|
|
Mr. President,
This debate on strengthening the United Nations system and revitalizing the
UN General Assembly is important, essential and timely. Every institution needs
to continue to renew itself – to stay relevant, efficient and effective. Today,
even the UN’s strongest detractors recognize that it is relevant – to address
the old and new challenges which face the international community.
2. The Secretary-General outlined these challenges in his opening remarks at the
inauguration of the Assembly’s general debate last month. His call for
institutional review and reform is timely. We welcome his initiative to convene
a Group of Eminent Persons to deliberate and devise recommendations to him for
consideration by Member States. We trust that the composition and work of these
Eminent Persons will reflect the broad spectrum of views and approaches to UN
Reform which exist in this Assembly.
3. The statement made by Algeria today reflects the broad approach of the
Non-Aligned Movement. Pakistan aligns itself with this approach.
4. We thank Deputy Secretary-General Frechette for her statement and her
dedicated efforts to preserve and promote the UN’s institutional vitality.
5. Pakistan greatly appreciates the vigour with which you, Mr. President, have
devoted yourself to promoting the reform process. Your informal paper of 17
October provides an invaluable framework and guide for our work on the General
Assembly’s revitalization.
Mr. President,
6. We must commence by acknowledging that, thanks to the purposeful efforts of
Secretary-General Kofi Anan, considerable progress has been made since 1997 in
improving the UN Secretariat and its support machinery – Human resource
management reforms, results-based budgeting, and other administrative
improvements are inculcating a new work culture. These are, of course, a work in
progress. Pakistan has contributed to this process – especially to human
management reforms – and will continue to do so.
7. We endorse the Secretary-General’s suggestion that attention now be focused
on institutional reforms of the UN’s intergovernmental organs. This has proved
to be a politically difficult exercise in the past. If it is to produce more
substantive results, Member States need to agree on at least the broad strategic
objectives for undertaking this exercise. The aim must be to enhance the
realization of the purposes and principles of the UN Charter – promoting
universal peace, security and prosperity on the basis of the sovereign equality
of States. It should not be propelled by the transient or narrow pre-occupations
of a few, albeit important, States if these run contrary to the central purposes
of our Charter and the democratic ethos of our Organization.
8. It is the hope of the Pakistan delegation that, in the light of recent
developments, the Eminent Experts convened by the Secretary-General will give
consideration to ensuring that the prescription against the use or threat of use
of force in international relations is strengthened and not eroded and that
neither Article 42 nor Article 51 are misused to breach this central Charter
principle. It is also essential to devise a more institutionalized method to
promote equitable implementation of UN resolutions, including implementation of
Security Council resolutions, in accordance with Article 25 of the UN Charter.
Mr. President,
9. The Assembly has already discussed the reform of the Security Council
recently. I will not repeat our views on this. But, in the context of UN
reforms, it is necessary to draw attention to the following considerations:
One, the Security Council is progressively extending the scope of its
responsibilities far beyond the role – the central role – it was assigned in the
Charter to deal with the threats to international peace and security. Many of
the issues taken up by the Council – especially in its thematic debates –
rightly belong within the orbit of the General Assembly, ECOSOC or other bodies.
New efforts to entrust the Council with responsibilities for
counter-proliferation – while ignoring the goals of disarmament – is a current
case in point.
Two, the deliberations of the Council lack transparency and openness, contrary
to rule 48 of the Provisional Rules of Procedure. Resolutions are prepared by
one or two or four permanent members and brought to the Council for informal
consultations which, often, prove to be proforma. Consensus is constructed
mostly in capitals, not in the Council. The views of the Council’s non-permanent
members are heard, at times, but bear little or no influence on the Council’s
decisions.
10. This ethos of the Council must be changed. It is for this Assembly to obtain
this change, with insistence, here and in the concerned capitals. Expanding the
Council may help to erode great power control of the Security Council; but not
if new members also seek to join the Club of the privileged by seeking the
status of permanent members. The deadlock on Security Council expansion is due
to the clash between the general aspiration for democracy versus the particular
demand for privilege.
