Executive summary
CHAPTER 4 (b): UNIQUENESS OF THE ACP GROUP
Yüklə 0,88 Mb.
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- CHAPTER 4 (c) : CAUCUSING BETWEEN ACP REPRESENTATIVES IN OTHER CAPITAL CITIES AND AT CONFERENCES
- CHAPTER 4 (f): MUTUAL HELP BETWEEN NAOs AND RAOs
- CHAPTER 4 (g): DEPLOYING THE HELP OF PARLIAMENTARIANS
- CHAPTER 4 (h): INTRA-ACP TRADE NEGLIGIBLE
- CHAPTER 4 (k): TROPICAL PRODUCTS VALUE-ADDED Mention has been made above 81
- CHAPTER 4 (l): COMMUNICATIONS
- CHAPTER 4 (m): COMMITMENT BY ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS AND SUMMITS
- CHAPTER 5 (a): ACP GROUP RELATIONS WITH OTHER INTERNATIONAL BODIES AND OTHER COUNTRIES
- TABLE 15: ACP GROUP RELATIONS WITH EU NON-EU STATES / ORGANISATIONS / GROUPS
- CHAPTER 5 (b): PRIORITY TO BE GIVEN TO ACP GROUP AS A VEHICLE TO PROMOTE INTERESTS OF MEMBERS
- Other Organisations
- TABLE 16 : CHAIN OF COMMAND PER GEORGETOWN AGREEMENT
CHAPTER 4 (b): UNIQUENESS OF THE ACP GROUPThe first matter to be noted is the large number of organisations and groupings to which ACP Members belong: in Annex “M” the mass of overlapping international groups is shown, but not one of them has the benefits of:
and yet priority is not universally given by ACP Member States to the ACP Group as a vehicle for the protection of interests of Members and as a spokesman for the developing world; there is an underestimation of the value of this unique organisation. Some of those consulted in the course of this Study emphasised the economic weakness of most of the Members; but others underlined the unique position the ACP Group is in as a beneficiary of global actions: the Monterrey targets, the Millennium Development Goals and the Commission for Africa. Those latter persons who found strength in this unique representativity give weight to the recommendations for the initiatives to create ties that bind in the ACP Group. Member States cannot have it both ways: either there is to be solidarity and promotion of the ACP Group or it must be subsidiary to the others – and this cannot be the Heads of States’ intention. The preparatory paper for the Millennium Development Goals Summit in New York in September 2005 is a good place to make a joint ACP statement. CHAPTER 4 (c): CAUCUSING BETWEEN ACP REPRESENTATIVES IN OTHER CAPITAL CITIES AND AT CONFERENCES The in-between periods after Council of Ministers meetings represent a lull in Council activities outside Brussels. The greater majority of ACP Members have diplomatic representatives in New York, London, Paris, Addis Ababa, Dakar, Pretoria and Tokyo and yet no formal or informal meetings take place between the Heads of Mission of the ACP Group in these cities. To give form and continuity, let alone to ensure solidarity, to ACP decisions, activities and lobbying, it is essential that other outposts of ACP members take up the cudgels of the ACP – that is what the Georgetown Agreement requires and has been the directive of the Heads of State in declarations of S Domingo, Nadi and Maputo. This Study strongly recommends that it become routine for diplomatic representatives of ACP Members to meet on a regular basis in the above capitals and to be briefed by their governments on issues facing the ACP Group. (It was decided in December 2004 by the Council of Ministers that organs of the ACP could meet in other ACP countries, but at the expense of the State which hosts the meeting.) It is to be hoped that the ACP office in Geneva will give rise to a new spirit of togetherness for ACP States. The presence of the ACP Group representative to the WTO in Geneva represents an act of independence and solidarity of the ACP Group which points the way for other cohesive and practical activities outside of the EU cocoon. In all negotiations at international conferences and forums, the Georgetown Agreement requires a common position by the ACP Group, but it would appear that this does not occur as a matter of course. The Secretary General, who could make proposals (Article 24 (2) of the Georgetown Agreement), does not intervene to define or suggest a common position in relation to important conference decisions which will have an impact on ACP interests. At the 4th Ministerial Meeting held in Doha (Doha Round), however, a common position emerged much to the credit of the ACP Group. This was a great boost to the cohesion of the Group, as was the common position adopted in the Doha Round at Cancún. The decision that the President in Office address the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg was also a sign of the potential visibility of the ACP Group. Possibilities for a relevant common position abound – child trafficking, drugs, smuggling of persons are but a few that affect the ACP, and this Study recommends a conscious effort at adopting common positions and announcing them as those of the ACP Group. One example where lack of common lobbying led to a weakened position was the Conference on Biological Diversity which required a report from the World Intellectual Property Organisation on disclosure of sources of genetic material and Traditional Knowledge which elicited proposals and suggestions from the Africa Group, Belize and Ghana when a common approach would have protected the members in a more weighty fashion75 especially as the genetic material in ACP States