Maintaining international peace and security: The case for a responsibility not to veto

Abstract

This paper argues that the permanent members of the Security Council (the SC) should have a responsibility not to exercise their veto power when genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, or ethnic cleansing (together mass atrocities) are occurring or there is an imminent threat of them occurring. It looks at the origins of the SC and the evolution of the veto. It explains that the flaws associated with the veto threaten the legitimacy of the SC. It then discusses the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and links this to the veto power. The paper then investigates ways of reforming the veto. It shows that amendment is unlikely so other means need to be looked at. It investigates creative interpretation of the Charter, the Uniting for Peace resolution, and the creation of a code of conduct, and deems creating a code of conduct regulating veto use as the strongest of these options. The paper then analyses initiatives that limit the veto power before proposing a new code of conduct. The paper concludes that there needs to be a commitment by the permanent members of the SC to refrain from using the veto in mass atrocity situations.