BRIEFING PAPER Number 7544, 6 October 2016

Selecting a new UN By Arabella Lang

Secretary General

Inside: 1. Selection process 2. Role and requirements 3. Diversity 4. Calls for reform 5. The 2016 selection process

www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary Number 7544, 6 October 2016 2

Contents

Summary 3 1. Selection process 5 1.1 The rules 5 1.2 Nominations 5 1.3 Security Council straw polls and single recommendation 6 1.4 General Assembly appointment 7 2. Role and requirements 8 2.1 UN Charter 8 2.2 In practice 8 2.3 Requirements for candidates 9 3. Diversity 11 3.1 ‘Due regard’ 11 3.2 Regional rotation 11 3.3 Gender 12 4. Calls for reform 13 4.1 The issues 13 4.2 1997 General Assembly Resolution 13 4.3 2010 Joint Investigation Unit report 14 4.4 ‘1 for 7 billion’ campaign 14 4.5 2015 General Assembly Resolution 15 4.6 Views of the P5 15 5. The 2016 selection process 17 5.1 Invitation for nominations 17 5.2 Candidates so far 17 Ms Irina Bokova 18 Ms Helen Clark 18 Ms Christiana Figueres [withdrawn] 18 Ms Natalia Gherman 18 Mr António Guterres 18 Mr Vuk Jeremic 19 Dr Srgjan Kerim 19 Mr Miroslav Lajčák 19 Dr Igor Lukšić [withdrawn] 19 Ms Susana Malcorra 19 Prof Dr sc Vesna Pusić [withdrawn] 20 Dr Danilo Türk 20 Other potential candidates 20 5.3 General Assembly dialogues with candidates 21 5.4 Security Council straw polls 21

Cover page image copyright: General Assembly hall during balloting by H.E. Mr. Sam K. Kutesa. Licenced under CC BY NC-SA 2.0 / image cropped.

3 Selecting a new UN General

Summary

STOP PRESS Antonio Guterres, former Prime Minister of and former head of the UN refugee agency, is the unanimous choice of the UN Security Council to be the next UN Secretary General. At a press conference on 5 October 2016, the current President of the Security Council announced that Mr Guterres was the Council’s ‘clear favourite’, after its sixth round of ‘straw poll’ voting showed him receiving 13 ‘encourage’ votes, two ‘no opinion’ votes, and no ‘discourage’ votes. He beat nine other candidates (including ’s EU budget commissioner who had been nominated only days earlier). The Council will hold a formal vote on 6 October on their recommendation to the UN General Assembly for formal appointment. Mr Guterres, who is 67, is expected to take up the position on 1 January 2017.

Before the end of 2016 the must select its ninth Secretary-General, to head the organisation until at least 2021. He – or she – will replace Ban Ki-moon, whose second term as Secretary-General is due to end on 31 December 2016. Despite pressure to appoint a woman, and/or someone from Eastern Europe, the candidate reportedly in the lead at the moment is António Guterres, former Prime Minister of Portugal. The selection process is rather opaque. The UN Charter simply states that the Secretary- General is appointed by the General Assembly (GA), on the recommendation of the Security Council (SC). This is fleshed out to some extent by GA resolutions, and rules of procedure for the General Assembly and Security Council, but there have been many calls for greater transparency and inclusiveness. The Security Council deliberates in private, first holding a series of informal ‘straw polls’ to gauge levels of support for the candidates and potentially narrow down the field, and then adopting a resolution recommending a single candidate to the General Assembly. The recommendation needs nine votes, and any of the five permanent members of the Security Council can exercise their veto. The General Assembly then formally appoints the recommended candidate, usually without debate. Because there is no detailed job description or set of requirements for the Secretary- General – who is described in the UN Charter as the ‘chief administrative officer’ of the UN – the criteria for selection are not clear, and incumbents have varied widely in their interpretations of the role. The 2015 UN letter inviting Member States to nominate candidates does give some criteria, but these still allow considerable latitude. A 1997 GA Resolution on selecting the Secretary-General says that ‘due regard shall continue to be given to regional rotation and shall also be given to gender equality’. Regional rotation is by no means strict, but as there has never been a Secretary-General from the Eastern Europe group of countries candidates from those countries are likely to be in a strong position. Nor has there ever been a female Secretary-General. The UK strongly supports appointing a woman, ‘if all qualifications are equal’. Pressure for reform from some UN Member States, as well as UN working groups and reports, and civil society groups including the ‘1 for 7 billion’ campaign, have resulted in some new processes for 2016. Member States have been invited to nominate their candidates publicly, and encouraged to nominate female candidates; and the General Assembly has held public dialogues with all the candidates. But other proposals, including recommending more than one candidate to the General Assembly, limiting the Secretary- Number 7544, 6 October 2016 4