Mr. President,
11. While criticism of the Security Council’s shortcomings are subdued,
assessments of this Assembly are often harsh. Inefficient, ineffective and
irrelevant are often adjectives placed before a description of the General
Assembly. Such harsh assessments ignore history and international politics. The
General Assembly has many outstanding achievements that history will recall. It
played the heading role in enabling the peoples under colonial rule liberate
themselves through the exercise of the right of self-determination. Most of our
States would not be here as sovereign Members of the UN were it not for the bold
and principled role of the General Assembly. The Assembly has contributed
immensely to the evolution of international law and norms – for disarmament and
non-proliferation, economic and social development, human rights, health, labour
communications and environment. It has addressed the issues of peace and
security, and opposed aggression and the use of force whenever – as happened
often in the Cold War – the Security Council was paralyzed by partisan vetos. It
has created institutions for international cooperation in vital fields,
including socio-economic development. It has convened Conferences to mobilize
the international community on global priority issues – population, the rights
of women and children, the environment, human rights, trade, financing for
development.
Mr. President,
12. It is not surprising that the Assembly’s agenda is long and often
over-loaded. Each of the UN’s member States has a sovereign and democratic right
to bring before this Assembly its difficulties and despair, its ideas and
initiatives. Consideration of these issues by the General Assembly is an
expression of solidarity which binds together the international community.
13. Our agenda would be shorter, if the problems and issues brought before the
Assembly could be speedily resolved. They cannot because, often, they are
complex and intractable. They cannot because, more often, action is not taken to
implement the Assembly’s decisions – for political, financial or practical
reasons. The concerned Member States have no choice but to keep reminding the
world of the existence of these issues.
14. The much advertised irrelevance of the General Assembly has, in fact, been
inflicted on it by some of those very powers who decry the importance of its
deliberations and decisions. Transferring consideration of most of the burning
issues of our times – e.g. terrorism and now non-proliferation – to the Security
Council, sucks the political oxygen out of the General Assembly. Enhancing the
role of the Assembly is a political not a procedural exercise. The Assembly must
be enabled, not disabled, from considering the priority issues and serve the
primary locus of the discussions and actions of the General Assembly. And all
Member States should commit themselves to observe and implement the Assembly’s
resolutions.
15. Sadly, the thrust of some proposals for the Assembly’s reform run counter
rather than towards the principles of democracy. Despite professions of respect
for the principle of sovereign equality, some States support proposals to create
more restricted bodies – an executive committee, steering committee, or other
select and privileged groups – within the General Assembly, ostensibly to
enhance efficiency and effectiveness. Such bodies – like the Security Council –
may be able to adopt decisions more quickly and perhaps more clearly; but these
will lack universality and legitimacy; they will deprive the majority of a voice
on the most important issues; they will increase inequality within the UN; they
will transform the Assembly into a rubber-stamp.
16. This is not to say that procedural improvements should not be made in the
General Assembly. In our debates over the past few years, a number of useful
suggestions have been advanced which merit positive consideration.
· Firstly, Rationalization of the Assembly’s agenda is a desirable objective.
Similar items can be amalgamated. Related items can be grouped. Some items –
which are no longer of interest to any Member State can be eliminated. Several
items presently taken up by plenary could be assigned to a Main Committee. At
the same time, the Agenda must remain open to the insertion of new issues which
may arise. However, it must be borne in mind that rationalization of the Agenda
is essentially a political exercise. We should first decide who will review and
recommend the agenda’s rationalization – the General Committee and or friends of
the President or a specially created group. Discussions will have to be taken in
consultation with states interested in the concerned items. And, any criteria
utilized to guide these decisions will have to equitably applied to all.
· Secondly, the Assembly can do much to improve the content of the resolutions.
We should attempt to restrict to shorter resolutions perhaps limited to three or
four operative paragraphs at least for items which have been previously
considered by the Assembly or on which there are substantive recommendations
from other bodies or organizations, which need not be repeated, but either
endorsed, amended or commented upon. When the reports from the Secretariat offer
recommendations, these could be subsequently endorsed or amended in a short
resolution. New issues or proposals may have to be addressed more substantively.
It could also be a requirement for resolutions on “old” references to be
submitted and circulated a few days before consideration of the item, so that
discussion could be focused on it, rather than a repetition of general problems.
On ‘new’ issues, debates may be necessary before the drafting of decisions.
