HEUNI Online course on the UN Crime Programme Meetings

Welcome to the online course
"Introduction to the
UN Crime Programme meetings"

This is an online course by the European Institute for Crime Prevention and Control, affiliated with the United Nations (HEUNI), a part of the "International Criminal Law" at the University of Turku and a part of the Master's Programme in Law at the University of Helsinki

START

DESCRIPTION

HEUNI is the European regional institute in the United Nations Criminal Justice and Crime Prevention Programme Network. HEUNI functions under the auspices of the Finnish Ministry of Justice as an independent research and policy-making institute. HEUNI's vision is to identify evidence-based criminal justice and crime prevention practices in Europe, and share these within Europe and beyond, in order to advance more effective, rational and humane criminal justice systems. www.heuni.fi

Learning outcomes: Much of the work of the United Nations takes place in official meetings. Have you ever wondered what happens in these meetings? This course gives you a basic understanding of one of the UN programmes, the UN Crime Programme. The course gives insider tips on how a person attending the UN Crime Programme meetings can make effective use of these meetings. The course focuses on the UN Crime Programme, but is also useful for other UN contexts, as well as a general overview of the skills needed for diplomatic discourse. The course is based on the personal experience of the former Director of HEUNI, Dr Matti Joutsen, who over the past 40 years has played an instrumental role in shaping the UN Crime Programme.

Target audience: The course is intended for anyone interested in the UN Crime Programme or UN organizations in general. It is, in particular, intended to those students specializing in international relations or law, or junior practitioners familiarizing themselves with the negotiation tactics at the UN.

Structure: The course is composed of 9 sessions, each one presenting a topic through texts, videos, graphics, quizzes, links and additional readings. The course will take approx. 17 hours depending on how much time one spends self-studying.

Part 1. Introduction
Session 1: Basic facts about the UN
Session 2: The United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme (the "UN Crime Programme")
Part 2 Who's Who
Session 3: Crime programme actors
Session 4: From policy to practice
Part 3 Participating in the UN Crime Programme Meetings
Session 6: Focus on the resolutions
Session 7: Adopting the report
Session 8: Sensitive issues in negotiations
Session 9: "Ten rules to follow" is a tongue-in-cheek analysis of different negotiating tactics"

part I. Introduction / session 1

United Nations System

The aim of this session is to remind ourselves of the basic facts about the UN. The United Nations is a complex system comprising of political bodies, executing agencies and funds which deliver e.g. technical assistance to countries.

Within the UN system, the primary responsibility for crime prevention and criminal justice lies with the Economic and Social Council. Within the UN Secretariat, in turn, these issues are dealt with by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, although related issues are also dealt with by, for example, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime also acts as the Secretariat to the Crime Commission, to which you will be introduced to in Session 2.

This Chart is a reflection of the functional organization of the United Nations System and for informational purposes only. It does not include all offices or entities of the United Nations System. The chart presents the situation as of 21/03/2017, published by the United Nations Department of Public Information.

This primer to the United Nations is designed for all global citizens. It covers the history of the UN, what it does and how it does it.

Read the book for free at the UN iLibrary.

Part I. Introduction / Session 2

The United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme

Since crime in general is a major concern for all countries, it should come as no surprise that crime-related issues have found their way onto the UN agenda. Within the UN Secretariat, crime issues are dealt with primarily by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). The Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (CCPCJ) functions as a governing body of the UNODC. The CCPCJ coordinates with other United Nations bodies that have specific mandates in the areas of crime prevention and criminal justice, and is also the preparatory body to the United Nations Crime Congress. In other words, the Crime Commission acts as the principal policy-making body of the United Nations in the field of crime prevention and criminal justice.

The following video gives you an opportunity to visit the Headquarters of UNODC in Vienna, where also the sessions of the Crime Commission take place:

UN Decision Wheel Explained

The following materials will give you insights to the UN Crime Congresses and the topics discussed there:

In 2015, at the 13th UN Crime Congress the Doha Declaration was adopted. Click here to read it.

Building on the Doha Declaration, Kyoto Declaration carries crime prevention further. The 14th UN Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice – held in an innovative hybrid format amid pandemic restrictions – opened in Kyoto on the 7th of March, 2021 with calls for renewing global cooperation against crime to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals and recover from the pandemic.
In the Kyoto Declaration governments agreed concrete actions to advance responses addressing crime prevention, criminal justice, rule of law and international cooperation. Member States will take commitments forward at the 30th session of the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice in Vienna in May, 2021. You can analyse the Kyoto Declaration here

Find out more about how the Crime Congress was held in 2021 from Dr Matti Joutsen, who attended the Kyoto Congress as a representative of Finland.

The 2021 publication "The Evolution of the United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice" provides a deeper overview of how the composition and the nature of the Congresses have evolved, largely reflecting shifts in the general approach to crime, as well as changes in the UN crime prevention and criminal justice programme.

Earlier in this session, two of the main bodies of the United Nations Crime Programme were presented; the Crime Commission and the Crime Congress. In addition to these, the governing structures of two of the main crime conventions are important in steering the crime related work of the Member States.

