By Mie Hansen, 5 May 2011

On 14 April, 2011, the Small Five Group (S5), consisting of Costa Rica, Jordan, Liechtenstein, Singapore and Switzerland, presented a draft resolution for Improving the Working Methods of the Security Council. The resolution was presented under agenda item 115 of the General Assembly (GA) that deals with follow-up to the outcome of the Millennium Summit. The S5 had presented its first draft resolution on the topic (A/60/L.49) in 2006 also as follow-up to the 2000/2005 Summits.

The primary focus in the GA to reform the Security Council currently takes place in the Intergovernmental Negotiations on the topic, facilitated by Afghan Ambassador Zahir Tanin (see www.centerforunreform.org/node/23). Reform of the working methods of the Council is one of the key issues under discussion in the Intergovernmental Negotiations 1 The other issues under discussion are the categories of membership; size of an enlarged Council, questions concerning regional representation; the question of veto; and questions regarding the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly. In the intergovernmental negotiations, many Member States – especially those who try to stall the process because they resist expansion with new permanent members – insist that the five reform clusters should not be dealt with separately.

In presenting its draft resolution, the S5 seems to stress that the issue of working methods both can and should be discussed independently, even outside the Intergovernmental Negotiations. According to the S5, progress in working methods simply has to take place, whether or not the membership can agree on the issue of Security Council expansion, for example. Unlike expansion of the Council, a change in working methods does not require a Charter amendment or a two-thirds majority to pass. When briefing the UN membership on 14 April, the S5 stressed that their draft resolution should not be seen as competing with the Intergovernmental Negotiations but as a complimentary effort to help push the reform process forward. The S5 expressed the hope that their draft resolution could help move the issue on working methods from talk to action by proposing some concrete steps for the Council, ready for immediate implementation.

At the briefing, the S5 also emphasized that the purpose of the group’s effort was not, in any way, to try to limit the power of the Council or to try to subordinate it to the GA. On the contrary, the S5’s aim is to strengthen the Council and to make it more efficient. Finally, the S5 emphasized its independent status, making it clear that the group is not working together with any other interest groups on other Security Council reform issues.

During the meeting, the S5 countries presented a brief summary of the draft resolution. In short, the resolution invites the Council to follow three steps: To enhance and report on the implementation of measures contained in its Presidential Note S/2010/5072; to consider the measures contained in the annex of the S5’s resolution; and finally to report to the GA by the end of its 65th session on action it has taken pursuant to its consideration of the present resolution. The annex of the resolution presented a list of concrete measures for the Council to consider, organized under the following seven main topics: Relationship with the GA and other principal organs; effectiveness of decisions; subsidiary bodies; operations mandated and missions carried out by the Council; governance and accountability; appointment of the UN Secretary-General; and the use of veto in the Security Council.

After the presentation of the draft proposal, six countries took the floor, delivering their statements on the subject matter.

Canada, Norway, New Zealand, Ireland and Australia all expressed their general support for the draft resolution and welcomed the efforts of the S5 to work for such reform. Additionally, some suggested further efforts to be made in the process, as well as proposed changes and moderations for the text.
Pakistan, as part of the group Uniting for Consensus (UfC) on the other hand, expressed concern over the fact that the issue of improving the working methods of the Security Council was dealt with separately from the rest of the reform issues.

None of the G4 countries (Germany, Brazil, Japan and India) or the African Group, nor any from the P5 (Security Council permanent members) spoke at the meeting. It is, however, clear that the G4 sees reform of working methods as competitive with their goal of new permanent seats and the members of the P5 have regularly expressed misgivings about interference in the way the Council does it work. (Managing Change, Chapter 1, p. 8)

Before the meeting ended, the S5 encouraged all Member States to put their statements and proposals in writing and transmitting them to the S5 as soon as possible for its consideration. The S5 expressed hope that further interaction with Member States would now take place – and that on the basis of this, the S5 would be able to decide on how to proceed.

Note: For an analysis on Reform of Security Council Working Methods by the Center see www.centerforunreform.org/node/412

• 1. Apparently, some insiders feel that resolution 62/557 implies that Member States agreed to take up SC reform in the Intergovernmental Negotiations only
• 2. Based on the recommendations of the Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Questions, the President of the Security Council in July 2010, Nigeria, distributed a note with an annex on measures to be implemented by the Council’s members in order to “…enhance the efficiency and transparency of the Council’s work, as well as interaction and dialogue with non-Council members…” S/2010/507