· Thirdly, the Main Committees of the Assembly have developed their own
entrenched cultures. There is a need to harmonize their work. As a general rule,
general debates could be restricted in the Committees; and discussions focused
on specific resolutions or proposals. There is also need to introduce uniformity
in the decision making process in various Committees. Some of them e.g. Second
and Sixth or Fifth committees work on the basis of consensus. The First
Committee resorts to voting as necessary; the Third Committee more often than
not. A uniform process should be evolved for intensive consultations to build
consensus, with the option of voting where consensus becomes impossible to
achieve. Fourth, the timings of the Committee meetings requires fresh thinking
concerning simultaneous meetings of the plenary and six Main Committees is
beyond the capacity of most of the smaller delegations. It also stretches the
conference services. Permanent Representatives are unable to devote adequate
attention to all issues. As suggested by many from this forum, sequential
convening of the Committee meetings spread from January to September should be
seriously considered. The results of the Committees could be collectively
approved in the Plenary when it opens in September for the general debate.
Mr. President,
17. The management of the Plenary and the Main Committees through the year
should be entrusted to the President of the General Assembly. To enable them to
discharge their responsibilities, it seems essential to strengthen the
President’s Executive Office.
18. Another extremely important aspect is cooperation between the Assembly and
other main organs of the UN, particularly the Security Council and the ECOSOC.
Greater coherence in the work of the three organs will bring synergy to our
work. In this context, my delegation had proposed the idea of Composite
Committees with membership drawn from the three main organs in order to address
complex emergencies. I am pleased to note that the summary of the 17th October
informals mentions this idea. At the informal discussion scheduled later this
month, we hope we can develop it further.
Mr. President,
19. Considerable attention has also been devoted to reform and revival of the
Economic & Social Council. It cannot be revived by merely changing its name. If
an Economic and Social Security Council is created, will it be empowered to
consider and decide on central issues relating to the management of
international economic and social relations? Will its decisions be binding on
Member States and thus implemented by Member States? If not, transforming ECOSOC
perhaps into a more restricted forum of few selected “economic powers” will
merely intensify inequality rather than carve the central role in economic and
social affairs envisaged for it in the UN Charter. It may be, therefore, more
productive to focus on ways and means to operationalize the responsibility
entrusted to ECOSOC for the integrated follow-up of the major international
Conferences. The annual high-level meetings, with the participation of the
Bretton Woods Institutions and the WTO, provide a good opportunity to introduce
coherence and complementarity in the global governance of economic and social
relations.
Mr. President,
20. Apart from political will, the decisions of Member States cannot be realized
without adequate resources. It is ironic that while military budgets are rising
and enormous amounts expended for wars and the reconstruction of countries
devastated by such wars, parsimony is practiced only when it comes to financing
the operations and actions of the United Nations. The political and moral
justification for constraining the United Nations to virtual zero growth must be
questioned – by Member States and by all those, including civil societies, which
are committed to the ideal of multilateral but democratic management of
international relations. The concomitant of UN Reform must be a political
commitment by all States to fund its approved activities.
Mr. President,
21. Pakistan believes that reform of the UN’s Budget and the budget formulation
process will strengthen the Organization. We would, therefore, like to
participate in the Budget reform discussions with an open mind. For us, the most
important issue is the end result. We would support a formula that better
enables the Organization to achieve the mandates and ensures alignment of
resources with the priority activities of the Organization. However, we also
believe that any institutional change must be preceded by indepth deliberations.
Some of the systemic implications of a change in the current budgetary process
need to be examined closely:
- Firstly, if we were to change the format of MTP and the role of CPC, through
what mechanism will the member states ensure that all mandates have been
translated into implementable programmes and provided adequate funding;
- Secondly, how do we handle the priority setting, a function that currently
falls in the purview of the CPC. If we leave it to the Fifth Committee, are we
letting the priority-setting be done on the basis of resources. This also raises
the larger question of whether resources should determine priorities or should
resources be aligned with priorities;
- Thirdly, what would be role of MTP, and who would frame and review it? And if
it is to be abolished and replaced by a Strategic Framework, as is being
proposed by the JIU, which intergovernmental body would frame and review the
Framework;
- There are several other aspects such as the implications of combining budget
outline with the MTP etc, which the Fifth Committee would need to discuss
thoroughly before reaching a decision.
Mr. President,
22. We look forward to a substantive and constructive debate on this important
item, which has far reaching implications for the future of our Organization and
indeed for inter-state relations. We assure you, Mr. President, of the full
cooperation of the Pakistan delegation in evolving positive and generally
acceptable decisions to strengthen the United Nations and revitalize the General
Assembly.
I thank you, Mr. President.