Media Home
UN Web TV
UN Audiovisual Library
UN PhotoSecurity Council
8539th Security Council Meeting: Note by President of Security Council
Consultations around peacekeeping, political or other mandates must be interactive, direct and focused on political strategy, a briefer told the Security Council today as it held an open debate on its own working methods.
The organ’s resolutions must contain meaningful language and enjoy the support of all Council members, said the Executive Director of Security Council Report, a former Special Representative of the Secretary-General. Recalling that four peacekeeping missions had their mandates renewed without Council unanimity in 2018, she noted that there have already been three such non-unanimous renewals in 2019.
A great deal can be achieved by adapting the Council’s working methods, she said, adding: “In these testing times, the challenge is to use the tools creatively and flexibly, contributing to a culture where better and more consultative decisions can be taken.” She went on to propose broader Council engagement with Member States, suggesting that the Council invite those with a particular interest in a given situation to informal dialogues.
Also briefing members, the Director of the United Nations University’s Centre for Policy Research stressed that the Council’s working methods must meaningfully protect the right of affected persons to be heard, adding that they must also offer an impartial review of the facts underpinning any sanctions listing. Noting the opinion of some legal experts that independent judicial review is the only way to ensure a completely fair process in listing and delisting for sanctions, he said the Security Council has been reluctant to accept that argument.
A decision to impose or remove targeted sanctions is not a penal decision, but a political one, taken to generate and harness leverage to fight terrorism, manage armed conflict and counter proliferation, he emphasized, further stressing that the test is not whether the Council’s working methods offer judicial protection, but whether they offer equivalent protection. Working methods must meaningfully protect the right of the affected person to be heard, he said, adding that they must also offer an impartial review of the fact base underpinning any sanctions listing.
However, what works for counter-terrorism may not work for armed conflict or counter-proliferation, he cautioned. In the counter-terrorism context, it may not be feasible to share all listing information with the target, and it may or may not be feasible for the reviewer of the fact base to meet with the target in person. In the context of armed conflict, however, impartial review and the right to be heard may require different information-gathering modalities and a fact reviewer with a different profile, he cautioned, pointing out that a reviewer might need the ability to visit conflict theatres and engage with parties to conflict while maintaining independence and neutrality.
South Africa’s representative, speaking on behalf of the Council’s 10 elected members, declared: “We see room — and an urgent need — for further progress.” Among other things, there is need to share the burden fairly among Council members, to better prepare newly elected members and to ensure stronger procedures for imposing sanctions, taking into account the need to respect international standards of due process and incorporate review mechanisms.
Permanent members emphasized flexibility, with the United Kingdom’s representative describing it as a priority for his delegation. It is important to strike the right balance of public and private meetings, he added.
The representative of the United States emphasized that informal consultations must remain informal, with participants steering away from reading prepared texts. The United States stands ready to assess new ideas and proposals, but the Council must retain flexibility and avoid rigidity, he said.
France’s representative pointed out that the Council spends three times more time in public meetings than in consultations. Although the latter increase transparency, they also tend to polarize Council members to the detriment of consensus decision-making, he said, stressing that changes in working methods must be guided by the principles of effectiveness, transparency and inclusiveness.
The Russian Federation’s representative said populist rhetoric about transparency does not achieve results, but rather, can make things more difficult. Emphasizing that there must be no artificial hurry in undertaking such a pain-staking effort, he described his delegation as “lukewarm” about the Council discussing thematic issues better handled in the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council.
China’s representative said the Council should focus more on urgent matters than on intervening in domestic matters that do not threaten international peace and security. It must strive for the broadest consensus, maintain unity, enhance communication and avoid the hasty adoption of resolutions, he added.
New Zealand’s representative spoke on behalf of 20 former Council members from all regional groups, saying that all Council members should have equal an opportunity to exercise their Charter obligations, including a balanced division of labour and equitable chairing of subsidiary bodies. The Council must also ensure that members “are not just speaking about countries concerned, but also speaking to them”.
Ireland’s representative, one of several candidates for Council membership to take the floor, said: “Working methods are not only what we put down on paper, but also the mindset with which we approach the challenges we face.” He noted that many elected members have “rightly looked askance at the sterile debates and grandstanding” that sometimes characterize the Council’s work.
Norway’s representative, speaking for the Nordic countries, called for broader engagement with the United Nations membership, emphasizing that the Council should maintain the practice of inviting civil society briefers and pay greater attention to preventing conflict.
Canada’s representative proposed that the Council drop the informal “penholder” system, whereby some members exercise an unspoken monopoly in drafting resolutions, often without meaningful input from elected members or committee chairs.
India’s representative was among the speakers who said that, while it is a common understanding that the views and concerns of troop- and police-contributing countries are crucial for better implementation of peacekeeping mandates, it is more significant to translate this understanding into action.
Brazil’s delegate underlined the importance of a healthy relationship between the Council and the General Assembly. Mexico’s representative suggested that the Assembly might consider matters of international peace and security immediately, under its “Uniting for Peace” resolution, if the Security Council fails to exercise its primary responsibility due to lack of unanimity among its permanent members.
Also speaking today were representatives of Kuwait, Romania, Estonia, Turkey, Switzerland, Singapore, Japan, Italy, Slovenia, Portugal, Morocco, Argentina, Sweden (on behalf of the Group of Like-Minded States on Targeted Sanctions), Liechtenstein, Costa Rica, Iran, Cuba, Guatemala, Egypt, Ukraine, Colombia and Bahrain.
The meeting began at 10:02 a.m. and ended at 2:10 p.m.
For further details please see:
MEETINGS COVERAGE AND PRESS RELEASES