安全理事会工作方法 - 安全理事会, 公开辩论
安全理事会
Date: 19 August 2026
Language: English
Transcript: https://transcripts.un.org/zh/sc/10210?lang=en
Transcripts available through this tool are created by using automatic speech recognition and are not official records nor official documents of the United Nations. Official records and official documents are available on the Official Document System of the United Nations.

---

Denmark · President [17:32]:

The 10210th meeting of the Security Council is called to order. The provisional agenda for this meeting is: implementing of the note by the President of the Security Council, S/2024/507, working methods of the Security Council. The agenda is adopted. In accordance with Rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representatives of Angola, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Maldives, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Namibia, New Zealand, Nigeria, Paraguay, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Thailand, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe to participate in this meeting. It is so decided. In accordance with Rule 39 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure, I invite Ms. Sharmila Kandia-Thomson, Executive Director of the Security Council Report, to participate in this meeting. It is so decided. In accordance with Rule 39 of the Councils provisional rules of procedure, I also invite His Excellency Mr. Mohamed Fati Ahmed Idris, Permanent Observer of the African Union to the United Nations to participate in this meeting. It is so decided. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of item two of the agenda. I wish to draw the attention of Council members to document S/2026/649, a letter dated 4 August 2026 from the Permanent Representatives of Denmark and Pakistan to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General transmitting a concept paper on the item under consideration. And I now give the floor to Ms. Shamila Kandia-Thomson. You have the floor.


SCR · Executive Director · Sharmila Kandia-Thomson [20:28]:

Thank you. Madam President, Excellencies, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, Thank you to Denmark for convening this working methods open debate and for the opportunity to brief the Security Council once again on an issue that's critical to the effectiveness of the Security Council and core to the work of Security Council report. I thank Council members, other member states, UN colleagues, and our counterparts in civil society without whose support and engagement, as your work would not be possible. I would also like to express our appreciation to our SCAD colleagues for their dedicated work, including on this issue that we're discussing today. Security Council Report has followed the Council's working methods closely for more than two decades. We have not just documented their evolution, but tracked how they're implemented. We have published several reports on working methods and maintained records of practices such as pen holding and the appointment of subsidiary body chairs. Sr. has made this institutional memory publicly available to all members and the wider public. Our experience has led us to conclude that while working methods cannot resolve political differences, they are essential in helping members navigate those differences. I will focus my remarks on three areas where working methods could be used to help bridge differences, the allocation of subsidiary body chairs, the process for selecting the next Secretary-General and the Council's relationship with the Secretary-General and visiting missions. Let me first address the allocation of chairs and vice-chairs of subsidiary bodies. The delay in their allocation is not a new problem, but the delays in the past two years have been of a different scale. In 2025, the allocation was not agreed until late May. In 2026, there's still no agreement. This is now the longest period without agreed chairs and vice chairs since the practice of recording this allocation in a presidential note began in 1979. The current impasse is linked to disagreement over who will chair the 1737 Iran Sanctions Committee and the broader dispute over the reimposition of sanctions on Iran through the snapback mechanism. The council has a limited contingency arrangement to redress the situation. A 2023 presidential note states that the responsibilities of the subsidiary body chairs devolve to the council president if appointments have not been made by 1st January. This arrangement was first used in 2025 with council members informally agreeing to extend the arrangement beyond January. The experience of the past two years has shown the limits of this arrangement. The presidency already has substantial responsibilities and cannot realistically chair all subsidiary bodies. There are also significant practical consequences. Sanctions committees are not functioning at full capacity. Presidencies have stepped in to perform some urgent tasks, including considering panel of experts reports and processing exemption and designation requests. But many other activities have not taken place. Working groups are not functioning. Sanctions committees have not been able to receive briefings from UN agencies and experts. The Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict, for example, has accumulated a backlog of country reports for which it's unable to adopt conclusions, weakening an important accountability mechanism. This is not just a procedural inconvenience. Subsidy bodies are part of how the council implements decisions, monitors sanctions, follows up mandates, and upholds accountability. And there is a further consequence this year, incoming elected members have not been able to start negotiations over the 2027 chair and vice chair positions. Madam President, the current practice of negotiating chairs as a package is often viewed as an important mechanism for compromise, but this needs to be balanced by the risk of a single unresolved issue derailing arrangement over the entire package. I'd like to offer some options for avoiding these delays becoming a yearly occurrence. First, the council could consider decoupling uncontested appointments from those that are disputed. At present, as I mentioned, the allocation is treated as a single package. Members could agree that when a chair is not contested, the appointment can proceed while negotiations continue over the remaining positions. Second, Two year terms for chairs could be pursued, allowing a member that continues into a second year to retain the chair without being affected by disagreements over positions available to incoming members. And third, the council could strengthen the role of the vice chairs as a genuine continuity mechanism. At least one vice chair of each subsidiary body could be a continuing council member and could assume the chair's functions if agreement on the new chair is delayed. And finally, the council needs to clarify what happens during a prolonged impasse. A future presidential note could specify the functions that an interim chair or vice chair could perform and how those arrangements would operate beyond January. Turning to the second issue, I'd like to recognize how much of the framework established during the previous Secretary-General selection process in 2015-2016 has been maintained. The joint call for candidates by the Presidents of the General Assembly and the Security Council has continued. Candidates' nominations and vision statements are public. The General Assembly continues to hold webcast interactive dialogues with candidates. And the current process has also included town hall meeting with candidates, as well as other opportunities for candidates to present their views outside New York. As was done in 2016, candidates have had the opportunity to meet informally with the council. One innovation has been the press remarks by the council president following these meetings, providing a public record that the meeting took place. The Council has also maintained the use of straw polls as its principal mechanism for assessing candidates and retained largely the same modalities. The first straw poll was held on the 30th of July and the second will be held this Friday. One of the main criticisms of the 2016 process was the limited transparency around the straw polls. During the negotiations of the modalities in May, members were again unable to agree on publicly releasing the results. As a result, well, as in 2016, the results were quickly circulated. The intense interest in the results from the wider membership, the media and the public is a good thing. But as we saw in 2016, there is the risk of inaccurate information being circulated with no easy way of verifying it. There's therefore a case for the council to consider whether official disclosure could provide greater certainty about the accuracy of the results and create a reliable public record for future analysis. It would also help to better align the council's public messaging with the realities and expectations around the process. I understand there may be little appetite to reopen the question in the current selection process. I would nevertheless encourage members to carefully consider the downside of not being the source of information. A related issue is the sequencing of meetings with candidates ahead of the straw polls. In 2016, all the candidates, including those who entered late in the race, took part in the General Assembly's interactive dialogues and then met with Council members before being included in the straw polls. This time, the sequence was not maintained. One candidate included in the straw poll had not gone through the same sequence of engagement with the General Assembly and the Security Council. I recognize that participation in the General Assembly's interactive dialogues and meeting with council members are not formal prerequisites for inclusion in a straw poll, but candidates should have comparable opportunities to present themselves to the General Assembly and the Security Council. This is not simply a question of fairness to the candidates, it is in the interest of council members. The council is making a consequential assessment. And before assessing the standing of candidates through straw polls, members ideally should have an opportunity to hear from the candidates. In this context, I'm pleased that the latest candidate that was announced yesterday will engage with the General Assembly and informally with council members ahead of the straw polls. Madam President, the relationship with the Security Council obviously extends beyond the selection and appointment process. As the selection process advances, the Council should consider how it intends to work with the next Secretary-General, especially on conflict prevention, an area most of the candidates have shown an interest in. At times when the Council lacks unity to act decisively, the Secretary-General's ability to balance discreet engagement with assertive action can make a critical contribution to conflict prevention and early warning. The UN is present in many countries, Through good offices, mediation, special representatives and envoys, regional political offices and country teams, the UN is able to identify emerging risks and support efforts to prevent escalation. Recently, there's been an increased interest in conflict prevention in the Council. Resolution 2788, Adopted in 2025 on peaceful settlement of disputes emphasized preventive diplomacy and early warning as part of the Council's and the UN system's preventive toolkit. Last month, in line with this resolution, the Secretary-General presented recommendations for strengthening mechanisms for the peaceful settlement of disputes. And the relationship with the Security Council matters not only when the Council is responding to a crisis, but before a crisis comes to the Council. The Secretary-General should be able to provide the Council not just with information, but concrete options for acting in the face of an impending crisis. And in turn, the Council needs to be responsive to early warning signals and be willing to engage and act. Existing working methods, including informal interactive dialogues and informal consultations, could be better utilized to create regular opportunities for the Secretary-General to brief Council members on emerging risks. The Secretary-General's lunches with members are also a good venue for discreet discussions. In addition, reports of the Secretary-General could, where relevant, include a distinct section on early warning to alert Council members to potential deterioration in situations where the UN is present. Such a section could also include concrete recommendations for possible Council action. There's one other council tool that's particularly relevant to prevention, but is being underutilized, the visiting mission. The council has used visiting missions for more than six decades for a range of purposes, including preventive diplomacy, gathering firsthand information, supporting peace processes, and mediation. But visiting missions are being used less frequently. While there have been between three and five missions a year leading up to 2020, In the six years since, there have only been four formal visiting missions. And there are a number of reasons for the decline in the use of this tool, including budgetary constraints and political divisions. This may be the time to consider reviving mini-missions involving a subset of members, a format last used in 2020 when the UN mission in Timor-Leste was shutting down. For greater impact though, visiting missions need to be used strategically. Members could decide at the start of the year where it would be most useful for them to go, for example, to better assess if conditions are suitable for a mission to scale down or the mandate needs to be revised. A visiting mission could also be useful at a critical stage in a peace process or ahead of elections. With the insights gained from interactions in the field, Council members may be able to work more closely with the Secretary-General in the area of early warning and preventive diplomacy. Madam President, in conclusion, I would say that working methods can act as a bulwark during times of uncertainty and change. But for working methods to be useful, implementation, evaluation and adaptation are needed. Working methods cannot resolve political differences, but they can help the Council manage these differences, preserve its ability to function and make better use of its tools. I hope this open debate will provide some new ideas towards this end. Thank you.


Denmark · President [33:54]:

I thank Ms. Shyamala Kandiya-Thompson for her briefing. I now give the floor to those Council members who wish to make statements. I give the floor to the representative of Liberia.


Liberia · E10 [34:06]:

Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the 10 elected members of the Security Council. Bahrain, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Greece, Latvia, Liberia, Pakistan, Panama, and Somalia. We thank Denmark as President of the Security Council for the month of August for convening this timely open debate on the implementation of note S/2024/507. We also express our appreciation to Ms. Shamala Kandiah-Thompson, Executive Director of Security Council Report for her valuable briefing. We welcome this opportunity to engage with the wider membership on the Council's working methods, and we believe that the views of the broader United Nations membership should inform the Council's ongoing efforts to improve its practices. Madam President, the elected members attach paramount importance to the council's working methods. They are not merely procedural formalities. They are essential tools for strengthening the credibility, effectiveness, transparency, inclusivity, and accountability of the council. and ultimately for enabling it to discharge its mandate for the maintenance of international peace and security. Article 24 of the charter entrusts the Security Council with primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security and provides that in carrying out its duties, The council acts on behalf of the membership of the United Nations. Article twenty-five further underscores the obligation of member states to accept and carry out the decisions of the council in accordance with the charter. These provisions establish a solemn relationship of trust. responsibility, and mutual reinforcement between the council and the wider membership. The manner in which the council conducts its work, from agenda setting and deliberation to decision making, implementation, monitoring, and follow up, is therefore of legitimate concern to all member states. As elected members, we take seriously the responsibility entrusted to us by the General Assembly. We remain committed to a council that is more transparent, inclusive, representative, responsive, democratic, and accountable and capable of translating its deliberations into timely and concrete action in response to threats to international peace and security. We reaffirm support for comprehensive reform of the Council through the intergovernmental negotiations mandated by the General Assembly. Note S/2024/507 remains the principal framework governing the council's working methods. It must remain a living document, reviewed and adapted as practice reviews operational gaps and as experience demonstrates where existing safeguards are insufficient. Its implementation should be reviewed regularly, including through open debates and through the work of the informal working group on documentation and other procedural questions. Such reviews should be guided by transparency, inclusivity, respect for the charter and the council's provisional rules of procedure with the objective of ensuring that the council's working methods remain fit for purpose in addressing evolving threats to international peace and security. Madam President, we express our grave concern over the unprecedented eight-month delay in the appointment of chairs and vice chairs of subsidiary bodies. The longest of such impasse in the council's history. The elected members deeply regret this situation. While we note the efforts of successive presidencies since January twenty twenty-six to ensure operational continuity exceptional measures cannot replace duly appointed leadership and must not become the new normal. This continued uncertainty has affected the delivery of the council's mandate. It has disrupted the work of subsidiary bodies, delayed decision making, weakened transparency and engagement with the wider membership and undermined the council's institutional effectiveness and credibility. It is therefore institutionally, politically, and operationally untenable. The requirement first established in note S slash 2017/507 and reaffirmed in note S/2024/507 to provisionally agree on subsidiary body leadership by 1st October exist to ensure predictability and an orderly transition. the experience of the past two years demonstrates the need to strengthen these arrangements so that future allocations are timely, structured, transparent, predictable, and resilient. In this regard, note five zero seven should be updated to include term bound contingency arrangements when agreement cannot be reached within the established time frame. Such arrangements could include aligning the tenure of appointed chairs and vice-chairs more closely with the two-year mandate of elected members, coupled with interim leadership continuity provisions and enhanced clarity on the process with the meaningful participation of elected members from an early stage. These safeguards could preserve operational stability and avoid future institutional paralysis. While respecting the principle of consensus. Madam President, beyond subsidiary bodies, the council must continue to strengthen operational inclusivity, transparency, representativeness, and a sense of shared responsibility among all its members. The E10 represents two thirds of the membership of this council. Our united view is clear. The council's legitimacy and effectiveness are strengthened when its workload is shared more equitably, when all members participate meaningfully, and when the views of those directed, affected, directly affected by the council's work are genuinely considered. We therefore call for systematic shared penholdership and an equitable division of labor between permanent and elected members. All 15 members share responsibility for the council's work and should have genuine opportunities to shape its agenda and outcomes. Elected members should be engaged from the outset in drafting and negotiating council products, including on files traditionally led by permanent members, including through co-penholdership arrangements where appropriate. The conduct of penholders and co-penholders is equally important. drafting and negotiations should be conducted in an inclusive, respectful, timely, and transparent manner guided by objectivity and impartiality while accounting for the views and concerns of all council members. Pen holders and co-pen holders should also consult in an inclusive and respectful manner with countries directly involved in or specifically affected by matters under consideration. In doing so, the council can improve the quality, legitimacy, and implementability of its decisions while strengthening unity and consensus. Equal access to documentation is also essential to fairness and effective participation. All council members should receive the same level of access to documents concerning matters under active consideration. sufficiently early to permit meaningful examination and engagement. Although Note 507 includes relevant provisions in this regard, further efforts are required to streamline procedures and ensure that access to relevant documentation is automatic and equal for all members of the council including members of its subsidiary bodies. We also underscore the importance of continuity among outgoing, current, and incoming elected members. Timely access to meetings of the council and its subsidiary bodies Informal consultations and communications as appropriate and in accordance with note five zero seven can help prepare incoming members to assume their responsibilities and contribute effectively to the council's work. While promoting equality. We reiterate the distinct and complimentary importance of both rules 37 and 39 of the council's provisional rules of procedure rule 37 is essential to ensure the participation of States directly affected by specifically involved in or with a direct Regional interest in situations under the council's consideration Their perspectives provide essential political, contextual, and firsthand information and contribute to more informed deliberations. Rule 39 likewise enables the Council to benefit from the expertise of the Secretariat, regional organizations, civil society, including women briefers and other relevant stakeholders. These rules should be applied fairly, clearly, and consistently while preserving the council's discretion to determine appropriate modalities. Participation should not be symbolic. It should lead to genuine consideration of the views and expertise presented to the council. We also underline the importance of ensuring that those who engage with the council including civil society briefers can do so safely and without intimidation. We further underscore the importance of continued cooperation and engagement with regional and sub-regional organizations in accordance with Chapter VIII of the Charter. Such cooperation can strengthen conflict prevention, mediation, burden sharing, and the Council's response to regional crises. In this context, The Council should continue to make effective use of regional perspectives and partnerships in addressing threats to international peace and security. The provisions contained in note 507 on enhancing interaction and consultation with troop and police contributing countries must also be fully implemented. Those who contribute personnel to United Nations peace operations bring indispensable operational experience and must be meaningfully consulted. particularly when mandates are established, renewed, or adjusted. Madam President, in the context of working methods, we also underscore the importance of greater emphasis on the Council's role in promoting the peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with the Charter. as was also reaffirmed by United Nations Security Council resolution 2788 of 2025 preventive diplomacy negotiation mediation conciliation good offices, and other peaceful means remain indispensable tools for preventing disputes from escalating into threats to international peace and security. The Council's working methods should facilitate the timely consideration of emerging tensions, appropriate use of preventive tools, early engagement with the parties to a dispute, before situation escalates into threats to international peace and security and cooperation with relevant regional and regional organizations. We also recognize the importance of targeted sanctions as a tool available to the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security. At the same time, we reiterate the need to strengthen due process, fairness, clarity, and transparency in United Nations sanctions procedures, thereby increasing the legitimacy and effectiveness of sanctions regimes. Sanctions must not have adverse humanitarian consequences for civilian populations or negatively affect humanitarian activities carried out by humanitarian organizations or United Nations agencies. In this regard, we recall the importance of the cross-cutting humanitarian exemptions established by relevant council resolutions and underline the need for their full and effective implementation. The ability of relevant subsidiary bodies including the informal working group on sanctions to function effectively depends on timely and predictable leadership arrangements. Madam President, Transparency must also guide major international processes, including the selection and recommendation of the Secretary-General. The appointment of the Secretary-General is one of the most consequential responsibilities in which the Security Council participates. It concerns the entire membership of the United Nations and the Council's role in making a recommendation carries a corresponding responsibility to conduct its part of the process with transparency, inclusivity, predictability, fairness, and merit. while respecting the confidentiality required at appropriate stages. The council should maintain effective engagement with candidates and keep the broader membership regularly informed in a structured and timely manner. Once the process is completed, It will be useful to review and reflect on lessons learned with a view to further improving the council's working methods in future selection processes. Madam President, we remain concerned about the impact of the veto on council's ability to act. The use of threat the use or threat of use of the veto may prevent the council from responding to urgent situations and from acting on matters at the very heart of its mandate. We recall the importance of General Assembly Resolution 76/262 in fostering transparency and accountability, and we encourage continued restraint in the use of the veto, particularly where the Council is called upon to prevent or respond to the most serious crimes of international concern, or to address grave threats to international peace and security. No council member should be shielded from the responsibility to explain its actions to the wider membership. Finally, we reaffirm support for comprehensive reform through the intergovernmental negotiations mandated by the General Assembly with a view to making the council more representative, inclusive, transparent, democratic, accountable, efficient, and effective. Madam President, The strength of the Security Council does not rest only on the powers conferred upon it by the Charter. It also rests on the confidence that Member States place in the Council to exercise those powers fairly, effectively, transparently and responsibly. For the E10, improving working methods means strengthening the legitimacy and effectiveness of the council. The E ten stands ready to work constructively with all members to uphold the trust reposed in the council under the charter to live up to the responsibility bestowed upon us through our election by the members of the United Nations and to help build a Council that is more effective, transparent, inclusive, representative and responsive. I thank you.


Denmark · President [57:38]:

I thank the representative of Liberia for the statement. I will now give the floor to the representative of China.


China [57:46]:

President, I thank Ms. Kandia for her briefing. As present, the international situation is marked by changes and turmoil. Hotspot issues are breaking out in multiple locations and they are complicated and difficult to resolve. As the court of the global collective security mechanism, the Security Council and whether it can function effectively bears on the authority and credibility of the UN and on the prospect of international peace and security. Working methods as an important safeguard for the council's functioning have never been merely technical issues, they require continuous improvement and refinement based on the broader interest of maintaining international peace and security, I would like to emphasize the following points. First, we must strengthen unity and cooperation and build broad consensus. Unity and cooperation are the source of vitality for multilateral mechanisms and should always be at the core of the Council working methods. Whether on substantive issues or procedural matters, Council members should respect one another, engage in full consultation, properly manage differences and make every effort to seek consensus. Forcing a vote on some draft resolutions that remain highly contentious not only exacerbates internal divisions but also significantly undermines the political weight and effectiveness of the resolutions. In this regard, pen holders play a crucial role. Holding a pen is not a privilege but a responsibility. Penholders should be objective and fair, listened extensively to varying views and actively play a coordinating role to help all parties build the broadest possible consensus. Second, we must seek truth from facts and serve the political process. The effectiveness of Council meetings, outcomes, and tools such as sanctions and peacekeeping should be measured by their ability to proceed from reality and constructively advance political solutions to hotspot issues. We must adhere to the spirit of Chapter VI of the UN Charter, create favorable conditions for dialogue and negotiations among parties concerned, Support regional countries and organizations in playing their role of good offices and mediation and make every effort to seek peaceful resolutions to disputes. We must earnestly respect the sovereignty and leading role of the countries concerned and exercise caution in the use of sanctions, force and other coercive measures. Sanctions mechanisms that fail to achieve their intended objectives should be promptly reviewed and adjusted, and those obsolete ones should be lifted without delay. We should support political and peacekeeping missions in focusing on their core responsibilities, working closely with the countries concerned and adjusting their mandates and deployments in accordance with local needs to strengthen their capacity and mandate implementation. The transition and withdrawal of missions should be smooth and orderly to avoid disrupting the local situation. Third, we must take practical measures to enhance the effectiveness of our work. The Security Council should promptly adjust its deliberation cycle in light of evolving circumstances, reasonably schedule discussions on comprehensive issues, and minimize meetings with overlapping agendas as much as possible. We should flexibly choose meeting formats appropriately, increase internal consultations, and promote frank and efficient communication among all parties. We should improve our writing style so as to make our outcome documents more concise and clear. The rotating presidency should effectively fulfil its coordinating role by soliciting views of other members on arrangements such as agenda and briefers and thereby demonstrating due respect for Member States and parties concerned. We must strengthen oversight of civil society briefers to ensure that their positions are objective and impartial and they contribute to effective discussions. Security Council members must strictly abide by the consensus and understandings reached among themselves and continuously enhance mutual trust and understanding. We support Council members in intensifying consultations on arrangements for subsidiary body chairs, resolving differences as soon as possible, and actively exploring innovative approaches to addressing such issues. Fourth, we must Put together global efforts to uphold the Council authority. The Security Council bears the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security and its status and role are irreplaceable. A united and strong Security Council serves the need for world peace and stability and aligns with the common interest of the broad membership. We call on all countries to actively support the work of the Council, strictly implement its resolutions, jointly uphold its authority and resist illegal unilateral acts that circumvent the Security Council and marginalize the UN. Permanent members must play a leading role in this regard, uphold fairness and justice, and truly demonstrate the responsibility of great powers. President, as a permanent member and a responsible major power, China has always participated constructively in the work of the Council. We are willing to continue working with all parties to uphold multilateralism, strengthen solidarity and cooperation, and jointly support the Council in improving its working methods and enhancing its capacity to fulfill its duties so as to play a greater role in promoting the building of a world of lasting peace and common security. Thank you.


United States of America [1:03:54]:

Thank you, Madam President.

Many thanks to Denmark for convening this important debate, and thank you to today's briefer. We welcome the opportunity to discuss what aspects of the Council's working methods serve us well and where there may be opportunities for improvement. Madam President, this Council's work, both substantive and procedural, is the basis for the development of the European Union. must serve the interests of UN member states. Recent events, unfortunately, suggest that this council's working methods are not being respected. For example, the Security Council plays a critical role in recommending the next Secretary General, as mandated in the UN Charter. The United States takes this responsibility very seriously. The intergovernmental process to identify the next Secretary General must allow for the selection of the best candidate, one who demonstrates the highest standards and qualifications for the position. This is why the United States takes exceptional issue with the President of the General Assembly's overreach and irresponsible actions in this process, the sum of which may serve to undermine the important selection process. The PGA has sent this Council two letters insinuating that it acted improperly, invoking transparency, fairness, and inclusion. This Council has respected the selection process as set forth in Resolution 79-327 on the revitalization work of the General Assembly. The PGA, in contrast, has not. The president's actions expose a hypocrisy and reflect poorly on the General Assembly's work writ large. On July 23rd, the PGA convened a town hall with candidates and used it to conduct an audience survey, soliciting feedback on candidates' performance and opinions. This survey was a complete surprise to the candidates themselves and to the observers. Most people who voted in the poll have no official role in the selection process of the Secretary General. This polling was unfair, untransparent and unprecedented. Resolution 79327 does not direct the President of the General Assembly to conduct polls or surveys of candidates in any form. The PGA knew this and did it anyway. The PGA continues a trend of UN leadership, fancying themselves as diplomatic superstars rather than chief administrative officers. In a second letter, P.J. Baerbock asked this council not to consider candidates that did not participate in a General Assembly dialogue. The president of the Security Council has already answered her letter, but it bears repeating. The joint letter on nominations is unambiguous. This Council may consider candidates who never participate in a General Assembly dialogue. Finally, Madam President, we would like to thank the Security Council Affairs Division and other members of the Secretariat for their continued operational legwork behind the scenes, providing essential support for this Council's work. Their outstanding professionalism is noteworthy. Thank you.


Denmark · President [1:07:40]:

I thank the representative of the United States for the statement, and I now give the floor to the representative of France.


