Intergovernmental organizations designated by the Council under rule 79 of the rules of procedure for participation in the deliberations of the Council on questions within the scope of their activities

2016 ◽  
pp. 159-163
Keyword(s):  
Intergovernmental Organizations ◽  
Rules Of Procedure

Comparison of the perception of overt and covert options in IPSAS financial statements by intergovernmental organizations

Tékhne ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-39
Author(s):  
Berit Adam
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Accounting Standards ◽  
Financial Statements ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Intergovernmental Organizations ◽  
Accounting System ◽  
Accrual Accounting ◽  
Public Sector Accounting ◽  
Primary Reference

AbstractSince 2012, the European Commission has embarked on the ambitious project to harmonize public sector accounting rules on all levels of government within Europe, mainly to improve the quality as well as the comparability of financial data. Although International Public Sector Accounting Standards were deemed not to be suitable for a simple take-over because of various reasons, they nevertheless shall function as a primary reference point for developing European Public Sector Accounting Standards. A total of 21 out of 28 central governments have already reformed their accounting standards to accrual accounting, and some of them have also relied on IPSAS in this exercise. Apart from governments, various international and supranational governmental organizations have also since the end of the 2000’s been reforming their accounting system to accrual accounting, and have in the same way relied on existing IPSAS. This paper explores accounting practices found in ten intergovernmental organizations (Commonwealth Secretariat, Council of Europe, European Commission, IAEA, INTERPOL, ITER, NAPMA, OECD, International Criminal Court, WFP) whose statements are prepared in compliance with IPSAS. It analyzes how overt and covert options contained in IPSAS with relevance to the activities of intergovernmental organizations are exercised and evaluates in which areas of accounting material differences in accounting practices can be found, which may hinder the comparability of financial statements prepared on the basis of IPSAS.

A Call for Public Participation in the Treaty-making Process in South Africa: What can South Africa Learn from the Kingdom of Thailand?

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Retselisitsoe Phooko
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Future Situation ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
Personal Jurisdiction

On 2 August 2002 South Africa signed the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Protocol on Tribunal and the Rules of Procedure Thereof, thus effectively recognising and accepting the jurisdiction of the SADC Tribunal. Among the cases received by the SADC Tribunal was a complaint involving allegations of human rights violations by the government of Zimbabwe. It ruled that the government of Zimbabwe had violated human rights. Consequently, Zimbabwe mounted a politico-legal challenge against the existence of the Tribunal. This resulted in the review of the role and functions of the Tribunal in 2011 which resulted in the Tribunal being barred from receiving new cases or proceeding with the cases that were already before it. Furthermore, on 18 August 2014, the SADC Summit adopted and signed the 2014 Protocol on the Tribunal in the SADC which disturbingly limits personal jurisdiction by denying individual access to the envisaged Tribunal, thus reducing it to an inter-state judicial forum. This article critically looks at the decision of 18 August 2014, specifically the legal implications of the Republic of South Africa’s signing of the 2014 Protocol outside the permissible procedure contained in article 37 of the SADC Protocol on the Tribunal. It proposes that South Africa should correct this democratic deficit by introducing public participation in treaty-making processes in order to prevent a future situation where the executive unilaterally withdraws from an international treaty that is meant to protect human rights at a regional level. To achieve this, this article makes a comparative study between South Africa and the Kingdom of Thailand to learn of any best practices from the latter.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document