Research Report Appointing the UN Secretary-General UN Secretary-General-designate Ban Ki-moon addressed the General The most important decision that the Security created 70 years ago. The next Secretary-General Assembly meeting after that body Council will take in 2016 will be the selection of will take on the job at a time when the organisa- endorsed his appointment as the next Secretary-General, 13 October the ninth Secretary-General of the UN. Secretary- tion is struggling to cope with increasingly intrac- 2006 (UN Photo) General Ban Ki-moon’s term ends on 31 Decem- table conflicts, deteriorating security situations ber 2016. Both the General Assembly and the and humanitarian and environmental disasters. Council have already begun considering the pro- As the time for the appointment decision cess. Unlike in previous years, a number of advo- approaches, Security Council Report will anal- cacy groups have chosen to focus on this issue in yse and preview specific developments, Coun- 2015, No. 2 order to bring greater transparency and inclusive- cil dynamics and possible options regarding the 16 October 2015 ness to the selection process. Coupled with the selection process. At this stage, our purpose in This report is available online at changes in technology and communications since writing this Research Report is to provide rel- securitycouncilreport.org. the last competitive election for a UN Secretary- evant factual background on the history of the For daily insights by SCR on evolving General, this selection process promises to attract process and procedure, and proposals for reform. Security Council actions please subscribe to our “What’s In Blue” scrutiny from a wide and diverse audience. We also cover recent Council and General Assem- series at whatsinblue.org or follow Finding the right person for the role will be bly developments as Council members begin con- @SCRtweets on Twitter. crucial to the future of the UN. The world has sidering the process for the selection of the next changed dramatically since the position was Secretary-General. • Security Council Report Research Report October 2015 securitycouncilreport.org 1 Part I: History of the Process and Procedure Who Selects the Secretary-General? of the Open-ended High-Level Working 2 Part I: History of the Process The UN Charter, in Article 97, says that the Group on the Strengthening of the United and Procedure Secretary-General: Nations System—an early phase of the cur- 2 Who Selects the Secretary- ...shall be appointed by the General rent UN reform initiatives. The General General? Assembly upon the recommendation of the Assembly in adopting the Working Group’s 2 The Selection Process Security Council. report in resolution 51/241 on 31 July 1997, Appointments have traditionally been decided that: 3 How Important is the Veto? made by way of a General Assembly resolu- 57. The General Assembly shall make full 4 Term of Office tion, for example resolution 61/3 of 13 Octo- use of the power of appointment enshrined 5 Timing of the Decision ber 2006 appointing Secretary-General Ban in the Charter in the process of the appoint- 5 Regional Rotation and Gender Ki-moon to his first term of office. ment of the Secretary-General and the Equality For most of the UN’s history, however, the agenda item entitled “Appointment of the 6 Multiple Candidates role of the General Assembly in appointing Secretary-General of the United Nations”. 7 The Deputy Secretary-General the Secretary-General has been limited to the Furthermore, it outlined a role for the and other Senior Appointments formal act of appointment. president of the General Assembly: In the early years of the UN, the General 60. Without prejudice to the prerogatives 7 Criteria and Qualifications for Appointment Assembly’s role was not so limited. In 1946, of the Security Council, the President of at its very first session, the General Assembly the General Assembly may consult with 8 Part II: Highlights of the 2006 took the lead in setting procedures for the Member States to identify potential can- Process appointment process. In resolution 11(I) (A/ didates endorsed by Member States and, 9 Part III: Developments Since RES/1/11 in current numbering), it estab- upon informing all Member States of the 2006 lished ground rules for the appointment results, may forward those results to the 9 Joint Investigation Unit process, including terms and conditions of Security Council. Evaluation employment; length of term of office and pos- 10 The Delphi Symposium sibility of reappointment; and procedures for The Selection Process 10 Accountability, Coherence and appointment. In 1946 the General Assembly set up a pro- Transparency Group and Civil Significantly, this resolution stated that cess in resolution 11 (I) involving: Society Groups it was desirable that the General Assembly • the specific delegation of the lead role to 12 Recent General Assembly should be presented with a