• the Conference of the States Parties to the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC CoSP)
• the Conference of the States Parties to the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC CoSP)

Also five Working Groups have been established under the mandate of the UNTOC CoSP and three Working Groups are organized annually under the mandate of the UNCAC CoSP to discuss particular topics related to the conventions.

The UN Crime Programme calendar below presents an overview of the yearly meeting routine of the UN Crime Programme:

DIVE INTO HISTORY

"FOUR TRANSITIONS IN THE UNITED NATIONS CRIME PROGRAMME"

ADDITIONAL READING:
"FOUR TRANSITIONS IN THE UNITED NATIONS CRIME PROGRAMME"
by Matti Joutsen

Click here to read the paper (PDF-format)

Over the course of seventy years, the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme (the "UN Crime Programme") has undergone three major transitions. The first was a transition from a forum for intellectual debate among primarily Western European and North American criminologists and practitioners, to a truly global programme (1950s – 1960s). The second was a transition from an expert-driven programme to a government-driven programme (the 1990s). The third was a transition from a soft law programme to a programme based also on hard law treaties (the 2000s).
Each of these transitions has, in different ways, changed and strengthened the UN Crime
Programme, but each has entailed its own costs. This paper briefly describes the transi-
tions, as well as their accompanying costs and benefits. It also suggests that a fourth
transition is underway, one that is framed by the 2030 UN Sustainable Development
Agenda.

2

PArt II. Who's Who / SESSION 3

United Nations Crime Programme Actors

Who participates in UN Crime Programme Meetings?

explained by Dr Matti Joutsen

As explained in the previous video, there are different categories of actors who have the right to participate in the UN Crime Programme meetings. As outlined in the Rules of Procedure there are four categories of participants: 1) member states, 2) intergovernmental organizations, 3) UN bodies "and others" and 4) non-governmental organizations. The category of member states is divided into geopolitical regional groups. These regional groups make a big difference in the negotiations as you will learn in the following sessions. Under the category of members states the actual participants - the representatives of the member states - can be either diplomats or experts representing the member state.

Regional Groups

The geopolitical regional groups of member states of the United Nations.

As of May 2014, 192 of the 193 UN member states are divided into five regional groups:

the African Group, with 54 member states
the Asia-Pacific Group, with 53 member states
the Eastern European Group, with 23 member states
the Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC), with 33 member states
the Western European and Others Group (WEOG), with 28 member states, plus 1 member state (the United States) as an observer state.

See the full list of countries on the UN Website.

Special cases:

Categories of participants

Grouping participats according to their expertise and field of work.

ADDITIONAL READING:
"WHEN EXPERTS AND DIPLOMATS AGREE: NEGOTIATING PEER REVIEW OF THE UN CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION"
by Matti Joutsen and Adam Graycar

Click here to read the paper (PDF-format)

The UN Convention Against Corruption is the only truly global convention in corruption control. Separate and rather difficult negotiations were conducted on a mechanism for the implementation of the treaty. These negotiations broke ground by providing, for the first time, peer review of a United Nations treaty. This article, which is based on the authors' close observations and interviews with key participants, seeks to show how the dynamics between technical experts and diplomats led to a resolution that would not have occurred if either the technical experts or the diplomats had acted alone.

PArt II. Who's Who / SESSION 4

From policy to practice

It is important to understand that national legislation does not evolve in a vacuum. International conventions and international discussions, such as those in the UN Crime Programme do have an effect on the national legislation and jurisprudence. The following example on trafficking in human beings illustrates this relationship, and how international ideological and political debates shape national legislation. It also shows how, vice versa, national issues arise to the international discussion whether through case law or trends recognised in criminological research.

The development of the Trafficking Protocol
The first comprehensive and internationally agreed upon definition of the crime called trafficking in persons came into existence as a result of the negotiations conducted at the United Nations in Vienna in 1999-2000 under the framework of the Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, and its Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (the so-called Trafficking Protocol). It is important to note that the Trafficking Protocol falls under an international treaty on crime, and more specifically, a treaty on organized crime. While the rationale to regulate, control and prohibit the traffic in women in the late 19th Century stemmed from moral panic concerning prostitution, the rationale to control trafficking in persons some 100 years later still included a focus on women and girls, but there was also an elevated fear – or perhaps moral panic – concerning illicit migration and international crime, and trafficking as an expression of such global crimes.

The development of the Convention against Transnational Organized Crime
The issue of organised crime as a global threat was raised within the context of the United Nations crime prevention work already in the 1960s and 70s. It was, at least in part, the historical and political developments in the late 1980s that pushed organized crime more prominently into the agenda of the United Nations. One of the proponents for strengthening the work of the United Nations against organized crime was the Italian judge Giovanni Falcone (who was to be assassinated for having imprisoned several members of the Sicilian mafia). A few months before his death, he participated in the first session of the crime Commission at the United Nations, where he called for joint international action against organized crime. At the time, international collaboration in addressing crime was scarce and lacked systematic frameworks. He also presented the idea of an international conference as a starting point for this strengthened collaboration between countries.

