
    Freedom of thought and conscience, speech, press, writing, communication, expression, publication, broadcasting, telecasting, and cinema, except as an overt part of or incitement to violence, armed riot or insurrection.
    Article 8:    A crime against the natural world is a sin
    To commit a crime against the natural world is a sin. It is a sin for humans to:
    a)     cause species to become extinct and to destroy the biological diversity of God's creation
    b)     degrade the integrity of Earth by causing changes in its climate, by stripping the Earth of its natural forests, or destroying its wetlands
    c)     injure other humans with disease
    d)     contaminate the Earth's waters, its land, its air, and its life, with poisonous substances

    We have become un-Creators. Earth is in jeopardy at our hands.
    Article 9:    The special responsibility that falls to all Global Community citizens
    The imperative first step is to repent of our sins, in the presence of God and one another. This repentance of our social and ecological sins will acknowledge the special responsibility that falls to those of us who are citizens of the world.
    Article 10:    God's sacred Earth is the moral assignment of our time
    Earth Government firmly believes that addressing the degradation of God's sacred Earth is the moral assignment of our time comparable to the Civil Rights struggles of the 1960s, the worldwide movement to achieve equality for women, or ongoing efforts to control weapons of mass destruction in a post-Hiroshima world.
    Article 11:    Ecological Affirmations of Faith
    a)     We stand with awe and gratitude as members of God's bountiful and good creation. We rejoice in the splendor and mystery of countless species, our common creaturehood, and the interdependence of all that God makes. We believe that the Earth is home for all and that it has been created intrinsically good.
    b)     We lament that the human species is shattering the splendid gifts of this web of life, ignoring our responsibility for the well being of all life, while destroying species and their habitats at a rate never before known in human history.
    c)     We believe that the Holy Spirit, who animates all of creation, breathes in us and can empower us to participate in working toward the flourishing of Earth's community of life. We believe that the people of God are called to forge ways of being human that enable socially just and ecologically sustainable communities to flourish for generations to come.
    d)     We lament that we have rejected this vocation, and have distorted our God-given abilities and knowledge in order to ransack and often destroy ecosystems and human communities rather than to protect, strengthen, and nourish them.
    e)     We believe that, in boundless love that hungers for justice, God acts to restore and redeem all creation (including human beings). God incarnate affirms all creation, which becomes a sacred window to eternity. In the cross and resurrection we know that God is drawn into life's most brutal and broken places and there brings forth healing and liberating power. That saving action restores right relationships among all members of the whole creation.
    f)     We confess that instead of living and proclaiming this salvation through our very lives and worship, we have abused and exploited the Earth and people on the margins of power and privilege, altering climates, extinguishing species, and jeopardizing Earth's capacity to sustain life as we know and love it.
    g)     We believe that the created world is sacred-a revelation of God's power and gracious presence filling all things. This sacred quality of creation demands moderation and sharing, urgent antidotes for our excess in consumption and waste, reminding us that economic justice is an essential condition of ecological integrity.
    h)     We cling to God's trustworthy promise to restore, renew, and fulfill all that God creates. We long for and work toward the day when churches, will respond to the groaning of creation and to God's passionate desire to renew the face of the Earth.
    i)     We look forward to the day when the lamentations and groans of creation will be over, justice with peace will reign, humankind will nurture not betray the Earth, and all of creation will sing for joy.

    Article 12:    Eco-justice
    The Global Community is compelled to seek eco-justice, the integration of social justice and ecological integrity.
    a)     The quest for eco-justice also implies the development of a set of human environmental rights, since one of the essential conditions of human well being is ecological integrity. These moral entitlements include protection of soils, air, and water from diverse pollutants; the preservation of biodiversity; and governmental actions ensuring the fair and frugal use of creation's riches.
    b)     Sustainability -- living within the bounds of planetary capacities indefinitely, in fairness to both present and future generations of life. God's covenant is with humanity and all other living creatures for all future generations. The concern for sustainability forces us to be responsible for the truly long-term impacts of our lifestyles and policies.
    c)     Bioresponsibility-- extending the covenant of justice to include all other life forms as beloved creatures of God and as expressions of God's presence, wisdom, power, and glory. We do not determine nor declare creation's value, and other creatures should not be treated merely as instruments for our needs and wants. Other species have their own integrity. They deserve a fair share of Earth's bounty- a share that allows a biodiversity of life to thrive along with human communities.
    d)     Humility--recognizing, as an antidote to arrogance, the limits of human knowledge, technological ingenuity, and moral character. We are not the masters of creation. Knowing human capacities for error and evil, humility keeps our own species in check for the good of the whole of Earth as God's creation.
    e)     Generosity--sharing Earth's riches to promote and defend the common good in recognition of God's purposes for the whole creation and God's gift of abundant life. Humans are not collections of isolated individuals, but rather communities of socially and ecologically interdependent beings. A measure of a good society is not whether it privileges those who already have much, but rather whether it privileges the most vulnerable members of creation. Essentially, these tasks require good government at all levels, from local to regional to national to Earth Government.
    f)     Frugality -- restraining economic production and consumption for the sake of eco-justice. Living lives filled with God's Spirit liberates us from the illusion of finding wholeness in the accumulation of material things and brings us to the reality of God's just purposes. Frugality connotes moderation, sufficiency, and temperance. Many call it simplicity. It demands the careful conservation of Earth's riches, comprehensive recycling, minimal harm to other species, material efficiency and the elimination of waste, and product durability. Frugality is the corrective to a cardinal vice of the age: prodigality - excessively taking from and wasting God's creation. On a finite planet, frugality is an expression of love and an instrument for justice and sustainability: it enables all life to thrive together by sparing and sharing global goods.
    g)     Solidarity -- acknowledging that we are increasingly bound together as a global community in which we bear responsibility for one another's well being. The social and environmental problems of the age must be addressed with cooperative action at all levels-local, regional, national and Earth Government. Solidarity is a commitment to the global common good through international cooperation.
    h)     Compassion -- sharing the joys and sufferings of all Earth's members and making them our own. The Global Community sees the vulnerable and excluded. From compassion flows inclusive caring and careful service to meet the needs of others.

     

     

    Global politics

    Global politics have never been handled for the view of what is best to humanity. If and when we did, we did something of no consequences. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and subsequently the Human Rights Charters of many nations, were good examples of failures to humanity. We developed rights and gave them equal importance. Nothing we can apply to any real situations. Nothing real! No where in Nature do we ever observe rights of equal importance. We, human beings, invented the Declaration and now much of our future is dependent on it.

    What is truly real is the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. It is a scale of social values. Just think about a situation where a group of people are watching a basketball game. Suddenly someone observed a hole in the roof and a dangerous structural fault. The roof is likely to fall anytime soon. That someone gives the alarm. Now what is the most important thing to do right now? If you think like someone with a good common sense, the most important thing to do right now is of course to have everyone out of the building. But if you think like those who developed the Declaration, you would still be watching the game (making sure that all basketball players follow the rules of the game as they have the same rights) and you would be dying later on along with everyone else in the building. Not a good scenario!

    What if it is a deadly gas coming into the building? a fire? an earthquake? a flood? What if the building is the Earth, home to all life we know of. What about climate change?! Green gases causing it. Deadly gases! The Kyoto Protocol is giving the alarm! What is the most important thing to do? That is the purpose of the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. It tells you what are the most important rights to sustain humanity now and in the coming future. An analysis has shown that the Declaration of Human Rights and Charters of Nations all over the world dont even consider these important rights. They are not even included. All because those who developed the Declaration were living in a different world where we live, where human beings live on Earth. They lived in an imaginary space where everything is just as important as everything else.

    We have to rectify their failures of helping humanity. We have to throw away the Declaration and Charters, and adopt the Scale. Simple as that!

    Global politics is about doing what is right for all of us now and in the future, and for all life on the planet. We base our understandings and actions on principles we all know are rights deep down. You cannot have a nation invading another nation for its resources? its water? its oil and gas? We have chaos without principles! We have conflicts and wars. There are ways of doing things that will give everyone a good survival chance. There are global equitable and sustainable solutions.

    Global politics are meant to guide us on the right path. They are meant to bring humanity on a safe ground. They are about the survival of all of us of the planet.


    Back to top of page









     

    Global citizen responsibility and accountability

    9.1    Public accountability of autonomous public organizations
    9.2    Ideas about accountability

    9.3     Conflicts within components of accountability
    9.4     Role of the Secretary of the Global Council
    9.5     Recommendations to modernize the Secretary’s role, and reinforce the integrity of the centre
    9.6     Responsibility, accountability and the role of Deputy Ministers in the GCEG
    9.7     Ministerial responsibility and the Global Financial Administration Act: the constitutional obligation to account for GCEG spending
    9.8     The fundamental principles underlying responsible global parliamentary government
    9.9     The evolving nature of GCEG
    9.10     Factors that have affected and altered the nature of government and governance in the world over the last 150 years
    9.11     Political actors versus professional actors
    9.12     The relationship between the exempt staff serving the President and the public servants
    9.13     The interface between political actors and professional actors
    9.14     The multiple responsibilities and accountabilities of Deputy Ministers
    9.15     Mechanisms for political and professional financial accountability
    9.16     The Global Parliament procedure and merits
    9.17     The responsibilities of an accounting officer
    9.18     The roles and accountabilities of Deputy Ministers/Accounting Officers
    9.19     Ministerial responsibility and the Global Financial Administration Act: the Constitutional obligation to account for GCEG spending
    9.20     Ministerial responsibility in GCEG
    9.21     The constitutional basis of global ministerial responsibility
    9.22     The statutory basis of financial accountability
    9.23     Responsibility, accountability, liability
    9.24     Recent statements on responsibility and accountability
    9.25     Accountability of Deputy Ministers
    9.26     Deputy Ministers’ direct accountability
    9.27     Deputy Ministers’ indirect accountability
    9.28     Conflict resulting from Deputy Ministers’ accountabilities
    9.29     The problem known as “regulation within government”
    9.30     Alternative patterns of governance and accountability
    9.31     What might be the best model of policy administration?
    9.32     Performance management
    9.33     The Global Community interest


    Back to top of page












    Public accountability of autonomous public organizations

    GCEG may not be able to accomplish its governance and financial responsibility objectives because of the “ambiguous nature of control and accountability” in dealing with government owned corporations, foundations, contracted organizations and other autonomous public bodies. The differing organizational forms and the variations in the degree of government control in these bodies, in contrast to the typical structure of government departments, complicate an already complex array of institutions mandated by GCEG to perform various tasks at arm’s length.

    The accountability of public organizations has become an increasingly complex issue for contemporary governments. The traditional parliamentary model of accountability that presumed a linear and hierarchical relationship between a public organization, a Minister and Global Parliament has decreasing relevance for the manner in which public services are actually delivered at the beginning of the 21st century. The need to reconsider accountability is apparent even for organizations that are components of “mainstream government.” Ministers have become less willing to accept full responsibility for the actions of their organizations, especially implementation decisions made at lower levels of those organizations, and the logic of government reforms has been that those lower level officials should have more latitude for making decisions and be more accountable for their actions. Further, given that a smaller percentage of public services are now delivered directly by ministerial departments, a re-examination of accountability is called for if the public sector is to slow, and perhaps even reverse, the public’s loss of confidence.

    Several changes in politics and public administration are driving changes in accountability. First, accountability as a form of democracy is increasingly important because of the decline of other forms of democracy. Participation in elections and membership in political parties have been declining steadily over the past several decades, and citizens appear to have lost much of their faith in the input institutions of democracy such as voting. Thinking about democracy, by both political leaders and scholars, has shifted to some extent towards “output legitimation,” emphasizing the role of policy and administration in building the foundations of a legitimate state. In that setting, accountability, as well as the ability of citizens to participate in controlling organizations that deliver their services, becomes crucial to democratic politics. Public sector reforms also have emphasized participation by clients, and by the public in general, in the decisions of public organizations, so that accountability now is being exercised downward as well as upward. In some instances, the ability of clientele to exert influence over, and demand accountability from, public organizations has been formalized through advice and consultation institutions, while in other instances the relationships with the stakeholders are more informal and subtle. In all these relationships among clientele and service providers, however, it is clear that the public expects direct accountability from public organizations, and that representative institutions no longer are considered sufficient means of control.

    Further, public organizations must find ways to deal effectively with other organizations in their environment that are necessary for the success of their programs. Very few, if any, public sector organizations can now deliver services effectively without cooperating with other organizations, public or private. Even if they could ignore other actors in their policymaking environment, public organizations would probably be ill-advised to consider acting as a “single, lonely organization” and not attempt to work cooperatively with programs and organizations that can make their program more effective. Thus, public organizations must now respond to pressures coming from a range of political and social actors, and some of those pressures may conflict with traditional forms of control coming from ministers and Global Parliament. In particular, coordination may diffuse both financial and programmatic lines of control and make it difficult for traditional accountability organizations to assign responsibility for actions.

    The complexity involved in delivering contemporary public services now also affects accountability because of the problem of “many hands”. The long chains of action involved in delivering services, and the number of actors involved in them, makes it difficult to identify the source of any administrative or policy failure, should one occur. As well, the capacity to track the utilization of public money involved in contracts, coordinated service delivery systems and partnership arrangements makes it more difficult to maintain fiscal accountability. Further, contracting powers granted without close supervision by Global Parliament, a Minister, or a board of directors may also make maintaining substantive accountability for policy decisions more difficult. These problems, arising from the involvement of multiple actors in the delivery of services, occur as policies are formulated and as the purposes for which contracts and other instruments of governing are being devised, as well as when the programs are being implemented with the contracts or cooperative mechanisms. Much of the focus on accountability of policy instruments such as contracts has been placed on implementation, but greater concern needs to be raised about the purposes for which these instruments are used and the content of the policy that is being implemented.

    Although the above-mentioned changes in patterns of governance are relevant, the most significant change affecting accountability in the public sector has been the increasing use of autonomous and quasi-autonomous organizations to deliver public services. A dominant pattern of reform in the public sector has been the creation of “agencies” to deliver public service. It is sometimes called “Distributed Public Governance,” meaning that tasks that once were housed within GPEC departments have now been widely dispersed. The public sector has as a consequence become more complex organizationally, with a large number of structures responsible for individual segments of policy, each having varying degrees of connection to public authority. A central justification motivating these reforms has been to separate policy-making and administration, with the presumption that greater managerial freedom would enhance the efficiency of the organizations.

    The slogan “let the managers manage”is used to justify the increasing power of managers in making decisions within the public sector and consequent weakening of the hierarchical control of ministers over the activities for which they are nominally responsible. The argument in favour of creating agencies and analogous organizations has also been to some degree accountability, at least financial accountability. When a program is located within a larger department, it may be difficult for Global Parliament or auditors to assess the real costs for that program, because of cross-subsidization and shared overheads. Having each organization as a “tub on its own bottom” makes tracking costs and financial accountability more feasible, although the separation from direct ministerial authority may limit the mechanisms for enforcing accountability.

    Although separating ministries into numerous separate organizations providing a single service may have improved one aspect of accountability, it appears to have had a negative impact on other aspects. In addition to the complexities identified already, the problem of coordination and the linking of services has been exacerbated by the development of the dispersed model of service delivery. Coordination and coherence have always been difficult in the public sector, but disaggregating ministries has only increased the problems. In accountability terms, the diffusion of responsibility for programs makes it difficult to trace authority and financial flows when managers attempt to overcome the internal divisions of government. Further, to reach its governance potential, the public sector must develop more coherent policy goals and integrated visions of the future; having multiple poorly coordinated organizations only increases the difficulty in governing in a coherent manner.

    To some extent, the use of these autonomous organizations is not new in the public sector, and analogous organizations have been used in the past. The logic of the contemporary changes is not dissimilar to that frequently used to justify the creation of agencies, public corporations, “quangos,” and a host of other organizations. Even from the initial use of these formats, there have been significant concerns about the ability of conventional public sector processes to maintain acceptable levels of control over the processes and performance of those organizations. All of these formats involve organizations operating at arm’s length from government and therefore having greater latitude for action; as a result, they also present accountability problems.

    Most problems of accountability for autonomous organizations have been assumed to be rather familiar ones of “shirking” responsibilities in order to retain budget funds, or perhaps pursuing their own policy interests. When autonomous or quasi-autonomous organizations are granted the latitude to make operational, and even strategic, decisions with minimal external supervision, the possibility for actions of this sort will always exist, and so accountability becomes an issue of ensuring conformity to the core policy and administrative values in the public sector, while still maintaining the autonomy considered necessary for efficiency.

    Ideas About Accountability

    To this point, the discussion has dealt with accountability as if the meaning of the term were agreed upon. In fact, the term accountability is used in at least four ways, each with rather different implications for public administration. We should understand the differences among these concepts and be more careful when discussing accountability, both in academic and practical discourse. Indeed, if one conception of accountability is stressed, then performance on the other dimensions may be undermined. In addition to distinctions among the four versions of accountability, it is important to differentiate accountability from other controls over public organizations, and especially differentiate ex ante controls used to shape behaviour from accountability that tends to be largely ex post. In general governments have been shifting from ex ante to ex post controls, allowing greater latitude for organizational leaders, especially for organizations such as the government owned corporations designed to have greater latitude for action, but which must still be held accountable for their actions.

    Contemporary languages tend to be flexible: the meaning of words can change or a word may have multiple meanings, depending on the context or the intent of the speaker. Politicians, public servants, the media and even academics use terms like responsibility, accountability, answerability and responsiveness loosely and often synonymously. Perhaps the most elusive dimension of the new global public management is its effect on accountability. Public management reformers have spoken of the need to improve accountability of Government and Ministers to the legislature; of public servants to Ministers; of public servants to their public service superiors; and, in certain respects, of public servants to legislators and even global citizens directly. The several meanings attached to accountability derive from different understandings of the purposes of accountability and how they relate to one another. Publications by the GCEG have not always been precise in the use of these key words. "Responsibility" in the Global Constitution, a document submitted August 2005, the meaning of the term “responsible” is not clearly defined but rather implied. The document notes that “Ministers are constitutionally responsible for the provision and conduct of government.” Does this sentence mean that Ministers are empowered to conduct government or that they must give an account of how they have exercised their powers? Another sentence suggests the latter: “Global Parliament may focus responsibility for the conduct of government on those of its members who hold ministerial office and who in the ultimate must personally answer to Global Parliament and thence to the electorate for their actions and the actions of their subordinates.” Furthermore, the document seems to use the words “answer” and “answerable” in the way others would use the words “account” and “accountable.”

    In another publication, Guidance for Deputy Ministers, a definition is provided: “Responsibility identifies the field within which a public office holder (whether elected or unelected) can act: it is defined by the specific authority given to an office holder (by law or delegation).” This sentence would suggest that responsibility refers to empowerment. The same publication also provides definitions of “accountability” and “answerability.” “Accountability” is the means of enforcing or explaining responsibility. It involves rendering an account of how responsibilities have been carried out and problems corrected and, depending on the circumstances, accepting personal consequences for problems the office holder caused or problems that could have been avoided or corrected if the office holder had acted appropriately. This definition suggests that accountability is the concomitant of empowerment: the obligation to explain how power was exercised and to accept the consequences for problems, including the possibility of sanctions. Answerability would appear to be a reporting function, without the possibility of sanctions in the event of problems being reported.

    Among other things, global governing responsibly implies that in providing good government for the people of the Global Community, Ministers are responsible and accountable to Global Parliament for the use of those powers vested in them by statute. Ministers must be present in Global Parliament to respond to questions on the use of those powers, as well as to accept responsibility and account for that use.

    This sentence suggests that “responsible” or “responsibility” refers to an obligation to accept possible blame—and sanctions—for the unacceptable exercise of power (which may, rather, be the definition of “accountability”). The publication is more helpful in dealing with the concept of “answerability”:

    “Ministers are also required to answer to Parliament by providing information for Parliament on the use of powers by bodies that report to Parliament through them.”

    There is no suggestion of personal blame or sanctions against the Minister in the case of answerability.

    The overlap is common usage between responsibility and accountability. Responsibility is most often used in respect to the authority of Ministers under a system of global parliamentary government and to the duties and obligations that come with this authority: ministerial responsibility. In most circumstances, accountability can be thought of as enforcing or explaining responsibility. It is often used as a synonym for ‘responsibility’ because both are defined by the office holder’s authority; they cover the same ground. Accountability involves rendering an account to someone, such as Global Parliament or a superior, on how and how well one’s responsibilities are being met, on actions taken to correct problems and to ensure they do not recur. It also involves accepting personal consequences, such as discipline, for problems that could have been avoided had the individual acted appropriately.

    Answerability is sometimes used “as a term to describe a key aspect of accountability, the duty to inform and explain. Thus answerability does not include the personal consequences that are a part of accountability. The concept of answerability sometimes is also used in circumstances where full and direct accountability is not an issue. For example, public servants are answerable before parliamentary committees, not accountable to them. Ministers are answerable to Global Parliament for independent tribunals, not accountable for their decisions.”

    The term “responsibility” is also often used synonymously with accountability, but its meaning should be differentiated. While accountability is based upon a hierarchical and external relationship, responsibility involves a more inward source of control being exercised over the actions of public servants. The individual public servant is expected to remain responsible to his or her own conception of the law being administered, as well as to an internalized set of values. 1 In this view, the public servant must exercise some personal judgment about appropriate behaviour and may be called upon to make an independent assessment of the legality of the actions that she or he is being mandated to undertake by the Minister. This difference in standards of behaviour in the public service raises the difficult question of whether the public servant, and the public organization, is indeed the servant of the Minister or the servant of the public. The answer to that question in most traditional models of accountability is clearly that the public servant is primarily, or even totally, the servant of the Minister. To the extent that there are judgments made about the public good, those judgments are to be made by the Minister, and a “willing suspension of judgment” may be enshrined in formal statements of constitutional principles. That having been said, however, both changes in the ethos of public servants as members of society and the increased transparency of most political systems have made maintaining internal control over public servants less viable than in the past. Civil servants may have been more willing to accept the control of their Minister so long as they were in a career structure separated from the outside and the two sets of actors were closely dependent upon one another. As managerial positions in the public sector have been opened to outside competition, senior public managers may no longer share the values of their ministers, or of their colleagues who have spent an entire career in government, and they therefore may be less committed, not only to obedience to their Minister, but also to the ethical principles that have been common within the public service.

    Accountability per se takes answerability one step further and demands that the individuals or organizations in question not only render an account of action, but that they be judged by some independent body on that action. In particular, accountability has come to mean that the public bureaucracy reports to a political organization, generally the legislature, and that it and the political officials in charge of the organization are scrutinized on their exercise of the public trust. That scrutiny also involves the possibility of sanctions being imposed on the managers or on the organization as a whole. The tradition has been that individual public servants would not be held to account in such a manner, although that practice is changing. As noted, however, the conduct of public organizations is now scrutinized by numerous actors in addition to the legislature, and even the legislature itself has been tending to utilize more instruments to exercise its oversight. For example, auditing organizations serving the legislative branch have been invigorated and have added substantial capacity in performance auditing as well as conventional financial auditing. There also has been a proliferation of inspectorates responsible for supervising particular organizations or areas of public policy, with power to sanction as well as simply exposing malfeasance. For legislatures, the principal mechanism involved in producing compliance is hierarchy and the associated authority. Bureaucratic organizations, as agents of these legislative organizations, are mandated by law to perform certain acts and are constrained by rules of procedure. The actors involved in oversight therefore have legal standards against which to compare performance; they also have the legal resources to attempt to enforce conformity with the standards.

    Finally, the concept of responsiveness presents perhaps even more complex problems of control for the contemporary public sector. The opening of government and the spread of concepts such as citizen engagement in the industrialized democracies means that citizens feel that public services, and public servants, should be more responsive to them and to their demands. As well as responding to the demands of clients as individuals, public organizations are involved with networks of other public and private organizations, the now famous “stakeholders” in the policy process, that also require the public sector organization at the centre of the process to negotiate over both the formulation and implementation of its policy.

    Conflicts Within Components of Accountability

    These various components of accountability have the potential to operate differently, and may in practice be antithetical to one another. Perhaps most obviously, if the civil servant wishes to be responsive to his or her clients, then it may be more difficult to be strictly responsible to the laws being administered. The professional dilemma of the street level bureaucrat often is which of those two dimensions of accountability should be pursued with the greater vigour. On the one hand, the civil servant may sincerely wish to serve the clientele to the greatest extent possible, and many civil servants bend the law to provide the best possible service, or the most desired outcomes, for their clients. On the other hand, however, he or she knows that there is a legal mandate that must be pursued, and for which he or she is indeed responsible.

