Submitted by crinadmin on
Summary: Transcript of the Secretary General's Press
Encounter on 7 April, the day he addressed
the Commission on the subject of reform.
SECRETARY-GENERAL: Good morning ladies and gentlemen. Let me first
thank you for coming in such numbers. And let me at the onset
congratulate your new President, the new President of ACANU, Mr.
Herbermann. I had hoped to stay in Geneva a bit longer but given the
death of the Pope, I also have to change my plans and go to Rome. So we
are having a rather brief press conference. But let me answer your
questions. I suspect most of you heard my speech this morning.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary-General, thank you very much. On behalf of
ACANU, I would like to ask you again whether it is possible to have a
proper press conference next time. The UN has all the facilities and it will
be much more convenient for all of us. My question is, on your reform
agenda, the Chinese want to have a consensus among UN-members on
the reform and they reject a deadline for the decisions. Is that a blow for
your plans? What does it mean for your reform agenda?
SECRETARY-GENERAL: Let me first of all deal with the first part of your
question. I would love to have a full-fledged press conference. Then,
next time I come into town, we will make time for it. In fact, I would
have stayed, but I had a very tight agenda. I am happy that we are having
this session.
On the Security Council reform, let me say that obviously the Member
States have to take the decisions. I cannot impose it on them. But I also
believe that the Security Council reform has been on the agenda of the
Organization for over a decade and the time has come for us to take some
hard decisions. I think it is in everyone's interest to reform the Council
and bring the structure and composition in line with today's realities.
And I think that if we can expand the Council and make it more
representative and democratic, it would also gain in greater legitimacy in
the eyes of peoples of the world. Yes, consensus is always possible. It
is always the best option. My suggestion was that ideally we should take
that decision by consensus. But if consensus appears not to be possible,
it should not be an excuse for inaction. And I would hope that the Member
States will come to [the] General Assembly in September determined to
make progress. And of course if they can reach consensus by September
or before the end of the sixtieth session, fine. But if they don't, I think they
have to have a mechanism for bringing the discussion to closure.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary-General sir, two questions that are very related.
First of all, you talked just now in your speech about selectivity in the
Human Rights Commission. I wonder if you could be blunt and tell us
exactly what you mean by that. Second, relating to UN reform, the UN has
faced a lot of criticism recently on the oil-for-food programme. You
visited the major agencies here in Geneva today. How do you find the
morale of the staff?
SECRETARY-GENERAL: On your first question, I think my statement was very
clear. I argue that no one can claim complete virtue when it comes to
human rights application, and that the new Council should have the
opportunity periodically of looking at human rights records of every
country, and that we should be able to apply the rules fairly and
consistently across the board. I think you were expecting I would name
names. I am not going to do that.
On the question of morale, I have met - first of all, the UN has gone
through a very difficult period. You mentioned the oil-for-food
[programme] where we've been criticised a lot. The two reports issued by
the Volcker Committee identified some lapses in management and also the
findings came up with some troubling questions which we are dealing with
and taking steps to strengthen our management and accountability. But
we must also not forget that the UN also continues with its work, its
substantive work, and I've encouraged the staff to focus on their work and
what they do best. We are all human. When your Organization is being
criticised and being knocked, it does affect morale. But I think we are
beginning to turn the corner. I met with the entire staff before I left
New York. I met the staff of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and I
will be seeing the [staff of] High Commissioner for Refugees this
afternoon. I think the morale can be better.
QUESTION: Mr. Annan, people in Asia have suffered greatly from human
rights abuses during the Second World War. Now in the context of your
proposed reform, public opinion in Asian countries like China and Korea is
demanding that Japan should redress its past atrocities before it can
become a permanent member of the Security Council. So I wonder if you
find it a reasonable demand in light of the human rights ideals that you
just spoke of.
