2. Governing Bodies

This category reviews the transparency of the governing bodies of the IFIs, such as the Board of Governors and the Board of Directors. These bodies are the ultimate decision-making authorities within the governance structure of the various institutions. They are tasked with determining the purpose and direction of their respective institutions and authorizing all relevant investments and expenditures. These bodies are made up of individuals that are appointed or elected by one or more of the institution’s members/governments who act as representatives of the country/countries that put them in place.

Recommended transparency standards: Citizens should have access to detailed information about how they are being represented in the governing bodies of the IFIs. The activities of these bodies should be a matter of public record.

Overview

There are many similarities in the procedures used by IFIs to make decisions. They have founding charters, by-laws and rules that establish their missions, structures and procedures. They rely on boards of governors, executive directors and key management committees. This section deals with these basics of organization and the mechanics of decision-making. It examines whether IFIs meet standards common to national deliberative bodies: such as advance notice to the public, open meetings, release of voting records and minutes and other basics of transparent governance. In general, IFIs perform poorly in these areas. The protection of upper-level confidentially appears to be a common IFI priority. Very few improvements have been seen in recent years, but there are signs of improvement as a few institutions reveal more about coming agendas and two- the Inter-American Development Bank and the Asian Development Bank- have begun disclosing minutes. One advance has been the publication of long-range board work plans and meeting agendas. These allow the public to know what subjects will be addressed in the coming months, although it is very rare for IFIs to disclose the documents that the staff lays before the decision-makers. The work plans, when released, spell out the larger picture of subjects to be addressed. The World Bank, for example, discloses a biannual Executive Directors’ Work Program Overview, a long-range planning document. Useful for short-range planning are the agendas of upcoming meetings. Every month, the World Bank releases a Board Calendar detailing topics for the upcoming meetings. The IMF discloses a provisional agenda for its development committee and board work program, but not a monthly agenda. The EBRD posts a monthly board schedule on upcoming strategies, policies and projects. Leading the pack on this score, the IDB issues annual and quarterly work programs for the Board of Executive Directors and subcommittees, while also providing advance agendas for board meetings. When meeting time arrives, however, the doors are closed at all the institutions, without exception. At the annual meetings of governors, for which most IFIs issue basic agendas, formal statements are sometimes made by member countries. These prepared statements by governors are disclosed (ADB, AfDB, EBRD, IDB, WB, IFC, MIGA and the IMF). The annual meetings also may conclude with summations in press conferences, communiqués and press releases. But much of the real business occurs at more frequent business meetings among the permanent representatives to the IFIs, such as the 24 executive directors of the World Bank. Their meetings are closed and directors rarely release statements made at the meeting. Information about the outcome of such executive board meetings, which occur regularly, is disseminated in a variety of forms. Most commonly the institutions use press releases and sometimes through the other kinds of summary documents designed for public consumption. These documents, however, rarely provide a glimpse of how management presented the issues or answered questions, what different board members said, or how they voted. Minutes of board meetings are rarely disclosed. Under its new 2003 disclosure policy, the IDB releases minutes within 60 days of their approval, but reserves the right to delete sensitive information. The Asian Development Bank also discloses minutes from its meetings, but only after the new disclosure policy took affect in September 2005. In addition, the ADB is the ONLY bank that discloses summaries of meetings, although they are often prepared by most IFIs, sometimes with considerable detail. The same closed-door, limited disclosure policies apply to subcommittees of the boards, many of which meet more often and make important operational and policy decisions. In fact, even finding out about the existence of these committees can be difficult. Finding out how to get in touch with individual executive directors can prove problematical. Only after its new disclosure policy took affect in September 2005 did the Asian Development Bank begin to provide the names of individuals on the Board of Executive directors and subcomittee members AND their contact information. Overall, access to information about the governing bodies is extremely limited. The most promising change in recent years has been the disclosure of more work programs and agendas. But all meetings remain closed. Post-meeting materials vary by topic and are tightly controlled. By declining to provide minutes or summaries, the institutions shield their officials and their decision-making bodies from public scrutiny.