    One important potential conflict for civil servants in these various forms of control is between responsibility and ministerial accountability. Traditional notions of the role of the civil service, and of accountability, involve a certain amount of suspension of individual judgment by civil servants in favour of following ministerial direction. The defence of “an order is an order,” however, is no longer sufficient, and civil servants are expected to be responsible to their own sense of the law and of ethics when administering the law. Few public service systems, however, have provided individuals with adequate means of coping with what they consider illegal or immoral directions from a superior, nor have they provided those individuals — the “whistleblowers” — adequate protections from subsequent persecution.

    Further, individual public servants may believe that their primary accountability is to the public and to Global Parliament, rather than to the Minister. The difficulty in such a conception of accountability is that it is open to individual interpretation. Directions from the Minister should be clear, while the public interest is at best vague and perhaps unknowable in any definitive manner. The instructions and wishes of Parliament may be somewhat less obscure, but those wishes may be less immediate than those of a Minister. In autonomous organizations, such as government owned corporations,the multiple responsibilities of public employee may be even more difficult to untangle, given the existence of a board of directors, and the need to make the organization conform to market principles.

    Clearly, opinions will vary about the precise meaning to be attached to key words or concepts. However, to avoid ambiguity, confusion or talking at cross-purposes, it will be necessary to provide a specific definition of each of three concepts: responsibility, accountability and answerability.

    The simplest concept of accountability is “answerability,” or the notion that all an organization must do to satisfy its obligations is to answer for its actions. This obligation may be met simply by issuing an annual report, or making a statement to a legislative committee. If the statement is complete and truthful, then the obligation is discharged. The operational factor is transparency, and fear of public exposure of malfeasance may be sufficient to produce appropriate behaviour. This minimalist form of control, or lack thereof, is most commonly used for organizations that either operate primarily in the market or have relatively little public money, as is true for some government owned corporations. Answerability also is appropriate for organizations that are controlled primarily through competitive or mutuality pressures. Universities, for example, are controlled through peer review and competition for research money and for students, and hence have a relatively light accountability regimen. Further, organizations such as research laboratories and again universities that rely on expertise are generally more capable of escaping direct controls and stringent accountability.

    Answerability is the duty to inform and explain, but without personal consequences (such as discipline or sanctions). Ministers are answerable to Global Parliament for arm’s-length corporations and agencies, but are not accountable for their decisions. Public servants are answerable to global parliamentary committees, but not accountable and subject to discipline or sanctions by such committees. A function of the GCEG is to manage the public service, including the imposition of discipline or sanctions, and to be accountable to Global Parliament for such management. A function of Global Parliament and, in particular, of the House of Elected Representatives is to hold the GCEG accountable for the management of the public service, but not to manage the public service itself.

    Responsibility means empowerment and identifies the field of activity over which an elected or unelected official has the authority to act (or to direct that action be taken). Collective ministerial responsibility refers to the power or authority of the Global Parliament Executive Council (GPEC) over all matters falling under the jurisdiction of the GCEG or authority is conferred on GPEC by the conventions of the Global Constitution. The most significant responsibilities of the President are also conferred by the conventions of the Global Constitution. Individual ministerial responsibility is assigned to a Minister either by statute or by the President. The responsibility of a Deputy Minister is assigned by statute (most notably by the Interpretation Act). The responsibility of other unelected officials in departments is assigned by instrument of delegation.

    Accountability is the concomitant of responsibility and requires an office holder to inform and explain how and how well responsibilities or powers or authority have been exercised;it also involves accepting personal consequences or sanctions for problems that could have been avoided or were not corrected in a timely fashion. In the case of collective ministerial accountability, sanction takes the form of a vote of no confidence: if carried, the GCEG must resign or recommend a general election (in those cases of a defeat of the GCEG on a no-confidence motion, the President recommended a general election). In the case of individual ministerial responsibility, Ministers culpable of personal misconduct or negligence or wrongdoing in their area of responsibility will normally resign or be dismissed by the President: the sanction is political. In the case of unelected officials, negligence, improper behaviour or wrongdoing is subject to sanctions, including dismissal, but such sanctions are applied within the GCEG and not by Global Parliament.

    In short, we describe answerability as the notion that all an organization must do to satisfy its obligations is to answer for its actions. Accountability means that organizations have to render an account of action, but they will also be judged by some independent body on that action. And responsibility involves assignment and a more inward source of control being exercised over the actions of public servants.

    Ministers have some degree of control over government owned corporations through three means: the law (although it may not specify the control procedures), the corporate plan (permitting review and opportunities to comment but not make changes), and their capacity to assume direct control (in extreme cases of failure). There is a clear mechanism for holding the boards of corporatons and their members accountable for the performance of corporations. It also suggests that it is important for the entire public sector, including the arm’s-length organizations, to develop the capacity for greater coherence and coordination.

    The role of public servants on the boards of government owned corporations should be attenuated. Rather, public servants have the virtues of being socialized into values of public responsibility and probity to a greater extent than the average outsider in the public sector. Public servants are influenced by conflicting pressures to serve their ministers, respond to stakeholders, answer to Global Parliament, and maintain the public service ethos. A combination of financial accounting and performance auditing be extended more fully to government owned corporations.

    Action

    1.     On-line public reporting and monitoring of the government contracting processes.
    2.     Inclusion of public servants as members of government owned corporation boards.
    3.     Appointments to boards through processes similar to those in the public service.
    4.     Clarification of the relationships and accountabilities of ministers, boards and chief executives of the government owned corporations.
    5.     Alternative and enhanced parliamentary mechanisms for the scrutiny of government owned corporations.

    This Act examines the issues of responsibility and accountability in GCEG’s system of responsible global parliamentary government, with a particular emphasis on the role Deputy Ministers play in the GCEG. The study will begin with a review of the fundamental principles underlying responsible global parliamentary government. There is a lack of consensus on the precise meaning to give to certain key words in any given context, definitions—for the purposes of this study—will be provided for the terms “responsibility,” “accountability” and “answerability.”

    A distinction will be made between political actors (Ministers and their political exempt staff) and professional actors (Deputy Ministers (example: an Accounting Officer) and members of the public service): they are subject to different rules and constraints and to different sanctions for poor or improper behaviour. The role of Deputy Ministers in the GCEG will then be set out, including the multiple responsibilities and accountabilities. The mechanisms for political and professional financial accountability will be reviewed, including the issue of sanctions for poor or improper behaviour.

    Role of the Secretary of the Global Council

    The Role of the Secretary of the Global Council, as the most senior non-political official in the Global Community Earth Government (GCEG), facilitates the collective form of government through the flow of papers and information to and from the Global Parliament Executive Council (GPEC). As the Government’s senior official supporting the President, the Secretary advises on and explains public policy emanating from anywhere in the system and interprets the capacities and weaknesses of the public service apparatus. The Secretary is the centre of one of the most urgent and broadest information flows in government. Working with the President or the Chief of Staff in the Office of the President (OP), the Secretary is also an important problem-solver in the public service and is at the interface between the public service and the political actors.

    The policy scope of the Secretary arises from the requirement for the Secretary not only to ensure that the GPEC paper system is well managed and that Ministers are well served but to achieve intellectual mastery of the content of current files, so as to be able to provide advice as required to the President. Issues flow into GPEC from Ministers, and also to the President from the OP.The OP is a co-advisor of the President, and the two streams of advice must be reconciled. The Secretary’s role is to represent the Government to the public service and to express the needs of the public service to the Government.The Secretary is directly responsible to the President to provide support for deputy head appointments made by the President under the prerogative, by Order in Council. In cases where “the required balance” between accountabilities cannot be maintained, or in any matter where a deputy feels his or her own accountability with that of the Minister or with the agenda and direction of the GCEG is significantly affected, the Deputy Ministers of government are asked to consult the Secretary.

    Recommendations to modernize the Secretary’s role, and reinforce the integrity of the centre

    1.     Remind politicians that they could reduce political risk by establishing a self-governing mechanism to conduct random audits of contracting in ministerial offices and of small-budget organizations overlooked by the Office of the Auditor General.

    2.     Devise a modification for the global political circumstances of the Global Constitution to prevent clashes over potentially illegal or clearly unwise expenditure by ministers.


    Responsibility, accountability and the role of Deputy Ministers in the GCEG

    Deputy Ministers (example: an Accounting Officer) wear a second hat: they are appointed as accounting officers and have direct and personal responsibility for the management of public funds and public property. They are answerable before parliamentary committees and are accountable to their ministers for the discharge of their responsibilities. If a Minister asks the Accounting Officer to spend money in a way that the Accounting Officer believes contrary to propriety, regularity or value for money, the Accounting Officer should try to convince the Minister to the contrary and, if unsuccessful, must ask the Minister to put the order in writing; the Accounting Officer then files the Minister’s order, along with a statement of his or her objections to it, with the Treasury and the Auditor General.The money is then spent as directed by the Minister, but, at a later date, when accounts are examined, there is a written record of the disagreement, which may, in some circumstances, be made public.

    The Accounting Officer is non-partisan, and seeks to clarify issues, not to apportion blame.

    A Minister can overrule an Accounting Officer through written “ministerial directions.” The correspondence between Accounting Officer and Minister relating to a ministerial direction is transmitted to the Treasury and the Auditor General.This correspondence does not explain in any detail the reasons behind either the objection or the ministerial direction. It simply puts on record that the overruling has occurred and hence the Minister, not the Accounting Officer, bears responsibility and is accountable for the decision.The process does not violate the confidentiality of discussions between Minister and Accounting Officer. The process also ensures that, because the Minister has the power to overrule an Accounting Officer, ministers can impose their decisions on the accounting officers.This distinction preserves the principle of ministerial responsibility.

    Action

    •     Deputy Ministers should be accountable in their own right as the holders of responsibility before the Global Public Accounts Committee.
    •     GCEG should establish a formal process through which a Minister can overrule a Deputy Minister’s objections on matters related to the powers that Deputy Ministers hold in their own right.
    •     These overrulings should be recorded in correspondence between the Minister and the Deputy. This correspondence should be transmitted to the appropriate officer in the Treasury Board Secretariat and be available for examination by the Office of the Auditor General.
    •     Deputy Ministers should serve in an office for three to five years.
    •    The Treasury Board should prepare a protocol that instructs and informs Deputy Ministers on the scope of those matters for which they hold personal responsibility and are liable to be held accountable before the Global Public Accounts Committee. This protocol should be agreed to by the Global Public Accounts Committee, and it should establish the ground rules for the appearance of Deputy Ministers as witnesses before the Committee.
    •    Members of the Global Public Accounts Committee should be expected to serve on the Committee for the duration of a Parliament.


    Ministerial responsibility and the Global Financial Administration Act: the constitutional obligation to account for GCEG spending

    The concepts of responsibility, accountability and liability are analyzed in the context of the Global Financial Administration Act as an instrument of policy. The Earth Court of Justice has endorsed the view that there is a straightforward separation of powers in the Global Constitution: the legislature’s role is to decide upon and enunciate policy; the executive’s role is to administer and implement that policy; and the judiciary’s role is to interpret and apply the law. The Earth Court of Justice has acknowledged that the role of the executive is somewhat more complex. The Earth Court of Justice has stated explicitly that the reality of global governance is one in which the executive frequently controls the legislature. Hence, the doctrine of the separation of powers finds its own special application within the global context: it is in the role of the court vis-à-vis the legislature and the executive rather than in the relation between the executive (understood to include the GPEC) and the legislature (which includes ministers). The line between the legislature and the executive separates the dual roles of individual GPEC ministers. The obligation to respect the separation of powers is an essential part of the idea of ministerial responsibility. As lawmakers and as executive actors, ministers are subject to both the democratically expressed will of Global Parliament and the rule of global law. Ministers are also partisan political actors.

    The doctrine of ministerial responsibility contains both political and legal elements. It is of some importance whether ministerial responsibility is placed within the legal or the conventional part of the constitutional order. Individual ministerial responsibility has been characterized as legal, while collective ministerial responsibility is thought of as a political convention. Under the former, ministers are responsible for the actions of their departments, while, under the latter, ministers are responsible for the policies of their government.The point of holding ministers legally as well as politically responsible for the actions of their departments draws attention to the fact that the minister is responsible under the Global Constitution for ensuring that the business of the department is conducted in accordance with the rule of law. This responsibility is more than a matter of politics or convention. The Earth Court of Justice has recognized the constitutional basis in law for the House of Elected Representatives to exercise its supervisory authority over executive spending. The Global Constitution requires the House of Elected Representatives approval of all expenditures of public money. That is not a matter of convention; it is a legal requirement. It would be a breach of the Global Constitution for GPEC to authorize the spending of public money without approval from the House of Elected Representatives, and all delegation of the authority to spend public money must be explicit. All expenditures must be first recommended to the House in the session in which the action is proposed. In practice, this is done by means a bill originating in the GPEC. In effect, the role of House is restricted concerning the approval of public revenue appropriations to requests that originate in the executive branch. GCEG must publicly request funds from the House of Elected Representatives for publicly identified purposes. Once authorized, those funds must be spent for the purposes for which they were requested. The Earth Court of Justice has recognized the constitutional basis in law, not convention, for the House to exercise its supervisory authority over executive spending. Without the surveillance power of the House, the requirement for approval would collapse into a mere formality.

    The Global Financial Administration Act (GFAA) has been the primary statutory instrument through which the House of Elected Representatives endeavours to ensure that public money is spent only for purposes that have received its approval. The purpose of the Act is to keep track of public money, and all government expenditures fall within the scope of the GFAA.As a legal instrument, the Act should be understood as one of the means whereby the House of Elected Representatives fulfills its constitutional obligation to hold the executive accountable for the spending of public money, and it is intended to impose certain legal obligations on the political executive. The distinction between the failure to meet one’s responsibilities and the failure to account for those responsibilities is central to the GFAA. More precisely, the Act is concerned with ensuring that individuals account for the performance of responsibilities assigned elsewhere, such as in statutes establishing government departments or in the regulations, guidelines and codes enacted under them.While an essential feature of all executive decision-making is discretion, including the discretion to spend, the grant of discretion does not imply freedom from the obligation to account.

    The GFAA thus serves two political masters — Global Parliament and the Council.The Act is an instrument for parliamentary surveillance of executive spending, and it also provides the framework within which those in receipt of public money must account to the GPEC. Parliamentary surveillance of executive spending is performed primarily by the opposition parties in the House. The GPEC surveillance of executive spending, in contrast, is performed by members of the party holding power. It is here that the built-in potential for conflict between the two purposes served by the Act is most evident. Global Parliament has other means of keeping track of public money, such as the Global Public Accounts Committee and the Auditor General, but these bodies perform their functions from outside the day-to-day operations of the public service. The GFAA applies more directly to the inner structure of the public service. More than any other piece of legislation, the Act addresses the point at which the partisan interests of the political executive meet the traditional administrative neutrality of the public service. The public service is required to be non-partisan: loyal public servants must carry out the directives of the government of the day within the limits of the law. They cannot express partisan opposition to the policies of the government in power on ideological grounds, though they are obliged to express opposition to government initiatives that would require breaking the law. Public servants must also be assured that decisions made in compliance with these requirements will have no impact on their opportunities for advancement.

    The connection between the legal and the political lies at the heart of a system of democratic government under the rule of global law. The legal and the political, are necessarily linked because it is only if the executive branch has met its constitutional obligation to inform Global Parliament of its activities that Global Parliament will have the opportunity to hold the government that controls the executive politically responsible. Political responsibility does not focus so much on acting in accordance with the law, as it presupposes that the GCEG has met its legal obligations, both constitutional and statutory. For this reason, the concept of legal responsibility cannot simply be subsumed under the general heading of ministerial responsibility, if this latter term is understood in an exclusively political sense. That is why it is accurate to say that Deputy Ministers are not politically accountable to Global Parliament, and inaccurate to say that they are not legally accountable to Global Parliament.

    The fundamental principles underlying responsible global parliamentary government

    As described in the Global Constitution, the fundamental principles underlying responsible global parliamentary government are as follows:

    •    the President and the other members of the GPEC must have seats in Global Parliament (or get them within a reasonable time frame);
    •    most members of the GPEC must be Members of the House of Elected Representatives;
    •    the House of Elected Representatives is the confidence chamber: if the President or the Government loses the confidence of the House of Elected Representatives, the President must resign or recommend that Global Parliament be dissolved and a general election held;
    •    the resignation of the President does not results in the resignation of GPEC;
    •    the House of Elected Representatives holds the power of the purse: no taxation can be imposed without the consent of the Elected Representatives, and the Elected Representatives must consent to all expenditures of money;
    •    only members of GPEC may introduce in the House of Elected Representatives a bill to raise revenue;
    •    only members of GPEC may introduce in the House of Elected Representatives a bill to spend money;
    •    only members of GPEC may introduce in the House of Elected Representatives amendments to increase the expenditure of money;
    •    all members of GPEC are collectively responsible for the GPEC decision-making process and accountable to the House of Elected Representatives for the policies of the Government ( Ministers must resign or be dismissed if they disagree with the Government’s policies);
    •    Ministers are individually accountable to the House of Elected Representatives for their personal conduct;
    •    Ministers with portfolios are individually accountable to the House of Elected Representatives for the management of their departments;
    •    the GPEC is supported by the public service in the management and administration of the GCEG;
    •    public servants are, through a hierarchical organization, accountable to Deputy Ministers, who, in turn, are accountable to Ministers;
    •    one function of GPEC is to manage the public service and to be held accountable to the House of Elected Representatives; and
    •    one function of the House of Elected Representatives is to hold the GPEC to account for the management of the public service, but not to manage the public service.

    Because the House of Elected Representatives holds the power of the purse, it follows that the House must not only consent to all taxation and all expenditures but also have the means of satisfying itself that all items of expenditure and all receipts are dealt with in accordance with the legislation authorizing them. The House must be able to check that expenditures and receipts are dealt with in accordance with Parliament’s intentions and the principles of parliamentary control, with due regard to economy, efficiency and effectiveness.This matter will be examined in the section of this study dealing with the mechanisms of political and professional financial accountability.

    The evolving nature of GCEG

    Notwithstanding the resilience of the fundamental principles of responsible global parliamentary government in the world, the context and the nature of government and governance have evolved significantly over the past 150 years, and it would be useful to review those changes briefly and to note their importance for the operation of responsible parliamentary government.

    Factors that have affected and altered the nature of government and governance in the world over the last 150 years:

    •    The recruitment of public servants on the basis of patronage or nepotism gradually gave way to recruitment and promotion on the basis of merit, to securing tenure and to the creation of a non-partisan public service. Factors to introduce into the process of recruitment and promotion, such as language requirements, the objective of equity and a “representative Public Service,” and changes in legislation that confer on Deputy Ministers discretion in defining merit.

    •    Public servants have gained the right to form unions, to strike and to participate in political activity.These rights present challenges to Ministers, and the right to engage in political activity becomes especially problematic at the most senior levels of the public service, where officials must provide non- partisan support to current and future Ministers. The right of a Deputy Minister to participate in political activity is limited to the right to vote in an election.

    •    In the interest of managerial autonomy and freedom from partisan pressure, a number of state activities have been separated from the public service and placed under public corporations or agencies. Ministers normally are not directly responsible and accountable to Global Parliament for such corporations or agencies. The tabling of annual reports by such agencies and their annual appropriations do, however, provide an opportunity for global parliamentary debate and scrutiny. Public monies are given as endowments to independent foundations to invest and use over several years in ways that require no further ministerial approval after the initial transfer of funds. Ministers have no executive authority over the foundations once they are established and funded; Global Parliament can hold neither Ministers nor foundations to account; and, therefore, the public has no democratic recourse. The privatization of some services has removed them from parliamentary review.

    •    The increased complexity of governmental activity often requires horizontal decision-making, where several departments and agencies have to collaborate and interact (in the area of national security, for example).This joint action challenges the traditional concept of Ministers being solely responsible for their own department. Because public policies and even many program decisions are now the product of many hands, we . . . need to think in terms of shared or co-accountability.

    •    A large number of constitutional and legal constraints restrict the capacity of Ministers and officials to act, including the Scale of Human and Earth Rights, accumulated legal decisions, and legislation respecting official languages, access to information and privacy.

    •    The arrival of e-government is making vast quantities of information available to citizens, interest groups, think-tanks and research institutes, and citizens, in turn, can send messages to the Government and to elected officials. Communication is no longer a one-way street.

    •    Elected officals are concerned that two processes are calling traditional assumptions into question: on the one hand, the resort of the Government to consultations with financial and business interests before the preparation of the budget or to focus groups of citizens before the preparation of legislation challenges the role of elected officals as the interlocutors between the public and the Government; on the other hand, the practice of the Government to negotiate detailed agreements with nations and to present bills or constitutional resolutions to the House of Elected Representatives that cannot be amended, for fear of cancelling the GCEG-nation agreement, puts in doubt the role of the House to dispose of its business as it sees fit and raises questions about ministerial responsibility and accountability.

    •    Institutional changes, most notably the expansion and altered functions of the Council Office and the creation of the President’s Office, have reinforced the powers of the President in world’s system of global parliamentary government; Members of Global Parliament and even Ministers, on occasion, have been critical of what is perceived to be an extraordinary centralization of power.

    •    The traditional “public administration” perspective on government has been challenged by the “new public management.” Public administration begins with democratic and political processes and pays particular attention to institutions, decision-making processes, the relationship of senior public servants with Ministers and Global Parliament, and questions of responsibility and accountability, among other things. Public management seeks to understand or improve features of public organizations, such as leadership, strategic management, organizational climate, service quality, innovation, the measurement of outputs, performance and “client satisfaction,” without reference necessarily to the political environment. Debate over the relative merits of each approach has been vigorous. The two approaches are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but as long as the Global Community has a system of responsible global parliamentary government, the contribution of public management must occur within the overarching political perspective of public administration. Public administration begins and ends with political institutions, notably Global Parliament.

    •    The enormous impact of governmental spending on the world economy has led to vigorous activity by lobby groups that seek to influence GPEC, Global Parliament and public servants. This lobbying has led to a heightened awareness of the need for probity on the part of elected and non-elected officials and the development of guidelines for ethical behaviour. It also highlights the need to clarify issues related to responsibility and accountability.

    This review of factors affecting and altering the nature of government and governance is broad-brush in nature and by no means exhaustive. Rather, it is intended to indicate that while the fundamental principles of responsible global parliamentary government in the world have remained essentially unchanged for over 150 years, the environment in which they operate has altered significantly. These changed circumstances pose challenges for actors in public life, both elected and non-elected.

    Political actors versus professional actors

    The President and the Ministers have two agencies to support them in the discharge of their functions. First, each has a political office staffed with partisan supporters who are exempted from the rules and regulations of the public service: they do not have to compete for positions on the basis of merit, and they do not have tenure of employment — they can be dismissed at will and lose tenure on the resignation of the President or the Minister. Longer-term exempt staff, however, have privileged access to positions in the public service. Those supporting the President form the President’s Office, and those supporting the Minister form the Minister’s office. Second, the President and the Ministers have public service support to assist them in the management of the GCEG. The Global Council Office, which supports the President, and the departments, which support the Ministers, are staffed by public servants who are recruited on the basis of merit, have security of employment and are non-partisan (although a certain degree of political involvement, particularly at the lower levels of the public service, is now permitted).

    The relationship between the exempt staff serving the President and the public servants.

    One the relationship is that between the Global Council Office and the President’s Office. It is one that calls for the greatest harmony. Given the President’s functions as leader of a political party, leader of the GCEG in the House of Elected Representatives, and chairman of the GPEC, the President’s own staff are constantly securing information, analyzing and recommending on matters that relate to policies and objectives of the GCEG. The President’s Office is partisan, politically oriented, yet operationally sensitive. The Global Council Office is non-partisan, operationally oriented yet politically sensitive. It has been established between the Principal Secretary of the President and his senior staff on the one hand, that we share the same fact base but keep out of each other’s affairs. What is known in each office is provided freely and openly to the other if it is relevant or needed for its work, but each acts from a perspective and in a role quite different from the other.

