As read
Remarks by Her Excellency
Ms.Enkhtsetseg Ochir,
Permanent Representative of Mongolia
to the United Nations,
at the informal plenary on the
Intergovernmental Negotiations on the
Security Council reform,
March 17, 2009
The Question of the Veto
Mr. Chairman,
The
last two days of discussion have demonstrated once more that the question of
veto is an essential element of the SC reform in order to make it more
democratic, equitable and representative. My delegation shares the view of the
majority of Member States that the veto right is anachronistic and obstructive tool
which undermines the fundamental principle of the UN Charter.
It
should be recalled that in 1945 the veto in the voting procedure of the
Security Council was opposed by a number of states. On what became paragraph 3
of Article 27 of the UN Charter, two countries voted against, 15 abstained and
3 were absent at the San-Francisco conference.
Mr. Chairman,
Veto raises question of equality
among members and challenges the basic principle of this organization because it
grants absolute power,
unilateral and unlimited, to P-5. The veto defies accountability and invites
undemocratic and abusive practices. It is worth recalling that such an abuse
was practiced much too often to block admission of new Member States to the
world Organization. Out of 261 vetoes[1]
used in the SC since 1946, 59
(or one fourth!) were cast for that purpose only. My country was among those 26
States that fell victim to such an abuse, both implicit and explicit, when she
endeavored to become a full-fledged member of the world Organization in 1940s
and 1950s.
During
the Cold War period veto obstructed the work of the Security Council throwing
it into the recurring paralysis. Since then veto practice has been used on a
relatively fewer occasions with even three full veto-free years in 1996, 1999 and 2000
respectively. Use of veto could seem to be lessening but either the actual use
of veto or the threat of its use still
loom large over the functioning of the Security Council.
Ideally,
veto needs to be abolished. Yet, despite the numerous calls for its elimination
at the present stage of the negotiations this task remains elusive. Hence, my
delegation is inclined to support attainable and realistic measures aimed at gradually
restricting the veto. Pragmatic steps in this direction could involve limiting the
scope of application of the veto to Chapter VII decisions, establishing
criteria for its use and formalization of the explanation of the use of veto.
These measures could be part of a longer process of the overall regulation of
the veto with a view to eventually abolishing it.
The
question of the veto is not just about discarding privileges or special rights
of individual member states or struggle between haves and have-nots. It has
become an issue of the credibility of the Security Council and of the UN as a
whole as the world Organization strives to address the multifaceted challenges
of the 21st century. Therefore, our principled position remains that
the right of the veto needs to be reviewed and we look forward to its further constructive
consideration in the intergovernmental negotiations to effectively address this
essential element of the SC reform.
I
thank you for your attention.