STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR BURHAN GAFOOR, PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE, AT THE OPEN DEBATE ON “WORKING METHODS OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL”, UNDER THE AGENDA ITEM “IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NOTE S/2017/507”, 6 JUNE 2019

1             Thank you Mr President. My delegation welcomes your very strong leadership in steering the work of the Informal Working Group on Documentation in an open and transparent manner. My delegation also appreciates the work of Japan, the previous Chair of the Informal Working Group, for their role in issuing and revising Note 507. We are also fortunate today to have had two comprehensive briefings by Ms Karin Landgren of the Security Council Report and Mr James Cockayne of the UN University Centre for Policy Research. They gave us plenty of food for thought.

2             We have also heard a very important statement this morning, delivered by the Permanent Representative of South Africa on behalf of the E10. This is a statement that Singapore endorses entirely. The statement by the E10 is significant, because in many ways it spoke for  the wider membership. Indeed, it is our expectation that all elected members should take working methods seriously during their term in the Council. We hope that all elected members will be committed to improving the working methods of the Council. From Singapore’s point of view, this is how we will judge all elected members; in terms of their commitment to improving the working methods of the Council. This is not a question of dividing the Council between the permanent members and the elected members. For Singapore, it is a question of making the work of the Council more transparent and accountable, so that the large majority of UN members who are not in the Council, and who often face huge difficulties in being elected into the Council, can participate in and support the important work being done in the Council.

Mr President,

3             As a small state, Singapore strongly supports improvements to the working methods of the Council. This benefits all states, big or small, including the permanent members. It is an area where we can make an immediate and noticeable difference, without getting caught up in the legalities and technicalities pertaining to Charter amendments.

4             I will focus my remarks on a few areas. First, we are pleased that good progress has been made on transparency and accountability. There has been an increased number of open debates and informal briefings on the work of the Council to the wider UN membership, and more meetings are covered by webcast. This is a trend we encourage.

5             Notwithstanding this, the practice of closed consultations remains. Of course, my delegation fully understands the necessity for closed discussions on certain issues. Indeed, they are often necessary to have candid and frank dicussions among the main stakeholders. Nevertheless, we believe that it would be useful if some form of summary records, at least on decision points, is maintained for these meetings and shared with the wider membership. In addition, the Council should seriously think of at least beginning a conversation on formalising its provisional Rules of Procedure. They constitute the only set of rules guiding the working methods and yet they remain provisional after more than 70 years. If codified, the Rules of Procedure will help to improve the Council's performance. More importantly, it would enhance the Council's own legitimacy and credibility.

6             I want to make a second point on inclusivenes. We are encouraged that the Council has made greater use of different formats such as Arria-formula meetings and Toledo-format dialogues to engage more interactively with the General Assembly. We are also encouraged by the regularisation of introductory and wrap-up meetings with the wider membership by the presidency of each month. We hope that these sessions will continue as a standard practice, and that they will contain more interactive discussions and greater analysis. We would suggest that the monthly wrap-up meetings be reflected as part of the Programme of Work of the Council, and the date and time of the meeting should be fixed well in advance and communicated to all members with ample notice, so that all of us can come prepared to participate.

7             My delegation is also encouraged by signs of increased intra-Council inclusiveness. The E10 has had regular meetings, including  meetings with the Secretary-General, and we think they have promoted more inclusiveness in the Council. We are heartened to see more E10 members taking on penholder roles in the Council. A Council with members who feel side-lined is not only non-inclusive, but will also be ineffective in representing the interests of the wider membership.

8             With regard to inclusiveness, the report of the Security Council to the General Assembly is important as it is the means by which the Council reaches out to the wider membership in the General Assembly. As pointed out earlier, this report is due by Spring, and yet we do not have it. In order for all members to have a considered debate on the work of the Council, these reports should be made available to all members in good time. Unfortunately, we have witnessed in recent years a trend where the report is submitted later and later. Worse still, the debate is rushed. Members are therefore not prepared for substantive discussions. We hope that Council members will take note of this, and submit the report in time so that the wider membership can have a substantive debate on the work of the Council. A delay in submitting the report does not help the credibility and legitimacy of the Council. A thorough debate by the General Assembly on the work and report of the Council will help to enhance the Council’s credibility and legitimacy.

9             My third point relates to effectiveness. The Council’s record on this remains mixed, with a strong voice being taken on some specific issues, but a lack of adequate action on other issues. The veto unfortunately has too often been used to block Council action aimed at preventing mass atrocity crimes. Singapore joined more than 100 countries in supporting the French-Mexican initiative and the ACT’s code of conduct on limiting the use of the veto against mass atrocity crimes. While the P5 has special privileges, these must be wielded with increased responsibilities. Otherwise, the Council will not be able to discharge its duties in the maintenance of international peace and security.

Mr President,

10           Let me conclude by thanking your country and you personally for the attention that you have brought to this issue. We support your intention to follow-up on today’s session by further discussing the practical proposals at the Informal Working Group of the Council. We call on all members to continue constructive engagement in improving the working methods of the Council. And in line with the E10’s earlier statement, we support the adoption of specific notes issued by the President, on specific issues as and when they are agreed, in order to allow for practical reforms to occur. We look forward to a good outcome under your able leadership.

.    .    .    .    .