General to one term of office and introducing a clear timeline for appointment, have not been implemented. By mid-September 2016, twelve candidates – six men and six women – had been publicly nominated by UN Member States. Eight of the twelve are from Eastern Europe. Three candidates have withdrawn from the process, and others may yet emerge. After General Assembly hearings for all the candidates and four rounds of ‘straw polls’ in the Security Council, António Guterres (Portugal) is still reportedly in the lead, although he may not have Russia’s support. Two other men, Miroslav Lajčák (Slovakia) and Vuk Jeremić (Serbia) are apparently in second place and third place respectively. Female candidates are not currently faring well. 5 Selecting a new UN Secretary General

1. Selection process

Summary The process for selecting the Secretary-General of the UN is rather opaque. The UN Charter simply states that the Secretary-General is appointed by the General Assembly (GA), on the recommendation of the Security Council (SC). This is fleshed out to some extent by GA resolutions, and rules of procedure for the Security Council and the General Assembly, but there have been many calls for greater transparency and inclusiveness. The Security Council deliberates in private, first holding a series of informal ‘straw polls’ to gauge levels of support for the candidates and potentially narrow down the field, and then adopting a resolution recommending a single candidate to the General Assembly. The recommendation needs nine votes, and any of the five permanent members of the Security Council can exercise their veto. The General Assembly then formally appoints the recommended candidate, usually without debate.

1.1 The rules Article 97 of the UN Charter outlines a two-stage process for appointing the UN Secretary-General: first the Security Council recommends a candidate, and then the General Assembly appoints them. The Charter gives no more detail, but some is provided by (non-binding) GA resolutions, rules of procedure for the Security Council and the General Assembly, and the 1996 ‘Wisnumurti Guidelines’.1

1.2 Nominations Until 2015 there was no specified process for nominating candidates. It appears that in the early years, candidates were generally suggested by the five permanent members of the Security Council (, , Russia, UK and the USA, known as the ‘P5’).2 More recently, Member States have presented candidates (who do not need to be their nationals) to the Security Council President (the Presidency is held by each of the members in turn, for one month at a time). Regional organisations have also sometimes chosen to write letters in support of a candidates from their region. In December 2015, Member States were invited to present their nominations publicly to the Presidents of both the Security Council and the General Assembly (with no deadline – see below).

1 A short note by the then President of the Security Council Ambassador Nugroho Wisnumurti () setting out general principles, the legal/procedural basis and the decision-making process, including using colour-coded straw polls. In the light of the new procedures for 2016 (see below), these guidelines are likely to need updating. 2 Security Council Report, In Hindsight: The Process of Selecting a UN Secretary- General, 31 August 2015 Number 7544, 6 October 2016 6

1.3 Security Council straw polls and single recommendation Once the nominees have emerged, the Security Council meets in private to decide who to recommend (rule 48 of the Provisional rules of procedure of the Security Council). It has always recommended only one candidate, in line with GA resolution 11 (I), 1946, although nothing in the Charter requires this. If it is considering more than one candidate, the Security Council can vote on them by secret ballot. Because this decision is a matter of substance it requires ‘an affirmative vote of nine members including the concurring votes of permanent members’ (Article 27 (3) of the UN Charter). In fact it is often adopted by acclamation. Any of the P5 countries can block a candidate by exercising their veto, and this has been a frequent feature of selecting Secretaries-General.3 Since the 1980s the Security Council has adopted a process of first conducting ‘straw polls’ at informal meetings to gauge support from the permanent and elected members of the Council for different candidates. Initially the ‘encourage’, ‘discourage’ and ‘no opinion expressed’ votes do not distinguish between permanent and non- permanent members of the Council. In later rounds the P5 use red ballot papers to show where the veto might fall.4 The straw poll process has helped to avoid deadlock, but means that there is no official communiqué of the meetings and no formal voting.5 However, the results of each informal vote are widely leaked. The UK has a policy of not revealing its voting intentions in the selection process for the Secretary-General,6 although in cases of re-appointment it has sometimes publicly indicated its support. Once the Security Council has decided on a candidate to recommend to the General Assembly, it adopts a resolution to that effect. It also specifies the term of office for its recommended candidate, which has almost always been five years, with the possibility of renewal (see GA resolution 11 (I), 1946). Again, the Charter does not specify the term of office or number or terms a Secretary-General can serve, or who should make that decision. No Secretary-General has so far served more than two terms, although unsuccessfully stood for a third term in 1981.

