Half of UN Bodies Hold Closed Meetings, Lack FOI Policies, EYE Survey Finds
Tags: Transparency, Open Government, United Nations

By Toby McIntosh

About half of United Nations agencies hold closed meetings of their key decision-making bodies, according to the survey of 27 UN bodies by eyeonglobaltransparency.net.

Only 14 of the 27 UN organizations have freedom of information (FOI) policies.

On the other hand, virtually all UN agencies perform positively when it comes to “proactive disclosure” — revealing agendas and documents in advance of meetings and issuing minutes and documents after meetings.

EYE gathered information on open meetings, FOI and five other widely accepted indicators of transparency.

Just three UN agencies fall well below average.

Notably opaque are:

– the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO,

– the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and

– the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

Scoring best across the board are six bodies:

– the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR),

– the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF),

– the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),

– the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA),

– the World Food Programme (WFP),

– the International Labour Organization (ILO), and

– the World Health Organization (WHO).

Follow EYE @tobyjmcintosh

Seven-Part Survey Conducted

To examine transparency at UN agencies, EYE gathered information from 27 UN agencies on seven key indicators:

– Access to information policy?

– Open meetings of the governing body?

– Meetings viewable online?

– Agendas published in advance?

– Minutes issued afterwards?

– Documents available before the meeting?

– Documents available after the meeting?

Many other factors could be added to the list, but these seven are considered to be basics of open government.

Such transparency practices allow the public to learn what issues the agencies will be addressing, to hear about the positions of their national representatives, to see the final decisions and to request documents.

To conduct its survey, EYE reviewed official websites and contacted officials.

See the full results on this spreadsheet: UN Transparency Dec 2020

Open Meetings Half and Half

A very slight majority of the 27 UN agencies (14) normally conduct open meetings for their key governing bodies, according to EYE’s survey.

Most UN agencies employ similar governing structures, with multiple layers.

Ultimate decision-making power rests with the nations that are members of the body. The full membership meets for plenary gatherings, but usually only annually, or even less frequently. These larger meetings are normally open.

However, during the interim periods, decisions typically get delegated to smaller, bodies of elected representatives, often known as executive boards or councils.

Their policy decisions may or may not need to be ratified by the plenary bodies, and their authority is substantial. They meet several times a year, or even more often.

EYE’s survey focused on whether such meetings are open to the public, interested parties and journalists.

Missions May Not Explain Secrecy

Delving into why some bodies are more secretive than others was beyond the scope of this survey, but the behaviors don’t appear to align with the sensitivity of the core subject matter.

The UN Security Council, while holding some sessions on very sensitive topics in private, conducts most of its meetings in public and discloses many documents.

Open sessions are held by the World Health Organization (WHO) Executive Board, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Executive Board and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Council.

On the other hand, closed meetings are the norm for the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) Executive Board, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Executive Board, and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Council.

The executive boards of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund meet behind closed doors.

Others holding closed meetings are: the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

For some of UN bodies, more openness exists for lower-level deliberations, done by committees and working groups. But there is substantial organizational variation from agency to agency, and transparency varies, too.

At some agencies, “accredited” outside observers from nongovernmental organizations are allowed to attend otherwise closed meetings, but they are usually required to respect the confidential nature of the meeting. The standards on accreditation depend on the agency.

The rules of all the UN bodies permit them to hold closed meetings at times, for example to discuss sensitive personnel matters.

The 14 UN bodies holding open meetings are: the UN Secretariat, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), UN Women, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS), United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), World Food Programme (WFP), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), International Labour Organization (ILO), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and World Health Organization (WHO).

Most Virtual Meetings Viewable Online

Because of the Covid-19 pandemic, meetings are being conducted virtually.

Of the 14 agencies that hold open meetings, almost all of them (12 of the 14) make their sessions viewable online.

All of the bodies reviewed have moved to virtual meetings. However, the shift has not resulted in switching toward openness by those that do not typically conduct open meetings.

FOI Policies Lacking

Another important indicator of transparency is whether a governmental body provides a mechanism for the public to ask for documents, including standards and procedures for handling such requests.

More than 125 national governments have such policies, often known as freedom of information (FOI) or right to information (RTI) policies. The “right to information” under international law has its roots in Article 19 of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Adoption. In addition, the passage of FOI regimes by national governments, and their implementation, is one of the UN‘s Sustainable Development Goals.

Nevertheless, UN bodies and other international organizations have been slow to adopt FOI policies.

They should, according to David Kaye, who until recently was a UN Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights. In an August 2017 report, he wrote, “There is no principled reason why intergovernmental organizations should adopt access-to-information policies that vary from those adopted by States.”

Only 14 of the 27 UN agencies have FOI policies, according to EYE’s research.

No UN agencies have adopted a FOI policy since 2018, when EYE conducted a similar survey. (See 2018 article.)

The UN Secretariat and committees have flirted with proposing a FOI policy, but the matter has not gone to the UN General Assembly (UNGA) for approval. Adoption of a FOI policy by the UNGA would not apply to all UN agencies.

Disclosing Materials Proactively

In order to follow what happens at meetings, open or closed, it is valuable to know what topics will be discussed and what proposals are being made. For most of the meetings covered, it is normal for proposals to be sent in advance.

