STATEMENT BY MS KAREN ONG, DEPUTY PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE ON THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATIONS (IGN)

         I thank the co-chairs for their excellent leadership throughout this complex and important intergovernmental process. Today’s debate has been made even more timely by the fact that the General Assembly will convene on Thursday for a debate under the Veto Initiative following the casting of vetoes in the Security Council last week.  

2        In our last statement at these negotiations, Singapore spoke about the need to ensure that the composition of the Council reflects the diversity of the UN membership and our support for expansion in both the permanent and non-permanent membership categories. However, the issue of expansion must be accompanied by the question of how it will affect the decision-making process in the Council. I will make a few points in this regard.  

Co-chairs, 

3        The greatest concern in respect of decision-making in the Council remains the veto and how this mechanism allows the decision of one State to override the will of the majority of Council Members. As a matter of principle, Singapore has always taken the view that the veto is an impediment to a more effective and responsive Council. It prevents the Council from discharging its responsibility to maintain international peace and security. For this reason, my delegation has said on many occasions that we do not support extending the veto to potential new permanent members. 

4        Let me be clear – we are not calling for the abolition of the veto, but to establish parameters for its responsible and accountable use. In addition to accountability, the question of equity between the Council and the General Assembly also arises. Fundamentally, the existence of five permanent members on the Council is an inequitable arrangement. But even the fact that there are only 15 members in the Council at any given time, and the rest of the membership has no say in the Council’s decisions, is an inequitable arrangement. Therefore, we do not see how adding more vetoes to an expanded Council will create greater equity.  In fact, it could worsen equity, since there will be more obstacles to the Council taking prompt and effective action. 

5        This brings me to the point that as long as the veto remains in place, we urge the permanent members of the Council to show the greatest restraint in its use and not to deploy it to further their own interests. To this end, Singapore supports the French-Mexican initiative on suspending the use of the veto in cases of mass atrocities, and the ACT Group’s Code of Conduct regarding Security Council action against genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes. 

6        In particular, we also urge all members of the Security Council to conform to Article 27 (3) of the Charter and its exhortation for parties to a dispute to abstain from voting at the Council. We lament that the last time this provision was observed was by an elected member in 1960. We therefore welcome the recent circulation by Liechtenstein of the draft resolution on the Implementation of Article 27 (3), on behalf of a group of countries. We look forward to engaging constructively on this draft, which we hope will advance discussions for the consistent and effective implementation of Article 27 (3). 

Co-chairs, 

7        In our view, a reformed Council must play a more effective role in upholding international law and adherence to the UN Charter. We believe that any reform should include measures to strengthen the accountability of all Council members, particularly the permanent members. Singapore remains committed to engaging constructively with all Member States in this process. 

8        I thank you.