is so interesting for pharmaceutical companies. CHAPTER 4 (d): SECTORAL MEETINGS The ACP Group has, through the Secretariat, taken initiatives to give concrete form to the cohesion of the Group by arranging Conferences with the ACP Ministers of Culture, and Trade and Science and Research in Cape Town in 2002 and further plans are afoot to repeat this experience with the Ministers of Education, Health and the Environment and this fits in well with the appeal made by Minister Manley of Jamaica at the formation of the ACP. It is all very well to hold sectoral meetings, but when there is little follow-up, the spirit of co-operation and the practical, poverty-alleviating results remain unachieved. This Study has recommended76 that the ACP Group co-ordinate cultural events like music festivals, recordings, TV documentaries and films - something the Agence Intergouvernementale de la Francophonie is urging - a study be launched into the formation of an Event Division in the Secretariat not just to underline solidarity, but as a possible source of revenue. A further recommendation made was the use of the proposed Forum to provide a EU-ACP Business Forum on the lines of that created between Mercosur and the EU77. CHAPTER 4 (e): UNDERUTILISATION OF THE EXPERTISE OF THE CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF ENTERPRISE AND THE TECHNICAL CENTRE FOR AGRICULTURE – ORGANS OF THE ACP GROUP Annex III of the Cotonou Agreement creates two organs for the ACP States, one for private sector development strategies (Centre for the Development of Enterprise - CDE) and the other to strengthen policy and institutional capacity development as well as information and communication management capacities of ACP agricultural and rural development organisations (Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Development - CTA). The organs clearly are created in a supportive capacity to the ACP policies and are joint EU-ACP institutions with members of both on the Board and an alternation between the EU and the ACP for the director generalship of each. They both fall under the supervision of the Committee of Ambassadors. There has been an underutilisation of these two organs of the ACP Group in the quest for greater unity in achieving the ACP Group’s goals. Both have programmes for the use of their budgets which are decided on by the Boards, but they seem to be diverging from the stated aims of Annex III, namely support for ACP policies. Certainly, the programmes and roles of both CDE and CTA are praiseworthy and successful, but too little is done on the side of the Committee of Ambassadors and the Boards to synchronise their programmes with the policies of the ACP Group. Repeatedly in this Study, reference is made to the Declarations of the Summits of Heads of State and Government whose directives and their implementation form the subject matter of this Study. These policy directives have to be the basis of the activities of the CDE and the CTA and are vaguely but not specifically followed by them. It is strongly recommended that these essential tools for two sectors of immense importance for ACP States, enterprise and agriculture, be brought closer to planning and policy of the ACP Group as seems to have been intended in the Cotonou Agreement. It is further recommended that in the planning of their budgets, the Committee of Ambassadors through its political committee, ensure that their programmes harmonise and synchronise with the ACP activities and concerns especially for solidarity of the Group, efficacy vis à vis the EU, promoting intra-ACP unity even in technical matters and agricultural research and marketing, supporting initiatives of the Secretariat in sectoral meetings and conferences such as that proposed in trade and investment and providing expertise in negotiation. CHAPTER 4 (f): MUTUAL HELP BETWEEN NAOs AND RAOs At this important stage of negotiations on the Economic Partnership Agreements at regional level, an occasion has been created for National and Regional Authorising Officers to help one another mutually. The collegial support and aid by experienced NAOs and RAOs to their colleagues is promoted as a means of helping the efficiency of the ACP Group and in the development of better understanding as has been recommended in Chapter 3 (b) and organised in workshops by the Secretariat. CHAPTER 4 (g): DEPLOYING THE HELP OF PARLIAMENTARIANS The Joint Parliamentary Assembly meets on a regular basis in member countries of the ACP and this is an opportunity for MEPs and MPs of ACP countries to examine the progress in the ACP Group and its relations with the EU. Sometimes, despite payment of expenses by the Secretariat, no Members of Parliament from various ACP countries attend and an official sometimes takes their place. In the light of the growing political input by the EU into the application of the Cotonou Partnership Agreement, it would be thought indispensable that ACP Governments ensure a hefty presence of their politicians at such a forum and this Study recommends strong lobbying for parliamentarians’ presence. Such a significant presence of politicians at the Joint Parliamentary Assembly will give credence to the political role the ACP States wish to play in the concert of nations as foreseen by several Summits of Heads of State and