Improving the Performance of National Governments through Factor Monitoring
The IBF System
By Sondlo Leonard Mhlaba, Ph.D.

Page 1 | Page 2

The Incentive-Based Franchise Proposal

There are four principles governing the IBF proposal.

1. The world needs the United Nations (UN).
   In the last 100 years, many problems have arisen which cannot be solved by one country acting alone. These include
   1. Environmental problems such as:
      • preventing oil spills on the world's oceans, or working together to decontaminate the oceans when spills occur;
      • reducing deforestation of the earth and its negative influences on the ecosystem and the earth's climate, and
      • co-ordinating river-damming projects and the tapping of underground water resources to ensure fair distribution across national boundaries.
   2. Managing natural disasters, which have become more destructive to human life, owing to increased urbanization;
   3. Resolving ethnic, territorial, and other international disputes and related refugee-resettlement challenges;
   4. Facilitating nuclear disarmament and preventing nuclear proliferation;
   5. Collaborating to effect a more equitable distribution of the world's resources, and
   6. Working together to assure the survival of all life forms on the planet.
      
      
2. All the states of the world must be eligible to be members of the United Nations.
   However, the definition of "state" must be revised to include political structures that are not presently covered under the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States.
   
   Under the Montevideo Convention, Article I provides that:
   
   The state as a person in international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; (d) capacity to enter into relations with other states."
   
   Article 2 provides that:
   
   The federal state shall constitute a sole person in the eyes of international law."
   These provisions and related articles must be revised to permit the creation of other entities, which constitute a sole person in the eyes of international law, all the time, or some of the time. Examples of such entities may include:
   • The European Union.
   • The Commonwealth of Independent States.
     
     
3. The number of votes which a member may exercise must be weighted in accordance with
   1. the member's real or potential capacity to help implement the decisions of the UN, and
   2. the member's degree of compliance with international norms which are exemplified by the following agreements, treaties, Conventions, and Covenants:
      • The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Between States and International
        Organizations or Between International Organizations, as amended, which came
        into force in 1980.
      • The Convention Concerning Forced or Compulsory Labour, as Modified by the Final Articles Revision Convention of 1946.
      • The Convention to Suppress the Slave Trade and Slavery of December 1953.
      • Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN General Assembly Resolution 217A (III) of December 10, 1948.
      • The Convention Concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize which came into force in July 1950.
      • The Convention on the Political Rights of Women which came into force in July
        1954.
      • The International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial
        Discrimination (1966), and
      • The International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 1976.
        
        

      Part I, section 1.1 of the 1976 Convention (above) states:

      "All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely
      determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development".

      Section 3 provides that " The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations".

      Part II, Article 2.2 of the same Convention provides that "The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to guarantee that the rights enunciated in the present Covenant will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status".

      Article 4 of Part II requires that "The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that, in the enjoyment of those rights provided by the State in conformity with the present Covenant, the State may subject such rights only to such limitations as are determined by law only in so far as this may be compatible with the nature of these rights and solely for the purpose of promoting the general welfare in a democratic society".

      Guideline number three and the principle of adherence to international norms are at the heart of this proposal in that they reflect a fundamental belief that is grounded in the major moral traditions of the planet. I invite the reader to examine biographical summaries of Jesus, the Buddha, Mohammed, and Confucius in 500 Hundred Years of Eurocentric Diplomacy (Mhlaba, 1999). Despite the different interpretations that have been visited upon their words, their essential message remains the same:

      • leaders must be virtuous;
      • leaders must serve their people, not oppress them;
      • Each society must be free to determine the best way for it to recruit and install its leaders.
        
        

      As we enter the 21st century, it appears that democracy, with all its imperfections, has become an internationally accepted concept for the recruitment and installation of political leaders. How this concept is implemented varies from country to country. In the United States the President is elected, more or less, by popular vote. This President becomes the head of state and head of government.

      In the United Kingdom, the head of state is the Monarchy whose position is hereditary. Thus, the present Queen Elizabeth will be succeeded by one of her children. The head of government, called the Prime Minister, is elected by members of Parliament who belong to his or her political party.