single name only the Council; Developments as a recommendation from the Council. • a decision that the Council undertake the 13 Part IV: Council Activity in 2015 In 1950 the General Assembly, in highly selection and recommend a single name; 13 UN Documents exceptional circumstances, took a prominent • required voting majorities in both the role in the appointment process. After a suc- Council and General Assembly; and 14 Useful Additional Resources cession of inconclusive votes in the Council • the requirement that discussion and deci- had led to deadlock, the General Assembly sion-making in both the Council and the decided by a majority vote to extend the term General Assembly be private. of Secretary-General Trygve Lie without a Confidentiality provisions were also recommendation from the Council. inserted into the Rules of Procedure of the Thereafter, until 1996, the General General Assembly (rule 141) and the Pro- Assembly adopted a passive role, accepting visional Rules of Procedure of the Security on each occasion the recommendation of the Council (rule 48). Both sets of rules require Council. In practice, the General Assembly’s that both voting and discussion be held in only choice has been to vote the recommen- private, but the General Assembly has tradi- dation of the Council up or down, and it has tionally made an important modification to never seriously considered rejecting a can- this provision. Since 1946 it has become the didate recommended by the Council. With custom, on the occasion of each appointment, the exception of Trygve Lie’s reappointment, for the General Assembly, on the proposal of the appointment of Secretaries-General has the president, to make the appointment in an always been determined by the Council—and open session, rather than in a closed session effectively by its five permanent members. as required in resolution 11 (I) and rule 141. In 1996 and 1997, however, in the wake of In 1950, the only occasion in which there was the US veto of the reappointment of Secre- a vote in the General Assembly, the meeting tary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the role was open, but the vote was by secret ballot, as and appointment of the Secretary-General required by rule 141. emerged as an important issue in discussions The most significant evolutions that have 2 whatsinblue.org Security Council Report Research Report October 2015 Part I: History of the Process and Procedure(con’t) occurred since 1946 have been in the prac- Clearly there is greater flexibility under International Labour Organization, the World tice of the Council. These changes in process the straw-ballot procedure. And there is the Health Organization and the World Trade have taken place in closed, informal consulta- possible advantage that permanent members Organization have specified qualifications tions and seem not to have been recorded as may find it easier to resile from a “red” straw or criteria that must be met. These organisa- Council decisions. As a result, their status is ballot than a formal veto cast in the Council tions, as well as the Food and Agricultural unclear. They include: chamber. On the other hand, it has made the Organization, have detailed timelines for the • In 1981, the Council began the practice process even more secret. appointment process, including opening and of conducting “straw polls” under which In an uncontested re-election, past practice closing dates for nominations, and curricu- members would indicate either “encour- suggests the Council is likely to dispense with la vitae are made publicly available on the agement” or “discouragement”. the informal balloting procedures developed organisation’s website. Meetings are also held • In 1991, the practice of colour-coded bal- for contested elections. Instead, the president with candidates where they are able to pres- lots, i.e. “red” for permanent member and is likely, after taking soundings of members, to ent their vision for the organisation. “white” for elected member, emerged in circulate a draft resolution in informal consul- In 1997, the General Assembly recog- later stages of the straw polls. tations, and then to convene a formal closed nised that a greater level of transparency was • In 1996, colour coding was used again, meeting of the Council at which the resolu- indeed desirable for the appointment of the distinguishing the votes of permanent and tion would be adopted by acclamation. Secretary-General, and it decided in resolu- elected members. An important practical evolution which tion 51/241 that: • In 2006, the straw ballot allowed Council occurred in the lead up to the 1996 appoint- 56. The process of selection of the Secretary- members to signify one of three options: ment was the informal paper, prepared in General shall be made more transparent. “encouragement; “discouragement”; or November 1996 under the presidency of The General Assembly also established “no opinion”.