The UN agencies examined normally do release advance agendas — 24 out of 27.

The posting of the documents in advance of the meetings is slightly less common, done by 20 of the 27.

Again, there is variation in practice. Selective release of pre-meeting materials is practiced by four agencies.

For example, the World Bank has exceptions to its policy “simultaneous disclosure,” releasing documents to the public at the same time they go to Executive Board members. For some major Bank documents, however, including a key one about proposed projects, affected nations can delay release until after a decision is made. (See 2020 EYE article.)

The existence of a FOI policy can mitigate undistinguished proactive disclosure policies, allowing the public to request what isn’t routinely provided. But the processing of requests takes time.

Disclosing of Minutes Is Normal

Virtually all UN agencies issue some form of minutes after the meetings of their key decision-making bodies.

The form and timing of these documents vary.

For examples, the IMF releases the minutes of its Executive Board, usually after three years, but for some topics the delay is five years.

Three agencies do not disclose minutes: the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

EYE did not survey agencies on the existence or disclosure of transcripts or recordings of meetings. However, it appears that few release such records. The use of virtual meetings would seem to facilitate the creation of recordings of the meetings. WHO stands out for posting recordings of its meetings online.

Post-Meeting Documents Disclosed

Virtually all but UN organizations studied disclose some information after the meetings.

This often occurs through press releases, and also through the disclosure of the documents that embody the decisions made — a new policy, for example.

However, the release of the documentary record is not uniform, and is not consistent at the World Bank, the IMF and ICAO.

A more complete transparent record, available from only a few bodies, would contain not only all documents considered by the body, but materials such also proposals made even if not adopted and position statements by delegates.

Three Outlier Agencies: ICAO, IAEA and UNRWA

Three agencies stand out as the least transparent UN agencies:

– the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO),

– the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and

– the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

All lack a FOI policy, hold closed meetings and fall well below average on disclosure of agendas, minutes and documents.

For the IAEA and UNRWA, their polices may be partly explained by their missions, but ICAO’s performance compares unfavorably with an agency with very similar functions, the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

The IAEA, dealing with sensitive nuclear issues, might be expected to be more circumspect. The IAEA Board of Governors doesn’t issue an agenda or pre-meeting documents, and only sometimes issues documents afterwards.

The IAEA has some transparency attributes. It distributes some information on Board of Governors meetings beforehand, and afterwards, in the form of media advisories. However, some Board decisions are not released because of security restrictions. The IAEA has a policy for derestricting Board documents later, generally two years after the meeting.

UNRWA is a very different type of entity, providing assistance and protection to Palestinian refugees. UNRWA’s Advisory Committee meets twice a year, mainly to consider budget issues. It sometimes issues progress reports, but not agendas, documents or minutes. UNRWA Issues press releases and concluding statements of the commissioner general following the AdCom meetings.

ICAO Compares Unfavorably With IMO

ICAO, which handles international aviation matters, is logically compared with the IMO, which deals with international shipping.

The IMO is not among the most transparent UN agencies, but is more open than ICAO.

In recent years the IMO has taken steps to expand transparency. Notably, it has encouraged members to make public their proposals in advance of Council and committee meetings, a voluntary program that increased the numbers of documents disclosed. Undisclosed Council documents are made public after a period of three years. IMODOC is the IMO’s online docket system.

By contrast, ICAO does not release Council agendas, pre-meeting documents or minutes. Some Council decisions are announced via press release, but not always accompanied by the relevant document. The outcomes will eventually be incorporated in ICAO standards. It has no public docket system. The Council’s minutes are not released. The Council issues annual reports.

Neither the IMO or ICAO allows press coverage of Council meetings. Press coverage of IMO committee meetings is permitted and the IMO recently dropped a rule restricting quotation of delegates’ statements. At a recent IMO committee meeting members were admonished not to live tweet. (See EYE story). ICAO does not make public a calendar of its committee meetings, nor are the meetings open to observe. (See EYE story.)

Proposals by the United States for more transparency at ICOA have not yet resulted in specific progress.

The ICAO Assembly, the body of all members, in October of 2019 adopted a resolution directing the ICAO Council and the Secretary General to “take further concrete steps to increase transparency.” (See EYE article.) There has been no discernible follow-up.

The general language of the Assembly resolution was in contrast with specific suggestions from the United States.

Embodying a reform agenda, the US Working Paper stated:

Transparency for Inclusiveness and Better Decision Making: ICAO should expand access to ICAO information, meeting documents, resolutions, decisions, minutes, reports, documents, and publications for Member States, stakeholders, and the public through increased use of ICAO’s public web site. The Council and Secretary General should ensure that the decisions and minutes of the Council are accurate reflections of statements made at Council and other meetings, and that transcripts of the Council meetings are available to Council members at their request. ICAO should consider the possibility of webcasting Council and certain other high-level meetings, as is the practice at the UN General Assembly, the UN Security Council and other UN specialized agencies. Security-related and industrial proprietary information shared with ICAO must continue to be protected.

It’s an agenda that could be applied to many UN agencies.