STATEMENT BY H.E. BURHAN GAFOOR, PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF SINGAPORE TO THE UNITED NATIONS, ON “THE REPORT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL” UNDER AGENDA ITEM 31, 10 SEPTEMBER 2019, NEW YORK

Thank you very much Mr President

I wish to associate myself with the statement made by the distinguished Permanent Representative of Thailand on behalf of the 10 member states of ASEAN. I also thank the President of the Security Council for presenting the report on behalf of all members of the Council.

Mr President

Let me begin by saying that this plenary meeting is one of the most important meetings in the calendar of the General Assembly.  Today, members of the General Assembly have the very important responsibility of considering the annual report of the Security Council contained in document A/73/2.

As we consider the annual report, a basic question arises.  Why is the General Assembly considering the annual report of the Security Council?  The short answer is that the annual report is a requirement of the UN Charter.  It is in fact the Security Council’s only clear obligation to the General Assembly under the Charter. This obligation is highlighted in not just one, but in two Articles, namely Article 15 and Article 24 of the UN Charter. Let me cite Article 15, paragraph 1 which states, and I quote:

                “The General Assembly shall receive and consider annual and special reports from the Security Council; these reports shall include an account of the measures that the Security Council has decided upon or taken to maintain international peace and security”.

In addition, if you look at Article 24, paragraph 3, this states, and I quote:

“The Security Council shall submit annual and, when necessary, special reports to the General Assembly for its consideration”.

In other words, Mr President,  the submission and consideration of the annual report is about fulfilling a Charter responsibility.  If we are serious about the Charter of the UN, then it is important that every member state carefully considers the report of the Security Council and give its views on the activities of the Council.  I am therefore very pleased to see that many member states have inscribed to speak in the debate today.

At the root of the debate today is a more fundamental question, which is: what is the relationship between the General Assembly and the Security Council?  In considering the roles of the General Assembly and the Security Council, we have to look at Article 24 in its entirety.  Paragraph 1 of Article 24 states, and I quote:

“In order to ensure prompt and effective action by the United Nations, its members confer on the Security Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and agree that in carrying out its duties under this responsibility the Security Council acts on their behalf.”

It is clear from Article 24 that the Security Council acts on behalf of all members.  And because the Security Council acts on behalf of all members, it has a corresponding duty and responsibility to report back to the General Assembly.  And from this perspective, the meeting today is fundamentally an exercise in accountability, transparency and legitimacy. 

Let me elaborate on what I mean by transparency, accountability and legitimacy.  The annual report is one of the means to bring greater transparency to the work of the Security Council.  The report catalogues all the documents and decisions of the Security Council.  This makes it a useful reference document for all members.  More importantly, the consideration of the annual report allows the General Assembly to hold the Security Council accountable for its actions or accountable for its lack of actions.   Through an open discussion and debate in the General Assembly, the Security Council gains greater legitimacy for its work and for its role as an important organ of the United Nations.  And that is the reason why the debate today is fundamentally an exercise in accountability, transparency and legitimacy of the Security Council.

I have carefully read the annual report that outlines the activities of the Security Council for the period January to December 2018.  And I also listened carefully to the report presented by the President of the Council earlier this morning.  As members of the General Assembly, each one of us has the duty to carefully scrutinise the report of the Security Council, and ask ourselves some basic questions.  Did the Security Council fulfil our expectations?  Did the Security Council act swiftly to resolve international crises?  Or was the Security Council too paralysed by politics to respond to international issues?  How many vetoes were cast by the Permanent Members and over what issues?  How did the elected members discharge their responsibilities in the Council?   These are the kind of questions that we need to ask ourselves, and ask members of the Security Council, as we consider the annual report.

In considering the annual report of the Security Council, it is important to keep in mind the importance of Note 507, issued by the President of the Council on 30 August 2017.  In Note 507, members of the Council expressed their commitment to implementing a set of measures to enhance the efficiency and transparency of the Council’s work.  Paragraph 125 of Note 507 states that the Security Council will take the necessary action to ensure the timely submission of its report to the General Assembly.   Paragraph 132 of Note 507 states, and I quote:

“The Secretariat should submit the draft report to the members of the Council no later than 15 March, immediately following the period covered by the report, so that it may be discussed and thereafter adopted by the Council in time for consideration by the General Assembly in the spring of that calendar year”.

Mr President

I wish to make several observations about the content of the annual report and the process of considering the report in the General Assembly.

Firstly, we are disappointed that the annual report has been submitted very late. We share and echo the sentiment of disappointment made by other delegations earlier. The report covers the period January to December 2018.  But it comes eight months after the period of review. If the annual report comes after eight months, can we really say it is a timely report?   Why does it take eight months to prepare this annual report?  My delegation did some research and we note that in the period between 1993 and 2015, the average time to produce the annual report was four months. So why does it take eight months now when it previously took only four months?  From our point of view, there is definitely room for improvement by members of the Security Council in terms of the timely submission of the annual report to the General Assembly. 