France [1:07:48]:

Madam President, I wish first and foremost to thank Ms. Shamala Khandare for her briefing. It is always a pleasure to have you with us for this annual debate, and I wish to hail the fact that for more than 20 years now, the Security Council report has helped Security Council working methods to evolve. These working methods are the means by which this Council discharges the mandate that has been entrusted to it by the Charter. It is through these working methods that the Council plays its role. in terms of international peace and security. It is consequently our unstinting and collective responsibility to ensure that the way in which the Council organizes its work safeguard an open and effective multilateralism rooted in universal values and law. I will make three points. First, and foremost, the Council is an executive organ. If we wish to see it able to preserve international peace and security, it cannot be reduced to a mere platform for advocacy. Its decision-making powers and its operational functions must consequently be preserved. The issue of limiting the number of meetings, particularly The issue of making only reasonable use of open debates and the idea of thinking about the number of speakers or managing speaking time are, in this connection, vital questions to consider. Adapting meeting formats to tailor it to the goal pursued is also crucial. Open meetings are useful because they heighten transparency of the council's work and make it possible to hear other views, including voices of women and of civil society. However, we must also preserve a forum for candid, sincere dialogue between council members through closed meetings. The work of the Council must never lose touch with reality on the ground, that is the reality in areas under its consideration. Efforts on the part of the Council to make its texts more concise and clearer are necessary, starting with mandates of peace operations. France is fully focused on that goal for the files on which it is penholder. My second point, better working methods will never replace the spirit of responsibility, accountability and compromise. There's no doubt that we must constantly reflect upon our working methods and ensure we can tweak them as necessary. The codification exercise cannot be a last resort and something done when the Council is unable to make progress elsewhere. Demonstrating responsibility means, first and foremost, engaging in good faith in negotiations and proving able to make necessary compromises so that the Council is able to hold discussions and take decisions in service of international peace and security. It this sense of responsibility that France invokes when considering the allocation of chairs to subsidiary bodies. This unprecedented impasse in which we find ourselves, with more than eight months of delay in making these appointments, is unacceptable. France has shown the utmost flexibility in seeking creative solutions which will bring about consensus. We call upon other council members to do the same. Demonstrating responsibility means, lastly, avoiding using the council as a platform for disinformation. It means avoiding saturating its programme of work with purely propagandistic meetings or making it into a circus by inviting outlandish briefers. The quality and solemnity of our conditions determines the credibility and legitimacy of the council. My third point relates to the procedure for selecting the next Secretary General. This process must continue to unfold in accordance with Article 97 of the Charter and the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly, namely, resolution 79/327 adopted by consensus on 5 September. Despite the fact that we would have been receptive to certain changes, France will comply with the process agreed upon by Council members to ultimately produce a recommendation in a timely fashion. Cognizant of expectations in terms of geographical diversity and gender, France will consider all official candidacies received, will do so in person and in light of their individual merits, in view of their capacity to defend and promote purposes and principles of the Charter, as well as to successfully steer organizational reform and to hold high the crucial torch of multilingualism, as well as to breathe new life into work across the three pillars. I will conclude by saying that beyond its working method, it is the Council itself that must evolve. France promotes an ambitious reform of its membership. The Council must become more representative by expanding both categories of member, permanent and non-permanent. Permanent members must make reasonable use of the veto. With that in mind, France since 2015 has alongside Mexico championed an initiative promoting the voluntary and collective suspension of the veto in mass atrocity cases. This initiative This initiative has recently gathered strong momentum. It is now supported by 121 states. We call upon states, including permanent members, to accede to this initiative. Thank you.


Denmark · President [1:13:25]:

France for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of United Kingdom.


United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [1:13:31]:

Thank you, Madam President. And I thank our briefer, Ms. Shamila Khandia Thompson, for sharing with us your suggestions and your considerable expertise. The United Kingdom welcomes this annual debate.

It is an opportunity to hear the views of Council members and the wider UN membership alike on where current Council procedures support advancing the maintenance of international peace and security, as well as.

Thoughts on how these might be refined further?

Underpinning the United Kingdom's approach to working methods is our desire for an action-oriented Security Council. A Council that is able to build consensus and to reach compromises through constructive and informed debates.

A Council in which we review the rhythm of meetings to ensure that time is adequately preserved for today's threats to international peace and security.

And a Council in which we recognise the importance of transparency and accountability alongside the principle of confidentiality.

Where that is required.

Our collective endeavour to select the next Secretary-General of the United Nations should continue.

To be guided by Article 97 of the Charter and by the processes outlined.

In the joint letter of 25 November 2025 and GA resolution 79/327. For our part, the United Kingdom will continue to assess all candidates on their merits. Our primary focus must be to secure the most qualified individual to lead the UN at this pivotal moment.

President, the United Kingdom is committed to responsible and effective pen holding, taking into careful account views of countries concerned and of the region.

This includes, where appropriate and mutually agreeable, co-penning products.

As we have done and as we have offered to do on many occasions.

We welcome the participation of Member States, relevant organizations and civil society briefers under rules 37 and 39. Their knowledge, experience and personal testimonies bring added depth to our consideration of questions of peace and security.

Finally.

We join colleagues across this Council who have today expressed concern over the continued delay in agreeing chairs to subsidiary bodies. We thank Presidencies which have ensured the most urgent committee business can continue, but those efforts are no substitute.

For a solution.

For our part, the United Kingdom has proposed a range of options to help move us forward, and we have demonstrated significant flexibility. We ask all colleagues likewise to demonstrate their flexibility so that we can collectively ensure that every Security Council subsidiary body.

Is allocated a chair. We must uphold and not undermine our collective decisions as set out in Security Council resolutions.

Resolving the current impasse is long overdue.

We also look forward to working with current and incoming Council members to reach agreement on chairs allocation in 2027.

And I thank you.


Denmark · President [1:17:07]:

And I thank the representative of the United Kingdom for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of the Russian Federation.


Russian Federation [1:17:15]:

Madam President, we thank the delegations of Denmark and Pakistan for jointly organizing the annual open debate on working methods and for their active work over the past year as co-chairs of the informal working group of the Security Council on documentation and other procedural questions. We would like to thank Ms. Shamala Kandiya Thompson for her briefing. The Russian Federation consistently advocates optimizing and streamlining the Council's workings method with a view to enhancing its effectiveness in carrying out its exclusive mandate in the field of maintaining international peace and security. It is of fundamental importance that any transformations in this area be thoroughly worked through and aimed at a real, rather than nominal, improvement in the quality of its work. They must take into account the specific nature of the body, the sensitive nature of many of the issues on its agenda and the importance of ensuring their effective implementation. In this context, we consistently support the Council's annual open discussion of this issue. which makes it possible to identify opportunities for further improvements and optimizing its working methods. And the confirmation of the effectiveness of this practice is the incorporation of many substantive proposals and initiatives voiced by Member States into the compendium of the Council's working practices, which we know as the President's Note 507. The importance of this document is difficult to overstate. It's actively used by incoming non-permanent members as they prepare for their turn and remains an important aid in the Council's work. And we trust that today's discussion will also contribute to the work of the informal working group and that new and fresh ideas will enrich future discussions in that format. And of course, with the understanding that the working methods themselves and any steps to modify them have been and will remain the prerogative of the members of the Council. Madam President, it is regrettable that the Council continues to face the problem of its agenda being diluted through the inclusion into it of issues that do not fall within its mandate, including such issues as human rights and climate. The practice of placing such initiatives on the Council's table is a source of mandate duplication, inefficient allocation of resources, and diversion of the Council's attention from its immediate responsibilities. The United Nations itself is becoming a victim of this trend. Tasks are assigned to its field presences whose implementation does not contribute to strengthening stability and this ultimately only increases the level of public criticism directed at the UN and undermines its authority. We observe many host countries against this background increasingly trying to rid themselves of such a presence. We also note the persistent unwillingness of our Western colleagues to review sanctions with respect to countries where restrictive measures no longer correspond to the current situation. The sanction bludgeon used in DPRK, Sudan, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic is used by some states as their favored instrument of foreign policy pressure under the flag of the United Nations. And this occurs despite the loss of relevance of the reasons for which the sanctions were introduced. And against this background, attempts not to review sanctions measures, but on the contrary, to expand their scope is a cause for concern. We regret the acute lack of the Council's ability to engage in constructive discussion and negotiations. Many drafts promoted in the Council are divorced from reality, have not been coordinated with their key implementers and carry an openly confrontational charge. Such documents not only fail to contribute to sustainable solutions, but in many cases they are doomed to failure from the outset. And, uh, let's, uh, not complain about the UN in this regard. We consider it is important to draw attention to the refusal of a number of states, primarily those from the Western camp, to seek compromise on important issues of peace and security. Decisions not adopted unanimously, as practice shows, do not have the same force on the ground as consensus decisions and resolutions. Some delegations altogether disregard previously adopted Council decisions and even try to resurrect long-expired resolutions from oblivion without any legal basis for doing so. matters have reached the point where these countries are prepared to sacrifice the effectiveness of the Security Council's work, including the functioning of its subsidiary bodies, to their short-term political interests. Artificial attempts to link the appointment of chairs of subsidiary bodies to unfounded unilateral demands of a particular group of states not only further aggravate differences amongst Council members, but also just simply adversely affect its work across a wide range of areas. And the these countries, some prominent members of the Council which touch upon these issues have no one to blame but themselves. The issue of informal penholdership of files remains acute on most issues. Only three delegations continues to serve as penholders. And despite having a long ago By some of them having lost their status over metropolitan powers, they continue to proceed from a sense of their own exceptionalism, adopting a mentoring posture towards other states and even regions. The views of the host country, regional actors often better informed about the situation on the ground, and sometimes even United Nations Secretariat representatives are ignored. Russia consistently advocates expanding the circle of informal pen holders, primarily through the greater involvement of non-permanent members of the Council. In this regard, we consider it useful to continue discussion on this issue in the informal working group on documentation. Particular attention should be paid, we think, to take into account the views of African states. The problem of the methodology for negotiating Security Council resolutions remains. Work is often conducted under conditions of artificial time pressure, and this does not allow comprehensive expert review of documents. As a result, obviously, raw, underdeveloped texts contain vague instructions for the Secretariat and are often unrealistic in terms of their goals and objectives. We advocate maintaining a balance between open and closed meetings of the Council. We can see that some Council members openly abuse the open meeting format in order to stage propaganda shows. At the same time, issues that are sensitive for them they prefer to consider behind closed doors. We have repeatedly pointed out the excessive volume of the Council's documentation. Each year, the Council produces several hundred documents, and the added value of some of which is unfortunately questionable. For our part, we consistently maintain that the Council's final products should be precise, concise, clear in meaning, and above all, results-oriented. This year, the Council faces the highly responsible task of selecting a candidate for the position of the next Secretary-General. We note that this process must proceed in strict accordance with Article 97 of the Charter of the United Nations, which establishes a strict distribution of roles between the Security Council and the General Assembly on this matter. I thank you.


Denmark · President [1:25:18]:

And I thank the representative of the Russian Federation for the statement. I wish to remind all speakers to limit their statements to no more than five minutes in order to enable the Council to carry out its work expeditiously. The flashing light on the microphone will prompt speakers to bring about their remarks to a close after five minutes. And I now give the floor to the representative of the Republic of Korea.


Republic of Korea [1:25:47]:

Madam President, I thank Denmark for convening today's open debate and Ms. Jamala Thompson for her insightful briefing. I also thank Pakistan for its contribution in this topic. The working methods of the Security Council are not simply a matter of procedure. How the Council deliberates, whose voices it heeds, and how it builds agreement will directly affect its ability to fulfill the primary responsibility and trust it to it by the UN charter the maintenance of international peace and security the Republic Korea believes that the implementation of note 507 should focus on translating agreed principles into practice while addressing the gaps that may emerge in this process today I would like to highlight three points drawing on our recent experience as a council member between 2024 and 25 first Prolonged delays in the appointment of chairs of subsidiary bodies should be resolved promptly so that the Council can effectively fulfill its duties under the Charter. It is important for the Council to avoid situations in which procedural difficulties impede the implementation of the very mandates it has established. The Security Council's practice of appointing chairs as part of an overall package has clear benefits. This practice has been fairly successful in striking a balance between members' preferences and the effective functioning of the Council. Having said that, these benefits should not come at the cost of prolonged disruption to the work of subsidiary bodies. An appointment delayed may, in effect, amount to an appointment denied. And if the effective functioning of the subsidiary body is hampered over time, the Council's institutional memory may fade, damaging the authority and credibility of the Council. Note 507 calls for early consultations on the chairs of subsidiary bodies for the following year and for a provisional agreement to be reached by October 1. It also contains a contingency measure in case agreement has not been reached by January 1, which is to have the Council President assume the responsibilities of the chair of all subsidiary bodies. This is a heavy burden to the President. While the current situation demands a real political solution, One possible interim solution to reduce the burden on the Council President and better preserve the Council's institutional memory is to have the Presidents of the previous and following months assist the President of the month, thereby forming some sort of troika. This can be achieved without amending Note 507. Second, panels needed to engage more systematically with relevant non-Council members from an early stage of drafting, particularly with States directly involved or specifically affected. The views of relevant non-Council members can help the Council develop a clearer understanding of the situation and better assess how its decisions may affect them. The more we listen, the closer we get to a solution. Such an engagement would not diminish the Council's decision-making authority, rather, it would contribute to more informed, effective, and inclusive Council decisions. This is why note 507 encourages penholders to consult a broader UN membership from an early stage of drafting. To translate these principles into practice, relevant states should have an opportunity to engage with penholders early enough for their views to be meaningfully considered, rather than merely reacting to a text that is largely finalized. In this regard, each month, the incoming president of the council, can remind and encourage the pen holders to engage with non-council members as it prepares the program of work for the next month. Third, we should continue to strengthen the transparency and inclusivity of the process for selecting the next Secretary-General. As the selection process is now underway, the question is not only who will become the next SG, but also whether candidates possess the vision, judgment, and leadership needed to lead the United Nations the complex challenges it faces for the wider membership the general assembly's interactive dialogue provide a useful opportunity to hear directly from candidates and express their views and expectations while fully respecting the confidential nature of the council's deliberations and its distinct role under the charter timely communication with the wider membership on key developments in the selection process could enhance the transparency and inclusivity of the process and and will definitely be beneficial to the council as well. This is again where the council president can play a particularly important role. In this regard, note 507 already has provided a useful guidance that we can follow. Madam President, improved working methods per se cannot solve all the problems associated with the council's conduct of business, but sound working methods can surely reduce the risk of institutional paralysis and enable the Council to better reflect the will of the peoples of the United Nations. Note 507 provides an important foundation in this regard, and we hope that its agreed principles will continue to be implemented faithfully, with due attention to issues that may emerge in practice. Thank you.


