New York, 7 April 2006 — According to reports from various member states, the Security Council has held bilateral consultations in the past two months, under the presidencies of the US and Argentina, on the selection of the UN Secretary-General. During these consultations there were discussions on enhancing transparency and dialogue with the General Assembly and setting a criterion of regional rotation. While some countries continue to stress the need to select the best qualified candidate regardless of regional considerations, China has argued that there is no reason why the two must be mutually exclusive. China has also given some indication that it may be ready to use its veto to ensure the selection of an Asian candidate.

Despite US efforts to have a decision by this summer, it appears that the process will formally be initiated either in June/July or August/September, which would allow for high-level consultations during the general debate. The current goal is to finalize the process by the end of September/October.

There is a general sense that the majority of Security Council members are reluctant to introduce formal changes in the selection process at this point in time. It has been argued, for example, that the development of shortlists is difficult because potential candidates in high-level positions cannot risk compromising their current positions by initiating campaigns. Member states have also expressed hesitancy in developing qualifications or a job description, arguing that the job description for the UN Secretary-General is already clear. While member states are well aware of the current Secretary-General’s role, one central motivation behind creating formal qualifications would be to address the conceptual divide between those member states that would prefer the Secretary-General to play an active and strong leadership role and those that would prefer the SG to play more of an administrative and managerial function.

Currently, there is no agreement on which concrete measures should be taken to ensure greater GA participation, although different proposals have received varying levels of support. For example, the recommendation that that the Security Council present more than one candidate to the GA has received little support, whereas members have reacted more positively to suggestions to improve communication between the GA and the Security Council, possibly through the presidents of the respective bodies. It has also been proposed that the GA have the opportunity to meet with candidates through informal hearings or by invite of the GA President or by the chairs of the regional groups. While there is some interest in exploring general ways to increase transparency to confer legitimacy on the process, there is significant reluctance towards implementing any formal modifications of the current process.

The General Assembly will also consider this issue when the Working Group on GA Revitalization meets on April 19th to discuss ways to enhance the GA’s role in the selection of the Secretary-General.