Study On Accountability Mechanism Of INGOs From The Perspective Of International Rule Of Law

International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs), widespread around theworld, have positively participated in the process of international rule of law byimproving the formation of international good laws and good governance. As theparticipant and promoter of international rule of law, INGOs have played an active rolein their procedure and gained widespread attention worldwide. However, everythinghas two sides, there has existed a good deal of disharmony between INGOs and theprocedure of international rule of law. Particularly, the accountability crisis that INGOshave encountered in this procedure has hindered their participation in it, therefore, it isnecessary for INGOs to examine their accountability in international rule of law.International rule of law is one condition that the international community hasaccepted a good governance by law. Although it’s an extension of domestic rule of lawto international community, it’s quite different from the domestic one. Considering theinternational environment depended upon by international rule of law andfragmentation of international law, the international rule of law has its peculiarconnotations such as diversified legislation, international legislation, and its intrinsicrequirement of international good law and good governance.Among these elements, the diversification of international rule of law manifestsitself in participants. Apart from domestic and international governmentalorganizations, INGOs have been reported to have participated in the procedureofinternational rule of law by right of its own peculiar superiority. In addition, INGOshave played a key role in the procedure of international good law and global goodgovernance required by the international rule of law.INGOs demonstrate their roles of participants and promoters in the procedure ofinternational rule of law from numerous facts. Hence, the diversification of theinternational rule of law requires features of the accountability of INGOs differentfrom the past, which mainly include objects, subjects, contents, mothods, purposes and procedures of the accountability.Numerous international treaties and international governmental organizationsmore or less endow INGOs with the rights enjoyed by the subjects of international lawin both direct and indirect ways. There is no right without obligation. Moreover, ifINGOs have rights to exercise their power, they are in duty bound to accept theirobligations. Therefore, this paper attempts to explore the accountability of INGOs inthe theoretic framework of “the accountability on the basis of rights” from theperspective of the international rule of law. The essence of this basis is the relativitybetween rights and duties, which means that since INGOs enjoy rights endowed byinternational law, they should undertake relevant obligations. INGOs should accountfor what they do to stakeholders and accept evaluation by them, so as to acceptrewards or punishment according to evaluation results. The accountability crisis ofINGOs stems from the rapid growth of INGOs, the increase of their financialinvestment; increasing significance in implementing international good law and globalgood governance and legality crisis.However, it is those factors that lead to the increasing interaction betweenINGOs and the international rule of law, therefore, it is necessary to discuss theaccountability crisis of INGOs from the perspective of international rule of law.The international rule of law mainly refers to rule by international law appliedamong the subjects of international law. However, it is quite difficult to exhaustivelyreveal all the problems in the accountability crisis of INGOs from the perspective ofinternational law, due to the deficiency of INGOs’ status as subjects in internationallaw. Despite of all kinds of efforts made by INGOs to gain status of international lawin their developmental process, the present progress is still unsatisfied because ofvarious restrictions.The mechanism of accountability of INGOs can be divided into three subclassesfrom the perspective of accountability subjects, all of which have both positive andnegative sides. Firstly, every country should claim requirements to INGOs actingdomestically through domestic legislation, moreover, a few countries in Europe canconclude international treaties to realize it. However, owing to the distinction of lawand values among different countries, this method has very limited influence in INGOs. Secondly, the relationship between IGOs and INGOs manifests coorperation andregulation, in which IGOs have played a positive role in the accountability of INGOsby establishing the latter’s obligations. However, given the inequal international legalstatus between IGOs and INGOs, surely this kind of accountability mechanism is notformal and comprehensive. Lastly, INGOs have itself restrained in establishing theirown accountability by concluding and entering all kinds of codes of conduct and ethicswhich have inherent inadequacy in their implement mechanism because of voluntarynature.In view of the peculiar connotation of INGOs’ accountability from the perspectiveof international rule of law and different requirements made by numerous stakeholders,theirs is little possibility for INGOs establishing a most effective mechanism ofaccountability. Combining connotational requirements of international rule of law andtheir own characteristics, the author has found that the best way is taking goodadvantage of several current mechanisms of accountability to transit towards the onesconstructed by treaty. Massive facts have demonstrated that INGOs have gained thequalification of the subject of international law so that constructing the accountabilitymechanism of INGOs by entering into treaty is feasible. On the basis ofpeople-oriented, sustainable development and harmonious coexistence principles,INGOs should obey rule of law as well as transparency and balance principles toconclude treaty, and formulate detailed rules for the construction of INGOs’accountability mechanisms by answering the content, object and procedure of INGOs’accountability. What is more important, is focusing on approval, implementationmechanism and prior mechanism of participating in pertinent codes of conduct, or thiskind of treaty would become formalistic. Although this method may face the challengeof time and cost, it will be quite an effective model which complies with the law ofdevelopment in the long run.