Just ten days after the UN’s International Conference on Financing for Development, and just in time for the endorsement of the new sustainable development agenda, a UN Committee has agreed on a set of principles to guide further sovereign debt restructuring processes. The new UN principles were inspired by the devastating bank bailouts in Greece, and by the vulture fund lawsuits that Argentina faced at US courts. They build on preparatory work done by an expert group convened by the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and, subject to approval by the UN General Assembly (UN GA) in early September, will be the first step towards a new multilateral debt restructuring framework that aims to prevent future debt crises, or at least manage them better.
Litmus test for the new development agenda
Debt crises undermine development and cause humanitarian catastrophe. Creating a better debt workout mechanism has been on the UN’s to do list since the first Financing for Development (FfD) Summit in 2002 in Monterrey (pushed mainly by G77 countries, the negotiating bloc of developing countries at the UN). Recently the Sustainable Development Goals also acknowledged the need for debt restructurings to prevent debt crises. However, the necessary institutions to restructure sovereign debts in a speedy, timely, fair and sustainable manner are still missing. The current process for managing debt crises remains a “bail-out” regime that facilitates and rewards reckless financial speculation, free-riding and predatory lending, by making such operations literally risk-free and allowing for usurious profit rates. The multi-€100 billion transfer of liabilities from the private to the public that this bailout regime implied faces massive critique, which is catalysing the reform processes.
1. The sovereign right to start a restructuring process
2. Good faith negotiations by debtor and creditor
3. Transparency of the process and related data
4. Impartiality of all institutions and actors involved
5. Equitable treatment of creditors
6. Sovereign immunity of states before foreign courts
7. Legitimacy of the institutions involved
8. Sustainability: speedy conclusion, and outcomes that promote growth and respect human rights
9. Majority restructurings: minorities that respect decisions approved by the majority.
Political setbacks caused delay
The original aim of the UN Committee to create a multilateral legal framework for debt restructuring could not be achieved in the short timeframe given. This was also due to the political blockade of a minority of countries in which the financial industry successfully lobbied the government, in particular the US and some EU Member States. The US government openly declared in the UN’s FfD negotiations that sovereign debt restructurings should follow the ideas of the International Capital Markets Association (ICMA), a financial industry lobby organisation that, according to its own description, “serves the needs of its members”.
The rejectionist front was far from solid, however. Towards the end of the process, Greece became the first EU Member State to participate in the Committee sessions. Norway and Switzerland did so from the beginning. The EU’s absence – in times when the need for a better debt restructuring framework is sorely felt by European citizens – faced strong criticism by European civil society, and by the European Parliament, which had called on EU governments to engage constructively in the UN Committee’s work. In the context of the Greek debt crises, more than 90,000 European citizens have so far signed the petition that called on the UN to create fair rules for debt workouts.
