Intervention delivered by H.E. Ambassador Katalin Annamária Bogyay, Permanent Representative of Hungary to the UN at the Inter-governmental negotiations on the question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters on Monday, 2nd May 2016.
After promising discussions on three key elements, we are ready to tackle the last two interrelated topics on categories of membership and regional representation.
On Categories of membership
Hungary continues to support enlargement in both categories in order to better reflect the current geopolitical and social realities. Should it find consensus, Hungary does not exclude an interim solution, where a new category of seats is created for longer period that can also be immediately renewable. This latter step can also be temporary in nature, until discussions on further enlargement in permanent membership come to a satisfactory conclusion.
Decisions on the enlargement in the permanent or other new proposed categories shall not jeopardize enlargement in the non-permanent category, which is uniformly supported by the international community.
In order to ensure adequate balance, enlargement in the non-permanent category shall, at least, matchthe enlargement in the permanent, or any other new, category. We offer this element as a guiding principle for our future negotiations.
On regional representation
Hungary supports a simple and understandable enlargement model that must be based on Paragraph 1 of Article 23 of the UN Charter, that is, “equitable regional distribution” of seats. Unfortunately, there is now a clear dichotomy between the size of regional groups and their representation in the Council.
Our proposal therefore, is to agree, as a guiding principle, that enlargement must continue to be based on the regional groups and must observe their equitable representation.
This does not mean that other supplementary models cannot be entertained. New ideas emerged, such as seats for sub-regional and cross-regional groups, notably the Arab Group, small and medium sized countries, for the Small Island Developing States (SIDS).
Then, the question is, how the creation of seats for sub-regional or cross-regional groups can be reconciled with the principle of regional distribution? It can be done only if allocation of seats to regional groups is adjusted accordingly, in order to maintain the overall balance among the regional groups.
Finally we do not think that “regional representation” can be interpreted in a way to create seats for regional organizations.
All proposals on the table contain acceptable elements and, therefore, can be utilized as basis for our discussions. The final solution does not necessarily have to be one of the proposals, in the consolidated text, but rather, a combination of their elements.
We see clear opportunities to narrow down differences and identify areas of consensus on these issues.
Hungary reiterates its requests for a second non-permanent seat for the Eastern European Group. The membership of the EEG has grown from 10 counties in 1965 (when non-permanent membership was expanded to 10) to the current 23 Member States. This request stands under any enlargement model. Hungary thanks for the support indicated by L69, CARICOM, UFC, G4 and other countries for this proposal, and notes that all respective enlargement models in the consolidated text also contain this option.
Thank you, Madam Chair!