Denmark · President [1:31:00]:

I thank the representative for the Republic of Korea for the statement, and I now give the floor to the representative of Kyrgyzstan.


Kyrgyzstan [1:31:08]:

Madam President, At the outset, allow me to express our appreciation to Denmark for organizing today's significant discussion. I would also like to thank Ms. Shamala Kandya-Thomson for her insightful and practical briefing. Working methods may sound technical, but in reality, they are about something very simple, whether the Council can listen to each other, overcome differences, and move from repeating positions to finding solutions. For Kyrgyzstan, this is at the heart of today's discussion. At a time of growing divisions, it's especially important to preserve space for direct and meaningful dialogue. Transparency and public meetings are important, but they are not always enough. The council should also make better use of informal formats when they can help members speak more openly, better understand each other's concerns, and to look for common ground. This is particularly important for preventive diplomacy. The Council should be able to discuss emerging risks before they turn into crises and before positions become too difficult to reconcile. Another important issue is the participation of countries directly affected by the situations under discussion. We believe that rules 37 and 39 should be applied in a clear, consistent, and predictable way. But participation should be also meaningful. It is much more useful for an affected country to share its views before key positions are formed than to be involved only after the main discussions have already taken place. This is not about only inclusivity. It is also about helping the Council make better informed decisions. A third issue is the selection of chairs of subsidiary bodies. The experience of recent years shows that agreed timelines are not enough if the process itself doesn't work effectively. We therefore support a clear timetable for consultations after the election of new Council members. Preferences should be discussed early. New members should have enough time to prepare properly for their responsibilities and to be fully ready from the first day of their term. Finally, working methods should be not judged only by what is written in Council notes and documents. We also need to look at how they work in practice. What helps the Council act more effectively? And where do we still see a gap between agreed procedures and actual practice? In this regard, I welcome the intention of Denmark and Pakistan to take forward the practical ideas raised today and to continue this discussion in the informal working group. We believe the follow-up should focus not on creating more procedures, but on making the existing ones work better in practice. Kyrgyzstan believes that the consistent implementation of Note S/2024/507, together with practical improvements where needed, can strengthen confidence in the Council and help it respond more effectively for today's challenges. In the end, good working methods are those that help the Council maintain dialogue when dialogue is difficult, prevent divisions where possible, and act when action is needed. Kyrgyzstan stands ready to contribute constructively to this work. I thank you.


Denmark · President [1:34:35]:

And I thank the representative of Kyrgyzstan for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Germany.


Germany [1:34:42]:

Thank you, Madam President. Germany is grateful to Denmark and Pakistan for convening this open debate, and I would like to thank Ms. Candia Thompson for her briefing. When the Security Council is united, it is capable of great things. When it is inefficient, however, or even paralyzed, it weakens faith in the United Nations, and it neglects its duties towards member states and towards civilian populations, including those in wars and conflicts. So working methods are not procedural housekeeping. They shape whether this council can actually deliver on its mandate. And I would like to make four specific points. First, the ongoing deadlock of the appointment of chairs and vice chairs of subsidiary bodies is unacceptable. The fact that eight months have elapsed without a solution is nothing less but damaging, not only for the reputation of the council, but for the United Nations as a whole. Filling these positions for sanctions committees and other subsidiary bodies is essential for the Council to implement its own decisions and deliver on its mandate. So we recommend the tireless efforts by the E10 to push for a solution and we call on those permanent members who block an agreement to show a minimum amount of flexibility and lift the blocking as soon as possible. Secondly, responsibilities in the Council must be shared more fairly. Council with an agenda covering all regions of the world should not let a handful of its members only to hold all the pens. Elected members bring regional perspectives, political legitimacy, and often firsthand experience of the conflicts to the table. Germany therefore encourages more co-penholder ships, including between permanent and elected members. And I would like to highlight the E10 should harness their collective strength. When elected members join forces, they can help bring divisions and bring forward solutions. And in this context, one word, a little beyond the methods, the fundamental question of council reform remains as pressing as ever, and Germany continues to advocate for an expansion of the council as proposed by the G4 and including the support for the common African position. Thirdly, listening to different perspectives does not weaken the council, it makes its decisions better. States that find themselves directly affected by a situation must have the opportunity to be heard, and rules 37 and 39 give us the tools for this, and we ought to apply them fairly and consistently. Germany also continues to advocate for the Council to tap into expertise from civil society, in particular from women and youth, and from other parts of the UN system, including from the Peacebuilding Commission. The need for close and efficient cooperation applies in particular to the Council's relationship with the General Assembly, and certainly the most pressing and current matter that affects all Member States is the selection of the next Secretary-General. Making this process as inclusive and transparent as possible is possible, and this is in the interest of the entire UN membership. And finally, on the veto, the veto is of course foreseen by the Charter. But using the veto carries enormous responsibility, and when the Council is unable to take action in the face of serious violations of international law, its credibility suffers profoundly. Germany therefore supports all efforts to limit the use of the veto, including the French-Mexican initiative on the suspension of veto powers in cases of mass atrocities. Madam President, the world does not expect the Security Council to see eye to eye on everything. people do expect it to function and live up to the fundamental responsibility the UN Charter has entrusted it with. They expect the Council and its members to listen, to discuss and then, importantly, to take decisions and then to implement them. Thank you very much.


Denmark · President [1:38:51]:

I thank the representative of Germany for the statement and I now give the floor to the representative of Austria.


Austria [1:38:57]:

Madam President, Excellencies, colleagues, The working methods of the UN Security Council are not merely a procedural and technical matter. They are crucial to provide a level playing field for all members, enhance the inclusivity of the Council, and ultimately serve to strengthen its efficiency and effectiveness. Austria has therefore always placed a particular emphasis on this topic, including through its role as IGCN co-chair from 2023 to 2025. through which Austria demonstrated its ability to build consensus on key matters related to procedural matters. Let me focus on three points that are of particular importance right now. First, the allocation of chairs of subsidiary bodies. We note with regret the unprecedented situation this year, which has a great impact on the ability of the subsidiary bodies to perform their work, raises questions of efficiency and puts an unnecessary additional burden on the monthly presidencies of the Council. We appreciate efforts to update Note 507 with a view to partially alleviating this issue in similar cases in the future. We would also be open to discussing a greater role for remaining Vice-Chairs in cases where the appointment of new Chairs is delayed, as also recommended by the breather Shamala Kanda-Thomsen. Second, on transparency towards the wider membership. According to Article 24 of the Charter, the Council acts on behalf of all members. This requires a certain degree of transparency of the Council's deliberations, work and decision making towards the wider membership. This can and should be ensured by making full use of instruments of transparency, such as monthly wrap in and wrap up meetings. However, closed meetings and consultations remain a key instrument to ensure candid and frank discussions and the ability to deliberate options for Council action in private. Austria also appreciates the important improvements in the Council's annual report, which Austria is looking forward to building upon as the Council member tasked with the drafting of the introduction of the annual report for next year. Third, on inclusivity. The legitimacy of the Council's outcomes also rests on the inclusivity of its work. In this regard, Austria welcomes the increase of the Council's practice on co-PEN holderships, which ensure an increased participation of the elected members in the decision-making processes of the Council. The Council should also continue and enhance its practice of consultations with troop and police contributing countries ahead of mandate renewals. In this regard, we encourage Council members to consult broadly with countries concerned, host countries, regional partners, and troop and police contributing countries before tabling draft resolutions. Finally, I would like to thank the co-chairs of the IWG, Denmark and Pakistan, for their excellent work during their ongoing mandate and encourage them to ensure follow-up to the concrete suggestions made today. And I thank you.


Denmark · President [1:42:02]:

And I thank the representative of Austria for the statement. And now I'll give the floor to the representative of Egypt.


Egypt [1:42:13]:

Madam President, I would like to thank you for holding this important meeting today. The debate on the working methods of the Council is part of the discussion on the credibility, effectiveness and efficiency of the Council. According to Article 24 of the Charter, the Council is representing the entire membership, hence its working methods need to reflect inclusivity, accountability and transparency. Egypt values the marked improvement in the working methods of the Council in the past years, however, We also stress that this cannot be a substitute to comprehensive Security Council reform in all aspects of its work in accordance with GA decision 62/557, including correcting the historical injustice for Africa through two permanent seats with veto and three other additional seats according to the common African position as part of the Zulini consensus and the sert declaration in addition Egypt also stresses that any true reform of the working methods of the council despite good intentions will have little value if there is no complete implementation of all Security Council resolutions and all Member States submitting to its resolutions and avoiding double standards when it comes to certain dossiers and for the interest of particular States. Allow me, Madam President, to focus on four main points that Egypt see as a priority as we speak of improving the working methods. First, Recent years have witnessed an increase in the number of Council meetings open to the wider membership, including briefings and open debates, as well as briefings by successive Council Presidencies before assuming the Presidency and following the conclusion of their respective terms. These are all positive steps that contribute to enhancing the transparency of the Council. Nevertheless, closed meetings remain among the most important forums in which decision making within the Council takes place. While recognising the need to maintain closed meetings and their importance in allowing Council members to consult candidly and without constraint, the Council should identify an appropriate mechanism for formally and authoritatively informing the wider membership of the substance and outcome of such meetings. Second, we welcome the notable progress achieved with regard to penholdership within the Council. Nevertheless, we remain convinced that further improvements can be made to this important practice, including through greater involvement of concerned States that are not members of the Council, as well as relevant regional organizations, in order to ensure that Council decisions are consistent with the realities on the ground. We also stress the importance of beginning consultations on Council outcomes at an early stage so as to ensure that all Members have sufficient time to study draft texts and contribute meaningfully to their formulation. Third, the process of selecting the Chairs of the Council's subsidiary bodies has, in recent years, encountered unjustified and difficult to understand challenges. These reveal a significant gap between the commitments undertaken by Member States to improve the Council's working methods and their implementation and practices. Member States should adhere to the provisions of Note 507 in this regard and establish a clear timeline, including a specific deadline for completing the selection of chairs and announcing those appointments to the membership before the beginning of each year, thereby ensuring that these bodies are able to continue carrying out the significant responsibilities entrusted to them. Four, the Security Council's role in the process of selecting the next Secretary-General should be characterized by a greater degree of transparency. While the GA continues to hold public dialogues with candidates, the Council should clearly announce its timetable and working procedures and maintain regular communication with the President of the General Assembly and the wider membership on this matter. Egypt further stresses the need to strengthen the role of the GA in the process of selecting the Secretary General who once appointed serves the entire membership of the United Nations and not only the members of the Security Council or its permanent members and is accountable to the broader membership rather than to a limited number of states, I think.


Denmark · President [1:47:12]:

I thank the representative of Egypt, and I now give the floor to the representative of Cuba.


Cuba [1:47:18]:

Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, year after year, we discuss the Security Council working methods without heeding the historical appeals of the countries of the South, comprehensive and deeply rooted Council reform, including reform of its working methods, is a task that remains outstanding. We should expand the membership of this organ across both of its categories. This will allow it to be more transparent, democratic and representative. We must eliminate the anti-democratic veto power that continues to hinder the adoption of crucial decisions. Moreover, it continues to weaken Security Council credibility. Until the veto is eliminated, the new seats created in the permanent category should enjoy the same prerogatives and rights as current members, including the veto power. We continue to see in the Security Council the following trends: it works in closed meetings; it presents every year to the rest of the membership the basic descriptive information of its work, it continues to adopt decisions without heeding the concerns of states that are not Security Council members and continues to force action on draft resolutions when considerable differences remain regarding the content and scope of these texts. Moreover, the provisional nature of the Security Council's rules of procedure continues to be seen. That's a status they've had since the Council's creation. The scope and definition of international peace and security continues to expand to the detriment of the functions and responsibilities of the General Assembly. We continue to see the selective manipulation of methods and practices of this body to serve political agendas and those fuelled by ambitions of domination. The most powerful military power that humanity has ever known continues on a daily basis to undermine the work of the Security Council and its work to preserve international peace and security. This power has an extensive track record of attacks, threats of use of force and interference in the domestic affairs of other states, and a track record in terms of imposing UCMs in flagrant violation of international law, including the Charter. At the same time, this power continues to stoke conflicts and division, undermines multilateralism and the credibility and legitimacy of the United Nations. Where Cuba is concerned, the government of the United States has ratcheted up its multidimensional war against Cuba to unprecedented levels. It maliciously continues to tighten up its regime change strategy that has only sown chaos in other countries. It applies a genocidal collective punishment to Cuba by combining work to strengthen up the economic, commercial and financial blockade that has been in place for more than seven years. It's doing that through the imposition of a brutal energy blockade which has now been in place for more than six months and in terms of its effect is equivalent to a naval blockade. Moreover, it enforces other unilateral measures of pressure. These include retaining Cuba on its arbitrary list of states that supposedly sponsor terrorism. And the US imposes other coercive measures against people, undertakings and other strategic sectors for Cuba, including the economy and its public health sector. We're also seeing dangerous public threats of a direct military attack against Cuba issued frequently by senior US officials. and in so doing they invoke mendacious and fanciful pretexts. These threats go hand in hand with diktats handed down related to our internal affairs, affairs that it is our sovereign prerogative to decide upon as an independent state fully exercising its right to self-determination. Once more we take the floor here to sound the alarm regarding the incalculable consequences that any military escapade against Cuba would have, not only for my country and for the United States, but also for international peace and security and that of the Southern Hemisphere. The Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. As such, it must act in strict accordance with its mandate where the aforementioned situation is concerned. Despite the looming threat of a military attack, Cuba continues to champion peace and dialogue, stringently adhering to international law and the principle of mutual respect. We are equally staunchly committed to defending our sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity until the very last. We once again appeal to sovereign and independent nations, including permanent and non-permanent members of the Security Council, to act with resolve and determination to defend the right to peace of a Member State of the United Nations. Thank you.


