PRESS CONFERENCE BY GENERAL ASSEMBLY PRESIDENT

 

The first-ever informal interactive hearings of the General Assembly with representatives of civil society, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector, scheduled for 23 and 24 June, represented a new stage in dialogue between Member States and those representatives, Assembly President Jean Ping (Gabon) told correspondents at a Headquarters press briefing this afternoon.

The outcome of the hearings, he stated, would serve as an input to the preparations for the 2005 World Summit -- the Assembly’s high-level plenary meeting to be held from 14 to 16 September.  Joining Mr. Ping was Gemma Adaba, representative of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions to the United Nations, and a member of the Task Force that assisted the Mr. Ping in organizing the hearings.  The briefing was moderated by Under-Secretary-General for Communication and Public Information Shashi Tharoor.  

The hearings, Mr. Ping noted, would be groundbreaking in that they represent the first time that the Assembly will have such a broad interaction with NGOs, civil society organizations and the private sector.  Secretary-General Kofi Annan, in his 2004 report responding to the conclusions of the Panel of Eminent Persons on United Nations-Civil Society Relations (Cardoso Panel), had suggested that the Assembly convene a two-day informal interactive hearing with NGOs prior to the opening of its session each year.  This week’s dialogue would be the first time that such hearings have been held. 

Over 200 participants have been invited to present their views for consideration by governments, with another 1,000 expected to attend as observers.  The hearings will focus on the clusters of the Secretary-General’s report “In Larger Freedom”, which is also the basis for the draft outcome of the September Summit.  The report focused on four main areas:  freedom from want; freedom from fear; freedom to live in dignity; and strengthening the United Nations.  Mr. Ping will prepare a summary of the viewpoints presented for Member States, which will be published as an Assembly document prior to the Summit.   

Ms. Adaba said that for civil society organizations, it was very important that the General Assembly President recognized the role that civil society organizations played and could play.  She and her colleagues had come together as a broad constituency of NGOs who had been working actively in the various thematic areas of the Secretary-General’s report.  They felt they had good proposals, and looked forward to putting forward a “bold” agenda that could help the international community move forward in the critical areas of development, peace and security, human rights and United Nations reform. 

Asked if there would now be annual hearings for NGOs in the Assembly, Mr. Ping said that this year’s hearings were a precedent for the Assembly, as per the decision of the world body.  That did not preclude the possibility for the Assembly to hold similar meetings in the future.  The hearings were organized on the occasion of the World Summit, he noted, and the United Nations was not having such summits every year. 

On whether civil society expected its ideas to be incorporated in the reforms, Ms. Adaba said that, hopefully, at the end of the day, there would be concrete proposals that would be fully reflected in the President’s summary and looked at by Member States.  In terms of proposals, there were groups of NGOs working on issues for each section of the Secretary-General’s report.  For example, in the area “freedom from want”, NGOs had been pressing for debt cancellation, which was now on the table as a serious proposal. 

On peace and security, she continued, they wanted the agenda for the proposed peacebuilding commission to include conflict prevention in addition to dealing with conflicts once they arose.  She hoped governments would take the proposals into account in their deliberations and at the summit. 

With regard to the decision announced today in Brussels by the “Group of Four” (Japan, Brazil, Germany, India, all of whom are seeking permanent membership on the Council) to submit a resolution to the Assembly next week calling for six new permanent seats on the Council, Mr. Ping said he had tried to ensure that things proceeded in a smooth manner and that the decisions taken did not derail the process.  He was constantly in touch with “G-4”, and noted that reform did not apply only to the Security Council.

In response to another question on whether it was possible to have any substantial reform of the Council by September, he said that reforming the Council was being tackled along two perspectives -- Model A and Model B, both of which involved increasing the Council’s membership.  If no consensus emerged, some of the advocates of Model A believed a vote should be held.

[The 2004 Report of the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change presented two models for increasing the membership of the Security Council.  Model A provides for six new permanent seats, with no veto being created, and three new two-year term non-permanent seats, divided among the major regional areas.  Model B provides for no new permanent seats but creates a new category of eight four-year renewable-term seats and one new two-year non-permanent (and non-renewable) seat, divided among the major regional areas.]

Asked how important the issue of Council reform was to civil society, Ms. Adaba said that the different parts of the Secretary-General’s reform agenda were closely interlinked.  It would be a pity if one part of the agenda dominated everything to the point that the rest was forgotten, particularly the development agenda.  In terms of the security agenda, she was interested in looking at how to, at the end of the day, get an effective Security Council that would really fulfil the mandate given to it in the Charter, namely to free the world from the scourge of war. 

She added that, over the long term, an arrangement with permanent seats “does not go in the direction of democracy”.  What was desired was a democratic system with a good balance of power.  In general, the NGOs were leaning towards Model B rather than Model A.  The issue would not be solved over the short term but would require a long-term set of discussions.

* *** *