The debate on whether international organizations such as WTO and OECD promote democracy or hinder it has been on going for quite some time now. There are those w believe that the institutions do promote democracy and those who believe that the institutions actually hinder it (Rodrik, 2011, p. 5). Those who view them as supporting democracy applaud them for committing both time and resources on democratic causes. Some, however, do not believe the organizations promote democracy. Some critics opine that they hinder democracy as opposed to promoting it. It has been pointed out that some of their practices do not take into account democratic principles hence, a democratic deficit.

International organizations like WTO and OECD seek to promote not only trade but also human rights. Respecting of human rights is a key tenet of democracy. WTO for instance requires member countries to provide certain economic and procedural rights to their citizens. These include the right to property, right to comment on trade policies, as well as the right for the citizens of member countries to appeal on administrative rulings that touch on trade (Shaffer, 2001, p.4). WTO does not simply request the member countries to grant these rights, rather it demands that member countries entrench these laws into their constitution and ensure they are enforced. In complying with these requirements, most countries have had to come up with new laws and train their workforce on law enforcement (Michael, 2012. P. 44). By so doing, WTO has expanded the democratic space within member countries and played a key role in ensuring that the rights of citizens in member countries are protected. By enforcing these requirements, the WTO considerably alters the balance of power between governments and their citizens.

Democracy advocates for equal rights for all citizens regardless of their status in society. WTO on its part promotes this by ensuring that the regulations it sets are applied for both the domestic and the foreign markets. The organization has a dispute resolution mechanism which is used to settle disputes in case policies of an individual country are challenged by players in that market. By so doing the organization promotes, the right of the citizens to participate in setting up trade policies in their countries as well as have their opinion on various other issues heard. This promotes democracy.

A good example of how international organizations like WTO and OECD promote democracy is China. In line with WTO’s requirements that member countries come up with transparent ways of enforcing economic rights, China has come up with new rules geared towards protecting intellectual property rights (Chow 2003, p. 106). These include the rights of an individual to patent, trademarks, product designs and so on. By so doing the Chinese government not only encourages innovation and investment, but it also protects rights of individuals; a major pillar in democracy. Previously the only avenue disgruntled Chinese traders had was to complain to the authorities. Considering that china had a poor reputation for protecting intellectual rights, many citizens felt left out. The presence of WTO now provides the citizens and traders in countries such as China an alternative mechanism through which trade related disputes can be solved (Michael, 2012. P. 39). This has not only increased the avenues via which one can acquire justice, but it has also increased the democratic space in countries such as China. The role organizations such as WTO and OECD play in widening the democratic space in member countries is an important one considering the fact that even other member countries with an interest in China can ask for detailed information on how the country has complied with WTO requirements on protection of individual property rights.

The dispute resolution mechanisms provided by international organizations such as WTO and OECD has served to empower citizens with added rights under international law (Santiso 2001, p.7). Using these dispute resolution mechanisms, farmers and traders in developing and third world countries, are challenging the subsidiaries given to farmers in developing world. Their defense is that such subsidiaries make it difficult for their produce to compete favorably in the developed world. Brazil for instance has successfully challenged subsidies given to cotton farmers in the United States at the WTO resolution board.

Decisions made by international organizations such as WTO and OECD go a long way in shaping both democratic space and trade practices in member countries. For instance, the decision by the WTO dispute resolution board on cotton subsidies has benefited other cotton exporting countries such as Chad and Egypt. Such rulings inspire citizens in other countries to be vocal about trade and other injustices going on in their country. Hence, international organizations promote democracy. Giving a platform for citizens and member countries to challenge policies that disadvantage them ensures that more people enjoy their rights and enables more people improve their quality of life.

International organizations such as WTO and OECD give member countries the right to restrict imports on specific goods to protect vulnerable industries. In case of disagreements arising from such a move, the aggrieved individual has a right to appeal under the regulation set by WTO. In addition to this member states are required to make public their standards and other technical regulations and allow interested parties and members of public to make comments on them (Michael, 2012. P. 43). The state then takes into account the issues raised and sees what can be included into the standards and regulations set. Hence, rules by international organizations such as WTO have served to make member countries more accountable to their citizens. This has allowed citizens have more influence on policies made in their countries and as widened the democratic space in those countries.