Denmark · President [1:52:03]:

I thank the representative of Cuba for the statement and I now give the floor to the representative of Liechtenstein.


Liechtenstein [1:52:09]:

Thank you so much for the floor, Madam President. Madam President, Liechtenstein has long taken an interest in the working methods of the Security Council. Given that, according to the Charter, the Council works on behalf of the membership, we have a clear interest in the Council being able to fulfil its primary responsibility for peace and security. The Council's commitment to its methods of work must be fit the life and death consequences of the products it adopts. Liechtenstein, as ever, aligns itself with the statement delivered by New Zealand on behalf of the ACT Group. Madam President, since our last open debate on this topic, we have seen a continued downturn in the number of vetoes cast by the Council's permanent members. This being said, the most recent veto cast on the ongoing crisis in the Strait of Hormuz exemplifies the Council's dysfunction. On this ongoing crisis with worldwide effects, Council members have been unable to commit to a cause of action that looks beyond the short-term interest of Council members towards the needs of those suffering its consequences, whether through disruptions to global trade, food shortages, or humanitarian action. This is even the case when Council members sought co-sponsorships from the wider membership, only to fail to bring relevant texts to action. We are pleased to see the General Assembly continuing to respond to vetoes through the veto initiative and encourage action as appropriate. We also note that 11 Council members are among the 130 signatories to the ACT Code of Conduct, who have pledged to support timely and decisive action to prevent and end atrocity crimes. In addition, in last year's resolution on the revitalization of the General Assembly, all Council members decided to support credible, timely, and decisive action by the Security Council in exercise of its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and to refrain from measures impeding action to prevent or end the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity, or war crimes. Furthermore, we encourage all Council members to clarify their approach to the application of the relevant part of Charter Article 27.3 as was agreed in the Pact for the Future. Madam President, we face an unprecedented failure in the Council's ability to manage a whole area of its work, namely to agree to a distribution of work for its subsidiary bodies. including those overseeing the implementation of Security Council sanctions. This year's disagreement was not only fully preventable, but has the potential to disrupt the work of the Council on an indefinite basis. We urge relevant Council members to find space for the necessary compromise. I'm present. We are pleased to see the Council taking up its role in the selection and appointment process of the incoming Secretary-General. and reiterate our hope that the process is concluded in the coming weeks in order to give the Secretary-General-elect sufficient time to prepare for the time in office. The membership made a landmark agreement on the structure of this process in the resolution on the revitalization of the General Assembly, which should be upheld in full. The process should be guided by the principles of transparency, accountability and inclusivity, something notably absent, for example, in the decision not to formally release the results of its straw polls, instead relying on members to leak such results to the public. We encourage the Council to codify its role in the process through discussions in the informal working group. I thank you so much.


Denmark · President [1:56:20]:

I thank the representative of Liechtenstein for the statement and I now give the floor to the representative of Indonesia.


Indonesia [1:56:28]:

Madam President, I thank Denmark for convening this open debate.

And also Pakistan as co-chairs of informal working group on working methods for their works.

Allow me also to appreciate Ms. Samala Kandia Thompson for her insights for our briefings. Indonesia welcomes this annual debate as an opportunity for a strategic assessment of the Council's working methods.

Our objective must remain steadfast to shape a Council that is genuinely fit for the future, relevant and capable of navigating an increasingly volatile global landscape. Outside this chamber, we are confronted by an increasingly unstable global environment, marked by the proliferation of protracted conflicts and humanitarian emergencies. Yet inside this room, geopolitical differences paralyze our collective will, turning vital decisions into inactions.

Against this backdrop, allow me to highlight three points.

First, improving the Council's working method must be an integral part of the broader UN reform. We should not mistake symptoms for the disease. Comprehensive reform is essential to overcome systemic inaction, toward the Council that is more effective, democratic, transparent, and representative of the wider global community. This must also translate to stronger cooperation with the whole UN system, including General Assembly, the ECOSOC, and the Peacebuilding Commission. Indonesia particularly welcomes note 507's emphasis on stronger cooperation with the PBC, including through more specific requests, early consultation, and timely advice. Second, the Council must be inclusive and responsive to those directly affected by its decisions. This requires the Council to draw more systematically on the perspectives and expertise of those serving on the ground. To this end, we encourage deeper cooperation with regional organizations, including by inviting them to the Council's meeting as briefers. ASEAN, through its established platforms for dialogue, confidence building measures and preventive diplomacy demonstrates regional values and perspective that could be brought to the Council's deliberations. This same principle must also guide the Council's engagement with troop and police contributing countries.

Their perspective must meaningfully inform the Council's decisions to ensure they are tailored to evolving situations.

And challenges on the ground. Third, procedural matters must not become sources of paralysis. Note 507 should be fully implemented to identify and remove bottlenecks in the Council's working methods. The continuing lack of agreements on the allocations of chairs and vice-chairs of subsidiary bodies for 2026 is a case in point. When procedural matters remain unresolved, they can directly constrain the Council's ability to fulfill its mandate and respond to crisis on the ground. This is why we must ensure that the Council's working methods are more effective, democratic, transparent, and representative, including its contributions in the selection of the Secretary-General. We therefore call for the selection process to be closely aligned with the Vis-Nomosti guidelines for internal Council consultations, while ensuring synergy with GA mandates to guarantee a transparent, inclusive and merit-based selection process. Madam President, working methods are not an end in themselves. They are created to ensure action, accountability and results. Let us therefore ensure that the Council's methods strengthen instead of weaken its ability to act. Indonesia remains committed to this endeavour.

I thank you, Madam President.


Denmark · President [2:00:25]:

And I thank the representative of Indonesia for the statement. And I'll give the floor to the representative of Bulgaria.


Bulgaria [2:00:32]:

Thank you, Madam President. Bulgaria welcomes the briefing by the Executive Director of the Security Council report and values the opportunity to contribute to today's discussion organized by Denmark and Pakistan. Although the Council's working method remained a prerogative of its members, The broader United Nations membership, on whose behalf the Councils act, has a legal and moral stake in their consistent implementation, effectiveness, adaptability to new realities, and adherence to universal values and the rule of law. Echoing earlier interventions, Bulgaria emphasises the need for greater inclusivity in pan-holder ship, timely appointments of subsidiary bodies, chairs and vice chairs, fair documentation access for the 10 elected members and the enhanced role of civil society, notably women briefers in council deliberations. We also take note with appreciation of the Council's consistent inclusion of sunset clauses in its mandates, an approach that could well inspire the broader UN membership as we move forward with the UNAT reform process. Next, given the growing risk of regional spillovers from conflicts and mindful of my country's geographical proximity.

To the war in.

Ukraine, I would like to share a few reflections on the participation of non-council members in the Security Council meetings. Rule 37 of the Council's provisions of the procedure establishes that a non-member state may participate in Council meetings if it is specially affected, a criterion noted in Article 31 of the Charter. In an era of rapidly advancing digital technologies, the already complex definition of this term faces new challenges, making it all more important that geographical proximity to a military conflict be recognized as meeting the threshold of being specially affected. Furthermore, it should be generally accepted that when one parties to a situation is invited to participate, Any other party to that situation should be extended the same invitation upon request. The participation of specially affected states strengthens the legitimacy of Council's decisions, which brings me to the Council's corresponding obligation to uphold the Charter in its voting practices, including through the full and consistent implementation of Article 27.3. Turning now to the selection of the next Secretary General, Bulgaria mindful that it is the General Assembly that appoints the Secretary General upon recommendation of the Council, joins the calls for the Council to ensure that its recommendation process are transparent and enable the General Assembly to fully exercise its authority in this matter. In closing, The Council's working methods serve as the principal vehicle for implementing its mandate. They are not a technicality, but rather a political tool essential to our collective mission of safeguarding international peace and security.

I thank you, Chair.


Denmark · President [2:04:13]:

Representative of Bulgaria for the statement, and I'll give the floor to the representative of Zimbabwe.


Zimbabwe [2:04:20]:

Thank you, Madam President. Zimbabwe congratulates Denmark on its presidency of the Security Council and commends its leadership in convening this.

Annual open debate on working methods.

We also thank Ms. Shamala Kandir Thompson on a valuable briefing.

As an incoming member of the Council, Zimbabwe attaches particular importance to working methods that enhance the Council's effectiveness, credibility, accountability, while maintaining the confidence of the wider United Nations membership. In this context, we remain concerned by the continuing delay in the appointment of chairs and vice-chairs of subsidiary bodies. Prolonged disagreement risks impairing the effective functioning and ultimately the Council's ability to discharge its responsibilities under the Charter. Zimbabwe's overriding interest is therefore in an early and practical, mutually acceptable resolution of the current impasse. We do not seek to apportion responsibility or pronounce on the merits of the respective positions advanced by the parties concerned. Any way forward should be without prejudice to the position of any delegation and should avoid creating precedents that may unnecessarily complicate future appointments. The principles reflected in Presidential Note S.2024/507, including equity, transparency, timeliness, inclusivity, and fair distribution of responsibilities, should continue to guide the process. Zimbabwe therefore encourages intensified and discreet consultations among members supported where appropriate by the presidency and relevant working methods mechanisms with a view to identifying areas of flexibility and reaching agreement within a clearly defined timeframe. The council should also draw lessons from the present experience, including through area consultations with incoming elected members and greater clarity regarding the expectations associated with particular subsidiary bodies. Beyond this immediate issue, Zimbabwe supports continued improvement in the Council's working methods. In this regard, we wish to highlight the following perspectives. First, we welcome greater panel ownership and co-panel ownership by the elected members. which broadens ownership and brings diverse perspectives to the preparation of Council outcomes. Second, we attach importance to the timely and meaningful participation of affected states under Rules 37 and 39. Those closest to a conflict often possess political, historical, and social insights that can enrich the Council's deliberations and contribute to more informed decision-making. Third, On African peace and security situations, early and systematic engagement with the African Union and relevant sub-regional organizations can strengthen ownership, legitimacy, and effectiveness of Council decisions. Engagement with troop and police contributing countries should likewise be enhanced. Finally, transparency should extend to the decisions of particular importance, the wider United Nations membership, including the selection of the next Secretary-General. Madam President, working methods cannot substitute for structural reform of the Security Council. They can, however, make the Council more transparent, inclusive, accountable and effective. Zimbabwe therefore encourages all members to approach both the outstanding appointments and in the broader working methods agenda with pragmatism, flexibility, and good faith. I thank you, Madam President.


Denmark · President [2:08:34]:

And I thank the representative of Zimbabwe for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of India.


India [2:08:43]:

At the outset, I would like to congratulate Denmark for assuming presidency of the Security Council and thank them for convening the annual open debate on working methods. I also thank the briefers for their remarks. Today's open debate gains particular salience given the questions among citizens of member states on the credibility, efficacy and legitimacy of the Security Council and its decision making. The underlying reason has been this principal organ's inability to purposefully intervene in raging conflicts across different parts of the globe. This has come at a huge cost to humanity particularly in the form of unabated human suffering. The need for reforming the Security Council is more pronounced and pressing than ever before. Our joint endeavour must be on appropriately equipping the UNSC to address contemporary and future challenges. The world of 1945 has changed beyond recognition. UN membership has grown fourfold since then. The outcome of one conflict 80 years ago cannot determine the composition, dynamics, approaches, and working methods for perpetuity. This needs to change and must happen at the earliest. India's position on reforms of the Security Council are well known. We seek an expansion in both categories with greater representation for the global south. This could be achieved only through text-based negotiations with clearly defined milestones and timelines. In this backdrop, I would like to make the following specific points with regard to working methods. First, a discussion on improvement of UNSC working methods must not be done in isolation. It is an important aspect of the broader umbrella of UNSC reforms and inherently linked to other clusters such as categories of membership, regional representation and veto among others. Any reform of the Security Council must account for all these clusters as a whole in order to make it comprehensive, real and meaningful. Second, it has been more than 80 years and the rules of procedure of the Security Council are continue to be provisional. The provisional nature of these rules also suggest that they could be amended suitably from time to time. Therefore, existing working methods must not be cited as a challenge or obstacle to implement reforms, particularly in terms of expanding the membership. Further, the provisional framework per se also needs corrections. Third, non-permanent members are elected by the wider UN membership through the General Assembly. they shoulder the responsibilities entrusted upon them by other member states. In order to enable the non-permanent members to make meaningful contributions during their respective two-year terms, all Security Council members must enjoy the same set of privileges in terms of access to documents. Access to historical documents must not be the exclusive preserve of a few. Similarly, there must be greater transparency in several ongoing processes of the Security Council. For instance, elected members and by implication the General Assembly must have a greater say in crucial aspects such as the election of the UN Secretary-General. Another important sphere is peacekeeping. TCCs and PCCs go far beyond the UNSC membership. Therefore, as direct stakeholders, they must be part of the UNSC decision-making architecture pertaining to all key questions of peacekeeping, such as mandates and resources. Fourth, subsidiary bodies serve important functions and enable better implementation of the Security Council mandates. However, these bodies have not been able to deliver optimally in the recent past, primarily due to the delay in finalizing the chairs. As no decision has been taken till date for the current year, India calls on the Security Council to urgently address this issue and finalize the chairs on priority. Moving forward, note 507 must be suitably amended so as to have a definitive and non-negotiable timeline for finalizing the chairs of subsidiary bodies. Finally, Security Council membership brings significant responsibilities. This must not become a platform to pursue narrow political interests. Listing and delisting are a case in point. There must be more transparency and objectivity on this front. Presence in the Security Council must not be instrumentalized to legitimize terrorists by attempting to delist them or to list other entities as terrorist organizations based solely on political considerations without any objective criteria or supporting documentation. Madam President, in closing, India would like to emphasize that the Security Council requires greater coordination with other principal organs, particularly the UN General Assembly, which remains the most universal and democratic arm of the UN. Institutional mechanisms such as consideration of the UNSC annual report by UNGA must not become a mere procedural formality. Working methods of the Security Council must be reviewed suitably in order to pave the way for closer interaction of the Security Council with other principal organs. Future consideration of the working methods must therefore be seen in this light. Thank you, Madam President.