See Vlassis 2002 for an overview of the historical developments towards the 2000 Convention against Transnational Organized Crime:

Click here

A couple of years later, in 1994, the World Ministerial Conference on Organized Crime was organized in Naples, Italy. One of the recommendations of the conference was the initiation of a process to develop an international instrument against organized transnational crime. The General Assembly of the United Nations founded an Ad-hoc Committee in 1998 with the aim to draft a Convention against transnational organised crime. At the same time, Argentina had introduced the idea of a separate convention against trafficking in minors. Argentina had previously tried to introduce the topic into the agenda of the human rights commission in Geneva but without success. For the first session of the Ad-Hoc Committee Argentina prepared a text focusing on trafficking in women and children, but the United States provided another draft, referring more broadly to trafficking in persons, including trafficking in persons both for the purposes of "forced labour and prostitution or other sexual exploitation". Almost all participating countries preferred this broader scope but also wanted to keep the specific focus on women and children.

See the official records – the Travaux Préparatoires – of the negotiations for more detail on the discussions and the positions of member states:

Click here

The difficult negotiations concerning trafficking for sexual exploitation

The negotiations for the Convention against transnational organised crime went on for 11 sessions in 1999-2000. In addition to the Trafficking Protocol, two other protocols were also negotiated: the Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air, and the Protocol against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, their Parts and Components and Ammunition. What makes the negotiations concerning the Trafficking Protocol unusual was the large involvement of non-governmental representatives at the negotiations, in particular human rights and women's NGOs. The negotiators, in particular the NGOs but also some of the member states, were deeply divided into two camps with regard to their view of and position on prostitution. One the one side of the NGO divide there was the Human Rights Caucus, which regarded prostitution as a form of legitimate labour.

One the other side there was a group of NGOs under the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women (CATW), which regarded all prostitution as a violation of women's human rights and ultimately as a form of violence against women. Some representatives of member states also aligned themselves with either group, and the negotiations became very heated at times. The key disagreements focused around the definition of trafficking for sexual exploitation (i.e. should prostitution be considered as exploitation or as legitimate work), and the issue of consent. In the end, agreement was found in defining trafficking in persons as a crime consisting of three elements: the act, the means, and the purpose (Art 3a). The act includes e.g. the recruitment and transportation of a victim. The means include using threats or force, deception or abusing power or the position of vulnerability of a victim. The purpose of exploitation includes the "exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs". The interpretative notes to the Trafficking Protocol clarify that the Protocol itself only addresses the exploitation of the prostitution of others in the context of trafficking in persons. This addition was included as a compromise between the two views in the negotiations, and as a consequence, it is up to countries themselves to decide how they want to address prostitution in their domestic laws (see the Travaux Préparatoires, p. 347).

Domestic implementation of the Trafficking Protocol

The Convention against transnational organised crime and its protocol on trafficking have been widely ratified. There are currently 173 parties to the Protocol. In many countries the domestic legislation on trafficking in persons largely follows the definition of the Trafficking Protocol. This is the case also in Finland, which ratified the Protocol in 2004. Furthermore, the European Union also adopted a very similar definition of trafficking in persons in its Framework Decision of 2002, and the subsequent EU Directive of 2011. The same definition is also largely reflected in the definition of trafficking of the Council of Europe Convention on Action Against Trafficking in Human Beings of 2005.

In addition to introducing the criminal provision of human trafficking into national legislation, the Trafficking Protocol – as well as the subsequent EU and Council of Europe treaties – have contributed to the development of practical and concrete assistance measures to victims of trafficking in Finland. The Act on the reception of persons seeking international protection and on the identification of and assistance to victims of trafficking in human beings (the Reception Act, 746/2011) outlines the elements of assistance to victims of trafficking in Finland. These include housing, health care, social services, legal support and financial help for those without an income. Since 2006, the reception center in Joutseno, which functions under the auspices of the Ministry of Interior, has been responsible for running the national assistance system for victims of human trafficking. The fact that assistance to victims is administrated under the auspices of the Ministry of Justice is an indication of how trafficking was, and to certain extent still is, framed in the context of organized crime and illicit migration. See Gallagher (2015) for an outline of the impact of the Trafficking Protocol and criticism of it:

Click here

Assistance to victims of trafficking is in Finland closely tied to the outcome of the criminal process. Victims are taken into the system of assistance when there is a reasonable ground to believe that a person may be a victim of trafficking. Victims are granted assistance as long as the criminal justice process continues. In practical terms this leads to a situation where victims are removed from the system of assistance if and when the police terminate the trafficking investigation or change the charge to a provision other than trafficking, if the prosecutor does not prosecute for trafficking, and if the court does not convict of trafficking.

See HEUNI website for a study assessing the assistance provided to victims of trafficking in Finland (available in Finnish and English).

Click here

Background information
The history of trafficking: "white slave traffic"

The question of trafficking in human beings is not new to international law. Already during the late 1800s, several countries in Europe became concerned with the prostitution, movement and procuring of European women and children abroad. This concern resulted in an international conference in Paris in 1902 on the issue of the white slave traffic. As a result of the conference the "International Agreement for the Suppression of the White Slave Traffic" was agreed upon, focusing on preventing the movement of white women and girls, in particular, for immoral purposes abroad. This was followed by a Convention on the same issue in 1910 ("the International Convention for the Suppression of the White Slave Trade"). Allain (2017, 30) argues that these two treaties and the negotiations that preceded them show at least three things: 1) how European countries at the turn of the century in their diplomatic relations started moving from bilateralism to multilateralism, i.e. a shift from diplomatic liaison and negotiations between two countries to negotiations involving several countries; 2) that the participating countries agreed, perhaps for the first time, that the idea of such negotiations was to produce international law that would not only apply internationally, but would be ratified also nationally, i.e. be incorporated into domestic legislation, and; 3) that although countries came to the negotiations with different aims and ideas concerning the regulation of prostitution and the movement of women, they managed to find common ground, i.e. compromise in the issue of criminalising the exploitation of the prostitution of adult women, and criminalizing all prostitution of minors.

