In Model UN procedure, a follow-up question is a supplementary question that the chair may grant to a delegate immediately after the speaker has answered their first question. It is intended to let the questioner refine, clarify, or press further on the previous response rather than introduce an entirely new topic. Follow-ups are most commonly used during press conferences, expert testimony, witness questioning in crisis or ICJ-style committees, and certain Q&A formats appended to substantive speeches.
The granting of a follow-up is at the discretion of the chair and is not automatic. In most rulebooks (including THIMUN-style and many North American Harvard/NMUN-style procedures), the delegate must explicitly request the follow-up after hearing the answer, and the chair weighs factors such as time remaining, the number of other delegates on the questioners' list, and whether the follow-up is genuinely connected to the prior exchange.
Key conventions usually observed:
- The follow-up must relate directly to the answer just given, not open a new line of inquiry.
- Rhetorical statements disguised as questions are typically ruled out of order.
- In ICJ simulations, follow-ups function similarly to redirect examination and may be limited by the President of the Court.
- Time limits (often 15–30 seconds) usually apply to both the follow-up and the response.
Follow-ups are procedurally distinct from a right of reply, which addresses personal or national insult, and from points of inquiry, which are directed at the chair rather than a speaker. Skilled delegates use follow-ups strategically to expose contradictions in a witness's testimony or to lock a rival bloc's representative into a public position during press conferences.
Example
During a 2023 NMUN Security Council press conference, the delegate of France used a follow-up question to press the witness on inconsistencies in their initial answer about troop deployments.