CC BY
20PHILOSOPHICAL SCIENCES
INTERPRETATION OF THE CONCEPT OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION IN
INTERNATIONAL LEGAL DOCUMENTS
Matkarimova J.
Tashkent State Transport University, Associate Professor of Social Sciences, Candidate of Sociological Sciences
Abstract
One of the most pressing and unresolved issues in the scientific and philosophical, political and legal literature and in the development of new legislative concepts and individual bills is the conceptual apparatus, which includes the term "non-governmental organization". More specifically, it is a matter of determining which organization the "non-governmental" characteristics belong to, while declaring the state's intention to apply to non-governmental organizations in particular. It is important to clarify and clarify this term scientifically, as it will naturally lead to unexpected difficulties in practice. The rationale or differences between its international classification or national classification are discussed and analyzed in this article.
Keywords: non-governmental organization, non-governmental non-profit organization, national legal system, representative structure.
There is experience and tradition of applying the concept of "NGO" in international and national legal systems, as well as in various international institutions (International Center for Not-for-Profit Law-ICNL). This issue is determined by the direction of "creating conditions for sustainable development of non-governmental organizations as part of civil society and strengthening the role of society in solving socially significant problems."
One of the most pressing and unresolved issues that has arisen in the development of the new legislative concept and some bills is the conceptual apparatus, which includes the term 'non-governmental organization'. More specifically, the state did not specify to which organization the "non-governmental" characteristics belonged, in particular by declaring its intention to apply to non-governmental organizations. For example, in neighboring Kazakhstan, the search for an "object" is said to have gone through a dubious way of legally defining a category (NGO) in addition to the notion of "nonprofits" that already exists in Kazakhstani law. (with more than ten sub-branches (organizational-legal forms)). I mean, it is necessary to try to answer two questions: First, in world practice, by whom, in what sense and in what context is the abbreviation "NGO" or their abbreviation "NGO" (or abbreviation) used. («Non-governmental organization». Abbreviation «NGO»).
Second, whether it is international experience or the experience of any country, it can serve as a theoretical basis and methodological basis for the introduction of the concept of "NGO" in the legislation of a particular country, in particular the Republic of Uzbekistan.
The main source of reference to non-governmental organizations is Article 71, which is the official text of the Charter of the United Nations (UN). "The Economic and Social Council has the authority to take appropriate measures to consult with non-governmental organizations interested in matters within its competence. Such events may also be held with national or-
ganizations after consultation with international organizations and, if necessary, with an interested member of the organization. "
It should be noted that the UN Charter does not define non-governmental organizations, but simply shows that this concept includes international organizations and national organizations.
Thus, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) has the power to establish consultative relationships with certain organizations called "non-governmental" (the nature and forms of these relationships). Since 1946, ECOSOC [1] has made a number of decisions regarding consulting relations with non-governmental organizations. However, none of the resolutions adopted designated a "non-governmental organization" and highlighted the most recent, Resolution 1996/31. Paragraph 12 of the Resolution states that an NGO is an organization that has not been established by any state body for the purposes of ECOSOC or has not been established on the basis of an intergovernmental agreement and agrees to the following. That is, the following conditions:
• has a "representative structure";
• it has "appropriate reporting mechanisms for its members";
• its members "exercise effective control over their policies and activities through the exercise of the right to vote and through other relevant democratic and transparent decision-making processes."
It follows from the above conditions that the organization applying for consultation status must be a member, i.e. it may be an association, association, association and so on. The term "fund" refers to the organizational form of a legal entity, which in any case, in continental law, excludes the possibility of membership. That is, the fund for ECOSOC purposes cannot be considered as NGO. However, among the organizations accredited by EKOSOC, we find a large amount of funds. Clearly, this change in reality since the adoption of the UN Charter can be explained by the internationalization of the activities of foundations, which
ECOSOC does not neglect in practice. But in one way or another, this contradicts the 1996/31 resolution. It also does not conform to the application form that must be completed when applying for accreditation [2, 3002]. It should be completed in a column in which the organization is required to indicate its membership content (and, if possible, its international character). Resolution 1996/31 [3] does not define the terms "non-governmental non-profit organization", "international organization" and "national organization" inherited from Article 71 of the UN Charter, nor does it refer to the "subregional" and "regional" levels arising from Resolution 1996/31. The concepts of Only the following is said:
"Unless otherwise specified, the term 'organization' means non-governmental organizations at the national, subregional, regional or international level." Whether this "degree" implies the international nature of membership in the organization or its governing bodies, international participation through representations, the territorial scope of its activities - this question is not answered in the 1996/31 resolution. According to the practice of the ECOSOC NGO Committee, an organization is considered international if it has branches in at least three countries.