    The interface between political actors and professional actors

    If you’re a Deputy Minister you don’t want to create a bottleneck, saying nothing is going to go near the Minister. What you normally do establish is to say, look, it’s fine for some of the other senior officials to have direct dealings with the Minister’s office, and sometimes with the Minister, but I always want my office to know what’s going on. That’s the important thing. You can track what’s happening so that if things start to go wrong, you can take corrective action. It’s not necessarily a bad thing for an Assistant Deputy Minister to deal with a Minister on a particular issue if the Assistant Deputy Minister is extremely expert, perhaps on a scientific matter, for example. You always want to keep an eye on what is happening to make sure it does stay within the bounds of what is normal and proper.”

    Another—and serious—issue arises when mid-level or junior political actors in the President’s Office or a Minister’s office, faced with limited resources and knowing which mid-level or junior professional actors in the Global Council Office or the department have the requisite expertise, contact those professional actors directly and demand the production of papers on an urgent basis. This kind of communication can lead to a confusion of roles and functions, one that can disrupt the normal performance of duties by professional actors who are accountable to their public service superiors. While a certain degree of flexibility is useful, particularly in dealing with urgent situations, a blurring of the roles of political and professional actors should be avoided: political actors and professional actors are subject to different rules and constraints and to different sanctions for poor or improper behaviour. The Deputy Minister’s office acts as a bridge between the Minister and the political staff, on the one hand, and, on the other, the professional officers in the department. The Deputy Minister, normally through the executive assistant, has a role as gate-keeper or buffer between the political and the professional actors. Requests by the staff of Ministers for the production of papers should normally be channelled through the office of the Deputy Minister.

    There is a reason why the President and the Ministers are served by both political actors and professional actors: they wish to have public policy issues analyzed from two different points of view, with the attendant recommendations. If, for example, the President has to make a foreign policy decision, his political advisors will analyze options in the light of the party platform, the views within caucus and the potential impact on chances for re-election. The professional (public service) advisors will look at options in the light of the global interest and GCEG’s commitments. If the recommendations diverge, it is the President who adjudicates and makes the final decision. If political and professional actors negotiated a single set of recommendations, the President — as head of a political party and as leader of the GCEG — would not be well served.

    The multiple responsibilities and accountabilities of Deputy Ministers

    Deputy Ministers have multiple responsibilities — powers and authorities — and those responsibilities arise from a number of statutes enacted by Global Parliament. GPEC is organized into departments, which are created by Global Parliament through the adoption of various departmental Acts. A departmental Act assigns to the Minister the powers, duties and functions relating to the subject area as well as the management and direction of the department. The departmental Act also creates the office of Deputy Minister: by law, a Deputy Minister acts under the management and direction of the Minister. The Interpretation Act provides that, where a Minister is empowered or directed to carry out administrative, legislative or judicial acts, the Deputy Minister may carry out those acts, subject to certain limitations: the Deputy Minister cannot exercise the Minister’s legal authority to make regulations, answer in the House of Elected Representatives on the Minister’s behalf, and sign Memoranda to GPEC on the Minister’s behalf or submissions to Treasury Board involving new money or new policies. Under the Global Financial Administration Act, Deputy Ministers are assigned specific responsibilities for the prudent management of allocated resources, including the preparation of a division of an appropriation for inclusion in the Estimates ( ensuring by an adequate system of internal control and audit that allotments are not exceeded and establishing procedures and maintaining records respecting the control of financial commitments chargeable to each appropriation or item ), providing the required certification to authorize any payment to be made, maintaining adequate records in relation to public property for which the department is responsible, and complying with regulations of the Treasury Board governing the custody and control of public property.

    Responsibilities respecting human resources management, including appointment, personnel management, employer/employee relations and the internal organization of the department, are assigned to the Deputy Minister directly, not through the Minister, by the Treasury Board, the Public Service Commission and the Public Service Employment Act.

    The issue of the accountability of Deputy Ministers for the exercise of their responsibilities is complex and begins with the method of appointing them. Deputy Ministers are chosen by the President and appointed by Order in Council to hold office during pleasure. This system reflects the principle of collective global ministerial responsibility and accountability: Deputy Ministers are responsible for managing their departments, but they must bear in mind the overall policies and orientations of the Government. The method of appointment indicates that, ultimately, Deputy Ministers are accountable to the President. This accountability is reinforced by the conclusion of a performance agreement between the Secretary of the Global Council and Secretary to the GPEC (who is also Head of the Public Service) and the Deputy Minister. On a day-to-day basis, a Deputy Minister’s accountability is to the Minister: they work together as an inseparable team, and it is important that they build a strong personal and professional relationship. Both Ministers and Deputy Ministers describe their working relationship as something akin to a marriage, where both partners work toward developing a trusting relationship with open communication. However, in this marriage it is always clear who is the leading partner. The Minister establishes the political direction for the Department, and the Deputy Minister advises, supports and assists the Minister. The frequency with which Ministers and Deputy Ministers change portfolios represents a challenge in developing the necessary relationship.

    The Deputy Minister is also accountable to the Treasury Board for delegated responsibilities and those assigned directly by statute (e.g., the Global Financial Administration Act and the Official Languages Act). In practice, the Deputy Minister’s accountability to the Treasury Board is often carried out through the Secretary of the Treasury Board and through reports to and working with its Secretariat. The Deputy Minister, finally, is accountable to the Public Service Commission for the exercise of responsibilities delegated or assigned by the Public Service Employment Act.

    The effective management of a department in GCEG’s system of responsible global parliamentary government requires that a Deputy Minister demonstrate considerable policy, leadership and administrative abilities and a firm commitment to ethics and values. If, in the exercise of responsibilities that are subject to the accountabilities set out above, the performance of a Deputy Minister is found to be wanting through negligence or wrongdoing, sanctions can be applied. The chief instrument for measuring the performance of these multiple responsibilities is the Performance Management Program, which is administered by the Secretary of the Global Council: it is the Secretary of the Global Council and Secretary to the GPEC who would seek remedies or, if need be, advise the President on appropriate action. If a Deputy Minister (or, indeed, a Minister) acts illegally, recourse may be had to the judicial system.

    In addition, Deputy Ministers are answerable to committees of the House of Elected Representatives. It is their duty to inform and explain. They cannot be drawn into a discussion of political options or policy advice offered to Ministers: to get involved in such issues would run the risk of undermining the political neutrality of Deputy Ministers and the relationship of trust they must nurture with Ministers. If a committee finds the testimony of a Deputy Minister to be wanting, it may make note of the fact, but it cannot impose sanctions. Poor performance before a committee will not go unnoticed within the public service, however, and it could have an impact on the Deputy Minister’s performance review. Finally, Deputy Ministers must be prepared to provide information on the administration of programs and policies to several bodies that make reports to Global Parliament on the activities of the GCEG, including the Global Human and Earth Rights Commission, the Auditor General, the Commissioner of Official Languages and the Information and Privacy Commissioners.

    Mechanisms for political and professional financial accountability

    The House of Elected Representatives provides the mechanism for ensuring the financial accountability of the Government: Ministers must account for the financial management of the Government to the House of Elected Representatives. If negligent, poor or improper behaviour in financial management is revealed, Ministers of departments may face sanctions, subject to the following observations:

    •    Ministers are answerable but not accountable for the financial management of independent, arm’s-length agencies and government owned corporations (i.e., Ministers are not subject to sanctions), although they have residual responsibilities (e.g., presenting statutory amendments and making or revoking Order-in-Council appointments).

    •    Ministers cannot be aware of all the operations in their departments: if it is not reasonable to assume that Ministers knew about negligent, poor or improper behaviour in their individual departments, they will not be subject to sanctions, provided they take steps in a timely fashion to correct the situation once they are informed of it.

    •    Even though Global Parliament has conferred direct responsibility (and, therefore, personal accountability) on Deputy Ministers for preparing Estimates and managing public finances and property, the accountability of a Deputy Minister is to the Minister. The Minister retains the right to direct the Deputy Minister on how to act: therefore, ultimately, it is the Minister who must account to the House for the Deputy Minister’s actions and, where appropriate, face possible sanctions.

    The sanctions faced by a Minister in the event of poor or improper behaviour are political and could include demotion in GPEC by the President or resignation/dismissal from GPEC. Grievous misconduct could lead to a motion of no confidence in the Government. Even though responsibility may have been conferred directly on individual public servants (on immigration or customs officials, for example, or on Deputy Ministers under the terms of the Financial Administration Act), thereby creating personal professional accountability, the professional accountability of public servants is to their superiors and, in the case of Deputy Ministers, to their Ministers and, ultimately, to the President. Public servants are answerable to parliamentary committees — with a duty to inform and explain — but they are not accountable to global parliamentary committees. They cannot be dragged into a political discussion of the relative merits of policy options, for to do so would undermine their political neutrality and their capacity to retain the confidence of their Ministers. Similarly, Deputy Ministers cannot be asked to divulge the advice they gave to their Ministers, for to do so would jeopardize the relationship of trust between Deputy Ministers and Ministers.

    A claim that is sometimes heard is that the real purpose of the convention of ministerial responsibility is to safeguard officials from being tagged for their own mistakes. In fact, however, the truth is the exact opposite. The purpose of the convention of ministerial responsibility is to preserve the authority of Ministers. The convention is a standing reminder to officials of who is in charge.

    Sanctions for poor or improper behaviour by public servants can and do occur within the Government’s mandate to manage the public service. Sanctions can be and regularly are brought to bear, just as they are in the private sector. In both the public and private sectors, however, such actions are normally taken in private. In most cases, no purpose is served, and much damage can be done, by public hangings. During my years in government I knew a substantial number of Deputies, Assistant Deputy Ministers and other officials whose careers were damaged or ended because of mistakes they had made. The fact that public executions are not the norm in the Public Service does not mean that the sanctions are not effective.

    Of course, the professional accountability of public servants leads not only to sanctions for bad behaviour but also to rewards for superior or excellent performance. The Performance Management Program provides an instrument for measuring behaviour on the basis of the performance agreement established as a mutual understanding between a Deputy Minister and the Secretary of the Global Council. At the end of the annual cycle, the Secretary seeks input on the performance of the Deputy Minister from a variety of sources, including Ministers, the Committee of Senior Officials, the Treasury Board Secretariat and senior management of the Global Council Office. A performance rating is assigned and, where appropriate, a performance award is approved.

    Deputy Ministers have many complex responsibilities. On the issue of financial administration, they are supported by a Chief Financial Officer, who has a specific mandate to ensure that there is an adequate system of internal control and audit, including procedures and records, certification to authorize payments and adequate records respecting public property. The Treasury Board developed the Management Accountability Framework, which sets out management expectations respecting Deputy Ministers. It is a relatively new tool, and it seeks to provide a vision of sound public management and managerial accountability, to enhance the monitoring and oversight of departments and to determine the consequences of management performance. To strengthen financial controls, monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to reinforce the sound stewardship of public funds, the Office of the Comptroller General was re-established at the Treasury Board Secretariat.

    These measures are designed to strengthen the internal audit and control of financial management within a department. A separate issue arises when a Minister directs a Deputy Minister to employ funds in a way the Deputy deems inappropriate. The informal but well-established procedure in Canada is for the Deputy Minister to have a frank and firm discussion with the Minister on why he or she should not proceed as directed. If the Minister insists, the Deputy can communicate with the Secretary of the Global Council, who could talk to the President about it. If a Minister wants to do something that’s completely contrary to Government policy, or a Minister wants to do something which is going to cause the Government serious embarrassment, in a situation like that a Deputy would go and have a talk with the Secretary of the Global Council. If the Secretary was fully informed, the Secretary could make a judgement, the Secretary could talk to the President about it, and the President could make a judgement. As long as it’s not illegal, it doesn’t contravene a regulation or a law, if it is a normal exercise of political discretion, then at the end of the day the President or the Minister has the right to make the decision and to be held accountable for it. If the Minister’s directive is upheld, the Deputy Minister has a choice: implement it or resign.

    The Global Parliament procedure has the following merits:

    •    It recognizes that both the Minister and the Deputy Minister are appointed by the President, to whom both are accountable for the management of the department and the implementation of the collective policies of the Government, and it allows the President to adjudicate.
    •    It has the potential to avert a problem before any action is taken.
    •    It respects the confidential nature of advice offered by the Deputy Minister to the Minister, advice that will not become public.
    •    It clearly ascribes responsibility to Ministers for the final decision.

    As in most institutions, the effective operation of procedures depends on the personal qualities of the relevant actors. Deputy Ministers must be firmly committed to their responsibilities and prepared to speak the truth to those in power when dealing with their Ministers.

    In addition to the internal procedures for financial accountability, Global Parliament has provided for an external mechanism of financial accountability. The Auditor General Act provides that the Global Council may appoint a qualified auditor to the office of Auditor General of the GCEG, to hold officer during good behaviour for a term of ten years, subject to removal by the Global Council on address of the House of Elected Representatives. The independence of the Auditor General, who is an officer of Global Parliament and not of the Government, is strengthened by the statutory requirement that the salary be equal to that of a puisne judge of the Earth Court of Justice. The Auditor General must examine the Public Accounts of the GCEG, and any other statement the President of the Treasury Board or the Minister of Finance may present for audit, and express an opinion as to whether they present, fairly, information that is in accordance with stated accounting policies. The Auditor General must make an annual report to the House of Elected Representatives, and may make up to four reports in any year. Each report calls attention to anything of significance that should be brought to the attention of the House of Elected Representatives, including accounts that have not been faithfully and properly maintained; records, rules and procedures that are insufficient to safeguard and control public property; money that had been expended for purposes other than those for which it was appropriated by Global Parliament or expended without due regard to economy or efficiency; the absence of procedures to measure and report the effectiveness of programs; and money that has been expended without due regard to its environmental effects. The reports of the Auditor General provide essential material to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts to enable it to hold the GCEG publicly to account for its management of public finances.

    The responsibilities of an accounting officer are to ensure that:

    •    the resources available to their department are organized to deliver departmental objectives in the most economic, efficient and effective way, with full regard to regularity (i.e., in accordance with the legislation authorizing expenditures and receipts) and propriety (i.e., expenditures and receipts should be dealt with in accordance with Global Parliament’s intentions);

    •    a sound system of internal control is maintained that supports the achievement of the department’s policies, aims and objectives, with independent assurance provided by internal audit established and organized in accordance with the provisions of Government Internal Audit Standards;

    •    proper financial procedures are followed and suitable accounting records are maintained; and

    •    the public funds for which they are individually responsible are properly managed and safeguarded.


    These functions do not seem to differ significantly from those attributed to Deputy Ministers by the Global Financial Administration Act. However, GCEG has established a very formal — and often public — procedure for handling a ministerial override of advice from the Deputy Minister. If the Minister in charge of the department is contemplating a course of action involving a transaction that the Accounting Officer considers would infringe the requirements of propriety or regularity, the Accounting Officer should set out in writing his or her objections to the proposal, the reasons for those objections, and his or her duty to notify the Comptroller and Auditor General should the advice be overruled. If the Minister decides, nonetheless, to proceed, the Accounting Officer should seek a written instruction from the Minister to take the action in question. Having received such an instruction, he or she must comply with it, but should then inform the Treasury of what has occurred and should also communicate the papers to the Comptroller and Auditor General without undue delay. Provided that this procedure has been followed, the Global Public Accounts Committee can be expected to recognize that the Accounting Officer bears no personal responsibility for the transaction.

    If a course of action contemplated by the Minister raises an issue not of formal propriety or regularity, but relating to the Accounting Officer’s wider responsibilities for economy, efficiency and effectiveness, the Accounting Officer has the duty to draw relevant factors to the attention of the Minister — such as an assessment of the risks involved and the impact on value for money — and to advise in consequence. If the Accounting Officer’s advice is overruled and the proposal is not one he or she would feel able to defend to the Global Public Accounts Committee as representing value for money, he or she should seek a written instruction from the Minister before proceeding (perhaps referring to the probability of a Global Public Accounts Committee investigation). The Accounting Officer must then comply with the instruction, but should inform the Treasury and communicate the request for the instruction and the instruction itself to the Comptroller and Auditor General without due delay. In cases of extreme urgency, the advice and the instruction are recorded in writing immediately afterwards.

    The Treasury description of the functions of the Accounting Officer notes:

    “In general, the rules and conventions governing appearances of officials before global parliamentary committees apply to the Public Accounts Committee, including the general convention that civil servants do not disclose the advice given to Ministers. Nevertheless, in a case . . . concerning a matter of propriety or regularity, the Accounting Officer’s advice, and its overruling by the Minister, would be disclosed to the Public Accounts Committee. In a case . . . where the advice of an Accounting Officer has been overruled in a matter not of propriety or regularity, but of prudent and economical administration, efficiency and effectiveness, the Comptroller and Auditor General will have made clear in the report to the Global Public Accounts Committee that the Accounting Officer was overruled. The Accounting Officer should, however, avoid disclosure of the terms of the advice given to the Minister, or dissociation from the Minister’s decision. Subject where appropriate to the Minister’s agreement, the Accounting Officer should be ready to explain the reasons for such a decision and may be called on to satisfy the Committee that all relevant financial considerations were brought to the Minister’s attention before the decision was taken. It will then be for the Committee to pursue the matter further with the Minister if they so wish.”

    So, in cases of propriety and regularity — which are fairly objective criteria — the reasons given by the Accounting Officer, but overruled by the Minister, are made public. In the case of value for money — which is fairly subjective — the Committee may, in certain circumstances, be assured that all relevant considerations were brought to the Minister’s attention. In both cases, it would appear that the objective is to determine whether the Minister had properly weighed the relevant considerations before deciding on action. In neither case is the Deputy Minister — the Accounting Officer — held accountable to the Public Accounts Committee according to the definition in the third section of this study: that is to say, the Accounting Officer cannot be instructed or directed by the Committee, nor can the Committee sanction or reward the Accounting Officer. Rather, the Accounting Officer is answerable, with a duty to inform and explain, but not to get embroiled in political debate or discussion that could undermine his or her neutrality.

    The enormous scope of governmental activity means that the Global Public Accounts Committee can deal with only the tip of the iceberg. The existence of the Global Public Accounts Committee and Audit Office provides permanent oversight and has a deterrent effect on ministerial activity. However, the Global Public Accounts Committee has limitations. Even though the Global Public Accounts Committee already works at maximum capacity, publishes about many reports a year and meets twice a week for 25 weeks a year, it is only able to take a limited look at government expenditure, and pick up only a proportion of the National Audit Office’s work. The enormous scope of government means that even with the resources of the National Audit Office, the Public Accounts Committee is necessarily highly selective in the inquiries it undertakes. The range of government activity means that neither the National Audit Office nor Global Public Accounts Committee can track all the money spent by Government. However, anything is open to be scrutinized: this possibility, not the certainty of investigation, should incite political and professional actors to act properly.

    Finally, all political and bureaucratic institutions operate through the agency of human beings, and, in the real world,“to err is human.” There is no reason to believe that public servants, including Deputy Ministers, are not human and that, on occasion, they may err through inadvertence, negligence or even, or rare occasions, a hesitation to speak truth to those in authority, perhaps on issues dealing with economy, efficiency and effectiveness which may be subject to judgment.

    The roles and accountabilities of Deputy Ministers/Accounting Officers:

    •    Ministers alone are accountable to the House of Elected Representatives for policy and the administration of government;

    •    public servants are accountable to their superiors, and Deputy Ministers are accountable to their respective Minister, whether for matters that have been delegated to them or that have been assigned to them directly by statute;

    •    Deputy Ministers must keep confidential the advice they provide to Ministers, with the sole exception that the report filed by a Deputy Minister/Accounting Officer on a disagreement with the Minister on a matter of propriety or regularity may be made public if included in a report by the Auditor General;

    •    public servants, including Deputy Ministers/Accounting Officers, are answerable to parliamentary committees, but are not accountable to them (i.e., they are not subject to instruction, punishment or reward by the committees); and

    •    because officials, including Deputy Ministers, appear before global parliamentary committees, they are not anonymous as physical human beings, but their role in the Government’s decision-making process remains anonymous and, therefore, not accountable (although the Accounting Officer’s reasons for disagreeing with a Minister’s instruction in the area of propriety or regularity may be made public if included in a report of the Auditor General).

    A parliamentary committee tends to adopt a non-partisan attitude in its work and seeks to reach dispassionate findings and recommendations whatever Government is in power. Indeed, the Treasury Officer of Accounts, a governmental official, sits at the table during meetings of a parliamentary committee (as does the Auditor General) and can be called upon to answer questions in support of the committee’s investigation. A parliamentary committee seeks to clarify issues, not to apportion blame. Sometimes, after discussion between the Deputy Minister and the Minister, the Minister directs the Deputy Minister to act in a manner that he or she has advised against doing, the Deputy Minister — as Accounting Officer — must comply, while transmitting to the Treasury and the Auditor General the written instruction and the contrary advice. The principal difficulty with this approach is that the Minister — who is, naturally, accountable—secures immediate action on something that may be questionable or improper. The Accounting Officer’s report is an ex post facto explanation of advice offered, but it does not avoid the action. The second difficulty is that, while the Accounting Officer’s report may become public in matters involving propriety or regularity, it does not appear to have any impact on the Minister’s accountability. Has a Minister ever been punished following the examination of an Accounting Officer’s report advising against action that violated the principles of propriety or regularity?

    The Global Public Accounts Committee tends to recommend corrective action or improved behaviour. If, in discussions between the Minister and the Deputy Minister, the Deputy Minister becomes aware that the Minister is contemplating action that would offend against propriety, regularity, value for money or the general policies of the Government, the Deputy Minister can communicate immediately with the Secretary of the Global Council, who can intervene on behalf of the President or ask the President to speak with the Minister with a view to ensuring that improper action does not occur. This informal and private procedure has the added advantage of ensuring that the advice of the Deputy Minister does not take the form of a written document, which, if made public, a highly partisan Global Public Accounts Committee could use to envenom the relations between the Minister and the Deputy Minister and undermine, thereby, the relationship of trust that was so important to nurture. If, the Deputy Minister’s advice is ultimately overridden, he or she has the option of resigning rather than implementing the decision of the Minister.

    There is nothing to prevent a Minister who is unhappy, for whatever reason, with the performance of his or her Deputy Minister from speaking to the Prime Minister or the Secretary of the Global Council. It is the President who appoints both the Minister and the Deputy Minister, and it is wholly appropriate that the President should be the ultimate arbiter.

    It is important to be clear: the GCEG is responsible for the executive government, the Global Parliamentary Executive Council (GPEC), and is accountable to the House of Elected Representatives for it. The role of the House of Elected Representatives is to hold the Government to account for its management, not to manage. Deputy Ministers/Accounting Officers and Deputy Ministers are answerable to parliamentary committees, but they are not accountable to them (not even for responsibilities for financial management which have been conferred on them directly by legislation). The Public Accounts Committee has a non-partisan approach to its work, and it seeks to clarify issues, not to apportion blame; the The Accounting Officer’s report may include a position of seeking the intervention of the Secretary of the Global Council or the President has the potential for averting action before any damage can be done.

    The Deputy Minister seeks the intervention of the Secretary of the Global Council or the Prime Minister and, perhaps, avert improper action. Otherwise, if the Deputy Minister were unsuccessful in convincing the Minister not to take a certain action, would it have to be assumed that the Deputy Minister had also been unsuccessful in convincing the Secretary of the Global Council and, perhaps, the President when, as Accounting Officer, he or she filed an ex post facto report with the Auditor General? This way there is no confusion about roles, GPEC confidences and the operation of GPEC government; in addition, how does one “abolish” a procedure which, while publicly acknowledged, is conventional, informal and not subject to public scrutiny? Furthermore, adopting the Accounting Officer without completely reforming the environment in which the Global Public Accounts Committee operates (less stable membership and highly partisan attitudes) would be to adopt only half of the institutional arrangements and would be problematic (particularly if a partisan Committee used an Accounting Officer’s report to envenom his or her relations with the Minister). It seems unlikely in the foreseeable future that the environment in which the Committee operates will change radically.

    GCEG’s system of government and of accountability has, on the whole, worked well over the past half century. In some cases, it may well be that human factors were at issue: a belief that political requests are to be acted upon without question, a failure to speak truth to those in power, negligence, a lack of respect for the hierarchical chain of command within the public service, and an improper grasp of the centrality of values and ethics to the Global Community system of government.