These early treaties also brought the issue of trafficking – then called traffic – to the international agenda as an international concern. It is today evident that these concerns were racist and protectionist (since the focus was largely on European, white women only), but elements of the early definition of "traffic" were to be incorporated into the international negotiations concerning the definition of "trafficking in persons" almost 100 years later.

See Allain (2017) for a thorough discussion on the "white slave traffic" and the relevance of the early international treaties.

See Morcom and Schloenhard (2011) for a detailed outline of the evolution of international law on trafficking:
Morcom and Schloenhard (2011) argue that the current understanding of trafficking in persons has in fact been influenced by five different areas of international law, namely: 1) slavery, 2) prostitution, 3) labour (including issues relating to migrant labour), 4) human rights, and 5) the rights of the child. They also argue that international law has addressed trafficking in persons, largely from a criminal justice (or law and order) perspective, and that the current conceptualisation of trafficking combines very different branches of international law, leading to a definition which is at times difficult to interpret and apply.

Questions to consider

Why, in your opinion, did organized crime become seen as an international concern in the early 1990s?

Why do you think that the crime of trafficking as outlined in the Trafficking protocol, is defined as consisting of three elements?

What is your view on the fact that assistance to victims of trafficking is, in Finnish domestic legislation, tied to the outcome of the criminal process?

ADDITIONAL READING:
"THE COMMISSION ON CRIME PREVENTION AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE:
A SEARCH FOR COMPLIMENTARITY BETWEEN POLITICS AND CRIMINOLOGY"
by Christopher Ram

Click here to read the paper

Christopher Ram argues that "the task of the criminologists is to tell the diplomats what is necessary, and the task of the diplomats is to tell what is possible".
He also states that "the reality of global crime is that the true agenda is neither set nor controlled by the diplomats or the criminologists: is it set by the criminals?"

Find out more in his paper on the work of the UN Crime Commission.

3

PART III. PARTICIPATING IN THE UN CRIME PROGRAMME MEETINGS / SESSION 5

The focus on resolutions

Meetings within the framework of the UN Crime Programme have the general purpose of promoting the prevention of crime and criminal justice. They are, however, very different from the academic conferences that researchers are used to, where people present and discuss papers. They are also quite different from policy discussions that policy-makers and practitioners are used to, where different options are presented and weighed, one policy is ultimately adopted, and then the work begins on getting it implemented (and, ideally, getting the impact of implementation assessed).

Most formal UN meetings revolve around the presentation, discussion and adoption of draft resolutions, and – perhaps to a surprising degree – the adoption of the report of the meeting.

UN Draft resolutions as explained by Dr. Matti Joutsen

In the United Nations, resolutions are important for several different types of reasons:

on the substantive level, resolutions embody the sense of the member states of the United Nations: what are the priority issues in crime prevention and criminal justice, and what should be done by the international community in general;
also on a substantive level, resolutions may express the will of member states to call upon member states, or to invite other actors (such as intergovernmental organizations) to take specific action;
on a political level, resolutions may be used to promote a certain political agenda: condemning certain developments, action taken or incidents, welcoming other developments, stressing the importance of certain values, and so on;
on a practical level, resolutions often request that the Secretariat take specific actions, such as prepare a report, organize a meeting or provide certain assistance to member states on request;
on a linguistic level, and as documents reflecting the outcome of UN negotiations, the phrasing and terminology used in resolutions becomes "agreed language", which may well be referred to in future negotiations.

Now that you understand what are the draft resolutions. In the following short video you will be introduced to the process of drafting resolutions.

Influencing the agenda: from an idea to the adoption of a resolution. Follow the process step-by-step:

The work of the UN Crime Commission takes place in formal and informal meetings, find out what they result in:

Informal negotiations

explained by Dr Matti Joutsen

SELF-ASSESSMENT

There is a draft resolution presented at the Crime Commission aiming at assuring a certain number of safe shelter for victims of gender based violence in every Member State. The proposal is based on research findings which point out that safe shelters are crucial for the victims to escape the perpetrator. However 24/7 shelters are also very costly.

Prepare your points for a statement on the resolution depending on your role. Choose a role/tone of voice for your statement. You could be a representative of an NGO, or you could present a low income, low resource country willing to improve the situation but struggling with resources. Or you could choose to be a wealthy industrial country not wanting to make any changes in the national legal system. The statement should be short and clear.

