The UN, centerpiece of global governance, offers a limited legal status in form of accreditation for the INGOs. Some prerequisites for admission into this status, albeit not formally identified, might be underlined. In this respect, Peter Willetts (2001), an eminent scholar studying civil society actors, provides at least fifth principles in order for an INGO to qualify for the definition of the UN. First, an INGO needs to work in furtherance of the goals and objectives of the UN. Second, an INGO should allow fair representation by members, establish a headquarters, and employ officers. Third, an INGO should be a non-profit organization without engaging in business or corporate activities. Fourth, an INGO should declare it will not rely on any violent measure whatsoever to pursue its goals. Fifth, an INGO should not act in a way that could be interpreted as an interference with the internal affairs of states. Even this set of principles fall short to offer an overall definition of an NGO which is inherently diverse and vague. Some INGOs proclaim a broad mandate whereas others may confine themselves to a specific agenda and cause. While some maintain a presence in a vast geography, some others may prefer remaining local or regional. It all depends on how an INGO identifies itself, its orientation and its goals. Naturally, their audience, the type of problems they are addressing, their constituency as well as opportunities they are able to enjoy all have to impact upon the kind of INGO that emerges.For instance, the INGOs are more concerned about how to make a contribution to the making of international law whereas national or regional NGOs are often focused on local political issues. Likewise, third world NGOs may employ domestic government whereas NGOs in developed countries have a strict code by which they prohibit admission of members with government connections. Additionally, while most third world NGOs are dedicated to the resolution of the economic problems and pay greater attention to humanitarian issues, the NGOs in the developed world are more focused on civil and political rights, and, for instance, committed to fair trial. These NGOs address problems pertinent to a violation of fundamental human rights rather than the betterment of a certain community or group and believe “in a pluralist society functioning within a framework of rules impartially applied to protect individuals against state interference” (Steiner, 1981: 15-16). It should be noted that lack of governmental support for their activities and the huge diversity in terms of their orientation and structure does not necessarily mean that INGOs are weak or ineffective. To the contrary, thanks to their diverse nature and flexibility, the INGOs are better able to address normative issues including human rights violations and environmental degradation. Similarly, their independent and private status enables the INGOs to act free of political oversight by the state. More importantly, because they do not have to consider the possible impact of their action upon a certain foreign policy design, the NGOs are often able to concentrate on a certain agenda. The proceeding sections dwell upon the role of INGOs in the international and regional organizations.