We are supportive of the work that the Special Representative of the Secretar...

We are supportive of the work that the Special Representative of the Secretary-General is doing, and would like to encourage her to continue to focus on the core of her mandate, that is, situations of armed conflict or occupation. Having carefully read the report of the Secretary-General (S/2012/33), we have some questions and comments on its specifics.

Ideas such as the inclusion of elections, political strife or civil unrest under “other situations” go beyond the mandate of the Security Council. They run counter to paragraph 8 of resolution 1960 (2010), which clearly confines the whole debate to the implementation of resolution 1888 (2009), that is, situations of armed conflict. That is what the report should focus on, not situations that are neither armed conflict nor post-conflict or that threaten international peace and security. It is a matter of concern that some members of the Council, while arguing for a binding nature of Security Council resolutions, paradoxically condone deviations from mandates authorized by those very resolutions. The report should also not deviate from the established notion of sexual violence in situations of armed conflict

As paragraphs 1 and 3 of resolution 1960 (2010) affirm, the mandate of taking action against specific parties is restricted to those situations that are on the agenda of the Security Council. However, in paragraph 116 of the report, the Secretary-General recommends that the Security Council take specific actions, including the use of targeted measures by sanctions committees, against all parties named in the report, instead of those mentioned in the annex. We would appreciate clarification of that anomaly.