3 See Security Council Report, Appointing the UN Secretary-General, Special Research Report, October 2015, pp3-4 and 9, and Selecting the UN Secretary-General: Vetoes, Timing and Regional Rotation, September 2015 4 See the 1996 Wisnumurti Guidelines 5 Security Council Report, Appointing the UN Secretary-General, Special Research Report, October 2015, p3 6 The Earl of Courtown, HL Deb 10 Sep 2015 c1581 7 Selecting a new UN Secretary General

1.4 General Assembly appointment Once the Security Council has passed a resolution recommending a candidate for Secretary-General, the GA considers the recommendation, usually without debate (GA resolution 11 (I)). Although the GA rules of procedure say that this should be done in private, by secret ballot, the General Assembly has traditionally made the appointment in open session.7 Any vote requires a two-thirds majority as it is considered an ‘important question’ (GA rules of procedure, rule 141 and rules 82-95), but there has only once been a General Assembly vote on appointing a Secretary-General, in 1950 (see below). The appointment itself is usually done by way of a GA Resolution. The General Assembly’s role is thus usually limited to formal act of appointment, although in 1950 it acted on its own initiative to appoint when deadlock in the Security Council meant that the Council was unable to make a recommendation.

7 See Security Council Report, Special Research Report No 3: Appointment of the UN Secretary-General, 24 May 2011 Number 7544, 6 October 2016 8

2. Role and requirements

Summary Because there is no detailed job description or set of requirements for the Secretary-General – who is described in the UN Charter as the ‘chief administrative officer’ of the UN – the criteria for selection are not clear, and incumbents have varied widely in their interpretations of the role. The 2015 UN letter inviting Member States to nominate candidates does give some criteria, but these still allow considerable latitude.

2.1 UN Charter The UN Charter describes the Secretary-General as the UN’s ‘chief administrative officer’ (Article 97), who shall also perform ‘such other functions as are entrusted’ to him or her by the Security Council, General Assembly, Economic and Social Council and other United Nations organs (Article 98). The Charter also empowers the Secretary-General to ‘bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security’ (Article 99).

2.2 In practice The UN Secretary General has been billed as both the UN’s top civil servant and also ‘the nearest we have to a world leader’.8 The UN website describes the Secretary-General as ‘equal parts diplomat and advocate, civil servant and CEO’; as ‘a symbol of United Nations ideals’ and ‘a spokesperson for the interests of the world's peoples, in particular the poor and vulnerable among them’. It sets out the ‘creative tension’ at the heart of the Secretary-General’s job in practice, as he or she must both: • take careful account of the concerns of Member States; and • uphold the values and moral authority of the United Nations, and speak and act for peace, even at the risk of challenging or disagreeing with Member States. It also summarises the Secretary-General’s day-to-day work: • attendance at sessions of United Nations bodies; • consultations with world leaders, government officials and others; • worldwide travel intended to keep him in touch with the peoples of the UN Member States and informed about the vast array of issues of international concern that are on the UN’s agenda; and

8 Edward Mortimer (director of communications under former Secretary General ), ‘Choosing the next UN leader should not be left to three people’, Open Security, 12 November 2014 9 Selecting a new UN Secretary General

• use of his ‘good offices’ -- steps taken publicly and in private, drawing upon his independence, impartiality and integrity, to prevent international disputes from arising, escalating or spreading. Periodic responsibilities include issuing an annual report on the work of the United Nations, and chairing the twice-yearly meetings of the UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB), which brings together the Executive Heads of all UN funds, programmes and specialised agencies to further coordination and cooperation. As the UN Elections Campaign notes, officeholders have adapted their mandate to their own style of leadership: While some such as Kofi Annan have been known for their strong public image as advocates, others, such as the current Secretary- General Ban Ki-moon, are seen more as bridge-builders or bureaucrats.

2.3 Requirements for candidates In their December 2015 letter inviting Member States to nominate candidates for the position of Secretary-General (see below), the Presidents of the Security Council and General Assembly said that ‘the position of Secretary-General … requires the highest standards of efficiency, competence and integrity, and a firm commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations’. It also asked for candidates with: • proven leadership and managerial abilities; • extensive experience in international relations; and • strong diplomatic, communication and multilingual skills. This reflects the terms of GA Resolution 60/286 (para 22): … Emphasizes the importance of candidates for the post of Secretary-General possessing and displaying, inter alia, commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, extensive leadership, and administrative and diplomatic experience… Arguably such a general set of criteria still leaves considerable room for latitude. Much more detailed criteria and qualifications for appointment of the Secretary-General were set out in the 1945 report by the United Nations Preparatory Commission.9 And the 2010 Delphi Symposium concluded that the most important qualities in a Secretary-General included: • integrity, independence, moral courage and impartiality; • capacity for moral and intellectual as well as political leadership; • the sophisticated diplomatic skills essential for a mediator and crisis manager;

9 PC/20, of 23 December 1945, section 2B, quoted in Security Council Report, Appointing the UN Secretary-General, Special Research Report, October 2015, p7 Number 7544, 6 October 2016 10