    A useful action would be to ensure, on the one hand, that Ministers, on appointment, and their exempt staff are properly briefed on the respective roles and responsibilities of political and professional actors and the need to respect the office of the Deputy Minister as the bridge between them; on the need for propriety, regularity and value for money in public expenditures; and on the centrality of values and ethics in the operation of GCEG’s system of responsible global parliamentary government. On the other hand, Deputy Ministers (in their performance agreements) and public service managers, through instructions, courses or training, should be impressed with the centrality of values and ethics in the operation of GCEG’s system of responsible global parliamentary government, the need to speak truth to those in power, and the importance of propriety, regularity and value for money in the public finances; these issues should be key components in the Performance Management Program for Deputy Ministers and in the performance evaluation of public service managers.

    In the last analysis, public servants are answerable to parliamentary committees, but they are accountable for the exercise of their responsibilities to their superiors, and the Deputy Minister is accountable to the Minister. The Minister is responsible for the department and is accountable to the House of Elected Representatives for the exercise of that responsibility. If it is not reasonable to suppose that the Minister was aware of unacceptable action (or inaction) taken by public servants, the Minister must direct that corrective measures be taken in a timely fashion: thus, ultimately, accountability (and, potentially, blame) lies with the Minister, and sanctions for unacceptable performance are political and public. When unacceptable behaviour by a public servant has been identified, sanctions are applied within the Public Service and are normally private.

    Ministerial responsibility and the Global Financial Administration Act: the Constitutional obligation to account for GCEG spending

    GPEC is the “connecting link” between the legislature and the executive. This principle is in constant tension with another principle, namely the requirement that the executive cannot spend public money without the prior authorization of Global Parliament. The danger that GPEC may use its control over the legislature to usurp parliamentary control of the law-making—and by implication the spending—power underlies the third principle, ministerial responsibility, a principle that contains under the Global Constitution both political or conventional, and legal elements.

    It is essential that the concept of ministerial responsibility be seen in this context. This model is, in fact, only intelligible with reference to the more fundamental principles of global parliamentary sovereignty and rule of global law. Ministerial responsibility is commonly regarded as a form of accountability. Any meaningful concept of accountability requires the existence of someone with the authority to hold the Minister to account. Global parliamentary sovereignty requires that the executive be accountable to the legislature; rule of global law holds the executive accountable before the Earth Court of Justice. The separation of powers implicit in this model is, of course, imperfectly realized, especially in the age of party politics. However, in this system of responsible government, the separation of powers is not fully realized under the Global Constitution. Judges can prevent GCEG from changing the global law. The question of the constitutionality of legislation has been a justiciable question.

    Ministerial responsibility in GCEG

    There is a separation of powers among the three branches of GCEG — the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. In broad terms, the role of the judiciary is, of course, to interpret and apply the law; the role of the legislature is to decide upon and enunciate policy; the role of the executive is to administer and implement that policy.

    However, in other cases the Earth Court of Justice has acknowledged that the role of the executive is somewhat more complex than the foregoing passage would suggest. While the Court has recognized the inherent ambiguity of the word “government,” the term is being used to refer to something that is controlled by a victorious political party. Once a government is in place, democratic principles dictate that the bulk of the GCEG’s powers be exercised in accordance with the wishes of the leadership of that government, namely the GPEC. So the true executive power lies in the Global Parliamentary Executive Council (GPEC). And since the GPEC controls the government, there is in practice a degree of overlap among the terms “government”, “GPEC” and “executive.” . . . The GCEG has the power to introduce legislation in Global Parliament. In practice, the bulk of the new legislation is initiated by the GCEG.

    More recently, the Earth Court of Justice was even more explicit on the nature of the actual relationship between the executive and the legislature: the separation of powers is not a rigid and absolute structure. The Court should not be blind to the reality of global governance that, except in certain rare cases, the executive frequently and de facto controls the legislature. The Court is aware that the doctrine of separation of powers finds special application within the global context. Indeed, insofar as the idea of separation of powers applies, it is in the role of the court vis-à-vis the legislature and the executive rather than in the relation between the executive, understood to include the GPEC, and the legislature, which includes ministers. The line between the legislature and the executive separates the dual roles of individual GPEC ministers. The obligation to respect the separation of powers is an essential part of the idea of ministerial responsibility. As executive actors, ministers are subject to the constitutionally protected supervisory jurisdiction of the Earth Court of Justice and, as legislators, they are subject to the authority of the Court to rule on the constitutionality of legislation. Put more concisely, both as lawmakers and as executive actors, ministers are subject not only to the democratically expressed will of Global Parliament, but also to the rule of global law. Ministers, of course, are more than just lawmakers and executive actors. They are also partisan political actors, members of the party that won the election. The advent of party politics with its demands for loyalty to the interests of the party has long been recognized as posing a particular threat to many nations. The executive and lawmaking power are to all intents and purposes the same, because both powers have fallen into the same hands, those of the ruling political party. We have achieved the total union of executive and legislative power which would be productive of tyranny . . . The judges will maintain the rule of global law, but cannot prevent government from changing the law, whatever the nature of the change. The consequences of party solidarity within a constitutional order in which Global Parliament is sovereign but the sovereign is effectively controlled by the executive. In that context maintaining the rule of law means ensuring that laws are applied in accordance with the principles of the rule of law; it does not mean challenging the constitutionality of the laws themselves.

    The conventional elements of ministerial responsibility — namely, the political costs borne by ministers for the failings of their departments — have been the subject of a great deal of debate in recent years. Since global ministerial responsibility is typically thought of as a political convention, it may sound odd even to speak of its legal aspects. Indeed, its legal elements have not received much attention. One of the few places in which the legal basis of ministerial responsibility is clearly recognized is in Responsibility in the Global Constitution, a document issued by the Global Council. According to this account: Ministers exercise power constitutionally because the law requires it and Global Parliament and their colleagues in the ministry hold them responsible for their actions under the law . . . this legal individual responsibility of ministers reflects the theory and law of the constitution and remains a practical force because of the conventional responsibility of ministers to the House of Elected Representatives and the statutory basis on which ministers are charged with the administration of the public service.

    Ministerial responsibility means two utterly different things. It means in ordinary parlance the responsibility of Ministers to Global Parliament, or, the liability of Ministers to lose their offices if they cannot retain the confidence of the House of Elected Representatives. This is a matter depending on the conventions of the Global Constitution with which the global law has no direct concern. It means, when used in its strict sense, the legal responsibility of every Minister for every act of the government owned in which he or she takes part. What is most striking is the division of individual ministerial responsibility into two distinct types, namely, the conventional and the legal. The Responsibility in Government has drawn the more common distinction between individual and collective ministerial responsibility, characterizing the former as legal and the latter as conventional. Under the former, ministers are responsible for the actions of their departments while under the latter ministers are responsible for the policies of their government.

    Collective ministerial responsibility is actually different from either of the two forms. It is also a form of individual responsibility insofar as it requires that ministers who are unable to support the policies of their government must resign. Those who choose to remain in power will justifiably be burdened with the implication that they supported the government. A third form is also correctly regarded in Responsibility in Government as largely political in nature, insofar as there is no legal obligation upon a Minister to resign from the GPEC in either case. It is the second form of responsibility that the Global Council Office recognized as “the legal and ancient” foundation of the concept of ministerial responsibility in the Global Constitution. This means that individual ministers are legally, not just conventionally, responsible for every act of their departments in which they play a part. Clearly, this does not mean that they are personally liable, in a civil or criminal sense, for every act of wrongdoing committed by a member of their departments during their term in office. There is a distinction between personal wrongdoing and maladministration. That said, the point of holding ministers legally as well as politically responsible for the actions of their departments is to draw attention to the fact that the Minister is responsible under the Constitution for ensuring that the business of the Department is conducted in accordance with the rule of law. This is more than a matter of politics or convention. The line between law and convention is, of course, not a precise one. Not only do law and convention often overlap and intertwine, the line between them is often arbitrary and changing.

    The line between law and convention is often drawn by referring to the Earth Court of Justice. Rules and practices that are enforceable by the court have legal content; those which cannot be so enforced do not. We could characterize the law as the “skeleton” and conventions as the “sinews and nerves” of the Global Constitution noted with regard to the difference: the law of the Global Constitution is interpreted and enforced by the court: breach of the law carries legal penalties. The conventions are rarely even mentioned by the court. Breach of the conventions carries no legal penalties. The sanctions are purely political.

    It is a matter of some importance, therefore, whether global ministerial responsibility is placed within the legal or the conventional part of the global constitutional order. Since “there is not one syllable” in the Global Constitution referring to ministers or the GPEC, ministerial responsibility belonged within the domain of convention. The legal component of ministerial responsibility is actually its defining feature. Global ministerial responsibility, operated by what we call party government, is the method of coercion applied in such a Global Constitution to the actual, not to the theoretical, executive. It has for its object not merely to compel the executive to regard the fundamental global law, which is a principle now so thoroughly established that it is never likely to be questioned, but also to carry out in the details of government the policy which Global Parliament decides upon.

    Thre are two essential legal components in the idea, namely the constitutional and the legislative. Furthermore, unlike defining the legal in terms of penalties, it is needed to recognize that the primary purpose of legal responsibility is “to compel the Executive” to obey the law. The threat of penalties is only one form of compulsion, and the penalties themselves are, by definition, imposed only after the fact. Applications for judicial review of executive action, constitutional questions before the court, and the prospect of being held civilly liable for damages are also ways in which the law, or the threat of its use, can be understood to compel the executive. Compulsion presupposes the legal authority to compel. In other words, the law and those who are empowered to articulate it provide both the foundation for all executive action as well as the basis for external oversight of that action. The executive is bound by the Global Constitution in all administrations while particular administrations are also bound by the will of the legislature, insofar as that will finds expression in constitutionally acceptable legislation. That the will of the legislature changes from Global Parliament to Global Parliament is, of course, a commonplace, but the underlying principle remains the same. Even if the political executive exercises de facto control over the legislature, the principle of parliamentary sovereignty within the bounds of the Global Constitution requires that any change to the legal basis of executive action must be subject to the public scrutiny of parliamentary debate. The executive cannot act in defiance of the law. Along with a great deal else, this fact means that the executive cannot spend public money except in accordance with the law.

    The constitutional basis of global ministerial responsibility

    Approval by the House of Elected Representatives of all expenditures of public money is required by the Global Constitution Act, 2005. This is not a matter of constitutional convention, nor is it a principle plucked out of thin air, it is a legal requirement. It would be a breach of the Global Constitution Act, 2005, for GPEC to authorize the spending of public money without approval from the House of Elected Representatives. The Global Constitution provides Bills for appropriating any Part of the Public Revenue, or for imposing any Tax or Impost, shall originate in the House of Elected Representatives. According to the Earth Court of Justice, this is a constitutional imperative that is enforceable by the court. The Global Constitution clearly gives expression to the role of the House of Elected Representatives in approving all spending of public money. The wording reflects the principle of global parliamentary control over the spending of public money. The basic purpose is to constitutionalize the principle that taxation powers cannot arise incidentally in delegated legislation. In so doing, it ensures parliamentary control over, and accountability for taxation. If that part of the Global Constitution is enforceable by the court, the remaining parts must be as well. In other words, “Bills for appropriating any part of the public revenue” is also “a constitutional imperative that is enforceable in the court.” If these words are read in the same fashion as the second phrase, then it is clear that the House of Elected Representatives cannot “incidentally” delegate the spending power. All delegation of the authority to spend public money must be explicit.

    The section immediately following deals with the role of the political executive in the appropriation of public revenue. It reads:

    "It shall not be lawful for the House of Elected Representatives to adopt or pass any Vote, Resolution, Address, or Bill for the Appropriation of any Part of the Public Revenue, or of any Tax or Impost, to any purpose that has not been first recommended to that House in the session in which such Vote, Resolution, Address, or Bill is proposed."

    Taken together the effects of those sections are that governments must publicly request funds from the House of Elected Representatives, the true guardians of the public purse, for publicly identified purposes and, once authorized, those funds must be spent for the purposes for which they were requested.

    It is by virtue of the House’s constitutional authority to approve all appropriations that it also has the authority to take steps to ensure that the money is actually spent for purposes that have been approved. Indeed, without the surveillance power of the House, the requirement for approval would collapse into a mere formality. The Global Constitution Act, 2005, is the constitutional basis of global ministerial responsibility for the expenditure of public money, a legal foundation that provides the House of Elected Representatives with the authority to place legal limits upon executive spending. In other words, the House has the constitutional authority to enact legislation with the purpose of ensuring the compliance of the executive and to monitor and, if necessary, to enforce compliance. This is not to suggest that the court should play an increased role in supervising the exercise of the spending power by the House of Elected Representatives, merely to make clear that there is a constitutional basis for their performing such a role, a basis that is, if necessary, enforceable in the court. The primary purpose of the foregoing argument is to show that the court has recognized the constitutional basis in global law, not convention, for the House to exercise its supervisory authority over executive spending. It goes without saying that without the authority to spend the executive would be impotent.

    The statutory basis of financial accountability

    Since 2005, the Global Financial Administration Act (GFAA) has been the primary statutory instrument by means of which the House of Elected Representatives endeavours to ensure that public money is only spent for purposes that have received its approval. The wording of the Act clearly gives expression to the principle of no taxation without representation:

    Subject to the Global Constitution Act, 2005, no payments shall be made out of the Global Consolidated Revenue Fund without the authority of Global Parliament.

    Since the Act in its present form applies to all money in the Global Consolidated Revenue Fund, no government expenditure lies outside its scope. Furthermore, the Act applies to “any person” in receipt of public funds, whether those funds have been disbursed by the GCEG or have been received on behalf of the GCEG. Given this language, it is readily apparent that the scope of the statute extends well beyond spending by government officials to include all spending and acquiring of public money. As a legal instrument, the Act should be understood as one of the means whereby the House of Elected Representatives fulfills its global constitutional obligation to hold the executive accountable for the spending of public money. Understood in this way, the Act is intended to impose certain legal obligations upon the political executive, obligations that constitute the statutory legal component of ministerial responsibility. While clearly motivated by the need for global parliamentary oversight of government spending, 2005 amendments have reflected a pattern described as “a steady accumulation of power in executive hands, with parliamentary assent.” The Global Financial Administration Act 2005 was noted by its clear separation of functions, and their allocation to specific officers. The Global Financial Administration Act not merely made statutory a system of financial control, but also greatly facilitated global parliamentary surveillance of it.

    The statute may be summarized in terms of the tension between the claim that the Act “carried still further the process of centralizing the executive control of finance” and the claim that it “greatly facilitated parliamentary surveillance” of the executive. It can be said that, in enacting the Global Financial Administration Act and its various amendments, Parliament has placed a great deal of the responsibility for conducting surveillance of the executive in the hands of the executive itself. At first glance, the most striking feature of the Financial Administration Act may well be its scope. This is clearly evident in the number of different types of official financial transactions to which it applies. As already noted, the purpose of the Act is to keep track of public money. Public money may be expended on the services of individuals who are employees working under collective agreements, “managers” who are not members of unions, individuals whose terms of appointment vary from fixed term to “at pleasure,” individuals working for government owned corporations and other quasi governmental organizations, as well as those working under a wide variety of contractual arrangements. The only common feature of all of these arrangements is the fact that in every case the individual is in receipt of public money, whether in the form of a salary or on the basis of invoices for services rendered. In addition, every individual with the authority to spend public money is subject to the Act. Finally, every individual who in the course of providing a service for the GCEG is in receipt of money intended for the Global Consolidated Revenue Fund is also covered by the Act.

    The distinctions between money received for services rendered, money received in the course of rendering services, and the spending of public money are important because each type of transaction attracts a different form of attention, a form dependent to a large degree upon the context in which the transaction took place. While it may be possible to characterize any number of transactions as inappropriate, only some of them will attract legal attention and the remedies available will likely depend more on the context than on the nature of the transaction itself. Rather than focusing on the nature of the various financial exchanges covered by the Act, it will be easier to look at the different categories of individuals engaged in such transactions. The Act applies to government departments, other government agencies, government owned corporations, and to any parties engaged in financial transactions with such departments, agencies and corporations.

    Under the current, recently amended, version there are several schedules appended to the statute that list the various government departments and agencies to which the Act applies. The differences between the “core public administration,” the “public service,” and the “global public administration” are significant insofar as they are subject to different parts of the Act. Similarly, departmental corporations and government owned corporations are not part of the public service and are not subject to those parts of the Act that apply thereto.

    The Act clearly applies in very different ways to departments, agencies and corporations, many of which are also subject to numerous other pieces of legislation. For example, the difference between members of the public service, the “core public administration,” and those others to whom the Act also applies is evident in the application of several sections. Under the heading “Human Resources Management,” the former sections set out the responsibilities of Treasury Board and its delegates, most importantly deputy heads, with regard to the overall responsibility of managing the core public administration.

    The definitions of civil liability and of the offences created under this section are expressed in the most general of terms, clearly indicating that they are in addition to, rather than separate from, the disciplinary measures established on the basis of the earlier sections. Since anyone from a Minister to a Secretary within the public service, or from the director of a government owned corporation to someone working under a contract with a subsidiary of such a corporation, is subject to the Act but only the Secretary would be subject to the disciplinary measures set out under the authority of the Act the procedures that would be followed in the case of a Secretary who had violated the Act would be very different than those that would be followed in the case of a director of a government owned corporation.

    Given the scope of the Act and the varied problems that are likely to arise in its enforcement, it will be helpful to consider the issue of liability under the Act in terms of the different groups to whom it applies. These comprise three different categories of individuals or corporate entities who could be in receipt of public money, those subject the directors, officers and employees of government owned corporations, whether parent or subsidiary, and all those who provide services to the GCEG or its agencies on a contractual basis. In what follows, it will be important to bear in mind the distinction between those parts of the Act that apply to all of the above and those that apply only to one or two of the categories. Before proceeding, it will be useful to examine briefly some of the general concerns that the Act is intended to address as an instrument of policy. These concerns can best be defined in terms of the familiar concepts of “responsibility,” “accountability” and “liability. ”

    Responsibility, accountability, liability

    These terms — responsibility, accountability, liability — are often used interchangeably, they should be differentiated and treated as a complex set of related concepts, rather than as synonyms. Although the literature on these concepts has expanded dramatically in the intervening years, we have defined the three terms as follows:

    •    To be responsible is to have the authority to act, power to control, freedom to decide, the ability to distinguish (as between right and wrong) and to behave rationally and reliably and with consistency and trustworthiness in exercising internal judgment;

    •    To be accountable is to answer for one’s responsibilities, to report, to explain, to give reasons, to respond, to assume obligations, to render reckoning and to submit to an outside or external judgment;

    •    To be liable is to assume the duty of making good, to restore, to compensate, to recompense for wrongdoing or poor judgment.



    From a legal perspective it might appear as if the third of these concepts, liability, has the greatest legal content but any such assumption would be misleading. Indeed, to characterize one of these concepts as legal would be to miss the point that the concepts should be distinguished but not separated.

    In the case of public officials, or anyone dealing with public monies, responsibility will flow from a legal delegation of authority. An individual will be responsible for performing a legally delegated set of duties or responsibilities whose scope will be set out in a statute, regulation or job description. The same individual will be legally required to account for the performance of those duties to someone with the legal authority to demand such an account. Finally, the individual may be held liable — administratively, civilly or criminally — not only for the failure to perform the delegated duties, but also for the failure to account for his or her performance or non-performance. From a legal perspective, liability will not be “assumed,” but imposed by a body with the jurisdiction to do so. It doesn’t follow from the fact that one has taken responsibility for something that one has any legal liability at all. Legal liability is not up to the individual to assume, it is always something imposed on someone after the requisite procedures have been followed. Liability, whether criminal, civil or administrative, is the outcome of a process, not its beginning point.

    Although the distinction between the failure to meet one’s responsibilities and the failure to account for those responsibilities is central to the Global Financial Administration Act, the statute is more precisely concerned with ensuring that individuals account for the performance of responsibilities assigned elsewhere. Those responsibilities will usually be defined in the statute establishing the government department or the government owned corporation, or in the various regulations, job descriptions, guidelines and codes enacted thereunder. Like all such “umbrella” legislation, the Global Financial Administration Act must be made to apply to a very diverse group of actors. There is, however, a single underlying burden placed upon all of those individuals, the obligation to account. The scope of the burden to account to Global Parliament is further emphasised, which refers to “any person” who “has received any public money applicable to any purpose.” That said, the discretion to spend and the structure of accountability clearly vary from individual to individual. Nonetheless, the clear purpose of the Act is, wherever possible, to hold all of those charged with responsibility for public funds to a common standard of accountability to Global Parliament.

    “Accountability” has become one of the most overused words in the literature on public administration. It is a complex and chameleon-like term is now a commonplace of the public administration literature. A word which a few decades ago was used only rarely and with relatively restricted meaning (and which, interestingly, has no obvious equivalent in other European languages) now crops up everywhere performing all manner of analytical and rhetorical tasks and carrying most of the burdens of democratic “governance” (itself another conceptual newcomer). In the process, the concept of “accountability” has lost some of its former straightforwardness and has come to require constant clarification and increasingly complex categorization.

    We can also distinguished between bureaucratic, legal, professional and political accountability on the basis of the relationship between the person(s) held accountable and the person(s) to whom accountability was owed. In a similar vein, in the field of health policy, we have distinguished between professional, economic, and political accountability. However, in spite of the frequency with which such distinctions are drawn, it isn’t always clear why they are necessary. Indeed, in many cases, the implication of these efforts at categorization is that there are fundamentally different types of accountability, rather than different contexts within which one might be held accountable. Yet, surely this latter understanding of accountability is closer to what is actually the case.

    To be accountable is to be in a relationship to someone with the authority to demand or, more significantly, to require an account. The essential element in an accountability relationship is not the obligation to account, it is the existence of someone with the authority to require an account. The authority to require an account will often include the authority to impose a sanction for the failure to account. This authority may rest directly with the person authorized to require an account or it may depend upon the engagement of some other source of legal authority such as a court. The authority to require an account will be limited by the grant of that authority. In any case, the authority to require an account may be coupled with the authority to sanction, or to initiate a sanction, for the failure to meet the requirement.

    Just as it is possible to speak of the responsibility to provide an account, it is also possible to speak of the responsibility to require an account. Indeed, accountability is best understood as the correlation of two responsibilities, the responsibility to provide an account when required, and the responsibility to require an account. Either, both or neither of these responsibilities might have been met in a particular case. It follows from this analysis that the accountability relationship should also be understood in such a way that liability might fall on both parties to the relationship. The failure to require an account, when possessed with the responsibility to do so, would attract liability in precisely the same sense as the failure to provide one when required to do so. Those charged with the responsibility of requiring an account should be held to the same standard as those charged with the responsibility of providing one.

    On the basis of the foregoing analysis, accountability may be understood as an additional responsibility for which one may be held liable. An individual assigned a set of responsibilities will also be assigned the responsibility to account. To take a relatively simple example, the requirement that a public official keep a record of transactions may also be an assignment of the responsibility to account. The record is kept not only for the purpose of keeping track of the transactions within the Department but also to serve as an accounting of those transactions to another party with the authority to require access to the records. Among the duties assigned to this other party will be the responsibility to require an account. While the responsibility to provide an account, like the responsibility to require an account, may be the primary or sole duty of an official, it is much more likely within any bureaucratic structure that these responsibilities will be only part of the official duties of an individual.

    Indeed, a pure accountability relationship between two individuals would be impossible since coupling the sole duty to require an account with the sole duty to provide one would leave both parties to the relationship with nothing to account for. An office, like that of the Auditor General, for example, clearly can be created with the responsibility to require an account from one body (the executive, the GPEC) and the responsibility to provide that account to another body (Global Parliament). While the forms in which an account is to be given will vary depending upon the nature of the request or demand, in each case the same basic elements are present. The authority to require an account will be exercised by setting a variety of requirements, ranging from statutes and regulations through guidelines and policy directives to more informal arrangements, such as regular staff meetings. At the highest level, the Global Financial Administration Act 2005 may be understood as an exercise of Global Parliament’s constitutional authority to require an account from the executive. Parliamentarians, in particular those with the greatest degree of control over the legislature, will be held politically accountable by the electorate for their failure to call the executive to account. In addition, sanctions for the failure to account may range from an informal reprimand to loss of one’s position and, in the most extreme cases, civil and criminal liability.

