General Assembly General Assembly

Statement by Abhishek Singh, First Secretary, Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations at the Special Political and decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) on Item 53: Comprehensive Review of Special Political Missions (SPMs) - 3 November, 2014

 

Mr. Chairperson,

1. Let me at the outset thank the Under Secretary General Jeffery Feltman for his useful presentation on the United Nations Special Political Missions (SPM).  SPMs by definition are part of the continuum UN Peace Operations at different stages of conflict cycle.  We take note of resolution 68/85 of 2013 on the Comprehensive Review of SPM and the Report of the Secretary General report on SPMs dated 18 August, 2014 (A/69/325).

 

Mr. Chairperson,

2. We would like to present the following points reflecting our views on SPMs of the United Nations.

 

3. We would like to emphasize the importance of respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all States where these SPMs are operating.  In this context, we would like to emphasize that the principles of impartiality, consent of parties, national ownership and national responsibility should be kept in mind during the implementation stage of SPMs.

 

4. We would like to stress the importance of having clear-cut mandates for SPMs.  We have seen blurring of mandate and also disconnect between the mandate and the political situation of a particular region where SPMs are proposed to be sent.  We would, therefore, expect more consultation with member states for policy formulation related to SPMs so that chances of disconnect of the mandate of SPMs with the political reality is minimized.

 

Mr. Chairperson,

5. There should be free flow of communication between the Security Council, General Assembly and the Secretariat regarding the SPMs.  These communications should not be routine in nature, but should involve the Member States in a substantial manner.  We have noticed that the policy formulation for SPMs is a rather opaque process which lacks transparency.  We would urge the Fourth Committee to look into this issue so as to have a more participatory process involving the member states and not letting it be a sole preserve of the Security Council and the Secretariat.

 

6. We have taken note of the increase in the number of SPMs and the new challenges it faces.  However, we should be cautious in expanding into areas which fall within the domain of treaty bodies or part of mandate of other UN institutions.

 

Mr. Chairperson,

7. We would like to mention about the Secretary-General’s Comprehensive Review of Peace Operations.  We expect to be enabled to contribute substantially to this Review. We hope that the Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on the Comprehensive Review for Peacekeeping Operations would involve serious and substantial consultations with Troop Contributing Countries (TCCs).

 

8. We would also expect that the Department of Political Affairs, which is primarily responsible for the SPMs, organizes more interactive briefings for the member states by the heads of the SPMs.  This would provide an opportunity for Member States to raise queries and offer suggestions on the functioning of SPMs.

 

Mr. Chairperson,

9. We would also like to mention about the need for establishing a separate new account for SPMs.  We do see an increase in the financial requirements of SPMs.  However, the SPMs do not follow the regular budget cycles of the UN.  Therefore, we would urge that the demands of the SPMs should be financed through the same criteria, methodology and accountability used for UN Peacekeeping operations.  This would further enhance the transparency in the budgetary process of SPMs.

 

10. Finally, we would like to emphasize the need for SPMs to operate within the framework of their mandate.  In case, there is need for expanding or amending the mandate, due process should be followed for the same.

 

I thank you, Mr. Chairperson