      In both countries, the US and the UK, people who wish to assume political leadership roles spend a great deal of money and time (more so in the US) trying to convince voters why they are better than the other candidates. It is only after they win that they begin to offer a hand of friendship to the loser. Both the US and UK systems are called democratic, even though they differ in form and procedure.
      L. H. M. Ling and Chih-yu Shin describe for us a Confucian manifestation of democracy in Taiwan. "politics under Confucian governance means moral rectification, that is, it is morally wrong to articulate one's own interests in public."

      "Given this normative constraint," Ling and Shin observe, "candidates in an election cannot promote themselves (as do candidates in the US, for example). To do so would tar them as "selfish" or "self-centered," thereby rendering them unqualified for public office. Nor can a candidate take sides on a policy issue where advocates divide into distinctly opposite camps such as pro-life vs. pro-choice, or National Rifle Association (NRA) vs. the Brady Bill. " What usually happens is that the candidate finds a way to assure the public that he or she is the right person to lead, to make decisions on their behalf, because of his or her training, experience, and character. Ling and Shin conclude: "For citizens of Taiwan as well as China, the purpose of democracy is not limited government. Rather, they support democracy as the most popular (and internationally accepted) means of installing virtuous, benevolent elite rule."

      Many in the West are used to looking at the world through one lens and have been sufficiently powerful, secure, and self-sufficient to not seek to understand other ways of life and other ways of looking at the world. I have included this other perspective on democracy, a common idea, to help all readers to receive the IBF proposal with an open mind. Since I spent fifteen years fighting for the principle of "One Person, One Vote" for my native land, Zimbabwe, it may come as a surprise to some, to have me recommend the concept of earned votes. I distinguish a vote for one's leaders in one's country and a vote at the UN. But this differentiation should not be seen to detract from the point that democracy must be measured more by results than by procedures or structures

4. All UN-affiliated institutions must be governed in such a way that their decision-making systems reflect the intent of guideline 3 above.

Implementation of the IBF Proposal

The four principles described above constitute proposals in their own right. What is left now is for me to offer an over-arching organizing idea that is consistent with, or helps us to move towards affirming those principles. It is my considered opinion that such an idea revolves around the UN vote. Under the IBF proposal, the members of the new United Nations would be able to fashion a more democratic UN, one that reflects the values of the majority of the people of the world, takes advantage of member strengths, and has incentives to move member states towards more democratic and just government practices.

How Member States Acquire Votes

Below are six suggested criteria on which all members will earn voting points.

1. Population size.
2. Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
3. Measures of income disparity.
4. Percent of women in elective office
5. Percent of the state's population that is incarcerated.
6. Percent of the state population that votes in the general election.

Below is an example of how member states may earn votes under each of the criteria.

1.a A member state with the highest population would receive 100 voting credits.
1.b A member state with the lowest population would earn 1 vote.
1.c A member state with a population between these two extremes would be assigned a number of votes between 1 and 100, based on the member's rank in that factor. (See the table that follows.)

The table (Table 3) that follows will show how the rest of the voting credits will be determined.

Incentive-Based Voting System

Under this formula, the maximum votes that a member country can exercise would be 600, and the minimum would be 6.

To illustrate how the formula might work, let us take country A and B.

Example One- Country A

A.1 Smallest population 1 vote
A.2 GDP towards the bottom 7 votes
A.3 Elected Women towards the bottom 11 votes
A.4 Disparity in incomes lowest 100 votes
A.5 Voter turn-out highest 100 votes
A.6 Prison population-- mid-range 50 votes

Example Two- Country B

B.1 Largest population 100 votes
B.2 GDP mid-range 50 votes
B.3 Elected women -mid-range 50 votes
B.4 Income Disparity--higher end. 22 votes
B.5 Voter turn-out- high end 75 votes
B.6 Prison population- mid-range 50 votes

In order to simplify the decision-making system at the new UN, each member would hold its voting points for a period of five years. At the end of the five years, there would be opportunities for each member to raise its voting points and, thereby its influence on the decisions of the organization.