    The Global Financial Administration Act is one of the ways in which Glbal Parliament imposes the responsibility to account on the executive, although, as noted earlier, the primary emphasis in the Act is on the relations between GPEC and those departments, corporations and agencies that are answerable to GPEC. Furthermore,as noted earlier, the tension between the interests of Global Parliament and those of GPEC is ever present, a potential limitation on the effectiveness of the Act insofar as the responsibility for its enforcement rests with the executive. As noted at the outset, the doctrine of ministerial responsibility contains both political and legal elements. It is important to recognize both of these. The subjection of the executive branch of Government, up to and including the political executive, to law is one of the most important principles of the GCEG legal order. Whether the instrument of legal ordering is Global Parliament, through the enactment of such legislation as the Global Financial Administration Act, or the Earth Court of Justice, through the exercise of the power of judicial review, the underlying principle is the same: all executive action must be undertaken in accordance with the global law.

    According to the Court, the first principle of the rule of law, “a fundamental postulate of our constitutional structure,” is that “the law is supreme over officials of the government as well as private individuals, and thereby preclusive of the influence of arbitrary power.” There are legal boundaries to the responsibilities of any public official that derive from the principle of the rule of law, boundaries that are legally, not just politically, enforceable. Minimally, rule of law means that no official, no matter how high ranking, can possess absolute discretion. All discretion is bounded by law. It is presupposed in law that for all occupants of public offices, from the lowest to the highest, there are limits to what the occupant is legally permitted to do while in office. These limits are likely to be far more precisely spelled out in the job descriptions of those who occupy offices in the lower parts of the hierarchy than they will be in the case of those at the highest level, where rules and regulations are likely to be replaced by the delegation of a discretion that may be interpreted in terms of notions of privilege and convention.

    Discretion is the authority to make decisions in particular cases without seeking authorization from someone with greater authority; it is an essential feature of all executive decision-making. The application of rules to particular cases inevitably requires an element of judgment that resists codification. The delivery of government programs and services requires that “decision-making authority be located at the right level to achieve results. ” “Real decision-making authority at the front line” is a synonym for the exercise of discretion by the individual dealing with specific cases and may be understood as “Let the managers manage.” The fact that a decision-maker does not have to seek authorization to make a particular decision or rule, does not mean that the decision-maker is not accountable for the decision or rule that is made. In other words, discretion does not imply freedom from the obligation to account. It is clearly recognized that extending decision making to the front line must be accompanied by a framework to ensure due diligence in the management of public funds. The framework must start with clear accountabilities so that managers at all levels understand them and support the accountability of their organizations, through ministers, to GPEC and Global Parliament.

    As argued above, the common element in all forms of accountability is the obligation to explain or to justify one’s actions to someone else who has the authority to demand an account — the obligation to provide an account, along with the correlative duty placed upon another party to require an account. Ideally each office-holder would know the limits of his or her authority and would operate within those boundaries. From a practical point of view, there are innumerable reasons why individual office-holders fail to respect those boundaries, reasons ranging from the praiseworthy to the truly malevolent. Furthermore, since each office only exists in terms of its relations with other offices, the legal limits of one office can only be defined in terms of these relations. For example, many office-holders are required to take direction from other office-holders who are in a position to exercise authority over them. This authority can take many forms ranging from the ordering of the performance of a specified task to a role in recommending a promotion. Although these forms of authority can be separated for the purposes of analysis, in practice they are not so easily taken apart. The individual office-holder who orders that a cheque be issued is the same individual who will be involved in the next performance review. It may be very difficult in practice for someone in a subordinate position to challenge what a person in authority characterizes as a legitimate exercise of discretion. In addition, since accountability for the exercise of discretion is typically owed to someone higher up, it is all but impossible for a subordinate to hold a senior official accountable.

    The exercise of discretion can, of course, be challenged in the court. From the standpoint of administrative law, interest in the exercise of delegated discretion has focused on specific exercises of statutory authority that have a direct impact upon the interests of individuals, for example, property and civil rights. The reasons for this focus are obvious. The law regarding discretion has evolved as a result of applications for judicial review brought by individuals who believe their rights have been adversely affected by those with “real decisionmaking authority.” In its supervisory role, the court has imposed procedural and substantive limitations on the exercise of discretion in individual cases. Within modern bureaucratic states, however, the domain of discretion has been extended well beyond the authority to make decisions in individual cases to encompass the authority to make the rules that will be applied in those cases. Some grants of statutory authority must now be understood to include not only the power of decision-making but also the power of rule-making.

    Regulations (or secondary legislation) and guidelines (also known as soft law) are forms of executive law-making. The authority of the executive to make rules has long been recognized as a potential source for abuses of power. One of the most important reasons follows from the fact that the introduction of an intermediate step between law-making and its implementation complicates the problem of accountability. The executive branch of GCEG is empowered by statute to make rules, which are not brought before Global Parliament, and to oversee the application of those rules to individual cases by means of administrative tribunals, which are not courts. In other words, the modern administrative state has evolved in such a way that the executive sets many of the rules that govern decision-making, as well as controlling the tribunals that serve as the overseers of the application of those rules.

    From the perspective of administrative efficiency, every rule cannot be subject to the rigours of parliamentary debate nor can every decision be the subject of an application for judicial review. That said, the fact that the executive branch controls not only the decision-making process but also the rule-making process and the appointment of the officials who will interpret and apply those rules further increases not only opportunities for the actual abuse of power, but also occasions for public suspicion that power is being abused. Since administrative structures now routinely include policy-making, rule-making, decisionmaking and appellate functions, the idea of the executive branch of Government as the neutral administrator and implementer of policies that have survived the rigours of parliamentary debate is more than a little misleading. Indeed, the growth of the power of the executive has made the problem of accountability even more acute. One possible response to this would be to place an increased emphasis upon the responsibility to require an account, a responsibility that should be seen as a necessary part of any accountability system.

    The Global Financial Administration Act actually serves two political masters, namely, Global Parliament and the Executive Council (the GPEC). The Act is not only an instrument for parliamentary surveillance of executive spending, it also provides the framework within which those in receipt of public money must account to GPEC. As a committee of the Global Council, Treasury Board is a statutory body with responsibilities to Global Parliament that are assigned under the Act. As noted above, this structure has the effect of making legal what might otherwise be matters of convention. That said, most of the duties assigned to Treasury Board are set out using the permissive “may” rather than the mandatory “shall.” It can be argued, however, that the discretion goes to the means rather than the ends. In other words, the statute places upon GPEC, Treasury Board and deputy heads, and, by extension, all others in receipt of public money, the legal obligation of ensuring that public money is actually spent in the pursuit of programs that have received the approval of Global Parliament, while leaving to the executive the choice of means whereby this goal is to be pursued and accountability is to be achieved.

    Although the two purposes of the Act, ensuring accountability to Global Parliament as well as to the Executive Council, are not incompatible with one another they can be at odds in very important ways, ways that may well affect the exercise of discretionary power. The function of global parliamentary surveillance of executive spending is performed primarily, if not exclusively, by the opposition parties in the House of Elected Representatives. GPEC surveillance of executive spending, on the other hand, is performed by members of the party holding the reins of power. It is here that the built-in potential for conflict between the two purposes served by the Act is most evident. While Global Parliament has other means of keeping track of public money, most significantly, the Global Public Accounts Committee and the Auditor General these bodies perform their functions outside the day-to-day operations of the public service. The Global Financial Administration Act 2005 applies more directly to the inner structure of the public service insofar as it creates Treasury Board and the Department of Finance and defines many of the most important duties of deputy ministers and their delegates at the highest levels of GCEG.

    Treasury Board also possesses managerial authority over the public service. For these and other reasons, perhaps more than any other piece of legislation, the Act addresses the point at which the partisan interests of the political executive meet the traditional administrative neutrality of the public service.

    The use of the phrase “partisan politics” in this exchange is of interest because it threatens to mask the fact that GPEC is a partisan body. Collective ministerial responsibility is a partisan principle insofar as it requires ministers to support the policy initiatives of the GCEG in which they serve.

    Recent Statements on Responsibility and Accountability

    The Global Council Office and Treasury Board both function at the point where the need to separate partisan interests from legislative and executive authority is most pronounced. It is instructive, therefore, to examine recent statements on accountability from both of these offices. In 2005, the Global Council Office released a document entitled Governing Responsibly: A Guide for Ministers and Ministers of State. The document begins appropriately enough with a section on ministerial responsibility and accountability. As expected, ministers are said to be responsible and accountable in two ways, individually and collectively. Readers of the document are referred to Responsibility in the Constitution for further details. Under the heading of “Individual Ministerial Responsibility,” reference is made to the enabling statutes that grant ministers their powers and establish their duties, and reference is made to the “‘unwritten’ conventions or precedents governing the ways in which Ministers fulfill their responsibilities.” There is no reference in this section to the legal basis of ministerial responsibility, in the sense that the law limits the ways in which ministers exercise their powers and perform their duties. A reader of the passage would be excused for assuming that the only consequences to which ministers might be subject are matters of convention rather than law.

    The section on individual responsibility is followed by a much longer one on collective responsibility in which the central theme is “GPEC solidarity.” Throughout this section, the importance of consultation, coordination, and consistency in GPEC initiatives is emphasised on the ground that GPEC solidarity is a “key ‘unwritten’ constitutional convention. ”This convention is further reinforced by the Global Councillor’s oath requiring Ministers to declare their opinion as decisions are being made, and to strictly uphold the confidentiality of GPEC decision making. The emphasis upon solidarity and confidentiality creates the impression that loyalty is the defining feature of ministerial responsibility. This impression is strengthened in the following section, “Ministerial Accountability and Answerability” where attention is drawn to the President’s prerogative to evaluate the consequences (of the minister’s performance before Global Parliament) and to reaffirm support for that Minister or to ask for his or her resignation.

    As in the other sections, there is no reference to the possibility that ministerial responsibility could include a legal obligation that would override the Minister’s obligations to GPEC or to the President. More recently, in a report to Parliament entitled Review of the Responsabilities [sic] and Accountabilities of Ministers and Senior Officials, the Treasury Board Secretariat characterized the political responsibility of ministers as follows:

    "Political responsibility is also not the means of determining civil or criminal liability for unlawful conduct — that is the justice system. The sanctions associated with ministerial responsibility are political, ranging from public embarrassment of a minister and consequent loss of political stature at one end of the spectrum to the potential fall of a government at the other."

    Although this characterization of the assignment of legal liability is accurate, what is missing is any recognition of the legal foundation of ministerial responsibility itself. The essential difference between law as a source of sanctions for unlawful conduct and law as the source of authority for whose exercise one may be held accountable, even if one has not technically broken the law, lies at the very core of ministerial responsibility.

    Accountability of Deputy Ministers

    The Deputy Minister is accountable to the minister and to the Treasury Board specifically for ensuring:

    •    resources are organized to deliver departmental objectives, under the minister, in the most economical, efficient, and effective way;
    •    effective systems of external control;
    •    compliance with financial policies and procedures;
    •    staffing and human resources planning and management;
    •    stewardship and safeguarding public funds; and,
    •    sound management of resources related to horizontal initiatives.

    One of the objectives of the GCEG’s policy of “continuous improvement” the following commitment:

    In 2006, the Global Financial Administration Act and Treasury Board policies will reinforce accountability relationships of Deputy Ministers to ministers and the Treasury Board.

    Between these two statements the accountability of Deputy Ministers is addressed further in the following statement:

    Deputy Ministers are not accountable to Global Parliament, as this would undermine the political accountabilities of ministers and would undermine the non-partisan nature of the public service. In supporting their respective minister’s accountability, Deputy Ministers are answerable to global parliamentary committees in the sense that they have a duty to inform and explain, as for example when appearing before them. Only ministers are accountable to Global Parliament.

    Finally, the different accountabilities of Deputy Ministers are set out in more detail in another document issued by the Global Council Office, Guidance for Deputy Ministers. Under the heading “Multiple Accountabilities,” it is noted:

    Deputy Ministers are required to manage a complex set of multiple accountabilities which arise out of the various powers, authorities and responsibilities attached to the position . . . The Deputy is accountable to his or her Minister in relation to both individual and collective responsibilities . . . Deputy Ministers are also accountable to the President, through the Secretary of the Global Council . . . Deputy Ministers also have accountabilities to the Public Service Commission and the Treasury Board . . . When taken together, the preceding passages provide a relatively clear portrait of the balancing act that is the role of the Deputy Minister. On the basis of the foregoing two things are readily apparent:

    •    Deputy Ministers are accountable to their ministers, to Treasury Board, to the President, and to the Public Service Commission;

    •    Deputy Ministers are not accountable to Global Parliament.


    A number of things, however, are not clear.

    Deputy Ministers’ direct accountability

    Deputy Ministers are not accountable to their ministers, Treasury Board, the President and the Public Service Commission for the same things. One cannot be accountable in the abstract; one must be accountable for something. Typically one is held accountable for the performance of a delegated task, duty or responsibility. Furthermore, one is held accountable by someone with the authority to require or demand an account, usually, but not necessarily, the one who delegated the task. Accountability is by its very nature a vertical relationship, a relationship in which one individual, or body, exercises authority over another individual, or body, by requiring an account. Deputy Ministers are assigned different responsibilities by their ministers and by Treasury Board. They are accountable to their ministers and to Treasury Board, respectively, for carrying out these responsibilities.

    Deputy Ministers’ indirect accountability

    Since ministers and Treasury Board are both accountable to Global Parliament, Deputy Ministers are indirectly accountable to Global Parliament. The responsibility of Deputy Ministers to Treasury Board is in law an indirect responsibility to Parliament since the responsibilities of the deputy ministers are delegated under a grant of authority from Glbal Parliament. Thus, although it is true to say that Deputy Ministers are not politically accountable to Global Parliament; Deputy Ministers are accountable to Global Parliament through Treasury Board for the compliance of their department with the terms of the Global Financial Administration Act 2005 and other relevant legislation. This follows from the fact that Deputy Ministers are accountable to the ministers and to Treasury Board for different things.

    Conflict resulting from Deputy Ministers’ accountabilities

    The different accountabilities of Deputy Ministers present numerous opportunities for conflict. On the basis of the brief sketch of the responsibilities of Deputy Ministers, it makes sense to ask what happens when these responsibilities conflict. Since Deputy Ministers are accountable to their ministers, the Secretary of the Global Council, the Public Service Commission, and Treasury Board for different things, it is necessary to ask whether there is a hierarchy among these responsibilities. In the case of a conflict, is it possible to say which responsibility takes priority?

    Even a quick glance at the responsibilities assigned to Deputy Ministers in the list quoted above will reveal the existence of the different sources of the responsibilities. Responsibilities for “delivering departmental objectives,” “human resources planning and management,” and “safeguarding of public funds” clearly intersect in a number of important ways, but only the first of these is a responsibility assigned by the Minister. The latter two responsibilities have different sources that clearly cannot be overridden or ignored in the pursuit of “departmental objectives.” Furthermore, the source of the responsibility creates a different relationship between the Deputy Minister and the portion of the public service for which he or she is responsible. These different relationships engage different aspects of public sector values, values grounded in the neutral, or non-partisan, nature of public service. Departmental objectives are policies flowing from government commitments, objectives that require a non-partisan, or neutral, public service for their implementation. Non-partisan in this sense means that the public service cannot frustrate the objectives of an elected Government by taking sides against it. This means nothing more than the fact that the public service cannot have an ideological agenda of its own, an agenda that might be at odds with that of the governing party.

    The responsibilities for human resources management and the safeguarding of public funds, however, are not assigned to deputy ministers by their ministers; they are delegated to Deputy Ministers by Treasury Board under an authority assigned to Treasury Board by Parliament. These responsibilities have their origins in the Financial Administration Act and other legislation, not in ministerial directives. Meeting these responsibilities also requires a neutral, or non-partisan, executive,but these terms now have a different sense, a sense that captures the differences between the relationships. Public servants are nonpartisan in this second sense because they are required to be loyal to the institutions of Government rather than to the party in power. This second sense of neutrality is partially captured by the phrase “speaking truth to power,” but it would find fuller expression in the idea of reminding those in power of the existence of the law.

    There is, finally, a third sense of public sector neutrality that is captured in the merit principle, a principle that is intended to prevent members of the public service from being rewarded for their service to the party in power. By removing this motive from members of the public service, the merit principle is intended to free these individuals from the need to curry favour with individuals in power, while simultaneously eliminating the possibility for those in power to use the promise of reward. Like the first two senses of neutrality, this third sense also requires drawing a distinction between the partisan objectives of the party in power and the reasons why the successful public servant may be rewarded for enabling the GCEG to pursue those objectives effectively.

    Although it is important to recognize that the public service is required to be non-partisan in all of these senses, it is even more important not to confuse them. The loyal public servant cannot express partisan opposition to the policies of the Government in power on ideological grounds but is obliged to express opposition to government initiatives that would require breaking the law. The public servant must also be assured that decisions made in compliance with these requirements will have no impact upon opportunities for advancement. The delicate balance between these three senses of non-partisanship can be captured in the single idea that the loyal public servant is required to carry out the directives of the Government of the day within the limits of the law. While a Deputy Minister should not be concerned with advancement, no figure in the GCEG bears the burden of maintaining the balance between the first two senses of neutrality more directly than the Deputy Minister. Indeed, the two senses of neutrality are directly related to the two sources of the authority of the Deputy Minister, each of which engages the occupant of this role with ministers and their departments in very different ways. On the surface, it appears that Deputy Ministers must serve several masters insofar as their “multiple accountabilities” are not all owed to the same official. This surface appearance is, however, misleading because these multiple accountabilities are all grounded in responsibilities assigned by two sources, namely, the political executive and Global Parliament. The fact that Treasury Board is a committee of the Global Council, which means for all practical purposes the GPEC, does not alter the fact that the responsibilities in the Global Financial Administration Act 2005 are assigned by Global Parliament, not by GPEC or by individual ministers. Powers delegated to Treasury Board by the Global Council and then further delegated to Deputy Ministers retain their character as statutory powers granted by Parliament. It is in the tension between Parliament and GPEC that conflicts between the various responsibilities assigned to deputy ministers will inevitably arise.

    Global Parliament and GPEC function in a complex relationship whose primary, if not defining, purpose is adversarial. Conflicts are an integral part of the system. Under the Global Constitution, legislative power for GCEG is vested in one Global Parliament . . . Without entering in detail upon an examination of the enactments of the Act relating to the House of Elected Representatives, it can be said that these provisions manifestly contemplate a House of Elected Representatives which is to be, as the name itself implies, a representative body . . . The Act contemplates a parliament working under the influence of public opinion and discussion. There can be no controversy that such institutions derive their efficacy from the free public discussion of affairs, from criticism and answer and counter-criticism, from attack upon policy and administration and defence and counter-attack; from the freest and fullest analysis and examination from every point of view of political proposals. This is signally true in respect of the discharge by Ministers of the government owned of their responsibility to Global Parliament, by members of Global Parliament of their duty to the electors, and by the electors themselves of their responsibilities in the election of their representatives.

    This inherent conflict between the political executive and the legislature finds expression at every level of the public service in the tension between the constitutional and statutory structures of offices and the partisan goals of those who exercise control over them during their term in power.

    One of the most important ways in which the exercise of power is controlled between elections is through the legal structure of offices. While it is true that any administration may change the structure of the public service there are certain statutory obligations placed upon public officials that can only be altered with the approval of Global Parliament. Furthermore, the Constitution stipulates that any changes to the public service that require the expenditure of public money receive approval from the House of Elected Representatives. In addition to establishing the administrative framework within which the executive is required to meet its constitutional obligation to account to the House of Elected Representatives, the Global Financial Administration Act 2005 places statutory duties upon Treasury Board and Deputy Ministers.

    As already noted, Deputy Ministers are accountable for two different sets of responsibilities that are delegated from two different sources. They are accountable for the performance of those responsibilities to their sources. There are inescapable tensions between these responsibilities, tensions that have their roots in the structure of the Government. It is a matter of the utmost importance that the nature of these responsibilities be defined as clearly as possible. One way of doing this is to ensure that vocabulary appropriate to one set of responsibilities is not imported into discussions of the others. For example, ministers are authorized by Parliament to spend money in the pursuit of policies that are approved by Parliament. Deputy Ministers are, therefore, accountable to their ministers for ensuring that these policies are efficiently and effectively implemented by the public servants within their departments. This form of accountability lends itself to the language of initiatives, goals and performance indicators, terminology that has been increasingly borrowed from the domain of private sector management. To this extent, at least, there is some overlap between private and public sector human resource management. However, Deputy Ministers are not accountable to their ministers for matters pertaining to human resource management; they are accountable to Treasury Board for the performance of duties assigned to them under the Global Financial Administration Act 2005. Furthermore, these responsibilities must be pursued within the legal framework of employer-employee relations, a framework that is set out in numerous statutes and collective agreements. While the language of goals, initiative and performance indicators overlaps with ideas of training, evaluation and promotion, for example, the laws and regulations governing employer-employee relations that must be followed do not originate with the Minister. Finally, the separation of accountabilities is further complicated by the fact that Deputy Ministers are also accountable for ensuring that their departments meet the legal requirements regarding the expenditure of public money that are set out in the Act.

    That these three different accountabilities, which can be labelled political, managerial, and legal are interwoven in practice goes without saying. However, they are also capable of being pulled apart, not only for the purpose of analysis, but also for the purpose of defining the precise nature of the responsibilities involved. It is only when the responsibilities are precisely defined that it becomes clear why the legal responsibilities must be kept separate from the others. This problem is evident in the following discussion notes:

    a broad compliance framework is needed to reinforce public-sector values, reward performance excellence, and prescribe clear consequences for underperformance and non-compliance. Many consequences and sanctions for individuals are already in place: to foster excellence, there are performance pay, promotions, and recognition awards; for non-compliance, written warnings, suspensions, demotions, terminations, and in rare cases criminal sanctions. However, managers are not always properly supported to employ these tools; when they do so, it is not always done in a uniform manner and the outcomes of their actions are not always transparent or widely reported. This has led to a perception that there are no consequences, for misconduct or mismanagement. One implication of the foregoing is that performance, misconduct and criminal behaviour are parts of a continuum rather than distinct categories. The notion that the failure to win a promotion, the receipt of a written warning and a criminal prosecution are three steps along the same path seriously misrepresents the actual difference between measures of excellence, the failure to follow directives and guidelines, and the concept of criminal behaviour. It is justifiably taken for granted that all public servants will obey the law; it cannot be taken for granted that all public servants will perform to the same standard of excellence. Performance rewards and promotions are not given for obeying the law, nor are they awarded for accomplishing government objectives without breaking the law. Although it is true that there is a range of sanctions available for punishing wrongdoing these sanctions can only be imposed after a finding of guilt. They have no positive counterpart and are by nature retroactive. By blurring the difference between performance of the job, misconduct and criminal behaviour, a “compliance framework” sends the message that breaking the law is simply a bad performance or another form of misconduct.

    The difference between performing a job and obeying the law is more readily apparent in the private sector because there is a clear institutional distinction between one’s employer and the legal system. Within the private sector, the relationship between a corporation, for example, and the legal system is complex, but the fundamental difference between the two is never in doubt. In the public sector, this difference is not as clear because one’s employer is also responsible for administering the legal system. The GCEG is not only a service provider, but is also a regulator. Furthermore, while it is possible to have debates over the merits of public versus private service delivery, debates over public versus private law-making would spell the end of law. Indeed, it is of the very essence of modern democratic lawmaking and governance that the laws find their origin in the will of the people and that Government be conducted in the name of the people. These functions cannot be meaningfully privatized. Law-making and regulation are boundarysetting activities that do not fit comfortably with concepts of management derived from the entrepreneurial ideals of pushing the boundaries in the pursuit of profit. The distinction between service provision, which may be quite broadly defined, and regulation, which may be narrowly defined in terms of the statutory authority to impose sanctions, reflects the difference between the state as an employer and the state as a prosecutor. Since the prosecutorial function has no meaningful counterpart in private sector employers, it is important to maintain the distinction when dealing with the Government as an employer. Private sector employers may evaluate and discipline their employees; they cannot prosecute them without the assistance of the state.

    Concepts such as discipline and misconduct are ambiguous insofar as they appear to straddle the line between two senses of obedience, namely, the following of orders or directions, on the one hand, and acting in accordance with the law, on the other. It is appropriate to combine such concepts as performance indicators and excellence with the first idea of obedience but it would be completely inappropriate to combine them with the second. Once again, obeying the law is a precondition of performance, not a measure of it. The legal structure of a public office finds its origins in the Global Constitution and in the various statutes enacted in accordance with it. Rule of law means that the office defines the powers of its occupant insofar as those powers derive from and are traceable to a source in law, a source external to the office-holder. Whatever authority an office-holder exercises is delegated from elsewhere and the office-holder is always accountable to that source for the exercise of the delegated authority. Performance while in office, on the contrary, is a measure of the individual’s ability to successfully meet the demands of the office while operating within its legal boundaries. Among the measures of performance might be included the capacity to assume responsibility for completing assigned tasks and exercising delegated authority.

