India calls for major role of UNGA
10:18 PM Posted by ●๋•N@sĘem'Ś•๋●™
United Nations: Calling for a major role of the General Assembly in the election of the Secretary-General, India has questioned the current system in which the Security Council decides on a name for the top UN post and the 192-member Assembly rubber stamps the decision. "Obviously, visibility and outreach of the General Assembly are important too," India's UN Ambassador Hardeep Singh Puri told the Ad-hoc Working Group on the Revitalisation of the UN General Assembly."While concrete proposals in this regard should be considered, we believe that real visibility of the General Assembly can only be generated if the Assembly takes important decisions or contributes meaningfully to important decisions," he said.
India's considered view, he said, is that role of the General Assembly as the chief deliberative, legislative, policy-making and representative body of the international community needs to be strengthened.
In this context a critical issue is the appointment of the Secretary-General, Puri said.
Stating that the mandate for the appointment of the UN Secretary-General flows from Article 97 of the UN Charter, he said this inter alia states that the Secretary-General shall be appointed by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. "Clearly, this article envisages a role for both the General Assembly as well as the Security Council," Puri added.
The modalities of the appointment process have, however, come to be governed by Resolution 11(1) of 24 January 1946. This, the ambassador said, states that it would be desirable for the Security Council to proffer one candidate only for the consideration of the General Assembly, and for debate on the nomination in the General Assembly to be avoided.
"Both nomination and appointment should be discussed at private meetings, and a vote in either the Security Council or the General Assembly, if taken, should be by secret ballot." He said it is important to emphasise that these restrictions arise from a General Assembly resolution, rather than a Security Council resolution, and certainly not from Charter provisions.
Besides, the tone of the para is recommendatory, rather than mandatory, he told the panel. "It would appear strange that while we all promote the principles of transparency and an inclusive selection process, the General Assembly willingly agreed to impose such restrictions on its own Charter mandate," he said.
The reason for Resolution 11(1), he pointed out, was the context of the post-1945 world, where it was preferable that the cold-war adversaries agree on a common candidate before putting forward the name.
"However, more than sixty years since the adoption of Resolution 11(1), we live in a different world. While the Security Council itself must change to reflect contemporary realities and expand its membership in both permanent and non-permanent categories, the General Assembly cannot remain bound by self-imposed restrictions reflecting an era gone by," he added.
A more inclusive and interactive selection process, he said, would also enhance the authority and effectiveness of the Secretary-General, as well as increase the confidence of all Member States in the Secretary-General.
"Only with real changes can we ensure that the General Assembly exercises its judgement in the matter of the appointment of the Secretary-General, rather than merely rubber stamping proposals by the Security Council while ensuring that the appointment process does not become a divisive issue between the General Assembly and the Security Council," he added.
But as envisaged in the Charter, this is a process that involves both these organs and needs to be carried out in a collaborative exercise respecting each others' mandate. The issue of timing of these changes, he said, is important.
"Some argue that since the appointment of a new Secretary-General is not on the horizon, this issue does not need to be addressed with urgency. On the contrary, such a situation provides the right opportunity to address this issue impartially and objectively," he told the panel.
0 comments:
Post a Comment