The reference to the existence of "national agencies and other components" in Article 13 of Resolution 1996/31 can be seen as an indirect confirmation of the validity of this approach. Another paradox of the 1996/31 resolution, as well as Article 71 of the UN Charter, is that relations with "international" NGOs do not require consultation with any government, and such relations may be with a "national" organization only "after consultation with the relevant member state." [4]. There is no system of national (non-governmental) organization of NGOs in the established world. Any "international" NGO is an organization formed by the laws of a particular country, in other words, a national organization. So in which cases is it necessary to consult with the national government and in which case is ECOSOC not responding? (official in any case).
In addition, if different interpretations and explanations are given in the UN and ECOSOC publications, the organization with consultative status must be nonprofit (non-profit), but this does not follow from Article 71 of the UN Charter. It also does not directly apply to the 1996/31 resolution. Perhaps this is coincidental, and perhaps this is due to the fact that ECOSOC has tried to leave the door open for organizations of any kind interested in cooperation. In many countries, especially in developing countries, the fact that the law does not distinguish between categories of nonprofits has been taken into account.
According to many commentators, "the nonprofit nature of the organization stems from the requirement that the organization be funded by the members themselves or through voluntary contributions." We refer to the text of Resolution 1996/31, which contains the following requirement:
"The fixed assets of this organization should consist mainly of the contributions of its national branches or other components or the income of individual members. In case of receipt of voluntary contributions, their
amount and payers shall be well informed to the Committee of the Council on Non-Governmental Organizations. However, if the above criteria are not met and the organization is funded from other sources, it shall satisfactorily explain to the Committee the reasons for non-compliance with the requirements set out in this paragraph. "
It should be noted the significant uncertainty of the established rule. First, it is unclear how to interpret the phrase "basically" - for example, is it possible to get 49 percent of the revenue from commercial activities without violating the requirements of Resolution 1996/31? Second, in the last sentence, if the organization is "funded from other sources," it does not "meet the requirements" set out in paragraph 13. The claim that some incomes take precedence over others is lost, and there is an absolute ban on taking income from "other sources". Regardless of how we interpret the terms of the 1996/31 resolution, it does not require that the organization be in a legal form recognized as nonprofit by the laws of the country in which it was established. The 1996/31 resolution should also not require the organization to benefit. The requirement that voluntary income take precedence over other income lies only in the plane of the actual ratio of income from the specified sources.
Admittedly, regardless of the gaps and inconsistencies interpreted in Resolution 1996/31, we cannot find transnational corporations in the list of accredited organizations. The basis of the demand for consulting organizations is non-membership in any government. First, the organization should not be set up by any government agency.
Thereafter, Resolution 1996/31 requires the NGO to pay special attention to any government, directly or indirectly, financially or otherwise, to report strictly, as well as to spend it for purposes consistent with UN goals. Thus, it depends on the state, which is considered as a decisive factor in determining the possibility of cooperation. Governments have ample opportunities in the UN system. The possibility of using NTs as "agents of influence" is also unacceptable.
The United Nations also gives NGOs the right to grant UN status - under the Department of Public Information (JAD) of the UN Secretariat. It is interesting how the concept of NGO is defined in JAD publications: "A non-governmental organization (NGO) is a voluntary non-profit association of citizens formed at the local, state, or international level."
Apparently, although this is unofficial, the definition is somewhat inconsistent with the ECOSOC position. This means that even in the UN system, there is no common concept of "NGO". This definition excludes the membership of legal entities in NGOs in addition to the allocation of funds.
All of the above does not deprive NGOs of a decisive role in the international arena, but demonstrates that there is no clear and complete answer to the question of "NGOs" within the conceptual framework of the UN system, particularly as "international NGOs". In the United Nations system, the identification mechanism as an "NGO" cannot serve as a model for national legislation.
References
1. ECOSOC grants accreditation to NGOs upon their request. Accreditation is granted to organizations in cooperation with which ECOSOC is interested, insofar as such organizations deal with all or individual issues within its competence. Of course, such an affiliation with ECOSOC is in the interests of NGOs themselves, not least because of their prestige. http://www.un.org/esa/coordination/ngo; Human Rights International http://www .hri. ru/ docu-ments/oun/oun3.php, Ekaterina Kuznetsova "Evolution of the consultative status of international nongovernmental organizations at the UN Economic and Social Council", published on the website of the
Belarusian Journal of International Law and International Relations (No. 3, 2001)
2. Pavel Smiltnex. (ISNL). "Elimination of contradictions, filling gaps and development of non-commercial legislation in the Republic of Kazakhstan" (Almaty, Kazakhstan, January 30-31, 2003).)
3. The Russian text of Resolution 1996/31 is posted on the website of the Department of Public Information of the UN Secretariat at http://www.un.org/russian/question/r199136.pdf
4. Al-koei Foundation, Asia Crime Prevention Foundation, Foundation for the Support of the United Nations, Abdul Momen Khan Memorial Foundation, Africa Infrastructure Foundation, African Refugees Foundation etc. http://www.un.org/esa/coordina-tion/ngo/).