• capacity to manage the organisation effectively and provide leadership to the wider UN system; • strong problem-solving capacity and political instincts; and • charisma and contemporary media skills of a global communicator.10 According to the ‘1 for 7 billion’ campaign (see below), the current process still ‘falls short of the UN’s own principles, basic recruitment standards and current practice at other international organisations’. The campaign calls for a formal, public, set of criteria and qualifications including: • A comprehensive understanding of, and demonstrated commitment to, the purposes and principles of the UN Charter including peace and security, human rights and development. • The possession and display of the highest qualities of moral authority, independence, integrity and courage. • A demonstrated capacity for moral, intellectual and political leadership of an international organisation and capacity to provide leadership to the wider UN system. • A proven ability to manage a complex international organization. • Sophisticated diplomatic, mediation and problem-solving skills. • The public speaking and media skills required to be an effective and inspiring global communicator. • Proven multicultural understanding and sensitivity to equality and diversity. • A track record showing a willingness to work with civil society and all other relevant stakeholders.

10 Quoted in Security Council Report, Appointing the UN Secretary-General, Special Research Report, October 2015, p10 11 Selecting a new UN Secretary General

3. Diversity

Summary A 1997 GA Resolution on selecting the Secretary-General says that ‘due regard shall continue to be given to regional rotation and shall also be given to gender equality’. Regional rotation is by no means strict, but as there has never been a Secretary-General from the Eastern Europe group of countries candidates from those countries are likely to be in a strong position. Nor has there ever been a female Secretary-General. The UK strongly supports appointing a woman, ‘if all qualifications are equal’.

3.1 ‘Due regard’ A 1997 GA Resolution, 51/241, says that when choosing a new Secretary-General ‘due regard shall continue to be given to regional rotation and shall also be given to gender equality’. But how this operates in practice, and how much weight it has, are not clear.

3.2 Regional rotation Many UN elections and other issues are organised around the five UN regional groups. In the case of selecting the Secretary-General, there is no formal pattern for rotating between the groups. Western Europe has been represented disproportionately often, and one group of countries – Eastern Europe – has never been represented. The eight Secretaries-General so far were from the following regional groups: 1946-1952: Western Europe and others (Trygve Lie, ) 1953-1961: Western Europe and others (Dag Hammarskjöld, ) 1961-1971: Asia-Pacific (, Burma – now Myanmar) 1972-1981: Western Europe and others (Kurt Waldheim, ) 1982-1991: Latin America and Caribbean (Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, ) 1992-1996: Africa (Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Egypt) 1997-2006: Africa (Kofi Annan, Ghana) 2007-2016: Asia-Pacific (Ban Ki-moon, Republic of Korea) Some Member States argue that the best candidate should be chosen regardless of which country they come from. But others assert that a principle of rotation exists and should be followed strictly, or are prepared to vote on an ad hoc basis in a manner that supports wider Number 7544, 6 October 2016 12

diversity, even if they do not believe that the principle of rotation binds the Security Council.11 By convention, candidates are not chosen from the five permanent members of the Security Council (China, France, Russia, UK, USA), to avoid too great a concentration of power.

3.3 Gender Despite the exhortation to give ‘due regard’ to gender equality, there has never been a woman Secretary-General of the UN, and there appear to have been only three formal nominations of women candidates before 2016.12 The UK is among those strongly supporting having a woman at the head of the UN. Its to the UN, Mark Rycroft, has told the Security Council that ‘If all qualifications are equal, the UK believes that it’s high time for a woman to lead the United Nations’.13 The Campaign to Elect a Woman Secretary-General was established in 2015 to advocate for a woman as the next Secretary-General and to help make the selection of a woman ‘inevitable’. It also aims to support the selection process by identifying ‘the best possible female candidates’: it lists on its website ‘outstanding women’ from each of the five regional groups.

11 Security Council Report, Appointing the UN Secretary-General, Special Research Report, October 2015, p6 12 Security Council Report, Appointing the UN Secretary-General, Special Research Report, October 2015, p6 13 ‘British UN Ambassador highlights need to improve how UN selects its head’, UNA- UK, 2 July 2015 13 Selecting a new UN Secretary General

4. Calls for reform

Summary There has been increasing pressure for reform of the Secretary General selection process from some UN Member States, as well as UN working groups and reports, and civil society groups including the ‘1 for 7 billion’ campaign. Their concerns centre around transparency and accountability, and proposals include: a public list of nominated candidates; dialogues with the candidates in the General Assembly; a clear timetable and detailed set of criteria; Security Council to submit multiple candidates to the General Assembly; and restricting Secretaries-General to a single term of office.

