Mr. Chairman,
 
let me first of all commend once again your leadership and your wisdom in guiding this informal session. As the French poet you have quoted, we believe that the book we are writing should reinforce the relationships among all Member States, the sense of participation and universality of the Unite Nations.  I will begin by addressing some of the main issues related to today’s topic. Then, as a preliminary conclusion to the past two months of intergovernmental negotiations, I will join my distinguished colleague, the Permanent Representative of Colombia, Ambassador Claudia Blum, in making a comprehensive proposal for the way forward.
I. The relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly. A central goal of a comprehensive reform of the Council is enhanced accountability of the Council to the whole membership. As I stated at our previous meetings, the basic prerequisite for enhancing accountability is the periodic election of all new Council members by the General Assembly. Only a reform centered on elections will increase equitable and democratic representation. Standing for elections is the only way to assure that a State will respond in an “accountable” way to the expectations of the General Assembly. Free and fair elections are the fundamental guarantee of accountability and legitimacy in our societies. Why should another standard, or a double standard, be applied to the reform of such a fundamental institution of the United Nations? Once this extremely important precondition has been met, a number of practical measures could be envisaged to strengthen the relationship between the Council and the General Assembly, in a reform that comprehends the full range of questions addressed in previous sessions. Specific guidelines are already in the UN Charter and simply have to be enacted: for example, the requirement that the Council report to the Assembly on a regular basis and through special reports, as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 15, and Paragraph 3 of Article 24. These measures bring into the realm of international relations a “checks and balances” model that is proper to a great number of Constitutions and systems of government. The main concern of such a model is to make executive bodies accountable to the Assemblies that elect them. Accountability is therefore enshrined in the Charter, and should be fully implemented.
 
The Security Council should not only be more accountable to the General Assembly. A reform should also strengthen the relationship between the Security Council and the other principal organs, through measures that institutionalize consultations and exchange of information. This would increase the occasions in which the Council must respond to Member States. The General Assembly’s prerogatives in the Council’s decision-making mechanisms should also be enhanced, particularly in relation to the veto. At our March 16th session, Member States that are not permanent members of the Council were almost unanimous in their support for limitations on this power. In their statements, the possibility was raised of the Assembly overriding a veto by a two-thirds majority vote. For specific cases, especially massive violations of humanitarian law, they also invoked an explanation to the General Assembly.  This is the direction for an improved interaction between the Security Council and the General Assembly, in the framework of a comprehensive reform that benefits the entire membership, particularly the many small States that have limited access to the Council.
II. The way forward  Mr. Chairman, at the end of this first round of negotiations it is unmistakably clear that all Member States, regions and groups of States have vital interests in the reform of the Security Council. A comprehensive, equitable reform, and reflective of the pluralism of contemporary reality is a shared objective.
 
 The intergovernmental negotiations offer this unique opportunity: to move away from the divisiveness of the past and work together in good faith to find a negotiated solution that corresponds to the interests and positions of all, and that promotes the supreme objectives of the United Nations.  This is why, as I stated at the outset, the Permanent Representative of Colombia, Ambassador Blum, and I are putting forward a comprehensive proposal for Security Council reform. This is not a “take it or leave it” framework resolution: on the contrary, it is an effort to include the positions and the interests that Member States have raised over the last two months on the five key issues. It is, therefore, open to negotiation. To move forward in these negotiations, it is prerequisite that similar openness and flexibility be demonstrated by other sectors of the membership.  This platform is based on the following concepts:            i) comprehensive reform, to achieve a comprehensive package; ii) equality among all States; iii) accountability; iv) unity of our organization.  During these negotiations we have focused on all the core issues and the true substance of the reform, not just on anxieties over adding a few new seats to the Council. Quick-fix or piecemeal solutions would not be in the interest of the wider membership and they would hamper the work of our United Nations.  Adding new national permanent members, as in the G-4 proposal, would be one such impediment. Each additional national permanent seat would be a permanent blow to the chances of representation for the rest of the membership. The G4 model has already led to serious divisions and tensions within the regions and has been a major stumbling block in the reform process.  The African position is fundamentally different. It stems from a well defined regional consensus and is a position taken by the under represented African group as a whole, and in the interests of the Group. That is why we have expressed our understanding and strong respect for the African common position, and we are ready to engage in constructive negotiations in this regard.  Our proposal has the necessary flexibility. We want to accommodate the interests and concerns of all States and regional groupings, based on the principle of equitable geographical representation.
The main features are:
- Enhancing the representation of under-represented regions and groups;
- Allocating one seat to small States, one to medium-sized States;
- In addition to regular non-permanent seats, allocating seats on a regional basis that will allow longer or more frequent presence in the Council;
- New provisions on decision-making, options on veto, improvement of working methods and the relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly.  This proposal is being circulated in its entirety, but I would like to underline some of its key features: - The allocation of longer-term seats to the regional groups, such as Africa, Asia, and GRULAC. As I mentioned in previous sessions, one seat is reserved for WEOG and Eastern Europe on a rotational basis. In Italy’s view, this would represent a first concrete step toward allowing the European Union better institutional access to the Council;
- An element of regional ownership, including arrangements for representation, re-election and rotation, decided on by the respective regional groups;
- Together with new seats for small and medium-size States, an increase in regular non-permanent seats for Africa, Asia, GRULAC, and the Eastern European Group;
- A Council of 25 plus seats, on the basis of equitable geographical distribution, consistent with the positions of many delegations in the last session;
- Limitations on the veto and reform of the working methods; enhanced accountability to the general membership; and a strengthened inter-relationship with the U.N.’s other principal organs.  Advantages. This approach would assure better access to the Council for the vast majority of UN members, doubling the ratio of elected members to permanent members.  Periodic election and re-election will greatly enhance accountability. Member States could seek regular and more frequent elections to the Council, and longer periods of representation.
 
 Among the options for longer terms, we envisage a mechanism to promote rotation that would allow more countries to fulfill their aspirations to serve in the Security Council. This proposal offers States that are willing to make greater contributions to international peace and security the option of more frequent or longer representation by immediate re-election or longer terms (3-5 years). Moreover, small and medium-sized States would have an increased representation through reserved seats.  This approach, close to the African position, guarantees regional groups the flexibility to make their own specific arrangements for better representation on the Council, and it would guarantee equal legal status to all States in the region, in compliance with the principle of sovereign equality.
 Mr. Chairman,  we are not talking about a magic solution. On the contrary, we are seeking a negotiated compromise solution, and are thus open to discussion. Our proposal contains the principles that we have consistently supported since the debate on reform started in the early 1990s. But it also takes significant steps forward. It encompasses the positions expressed by vast sectors of the membership in recent years and especially in recent months. It reflects the reality of today’s world. This is the way we have approached these negotiations. And this is the way we will proceed in the next round. I would expect that delegations who invoke the urgency of a paper from the Chair will circulate position papers which, like the one my authorities have instructed me to support and co-introduce today, bring their original proposals forward in a flexible way.    
 I thank you, Mr. Chairman.