You can refer to the following sources for more background information:
Strengthening Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Responses to Violence against Women
Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences
Council of Europe Istanbul Convention on Violence Against Women

PART III. PARTICIPATING IN THE UN CRIME PROGRAMME MEETINGS / SESSION 6

Oral statements

Once the Secretariat representative has introduced an agenda item (or the members of a panel or roundtable have given their statements), the chairperson opens the floor for discussion. As noted, regional groups have the option of speaking first, followed by representatives of member states. If Ministers or other dignitaries are in attendance, they will generally be invited to speak first.

The Secretariat keeps the list of speakers, which the chairperson consults in giving speakers the floor. Persons who wish to speak should contact a conference room officer and ask to be placed on the list of speakers, on the basis of "first come, first served". The speaker can also ask to be allotted a certain time (such as the first to speak after lunch, or the first to speak after another speaker), as long as this does not endanger the "first come, first served" approach, or speakers whose priority would be affected inform the conference room officer that they agree to this.

The conference room officer will generally ask if the statement is in writing, so that this can be distributed to the interpreters. If so, the written statements should preferably be given to the Secretariat at least an hour in advance, so that the Secretariat has time to deliver it to the interpreters' booths, and the interpreters, in turn, have time to note the availability of the text, and use it for the interpretation. (The UN interpreters are very competent, and can adjust if the speaker makes changes to the text during delivery.)

Because of the need for interpretation, oral statements should be given at a relatively leisurely pace: not ponderously slow, but definitely not in a rush. Most interpreters prefer simple, straightforward sentences that follow the normal rhythm of conversation. All too often, written statements can include long and convoluted sentence structures which can be difficult to follow, even if the interpreter has a written text in front of him or her.

The chairperson may limit the length of oral statements. However, even if no limit has been placed, speakers should avoid trying the patience of the audience, who have to sit through six hours of meetings every day, involving a study stream of oral statements. Power point presentations and even videos may help in getting a point across, but if these are given, the speaker should be mindful that the UN works with six official languages, and thus perhaps the majority of the participants will depend on the interpretation.

Under the rules of procedure, the chairperson has the power to call a speaker to order if his or her remarks are not relevant to the subject under discussion. This is extremely rare.

Aarne Kinnunen (Ministry of Justice, Finland) giving an oral statement during the CCPCJ 2018.

PART III. PARTICIPATING IN THE UN CRIME PROGRAMME MEETINGS / SESSION 7

Adoption of the report

The final stage of work at UN meetings involves the adoption of the report. The Secretariat generally assists the rapporteur in this process, and the draft text is usually very carefully constructed to reflect what should be an impartial summary of the discussions.

Drafting UN reports can be called an art in its own right. UN meetings often deal with sensitive points, and the rapporteur (assisted by the Secretariat) seeks to present these in a way that would be acceptable to the different sides of the issues. Generally, speakers are not identified in the report, even by member state. The reference will be simply to "one speaker noted" or "several speakers suggested that …"

Many participants, who may be exhausted by the lengthy negotiations and are looking forward to their return flight (or at least a restful weekend), may assume that the adoption of the report will be a formality. However, on particularly sensitive issues, some representatives may try to expand the presentation of the arguments that their side had made, and diminish the amount of attention given to opposing points of view. One technique used here is for a representative to argue that his/her country's position, as given earlier, was not correctly reflected in the report, and then submit a (lengthy) proposal for amending the report to remedy this. The chairperson usually accepts short amendments along these lines. Given that this may indeed give a one-sided impression of the discussion, representatives from the other side of the issues may wish to make corresponding amendments based on points made in the discussions by other speakers.

Report on the 28th Crime Commission (7 December 2018 and 20–24 May 2019)

SELF-ASSESSMENT

Read the Report of the 27th Crime Commission.

What kind of issues were identified and what measures were proposed by the Commission to tackle human trafficking in the online environment ? Do you think these were relevant issues and relevant countermeasures, or were some topics maybe left out due to political sensitivities? Write down your points.

NOTE: It is important to learn to skim read long texts and documentations (which are produced in multitude in international organizations), and to find the most relevant points quickly.

Show/add comments

SELF-ASSESSMENT

In this part the focus was on draft resolutions. Have a look at the attached draft resolution on restorative justice submitted at the 27th Crime Commission. Then, have a look at the final adopted text of the Report of the Commission. What has changed in the text during the course of the negotiations, and what do you think where the political/criminological reasons behind these changes?

Draft resolution on restorative justice submitted at the 27th Crime Commission.

PART III. PARTICIPATING IN THE UN CRIME PROGRAMME MEETINGS / SESSION 8

Sensitive issues

Different states have different priorities, and there are often disagreements over what should be done. This session identifies some of the sensitive issues within the scope of the United Nations crime programme.

Disagreements, of course, are nothing new in international cooperation. Different countries have different approaches, different priorities and different understandings of the issues at hand. Disagreements generally lead to negotiations, which are designed to overcome these disagreements so that all the stakeholders can work more effectively together in pursuit of common goals.

The role of civil society is perhaps the major disagreement within the UN Crime Programme at present. It arose in connection with the negotiation of the UNCAC implementation review mechanism (2006-2011), and centres on different understandings of the "intergovernmental nature" of the United Nations. Basically, some states are of the view that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) should not have a role in many international discussions on crime prevention and criminal justice within the UN framework, while other states are of the view that non-governmental organizations can strengthen the international response.

