United Nations: In the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, discussions are afoot surrounding Russia's use of Veto power in UN Security Council.
Given its special power in the house, Russia could impede any move against Russian interests—no matter even if it is widely looked up on as aggressive.
Probably as a response, India as well as its allies has called for serious look into the veto powers of the permanent members.
India and G4 nations were in fact, reportedly, pushing for the reform of the Security Council. This move appears to be important as the group view that the permanent members are "undermining the legitimacy" of the UN body.
Tokyo's Permanent Representative Ishikane Kimihiro presented the joint position of India, Brazil, Germany and Japan on Monday. "Due to the use of veto, the Security Council has at times failed to fulfil its responsibility to maintain international peace and security. We have seen these failures are seriously undermining the legitimacy of this important body on multiple occasions, "he said.
Speaking at a meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiations (IGN) on Council reforms he said that the question of veto requires profound and serious discussions.
Ishkane laid out the position of the four countries known as the G4, which together work for an expansion of the permanent membership of the Council and mutually support their claims to a permanent seat, according to reports.
With Russia vetoing any criticism of it in the Security Council, following its atrocities in Ukraine, the question of veto powers is in the limelight.
G4 according to Ishikane appreciates the initiative by France and Mexico limiting the use of veto in circumstances involving mass atrocities, crimes against humanity, war crimes that has been proposed by the 27-member Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) group.
Adopting these reforms mean a permanent member would forego veto powers if it violates UN Charter or humanitarian laws.
"The dynamics of the Council gives permanent members a differentiated status in the decision-making process" and they influence its decisions in a way non-permanent members cannot, Ishikane said.
Any meaningful reform of the Council must take into account the current imbalance in the composition of the permanent membership of body, according to him. He added the legitimacy of the Council depended on this.