4.1 The issues There have long been concerns that the selection process for UN Secretaries-General is too opaque and insufficiently accountable. Arguments that ‘a more open and inclusive selection process, that engages all Member States, could give future Secretaries-General a stronger mandate, which in turn would boost their ability to mobilise support for, and drive forward, the UN’s agenda’ are widespread.14 Successive UN debates have shown a significant degree of support for some reform issues, including Member State dialogue with candidates, a timeline and a public list of official candidates, and even on eliminating the possibility of a second term (critics argue that this can make the Secretary-General too beholden to the permanent five members of the Council, which can determine whether or not the sitting Secretary-General receives a second term by use of the veto).

4.2 1997 General Assembly Resolution Following the US veto of Boutros Boutros-Ghali’s re-appointment in 1996, UN reform initiatives led to a 1997 GA Resolution (Resolution A/RES/51/241). This called for the process of selecting the Secretary- General to be made more transparent, and gave the President of the General Assembly a greater role in the process, by stipulating that he or she: may consult with Member States to identify potential candidates endorsed by Member States and, upon informing all Member States of the results, may forward those results to the Security Council. It also required the General Assembly to consider the Secretary- General’s term of appointment before the appointment of the next Secretary-General. Similar provisions appear in subsequent GA resolutions 60/286 (2006) and 64/301 (2010).

14 ‘1 for 7 billion’ campaign policy platform Number 7544, 6 October 2016 14

4.3 2010 Joint Investigation Unit report In 2009-10, as part of the ‘Strengthening of the ’ agenda, the UN’s Joint Investigation Unit (JIU) evaluated the selection processes for the Secretary-General and other UN executive heads. The JIU’s report15 found that Member States agreed that the Secretary- General’s unique position meant that the (more transparent and articulated) selection processes for other UN executive heads would not necessarily be appropriate. Nevertheless, most Member States supported the call for increased transparency and for them to be included at an earlier stage, for example by the General Assembly holding formal hearings or meetings with the candidates. GA resolution 67/297 (2013) ‘takes note’ of the report’s recommendation on General Assembly hearings or meetings with candidates.

4.4 ‘1 for 7 billion’ campaign The ‘1 for 7 billion’ campaign (co-founded by the UK’s UN Association and run by the World Federalist Movement-Institute for Global Policy with NGO partners around the world) argued for ten reforms in time for the 2016 selection: 1. The position and qualifications should be advertised in all countries, with a call for nominations by Member States, parliaments and civil society organisations, and include a closing date for nominations. 2. A formal list of selection criteria should be published by the UN; these criteria should stress that the best person should be chosen irrespective of his or her country of origin. 3. A clear timetable for the selection process should be made public by the President of the General Assembly and President of the Security Council, no later than the start of the GA’s 70th session. 4. A list of all the official candidates and their CVs should be published by the President of the GA at the end of the nomination phase and by the Security Council President when considering its list of preferred candidates. 5. The President of the General Assembly and the President of the Security Council will be jointly responsible for regularly updating the UN membership and general public on the selection process once the full list of candidates has been announced. 6. Each candidate should release a manifesto, which should include their policy priorities and a commitment to selecting senior UN officials on the basis of merit, irrespective of their country of origin. 7. Once the names of all candidates have been announced, the General Assembly should organise a series of open

15 M Zahran, PL Fall and E Roman-Morey, Selection and Conditions of Service of Executive Heads in the United Systems Organizations, UN Joint Inspection Unit, JIU/REP/2009/8, 2009. See also doc A/65/71, 8 April 2010. 15 Selecting a new UN Secretary General

sessions that will enable member states as well as the public and media to scrutinise candidates and their manifestos. 8. The GA should insist that candidates do not make promises to individual countries on senior appointments, and member states should undertake not to seek such promises. 9. The Security Council should be encouraged to present two or more candidates for the General Assembly to appoint as Secretary-General. 10. The term of the Secretary-General should be limited to a single, non-renewable period of seven years.

4.5 2015 General Assembly Resolution These and other initiatives and recommendations, for example from The Elders and the Campaign to Elect a Woman Secretary-General,16 helped to inform the 2015 UN reform negotiations in the ad hoc Working Group on General Assembly Revitalisation (AHWG – see document A/69/1007 paras 44-53) and the GA Resolution that followed in September 2015 (Resolution 69/321, paras 32-44). This Resolution – adopted by consensus – sets out basic selection criteria for the Secretary-General, called for the presidents of the SC and GA to issue a joint letter calling for nominations, and proposed that the General Assembly conduct informal dialogues with candidates. It did not, however, ask the Security Council to present more than one candidate to the GA, or limit the Secretary-General to one term of office. The AHWG has continued its work on selecting the Secretary-General in 2016. For example, all UN Permanent Representatives were invited to the AHWG’s third thematic meeting on the selection and appointment of the UN Secretary-General and other UN executive heads on 22 March 2016. This included a briefing on gender balance and regional origin of the UN executive heads and Senior Management Group.

