Enhancing transparency of Security Council proceedings.

• Author: Buallay, Jassim M.

Article 35 of the United Nations Charter and Rule 37 of the Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Security Council allow non-members of the Council to draw attention to, and participate in discussing, any issue of interest to them without the right to vote. This was made possible when the Council conducted its business in the open and in public. However, through the years and given the complications and perhaps confidentiality relating to certain issues, the Council deemed it necessary to undertake its deliberations in private, with only members attending in what it calls "informal consultants". By and large, this became the prescribed method of work, and the Council does not go public except when the issue is finalized. This practically shut off non-members from the privilege of participation stipulated by Article 35 and Rule 37.

In recent years, efforts have been exerted to get things back to "normal". This has proved to be a difficult task not only because of breaking with habits, but the issues handled by the Council suffered some complications that generated fundamental differences of opinion among members and consequently caused some divisions in approach, even some stalemate in dealing with certain issues that rendered Council actions somewhat compromising. Lastly, there is some resistance on the part of some members to expose Council deliberations to the public, although its informal consultations are not in the Rules of Procedure because in the end it goes formal every time it needs to legalize its decisions prior to action.

Understandably, attempts to open up the Council again started timidly by a number of non-permanent (some call them elected) members in a letter to the Council President asking precisely for transparency in its work. There is no question of more transparency here as is occasionally said because it simply did not exist, except when the Council wanted to air views of non-members on issues that have been discussed for years, with little or no impact on Council decisions regarding those issues. The letter was referred to the Council's Documentation and Procedure Committee where its experts discussed its contents, and eventually no action was taken. Non-permanent members who came after that group picked up the relay and found that it might be more practical, by way of results, to address the Council directly with the problem of transparency. This exercise, with the think-alike mentality, was even enchanced by the...