Norway may lose control over Nobel peace prize
Article in Swedish
The Nobel prize consists of a central foundation that manage the money and several committees that decide on who's to win the prize. The committees has so far been operating independently from the foundation managing the money. But according to Swedish law, the foundation leaders would be forced to personally replace any money given outside the will of the testament.
In the last 10 years there has been a growing tendency in peace prize committee to give the prize to people who may have done something beneficial for mankind, but fail to uphold all the criteria in the testament. The criticism is nicely summarised by Michael Nobel who is the nephew of Alfred Nobel (article in Norwegian, here)
Protests against this has forced Länsstyrelsen in Stockholm who are responsible for overseeing the foundation to conduct a review of the Nobel foundation. So far they have stated that the board members of the foundation are personally responsible for carrying out the will of the testament but not directly stated against previous selections made by the committees. We may however end up with a situation where the foundation either has to approve the committee selection or run the risk of being personally liable for the money given to a peace prize winner.
Direct translation from the will where I have bolded sections that effect the peace prize:
The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way: the capital, invested in safe securities by my executors, shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics; one part to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work in an ideal direction; and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses. The prizes for physics and chemistry shall be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Sciences; that for physiological or medical work by the Caroline Institute in Stockholm; that for literature by the Academy in Stockholm, and that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be elected by the Norwegian Storting. It is my express wish that in awarding the prizes no consideration whatever shall be given to the nationality of the candidates, but that the most worthy shall receive the prize, whether he be a Scandinavian or not.
So according to the will the criterias are: Delivering benefit to mankind AND encouraging national collaboration AND work encouraging disarnament AND promoting peace congresses (this is considered to be diplomatic work as peace congresses are outdated due to organizations such as the UN).
The Norwegian committee is obviously going to keep selecting the winner. But the Swedish government would be forced to fine the foundation for giving it out to the candidates who do not follow all the criteria set up the testament.
For background we can also look at the last 20 decisions as they show that in the last 20 years it has been a clear movement from "international peace" to "do good things" in the committee decisions.
2011
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee och Tawakkol Karman.
Ellen and Leymah has actively been working against civil war for a long time while Tawakkol is opposing oppression in Jemen. None of them has been promoting international fraternity.
2010
Liu Xiaobo
Human right activist, no peace work
2009
Barack Obama, USA:s president.
Has been working more actively for international unity than his predecessor but got the price before any military reductions had been made or decided.
2008
Martti Ahtisaari,former president Finland.
Has been working a long time for peace and brokered the peace treaty in Aceh.
2007
Al Gore and the international climate panel of the UN
Justified by the committee as that climate change could cause war. But to be honest, they haven't actually successfully done anything regarding fraternity or disarmament.
2006
Muhammed Yunus and Grameen Bank, Bangladesh
Brilliant idea with micro loans to poor people. But little to do with peace
2005 IAEA and former chief Muhammed el-Baradei.
International collaboration to promote disarmament of nuclear weapons.
2004 Wangari Maathai, Environmentalist planting trees in Kenya.
Good idea but promotes neither disarmament or international fraternity.
2003 Shirin Ebadi, human rights activist Iran.
No international work or support of disarmament. Rather a political decision to put pressure on Iran.
2002 Jimmy Carter, president USA peace treaty between Israel and Egypt
The peace treaty was signed in 1978 which makes the previous year hard to accept. Did he do anything in 2001-2002?
2001 UN and Kofi Annan
Rather obvious choice.
2000 Kim Dae Jung, South Korean president who opened collaboration with North Korea
Reducing the risk of the most dangerous conflict in the world is a good choice.
1999 Doctors without borders
I do not know if they did anything in 1998-1999 but they are always promoting fraternity and work against armed conflicts.
1998 John Hume and David Trimble, peace treaty on Northern Ireland
Fulfills all criteria
1997 International campaign against land mines and it's coordinator Jody Williams
International fraternity and abolition of land mines fulfills all criteria.
1996 Carlos Filipe Ximenes Beloand José Ramos-Horta for peace treaty on East Timor
Peace between two nations is always a safe bet for this price.
1995 Jospeh Rotblat and Pugwash-movement against nuclear weapons
Pugwash is probably the closest you can get to an international peace conference.
1994 Yassir Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzak Rabin for peace treaty between PLO and Israel.
Killing a lot of people and then promising to not do it again seems to be the safest way to get a Nobel Peace prize but it do fulfill the criteria of the prize.
1993 Nelson Mandela and F W de Clerk for abolishing apartheid in South Africa
They did avoid a dangerous civil war and relations between South Africa and the rest of the world improved.
Personally I think that the Norwegian committee must realize that their obligation is to fulfill the will of the testament rather than promoting people doing good things. The Norwegian committee is always going to be selecting the winner but the parliament must probably better instruct the members to follow the testament rather than their own personal views.
Reply With Quote
ing joke, not only do they give it out to who the Norwegian peace prize committee think is good according to their ideology which is often for idiotic reasons but they have also have celebrities having some ridiculous concert which makes it even more of a joke.
Originally Posted by Tom Cruise
