April 21, 1999
After a protracted and highly contentious internal review, the World Bank Board of Executive Directors today approved a proposal to revamp its independent Inspection Panel, a forum created to respond to citizen complaints about Bank-financed projects that harm people and the environment. The review was undertaken in an effort to resolve the intense politicization of the claims process at the Board level, and the Executive Directors’ acknowledged failure to allow the Panel process to function as intended. The proposal was recently revised due to pressure from non-governmental organizations, academics, members of Congress and the US government. However, NGOs remain skeptical that the new rules will solve the problem of Board policies, despite the changes that have been made.
The key problem with the proposal is that it’s effectiveness relies upon a non-binding “gentleman’s agreement”: In exchange for restricting the Panel’s preliminary investigation process, the Board promises to approve Panel recommendations for investigation of claims. Given the past history of vigorous opposition to Inspection Panel investigations by members of the Board, NGOs are skeptical of this gentleman’s agreement.
“We would have preferred that the Inspection Panel be given the authority to make its own determination on the merits about whether to proceed with an investigation,” said David Hunter, Executive Director of the Center for International Environmental Law. “So far, Board involvement in that decision has resulted in internal politics affecting the outcome. This is fundamentally unfair to the local people who are seeking justice and accountability.”
The new proposal was the result of a year-long review process by a 6-member Board working group. The group originally intended to bring its secretly drafted proposal to the Board on February 9. Critics contended that the integrity of the Panel – and Bank accountability – was at stake. But public outrage over the substance and process of the initial working group proposal resulted in the Board’s agreement to consult with international NGOs, claimants, and grassroots representatives from the Bank’s borrowing countries. A precedent-setting meeting was held between the Board and 26 representatives of NGOs and claimants on March 24 in Washington, D.C.
While problems remain, the proposal does reflect changes that were apparently made in response to input from the NGO/Board consultation and written comments submitted to the Board. For example, the revised proposal places restrictions on Bank Management’s ability to interfere with the claim. The new rules require that management and the government develop problem-solving action plans as a result of the Panel’s investigation, in consultation with affected people. Also included in the proposal is a requirement to translate documents related to the Panel’s investigations into the languages of the claimants.
“We are encouraged that the Board has made changes in the original proposal that increase the chances full investigations”, said Kay Treakle of the Bank Information Center, a Washington-based NGO. “These changes prove that consultation with NGOs and affected people on serious policy issues is not only the right thing to do, but can improve how the Bank functions. It is now up to President Wolfensohn, and civil society, to make sure that Management and the Board follow the new rules.”