Secondly, we are very disappointed that the Security Council has not made an effort to respect the timeline in Note 507.  Note 507 says clearly that annual report should be adopted by the Council in time for consideration by the General Assembly and I quote “in the spring of that calendar year”.  We are well past spring, well past summer, and we are into autumn.  This raises a related question.  Did the Secretariat submit the draft report to the Security Council by March 15, as required by Note 507?  If not, why not?  I would like this specific question answered by the Secretariat at some point.

Thirdly, we note that it has become a trend in the last few years for the annual report to be submitted late and rushed to the General Assembly in late August or early September.  This does not allow for a proper debate and discussion of the report here in the General Assembly.  It is not appropriate to rush through an important report like this one during the last few days of the General Assembly.  In particular, late August is not appropriate as many Mission staff are away from New York.  Likewise, early September is a busy period for Missions because we are all deep in preparation for the High-Level Week.  So we have to seriously look at changing the timeline for consideration of the report by the General Assembly.

Fourthly, I would like to comment on the monthly assessment report contained in page 78 of the annual report.  The issue of monthly assessment reports is also addressed in paragraph 136 of Note 507.   We are disappointed to note that in 2018, ten members of the Security Council have not submitted their monthly assessment report of their Council Presidency.  Why is this so? In previous years, all members of the Security Council submitted the monthly assessment of their Presidency.  However, in recent years, we note that more and more Council members are not submitting their monthly assessment report.  We would like to know why this is the case.  Is it the case that members of the Council think that members of the General Assembly do not think the monthly assessment is important? On the contrary, I would like to underline that all General Assembly members consider this a very important exercise. And I hope the President of the Security Council can feed this back to the Council, and can also shed some light on why ten members of the Council have not submitted their monthly reports. I wish to add that we will be waiting for the submission of the remaining monthly reports in due time.

Fifth, I note that the preparation of the report appears to have become a ritual exercise. There has been little effort at wider consultations. Paragraph 129 of Note 507 states that the drafter of the report “may consider organising, where appropriate, interactive informal exchanges of views with the wider membership”. We understand that the drafter of the report this time was the Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom.  However, we have not seen any informal exchange of views with the wider membership in recent years on the annual report. There also appears to be a lack of consultation on the report even within the Council. The only time that all 15 Council members made interventions during the adoption of the report was in 2002, which was a long time ago. We would request that the member of the Council charged with drafting the report engage in an exercise to reach out to members of the General Assembly, before the report is finalised and submitted to the General Assembly.

Mr President

Finally, I would like to comment on the content of the report.  The key part of the report is the introduction.  The first-ever introduction was included in the report in 2002, and it contained an excellent and concise analysis of the Security Council’s work.  But the level of analysis has varied since then. While the recent introductions are much improved from previous years, we think there is room for improvement and we have three specific suggestions with regard to the content of the report. 

First, we think that the annual report should give a summary of the vetoes used during the year and the voting positions of Council members on all procedural and substantive votes taken in the Council during the period under review.

Secondly, the annual report should give more details on the issues discussed to improve the working methods of the Council.

Thirdly, the annual report should provide an analysis of the statistical trends on the Council’s products or outcomes, in terms of statements or resolutions.

In addition to the three suggestions, my delegation would like to make three specific requests.

Firstly, we request that all members of the Security Council fulfil their Charter responsibility by submitting the annual report in a timely manner and to do so no later than April every year. 

Secondly, we request all members of the Security Council to review Note 507 relating to the annual report of the Council.  In particular, we request that paragraph 132 of Note 507 be amended to indicate clearly that the annual report of the Security Council should be submitted to the General Assembly no later than the month of April of the following year.

Thirdly, we request the President of the General Assembly to give adequate time to delegations to consider the annual report before scheduling the plenary meeting.  After the submission of the report to the General Assembly, we think that delegations should be given three to four weeks to read the report, consult their capitals, and prepare statements. If the report is to be submitted by April, we think that the meeting of General Assembly should be held in May or June and certainly not in August or September.

Let me conclude with some final observations.  The submission of the annual report of the Security Council and its consideration by the General Assembly is an important and serious matter.  The timeliness of the report must be taken seriously.  If timeliness is compromised, then we risk compromising the transparency, accountability and legitimacy of the Security Council.

I am aware that members of the Security Council face tremendous pressures and have a very demanding schedule.  I have every sympathy for their position.  However, it is important to improve our work and our way of doing things.  It is equally important for the Security Council and the General Assembly to work together and to support each other to achieve our common vision of peace and stability around the world.   It is in this constructive spirit of improving our work and making the UN better that I have made this statement. I thank you very much for your attention.

.    .    .    .    .