Law Commons^™

Exiting The Disaster, Evading The Responsibility? Wadi Al-Qamar -- The Moon Valley, Suzan Nada

Perspectives

This essay explores a case that delivered no results for the complainants, where harm was not prevented, and where stakeholders who filed the complaint were not compensated. Investigated by the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO) of the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the Wadi al-Qamar case illustrates some of the limitations of accountability mechanisms in limiting the harms caused directly or indirectly by projects in which the International Financial Institutions (IFIs) invest.

Ending 30 Years Of Imf Exceptionalism: A Call For An Accountability Mechanism At The International Monetary Fund, Luiz Vieria

Perspectives

This year marks the 30^th anniversary of the World Bank’s Inspection Panel (WBIP or Panel), created as the result of grass-roots and international pressure on the Bank to address the well-documented negative impacts on marginalised communities of the Bank-financed Narmada dam and similar projects.

The establishment of the world’s first independent accountability mechanism (IAM) at the World Bank led to the creation of similar mechanisms at nearly all international financial institutions (IFIs), with the IMF an important exception. The establishment of the WBIP and other IAMs was a step-change in accountability, as previously IFIs were only accountable to shareholders …

Unacceptable Means: The Inspection Panel Actions On World Bank Forcible Resettlement, Lori Udall

Perspectives

This essay reviews the World Bank’s Inspection Panel’s work on cases involving involuntary resettlement. Since its Inception, the Panel has received 89 requests involving resettlement (over half of all cases) and has investigated 32. It traces Panel cases, lessons learned, and advisory reports on resettlement and livelihood restoration. Despite the growing evidence through the years of resettlement failures, the World Bank continues to violate its own safeguard policies and repeat the same omissions and mistakes in projects. The essay concludes with recommendations for empowering the Inspection Panel and for the Bank to move towards bottom-up community development that better addresses …

The River Of Accountability Mechanisms: Then And Now, Suresh Nanwani

Perspectives

In 1993, the river of international accountability mechanisms (IAMs) commenced from its source – the World Bank Inspection Panel (The Panel). In its journey the river was fed by the tributaries of similar accountability mechanisms from other development institutions, including four regional development banks – the Inter-American Development Bank in 1994, the Asian Development Bank in 1995, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development in 2003, and the African Development Bank in 2006. It also welcomed other entities – bilateral institutions like Japan Bank for International Cooperation (2003) and Proparco (2018), United Nations Development Program (2014) and other organizations like …

Thirty Years Of Accountability In International Development: Insights From The General Counsel Of The World Bank Group, Christopher H. Stephens

Perspectives

The creation of the World Bank’s Inspection Panel in 1993 was a groundbreaking moment in international development. The first accountability mechanism of its kind, it established a precedent for accountability in development that has been followed by multiple development banks and international financial institutions over the last decades. Today, the credibility of international financial institutions rests significantly on the mechanisms that they put in place to check their own behavior and the avenues they offer for affected communities and individuals to raise questions of harm related to the projects financed by these institutions. This essay is a reflection on the …

Legal Risk And Accountability In Development Finance: Lessons From Jam V. International Finance Corporation, Michelle Harrison, Shannon Marcoux

Perspectives

In a landmark decision in 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Jam v. International Finance Corporation that international organizations like the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the private lending arm of the World Bank Group, can be sued in U.S. courts, ending the “absolute immunity” from suit that they had long claimed. The Jam lawsuit arose out of IFC’s gross mishandling of the Tata Mundra coal-fired power plant project in Gujarat, India, which has destroyed the livelihoods, environment, and way of life of local communities living in its shadow. The lawsuit, and especially the clash between IFC’s sweeping assertions of …

Imf Human Rights Accountability: A Pragmatic Way To Break The Deadlock, Aldo Caliari

Perspectives

In the three decades since the 1993 establishment of the World Bank Inspection Panel, almost all development finance institutions (DFIs) have established analogous panels, ombudsperson offices or other independent accountability mechanisms (IAMs) to allow people who believe they have been harmed by the DFI’s activities to directly trigger processes of fact-finding, dispute resolution, and, if applicable, redress. The primary exception has been the International Monetary Fund.

World Bank's Roadmap And The Inspection Panel's Human Rights Responsibilities, Juan Pablo Bohoslavsky, C.P. Chandrasekhar

Perspectives

The World Bank has been under pressure to devise a process for “evolving” its mission, operations, and resources, acknowledging that decades of engagement with low- and middle-income countries has resulted, paradoxically and contrary to its official mission, in a “crisis of development.” The Bank bluntly notes in the opening to its paper “Evolving the World Bank Group’s Mission, Operations, and Resources: A Roadmap,” issued in December 2022, “after decades of progress, growth and poverty reduction have stalled.” Indeed, this “crisis of development” threatens to unleash political instability around the world.