Government. Moreover, not all participants are briefed by their governments on the burning issues which it is trusted this Study will bring to the fore for debate in particular in the political lobbying of the EU and its Members, new or old. The creative role of parliamentarians was illustrated well at the April 2005 Joint Parliamentary Assembly meeting in Bamako, Mali. At the Assembly, ACP parliamentarians took issue with the European parliamentarians on the question of budgetisation leading to the formation of a study group to examine the implications and whether the ACP Group would be worse off – this is a positive political development. The decision to create a Parliamentary Assembly (Article 5 of the Georgetown Agreement) is a step towards bringing political decision-making further into the body of the ACP Group as the Partnership Agreement envisages. CHAPTER 4 (h): INTRA-ACP TRADE NEGLIGIBLE Complementary trade is a unifier as the EU wishes to demonstrate in the EPAs with the EU being a model. Two elements militate against this unifying force: Trade between members of the ACP Group is negligible, and even in Africa, inter-African trade only accounts for 6% of GDP. As far as the outposts of the Caribbean and the Pacific are concerned, trade Pacific-Caribbean-Africa can be said to be non-existent. Secondly, as mentioned in several analyses, the ACP States are, primarily, in their regions, producers of the same basket of commodities. On a regional level, the negotiation of EPAs will possibly force greater collaboration between members, resulting in prioritisation of joint interests and possibly joint marketing efforts. However, even where there are ACP customs unions, the relations do not necessarily lead to greater liberalisation or joint projects for marketing outside the region. In discussions in several countries leading up to this Study, with representatives of ACP States belonging to customs unions, there is an admission that customs regimes are often more honoured in the breach than in the respect: the local EC Delegates are also perplexed by the vagaries of the application of such agreements which sometimes follow the whims of governments and customs officials and lead to suspicions of malpractices. It is nevertheless recommended that trade as an ACP unifier be promoted and, as proposed earlier, the ACP Secretariat monitor how customs unions in the regions are functioning in order to lend weight to the process and to assist the increase of intra-ACP commerce and investment as declared policy of the Summits of Heads of State and Government. Table 14 shows what a mountain there is to climb – the major destination of exports for Africa is still the EU. There is however light at the end of this tunnel. One ACP State has become the largest provider of Direct Foreign Investment in ACP countries in Africa with €1,4 billion invested last year, and, if this pattern continues, trade will invariably follow78 TABLE 14: 
Adapted from: WTO statistics. www.wto.org CHAPTER 4 (i): INTRA-ACP TOURISM AS A UNIFIER In one area, however, there is a large community of interests viz. tourism, which is recognised as a theme in Summits and as an important generator of wealth and a unifying factor – a joint tourism promotion agency exists in Southern Africa, for instance – and the Cotonou Agreement specifically targets tourism in Art 24. However, air transport between the three geographic areas of the ACP is also non-existent. That air transport between African States is deficient, led to a conference of Ministers responsible for Air Transport at Sun City on 17-18 May 2005. The theme was sustainable development promoted by efficient and affordable air travel in Africa in line with the Yamoussoukro Decision on opening of the skies in Africa79. The ACP Group would have been well advised to attend the meeting to also include the Pacific and Caribbean Members as observers. Unfortunately, once again, the Members of the ACP present failed to mention or promote the ACP as a vehicle to promote a declared element of ACP Group policy. Furthermore, air transport between countries in Africa is prohibitively expensive leading to passengers flying to Europe to reach another African state! Moreover, immigration procedures are not user-friendly and are costly for ACP State citizens: the Georgetown Agreement obliges Member to promote closer economic relations (Article 2 (e)) and this is hampered by the difficult cross-border movement of citizens and the bureaucracy at airports and ports which affects both trade and tourism. This Study recommends that these matters receive attention at the intended Transport Ministers Conference planned by the Secretariat80. CHAPTER 4 (j): TROPICS AS A UNIFIER The fact that all but two of the ACP members are tropical countries opens a door to combined efforts in Tourism promotion which could lead to collaboration at the level of the tropics. In the recommendations below, the tropical nature of the ACP Group as a cohesive glue is applied in the possible inclusion of the word “tropical” as an identifier in the visibility in the name of the ACP Group. This identifier is a promotional tool for cruise liners and makes possible the linking across oceans of the Caribbean and Africa, and, to a lesser degree, between the Pacific and Africa and it is recommended