By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Sep 19 1996 (IPS)

The U.N. General Assembly is seeking to break with tradition and assume a more assertive role in the selection of the next Secretary-General in November.

“The General Assembly will not be a rubber stamp,” president of the Assembly, Ambassador Razali Ismail of Malaysia, told reporters. “If we disagree with the choice made by the Security Council, we will send it back to the Council.”

Addressing a press conference Thursday, Razali said the United Nations’ highest policy-making body will not just “anoint” any candidate nominated by the Security Council.

Since the Assembly is the true representative of the United Nations with all 185 member-states participating in its deliberations, it should have a more positive role in picking the next Secretary-General, he added.

Asked about Malaysia’s opposition to the re-election of the incumbent Boutros Boutros-Ghali of Egypt, Razali said his government’s position had not changed.

“We stand by that,” he said. “But I can give you a clear assurance that my position will not in any way impair my ability to put together a constructive role for the General Assembly in the election of the Secretary-General.”

A candidate for Secretary-General is usually elected in secret by the Security Council and then recommended for approval by the General Assembly. But each of the five big powers in the Council — Britain, China, France, Russia, and the United States — can veto a candidate, killing his or her chances of going before the Assembly.

The Assembly has the right to reject the nomination and propose its own candidate, but it has rarely exercised this right. Boutros- Ghali ends his five-year term in December, but he has said he wants to run for a second term.

The United States has publicly declared it will veto his candidature because, according to Washington, he has not done enough to reform the financially ailing organisation.

U.N. Spokeswoman Sylvana Foa notes there have been a few occasions when members of the Security Council have had disagreements over a candidate.

“On one occasion, it took six weeks and 16 ballots before they finally agreed on a compromise, which was Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar,” Foa said. Perez de Cuellar served two terms ending Dec. 1991.

In 1950, Secretary-General Trygve Lie’s first re-election was vetoed by the then Soviet Union.

“At one point — according to third-hand reports, as these things are all very secret — it was decided to simply send it to the General Assembly, saying ‘we’re deadlocked’, or ‘there’s a stand-off, we can’t make up our minds’, and the General Assembly simply went ahead,” Foa said.

“History tells us that it was almost impossible for Secretary- General Trygve Lie to function effectively, and he resigned after three years or so.”

The U.N. Charter is “rather vague on the whole issue,” Foa added. “It just says that the General Assembly would elect the Secretary-General on the recommendation of the Security Council.”

A study sponsored by two major think-tanks last month implicitly accused the world’s major powers of manipulating the election of the Secretary-General.

“It is impossible to escape the impression, that many governments, including some of the most powerful, do not want a strong, independent leader as Secretary-General,” according to the study published under the auspices of the New York-based Ford Foundation and the Dag Hammarskjold Foundation of Stockholm.

The authors of the study, Brian Urquhart and the late Erskine Childers, said the selection of the Secretary-General was literally part of “an old-boy network.”

The two former high-ranking U.N. officials accused the big powers of instituting an election process which merely finds “a reasonably acceptable candidate who could get past five potential vetoes.” The study urged the five veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council to relinquish their claimed right of veto over the election of a Secretary-General.

The lifting of the veto, they argued, might be balanced by reconsidering the tradition that no national of a permanent member- state of the Security Council can be candidate for the post of Secretary-General.

The study called on governments to choose the Secretary-General “more creatively, more systematically and more democratically.” The authors proposed that the General Assembly adopt a comprehensive new policy, including a single, seven-year term to free the incumbent from re-election stresses and pressures.

Urquhart and Childers proposed a public call for nominations, with a short- list of between five and 10 selected names published by the Security Council mid-way through the process. After 30 days for comment or additional suggestions from governments, parliamentarians, civic groups and media, the Security Council would then resume the selection process.

The candidates on a refined short list should then be interviewed by the Security Council before it sends a name to the General Assembly, the authors say.

Excerpt: