Member States Diverge over Civil Society Participation in Upcoming World Programme of Action for Youth Meeting before Adopting Resolution, Other Texts
Vacancy in International Court of Justice Also Filled
Member States clashed over how to manage civil society participation in the upcoming high-level meeting on the thirtieth anniversary of the World Programme of Action for Youth, as the General Assembly convened today to take action on a range of matters.
High-Level Commemorative Meeting on World Programme of Action for Youth
Delegates had before them the draft resolution, titled “Scope, modalities, format and organization of the high-level plenary meeting of the General Assembly to commemorate the thirtieth anniversary of the World Programme of Action for Youth” (document A/79/L.86), which was eventually adopted by consensus.
Tensions flared over operative paragraph 8 containing the “non-objection basis”, a procedural method employed across various UN bodies to assess whether non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can participate in official meetings. While intended to facilitate consensus by automatically approving applications unless a Member State objects within a set timeframe, the process has drawn increasing criticism for its lack of transparency and potential for political misuse. Critics warn that it enables Governments to silently block NGOs — often without explanation or accountability — thereby undermining the UN’s commitment to inclusive and participatory dialogue.
Operative paragraph 8 sought to address the issue by giving the Assembly the power to make a final decision on civil society participation. However, the Russian Federation tabled an amendment (document A/79/L.88) to “L.86”, opposing such a procedure in that provision.
In introducing the amended text, the country’s representative expressed strong concern that “L.86” allows NGOs without consultative status with the Economic and Social Council to participate in a UN meeting. She criticized operative paragraph 8 for enabling the Assembly to approve the final list of NGOs, bypassing State objections. This undermines the established procedure under Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31, which requires NGOs to undergo a rigorous vetting process through the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations.
She also warned that “L.86” would allow ad hoc participation of NGOs, thus turning UN forums into platforms for “political score-settling”, allowing propaganda artists — some allegedly repeating the rhetoric of specific Governments — to misuse their access. She also objected to the shift in language from “attend” to “participate”, saying it grants undue influence to unvetted NGOs. While rejecting claims of blocking civil society, she emphasized support for constructive, experienced NGOs and called for transparency and non-arbitrariness in the objection process. She urged delegations to back its proposed “L.88” amendment.
Canada’s delegate expressed regret that the language on civil society participation has once again been brought to question despite having been adopted with 18 other modalities’ resolutions to date. Moscow’s amendment seeks to remove the requirement that the Assembly have the final decision on the list of stakeholders. “As we have noted before, Member States should not be able to unilaterally determine which voices are permitted at the table, especially in a way that shields such decisions from scrutiny,” she said.
Similarly, the speaker for the United Kingdom warned that a small number of Member States continue to use the non-objection basis to attempt to block organizations from other countries even without providing rationale. “This effectively amounts to a veto for stakeholder participation,” she said. The criteria and principles in Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31 are distinct and separate from accreditation to Assembly high-level meetings. Organizations are required to go through a review process with the conference’s Secretariat, she added.
Member States Reject Proposed Amendment to Operative Paragraph 8 by Recorded Vote
The proposed amendment was rejected in a recorded vote of 15 in favour to 76 against with 47 abstentions while operative paragraph 8 in “L.86” was retained by a recorded vote of 91 in favour to 12 against with 36 abstentions, before being adopted as a whole without a vote.
Speaking after the votes, Iran’s representative stressed the need for honoring principles and procedures established in the Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31. On a reference to gender parity in “L.86”, Argentina would prefer the references to minorities not to be selective, its speaker said.
The representative of the Russian Federation stated that, while her delegation joined the consensus on the resolution, it remains deeply concerned by a growing trend of granting the right to participate in Assembly plenary meetings to individuals who are not part of official State delegations. She emphasized that statements during plenary sessions should be reserved exclusively for Member States. Drawing attention to operative paragraph 7, she noted that NGOs with Economic and Social Council consultative status are merely invited to “attend” meetings. In contrast, operative paragraph 8 would allow non-verified civil society groups to “participate,” effectively granting them a more privileged form of engagement than those who have undergone the formal vetting process.
The representative of Belarus disassociated from operative paragraph 8, expressing concern over a trend of “equating the role of NGOs with those of States in intergovernmental discussions”. This causes serious concerns because it is precisely States that bear the primary responsibility to make international decisions.
Peru’s delegate expressed concern that the high-level meeting on the thirtieth anniversary of the World Programme of Action for Youth is scheduled to take place concurrently with other major high-level events. He noted that, due to these overlapping commitments, his delegation would be unable to attend all events simultaneously.
The United States’ speaker disassociated his delegation from operative paragraphs 3, 4, 8 and 10 due to the references to gender balance and gender parity.
The representative of Mexico said that his delegation voted against the amendment, as civil society participation should be decided democratically in a multilateral forum, not unilaterally.
UN Ocean Conference
Also adopted today without a vote was a draft decision concerning “Accreditation and participation of intergovernmental organizations in the 2025 United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development” (document A/79/L.87), by which the Assembly decided to invite the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law to participate in the work of that Conference, with observer status.
UN-ASEAN Cooperation
By a recorded vote of 158 in favour to 1 against (United States), with 1 abstention (Israel), the Assembly also adopted the draft resolution on “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations” (document A/79/L.83). By its terms, the Assembly would reaffirm the commitment of the United Nations and ASEAN to further strengthening their partnership, and encourage the UN, including the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) and other relevant United Nations entities, to continue to work closely with ASEAN in implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and ASEAN’s Vision 2025.
Introducing the text on behalf of ASEAN, the representative of Malaysia recalled the Secretary-General’s description of the Association as “a bridge-builder and a messenger for peace”. This biennial resolution has been adopted without a vote since it was first tabled, he said, in broad recognition of the multilateral role of the Association and other regional organizations. “It is our fervent hope that the long-standing consensus on this important initiative will be maintained,” he said, adding: “If consensus is not possible during the present session, we call on all delegations to vote in favor of this draft resolution.”
However, speaking in explanation of vote before the vote, the representative of the United States said that while her country values its partnership with the ASEAN, its no-vote today reflects reservations with the resolution’s reaffirmations of the 2030 Agenda, as well as gender and decarbonization initiatives. She expressed concern about “soft global governance” and gender ideologies, both of which are contrary to her country’s positions.
International Court of Justice Election
The Assembly also convened, concurrently but independently with the Security Council, to elect a member to the International Court of Justice. After securing the required absolute majority in both UN organs, Judge Mahmoud Daifallah Hmoud (Jordan) was elected to serve the remainder of the term vacated by Judge Nawaf Salam (Lebanon), who resigned effective 14 January 2025. Mr. Hmoud, who received 178 votes in the Assembly, will begin his tenure on 27 May 2025, with his term set to conclude on 5 February 2027.