READING:
"CIVIL SOCIETY ENGAGEMENT IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION"
by Dr Matti Joutsen

Click here to read the paper (PDF-format)

The disagreement over the role of civil society in responding to corruption has become a serious one, which is consuming more and more time at various meetings in Vienna. This conference room paper submitted by Finland in the sixth session of the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption in St. Petersburg gives insights to the development of the debate on NGO's role.

Discussion:

Should NGO's have a role in the UN Crime Programme meetings, and if what kind of role?

Justify your opinion.

Show/add comments

ADDITIONAL READING:
"THE UN CRIME PROGRAMME: SENSITIVE ISSUES IN NEGOTIATIONS "
by Dr Matti Joutsen

Click here to read the paper (PDF-format)

What you can and cannot discuss in Vienna? Which issues are dividing the Global South and the Global North? Why is cybercrime such a hot topic? When to use "States shall ..", "States may ..." and "States may consider … "? Find out inside tips from the life-long UN Crime programme negotiations expert.

PART III. PARTICIPATING IN THE UN CRIME PROGRAMME MEETINGS / SESSION 9

"Ten rules to follow"

A tongue-in-cheek analysis of different negotiating tactics
based on Matti Joutsen, Negotiating Conventions in the United Nations: Ten Rules to Follow, in Marc Groenhuijsen, Rianne Letschert and Sylvia Hazenbroek (eds.), KLO Van Dijk. Liber amicorum prof.dr,mr. J.J.M. van Dijk, Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen 2012, pp. 177 – 190.

As with so many negotiations, success at UN Crime Programme meetings depends on preparation of one's own position, anticipation of contrary positions, and an ability to influence the course of the negotiations. Negotiators come in many shapes and sizes, representing member states both large and small, and there are no hard-and-fast rules as to who will "win out" at the end. At times, the outcome may even depend on chance statements, suggestions or events. Nonetheless, in the experience of the author, the more influential and successful negotiators in Vienna tend to fit a distinct (and rather loose) profile. The author suggests, and not merely facetiously, that those interested in negotiating in Vienna might wish to learn the following rules:

Be polite (and never dis the chairman). International diplomacy is based on at least superficial respect for the views of the other players, even if you not only totally disagree with these views but cannot understand how any sensible person could suggest them. One can succeed in negotiations only if one respects, and has the respect of, the other parties. Persons from different cultures have different styles, and the use of blunt language (especially when interpreted into the other five working UN language) may unintentionally be regarded as impolite or offensive, taking attention away from the substance.*

This politeness can be seen, for example, when participants are referring to the interventions made by earlier speakers. No matter whether one agrees or disagrees with a statement, the rule is to thank the "[distinguished] representative of X" for his or her statement and then go on to say if one supports it or, with great regret, cannot support it.

It is of particular importance to be polite to the chairperson. One of the key functions of the chairperson is to serve as the neutral arbitrator who seeks to identify the points of conflict, ascertains the views of the participants, and tries to piece together wording that would achieve consensus. If the chairperson's impartiality is questioned, this could endanger the success of the entire negotiations. The politeness is shown in that participants, when they are speaking for the first time at a session, almost invariably express sentiments along the lines of the following: "Thank you Mr/Ms Chairman for giving me the floor. Since this is the first time that my delegation has the opportunity to speak at this meeting, I would like to convey to you, and through you to the other members of the Bureau, our profound respect for the important work which you are doing. We would also like to assure you of our country's commitment to the success of this work…" (and so on).

* In one very difficult negotiation, where the participants had strong disagreements, one person was heard to whisper to the chairperson "you must feel like you are herding cats". This was unfortunately misheard by one interpreter – and interpreted – as "you must feel like you are hurting cats". A representative from that language group angrily criticized the whisperer for having accused the chairperson of strangling kittens.

Avoid pomposity. In an article published during the 1980s, Thomas Mathiesen identified what he calls the "importance norm" and the "self-importance norm" at UN Crime Congresses.* Essentially, the first requires that everyone respects the importance of the work beyond done, even if it does seem silly at times. The second is clearly linked with the one-up-manship that is so often evident in any social activity, work or play; if a participant is able to project the aura of importance (or of experience, or of being knowledgeable), perhaps the participants will pay closer attention to his or her views.

Indeed, some pomposity can at times be detected at UN Crime Programme meetings, and some individual participants do appear to try to bolster their self-importance. At times, this is apparently done for tactical reasons. For example, there are some speakers who never use the first-person singular in referring to themselves, but always speak about "my delegation": "My delegation is of the view that …" Apparently, these speakers believe that an argument would be more persuasive if the audience understood it to reflect the collective view of the Government of a member state, and not just of one person. (At times, however, the tactic can misfire, especially if most listeners in the room are quite aware that the delegation in question consists of only that one person, and the speaker says something like "My delegation is of the view that we would prefer to wait until after lunch to speak on this issue.")

These examples of importance and self-importance, however, appear to be becoming more infrequent. There is currently less pomposity than what was evident in earlier United Nations Congresses or other UN Crime Programme meetings. This presumably is related to the fact that most of the participants are representatives of the permanent missions based in Vienna, and have generally worked with one another for many years. After such a long time, how often can one repeat the same phrases to the same audience?