4.6 Views of the P5 Russia and the US have strongly advocated for continuing the existing selection procedures, and have for example rejected proposals for multiple candidates, detailed criteria or a set deadline for nominations. China holds similar views. France is more open to greater transparency but has not made any concrete proposals. By contrast, the UK supports clear timelines, encouragement of female candidates and increased interaction with candidates in open discussions: the has proposed an initiative that pushes for three key changes to be made to achieve this. First, greater

16 See Security Council Report, Appointing the UN Secretary-General, Special Research Report, October 2015, pp10-11 Number 7544, 6 October 2016 16

structure on the selection process could be provided by setting a date for candidates to declare themselves and a date by which the selection should happen. Secondly, the President of the General Assembly and the President of the Security Council should provide a formal call to candidates that includes encouraging applications from women, which was mentioned by many noble Lords. We want to encourage female candidates to stand to be the first female Secretary-General, while being firm that the selection process itself should be based on merit, rather than gender. Thirdly, candidates should be provided with a platform to set out their manifestos and be questioned by Security Council and General Assembly members, as well as NGOs and civil society. This would allow for greater involvement from the wider United Nations community about issues of concern.17 However, the UK does not agree with requiring the Security Council to recommend more than one candidate to the General Assembly, or limiting the Secretary-General to a single term.

17 The Earl of Courtown, HL Deb 10 Sep 2015 c1582 17 Selecting a new UN Secretary General

5. The 2016 selection process

Summary The 2016 selection process has two particularly novel features: public nominations by Member States, and informal ‘dialogues’ with each of the candidates in the General Assembly. By mid-September 2016, twelve candidates – six men and six women – had been publicly nominated by UN Member States to succeed Ban Ki-moon as Secretary General from 2017. Eight of the twelve are from Eastern Europe. Three candidates have withdrawn from the process, and others may yet emerge. After General Assembly hearings for all the candidates and four rounds of ‘straw polls’ in the Security Council, António Guterres (Portugal) is still reportedly in the lead, although he may not have Russia’s support. Two other men, Miroslav Lajčák (Slovakia) and Vuk Jeremić (Serbia) are apparently in second place and third place respectively. Female candidates are not currently faring well, but more candidates could yet emerge. The appointment is likely to be made in October or November 2016.

5.1 Invitation for nominations In December 2015, the Presidents of the Security Council and the General Assembly wrote to the UN Member States, inviting them to present candidates for the position, and particularly encouraging them to present women candidates. The letter also said that the Presidents would offer candidates opportunities for informal dialogues or meetings with their members. It gave no deadline for nominations, despite calls for a clear timetable for the 2016 selection, so more could emerge right up to the last minute. This is the first time that UN Member States will be ‘included totally in the discussion of the next Secretary-General’.18 The ‘1 for 7 billion’ campaign has written to the official candidates, asking them to present publicly their vision and objectives; to refrain from reserving key senior positions for certain member states (as is alleged to have been promised in the past in order to increase a candidate’s chances); and to participate actively in hearings with states and civil society. The letter also encourages candidates to commit to serving a single, non-renewable term of office.

5.2 Candidates so far By mid-September 2016, twelve official candidates – six men and six women – were listed on the GA President’s websites, along with their letters of nomination and CVs. All have been Prime Minister, President or Foreign Minister of their country, and/or held senior UN posts. Eight

18 General Assembly President Mogens Lykketoft, quoted in ‘For first time in history, selection of next UN Secretary-General will include input from all Member States’, UN news centre, 15 December 2016 Number 7544, 6 October 2016 18

of the twelve are from Eastern Europe. Three candidates have withdrawn from the process. In previous years there was no public list of candidates. Ms Irina Bokova Bulgaria Ms Bokova has been the Director-General of UNESCO since 2009 (the first woman and the first Eastern European to hold the post), and chairs the High-Level Committee on Management of the UN Chief Executives Board. Before that she had been an Ambassador, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Member of Parliament for Bulgaria.

Box 1: Bulgarian controversy The reported that there was controversy in Bulgaria over who to nominate as its candidate for Secretary-General. Ms Bokova, undoubtedly a strong candidate, was nominated by the previous Government, and there is widespread speculation that the current Government would prefer Kristalina Georgieva (the current vice-president of the European Commission) or Nickolay Mladenov (the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East). Other UN Member States could nominate them. Bulgaria is considered particularly important in the contest as it is judged to be one of the few countries in the Eastern Europe group likely to be able to garner support from all the P5 countries.

