Conceptual confusions in debating the role of NGOs for the democratic legitimacy of international law

Abstract

This article revisits the debate on the contribution of NGOs to the democratic legitimacy of international law. While the primary focus of this debate seems to be on the question of whether or not NGOs are a justifiable source for the democratic legitimacy of international law, there is little consensus on the meaning, interpretation, and scope of democratic legitimacy. This is troublesome as their different—often—implicit—interpretations of democratic legitimacy influence the ways scholars validate NGOs. In this article I offer a threefold classification of the conceptions of democratic legitimacy that seem to underlie the debate: universalistic versus particularistic approaches, institutionalist versus non-institutionalist approaches, and uniform versus multiform approaches. The classification of these different approaches aims to invite scholars to first engage in the fundamental debate on how democratic legitimacy should be theorised in the context of international law in order to address each other’s arguments at the same conceptual level.