Denmark · President [2:14:52]:

Representative of India for the statement, and I now give the floor to the representative of Portugal.


Portugal [2:14:59]:

Madam President, Portugal thanks Denmark and Pakistan.

For convening this debate and Ms. Shamala Thompson for her comprehensive briefing and always very enlightening remarks.

Working methods are not merely procedural housekeeping. They shape the Council's ability to discharge the responsibility entrusted to it by Article 24 and to act effectively on behalf of all Member States. Statistics do not tell the whole story, but they reveal a troubling trend. fewer outcomes, declining unanimity and political divisions so entrenched that in some crises the prospect of a veto can discourage negotiations before a draft even.

Reaches the table.

Working methods cannot manufacture political will, but they can create better conditions for diplomacy.

Portugal would like to highlight five practical areas.

First, we need to restore genuine deliberation.

Close consultations should not reproduce public meetings behind closed doors.

Members should engage directly, avoid prepared statements, and make greater use of interactive and informal formats.

Negotiations should start earlier and whenever possible, take place face to face. Efficiency should be measured not by the number of meetings or products, but by whether they advance a political objective. Second, the Council must address the paralysis of its subsidiary bodies. An entire system should not be immobilised because agreement cannot be reached on a package. Contingency arrangements also need clearer guidance for monthly presidencies temporarily exercising sharing responsibilities. But this must remain a safeguard, not become the normal way of operating. Third, penholdership must facilitate consensus, not replace it. Early consultation, inclusivity and burden sharing should be applied consistently. Affected states, relevant regional actors and troop and police contributing countries should be consulted early enough to influence Council decisions. Co-penholdership and broader distribution of drafting responsibilities can bring additional expertise and perspectives. Where disagreements persist, the answer should be neither a take it or leave it drafts, not abandoning initiatives because disagreement is anticipated. More political negotiation is needed between those extremes. Fourth, implementation deserves as much attention as adoption.

Council products should, where appropriate, contain clear benchmarks and.

Follow-up mechanisms to assess whether decisions are producing results on the ground.

Finally, the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly strengthens the Council's.

Legitimacy and allows constructive scrutiny by the wider membership, including through the veto initiative. The selection of the next Secretary General will also be an important test. Predictable procedures, equal treatment of candidates and regular factual communication with the General Assembly can strengthen confidence without.

Undermining the Council's responsibilities and prerogatives under the Charter. As an incoming member of this chamber, Portugal will approach working.

Methods not as an end in themselves, but as instruments for diplomacy. A more effective Council will not necessarily be one that meets more often or produces more documents. It will be one that listens earlier, negotiates more genuinely, follows up on its decisions and fosters political space for agreement. I thank you.


Denmark · President [2:18:34]:

I thank the representative of Portugal for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Italy.


Italy [2:18:45]:

Madam President, I thank you for convening this meeting on a topic which is of the utmost importance and deserves our continued attention. The international community has a vital interest in a Security Council that is efficient and effective in carrying out its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, which is critically needed in today's complex global environment. Madam President, the Uniting for Consensus Group has tabled a proposal for the reform of the Security Council, which also encompasses concrete ideas on the working methods of this body. Flexible, inclusive and transparent decision-making processes are key aspects of any reformed Security Council, as well as of an enhanced relationship between the Council and the General Assembly. Inclusive working methods in particular should entail the possibility for all elected members to play a greater role in the Security Council. The distribution of duties among the Council members should be fairer and more balanced when it comes both to the chairmanship of the subsidiary bodies and to the practice of penholderships and co-penholderships. Moreover, it is essential that views and interests of Member States affected or concerned by any matter on the agenda of the Council, including troop and police contributing countries and host countries, be heard and taken into account in its work. The working methods of the Security Council, as well as its relationship with the GA, can be improved through several measures, among which, first, formal adoption of the Rules of Procedure of the Security Council, Second, increased quality and enhanced analytical content of the Security Council's annual report to be presented during a special session of the GA. Third, continuing to increase the transparency of the work of subsidiary bodies, also by improving the quality, frequency and availability of their formal and informal reports and summary records. We invite Council members to increase efforts to reach an agreement on the appointment of chairs and vice-chairs of these bodies. Fourth, offering Member States more informal opportunities to interact with subsidiary bodies. Fifth, frequent, timely and more informative briefings for non-Council members on matters discussed in the Security Council closed meetings and informal consultation and in its subsidiary bodies. Sixth, more and better access to information through open briefings and interaction between the Council and all interested and the involved parties, including regional and sub-regional organization. Seventh, timely availability to non-Council members of draft resolutions and presidential statements, as well as other Security Council documents such as elements to the press and notes by the President. We also strongly support the practice of inviting briefers from civil society to Council meetings, ensuring adequate women's participation and greater gender inclusivity and equality in order to allow the Council members to hear different voices and points of view before deliberating. It is furthermore important to ensure that public meetings remain the primary format for the Security Council's work, while limiting closed meetings and informal consultation to exceptional cases in keeping with their original purpose. Madam President, the improvement of working methods is also part of the broader discussion on the comprehensive and effective reform of the Security Council, which should aim at a more transparent, democratic, efficient and, in our view, also more accountable Security Council. It is hard to speak of working methods without reflecting at the same time on the root causes of the councils in action, which are directly and closely linked to the veto, regardless of whether it is actually used or simply threatened. This is why Italy supports all initiatives aimed at self-restraining the exercise of the veto, such as the French-Mexican initiative and the ACT code of conduct, and was among the co-sponsors of the GA resolution 76/262 known as the veto initiative spearheaded by Liechtenstein. This is also the reason, and I conclude, why we do not support the expansion of the Security Council in the category of permanent members, as it would generate additional vetoes and further discrimination and divisions among Council members, thus making it less efficient, less democratic, less accountable to the general membership. I thank you, Madam President.


Denmark · President [2:23:46]:

I thank the representative of Italy for the statement, and I now give the floor to the representative of Singapore.


Singapore [2:23:53]:

Thank you very much, Madam President. I am delighted to see you presiding the Council and thank you very much for convening this timely and important discussion. I also thank Ms. Shamila Khandiah from SCR for her very insightful briefing and for putting forward some concrete suggestions. I welcome the East TEN statement on working methods that was made by Liberia earlier. And I take this opportunity to commend the E10 for their continued unity, initiative and leadership on this important issue of working methods. In particular, we are proud of the role that small states have played in the Council in bringing greater transparency to the work of the Council. And we share the view of the E10 on this important issue and we would like to offer some additional perspectives. First, a discussion on working methods is fundamentally about transparency. And transparency is the foundation for a credible, effective and accountable Security Council. It positively impacts the work of the Council and the implementation of the Council's decision. It also promotes greater dialogue and transparency beyond the Council and amongst the broader UN membership. In this regard, while we commend the increase in the proportion of open meetings of the Council, we note that closed consultations remain a regular practice for certain files. And while closed discussions do facilitate candid exchanges between Council members, greater effort should be made to convene some of these meetings in open format, allowing for the participation of concerned Member States. The Council can consider producing a summary record of decision points to be shared with the wider membership. In addition, the annual report of the Secretariat Council is important for accountability between the Council and the wider membership. Singapore commends this year's panholder, Pakistan, for the exemplary manner in which they led the process in drafting the annual report. We also thank them for convening the interactive informal exchange of views with the wider membership when the annual report was being drafted in accordance with paragraph 148 of note 507. Second, we'd like to see greater inclusivity in the Council's working methods. And the selection of the next Secretary-General is an opportunity for the Council to demonstrate its commitment to inclusiveness. It is essential that the Council's recommendation is the culmination of a fair, inclusive, and consultative process. It will be important for all candidates to be given the opportunity to engage in interactive dialogues with the General Assembly before the Security Council begins its selection process. In addition, while we respect the council's prerogatives, we also urge greater transparency in the modalities and outcomes of the selection process, including, I should say, or in particular, by releasing the results of the straw polls in a more formal manner. The current practice of the results being shared through leaks is not good for the credibility of the process, nor of the credibility of the council. Madam President, my third and final point is about effectiveness. For the second year in a row, the continued delay in the appointment of the chairs of subsidiary bodies has posed severe challenges to the implementation of the Council's decisions. We call on Council members to adhere to the guidelines for the selection of chairs of subsidiary bodies as contained in paragraphs 125 to 129 of note 547 and to avoid the politicisation of this process. In this regard, the suggestions put forward by our breather this morning is worthy of further reflection in the Council, and I would commend that to members of the Council to look at it in a more considered manner. Allow me to conclude by thanking the co-chairs of the informal working group, Denmark and Pakistan, for their continued efforts on this issue. As the UN system undergoes reform to make it more effective and fit for purpose, We urge the Council to undertake practical reforms and steps to its working methods with a view to enhancing transparency and credibility of the Council's work. I thank you very much.


Denmark · President [2:28:19]:

I thank the representative of Singapore for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of New Zealand.


New Zealand · ACT [2:28:30]:

I have the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the Cross-Regional Accountability, Coherence and Transparency Group of 27 Member States. President, effective working methods are not a procedural luxury. They are essential to the Council's ability to discharge its responsibilities under the Charter. As Article 24 reminds us, the Council acts on behalf of the entire United Nations membership. How it conducts its work is therefore of relevance and concern to us all. Allow me to focus on four areas. First, the Council's subsidiary bodies. ACT remains concerned by the delay in appointing chairs and vice chairs. Subsidiary bodies are essential to implementing the Council's mandates, and leaving them without agreed leadership undermines continuity, effectiveness, and the Council's credibility. ACT has repeatedly raised this concern. We appreciate the efforts of successive council presidencies to serve as caretakers, but temporary arrangements cannot become the norm. The past two years have demonstrated that current arrangements are insufficient to guarantee timely appointments. ACT therefore calls for strengthening of paragraphs 124 to 129 of note 507 including clearer timelines and effective contingency arrangements when consensus cannot be reached. The Act encourages the council to reinforce 1 October as a genuine deadline and establish a clear fallback mechanism, including to ensure the effective functioning of subsidiary bodies in the event of disagreement. This could include allowing outgoing chairs and vice chairs to continue temporarily or assume caretaker responsibilities until agreement is reached. Second, the selection and appointment of the next Secretary General. ACT has consistently advocated for a process that is fair, transparent, inclusive, and conducted on an equal basis for all candidates. Transparency does not weaken the Council's role, it strengthens the legitimacy of its recommendation to the General Assembly. While we recognise some progress this year, including greater clarity around the timing of the first straw poll, we continue to encourage a more cohesive relationship between the timing of nominations, General Assembly dialogues, and the Council's consideration of candidates. These practices should be institutionalised rather than reinvented with each selection process, including greater transparency around straw polls. ACT has previously called for regular updates from the council president and official announcement of results. Given that informal results quickly enter the public domain in an unverified manner, a structured approach to communicating results could enhance transparency while avoiding uncertainty and undue pressure on Council members or the Presidency. We also encourage sustained and structured communication between the Presidents of the Security Council and the General Assembly. The Secretary General serves the entire membership and the charter and signs important and complimentary roles to both organs. Act encourages the council to conclude its consideration of candidacies and make its recommendation no later than one October, 2026, including to suggest more than one candidate for consideration by the General Assembly. Third, the council building further trust amongst its members. Council interactions increasingly take place through formal meetings and prepared statements. These have their place, but diplomacy also requires space to listen, to practically explore ideas and understand respective positions. ACT therefore encourages more regular informal exchanges among Council members, including informal lunches, fireside discussions and where appropriate exchanges with the Secretary-General. The Council could also consider periodic retreats away from headquarters without prepared statements to enable more candid discussions. Fourth and finally, the Council must strengthen its relationship with the wider UN membership. This means more systematic engagement with countries directly affected by Council decisions, meaningful and timely consultations with troop and police contributing countries, and more regular dialogue with the Peacebuilding Commission. It also means effective use of area formula meetings, strengthening exchanges with the General Assembly and ECOSOC, and ensuring the Council hears perspectives from across the UN system, including the human rights pillar. President, working methods are not only about procedures. Ultimately, they're also about behaviour. A more transparent, inclusive, and effective council requires members to engage earlier, listen more closely, negotiate in good faith, demonstrate flexibility, and rebuild trust. Note 507 provides an important framework, but frameworks only work when implemented and regularly updated to reflect current realities and challenges. The council has an important responsibility to act on behalf of the entire membership. which its working methods should reflect. I thank you, President.