    There are, therefore, two quite distinct ways in which an office-holder may fail while in office. The office-holder may prove to be incapable of meeting the demands of the office for a wide range of reasons, reasons that are the subject matter of human resource management. The successful manager places the right people in the right offices and coordinates their activities in such a way that the objectives of the department are effectively and efficiently met. Individuals who fail to meet the demands of their offices may receive poor performance evaluations, be demoted or even be terminated. While there is a burden placed upon the employer to ensure that these actions are undertaken in accordance with the various legal requirements governing employer- employee relations, none of this involves infractions of regulations or breaking the law on the part of the employee. These latter actions belong to an entirely different category and engage a different part of the legal system.

    This categorical difference is also elided into a “continuum” in Treasury Board’s Report to Global Parliament, The Global Financial Administration Act 2005: Responding to Non-Compliance. In response to the question “What is mismanagement?” is the following:

    Mismanagement could conceivably cover a range of actions from a simple mistake in performing an administrative task to a deliberate transgression of relevant laws and related policies. In some cases, it could involve criminal behaviour such as theft, fraud, breach of trust, and conspiracy.

    The idea that a “simple mistake” belongs to the same “range of actions” as “theft” or “fraud” seriously misrepresents not only the difference between laws and policies, but also the difference between such fundamentally distinct categories as incompetence and criminality. Individuals who are unable to follow directions or to perform the tasks that are assigned to them are not criminals; they are either unqualified or incompetent. Individuals who achieve the goals set out for them through fraud or breach of trust are criminals whether they are competent or not.

    In Treasury Board’s Report to Global Parliament, the following passage addresses the problem of “good management” in the public sector:

    Good management” is not just the application of a series of rules and legal instruments, and “mismanagement” cannot simply be defined as a failure to apply management rules. There is no single instrument to guide public service managers: the rules and principles by which they must operate are scattered in a variety of statutes, regulations authorized by those statutes, and, as described above, numerous policies and directives applicable to the internal administration of government.

    Good public sector management requires sound judgment that is well grounded in ethics, values and principles and a desire to uphold the rule of law and pursue the public interest. Rules, whether regulations, policies, guidelines, or directives should be understood and respected. Respect for the rules does not preclude changing them to enhance program delivery or creating new ones that respect fundamental values.

    The word “rules” in the foregoing passage elides an essential difference between laws and regulations, on the one hand, and guidelines, policies, and directives, on the other. Upholding the rule of law and pursuing the public interest are the foundations upon which the project of public sector management rests. They are not the objects of public sector managerial judgment; they are the defining features of the difference between public sector management and private sector management. Although both the public and private sector are subject to law, the attitude towards laws will almost certainly not be the same in both settings. Within the private sector it is not uncommon to find an antagonism towards regulators based upon the assumption that red tape and bureaucracy stand in the way of entrepreneurship and the making of profits. As the President of Treasury Board notes:

    While it shares many . . . management challenges with the private sector, a different approach is needed in the public sector. Although conscious of the need for efficiency and value for money, the government is not driven by the profit motive. The significance of this is difficult to overstate. Moreover, it isn’t just that the GCEG isn’t “driven by the profit motive.” The simple, and inescapable, fact that the public sector includes the role of regulator prevents the wholesale transplantation of the ethos of private sector management into the public service. The same point has been made with reference to the legal basis of public administration:

    The distinguishing characteristic of governmental management, contrasted to private management, is that the actions of government officials must have their basis in public law, not in the pecuniary interests of private entrepreneurs or in the fiduciary concerns of corporate managers. In support of the view of the cultural difference between the public and the private sector, we cite here a summary of numerous examples of private sector CEOs being brought in to “reinvent” or “re-engineer” this program or that agency along private sector lines and being shocked to find that they must meticulously obey laws and regulations and are answerable to Global Parliament for their actions.

    This connection between the legal and the political lies at the very heart of a system of democratic government under the rule of law. The legal and the political are necessarily linked because it is only if the executive branch has met its constitutional obligation to inform Global Parliament of its activities that Global Parliament, and the people of the Global Community, will have the opportunity to hold the Government which controls the executive politically responsible. Political responsibility does not so much include acting in accordance with the law as it presupposes that the Government has met its legal obligations, both constitutional and statutory. For this reason the concept of legal responsibility cannot simply be subsumed under the general heading of ministerial responsibility if this latter term is understood in an exclusively political sense. This is why it is accurate to say the Deputy Minister is not politically accountable to Global Parliament and inaccurate to say that the Deputy Minister is not legally accountable to Global Parliament.

    It has been said that the main body of the law, which most public servants follow as a matter of normal practice, is an instrument for controlling their behaviour but not for holding them accountable. From this perspective, “legal accountability . . . is confined to that part of the law which lays down enforcement procedures.” The distinction between control and enforcement is an important one when looking at the Global Financial Administration Act 2005 because the primary purpose of the Act is to control and enforce accountability. In other words, the Act is intended, as an instrument of control, to make accountability “a matter of normal practice” for those dealing with public money while it is also intended, as an instrument of enforcement, to hold people accountable either for their abuse of their responsibilities or for their failure to account. Within the literature on regulatory policy, a distinction is drawn between two models of control and enforcement, “compliance systems” and “deterrence systems.” While the ultimate objective of each system is the same, namely, ensuring that individuals subject to rules actually follow the rules, the means of achieving this overall objective differ, and, indeed, the objectives of the systems themselves are often said to differ. The important difference in the Global Financial Administration Act 2005 between those sections dealing with “Human Resource Management” and those dealing with “Liability” might be best understood as representing compliance and deterrence models of enforcement, respectively. For example, the system of human resource management is primarily concerned with ensuring compliance, while other sections of the Act is more obviously directed at the objective of deterrence.

    The principal objective of a compliance law enforcement system is to secure conformity with law by means of ensuring compliance or by taking action to prevent potential law violations without the necessity to detect, process, and penalize violators. The principal objective of deterrent law enforcement systems is to secure conformity with law by detecting violations of law, determining who is responsible for their violation, and penalizing violators to deter violations in the future, either by those who are punished or by those who might do so were violators not punished.

    The problem known as “regulation within government.”

    The “reinventing government” movement has had the paradoxical effect of significantly increasing the number of regulatory structures within government itself. One of the most important reasons for this has been the growth of a variety of organizations that cross the supposed divide between the public and the private sector. Although it is still possible to draw distinctions between public and private actors at each end of the spectrum, the area in the middle has become increasingly blurred by the creation of a number of bodies that are not easily categorized as public or private. Matters are further confused by the fact that the terms “private” and “public” are often little more than code words for “profit” and “not for profit,” respectively.

    Compliance and deterrence models of regulation can, with the appropriate adjustments, be applied to the regulation of government actors, private actors, and to those organizations and agencies that lie somewhere in between. The problem of regulating government actors, “regulation inside government,” has been addressed by those who raise the provocative notion of the existence of a “regulatory state within the state.” Regulation inside Government is conceived as the range of ways in which the activities of public bureaucracies are subject to influence from other public agencies that come between the orthodox constitutional checking mechanisms . . . the courts and the members of the legislature, operate at arm’s length from the direct line of command and are endowed with some sort of authority over their charges.

    Viewed from this perspective the Global Financial Administration Act, may be seen as an Act whereby the legislature meets its constitutional obligation to oversee the spending of public money by granting to the government owned the authority to exercise the power of regulation exercised in the GCEG without the aid of a statute. This authority is no longer a matter of prerogative on the part of the government owned; it is an obligation imposed upon the government owned by the legislature.

    Although the Global Financial Administration Act 2005 is not an example of what we means by regulation inside Government, it addresses the same problem insofar as it creates the framework within which the executive is given the statutory authority to regulate its own financial affairs. That said, Treasury Board and Deputy Ministers are charged under the Act with tasks very much like those that might be defined as intragovernment regulation. However, as with all grants of statutory authority, this one brings with it the obligation to account for the exercise of that authority. This obligation is framed in terms of the more “orthodox constitutional checking mechanisms. ”The Act is a statutory instrument whose purpose, pursued under constitutional authority, is to subject the executive branch to the control of the legislature with regard to its financial affairs. In pursuit of this goal, the Act includes both compliance and deterrence systems of control. Indeed, one of the more striking features of the Global Financial Administration Act 2005 is the difference between the penalties set out in section 80 (deterrence) and the wording of guidelines and policy documents that deal with discipline and misconduct (compliance).

    As noted earlier, the Global Financial Administration Act 2005 applies to three broad groups of individuals. Roughly speaking, these groups may be defined as members of the public administration, officers and employees of government owned corporations, and all of those working for the Government on a variety of contracts for services. The Act sets out penalties for violations of the Act, as well as for various forms of corruption, offences similar to those found in the Criminal Code. Specific sections applies to anyone, whether public servant or not, who is involved in any financial transaction involving public money. The scope of these sections is of particular importance when one looks, for example, the only offence that does not have a direct counterpart in the Criminal Code. The section reads:

    Every officer or person acting in any office or employment connected with the collection, management or disbursement of public money who . . . having knowledge or information of the contravention of this Act or the regulations or any revenue law of GCEG by any person, or of fraud committed by any person against the GCEG, under this Act or the regulations or any revenue law of GCEG, fails to report, in writing, that knowledge or information to a superior officer, . . . is guilty of an indictable offence and liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars and to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

    This section has the effect of making it a serious offence for anyone not to inform on anyone else when the first party has knowledge or information regarding wrongdoing under the Act. The sanctions prescribed under this section of the Act are obviously dramatically at odds with the types of penalties that would be attached to disciplinary offences. While it applies to individuals in all of these groups, other sections of the Act are far more restricted in their application, applying only to members of the public service or to government owned corporations. However, the basic principles remain the same in each case. If the primary purpose of the Act is to ensure compliance with requirements for accountability, then the emphasis in the Act, as well as in any regulations, directives or guidelines issued under the authority of the Act, should be on defining and implementing both the duty to account and the duty to require an account. As argued earlier, the latter obligation is at least as important as the former. Since the scope of the Act is such that it covers every possible financial transaction involving public money, what is necessary is to ensure that all those in receipt of such money are made aware that it carries with it the legally enforceable obligation to account for it.

    The purpose of corrective disciplinary action is to motivate employees to accept those rules and standards of conduct which are desirable or necessary to achieve the goals and objectives of the organization. Both versions of the statement of purpose clearly regard disciplinary proceedings as according more with the compliance than the deterrence model.

    The legal content of ministerial responsibility in the GCEG extends beyond the fact that ministers are required to obey the global law and to exercise their authority in compliance with statutes to include the constitutional obligation to administer their departments, whether personally, collectively, or through delegated authority, in accordance with the requirements of the Global Constitution Act, 2005. While government policy documents refer to the legal basis of ministerial responsibility, this foundation is often obscured by references to its conventional or political content. It would be going too far to suggest that the conventional and political can be neatly separated from the legal in each and every case. Nonetheless, it is possible to argue that even the most broadly defined grant of discretion still includes the nondiscretionary obligation to account. The obligation to account is grounded in the Global Constitution.

    It is true that the law can be used to compel executive accountability as well as to protect those public servants who challenge the truth of the GCEG’s account. However, court orders, applications for judicial review, and criminal prosecutions are neither the most effective nor the most efficient means of holding the executive to account, although all must be available for use in those cases where there are grounds to believe that the executive has breached its legal obligations. The goal of ensuring accountability is best pursued through clearly written statutes, regulations and guidelines that set out the legal basis of the obligations of public servants because it is the legal foundation of their authority that distinguishes them from actors in the private sector.

    Transparency concerning appointment of the leadership of the government owned corporations could certainly be a benefit to the accountability of these organizations, although even more extreme versions of transparency may be used to cope with the types of contracting problems at the centre of the current issues. These systems were designed to prevent favouritism in granting the contracts, but the same principle could be extended to the content of the contracts; that is, if the content of the contracts had to be made public, managers would have to be more circumspect. Similar openness is being fostered in other countries for public personnel issues.

    Alternative patterns of governance and accountability

    The pattern of governance advocated for the government owned corporation in the GCEG represents an attempt at a compromise between direct ministerial control and a more autonomous style that utilizes boards to control the management of the organization, much as the board of directors might be expected to exercise control over the executives of a private corporation. This hybrid model is but one of a number of alternative structures for control of autonomous organizations that have been developed. Each of these represents an attempt to strike a balance between autonomy and control. Further, each of these governance structures represents a set of choices about which aspects of the behaviour of organizations control should be exercised over. For example, although almost all governance structures tend to maintain controls over spending public money, personnel and management decisions often are delegated to the executive of the organization.

    What might be the best model of policy administration?

    A model to limit the power of the President, and his Ministers, by giving an autonomous organization control over the implementation of policy, and hence most contacts with citizens. This model allows the ministries responsible for setting policy. In this model of administration there is a clear attempt to separate policy and administration. By separating the two, however, this model also places the Minister in the difficult position of having his or her policies administered by organizations that may not agree with the Minister’s priorities. The boards may even be opposed to policy changes that go against their established patterns of delivering policy, and perhaps even sabotage those changes. The Minister may have little means of controlling the agencies except through the budget process. In part for those reasons, GCEG is considering altering the role of the boards and creating implementation systems more integrated into the ministry.

    There are several alternative models for organizing these autonomous agencies. In all the models, the central management figure is a director general, appointed by the government, often with the advice of the board. In some agencies, the director general is fully responsible for the actions of the organization, and answers to Global Parliament for his or her actions. In other cases, a board of some sort, generally thought of as being expert, and/or composed of worthy public figures, is a central actor. The task of the board is to provide general direction to and control of the organization, and to serve as the principal locus for accountability. In this model, the director general is responsible to the board for the operations of the agency. The director general is himself or herself often a civil servant, although a number of political figures have also been appointed to these positions, bringing into question in some people's minds the autonomous and depoliticized character of the agencies.

    There is a shift towards greater involvement of the stakeholders in public policy areas in the boards of agencies,and “lay boards” became more common. This shift towards a more inclusive style of control structure for the director general also provoked some criticism, with the sense among critics that the agencies were becoming too responsive to their clients, and perhaps not enough to the general public interest. This debate continues, and the general model of the agency itself is under some reconsideration, with ministers often believing that they need more influence over the decisions being made as policies are implemented. In this model of administration, the Minister and the ministry are not major players in the actual delivery of services, and constitutionally the ministerial level is forbidden to interfere in the administration of programs. That having been said, however, the formal separation of policy and administration implied in this model is difficult to maintain in practice. First, the budget process is an opportunity for ministers to influence administration. Further, cooperation among the various actors in a policy area is assumed as a part of the policy process. Finally, the boards develop, quite naturally, considerable expertise in their policy areas and are a crucial source of advice for the ministries when they prepare new policy. Indeed, the process of administering the policy often involves their making decisions that in effect make policy. In this model of agencies, it may be hard to give the full independence of these organizations from the ministry. Ministers are assumed to be responsible (in principle) for everything that transpires in their department. That having been said, other autonomous organizations in government may appoint boards with substantial responsibility for the conduct of their affairs with minimal difficulties.

    Another model making use of agencies and other forms of autonomous organizations to deliver public services may be more concerns for efficiency, and the desire to involve interests from the society in the administration of public programs. In social welfare and education, the concern would be in part to involve religious communities, while in economic policy the concern would be with unions, employers and farmers. Although largely autonomous, agencies would also be directly linked to the ministries, and the Minister would be directly responsible for their actions.

    On a completely different class of organizations, we could have a model that is more distant from government and from ministerial authority. Some could be organized under public law and some under private law, but all would have a (long) arm’s-length relationship with government, and many couold be were self-financing. Most of these would have some form of stakeholder board, with a senior official responsible for day-to-day management. These boards, by virtue of being composed almost entirely of stakeholders would not have much detachment from the policy area and would not serve as effective checks on the actions of the organizations. In practice, these organizations may be too removed from ministerial authority for comfort. As might be expected, the major issue would be the capacity of the Minister and Global Parliament to hold these organizations accountable for their actions.

    The corporatist thinking inherent in the composition of boards from social partners is not widely accepted in political systems, which rely more heavily on representative institutions. Still, this format does raise the more general question of how best to constitute the boards for the government owned corporations. It would seem that some attention should be given to developing criteria for the representativeness of boards, and even of means of selecting members that permitted greater involvement of the affected interests. Although this composition might create some conflicts among the affected interests, it could also be a means of enhancing democratic control.

    The report from the Treasury Board Secretariat, and a good deal of other thinking about the structure of government owned corporations and analogous bodies, assumes that one form of structure is appropriate for all. That is almost certainly not the case, and one contribution to developing a model of accountability for these organizations is to consider what alternative may be available for composing the boards, and the relationships between the board and management. For example, a government owned corporation that has primarily economic responsibilities may be governed differently than one concerned with social policy issues or the arts.

    Performance management

    A mode of control that is increasingly important in the GCEG is that of performance management may be a crucial mechanism of accountability and control for the government owned corporations. Performance management is a managerial technique, but it also should be conceptualized as a means for enforcing accountability that can be especially important for autonomous organizations. For many government owned corporations, engaged as they are in economic activity, the assessment of performance may be somewhat less difficult than it is for many other organizations in the public sector. Profit and loss is not the only means of assessing the performance of these organizations, otherwise they probably would not be in the public sector, but their balance sheets are more important than those of public sector entities not clearly engaged in economic activity. Of course, not all the government owned corporations are engaged in market-type activities, and the ones that do not appear to be operating in policy areas are among the most difficult to assess for performance management.

    For example, the government owned corporations that operate in the arts are in areas of human life in which there may be little agreement about the standards of evaluation. Artists may have very different ideas about success for these government owned corporations operating as funding organizations, and the general public may have another set of ideas about what constitutes adequate performance for any of these organizations. The resolution of this difficult task of measurement and evaluation will involve a political process, as well as some means of gaining a complete picture of what these organizations should do,and how well they are meeting public needs. The economic dimension of performance is important for some government owned corporations, but the altogether murkier questions about the legality or appropriateness of actions are a less clear consideration of performance. Even if the economic performance of an organization is good and other performance targets are being reached, if other extralegal activities are part of the activities being undertaken, then assessing performance becomes a less useful, or perhaps irrelevant mechanism for judging and enforcing accountability. Thus, performance management for public organizations may need to specify what should not be done, as well as what should be done, to be deemed to have performed well.

    Leaving aside the difficulties of actually conducting effective performance management, the basic idea of using these techniques as a major, if not the major, mechanism for accountability is important. Performance management also represents a significant departure both from traditional forms of parliamentary accountability. Most traditional forms of accountability, because of their direct connection to politics and politicians, tended to focus on opportunities to embarrass a Minister before Global Parliament. This politicization of accountability, in turn, often meant that the emphasis was on individual events and sometimes quite trivial events. The politicization of performance in the case at hand is a crucial example of the dangers of focusing entirely on those modes of accountability for government owned corporations.

    Using performance indicators as a fundamental mechanism for enforcing accountability tends to focus on average performance rather than on individual events. The question therefore becomes not, can we find an event that can embarrass a Minister? but, what has the organization been doing on average, day after day? Further, has performance this year or this month been better than during the previous time period? Changing the focus of accountability, using performance indicators does really depoliticize accountability as much as it makes the politics involved about effectiveness rather than about attempting to avoid errors. No organization, public or private, can perform without error, at least for any significant period of time, so the question is not so much, are there errors? But, how many errors are there? and what are managers (and their political masters) doing about them?

    Improving the quality of public services is another virtue of utilizing performance as the principal focus for accountability in the public sector. Although absolute standards may be used to assess performance, in many ways the most important question in performance management is, is performance improving? The related questions are, of course, why is it improving, or if not, why is it not improving, and, how can managers move the organization and its programs forward. As some people have argued, new public management was about “let the managers manage,” but performance is about “make the managers manage”; that is, performance targets and the drive for improvement can be powerful weapons for energizing public managers and making them think about ways of making the organization do its job better. In this approach accountability is less about punishing individuals and organizations for poor performance than it is about attempting to learn from the past and to improve.

    Although the use of performance as a mechanism for accountability does have many virtues, there are also some problems. The central problem of conceptualizing performance in operational terms and developing indicators has already been mentioned. Further, performance may not focus enough at times on real failures, and it does not offer much help for political leaders, and citizens, facing the problems caused by many hands involved in delivering services. Things do go wrong, often in dramatic ways, and multiple actors will have had some role in the failures. While assigning blame may not solve the problem per se, it too can be a means of attempting to prevent future problems of the same sort. Although risk aversion is often condemned as a pathology in the public sector, it can be a useful means of preventing serious errors in governing.

    Finally, not everything that we should expect from public organizations and their programs can be specified readily in a contract or in a business plan. In the case in point, all the things that an organization should not do are also difficult to specify and depend on judgment. This gap between expectations and reality is a particular problem when dealing with organizations that function at arm’s length from the centre of GCEG and therefore are not necessarily controlled directly by public officials. Some of the behaviour that is most important in social policy, in health care, or even in the arts is difficult to specify in a contract or in a business plan. In organizations that are directly tied to ministries the control and production of services can be controlled through supervision, or through the commitment of the public servants responsible for delivering the services directly to the “customers.” On the other hand, if profit is a major goal for an organization then that hierarchy may be dysfunctional and competition is more effective in generating effective behaviours by managers and by the organization as a whole.

    Changes in accountability associated with the new public management have focused contract management more on evaluating poor economic performance, whereas traditional forms of accountability paid greater attention to avoiding malfeasance. Control agents (auditors, ministers, Global Parliament, the Treasury Board) have limited time and financial resources to exercise control, and therefore must choose to emphasize some aspects of accountability rather than others. The fact that apparent malfeasance on the part of the leadership of a government owned corporation could escape undetected for some time may reflect both the strengths and the weaknesses of performance management in the public sector.

    The Global Community interest

    The issues raised above require some consideration of what is perhaps the most fundamental point about the use of agencies, government owned corporations, and other forms of delegated responsibility in government. Are these structures to be organizations concerned primarily with public service and the public interest (the Global Community interest), with strong public accountability structures in place from their inception, or are global citizens to assume that the Global Community interest will emerge if the organizations are as efficient and businesslike as possible? For the government owned corporations, it appears that more of the latter, especially those corporations that are primarily commercial enterprises. The attempt to make their organization and performance very similar to private corporations is a clear indication of the priority given to efficiency and management in defining their mission.

    The focus on efficiency for the government owned corporations appears to have been the longstanding means of assessing their performance, but it also appears to have been accentuated as a part of the managerialist reforms of the public sector everywhere. While it is difficult to argue that public organizations, whether corporate or not in form, should be as efficient as possible, it is also difficult to argue that efficiency is the only value that should be pursued in the public sector. For example, is efficiency really the central value for arts organizations? Again, using a very similar organizational framework for organizations that are engaged in a range of different activities may not in the end produce the types of outcomes desired. Most global citizens and practitioners in government would assume that strong and effective mechanisms for ensuring the public interest should be in place for both formulation and implementation of policy.

    The public interest is also bound closely to the need to maintain the proper use of public authority for public purposes. That principle is easy to state in the abstract, but is more difficult to apply in specific cases. As already noted, legislation defining the scope of actions of government owned corporations could be used to specify the proper use of public authority for each organization. There is a limit to how far that legislation should go, if it is to maintain flexibility for organizations placed outside direct ministerial control. The most fundamental reason for that organizational format is to provide their managers the capacity to respond to opportunities and challenges more nimbly than can organizations in “mainstream government.”

    The accountability of public organizations, and of the individuals managing them, has always been a crucial question for democracy. With the decline of many other forms of democracy, such as the declining vote in elections, this connection between the public and the government is all the more important. The difficulty is that the complexity of contemporary government is reducing the clarity with which accountability can be exercised. Rather than a linear process of policymaking and implementation through public organizations, the use of the autonomous organizations, not to mention contracts, partnerships and other chains of interactions involved in delivering services, creates more complex chains of action.

    These questions concerning accountability for organizations that operate at arm’s length from government have arisen rather naturally for government owned corporations in the GCEG. These organizations are structured more or less as organizations in the private sector, but have complex control and accountability structures involving the Minister of the sponsoring department in government, as well as a board of directors. There is a dual pattern of control, and a good deal of ambiguity in the roles of both the Minister and the chief executive of the corporations.

