On
UNSC Reform,
New UfC Paper
Calls for
Transparency,
No New
Permanent
Seats
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS, March
25 -- With UN
Security
Council reform
to be taken up
again
tomorrow,
Inner City
Press has
obtained and
is publishing
here the
United for
Consensus
group's
proposals for
2015, being
circulated
today by
Italy's
mission to the
UN as UfC
Focal Point.
As
before, UfC is
opposed to the
creation of
new Permanent
seats on the
Council (while
that is what
the G4
grouping
wants).
United for
Consensus
says, “we
could support
a UNSC of up
to 26 members
in total - a
Council that
is more
representative
of the
international
community as a
whole while
preserving the
principles of
democracy and
accountability
to Member
States. The
legitimacy of
the Council
depends not
only - or even
primarily - on
its
composition,
but on its
transparency,
accountability
and
effectiveness.
It is not just
about who
takes
decisions, but
most
importantly
the inclusive
and democratic
nature of
decision-making.”
“Transparency
in the work of
the Security
Council should
be enhanced
through, for
instance,
better access
to
information,
an increase in
open
briefings, and
greater
interaction
with the
General
Assembly and
other
interested
parties,
including
TCCs/PCCs and
regional and
sub-regional
organizations.”
Inner City
Press and the
new Free
UN Coalition
for Access
might add
there has in
some recent
months been a
decrease even
in question
and answer
media
stakeouts
after closed
consultation
of the
Council.
UfC continues,
“the new
category of
longer term
non-permanent
seats and an
appropriate
increase in
two-year
non-permanent
seats could
guarantee
better
representation
among regional
groups as well
as Small
States,
including
Small Island
Developing
States (SIDS).
Such an
increase in
the membership
of the Council
could also
provide
avenues to
account for
the
aspirations of
cross regional
and
sub-regional
groups.
Re-election
and rotation
of seats would
be left to the
autonomous
arrangements
within each
regional
group.
On the veto,
UfC says
“While
outright
abolition of
the veto would
be ideal, in
the immediate
term our
negotiations
should address
how to best
limit the use
of veto in
circumstances
that include,
but are not
limited to,
mass
atrocities.”
Inner City
Press is
putting the
full United
for Consensus
document
online here.
We'll have
more on this.
, 