Ms Helen Clark New Zealand Ms Clark was Prime Minister of New Zealand for three successive terms from 1999 to 2008. Since 2009 she has led the UN Development Programme, being reappointed unanimously in 2013. Before entering New Zealand’s Parliament she worked as an academic. Ms Christiana Figueres [withdrawn] Costa Rica Ms Figueres was Executive Secretary for the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) from 2010 to 2016. She has been a diplomat and also founder-director of a non-profit organisation, the Center for Sustainable Development of the Americas. The latest entrant so far, Ms Figueres was also the most recent to withdraw her candidacy, on 13 September 2016 (following the fourth straw poll). Ms Natalia Gherman Ms Gherman has been Moldova’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and European Integration, as well as Ambassador. She led the UN Global Dialogue on Institutional Capacities for Sustainable Development and their indicators, and subsequent adoption of the Chisinau Outcome Statement. Mr António Guterres Portugal Mr Guterres was Prime Minister of Portugal for seven years and then UN High Commissioner for Refugees for ten. He had been a Member of 19 Selecting a new UN Secretary General

Parliament for 17 years, and for many years he was active in the Socialist International, a worldwide organisation of social democratic political parties. Mr Vuk Jeremic Serbia Currently President of a Belgrade think-tank (the Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development), and Editor-in- Chief of a journal in the same field (Horizons), Mr Jeremic was President of the UN General Assembly in 2012-13. Before that he was Serbia’s Foreign Minister from 2007-12. He has worked in the private sector in and holds a physics degree from Cambridge University. Dr Srgjan Kerim Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia A former economics professor and author, as well as businessman, Dr Kerim has served as Foreign Minister and Ambassador for Macedonia, and was President of the 62nd Session of the UN General Assembly (2007-08). Mr Miroslav Lajčák Slovak Republic Currently Slovakia’s Minister of Foreign and European Affairs and an MP, Mr Lajtak’s diplomatic career includes senior positions in the European External Action Service and the UN. He was the High Representative of the international community and EU Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina from 2007 to 2009. Dr Igor Lukšić [withdrawn] Montenegro As well as teaching economics and development at Podgorica University, Dr Luksic is Montenegro’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and European Integration. He has also been Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, as well as Governor on behalf of Montenegro at the World Bank and at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. He withdrew his candidacy on 23 August 2016 following the second Security Council straw poll. Ms Susana Malcorra Argentina Ms Malcorra has been Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship of the Argentine Republic since December 2015. Before that she was Chef de Cabinet to the UN Secretary-General (in other words Ban Ki-moon’s chief of staff) and Chair of the Secretary-General's Management Committee, for three years, and held other senior positions in the UN. She worked for 25 years in the private sector, including the telecoms industry, having graduated as an Engineer in Electronics. Number 7544, 6 October 2016 20

Box 2: The Falklands controversy> Argentina’s constitutional claim to the Falklands Islands / Islas Malvinas could threaten Ms Malcorra’s candidacy. Since becoming Foreign Minister in Argentina’s new administration, Ms Malcorra has taken a more conciliatory approach; for instance in September 2016 she reportedly said that Argentina is willing to consider resuming direct flights to and from the Falklands Islands and a joint UK-Argentinian exploration of hydrocarbons in the area. She has expressed ‘confidence’ that the UK would not veto her candidacy solely on account of her nationality. Officials from Argentina and the UK will reportedly hold high-level talks on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in September 2016, with Ms Malcorra and UK Foreign Office Minister Alan Duncan agreeing the agenda for the talks. Press reports suggest that the US and China support Ms Malcorra’s candidacy, and point out the dilemma for the UK given its strong support for having female candidates for the position.

Prof Dr sc Vesna Pusić [withdrawn] Croatia Professor Pusic is Croatia’s Minister of Foreign and European Affairs, and First Deputy Prime Minister. She has been a Member of the Croatian Parliament and its Deputy Speaker. She was also Professor of Sociology and Political Theory at the University of Zagreb. She was the first candidate to withdraw, on 4 August 2016, on the eve of the second Security Council straw poll. Dr Danilo Türk Slovenia A former President of Slovenia, Dr Turk has also been UN Assistant- General for Political Affairs, President of the UN Security Council and a member of the UN Human Rights Committee. He is Chairman of the Global High Level Panel on Water and Peace, and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Global Fairness Initiative (a Washington-based NGO dedicated to economic and social development projects in developing countries). He is also a professor of international law. Other potential candidates There has been speculation in the media mentioning dozens of other potential candidates, including: • Michelle Bachelet (President of Chile and former head of UN Women); • Carl Bildt (Swedish Foreign Minister) • Kristalina Georgieva (European Commission vice-president, from Bulgaria) • (German Chancellor); and • Kevin Rudd (former Prime Minister of Australia). However, none of these has yet received a formal nomination from a UN Member State. 21 Selecting a new UN Secretary General