Under this system, many current leaders at the United Nations such as the United States, Britain and France, would continue to be in the leadership ranks, but they would not necessarily have the greatest influence in terms of votes. Most probably Japan and South Korea would be moved up significantly, while Russia might drop a few notches. This new UN would then be able to use its incentive-based voting structure to reorganize the international body to more effectively and equitably respond to the needs of the people of the world. It is my hope that this newly reconstituted UN would, at a minimum:

1. Amend the 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons to abolish the right to own bombs that was reserved for the US, France, the United Kingdom, China, and Russia;
2. Restructure the Security Council to facilitate the efficient work of the world and remove the present permanent veto power that is reserved for the nuclear club members;
3. Establish a mechanism for orderly nuclear disarmament and effective policing of nuclear proliferation;
4. Internationalize the disposition of nuclear waste;
5. Create an international instrumentality responsible for research, development and control of defensive weapons systems such as SDI (Star Wars), and computational defensive strategies to guard against computer-based military crimes;
6. Empower the world's judicial systems to make enforceable decisions;
7. Review, revise, and strengthen the 1928 General Act for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes;
8. Support the creation or strengthening of regional institutions such as the OAU, OAS, the Arab League, and others, and ensure that all such regional bodies operate under international law, and are governed under the IBF model;
9. Abolish all defense alliances, and
10. Establish a Rapid Response military force under UN command, to meet security emergencies that cannot be handled on a national or regional basis.

Illustration of the IBF Model

To illustrate the workings of the IBF Model, I have collected data on the six factors that would be considered in assigning member votes in the new UN.

1. For population size, Factor 1, I have relied on World Bank records for 1999.
2. For GDP, Factor 2, I have also relied on World Bank data for 1999. These data reflect purchasing power parity (PPP) and are, thus somewhat different from row GDP comparisons.
3. For data on electoral participation, I have relied on the International Institute for Democracy, see http://www.IDEA.Int.
4. For Women in Elective Office, I have relied on the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) database-see www.ipu.org
5. Income disparity measures have been the most difficult to obtain, partly because there is no agreement among development economists and other scholars as to how you measure inequalities in income. For the purposes of this illustration, I have ranked countries by the percent of the national income that is owned by 10% of the population. The country where 10% of the population owned the largest part of the economic pie was ranked number 1 and given a score equivalent to one vote in the UN. This data came from the World Handbook of Political & Social Indicators, and was cited in Kuriac's World Rankings, page 101.
6. For the prison population ranking, I am indebted to Roy Walmsley, Research Findings No. 88 of the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, UK.

Since most data was incomplete, I have applied some educated guesses and data assignments to complete the picture. All figures with an asterisk are either based on my educated guesses or have been assigned in order to complete the illustration. The final results are more accurate for those countries that have better data. While great effort has been taken to use accurate data when available, the following table, UN Member Rank by Votes Under the IBF Model, is best understood as illustrative only. The IBF System is a work-in-progress. I shall be happy to get the idea of incentives in politics debated in respectable circles in the US and elsewhere, and more so if it can become an organizing paradigm for global democratization in the future. The IBF System would not be needed if the idea of one-person-one-vote had provided the necessary political incentive. But, as history has shown, there is rarely a level playing field in the battle for votes, and the powerful always find a way to get what they want, while the powerless have to wait until the powerful are ready. With the IBF System, the larger work has been done. Nations of the world have voluntarily signed on to several shared norms. Under the IBF System, all they have to do is to agree to have their compliance monitored, independently, every five years and their UN votes set according to the results of such monitoring.

If implemented and successful, the IBF System would be an effective method for the United States to exert its influence in the world without seeming to be overbearing. In the best of circumstances, the world would become a better place for the powerful as well as the powerless. Refugees would go home, tribal and ethnic warfare would be reduced, and America would turn its attention to its own population here at home.

Please turn to the next page for the important IBF System data and also review the more detailed data that are also included.

UN Member Rank by Vote Under IBF Model