that cruise line representatives be included in the meeting of Transport Ministers the Secretariat is planning. CHAPTER 4 (k): TROPICAL PRODUCTS VALUE-ADDED Mention has been made above81 of the infinitesimal encouragement of trade and help to rural development in the National Indicative Programmes for the EDF which means that combined efforts for the entry of ACP Group value-added tropical fruits and confectionaries into developed countries’ markets needs a hefty impetus. There has already been a meeting of Ministers of Science and Research and the former Secretary General of the ACP visited research facilities in Fiji during the Nadi Summit, but the combining of forces for the production of tropical foodstuffs (yams, cassava, manioc, nerica rice, dry and glacé fruit like bananas and pineapple, the production of juices like litchee and granadilla) and the improvement in quality of coffee, cocoa and tea has not reached practical results or application. The export of kava from the Pacific is another product mentioned during the preparation of this Study. With the help of the FAO which has an office in Brussels, and the assistance of the CTA, this Study recommends that steps be taken to combine with scientific bodies in achieving positive trading, commercialisation and investment results for the ACP Group countries. The use by Pacific Islands of experts to prove that kava is not harmful is an innovation to be supported. The combined efforts to make common cause in Food Agriculture and Natural Resources with the CTA in SADC countries is an example of productive co-operation and the presence of tropical fruit experts from one of the Member countries’ institutes has been proffered. CHAPTER 4 (l): COMMUNICATIONS That landline telephone and ICT connections between ACP Countries should still pass through third countries (and in the case of Africa, sometimes through Europe and through the USA in the case of the Caribbean) is antipathetic to the collaboration between ACP States. Telecommunications / Transport Ministers also need to assemble to iron out direct ICT links. Much can be learnt fro the CTA ICT initiative which uses electronic means to distribute information and the development of internet access. CHAPTER 4 (m): COMMITMENT BY ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS AND SUMMITS A full quota of Heads never attends heads of State and Government Summits: less than half except at the inaugural Summit. This absence reflects badly on the political desire to make things work and needs attention both from the Secretary General who needs to prepare and lobby well before the time and the Foreign Ministers of the Members. The same applies to Council of Ministers’ meetings. Few resources beyond those already at the disposal of the Secretariat and the individual ACP States need to be deployed to get to a realistic cohesion, solidarity and collaboration between ACP States such as has been demanded by the Heads of State and Government since the beginning of the ACP. Political will can not only be rhetorical - it is recommended that it be supported by real action, which, as can be seen from the above is right at hand. Even the growth in trade and joint promotion of tourism is not beyond reach. Chances should not be let slip like the opportunity to make a unified voice heard at the Air Ministers’ meeting or on the disclosure of intellectual property rights and origins of genetic material82 which significantly involve tropical countries or any other Conventions. It is recommended that a declared common position be adopted for the Millennium Development Goals Summit in September 2005. It is urgent that this occasion be exploited to affirm the visibility and independence of the ACP Group. A combined, unified approach will depend on feedback from the power of the tentacular stretch of ACP countries throughout the world and at international bodies, conferences and organisations and the ACP office in Geneva. This links to Chapter 5 where this Study makes proposals concerning visibility and relations with other countries and bodies. Intra-ACP solidarity presupposes joint capacity in the face of other international players. The overt political nature of the ACP Group should allow it to play a mature role in international politics. It need no longer be shy to censure members who do not abide by the declared principles of the respect of human rights and transparency. This applies as well to matters such as human trafficking, coups, elections and corruption. The ACP Group has a press office and it is recommended it pronounce on intra-ACP actions and concerns, otherwise the political credibility of the ACP Group becomes suspect. The ACP Group’s long history has brought it to the crossroads also in the way in which it deals with activities of its members. Positive signs such as the observer missions to Togo and to Guinea and the mission to Sudan are steps in that direction: greater boldness must become the order of the day. -o0o-