Denmark · President [2:34:12]:

Thank you, representative of New Zealand, for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Romania.


Romania [2:34:19]:

Thank you very much, Madam President, and thank you for convening this important debate. I also want to thank Ms. Shamala Kandiya-Thomson for a very insightful reflection on the working methods of the Security Council, but also important ideas. Madam President, the confidence in the work carried out by the Security Council is an issue of fundamental importance for the broader international community. Much of it is built around the Council's ability to discharge its essential mandate related to the maintenance of international peace and security. And this ability is in turn dependent on robust and effective working methods complemented by their consistent and coherent application across the board. Enhancing and updating working methods is within the Council's remit, requires no Charter amendment and can deliver tangible gains in ensuring increased transparency, inclusivity and effectiveness. Procedural matters have a direct bearing on the end result of what the Council is mandated to achieve in important areas for peace and security, such as sanctions and mandate oversight. No discussion on the working methods of the Security Council can be advanced without referencing its core decision-making mechanisms on peace and security and their inherent challenges. A relevant instrument is Article 27 of the Charter, The longstanding judicial and political principle embedded in 27/3 has unfortunately been disregarded numerous times. Respect for the letter and the spirit of the Charter is the foundation of the Council legitimacy, authority and credibility within the UN and outside the United Nations. Madam President, Romania strongly advocates for the continuous and gradual consolidation of the institutional cooperation between the Security Council and the General Assembly. building on their complementary role in addressing matters related to the maintenance of international peace and security as enshrined in the Charter, the progressive contribution of the General Assembly in this field throughout eight decades cannot be overlooked. For this reason, consultation and coordination between the two are not only a matter of procedure, but are critical safeguards for the coherence and legitimacy of the UN system as a whole. One important contribution is the annual report of the Security Council, which enhances transparency on matters related to the maintenance of international peace and security. We welcome efforts to make the report more comprehensive, including by a focus on core issues that frame the current debate on its functioning, such as the use of the veto. And this is a direct result of the commitments undertaken consensually by UN member states last year in the resolution 79327 on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly and as part of a strategic political outlook in the pact for the future. Pursuant to similar positive developments and building trust in the work carried out by the Council, Romania looks forward to concrete steps towards the implementation of the objectives set out in Note S.2024/507. To this end, we see merit in the establishment of a periodic structured implementation review by the informal working group on documentation and other procedural questions, which would provide an itemised presentation of the provisions that are being observed and those that are not. Madam President, as we have embarked on the process of selection appointment of the upcoming Secretary General of United Nations, we must reflect on what further improvements can be sought to ensure the most efficient and effective cooperation between the two main organs entrusted with the responsibility on this topic, the Security Council and the General Assembly. Even as they may have distinct roles, different rules of procedure and working methods, it is evident that they cannot approach this process in a siloed manner. Resolution 179327 offers the contours for this collaboration and its implementation is key to ensuring the process of selection appointment is carried in a predictable manner guided by the principle of transparency and inclusivity. And I will also add that it's important for the legitimacy of the outcome of the overall process. We seize this opportunity to call for a practical and consensual solution to the dissemination of results in the informal Security Council straw polls to the wider UN membership. in a structured and consistent manner, reflective of the good collaboration among these organs and the spirit of the process. Such further efforts are concrete steps in building trust between these main organs and implicitly in the UN system, and of course it's very much important as they involve the entire UN membership. To conclude, we commend the Council for placing its working methods under continuing review, and we encourage it to move from the enumeration of good practice to its consistent observance. Thank you.


Denmark · President [2:38:52]:

I thank the representative of Romania for the statement. And I now give the floor to the representative of Estonia.


Estonia [2:38:58]:

Thank you, President. Thank you for convening this important discussion today, and Ms. Thompson for her insightful briefing. Estonia aligns itself with the statement delivered by New Zealand on behalf of the Accountability, Coherence, and Transparency Group. Allow me to add a few points in our national capacity. First, the use of the veto and the threat of the use of the veto continue to be the main obstacles in preventing the Council from taking timely and decisive action in responding to atrocity crimes or violations of international law. Estonia reiterates its call to reframe vetoing resolutions aimed at ending mass atrocities in line with the France-Mexico proposal and the Act's Code of Conduct. We also reiterate our call for the full application of Article 27 of the Charter and its obligatory provision to abstain in cases where members of the Council are a party to a dispute. We believe that this obligation, stemming directly from the Charter, should be reflected in Note 507. Secondly, The record-breaking delay in appointing chairs and co-chairs of the council's subsidiary bodies continues to hinder the work of the sanctions committees and working groups, weakening the council's ability to fulfill its mandate and implement its resolutions. We encourage the council members to resolve this impasse, including by considering moving away from a package deal approach, allowing the continuing members to continue serving as chairs, or vice chairs to step in as interim chairs. Thirdly, we emphasize the importance of the council visiting missions to their decision making quality. Studying reports and listening to briefs in New York is important and valuable, yet it cannot substitute the first hand information one receives on the ground through direct engagement with local communities, stakeholders, or parties to the conflict. Given the financial constraints, a small and more targeted visiting mission could be considered. To further enhance their impact, the findings of such mission should be systematically incorporated into the Council's subsequent discussions and decision-making. Finally, Estonia continues to encourage the Council to ensure that the process of the selection of the next Secretary General within the Council is transparent and inclusive. The General Assembly should be able to make an informed and meaningful decision on the appointment of the Secretary General. We encourage the Council to suggest to the Assembly more than one candidate for its consideration. We further call the Council to consider to publicly announce the results of its straw polls, allowing both candidates as well as the Assembly to hear them directly from the Council. President, to conclude, There is a growing urgency increasing the effectiveness of the Security Council and its ability to carry out its primary responsibility to maintain international peace and security. The credibility of this organization is on the line. I trust that the Council will work to implement improvements presented today on the working methods. I thank you.


Denmark · President [2:42:21]:

And I thank the representative of Estonia for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Japan.


Japan [2:42:27]:

Thank you, Madam President. I thank Denmark for convening this open debate on the implementation of Note 507. I also thank the breifer for very insightful briefing. Japan welcomes this annual debate, which offers UN member states a valuable opportunity to put forward proposals for improvements to the Council's working methods under paragraph 111 of the note. The significance of Note 507 lies in its role in guiding the Security Council to continuously improve its working methods, maintaining the right balance between transparency and efficiency. This is by its very nature a work in progress, one that knows no finish line. Madam President, since 2006, every time when Japan served as elected member of the Council, Japan chaired IWG. In 2006, the first note 507 was adopted, And in 2010, 2017, and most recently 2024, the Council adopted revised Note 507, being also through IWG chaired by Japan. Japan wishes to express its sincere appreciation to Denmark and Pakistan for their dedication as co-chairs of the IWG last year and hopes for continued progress under the next chair once appointed. Note 507 represents culmination of years of collective effort, yet its full significance can only be realized through faithful implementation. In this regard, Japan shares a serious concern about appointment of the chairs of subsidiary bodies for this year expressed by the IETM members in their letter dated 30th of July. Eight months into the current term, the chairs have yet to be named. As paragraph 124 of the note makes clear, Council members are expected to make every effort to agree on such appointment by 1 October of the preceding year. Japan strongly urges that agreement be reached without further delay through balanced, transparent, efficient and inclusive consultation. Madam President, in order to enhance Council's efficiency, Informal consultations offer a valuable forum for candid and constructive exchanges, given the complexity and sensitivity of matters handled by the Council. Japan encourages members to make full use of this format, fostering interactive discussions through flexible exchanges between briefers and Council members. Recognizing the important role of informal consultations, Japan considers that future revision of Note 507 should incorporate provisions promoting more interactive exchange at informal consultations of the four. From the perspective of exchanging enhancing transparency, Japan has proposed making better use of monthly assessment prepared by the Council presidency. At present, these assessments are often not submitted or significantly delayed, undermining the transparency of the Council's work. Japan suggests incorporating the assessments into the Council's annual report as annexes, whereby presidencies would be better positioned to produce more substantive and analytical assessments in a timely manner. On a related note, the ongoing Secretary-General selection process warrants particular attention. Japan has consistently underscored the importance of transparency, inclusivity, and predictability in the process, a position articulated by Permanent Representative Besho in 2017. Unfortunately, the process has seen little meaningful change so far, despite our repeated calls. Nevertheless, Japan continues to urge the Council to make further efforts to improve the process so that UN can be better understood and trusted. In conclusion, Japan reaffirms that improvements to the Council's working methods are directly linked to its fundamental mandate of maintaining international peace and security. It is therefore incumbent upon the Council to continue striving for rules that are more efficient and transparent. I thank you.


Denmark · President [2:46:54]:

I thank the representative of Japan for the statement, and I now give the floor to His Excellency, Mr. Mohamed Idris, Permanent Observer of the African Union to the United Nations.


AU · Permanent Observer · Mohamed Fati Ahmed Idris [2:47:05]:

Madam President, I congratulate and thank Denmark for successful presidency of Security Council, for convening this important debate, and able co-chairing with Pakistan the IWG. As well, I appreciate the insightful briefing of Ms. Shamila Kandia-Thomson,

the Executive Director of the SCR.

Madam President, the African Union does not often take the floor on the Council's working methods. It does so today because the way this Council conducts its business falls with particular weight on Africa. The majority of the situations on the Council's agenda are African. Most of its peacekeeping operations deploy on African soil. And most of its sanctions regimes concern African states. When working methods function poorly, the cost is measured in African outcomes. Madam President, the African Union is the regional organization most frequently invited under Rule 39. Its officials envoys and mission leadership brief this Council on the greater part of its country files. Yet, the practice governing the participation remains discretionary, uneven between presidencies and between files. The concept note asks how rules 37 and 39 could be applied more fairly and more consistently. consistently. The Union's answer draws on its own experience. Participation of the regional organization whose peace and security architecture is engaged in a given situation should be a matter of settled practice rather than monthly negotiation. Where the Peace and Security Council of the African Union has pronounced itself on a situation before this council, Its positions need to be heard before decisions are taken, not conveyed afterwards. The annual consultative meetings between the two councils and the joint framework established under resolution 2719 already give this partnership institutional forum. What is asked here is modest, that the working methods of this council carry that partnership into its daily practice. The same logic applies to pen holding. The African Union is the implementation partner for mandates across the continent, from Somalia to the Sahel. It is rarely consulted at the drafting stage of the products it is expected to carry out. The union welcomes the movement in recent years toward open holding by African elected members on African files and encourages the council to make that practice the norm rather than the exception. Paragraph 111 of the note commits council members to hearing the wider membership, hearing the organizations that implement the council's decision is the necessary complement. Madam President, the concept note asks in its third question how the selection of chairs and vice chairs of subsidiary bodies might be improved. The African Union observed the 2025 impasse with concern. Sanctions committees dealing with African situations sat without chairs for months, while the allocation was negotiated as a single package. And the work of those committees, which touches lives on the continent directly, stalled with them. The African Union supports an equitable and transparent distribution of these positions agreed early and being shared across the whole membership of the council rather than concentrated on the P5. Where agreement on a full package proves impossible by the start of the year, uncontested bodies should be permitted to proceed. Madam President, in conclusion, the important role and contribution of the A3+ is an attempt to enhance the working dynamics in the Security Council. The African Union's position on reforming the composition and effectiveness of this council is well known and pursued in the proper forum. Today's appeal is narrower. A council that hears the region before it decides, that shares its spends with those who hold its mandates, and that keeps its subsidiary machinery working will serve Africa better within its present configuration. whatever configuration the future holds. Thank you very much.


Denmark · President [2:52:45]:

And I thank His Excellency Mr. Idris for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Finland.


