NST Leader: UN veto power under fire as calls for reform intensify

VETO is the Latin word for "I forbid" or "I prohibit", derived from the Latin verb vetare conceived during the 494BC revolt in ancient Rome against the unjust actions or laws of ruling aristocratic magistrates.

In what is known as the First Secession of the Plebs, plebeians formed the Tribune of the Plebs to protect or rescue their class from arbitrary and unfair arrest, punishment or judgment, usually with laws equivalent to Roman authority.

Later expanding to 10 members, the tribune became legally and religiously inviolable but its authority was capped within Rome's city limits.

Under the system, antagonists who harmed a tribune were executed on the spot without trial. Sounds familiar? Now, 2,440 years into the future, this system has evolved into the United Nations and, more crucially, the 15-member Security Council (UNSC).

Unlike in ancient times, the five superpowers of the United States, Russia (then the Soviet Union), China, the United Kingdom and France have commandeered the UNSC.

Before the UN became fully operational, at the 1945 San Francisco Conference a bloc of small and medium-sized nations, led by Australian politician H.V. Evatt, opposed the veto, warning of institutional paralysis.

At the start of his premiership in 1981, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad initiated the first Malaysian opposition to the veto, a foreign policy position maintained by his successors.

Last week at the UN General Assembly, Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan reemphasised this policy, imploring that the veto must be questioned and firmly challenged, particularly its support of crimes against humanity.

Urging stronger accountability over its use, Mohamad pointed out that expanding the UNSC's membership was pointless but judged that its paralysis should not dislocate the UN's viability.

The five superpowers' rationale in justifying veto power is not democratic fairness but pragmatism. Russia, including the now-defunct Soviet Union, has used it the most at 131 times, mostly during the Cold War to block Western-backed resolutions.

The US has invoked the veto 89 times, mostly to block resolutions critical of or restricting Israel, followed by the UK (29), mostly to deal with African colonial issues. At 21 times, China has jointly invoked the veto together with Russia over resolutions involving Syria and the Middle East.

At 16 times, France has not imposed a veto since 1989, reflecting its advocacy of restraint. Having been invoked 286 times since 1945, the veto has been used as a "power tool" on matters of survival, life and death.

Theoretically, the veto can be cancelled but this needs two-thirds of UNGA members to vote on a resolution to amend Article 108 of the UN Charter.

Realistically, the vote serves no purpose as the five permanent members would stymie it. Malaysia can only condemn the undemocratic and anachronistic veto but for now, Mohamad's statement remains a global rallying call.