* Thomas Mathiesen, FN-kongress som kulturfenomen (UN Congresses as cultural phenomena), Nordisk Tidsskrift for Kriminalvidenskab, Oslo, vol. 73, no. 2 (April 1986), pp. 157 – 160.

The UN Crime Programme deals with a large variety of issues, on many of which there are considerable differences of opinion as to what, exactly, should be done: cybercrime, assisting victims, review of the implementation of the United Nations Convention on Transnational Organized Crime, including references to human rights in resolutions worked out within the framework of the Crime Programme, and so on. Different individuals and different countries have different experiences with crime and criminal justice, and thus they have different priorities. Some countries have a strong practical or political reason to address the issue of trafficking in cultural property; others do not. Some countries want to involve non-governmental organizations more actively in the national and in particular in the international response to crime; others do not.

The UN Crime Programme follows what is known as the "spirit of Vienna", which calls for consensus on all issues, without the taking of a vote. The chairperson seeks throughout the process to ensure that all the delegations agree on the formulations used in draft resolutions or the report of the meeting. Because of the intense nature of the negotiations, and because a large proportion of the negotiators are career diplomats who do not have personal practical or academic experience in criminal justice or international co-operation, arguments based on criminology or criminal justice have limited value, and more weight is placed on political and national priorities.*

That is not to say that substantive arguments are not made; indeed, they often are. Especially the larger delegations may have participants with extensive practical or academic experience who can readily explain why certain formulations suggested by others simply would not work in practice, or would have significant drawbacks. Yet other delegations may have participants who can quickly direct a logical mind at even the more obtuse questions and outline the key issues so that these can be better understood.

However, the stilted nature of the negotiations at times make rational discourse difficult at best. With over 100 member states attending some of the UN Crime Programme meetings, the floor needs to be given in turn to each and all who have requested permission to speak. If the participant from country A happens to disagree with a participant from country B, it can often take many interventions before be or she can get the floor back and reply, by which time the focus of the discussion may already have meandered off on a tangent.

As a result, the more successful negotiators include those who are good at haggling. The following gives some of the rules that these inveterate wheeler-dealers appear to follow:

Find out in advance who your main opponents might be, and find out what their interests are. At times it is necessary to find out why ideas are being opposed, and whether the opponents would be satisfied either by a minor change of wording, or whether (for example), they might have to be brought on your side by promising to support some of their own initiatives.
Be careful of "blind-siders". With over 100 delegations in attendance, and with the constant turn-over in the participants, it is not enough to simply assume that certain delegations will be on your aside, or at least would not speak out against your proposal. At times, opposition might pop up from a completely unexpected source. Worse, when one delegation goes on record as being against your proposal, there is a strong likelihood that subsequent speakers (especially if they come from the same regional group) would say that they tend to agree with these nay-sayers.
Work the corridors. Now and then, it is important to enlist as many speakers as possible to go on record as being in support of your proposal; this may induce others to jump on the bandwagon of support.
Get the support of key delegations. If such key delegations come out in your support, this can help considerably to win the field. Another tactic, especially important in matters with a political dimension, is to get the support of delegations from as many different regions as possible.
Set up positions as bargaining chips (even if they may seem rather extreme) and insist on them as long as necessary. This is an unusual tactic, but also it can be seen to be used now and then. By not showing your hand too early, it may be possible to appear to be satisfied with a compromise – and yet this "compromise" may be the position that you had wanted to achieve from the outset. (Without the benefit of ESP, it is difficult to know how often this tactic is used at UN Crime Programme meetings. However, towards the end of some negotiations there tend to be more and more examples of delegations stating that they want an entire paragraph or even section deleted from a draft resolution. Often, this leads to slight amendments of the text of these paragraphs "as a compromise", perhaps along the line that the delegations in question wanted in the first place.)

*This development can be seen to be related to the strengthening tendency to see crime and criminal justice as national security issues. While it is true that academics and practitioners represent a great variety of approaches, they can be said to have a greater tendency to see crime and criminal justice as social (or economic, or medical) issues.

Learn and use certain stock phrases and "agreed language". In accordance with the "consensus norm" identified by Mathiesen, delegations that disagree on certain points tend to be pressured by the chairperson to find language suitable to all. On the other hand, delegations applying the "my-country norm" identified by Mathiesen tend to try to avoid accepting any wording that would force them to change their domestic law or practice or, more importantly, to go against their strong views on how international criminal policy should be conducted. If delegations in the minority fail to block wording with which they disagree, then they can fall back on a set of defensive ploys, all of which involve inserting certain stock phrases that weakened the nature of the obligation, or even emasculate it entirely.

The first such ploy is to replace the obligatory "states shall …" with the much weaker "states may …" or even "states may consider …". Other formulations along the same line include the exhortatory but non-binding "states are called upon …" and "states are encouraged to …". One more phrase, "states shall consider …" may seem binding at first glance, but ultimately all that it requires is that states consider something. What steps they actually take is left entirely to their discretion.

The second ploy is to insert a condition: states are required to undertake certain measures, but only for example those that "may be necessary, consistent with its legal principles" or "to the extent appropriate and consistent with its legal system". Even the insertion of the simple phrase "where appropriate" leaves each state with a margin of appreciation in deciding how to implement the resolution in question.