SECRETARY-GENERAL: Let me say that I know this is an issue in several
Asian countries. And some of these decisions have to be taken by the
Government concerned. My hope is that when the Council takes up the
issue of expansion, some of these issues would have been worked out
within the countries so that the Representatives can come to the General
Assembly ready to take decisions or with a clear position. I have followed
the developments you are talking about. We should also accept that over
the past 60 years, all the countries concerned have played their role in the
UN and have sat on the Security Council in the past. And I hope that this
will not be a major impediment to our reform process.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary-General, you said today that the reform of the
Commission was one of the most dramatic parts of your package. But the
question is then, why make it all one package, an all or northing, and not
a la carte. Isn't there a danger this argument over the enlargement of the
Security Council could drag on and therefore prevent any effective reform
of a body which everybody agrees is in urgent need of attention.
SECRETARY-GENERAL: That is a very interesting question. My suggestion
that they look at the proposal as a package was not intended to convey
the message - take it or leave it. What I am suggesting is, look at it
comprehensively. Let's look at the package comprehensively in the sense
that you have three pillars and it hangs together - security, development,
rooted in human rights and the rule of law. The President of the General
Assembly has come up with a very good approach where they are looking
at the proposals in various clusters. If you make progress in one cluster, I
think you should lock it in and focus on the areas of difficulties so that
we don't get into the situation you have referred to. And at the end of
the day, you will have a proposal that the Member States can agree [on],
even if one or two items does not command the support of the Members.
So it is not intended to be take it or leave it. We should be able to move
forward and I hope we'll make progress on most of the proposals. It is not
going to be easy. It is going to be tough negotiations and discussions,
but I am still hopeful.
QUESTION: M. Annan, il y a une inquiétude ici à Genève à propos de la
création d'un conseil des droits de l'homme, qui pourrait voir le départ de
la Commission des droits de l'homme de Genève pour aller à New York.
Est-ce que c'est effectivement un risque possible ?
LE SECRÉTAIRE GÉNÉRAL: J'espère que non. J'espère que non parce que le
Haut Commissariat fonctionne très, très bien ici à Genève. La question
d'envoyer ça à New York n'est pas posée. Donc, je crois que tout le monde
doit se calmer.
QUESTION: Dans votre discours, vous avez dit que les forces de l'Union
africaine au Soudan sont clairement insuffisantes. Est-ce que vous
proposez d'élargir les forces là, et si oui, de quelle région seulement,
africaine, ou ça serait ouvert à d'autres régions au monde?
LE SECRÉTAIRE GÉNÉRAL: Nous sommes en train de discuter ça avec les
leaders africains. On vient d'envoyer une mission sur le terrain, une
mission dirigée par l'Union africaine, mais les Nations Unies y ont participé
et également les États-Unis et l'Union européenne. Nous sommes en train
de travailler avec eux pour augmenter la force, mais ça serait une force
africaine. Si le Conseil de sécurité accepte ça, les pays africains aussi
insistent que ça soit une force africaine. Donc, on va travailler avec
eux. On va suivre les données, demander à la communauté internationale
de les soutenir financièrement et de donner le soutien à cette logistique.
QUESTION: Sur l'urgence de la réforme de la Commission, vous arrivez et
vous avez dit, il est urgent d'agir, le temps est restreint, le temps est
réduit. Pourquoi arriver seulement maintenant avec cette proposition de
réforme?
LE SECRÉTAIRE GÉNÉRAL: Je crois qu'après la guerre d'Iraq, j'avais fait une
déclaration devant les États membres. Je crois qu'il y a deux ans dans
l'Assemblée générale où j'avais dit qu'on est arrivé à un moment
historique, un moment clé où les Nations Unies doivent décider de
s'adapter, de pouvoir confronter les défis qu'on a aujourd'hui. Ou bien,
je ne peux pas utiliser des mots «irrelevant», comme les autres disent,
mais de se trouver dans cette situation, on ne peut pas confronter les
«challenges» qu'ils ont aujourd'hui. Donc, il y a deux ans qu'on avait
commencé à penser de ces choses là. J'avais créé un panel de seize
hommes et femmes pour me donner des idées et ils ont travaillé pendant
dix-huit mois pour me soumettre un rapport. Donc, c'est le rapport qui
arrive aujourd'hui, mais on n'a pas commencé à penser à ça aujourd'hui.