Finland · Nordic Group [2:52:54]:

Thank you, President. I have the honor to address the Council on behalf of the Nordic countries, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and my own country, Finland. I thank Denmark and Pakistan for this timely debate and Security Council report for the briefing. President, the way in which the Security Council operates and takes decisions is a legitimate concern to the entire UN membership, as the Council, in line with Article 24 of the Charter, acts on their behalf. We all have a vested interest in ensuring the Council can properly and more efficiently respond to today's many challenges. The selection and appointment of the next Secretary General is one of the most significant decisions at hand. The interactive dialogues with the candidates in the General Assembly, including engagement with civil society, have been instrumental in advancing the key principles of transparency and inclusivity, and should remain an integral part of the process. We encourage the Council to uphold the same high standards in its own deliberations. This includes ensuring an equal and fair procedure for all candidates. The selection and appointment process is a joint endeavour of the General Assembly and the Security Council, and the results of the Council's straw polls should be communicated to the GA Member States in an appropriate manner rather than through inevitable leaks. We further underscore the importance of geographical balance and gender equality and are encouraged by the number of highly qualified women candidates. President. The Nordic countries remain deeply concerned by the continued inability of the Council to reach agreement on the allocation of the chairs and the vice-chairs of subsidiary bodies. The uncertainty may have consequences extending beyond the current Council term. This is not merely a procedural matter. We share the concern expressed by the elected members in their letter in July that this prolonged impasse undermines the credibility, effectiveness and institutional integrity of the Council and hampers its ability to discharge its Charter responsibilities. We call on those Council members who are currently preventing consensus to demonstrate flexibility to finally resolve this issue. Looking ahead, we believe that efforts should be made to review and improve the process, including in the context of IWG. President, the Nordic countries continue to support more equitable distribution of work within the Security Council. While progress has been made through co penholdership and more equal participation by elected members, penholdership still remains largely the responsibility of a limited number of Council members. Broader participation would better reflect the diverse perspectives in the Council and make fuller use of the regional expertise and insights of all elected members. Presidents, Working methods must continue to evolve. We therefore encourage the Council to regularly review and update Note 507 to ensure that it remains relevant. Continued and determined efforts are needed to strengthen the Council's transparency, accountability and effectiveness. One such mechanism is veto initiative, where General Assembly is convened after a veto is cast. It is imperative to make the Council more accountable to the wider UN membership, whose trust and confidence are essential to the Council's legitimacy. I thank you.


Denmark · President [2:57:10]:

Thank you, representative of Finland, for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Slovenia.


Slovenia [2:57:17]:

Thank you, Madam President. We align ourselves with the statement delivered by the ACT group earlier. Drawing from our recent experience in the Council, we wish to add a few additional points. And of course, we thank Shamala Thompson for her briefing and for her very practical proposals. Your concept paper, Madam President, just as many of our statements these days, points to the soaring number of civilians suffering in ever-expanding conflicts. This tragic reality is a reflection of a deeply polarized world. which steadily eroded trust within this chamber. The end result is paralysis of collective action, which subsequently erodes the global public trust in this institution. Better working methods will not heal the divisions in the international community, but they can help rebuild trust. Reforming the Council's working methods is not merely a technical exercise. It is a vital effort to restore the Council's credibility. So allow me, therefore, to offer six practical steps, three to rebuild trust within the Council and three to rebuild trust with the general membership. On trust within the Council, first, re-evaluate consultations. Close consultations have become little more than a continuation of the open briefing with limited added value. The declining presence of permanent representatives is perhaps the clearest indication of this. During our tenure, we remember a handful of genuinely frank exchanges when colleagues put aside their prepared remarks and actually engaged with one another. Each time we left the room saying we should do this more often. And yet, we rarely did. So let me therefore appeal on all members, move beyond your scripts, engage frankly with one another and focus on finding solutions in consultations. Two, revive SOFA talks. Only three presidencies organized SOFA talks during our tenure. Informal agenda free meetings outside the UNHQ are ideal for building trust. Trust can only be built by making a conscious effort to talk openly, listen and hear the arguments of others and show respect to all colleagues. Re-energising consultations could be an excellent theme for the next SOFA talks. Three, unblock subsidiary bodies. It is deeply damaging to the Council's atmosphere when it cannot agree on the division of the subsidiary bodies eight months in. Clearly, A deep reflection on a new model of distribution is required. And early today, we heard from the briefer some very concrete proposals in that regard. On rebuilding trust with general membership, ultimately, the most powerful way for the Council to rebuild trust would be to fulfill its primary role, maintaining international peace and security. It must also recognize today's global realities, including through reform of its composition. But while those larger questions remain unresolved, there are practical steps we can take now. One, expand outreach and dialogue. The Council must engage more systematically with actors beyond this chamber. Building on last November's twin resolutions on the peacebuilding architecture, the Council should utilize more its relationship with and advice from the Peacebuilding Commission. It should also increase its informal communications and consultations with regional organisations, countries of interest and key personalities. Two, increase field visits. Field visits can provide something no briefing can fully replicate, first-hand understanding of realities on the ground. They allow the Council to send political messages directly and to support peace efforts in a visible way. Plus, they build trust among the Council members themselves. If mobilising an entire Council is too cumbersome, one should explore smaller delegations mandated to visit on the Council's behalf. The topic of possible field visits could be a standing agenda item of the Presidency breakfast meetings. Three, restore decorum and respect. Finally, we need to restore decorum. When Council meetings descend into shouting matches, the institution loses authority. We should establish clearer common understanding on conduct in this Chamber, including on the introduction and display of props. Agreeing on a note that would guide the Council on this matter is essential. Madam President, to conclude, none of these proposals will resolve the geopolitical divisions that confront this Council, but working methods are not irrelevant to those divisions. So we encourage all Council members, all Council colleagues, to reflect on their own approach in this chamber. As Paulo Coelho once said, the world is changed by your example, not by your opinion. Thank you.


Denmark · President [3:02:33]:

Thank you, representative of Slovenia for the statement. And I now give the floor to the representative of Lithuania.


Lithuania [3:02:41]:

Thank you, Madam President. We appreciate this opportunity to discuss the working methods of the Security Council. The continued dialogue with broader UN membership is key to ensuring transparency, inclusiveness and cohesion of its work. Lithuania believes that in order to fulfill effectively its primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, the Council must adapt its work to the changing international realities. Lithuania also shares the concerns expressed by other speakers regarding the continued delays in appointing chairs of subsidiary bodies and their impact on the Council's ability to fulfill its mandate. Moreover, with ever-expanding scope of issues addressed by the Council, it is increasingly important to ensure that the voices of the broader membership are heard. In this regard, Rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure must be applied consistently, particularly when considering acts of aggression and mass atrocities. Rule 37 participants should also receive sufficient advance notice of the opening of the speakers list and timely confirmation of their inclusion in the list. President, the use of veto remains a critical concern. The use, or rather abuse, of veto power by Russia to shield itself from accountability for its illegal aggression against Ukraine cannot be ignored. Lithuania remains steadfast supporter of efforts to limit the use of veto, particularly in situation of mass atrocity, genocide and war crimes. We encourage all delegations to commit to the accountability, coherence and transparency code of conduct and the French-Mexican initiative. The adoption of the General Assembly resolution 76/131 262 establishing the veto initiative marked a significant and long overdue step. Lithuania also recalls that the veto power is constrained under Article 27, paragraph 3 of the Charter, which obliges a party to a dispute to abstain from voting. Further consideration should be given to ensuring full implementation of this key provision. President, Lithuania joins calls for greater transparency in the Council's deliberations, including through a better balance between public meetings and closed consultations, and more meaningful interaction with the wider UN membership. The valuable contribution of civil society briefers must also continue to be protected and encouraged. Improving working methods cannot replace comprehensive Security Council reform. However, practical procedural improvements need not wait for such reform. We urge the Council to heed these calls and translate this dialogue into concrete action. I thank you.


Denmark · President [3:05:48]:

Representative of Lithuania for the statement. And I now give the floor to the representative of Malta.


Malta [3:05:54]:

Thank you, Madam President, and thank you also to the breifer for her insightful remarks. Entrusted with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, the Security Council acts on behalf of the wider membership and in the collective interest of the international community. Its working methods are therefore central to its legitimacy and credibility. Today, more than ever, ensuring that the Council works collectively, efficiently and transparently, while maintaining the confidence of the membership it serves, is imperative. In this regard, allow me to make four points. First, we must address the use of the veto and the risk of Council paralysis. While the Charter provides permanent members with a distinct voting prerogative, the exercise of the veto should not come at the expense of the Council's ability to discharge its responsibilities. Malta, apart from being a member of the Uniting for Consensus Group, continues to support initiatives aimed at promoting the responsible use of the veto, including the Act Code of Conduct, the Franco-Mexican Initiative and the General Assembly Veto Initiative. Malta also reaffirms its support for efforts to ensure the full implementation of Article 27 of the Charter, supporting a dedicated chapter in the Council's annual report on its application. Second, inclusivity must remain at the heart of the Council's working methods. For the Council to act on behalf of the wider membership, its working methods must ensure meaningful opportunities for engagement beyond the Council itself. including with the General Assembly and with regional organizations to strengthen its ability to respond to situations on its agenda. Inclusivity should also extend beyond the intergovernmental system. Civil society, affected communities, women and youth offer vital perspectives and lived experiences. Malta encourages the Council to make full use of interactive formats to ensure the meaningful and safe participation of reefers, and other voices. Third, the Council must ensure the effective functioning of its subsidiary bodies. Malta remains concerned that chairs and vice-chairs have yet to be appointed for the Council's subsidiary bodies. These bodies perform an important role in supporting the Council's work and the absence of agreed leadership impedes their ability to discharge their mandates effectively. We urge Council members to engage constructively and make effort to reach agreement on these appointments without delay. Fourth, transparency and accountability must remain at the centre of the Council's working methods. Transparency remains essential to build confidence in the Council and in the wider multilateral system. Of particular significance is the ongoing process for the selection and appointment of the next Secretary General. The manner in which this process is conducted and the confidence it inspires among the wider membership will have implications well beyond the Council and for trust in the organisation as a whole. Malta calls for increased openness in the selection process and supports efforts aimed at providing the General Assembly with a meaningful choice in the appointment of the next Secretary General. Madam President, note 507 provides an important framework for improving the Council's working methods, but its value ultimately depends on its faithful and meaningful implementation. Malta stands ready to work constructively with all members in advancing these efforts and ensuring that the Council is equipped to respond effectively to the challenges before it. Thank you.


Denmark · President [3:10:00]:

I thank the representative of Malta for the statement and I now give the floor to the Islamic Republic of Iran.


Iran (Islamic Republic of) [3:10:08]:

In the name of God, the compassionate, the merciful. Madam President, The working methods of the Security Council are not merely procedural. They directly affect the Council's credibility, legitimacy, and effectiveness in maintaining international peace and security. Iran supports efforts to make the Security Council more transparent, inclusive, efficient, and accountable, consistent with the UN Charter and international law. The adoption of Note 507 was an important step, but its value depends on consistent, impartial, and good faith implementation. In this regard, I wish to emphasize the following points. First, the Security Council must act strictly within the UN Charter and international law, respecting the sovereignty, political independence, and territorial integrity of member states. Its procedures must not be used to circumvent Charter's principles or exceed the Council's authority beyond its mandate. Second, the Council's authority must be exercised impartially and in collective interest of maintaining international peace and security. The presidency carries a particular responsibility in this regard. Its procedural and agenda-setting authority must be exercised impartially and must never be used to advance the political interests of individual members or groups of states. Third, Security Council meetings and procedures must not be exploited to promote politically motivated or unsubstantiated allegations against member states. or to provide political cover for unlawful acts. Procedural action cannot confer legitimacy on unsupported claims. Fourth, measures under Chapter 7 must have a clear legal basis, defined objectives, and due consideration of their humanitarian and economic consequences. Procedural mechanisms must not become instruments for predetermined political outcomes. Fifth, subsidiary bodies and mechanisms of the Security Council must operate strictly within their respective mandates and in full accordance with the UN Charter, and must not be abused to advance the political agenda of individual member states. Their work must be guided by transparency, impartiality, objectivity and accountability. Sixth, the penholder system should be more transparent, inclusive and consultative. Penholders should engage meaningfully with all Council members, particularly elected members, as well as affected States and relevant regional actors. Greater sharing of pen-holding responsibilities should be applied to promote genuine consensus building and to avoid rushed and non-consensus outcomes. Madam President, against this backdrop, the military aggression committed by the United States and the Israeli regime against Iran's sovereignty and territorial integrity, has once again exposed the politicization, double standards, and selective application of the Council's rules and procedure. The acts of aggression committed by the United States and the Israeli regime constitute flagrant violations of the UN Charter and fundamental principles of international law, including international humanitarian law. and have had serious consequences for regional and international peace and security. While disregarding the root causes of the situation, the United States and certain other members have sought to instrumentalize the Council's procedures and meeting to advance politically motivated allegations against Iran. Yet, the Security Council has regrettably failed to fully discharge its responsibilities under the UN Charter to determine aggressors and the act of aggression committed by the United States and Israeli regime and to take appropriate measures to prevent their recurrences owing to the obstruction of a permanent member that is itself a party to the aggression. Madam President, Of equal concern is the continued abuse by France, the United Kingdom, and the United States of the Council's procedure, meetings, and mechanisms to advance politically motivated narratives and allegations against Iran's peaceful nuclear program. This includes through their failed and legally unfounded attempt to invoke the so-called snapback under Resolution 2231, while disregarding their own failure to uphold their commitment under Resolution 2231 and the JCPOA. In this context, I wish to reiterate once again Iran's consistent and principled position that Resolution 2231 expired definitively on 18 October 2025. All measures, mandates, reporting requirements, and mechanisms established under it ceased to have legal effect. Iran therefore does not recognize any purported measures or mechanisms derived from resolution 2231 nor any legal basis for further reporting or meetings concerning its implementation under the agenda item non-proliferation. Any attempt to do so constitute a blatant abuse of the authority and procedures of the UN Security Council. To conclude, Madam President, improving the Council's working methods requires more than adopting procedural language. It requires the consistent, impartial, and good faith application of its rules and practices. I thank you, Madam President.


Denmark · President [3:17:27]:

I thank the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran for the statement. There are still a number of speakers remaining on my list for this meeting. I intend, with concurrence of the members of the Council, to suspend the meeting until 3.00 pm. The meeting is suspended.