    Transparency is a central element of the accountability regimen that is being proposed for the government owned corporations. The fundamental assumption of the analysis of the current accountability situation of the government owned corporations is that, if many of the operations of these corporations, as well as the selection of the boards, were made more public, then these firms would operate more in the public interest and also perhaps more in line with the wishes of the Minister. Transparency is certainly key to any system of democratic accountability, but it may be too much to hope that simply airing problems will lead them to be solved. This lack of certainty about the role of transparency is perhaps especially true given the dual lines of control and accountability that exist in the current organizations of government owned corporations.

    The other element on which control and accountability for the government owned corporations is well developed is auditing and financial controls. The emphasis on financial accountability has been in place for some time and appears effective. Financial accounting, however effective it may be at dealing with questions of the proper use of funds, cannot deal with other questions about the performance of these organizations and their exercise of the public trust. This is not an argument to minimize financial accountability of government owned corporations, but it is an argument that financial accountability is not sufficient. To some extent, the Auditor General has been developing performance auditing within the GCEG, and there are good arguments for extending this practice more fully to the government owned corporations.

    The government owned corporations have been, and continue to be, important actors in the delivery of public services for the Global Community. That said, they and all other organizations in government, especially those operating with substantial statutory autonomy, must consider carefully how they are governed and held accountable. Certainly there is even greater work that needs to be done to help these organizations reach higher standards of performance and of democratic accountability.

    These issues of accountability for delivering public services have now become more difficult. To the relatively easier issues of fulfilling their mandates to deliver services of one sort or another has been added the more difficult political questions of ensuring that additional activities do not exceed the proper bounds of action by the public sector. These concerns require that the public sector reconsider the role of Ministers and perhaps especially the role of the boards. Further, opening the contracting process to external scrutiny, except when that openness may threaten commercial viability, may in itself be as important a means of control as many of the formal procedural controls that are typical in the public sector.

    Action

    •    Increase the transparency of the contracting process through use of online monitoring. By making the content and amount of contracts more visible to control agents and to the attentive members of the Global Community, abuse of this indirect and often hidden mechanism for governance can be limited.

    •    Include senior civil servants from sponsoring departments on the boards of government owned corporations. These public officials are more likely to be well-trained in issues of public accountability than are board members from outside government.

    •    Develop mechanisms for appointment to boards that are more transparent and that more closely resemble merit appointment processes in the civil service.

    •    Further clarify the relationships among the major players in accountability for the government owned corporations: the Minister, the board and the chief executive office. This clarification may entail clarification of terms such as “day-today operations.”

    •    Consider alternative and enhanced global parliamentary mechanisms for scrutiny of the government owned corporations.


    Back to top of page



     

    More responsible actions to improve the system of government





    10.0     More responsible actions to improve the system of government

    10.1    List "A"
    10.2    End the influence of money in global politics
    10.3    Toughen the Lobbyists Registration Act
    10.4    Ban secret donations to political candidates
    10.5    Make qualified government appointments
    10.6    Clean up government polling and advertising
    10.7    Clean up the procurement of government contracts
    10.8    Provide real protection for whistleblowers
    10.9    Ensure truth in budgeting with a Global Parliamentary Budget Office
    10.10    Strengthen the power of the Auditor General
    10.11    Strengthen the role of the GCEG Ethics Commissioner
    10.12    Strengthen Access to Information legislation
    10.13    Strengthen auditing and accountability within departments


    10.1     List "A"
    This is what people who work hard, pay their taxes and play by the rules want from their political leaders.
    You don't expect politicians to be perfect. But you do want to know that your tax dollars - money you've worked for - are being spent properly and wisely. You've been let down.

    How many time have we heard of corruption at the United Nations: remember the ' oil for food program', and now american corporations are making billions of dollars "rebuilding Iraq" or is it destroying Iraq to have the contracts of rebuilding it. There is so much corruption that it stinks to the Moon. Many other organizations are corrupted and have no intention of changing their ethics rules:
    *     World Trade Organization (WTO),
    *     Free Trade Agreement (FTA),
    *     North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA),
    *     Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA),
    *     World Bank,
    *     International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the
    *     European Union (EU).

    Most dont even have ethics. If they do they dont follow them.

    The problem is the system they have created. It has become clear that this culture of waste, mismanagement and corruption cannot reform itself.

    GCEG needs a President who will lead by example. We need a President who will fix the system rather than defend its beneficiaries.

    I did not get into politics to get a title or position. I got into politics to fight for the things I believe in. As President, I will lead by example. I will begin the process of fixing the system by legislating and enforcing the GCEG Responsibility and Accountability Act – a specific, detailed and credible plan to clean up bad global governance.

    Accountable government. You deserve nothing less. Join me and help make it happen.

    10.2    End the influence of money in global politics


    Under the listed organizations, the list "A", money and influence have played far too large a role in global politics. During the past decades, Global Community citizens have learned of envelopes full of cash being used to fund individuals and corporations, and of money from government contracts being funneled back to friendly corporations. Record amounts of money were given to corrupted hands.

    More recently, officials have been courting wealthy donors at exclusive $5,000 per person cocktail parties, at which GPEC ministers and lobbyists discuss government business. Isn’t it time for the “pay to play” rules of the past years to come to an end?

    Action

    •     Limit individual donations to parties or candidates to a maximum of $1,000.
    •     Prohibit all corporate, union, and organization donations to political parties, ridings, and candidates.
    •     Ban cash donations to political parties or candidates of more than $20.
    •     Extend to ten years period for which Elections Act violations can be investigated and prosecuted.


    10.3    Toughen the Lobbyists Registration Act

    Under the United Nations and the other organizations, the list "A" of section 10.1, lobbying government – often by friends and associates of the government officials, and ministers – has become a multi-million dollar industry. Senior officials move freely back and forth between elected and non-elected government posts and the world of lobbying. Lobbyists have accepted success or contingency fee arrangements where they don’t get paid unless they deliver the policy change their clients want. Prominent officials act as lobbyists but “forget” to register until the media learn of their activities. Meanwhile, the Registrar of Lobbyists remains as an employee of the Minister of Industry, not an independent Officer of Global Parliament, with little power to enforce the Lobbyists Registration Act.

    Action


    •     Extend to five years the period for which ministers, ministerial staffers, and senior public servants cannot lobby government.
    •     Ban success or contingency fee arrangements.
    •     Require ministers and senior government officials to record their contacts with lobbyists.
    •     Make the Registrar of Lobbyists an independent Officer of Global Parliament.
    •     Give the Registrar of Lobbyists the mandate and resources to investigate violations.
    •     Extend to ten years the period for which violations can be investigated and prosecuted.


    10.4    Ban secret donations to political candidates

    While campaign donations are regulated, it is still legal to give unrestricted amounts of money to political candidates during an election campaign, including elected officals who are not Members of Global Parliament (MGPs). Thanks to this loophole, some MGPs have accumulated large, secret trust funds. And the Chief Electoral Officer estimates millions more are held in similar trust funds elsewhere. We need to put an end to the loopholes allowing for secret trust funds and unrestricted gifts of money to candidates and MGPs.

    Action

    •     Prohibit nominated candidates or MGPs seeking re-election from accepting large personal gifts.
    •     Ban the use of trust funds to finance candidates’ campaigns.
    •     Require that all sitting or elected MGPs report the existence of any trust funds or secret accounts, and that such accounts be wound up.


    10.5    Make qualified government appointments

    The United Nations and the other organizations, the list "A" of section 10.1, have repeatedly appointed insiders, in some cases completely unqualified, to important public offices. These insiders, candidates and MGPs have received appointments as heads of government owned corporations, board members, and ambassadors. Many have worked their way into key positions in the public service. A new government is needed to make sure that important public appointments are filled on the basis of merit and not simply as favours to friends and political supporters.

    Action

    •     Ensure that all Officers of Global Parliament are appointed through consultation with all parties in the House of Elected Representatives and confirmed through a secret ballot of all MGPs, not just named by the President. This appointment process will include:

    o   The Ethics Commissioner
    o   The Auditor General
    o   The Chief Electoral Officer
    o   The Information Commissioner
    o   The Privacy Commissioner
    o   The Registrar of Lobbyists
    •     Establish a Public Appointments Commission to set merit-based requirements for appointments to government boards, commissions and agencies, to ensure that competitions for posts are widely publicized and fairly conducted.
    •     Prevent ministerial aides and other political appointees receiving favoured treatment when applying for public service positions.


    10.6    Clean up government polling and advertising

    The United Nations and the other organizations, the list "A" of section 10.1, commission some millions of dollars per year in polling and public opinion research. Much of this polling is conducted by partizan-connected polling firms for which there were “only verbal reports” – nothing was written down so there was no paper trail.

    And while the United Nations and the other organizations, the list "A" of section 10.1,-friendly ad firms involved are under investigation, tens of millions of dollars have been awarded to the United Nations-connected advertising firms in other contracts. Government advertising and contracting must be cleaned up – not used for partisan purposes by government, or for the private benefit of contract recipients.

    Action


    •     Ensure that all GCEG public opinion research is automatically published within six months of the completion of the project, and prohibit verbal-only reports.
    •     Ensure that an independent review is conducted of government public opinion research practices to determine whether further action is required.
    •     Open up the bidding process for government advertising and public opinion contracts to prevent insider firms from monopolizing government business.


    10.7    Clean up the procurement of government contracts

    Under the United Nations and the other organizations, the list "A" of section 10.1, abuse of the government contracting process has become commonplace. Former Minister, for example, awarded an untendered contract to a former girlfriend.

    Action

    •     Review and amend all contracting rules to make the GCEG’s procurement process free from political interference.
    •     Appoint a Procurement Auditor to ensure that all procurements are fair and transparent, and to address complaints from vendors.
    •     Permit smaller vendors and vendors outside of the GCEG Head Office Region to receive due consideration for government contracts.


    10.8    Provide real protection for whistleblowers

    There have been many examples over the years of reprisals against government whistleblowers, including public servants who helped reveal the corruption problems, and others who exposed waste and abuse in the departments. Weak legislation was brought forward to deal with the issue. Much more still needs to be done.
    Action


    •     Give the Public Service Integrity Commissioner the power to enforce compliance with the Act.
    •     Ensure that all Global Community citizens who report government wrongdoing are protected, not just public servants.
    •     Remove the government’s ability to exempt government owned corporations and other bodies from the Act.
    •     Require the prompt public disclosure of information revealed by whistleblowers, except where national security or the security of individuals is affected.
    •     Ensure that whistleblowers have access to the Earth Court of Justice, and that they are provided with adequate legal counsel.
    •     Establish monetary rewards for whistleblowers who expose wrongdoing or save taxpayers dollars.


    10.9    Ensure truth in budgeting with a Global Parliamentary Budget Office

    Over the past decades many donations were made to the United Nations and use of the money invited corruption. For example the 'food for oil' program was a typical way to handle large sums of money. A scandalous level of corruption followed. Noone was ever punished for their crimes. Governments cannot be held to account if Global Parliament does not know the accurate state of public finances. For too long, MGPs have had to beg and plead with the government to discover its plans and to review its figures.

    Action

    •     Create an independent Global Parliamentary Budget Office to provide objective analysis directly to Global Parliament about the state of the GCEG’s finances and trends in the global economy.
    •     Require government departments and agencies, including the Department of Finance, GCEG Revenue Agency, and GCEG Statistics , to provide accurate, timely information to the Global Parliamentary Budget Office to ensure it has the information it needs to provide accurate analyses to Global Parliament.
    •     Ensure that GCEG fiscal forecasts are updated quarterly, and that they provide complete data for both revenue and spending forecasts.



    10.10    Strengthen the power of the Auditor General

    Over the past decade, the GCEG Auditor General has repeatedly blown the whistle on corruption. From the 'food for oil' program of the United Nations, to the scandalous waste and mismanagement of the United Nations and the other organizations, the list "A" of section 10.1, to the ineffective request of the UN Security Council to stop the USA from invading Iraq; nearly every audit turns up more examples of mismanagement.

    The United Nations and the other organizations, the list "A" of section 10.1, spent billions of dollars per year on grants and contributions to individuals, companies, and non-governmental organizations. Another several billions per year were spent on government contracts. Undoubtedly, many of these grants, contributions and contracts are for worthwhile public purposes. But too often, these organizations and its friends and insiders have used them for their own benefit. This must stop. The Auditor General must be given the mandate and resources to examine and propose changes to the entire range of government grants, contributions and contracting policies in all government departments, government owned corporations and agencies.

    Action


    •     Ask the GCEG Auditor General to conduct, on an expedited basis, an audit of all grant, contribution and contracting policies, and will commit to following her recommendations.
    •     Increase funding for the Office of the GCEG Auditor General to ensure she has the necessary resources to conduct a complete audit of grants and contributions programs and of any such departments, agencies and government owned corporations as she deems necessary.
    •     Allow the GCEG Auditor General to “follow the money” to end recipients by providing her with the statutory authority to conduct audits of the records, documents and accounts of any individual, institution or company that receives grants, contribution or transfers under an agreement with the GCEG.
    •     Ensure that all granting programs are reviewed every five years.
    •     Strengthen enforcement of government financial guidelines, and introduce new Criminal Code penalties for fraud involving the misuse of taxpayers’ money.


    10.11    Strengthen the role of the GCEG Ethics Commissioner

    GCEG will be appointing an independent Ethics Commissioner.

    Action

    •     Give the GCEG Ethics Commissioner the power to fine violators.
    •     Prevent the President from overruling the GCEG Ethics Commissioner on whether the President, a minister, or an official is in violation of the Conflict of Interest Code.
    •     Enshrine the Conflict of Interest Code into law.
    •     Close the loopholes that allow ministers to vote on matters connected with their business interests.
    •     End “venetian blind” trusts that allow ministers to remain informed about their business interests, and require all ministerial assets to be placed in truly blind trusts.
    •     Allow members of the public – not just politicians – to make complaints to the Ethics Commissioner.
    •     Make part-time or non-remunerated ministerial advisers subject to the Ethics Code.


    10.12    Strengthen Access to Information legislation

    The United Nations and the other organizations, the list "A" of section 10.1, have consistently rejected attempts to provide Global Community citizens with better access to information. The present Information Commissioner has gone to court several times to force them to open their windows.

    Action


    •     Implement the Information Commissioner’s recommendations for reform of the Access to Information Act.
    •     Give the Information Commissioner the power to order the release of global information.
    •     Expand the coverage of the act to all government owned corporations, Officers of Global Parliament, foundations and organizations that spend taxpayers’ money or perform public functions.
    •     Subject the exclusion of GPEC confidences to review by the Information Commissioner
    •     Oblige public officials to create the records necessary to document their actions and decisions.
    •     Provide a general public interest override for all exemptions, so that the public interest is put before the secrecy of the government.
    •     Ensure that all exemptions from the disclosure of government information are justified only on the basis of the harm or injury that would result from disclosure, not blanket exemption rules.
    •     Ensure that the disclosure requirements of the Access to Information Act cannot be circumvented by secrecy provisions in other federal acts.


    10.13    Strengthen auditing and accountability within departments

    Under the United Nations and the other organizations, the list "A" of section 10.1, the lines between ministers and non-partisan civil servants have been blurred, and clear lines of accountability need to be re-established.

    Action


    •     Give the Comptroller General the overall authority for the internal audit function in each government department.
    •     Designate the Deputy Minister of each government department or agency as the Accounting Officer for that department. The deputy will be responsible to Global Parliament for the departmental spending and administrative practices of his or her department.
    •     Require that, in the event of a disagreement between a minister and Deputy Minister on a matter of administration, the minister must provide written instruction to the Deputy Minister and notify the Auditor General and Comptroller General of the disagreement.



    Back to top of page


     

    Corporate global citizens responsibility and accountability

    The Global Community proposes to corporations that they take responsibility on behalf of society and people, and that they should pay more attention to human and Earth rights, working conditions and getting ride of corruption in the world of business and trade. We have developed a criteria, and we ask you to turn it into practice. Governments should encourage enterprises to use the criteria both by legal and moral means. At first, the criteria should be adopted in key areas such as procurement, facilities management, investment management, and human resources. Corporations want to be seen as good corporate leaders and have a stronger form of accountability. Business and trade will prosper after stronger common bonds and values have been established. Adopting the criteria will have a beneficial impact on future returns, and share price performance.

    Obtaining one ECO will help businesses to be part of the solution to the challenges of globalisation. In this way, the private sector in partnership with the civil society can help realize a vision: allowing a global equitable and peaceful development and a more stable and inclusive global economy.

    The Global Community Assessment Centre (GCAC) will guide you on how to better integrate criteria issues in your business. In the context of a healthy world sustainable development, companies will perform better and increase shareholder value by properly managing risks, anticipating regulatory action or accessing new markets. Tangible results of adopting the criteria include a better company reflected in its reputation and quality of brands.

    Obtaining one ECO is a tremendous asset to business owners, self-regulatory organizations, investors, brokers, regulators, stock exchanges, accountants, analysts, financial advisers, asset managers, and consultants. It will contribute to strengthen investment markets.

    The quality of Earth governance is reflected in each local community worldwide. The Global Community will show leadership by creating a global civil ethic within our ways of life. The Charter of the Global Community describes all values needed for good global governance: mutual respect, tolerance, respect for life, justice for all everywhere, integrity, and caring. The Scale of Human and Earth Rights has become an inner truth and the benchmark of the millennium in how everyone sees all values. The Scale encompasses the right of all people to:

    *     the preservation of ethnicity
    *     equitable treatment, including gender equity
    *     security
    *     protection against corruption and the military
    *     earn a fair living, have shelter and provide for their own welfare and that of their family
    *     peace and stability
    *     universal value systems
    *     participation in governance at all levels
    *     access the Earth Court of Justice for redress of gross injustices
    *     equal access to information


    Governance of the Earth will make the rule of arbitrary power--economic (WTO, FTAA, EU), political, or military (NATO)-- subjected to the rule of law within the global civil society, the human family. Justice is for everyone and is everywhere, a universal constant. Justice is without borders.

    The Global Community has no intention of changing the status and privileges of state governments. In fact, state governments become primary members of the Global Community. Global governance can only be effective within the framework of the criteria of the Global Community citizenship.

    The Global Community was built from a grassroots process with a vision for humanity that is challenging every person on Earth as well as nation governments, and has a vision of the people working together building a new civilization including a healthy and rewarding future for the next generations. Global cooperation brings people together for a common future for the good of all.

    Earth governance does not imply a lost of state sovereignty and territorial integrity. A nation government exists within the framework of an effective Global Community protecting common global values and humanity heritage. Earth governance gives a new meaning to the notions of territoriality, and non-intervention in a state way of life, and it is about protecting the cultural heritage of a state. Diversity of cultural and ethnic groups is an important aspect of Earth governance.

    Earth governance is a balance between the rights of states with rights of people, and the interests of nations with the interests of the the Global Community, the human family, the global civil society.

    Earth governance is about the rights of states to self-determination in the global context of the Global Community rather than the traditional context of a world of separate states.

    Although the Global Community ensures state governments that it will obey the principle of non-intervention in domestic affairs, it will also stand for the rights and interests of the people within individual states in which the security of people is extensively endangered. A global consensus to that effect will be agreed upon by all nation states.

    Effective Earth governance requires a greater understanding of what it means to live in a more crowded, interdependent humanity with finite resources and more pollution threatening the global life-support systems. The Global Community has no other choice but to work together at all levels. The collective power is needed to create a better world .

    As a business you may:

    a)     be a corporate Knight
    b)     be a socially responsible investor
    c)     have taken the challenge of a more integrated approach to corporate responsibility by placing environmental and community-based objectives and measures onto the decision-making table alongside with the strategic business planning and operational factors that impact your bottom-line results
    d)    provide not only competitive return to your shareholders but you also operate your business in light of environmental and social contributions, and you have understood the interdependence between financial performance, environmental performance and commitment to the community
    e)     have taken a full life-cycle approach to integrate and balance environmental and economic decisions for major projects
    f)     have an active Environmental, Health and Safety Committee and integrated codes of conduct, policies, standards and operating procedures to reflect your corporate responsibility management
    g)     have scored high on categories such as:

    * environmental performance
    * product safety
    * business practices
    * help small business in the least developed countries
    * commitment to the community
    * abolition of child labour
    * eliminate discrimination in respect of employment and occupation
    * employee relations and diversity
    * effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining
    * corporate governance
    * share performance
    * global corporate responsibility
    * against corruption in all its forms, including extortion and bribery
    * health, safety and security
    * provided help to combat diseases such as AIDS
    * uphold the freedom of association
    * audits and inspections
    * emergency preparedness
    * corporate global ethical values
    * ensured decent working conditions
    * implemented no-bribe policies
    * standards of honesty, integrity and ethical behaviour
    * elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labour
    * in line with the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the Charter of Global Community
    h)     support a balance and responsible approach that promotes action on the issue of climate change as well as all other issues related to the global life-support systems:

    * global warming
    * Ozone layer
    * wastes of all kind including nuclear and release of radiation
    * climate change
    * species of the fauna and flora becoming extinct
    * losses of forest cover and of biological diversity
    * the capacity for photosynthesis
    * the water cycle
    * food production systems
    * genetic resources
    * chemicals produced for human use and not found in nature and, eventually, reaching the environment with impacts on Earth's waters, soils, air, and ecology


    Now is time to reach a higher level of protection to life on Earth. We all need this for the survival of our species. We can help you integrate and balance global life-support systems protection, global community participation, and economic decisions into your operations and products.

    We want to help you be an active corporate member of the Global Community, the human family, the Earth Community.

    Apply to us to be a global corporate citizen of the Global Community.

    A Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship is a unique way to show the world that your ways of doing business are best for the Global Community.

    You can obtain the citizenship after accepting the Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship and following an assessment of your business. The process shown here is now standardized to all applicants. You are then asked to operate your business as per the values of the citizenship.

    GCAC will be conducting the assessment of your business. GCAC is the assessment centre of the Global Community. It was created to give individuals, businesses or other organizations help and advice about negative events happening in their communities which cause concern to people, resources, industry or the environment. GCAC is also the Centre of assessment of local and global indicators about the four major quality systems: Environment, People, Economic Development and the Availability of Resources. The assessment of these indicators will result in giving the Global Community a sense of direction as to ensure a sound future for Earth.

    In order to do this GCAC will continue to amass a body of scientific information based on formal assessments such as those on Biodiversity, Climate Change, Human Development Report, World Development Report, struggle for Human and Earth Rights, life species Conservation, Health, Economic Analyses, Commission on Sustainable Development, etc., which have bridged the distance between incomplete science and contentious policy. Local and global indicators developed by the Global Community will also be used as basic scientific information.

    Furthermore, no one really understands what assessment processes have been most effective in the past, or why others have failed. GCAC’s goal is to explore how assessment of local and global indicators can better link scientific understanding with the progressive implementation of effective policy solutions to global changes. Achieving this integration is fundamental. The Global Community needs this annual assessment to effectively manage global changes.

    GCAC conducts an annual assessment of the 'Global Community Overall Picture' which describes the situation in all nations of the world. The world was divided into five different regions: North America, Latin America & the Caribbean, Africa, Europe, and Asia & Oceania. Each assessment has a description of what is happening in the different regions. They are actual facts concerning issues we have discussed during previous global dialogues in years 2000, 2002 and 2004. Issues between now and the coming global dialogue in 2006 are also included in this project. Our work is too create a plausible scenario(s) of what the world could be between now and 'a not-so-distant-future'. This project will help humanity understand itself better.

    Certainly our work is sound. We have already produced very valuable and original tools to help humanity: the Vision of Earth in Year 2024, the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the Charter of the Global Community, the Earth Court of Justice, global ministries, and we stood for the values we promoted no matter how big was the opponent. Now is time to expand our work for the good of all humanity.

    The Global Community believes all citizens have the right to share the wealth in the world. Foreign investment and the trade agreement must protect and improve social and environmental rights, not just the economy. A global sustainable development would mean finding a sound balance among the interactions designed to create a healthy economic growth, preserve environmental quality, make a wise use of our resources, and enhance social benefits. Free trade cannot proceed at the expense of the environment, labour rights, human rights and the sovereignty of a nation. Free trade will lead to an increase in poverty by giving investor rights priority over government decision-making. Employers will be looking for more concessions from workers. Small businesses will find it more difficult to grow and compete against large corporations.