Openness and transparency are key pillars of democracy. Fortunately they are also key pillars of international organizations such as OECD. OECD places a lot of emphasis on accountability and trust amongst its member partners (Jackson, 2013, p.4). This, however, cannot be achieved without openness and transparency. By insisting that member states be transparent in their operations with both citizens and other states, it ensures fair treatment for all. The organization believes that openness is key to achieving open markets. Democracy also seeks to have a fair playground for all. Hence by promoting openness and transparency among its member countries, OECD promotes democracy in them.

International organizations such as OECD have been at the forefront of protecting freedom to information and fundamental basic rights. These are key ingredients of democracy. OECD for instance has laid down procedures to ensure that freedom of expression and personal data are protected in all member countries (OECD, 2003, p. 6). Through its Open and Innovative government project, OECD ensures that governments in member countries are transparent, accessible and respond to the demands of their citizens. To achieve this goal, OECD has developed a range of instruments that are designed to help member governments attain high levels of transparency. These include instruments that help entrench transparency in public procurement, budgeting, conflict management and other related procedures. More to this OECD has measures to ensure that countries it has interactions with comply with its transparency requirements. For instance, aid advanced to countries as to be used for the intended purpose, and not diverted to other unrelated causes.

Not everyone seems to think that international organizations promote democracy. On the contrary, there are others who feel that international organizations actually hinder democracy as opposed to promoting it (Petersmann, 2005, p.31). WTO for instance has been accused of trying to have influence way beyond trade related aspects which is its core mandate. This has been interpreted by critics as interference with internal democratic processes of member countries. Protesters have on several occasions attended WTO meetings in Hong Kong and other parts of the world protesting unfair and trade practices by the international organization. The organization has on several occasions been accused of failing to live by the same democratic ideals it professes. Critics of international organizations such as WTO and OECD point out that, such organizations enhance the profitability of multinational companies and developed nations at the expense of developing and third world countries. This goes against democracy which advocates for equal rights for all regardless of the economic status.

It is not in all cases that WTO and OECD rules and regulations enhance human rights and fairness as is expected in a democracy. For instance, WTO allows developed nations to give subsidies to its citizens (Sinclair 2000, p.7). This in turn undermines the ability of third world countries and traders to compete effectively in the global market. Making traders in the developing world economically vulnerable makes it more difficult for them to agitate for democratic reforms in their own countries. So far, WTO has never come up with a working group to find out how exactly their rules affect other countries or whether they stifle democracy.

Whereas international organizations place much emphasis on promotion of democracy, critics accuse it of tolerating many elements that stifle democracy as opposed to promoting it. It has been accused of tolerating governments that overly dominate the parliament, not placing enough emphasis on the freedom of the media, and even condoning restriction of free speech among member countries (Barfield, 2001, p.4). This has led some critics to conclude that international organizations like WTO and OECD hinder democracy as opposed to promoting it. WTO, on the other hand, has been accused of enabling large organizations benefit from tax breaks while at the same time lowering labor and environmental standards. It has also been claimed that international trade agreements reached with the help of bodies such as WTO and OECD help large corporations run away from their democratic accountability.

Instead of coming up with rules that help regulate trade for the benefit of society, international organizations have resulted to regulating democratic governments of sovereign states preventing them from checking the excesses of corporations. For instance, WTO, forced USA to relax its environmental standards to allow the importation of less clean gasoline. It also forced Japan to lower its quality standards on pesticides. This not only endangers the lives of the citizens, but it also hinders democracy.

Despite the fact that international organizations have a few elements that go against their ideal of promoting democracy; they do a good job of promoting it. This is especially felt in third world countries and autocratic countries. Generally speaking, international organizations such as WTO and OECD promote democracy.

CLICK BUTTON TO ORDER NOW