5.3 General Assembly dialogues with candidates The General Assembly’s informal dialogues or meetings with candidates (see GA Resolution 69/321, 11 September 2015) are a new feature of the process for 2016. The format is as follows: • Candidates are invited to submit a short ‘vision statement’ on future challenges and opportunities, for instance in the fields of peace and security, sustainable development, human rights, humanitarian response and the management of the UN. • Each candidate has a two hour ‘segment’ chaired by the President of the General Assembly, consisting of a 10-minute opening statement by the candidate, followed by questions from Member States on a first-come, first-served basis (two minutes each), with the opportunity for candidates to respond at regular intervals. • One or two civil society representatives are given the floor, time permitting. • The meetings are open and webcast with interpretation in all official languages, and a link to each webcast is posted on the GA President's webpage. The UN Non-Governmental Liaison Service (UN-NGLS) invited civil society to submit questions to ask candidates during the General Assembly dialogues. A civil society committee narrowed these down to a short-list, from which the Office of the President of the General Assembly selected some to be presented in person, shared via video or audio recordings, or read out by the President during the dialogues. Many of the questions submitted were about sustainable development and poverty, but there were also questions on peace and security (both in general and in specific situations such as ), climate change, the Security Council veto, the role and rights of women and more. The first hearings took place in April 2016, with further rounds in June and July as new candidates were nominated. The ‘1 for 7 billion’ campaign summarised the topics raised, but no obvious front-runner emerged from the hearings. The new president of the General Assembly, Peter Thomson of Fiji, who took over the position on 13 September 2016, has publicly committed to hold hearings for any further candidates.19

5.4 Security Council straw polls Once the first candidates had been nominated, the Security Council started its ‘straw poll’ process to gauge the level of support for each candidate. It has conducted four ‘undifferentiated’ polls so far (21 July 2016, 5 August, 29 August and 9 September), which give no indication of how the P5 might use their veto.

19 ‘Fourth Straw Poll to Select the Next Secretary-General’, What’s In Blue, 8 September 2016 Number 7544, 6 October 2016 22

Although the polls are conducted in private meetings, the results for each candidate – though not which country voted for whom – are widely leaked in the press and social media. The ‘1 for 7 billion’ campaign has a ’score card’ on its website which tracks each candidate’s reported position. After the fourth straw poll it showed the former Prime Minister of Portugal and former head of the UN Refugee Agency, António Guterres, still in the lead. However, press reports suggest that Russia might veto his appointment, because when he was Prime Minister he was a strong supporter of both NATO and the EU enlarging to the east. Late entrants Miroslav Lajčák (Slovakia) and Vuk Jeremić (Serbia) also maintained their positions in second place and third place respectively. Coming from Eastern European countries is likely to increase their chances. Female candidates are not currently faring well. Irina Bokova, currently in fifth place in the straw polls and said to be Russia’s preferred candidate, is unlikely to have the support of the US, the UK or France; Susana Malcorra (seventh place) is reportedly supported by the US and China but might not get the UK’s support as a result of Argentina’s position on the Falkland Islands. Her former position as Ban Ki-moon’s chief of staff is seen by some as an advantage and by others as a drawback. A potential thirteenth candidate, Bulgaria’s Kristalina Georgieva (currently EU budget commissioner), might yet be nominated by a group of countries including Croatia and Hungary, but she has little UN or diplomatic experience. The first ‘colour-coded’ poll showing the views of the veto-holding permanent members of the Security Council is expected in mid-October (after two further undifferentiated straw polls). This could change the dynamics dramatically. The Council has not set a deadline for making a recommendation to the General Assembly, but plans to do so ‘in a timely manner so that the appointment by the General Assembly allows the newly appointed Secretary-General sufficient time to prepare for the job’.20 GA Resolution 51/241 recommends that the new Secretary-General is appointed at least a month before the incumbent’s term expires, which would see the ninth Secretary-General appointed by the end of November 2016.

20 Letter from the Presidents of the Security Council and General Assembly, 15 December 2016

The House of Commons Library research service provides MPs and their staff with the impartial briefing and evidence base they need to do their work in scrutinising Government, proposing legislation, and supporting constituents. As well as providing MPs with a confidential service we publish open briefing papers, which are available on the Parliament website. Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in these publically available research briefings is correct at the time of publication. Readers should be aware however that briefings are not necessarily updated or otherwise amended to reflect subsequent changes. If you have any comments on our briefings please email [email protected]. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing only with Members and their staff. If you have any general questions about the work of the House of Commons you can email [email protected]. Disclaimer - This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties. It is a general briefing only and should not be relied on as a substitute for specific advice. The House of Commons or the author(s) shall not be liable for any errors or omissions, or for any loss or damage of any kind arising from its use, and may remove, vary or amend any information at any time without prior notice. The House of Commons accepts no responsibility for any references or links to, BRIEFING PAPER or the content of, information maintained by third parties. This information is Number 7544, 6 October provided subject to the conditions of the Open Parliament Licence. 2016