    For the first time in human history, and the first time this millennium, humanity has proposed a benchmark:

    *     the Global Constitution
    *     formation of global ministries in all important aspects of our lives
    *     the Scale of Human and Earth Rights as a replacement to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
    *     Statement of Rights and Responsibilities of a person belonging to 'a global community' and to 'the Global Community'
    *     an evolved Democracy based on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the Charter of the Global Community
    *     a central organization for Earth management, the restoration of the planet and Earth governance: the Global Community Assessment Centre (GCAC)
    *     the Earth Court of Justice to deal with all aspects of governance and management of the Earth
    *     a new impetus given to the way of doing business and trade
    *     more new, diversified (geographical, economical, political, social, business, religious) symbiotical relationships between nations, communities, businesses, for the good and well-being of all
    *     proposal to reform the United Nations, World Trade Organization, World Bank, IMF, E.U., NAFTA, FTAA, and to centralize them under the Global Community, and these organizations will be asked to pay a global tax to be administered by the Global Community
    *     the Peace Movement of the Global Community and shelving of the war industry from humanity
    *     a global regulatory framework for capitals and corporations that emphasizes global corporate ethics, corporate social responsibility, protection of human and Earth rights, the environment, community and family aspects, safe working conditions, fair wages and sustainable consumption aspects
    *     the ruling by the Earth Court of Justice of the abolishment of the debt of the poor or developing nations as it is really a form of global tax to be paid annually by the rich or industrialized nations to the developing nations
    *     establishing freshwater and clean air as primordial human rights


    The Global Community promotes the adoption of world sustainable development and for strong international cooperation to achieve world sustainable development. Global cooperation can facilitate native people's acceptance of rational policies, financial assistances and advanced technologies provided by the international community and that international cooperation also can contribute to regulating world population distribution, improving low population quality of backward countries, protecting and exploiting natural resources, developing those products and industries which can cause lower consumption of natural resources and energy sources with light pollution of environment, and keeping environmental stability and ecological balance. In a word, international cooperation greatly contributes to world sustainable development.

    Earth environmental governance can only be achieved successfully within the larger context of sustainable developent and Earth management. All aspects are inter-related and affect one another. A healthy environment is essential to long term prosperity and well-being, and citizens in the Global Community demand a high level of ecological protection. This is the 'raison d'etre' of the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. On the Scale, primordial human rights and the protection of the global life-support systems (ecological rights) are on top of the Scale. They are the most important aspects. Primordial human rights are those human rights that individuals have by virtue of their very existence as human beings: to live, have security, eat, drink fresh water, breath clean air, and have shelter. These rights are separate categories than ecological rights, the right of the greatest number of people, economic rights, social rights, cultural rights and religious rights. Ecological and primordial human rights are the only rights that have existed unchanged throughout the evolutionary origin of our species. Any major change would have threatened our very existence. All other human rights listed here are rights created by human beings and can be changed depending of new circumstances; they are not stagnant but are rather flexible and adaptive, and they can evolve. Ecological and primordial human rights of this generation and of future generations are therefore much more important than any other human rights existing now and in the future.

    Ever since the early 1990s, the Global Community has developed and defined sustainable development and a mean of measuring it. Now we want the corporate world as well as everyone else, all consumers, to integrate and balance global life-support systems protection, global community participation, and economic decisions into your operations and products, and into your way of life and of doing things.

    Global Community WebNet Ltd. is a federal corporation of Canada. The corporation has sponsored the research and development of the global concepts of the Earth Community Organization (ECO). Global Community WebNet Ltd. was the first corporation on Earth to qualify and obtain one ECO, the Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship.

    Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship


    1. Acceptance of the Statement of Rights and Responsibilities of a person belonging to 'a global community' and to 'the Global Community', the Earth Community, the human family. That is, to take such a stand has four parts:

    a)     I am not just a woman, I am a person, I am citizen of a global community,
    b)     I am not just a man, I am a person, I am citizen of a global community,
    c)     We are responsible, accountable and equal persons in every way, and we will manage wisely our population and Earth, and
    d)     We are citizens of the Global Community, the Earth Community, the human family.

    We need to take this stand for the survival of our species.

    2. Acceptance of the concept of 'a global community'. The concept of 'a global community' is part of the Glass Bubble concept of a global community. The concept was first researched and developed by the Earth Community Organization (ECO).

    We have already said that 'a global community' is not about a piece of land you acquired by force or otherwise. A typical global community may be what a group of people, together, wants it to be. It can be a group of people with the same values. It can be a group of people with the same cultural background, or the same religious background. Or it can be a group of people with different values and beliefs, and with totally different backgrounds and origins. One could think of a typical global community of a million people that does not have to be bounded by a geographical or political border. It can be a million people living in many different locations all over the world. The Global Community is thus more fluid and dynamic. The Global Community is this great, wide, wonderful world made of all these diverse global communities. We need to let go the archaic ways of seeing a community as the street where we live and contained by a border. The people making a global community may be living in many different locations on the planet. It can be a village, or two villages together where people have decided to unite as one global community. The two villages may be found in different parts of the world. It can be a town, a city, or a nation. It can be two or more nations together.

    We can no longer perceive ourselves as a People who could survive alone and a People who does not need anyone else. We belong and depend to this much larger group, that of the Global Community. The 21st Century will see limitless links and symbiotical relationships with and within the Global Community. A global symbiotical relationship between two or more nations, or between two or more global communities, can have trade as the major aspect of the relationship or it can have as many other aspects as agreed by the people involved. The fundamental criteria is that a relationship is created for the good of all groups participating in the relationship and for the good of humanity, all life on Earth. The relationship allows a global equitable and peaceful development.

    The emphasis of a global symbiotical relationship is not so much on how much money a nation should have or how high a GDP should be although money can be made a part of the relationship. We all know developed countries live off developing countries so the emphasis has no need to stress out the profit a rich nation is making off a poor nation. The emphasis of the relationship should give more importance to the other aspects such as quality of life, protection of the environment and of the global life-support systems, the entrenchment of the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the Charter of the Global Community into our ways of life, justice, peace, cultural and spiritual freedom, security, and many other important aspects as described in the global ministries (health, agriculture, energy, trade, resources, etc.).

    3. Acceptance of the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. To determine rights requires an understanding of needs and reponsibilities and their importance. The Scale of Human and Earth Rights and the Charter of the Global Community were researched and developed by the Global Community to guide us in continuing this process. The Scale shows social values in order of importance and so will help us understand the rights and responsibilities of global communities.

    Scale of Human and Earth Rights

    * Ecological rights and the protection of the global life-support systems
    * Primordial human rights
    * The ecological rights, the protection of the global life-support systems and the primordial human rights of future generations
    * Community rights, rights of direct democracy, the right that the greatest number of people has by virtue of its number (50% plus one) and after voting representatives democratically
    * Economic rights (business and consumer rights, and their responsibilities and accountabilities) and social rights (civil and political rights)
    * Cultural rights and religious rights

    4. Acceptance of the Charter of the Global Community. The Charter of the Global Community is a declaration of interdependence and responsibility and an urgent call to build a global symbiotical relationship between nations for sustainable development. It is a commitment to Life and its evolution to bring humanity to God. The Global Community has focused people aspirations toward a unique goal: humanity survival now and in the future along with all Life on Earth. The Belief, Values, Principles and Aspirations of the Global Community of the Charter are closely interrelated. Together they provide a conception of sustainable development and set forth fundamental guidelines for achieving it; they were drawn from international law, science, philosophy, religion, and they were discussed as research papers during the global dialogues.

    5. Acceptance of your birth right of electing a democratic government to manage Earth. The political system of an individual country does not have to be a democracy. Political rights of a country belong to that country alone. Democracy is not to be enforced by anyone and to anyone or to any global community. Every global community can and should choose the political system of their choice with the understanding of the importance of such a right on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. On the other hand, representatives to the Global Community must be elected democratically in every part of the world. An individual country may have any political system at home but the government of that country will have to ensure (and allow verification by the Global Community) that representatives to the Global Community have been elected democratically. This way, every person in the world can claim the birth right of electing a democratic government to manage Earth: the rights to vote and elect representatives to form the Global Community.

    6. Acceptance of the Earth Court of Justice as the highest Court on Earth. The Global Community is promoting the settling of disputes between nations through the process of the Earth Court of Justice. Justice for all is what we want. Justice withour borders! The Earth Court of Justice will hear cases involving crimes related to the global ministries. It will have the power to rule on cases involving crimes related to each one of the ministries.

    Prosecuting criminals on the basis of universal jurisdiction regardless of a territorial or nationality nexus required a solid commitment of political will from national governments and the Global Community. Once in effect, the Earth Court of Justice will become the principal judicial organ of the Global Community. The Court will have a dual role: to settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted to it by national governments, local communities, and in some special cases by corporations, non-government-organizations and citizens, and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized organs and agencies.

    The Court will be composed of judges elected by the Elected Representatives Council and Earth Security Council. It may not include more than one judge of any nationality. The Members of the Court do not represent their governments but are independent magistrates. The judges must possess the qualifications required in their respective countries for appointment to the highest judicial offices, or by jurists of recognized competence in international law. The composition of the Court has also to reflect the main forms of civilization and the principal legal systems of the world.

    The Earth Court of Justice will hear cases involving:

    *     nation states
    *     national political and military leaders accountable for violations of international humanitarian law
    *     'core' crimes of genocide
    *     crimes against humanity and human rights
    *     war crimes
    *     crimes with significant impacts perpetuated against the life-support system of the planet (for instance wars and use of weapons of widespread destruction are listed under this category)
    *     crimes related to the relentless misuse of the Earth Resources
    *     environmental crimes
    *     social crimes as the Court may see apply
    *     crimes stemming from the global ministries

    The Earth Court of Justice will also rule on global problems and concerns such as the creation of a new nation in the world, and disputing territories or land between nations.

    The procedure followed by the Court is defined in its Statute. The Court decides in accordance with:

    *     the Global Constitution,
    *     the Scale of Human and Earth Rights,
    *     belief, values, principles and aspirations of the Global Community,
    *     international treaties and conventions in force,
    *     international custom,
    *     the general principles of law,
    *     as subsidiary means, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists,
    *     the Statement of Rights, Responsibilities and Accountabilities of Global Community citizens, and
    *     the criteria of a Global Community citizen.

    The Statute of the Earth Court of Justice will be established later.

    The Earth Court of Justice established by the Charter of the Global Community as the principal organ of the Global Community shall be constituted and shall function in accordance with the provisions of the Statute.


    Back to top of page


     

    Corporate global citizens ethics
    This Global Community project promotes research and policy dialogue on corporate social and environmental responsibility. An investigation is conducted to found whether or not transnational corporations (TNCs) and other companies are taking meaningful steps to improve their social and environmental record, particularly in developing countries. Considerable attention is focused on the effectiveness of "voluntary initiatives" such as codes of conduct, social and environmental reporting, certification, labelling, corporate social investment and improvements in environmental management systems.

    The Global Community proposes to corporations that they take responsibility on behalf of society and people, and that they should pay more attention to human and Earth rights, working conditions and getting ride of corruption in the world of business and trade. We have developed a criteria, and we ask you to turn it into practice.


    The following types of issues are addressed:

    *     Is the TNC discourse on "corporate responsibility" being applied in practice?
    *     Where progress is apparent, what types of pressures, incentives and institutional arrangements are promoting change?
    *     Do voluntary initiatives and corporate self-regulation constitute an effective alternative to government and international regulation?
    *     What are the implications for development in the South of efforts by TNCs and others to raise social and environmental standards?

    Additional research on issues of international regulation of TNCs, company codes of conduct, multistakeholder standard-setting and certification schemes, UN-business partnerships and the corporate accountability movement is also being carried out.

    The Global Community proposes to corporations that they take responsibility on behalf of society and people, and that they should pay more attention to human and Earth rights, working conditions and getting ride of corruption in the world of business and trade. We have developed a criteria, and we ask you to turn it into practice. Governments should encourage enterprises to use the criteria both by legal and moral means. At first, the criteria should be adopted in key areas such as procurement, facilities management, investment management, and human resources. Corporations want to be seen as good corporate leaders and have a stronger form of accountability. Business and trade will prosper after stronger common bonds and values have been established. Adopting the criteria will have a beneficial impact on future returns, and share price performance.

    We want to help businesses be active corporate members of the Global Community, the human family, the Earth Community.

    Apply to us to be a global corporate citizen of the Global Community.

    A Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship is a unique way to show the world that your ways of doing business are best for the Global Community.

    You can obtain the citizenship after accepting the Criteria of the Global Community Citizenship and following an assessment of your business. The process shown here is now standardized to all applicants. You are then asked to operate your business as per the values of the citizenship.

    GCAC will be conducting the assessment of your business.

    Corporate citizen global ethics

    A corporation will now be required to operate its business as per global ehtics:

    *    Be concerned with issues such as climate change, bio-diversity, pollution prevention and adopt high standards
    *     Minimize environmental degradation and health impacts
    *    Be responsible for the environmental impact of its products and services throughout their cycle
    *     Adopt a wide environmental code, and policies, health and safety practices and procedures aimed at reducing resource and energy use in each stage of a product or service life-cycle
    *     Set up appropriate management systems to implement policies
    *     Conduct annual checks and balances and provide reports to the community
    *     Respect the political jurisdiction of national communities
    *     Respect human rights, social and cultural rights
    *     Recognize its political and economic impact on local communities
    *     Contribute to the long-term social, cultural, environmental and economic sustainability of the local communities
    *     Respect the rights of indigenous peoples, their culture and land, and their religious and social customs; provide employment and training opportunities
    *     Ensure that each employee is treated with respect and dignity and is not subjected to any physical, sexual, psychological or verbal harassment or abuse
    *     Respect employees' right to freedom of association, labour organization, and free collective bargaining
    *     Provide equal pay for work of equal value
    *     Recognize the responsibilities of all workers to their families, and provide for maternity leave, and paternity leave
    *     Ensure that their be no barriers to the full participation of women within the company
    *     Participate in the creation of child care centres and centres for the elderly and persons with disabilities where appropriate
    *     Ensure no discrimination on grounds of race, ethnicity, or culture
    *     Ensure that persons with disabilities who apply for jobs with the company receive fair treatment and are considered solely on their ability to do the job; provide resources and facilities which enable them to achieve progression in employment in the company
    *     Provide training to all employees to conduct their activities in an environmentally responsible manner
    *     Work with organizations concerned with children's rights, human rights and labour rights to ensure that young workers are not exploited
    *     Ensure that a mechanism is in place to address ethical issues of concern raised by employees
    *     Make sure that the company's policies balance the interests of managers, shareholders, employees, and other affected parties
    *     Adhere to international standards and protocols relevant to its products and services
    *     Adopt marketing practices which protect consumers and ensure the safety of all products
    *     Conduct or support research on the environmental impacts of raw materials, products, processes, emissions and wastes associates with the company and on the means of minimizing such adverse impacts
    *     Make a sustainable use of renewable natural resources such as water, soils and forests
    *     Conserve non-renewable natural resources through efficient use and careful planning
    *     Conserve energy and improve energy efficiency of internal operations and of the goods and services being sold



    Back to top of page


     

    Preventive actions against polluters

    It is a crime against humanity and all life on Earth not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. It is a terrible crime against the global life-support systems, against the very existence of the next generations. On the Scale of Human and Earth Rights the crime is of maximum importance. There is no need to wait for the election of the Global Community to create the Earth Court of Justice. The Court can be formed now and incorporated to the Global Community.


    The world is too crowded and too small nowadays! And weapons too lethal! So security cannot be achieved through the military. The only job the military should be asked to do today is to protect the global life-support systems. These systems have the highest priority on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and are certainly more important than any of the other rights on the Scale including security. Simply because without life there is no other right possible. Without Oxygen there is no life! Without clean water there is no life! So protect life on Earth at all costs. Wars are the biggest threat to life and the ecosystem of the planet.


    The production and trade in arms should be listed as a criminal act against humanity; this global ministry will introduce a Convention on the curtailment of the arms trade, a provision for a mandatory Arms Register and the prohibition of the financing or subsidy of arms exports by governments.


    The Earth Court of Justice has listed America as the first nation to be prosecuted for a global environmental crime. Because the leader of the USA was responsible for not signing the Kyoto Protocol, President George W. Bush will be first to appear in Court. He is an evil man. In comparison, he makes Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein look like kids in the block. The splitting of America into separate independent states living at peace for the good of all would certainly be a better solution to all Americans and the world.

    The reality here is that every American is on trial here. A large majority of the consumers in USA are also responsible for producing the deadly gas causing global warming, and they are all on trial. The same goes for every person on Earth producing the deadly gas. The gas is just as deadly as the gas that murdered millions of Jews during World War II. It is even more deadly as it is destroying the global life-support systems of all life on Earth. We are killing billions of human beings and countless life species. Americans have closed their conscience to the reality of life on Earth. Justice must prevail to stop the "killing fields". And therefore they are guilty as charge.

    It is a crime against humanity and all life on Earth not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. It is a terrible crime against the global life-support systems, against the very existence of the next generations. On the Scale of Human and Earth Rights the crime is of maximum importance. There is no need to wait for the election of the Global Community to create the Earth Court of Justice. The Court can be formed now and incorporated to the Global Community.

    Prosecuting criminals on the basis of universal jurisdiction regardless of a territorial or nationality nexus required a solid commitment of political will from national governments and the Global Community.

    Once in effect, the Earth Court of Justice will become the principal judicial organ of the Global Community. The Court will have a dual role: to settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted to it by national governments, local communities, and in some special cases by corporations, non-government-organizations and citizens, and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized organs and agencies.

    The Court will be composed of judges elected by the Elected Representatives Council and Earth Security Council. It may not include more than one judge of any nationality. The Members of the Court do not represent their governments but are independent magistrates. The judges must possess the qualifications required in their respective countries for appointment to the highest judicial offices, or by jurists of recognized competence in international law. The composition of the Court has also to reflect the main forms of civilization and the principal legal systems of the world.

    The Earth Court of Justice will hear cases involving:

    *     nation states
    *     national political and military leaders accountable for violations of international humanitarian law
    *     'core' crimes of genocide
    *     crimes against humanity and human rights
    *     war crimes
    *     crimes with significant impacts perpetuated against the life-support system of the planet (for instance wars and use of weapons of widespread destruction are listed under this category)
    *     crimes related to the relentless misuse of the Earth Resources
    *     environmental crimes
    *     social crimes as the Court may see apply
    *     crimes stemming from the global ministries

    The Earth Court of Justice will also rule on global problems and concerns such as the creation of a new nation in the world, and disputing territories or land between nations.

    The procedure followed by the Court is defined in its Statute. The Court decides in accordance with:

    *     the Charter of the Global Community,
    *     the Scale of Human and Earth Rights,
    *     belief, values, principles and aspirations of the New Age,
    *     international treaties and conventions in force,
    *     international custom,
    *     the general principles of law and,
    *     as subsidiary means, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists.

    The Earth Court of Justice will handle environmental damage cause by the U.S. military action. The Global Community has classified the damage as a criminal liability for military personnel and/or their contractors. The war industry has become a liability to humanity.

    The Global Community has broadened the traditional focus of the security of states to include both the security of people as well as that of the planet. Global security policies include:

    *     every person on Earth has a right to a secure existence, and all states have an obligation to protect those rights
    *     prevention of conflicts and wars; identification, anticipation, and resolving conflicts before they become armed confrontations. The Earth Court of Justice will help here.
    *     military force is not a legitimate political instrument
    *     weapons of mass destruction are not legitimate instruments of national defence
    *     eliminate all weapons of mass destruction from all nations and have inspectors verifying progress to that effect
    *     all nations should sign and ratify the conventions to eliminate nuclear, chemical and biological weapons
    *     the production and trade in arms should be listed as a criminal act against humanity; this global ministry will introduce a Convention on the curtailment of the arms trade, a provision for a mandatory Arms Register and the prohibition of the financing or subsidy of arms exports by governments
    *     the development of military capabilities is a potential threat to the security of people and all life on Earth; the ministry will make the demilitarization of global politics a high priority.
    *     anticipating and managing crises before they escalate into armed conflicts and wars
    *     maintaining the integrity of the environment and global life-support systems
    *     managing the environmental, economic, social, political and military conditions that threatened the security of people and the planet
    *     over the past decades and even now today, all Five Permanent Members of the United Nations Security Council (mostly the United States, Russia and Britain) were responsible for selling weapons and war equipment. These three nations are required to give back to the Global Community an amount of 8 trillion dollars (American) as a payment for the immense damage they have caused in the world. They have created a culture of violence throughout the world. They are nation bullies, nation predators. They are responsible for economic mismanagement, ethnic tensions, crimes, drug abuse, high unemployment, urban stress, worldwide poverty, and pressures on natural resources. Most conflicts in the world are direct legacies of cold war power politics, senseless politics. Other conflicts were caused by the end of the cold war and the collapse of old regimes. Other factors have combined to increase tension: religious, economical, political, and ethnic aspects.



    Primordial human rights come next on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights. Without a shelter life will still exist in some places but is not possible in cold place. There are many related aspects of the global life-support systems:

    *     global warming
    *     Ozone layer
    *     wastes of all kind including nuclear and release of radiation
    *     climate change
    *     species of the fauna and flora becoming extinct
    *     losses of forest cover and of biological diversity
    *     the capacity for photosynthesis
    *     the water cycle
    *     food production systems
    *     genetic resources
    *     chemicals produced for human use and not found in nature and, eventually, reaching the environment with impacts on Earth's waters, soils, air, and ecology


    In the past, security was thought as better accomplished through military means. Expanding the military capabilities and forming alliances with other nations were the only way to 'win'. Today wars are unlikely to produce winners. The Global Community is all over the planet. Ethnic groups are everywhere. Some say there are more Italians in Montreal, Canada that there are in Italy. So we would fight our own people? Wars truly make no sense! The world is too crowded and too small nowadays! And weapons too lethal! So security cannot be achieved through the military. The only job the military should be asked to do today is to protect the global life-support systems. These systems have the highest priority on the Scale of Human and Earth Rights and are certainly more important than any of the other rights on the Scale including security. Simply because without life there is no other right possible. Without Oxygen there is no life! Without clean water there is no life! So protect life on Earth at all costs. Wars are the biggest threat to life and the ecosystem of the planet.

    So security must be achieved by other means than wars. We might as well shelved the war industry from humanity right now and that means phasing out all nuclear, biological, chemical weapons right now. No waiting! That also means having inspectors verifying the phasing out in all nations of the world, and not just in some Middle East country. The nature of global security has changed since the rise of the Earth Government. Security used to be about the protection of the state and its boundaries, people, institutions and values from an outside threat. Earth Government will emphasize as a priority the prohibition of external interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states. Today the security of people within the Earth Government is just as important as the security of states. Citizens must be secure. Earth Government is just as important as the security and life of citizens and states.

    There are many threats to security other than the threats to the global life-support systems and threat caused by weapons of mass destruction and the threats to the sovereignty of a state, and they include:

    *     the proliferation of conventional small arms
    *     the terrorizing of civilian populations by domestic groups
    *     gross violations of human and Earth rights


    Global security can only be achieved if it can be shared by all peoples and through global co-operation, based on principles as explained in the Charter of the Global Community such as justice, human dignity, and equity for all and for the good of all. All people and states are protected by the Global Community.

















    Back to top of page


     

    Business and trade responsibility and accountability: new way of doing business for everyone


    New way of doing business and trade

    Competition wil only be good when corporations, the business world, and every global citizen, have accepted the new way of doing business and trade, and obtained the Certified Corporate Global Community Citizenship.

    Over its long past history trade has never evolved to require from the trading partners to become legally and morally responsible and accountable for their products from beginning to end. At the end the product becomes a waste and it needs to be properly dispose of. Now trade must be given a new impetus to be in line with the global concepts of the Global Community. You manufacture, produce, mine, farm or create a product, you become legally and morally responsible and accountable of your product from beginning to end (to the point where it actually becomes a waste; you are also responsible for the proper disposable of the waste). This product may be anything and everything from oil & gas, weapons, war products, to genetically engineered food products. All consumer products. All medicinal products! All pharmaceutical products!





     


    Back to top of page

    Activities of the Global Community

    Send mail to GlobalConstitution@telus.net with questions or comments about the Global Constitution. Your mail
    Send comments about website to webmaster at gdufour@globalcommunitywebnet.com Webmaster

    Copyright © 2005 Global Community WebNet Ltd.Global Community WebNet Ltd