CHAPTER 5: FORGING RELATIONS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES AND ORGANISATIONS CHAPTER 5 (a): ACP GROUP RELATIONS WITH OTHER INTERNATIONAL BODIES AND OTHER COUNTRIES An essential directive from the Heads of States and Government with a view to a post-Cotonou future, demands that the ACP Group ”form alliances and strengthen relations with other organisations, countries and groups.” This goes to the visibility of the ACP Group and is closely tied to the intra-ACP actions together. Visibility, in turn, depends on credibility, and this can only be achieved if the ACP Group demonstrates leadership, cohesion and direction. The ACP Group has a Press Office. By its very nature a Press Office is able to move proactively in support of the organisation and react swiftly and firmly to events. The freedom of action of a Press Office in no ways impinges on the sovereignty of the Member States and does not create obligations for them. Not to be in a position to make pronouncements on developments affecting the Member States, is a severe limitation on credibility. The length of time the ACP Group took to react to the Togo events does no credit to the organisation. Similarly, the silence of the Group after the ACP election-monitoring group for Togo means that a significant initiative which involved Members from other regions than Africa went by unnoticed. The table below depicts the present state of relations with other organisations, bodies and groups: as can be seen, the result is meagre: TABLE 15: ACP GROUP RELATIONS WITH EU & NON-EU STATES / ORGANISATIONS / GROUPS
Adapted from: Bradley, A (See Bibliography for full reference); and ACP Decisions 2004 The question which the Heads of State and Government pose with this demand is: “Is there life after the Cotonou Partnership Agreement?” Does the ACP have an existence outside its derivative nature from the EU? From what has been stated above in the Chapters on its history, its actions in the New World Order and in its moves for solidarity, the ACP Group is a body already having a role in the concert of nations apart from the co-ordination of trade and development from the EU. CHAPTER 5 (b): PRIORITY TO BE GIVEN TO ACP GROUP AS A VEHICLE TO PROMOTE INTERESTS OF MEMBERS It is true that the ACP is one of a myriad of organisations in the world which have overlapping functions with the ACP. But there is undoubtedly a niche for the ACP Group which is proven by its resilience, its size, its guaranteed position vis à vis the EU and by the dynamism the Heads of State and Government wish to imbue it with83. Despite what the Heads of State and Government declare, Member States of the ACP Group seem little concerned with promoting the Group and using it as a strong vehicle to protect interests. For instance, in the ECOWAS 2004 Annual Report, the ACP Group is mentioned only in regard to the EPA negotiations – NEPAD on the other hand is constantly referred to84. To claim primacy in the crowd of organisations, the ACP needs to take some simple steps to affirm its position:
As far as groupings like NAM, Group of 90 etc. are concerned, there can be no talk of alliances – the ACP members already belong to these informal groupings – what is necessary here is for, as the Georgetown Agreement states, the ACP to “act as a coherent political force in international bodies and … ensure that due regard is accorded its specific interests.” This means that meetings together with outside members of these types of groupings the ACP must hang together and lobby together as recommended earlier and as occurred in Cancún. The ACP Group has enjoyed observer status with UN since 1981 and has memoranda of understanding with Francophonie, the Commonwealth, WHO, UNCTAD, WIPO, UNDP, the WTO and others as in Table 15. This represents a return from the S. Domingo Declaration which spelled out the areas the Heads of State and Government wanted a presence. These included regional organisations in N Africa, Middle East, Asia and North and Latin America. Action in this respect appears to have been placed on the back-burner and this Study recommends that this once again be given priority. There are even more important bodies where it is recommended the ACP Group be present – observer status and the active participation of the permanent representative of the country acting as President of the Council of Ministers must be considered for ILO, World Meteorological Office, FAO in Rome and with its representative in Brussels, and also the African Union (so as to bring the Caribbean and the Pacific into AU halls of decision-making - a major boon the ACP can give the AU). A short exegesis on the relationship with the WIPO is apposite at this point: as stated in Chapter 4, the ACP Group missed a trick by not making comment in its own right on the access to genetic resources and disclosure requirements. This is a unique area where the interests of the Members could be protected by the numerical superiority of the ACP Group in an area of future exploitation in terms of TRIPS (Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights). The tropical ACP Members are endowed with plant and genetic material together with Traditional Knowledge of the use of these materials of vast interest to, inter alia pharmaceutical companies, who, at present are not required to divulge the source of their “discoveries”. As a result, Members are losing out on rich royalties which should potentially be provided for the use of the Traditional Knowledge as well as the plant material. Both the USA and the EU seem to be opposed to the compulsory disclosure and, unless the ACP takes care, this opportunity for