The third ploy is to subject everything to domestic law. It is, of course, understood that different legal systems require different measures for implementation. For example, in some countries the police carry out measures which, elsewhere, are carried out by investigating magistrates, or the courts. Furthermore, Continental law countries rely primarily on statutory law, while common law countries continue to place considerable weight on court practice. Finally, different legal systems used different concepts. Accordingly, now and then a paragraph may be inserted in a draft resolution obliging states to do something "in conformity with fundamental principles of its domestic law."

In the drafting of resolutions in Vienna, at times a delegation may seek to insert a somewhat modified version of this phrase, "subject to the fundamental principles of its domestic law". The difference at first seemed innocuous. However, when there is an obligation to do something "in conformity" with domestic law, the obligation to do something remains; domestic law only governs how it is done. But if the obligation is to do something "subject" to domestic law, then, logically, the state is not required to do anything that would go against its domestic law.

Learn the importance of form over substance. All words are not created equal. In the work of UN Crime Programme bodies, it is possible to identify four categories of words, from the most to the least important: words as such, words in an optional paragraph, words in brackets, and words in a footnote.

When words are left as such in the text of a draft resolution in informal negotiations, the assumption is that they reflect the general consensus of the participants. They benefit from the rule of inertia: unless someone is later able to persuasively argue why these words should be amended or even deleted, they are allowed to stay in the text, all the way through to final adoption.*

If a state is not satisfied with a formulation in general, it may suggest a completely different formulation or an entirely new paragraph as an "option". Much of the work in informal negotiations is spent on trying to eliminate the options, so that just one text remains. Thus, options existed on sufferance. It is the survival of the fittest, with the options brandishing pistols at twenty paces.

When brackets are used, they denote words or entire phrases that had been questioned by one or several delegations. These delegations may disagree with the entire purpose of the words or phrase, or they may simply feel uncomfortable with the wording. Again, considerable time can be spent on debating whether or not the brackets could be "lifted". (This phrase may give rise to considerable confusion. At times, delegations may say that they want the brackets deleted; the chairperson would usually then have to ascertain whether it is only the brackets themselves that are to be deleted – in which case the words would remain in the text - or whether it is the words in the brackets that are to be deleted.)

Words in a footnote lived an even more tenuous existence (and this category does not appear very often in practice). Every now and then, a country or group of countries may strongly disagree with the view of the majority. For them, it is often important to have their views clearly reflected in the drafting, even in a footnote, so that when the matter comes up again, the reason for their disagreement would be clear, and in the meantime they may have succeeded in getting more allies. However, once words have been demoted to a footnote, it usually proves very difficult to get them back into the text.

* A further distinction can be made between words in an "operative paragraph" of a draft resolution, and words in a "preambular paragraph". The operative paragraphs are generally regarded as the most important part of a resolution, since they lay out policy or establish mandates. The preambular paragraphs in general give the context of the draft resolution: concern over certain developments (such as the increase in certain forms of crime), pleasure over certain other developments (such as meetings held, or decisions taken), and what key resolutions have previously been adopted on the subject. Now and then, a contentious issue may be shifted, with appropriate rewording, from the draft operative paragraphs into the preamble of the draft resolution, thus in effect giving it less political weight.

Drink lots of melange and forget about your social life. Vienna is a city well known for its great variety of excellent coffee. The coffee bars outside the meeting rooms at the Vienna International Centre serve quite a few of these varieties, but it seems to be melange that is the drink of choice for many participants. Filling oneself with caffeine proves to be a good tactic for a variety of reasons. First, it helps to keep the participants awake during the long sessions; at times, listening to delegations raise the same points, over and over again, can become mind-numbing. The participants must, nonetheless, stay on their toes. The chairperson may seek at various stages to push things along by moving on to the next paragraph in the negotiations, and asking if there are any comments. If no participant raises his or her country's nameplate, the paragraph may be gavelled, and the chairperson proceeds to the next point. Anyone who tries to reopen a gavelled paragraph could be subjected to considerable peer pressure.

But melange also had other functions. Coffee breaks are used for informal consultations and for lobbying. When a particularly difficult point arises, the chairperson might ask the key delegations to step outside and come back with an acceptable formulation. If the issue proves to be very vexatious, the chairperson might even declare a "15-minute coffee break" for the entire informal negotiations, and the time is used – often quite successfully - to lobby for support for whatever proposals are on the floor.

In general, the pace of the negotiations in Vienna can be deceptively slow. Sessions usually do not begin on time, and fifteen-minute coffee breaks may last half an hour or longer. As the French ambassador warned participants towards the end of one meeting in Vienna, "forget about your social life". Evenings tend to be free for most participants, but especially on the third and fourth day of one-week meetings, some informal discussions continue until late at night.*

*The Secretariat generally has to work not only the hours during which the participants are meeting formally or informally, but late into the night, checking and rechecking the texts and ensuring translation, editing and dissemination for the next morning.

What would be your very own 5 rules on negotiation tactics?

Create them and discuss with your classmates or colleagues if you have an opportunity.

Show/add comments