Naina Dhingra is the Director of International Policy at Advocates for Youth and serves on the Developed Country NGO Board Delegation of the Global Fund.

After two days and nearly twenty-two hours of deliberations, the Board of the Global Fund Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria was unable to select a candidate for Executive Director and decided to reopen the search. The Board of the Global Fund is unlike any multilateral institution. There are twenty voting board seats divided equally between donors and recipients. There are also seats for foundations and the private sector (counted in the donor block) and for developed country NGOs, developing country NGOs, and people living with the three diseases (counted in the recipient block). In order for a candidate to be selected, a two-thirds majority in both the donor and recipient block was needed. Unfortunately, this consensus was not achieved.

The process for a new Executive Director began at the last Board meeting. A small nomination committee was selected from the Board and along with the help of a global head-hunting search firm; five diverse candidates were presented to the Board. While all five candidates were considered carefully, none were able to achieve the two-thirds majority from both blocks. The Board has therefore decided to re-launch the search process with the goal of identifying a candidate by the April 2007 board meeting.

Reactions at the meeting were mixed. Some felt extremely disappointed in the process and result. But many Board members view this decision as positive as it allows an opportunity for members to work together to select a candidate who will be well-received by the entire Board instead of allowing someone to be elected who many would not support.

This entire process demonstrates the Global Fund's uniqueness in the development system and the shift in traditional power dynamics between developed and developing countries. If we compare this process to the WHO Director General election that is about to take place November 6-8 in Geneva, we can easily see the difference. It is general knowledge that governments use promises of increased development aid, trade, and other favors in order to essentially buy votes, greatly disadvantaging candidates from low-income countries. This outright bribery and lack of transparency does not exist within the Global Fund. For the first time, civil society was in the room and had equal voting power.

The Board nominations committee is now tasked with the new search and the coming months are critical to the future of the Global Fund. NGOs involved with the Global Fund are strongly committed to working with both donor and recipient governments to find a qualified merit-based candidate who will take the institution from start-up to maturity.