The legitimacy of international institutions has become an important issue as more and more states delegate competencies to international institutions, where competencies are no longer under the direct control of citizens. However, the concept of domestic legitimacy being highly related to democracy cannot be transferred directly to the international realm. This paper develops an account of international legitimacy that is sensitive to different kinds of international institutions and elaborates multilateral democracy as a maximal standard.
First, I will argue that an account of legitimacy is needed for international institutions, whereas such legitimacy cannot be equated with democracy as majority rule. Moreover, domestic liberal democracy is not solely defined by equal participation and majority rule but also by the rule of law and standards of transparency and accountability. These values are achievable without a full-blown democracy and can therefore serve as alternative standards of legitimacy. Furthermore, different international institutions have to be evaluated against different standards depending on their function and competences. In such a matched approach of international legitimacy a minimal standard should guarantee transparency and non-violation of human rights. In contrast, multilateral democracy is to be understood as the maximal concept of legitimacy for specific supranational institutions having direct rule making competences like the EU.