greater income for the ACP Group itself (because the plant material is often not confined to frontiers of one country and because the ACP Group can act as conduit and agent for reward) as well as for the individual countries may be missed. The fact that there is now an ACP office in Geneva will make it easier for the delegate to keep him/herself up to date on the developments in this extremely important patent right especially as a Memorandum of Understanding has been finalised. Other States: It is commonly accepted amongst those interviewed, the ACP is a virtual unknown outside of the confines of the EU context. In the preparation of this Study, it was observed how little promotion of the ACP Group takes place in publications, the media and education. The public of ACP Group Sates and the legislative assemblies rarely receive information or promotional material. Furthermore, some non-ACP governments are known to have avoided it or dismissed it as an instrument or creature of the EU and therefore not having an independent existence able to act outside the confines of the EU. This misconception can only be allayed by direct and persistent pursuance of relations with the countries most likely to have common interests and those who seek consistent development patterns in the developing world. Already in the Group of 90 at the Cancùn common cause was made with some of those members of the former group. The previous Secretary General also made initial contacts with the USA, Canada and Japan amongst the non-EU industrialised countries. Countries which may have common interests with whom relations can be entered for joint positioning in international forums could include India and Brazil, with whom South Africa, an ACP Member, could be joined as the three have already formed alliances (IBSA). Their closeness to developing countries makes their co-operation a natural phase in relations and their relative economic strength can be used as a springboard to development in other countries. The previous Secretary General had made initial approaches to the USA, Japan and Canada, and, as there is a natural extension to New Zealand, Australia and Russia all as providers of development aid, these countries must be included in the round of seminars for enhanced trade and investment recommended in line with the EU-Mercosur business forum example. These and other developed countries are very aware of the dangers inherent in a steep international Gini coefficient which affects the world’s social stability, the likelihood of terrorism growing from poverty, and the threat to peace both regionally and globally. Closer relations with the ACP which houses so many LDC’s can engender greater urgency in addressing the threat caused by poverty to their own interests85. Regional Organisations: The S Domingo Declaration spells out the directives for co-operation with regional organisations and these are enumerated: N Africa, M East, Asia, North & Latin America, which would entail memoranda of understanding with ASEAN, APEC, MERCOSUR, FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas), the Arab League to name but a few. There is an infinity of options in the expansion of the relations of the ACP Group outside the EU. This has been urged times without number on the Secretary General and the Secretariat – the leadership of the ACP Group needs to take the bit between the teeth and run with this directive. The recommendations below are merely indicative. In this Chapter, the high visibility demanded the Heads of State and Government have demanded is treated as a task for the Secretary General, but without the Members’ active participation and awareness of their role in placing the ACP Group at the forefront in their own relations through the Council of Ministers and the Committee of Ambassadors, the ACP Group will not be able to protect their interests as a cohesive player in the concert of nations. The element left for last, namely the improvements to the structures of the institution of the ACP headquarters implying changes to the Georgetown Agreement, creates the indispensable platform and underpinning of all that has gone before in this Study. It is entered as the last area for discussion and analysis because the positive results enumerated above that can be brought about need elucidating before the mechanisms can be identified to effectuate the processes to achieve the desired results. -o0o- CHAPTER 6 INSTITUTIONS AND STRUCTURES OF THE ACP GROUP AND THE GEORGETOWN AGREEMENT CHAPTER 6: INTRODUCTION The founding document of the ACP Group is the Georgetown Agreement which has been through revisions of 1992 and 2003. The policy making organ of the ACP Group is the Summit of Heads of State and of Government whose operative instructions go to the Council of Ministers who operate through a Bureau consisting of the six regions and the outgoing, present and incoming President of Council, while the day-to-day business of the ACP Group falls to the Committee of Ambassadors. Alongside this the Secretary General manages the Secretariat and is “vested with Executive powers.” A summary of the roles and function of the levels of authority in the ACP Group appears in Table 17: TABLE 16 : CHAIN OF COMMAND PER GEORGETOWN AGREEMENT Yüklə 0,88 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|