Statement by Permanent Representative of Slovenia to the United Nations Samuel Žbogar at the General Assembly’s 47th plenary meeting: Agenda item 64 – Use of the Veto

Mr. President,

Thank you for convening this important yearly debate on the Use of the Veto. Slovenia is one of the co-sponsors of Resolution 76/262, known as the veto initiative, which has proved to be an important tool for the wider membership of the UN to reflect on the work of the Security Council when a veto is used, and thus providing a degree of accountability.

We align with the statement delivered by Liechtenstein on behalf of a group of States committed to its implementation.

President,

Since our last debate on this item, exactly a year ago, the veto has regrettably been used to block the adoption of two Amendments and two Draft Resolutions, addressing the war on Ukraine and the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

Slovenia, as an elected member of the Council with six weeks left of its term, including a Presidency in December, will persist in working towards a more responsive, responsible, efficient and transparent Council, capable and willing of fulfilling its mandate.

Slovenia’s principled position is that the veto requires the highest degree of restraint, responsibility and accountability. It should never undermine the Council’s mandate of maintaining peace and security. Likewise, it should never stand in the way of urgent action against genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes. We therefore support the existing initiatives towards limitations on the use of the veto. As a member of the ACT Group, Slovenia supports and advocates for the ACT Code of Conduct and we support the French-Mexican initiative on veto restraint in cases of mass atrocities. We continue to encourage those Member States that have not yet done so to join these important initiatives.

Furthermore, in her address to the General Assembly last September, the President of Slovenia proposed an initiative to seek an advisory opinion of the ICJ on the legal limitations to casting a veto in the Security Council situations involving widespread atrocity crimes such as genocide and crimes against humanity since their prevention and punishment are considered as peremptory norms of international law.  

Mr. President,

The international environment is never static, it is continuously changing. However, there is at least one element that is constant – the need for international cooperation and multilateralism. The world is not the same as it was 80 years ago, but the crucial importance of the UN and its promise remain. They actually grow with the ever more complex global changes that demand collective action. To be able to address these challenges effectively, multilateralism, with the UN at its center, must adapt and evolve. Reforms are not optional, they are necessary and overdue.

We need to continue discussions on a comprehensive reform of the Security Council with a renewed urgency, and within these discussions, and I quote, “intensify efforts to reach an agreement on the future of the veto, including discussions on limiting its scope and use”, end of quote, as pledged in the Pact for the Future. It is also important to remember and highlight that in the same document we also decided to fully implement and adhere to all provisions of the Charter as they relate to decision-making processes in the Council, including Article 27(3). We cannot afford these to have been empty promises.

Furthermore, we should continue strengthening the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly and further highlight the General Assembly’s role in maintenance of peace and security in accordance with the Charter, especially when the Council is unable to deliver on its mandate.

In conclusion, Mr. President,

The adoption of Resolution 76/262 (Veto initiative) was a milestone in the relations between two of the main UN organs and for the role of the General Assembly in peace and security. We continue to hope that it will also contribute to more responsible and restrained use of the veto.

I thank you.

Recent Statements