Five members belonging to the Non-Aligned Movement will sit on the Security Council in 2022
11 October 2021
Of the countries serving terms on the Security Council in 2022, five will be full members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM): Gabon, Ghana, India, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates, representing a drop of one from the 2021 Council . . .
Five members belonging to the Non-Aligned Movement will sit on the Security Council in 2022
11 October 2021
Of the countries serving terms on the Security Council in 2022, five will be full members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM): Gabon, Ghana, India, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates, representing a drop of one from the 2021 Council . . .
Five members belonging to the Non-Aligned Movement will sit on the Security Council in 2022
11 October 2021
Of the countries serving terms on the Security Council in 2022, five will be full members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM): Gabon, Ghana, India, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates, representing a drop of one from the 2021 Council . . .
Five members belonging to the Non-Aligned Movement will sit on the Security Council in 2022
11 October 2021
Of the countries serving terms on the Security Council in 2022, five will be full members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM): Gabon, Ghana, India, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates, representing a drop of one from the 2021 Council . . .
Five members belonging to the Non-Aligned Movement will sit on the Security Council in 2022
11 October 2021
Of the countries serving terms on the Security Council in 2022, five will be full members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM): Gabon, Ghana, India, Kenya and the United Arab Emirates, representing a drop of one from the 2021 Council . . .
Vetoes, insufficient votes and competing draft resolutions accentuate divisions within the Council
2 April 2022
Since 2000, and especially since 2010, there has been a marked increase in divisive votes in the Security Council,
which reflects the fact that some Council members are now less willing to shield the Council's divisions from
public view. In part, this reflects the polarizing nature of some key items more recently before the Council . . .
Last Update: 24 July. 2024
UPDATE WEBSITE OF
THE PROCEDURE OF THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL, 4TH EDITION
by Loraine Sievers and Sam Daws, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2014
Updated on 6 December 2014
Chapter 7: DECISIONS AND DOCUMENTS
Section 1: Formats of decisions
Agreeing outcomes at an informal gathering
The report on the Finnish Workshop held in November 2013 (S/2014/213) states that ‘three outcomes’ were agreed at the Workshop:
(a) a meeting of the force commanders with the members of the Security Council would be arranged annually in June when they came to New York to see the Secretary-General; (b) a similar session would be held with police commissioners when they visited New York in November; and (c) it would become regular practice to have force commanders participate by video teleconference when Special Representatives of the Secretary-General briefed the Council.
It is noteworthy that these outcomes relating to Council procedure were decided by the Council members at an informal, off-site gathering, and that the format for their publication was initially the report on the Finnish Workshop which was compiled ‘under the sole responsibility of the Permanent Mission of Finland’. Outcome (b) was restated by the Security Council itself one year later, on 20 November 2014, when in paragraph 31 of its resolution 2185 (2014), the Council expressed “its intention to consider holding an annual meeting on policing issues with the Heads of United Nations Police Components”. (This update supplements pages 374-376 of the book.)