A. Veto

(a) Defining the scope of the veto and modification of the use of the veto

Our preference is to limit the use of veto and to promote a veto free culture.

Colombia has always expressed its opposition to the veto, and we voted against it in San Francisco, because we believed that it would introduce an anti democratic element into the decision making process and that it did not reflect the principle of the sovereign equality of States.

Should the veto be extended to new permanent members or eliminated?

There should be no extension of the right of veto, and the use of the veto should be limited.

Time limits should be established on the right to the veto, which, by its nature, should not be perpetual.

The Hamas Veto

There is now a wide consensus that the use of the veto should be curtailed with a view to its eventual abolition.

Limiting the Security Council Veto

(a) Restraint on the use of the veto

No extension of the veto power should take place.

The legal basis of the veto

5. Extension of the veto to the new permanent membership

Any attempt to curtail the veto will be vetoed. Undemocratic though it may be, the veto will be with us for the foreseeable future.

They should have a right of veto.

(f) The question of the use of the veto.

f Ibid., para.

No member had the right of veto in the Committee.

The permanent members of the Security Council should endeavour not to resort to the veto or to the threat of its use.

That was a falsehood there was no such veto and there never had been.

Later, at Ezulwini, Africa reiterated its opposition to the right of the veto, while at the same time deciding that, so long as the current permanent members had that right, Africa should have it as well.

Moreover, we must do away with the right of the veto.

C. Decision making in the Security Council, including the veto

2. Decision making in the Security Council, including the veto.

VI. Decision making in the Security Council, including the veto

Given concerns of Member States about the current scope and application of the veto, agreement on its possible extension to new permanent members may depend on the willingness of the existing permanent members to accept restrictions on its use.

The purpose for which the veto was instituted and the grounds on which it was assigned 60 years ago are no longer valid in today's world.

On the issue of the veto, we believe that this proposal mirrors our support for its use to be voluntarily limited.

We all know the inhibiting effect that the veto, or even the threat of its use, can have on Council deliberations.

Your homestead application has bee turned down.

(b) That the new permanent members shall not exercise the right of veto until the question of the extension of the right of veto to new permanent members has been decided upon in the framework of the review mandated under paragraph 7 below

The leaders affirm the need to restrict the use of the veto power to make it exercisable within narrower limits.

For my delegation, the choice is straightforward either we abolish the right of veto or we grant it to new permanent members.

2. Decision making process in the Security Council, including the veto

I. The veto as a voting instrument in the Security Council

We further call for the elimination of the veto power.

Of course, and we reserve the right to veto.

1. Extension of the veto to new permanent members should be considered only in the context of curtailment or limitation of its use1 by the current permanent members.

My third point relates to the use of the veto.

The third message is the claim to the veto power.

Let me briefly deal with the matter of the veto.

We have often reaffirmed that the veto should be eliminated.

These proposals do not affect the substance of the veto.

As a matter of principle, and in keeping with its historical position of rejecting the veto, Chile makes a specific reservation with regard to the granting of the right of veto to the new permanent members, whether immediately or subject to a suspension or moratorium.