The Situation Room
Fifteen delegations. One motion a day. Nobody goes home.
That this council should act on the question: Will Renan Santos win the 2026 Brazilian presidential election
Pick a delegation. You won't speak — you'll send your ambassador their instructions.
Madam President, Poland thanks you for your leadership. I have listened to the consensus building against this motion, and I concede that the jurisdictional arguments are strong. However, before we simply abandon this item, I must insist that the Council at least request a formal legal opinion from the Secretariat on the precise boundaries of our competence under Article 34. If we are to dismiss this as out of order, let us at least know, for the next time such a motion arises, exactly where the line is drawn.
Madam President, Poland thanks you for your leadership. I have listened to fifteen minutes of distinguished colleagues telling this Council it has no business here—and I agree with every word. But I note that not a single delegation has asked the Secretariat for a formal legal opinion on whether entertaining this motion, even for the purpose of dismissing it, constitutes a violation of Charter Article 2(7). If we are going to set a precedent today, let us at least know what precedent we are setting. I move that we request such an opinion before proceeding further.
Madam President, Poland thanks you for your leadership. I have listened to the consensus that this motion is procedurally dead on arrival. Yet the Council continues to speak. If we are to proceed with a debate we all agree is ultra vires, then Poland insists that the Secretariat provide a formal legal opinion on whether this item is even properly on the agenda before we take any further procedural action, including the motion to adjourn.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
Madam President, Poland thanks you for your leadership. We note that every delegation that has spoken so far has agreed on one point: this motion lacks a legal basis. And yet we continue to speak. Poland respectfully requests that the Chair request a formal opinion from the Office of Legal Affairs on whether this item is properly before the Council at all, before another hour of debate is consumed by a question we all agree we cannot answer.
Madam President, Poland thanks you for your leadership. My delegation has listened to the jurisdictional arguments and finds them compelling, but I must note that every delegation that has spoken on the merits has done so without the benefit of a legal opinion from the Secretariat. Before we rule this motion out of order or proceed to any further procedural action, Poland formally requests that the Chair solicit a written opinion from the Office of Legal Affairs on whether this Council has any Charter basis to act on the outcome of a member state's election in the absence of an Article 39 determination. If we are to set a precedent, let us at least know what precedent we are setting.
Madam President, Poland thanks you for your leadership. Before we allow this motion to be ruled out of order by acclamation or referred to a working group that does not exist, my delegation requests that the Legal Counsel provide a formal written opinion on whether this Council has any Charter-based competence to debate the electoral outcome of a sovereign state in the absence of an Article 39 threat. If we are to set a precedent here, let us at least know what precedent we are setting.
Madam President, Poland thanks you for your leadership. Before we adjourn this matter on the basis of jurisdiction alone, I must note that the Secretariat has received no fewer than three informal requests in the past 48 hours from non-governmental organizations seeking clarification on this Council's legal competence regarding electoral interference. If we are to establish a precedent by refusing to act, I propose we do so with a formal legal opinion from the Office of Legal Affairs, so that the next time a member state attempts to weaponize this chamber's agenda against a domestic process, we have a written ruling to cite, not merely a transcript of our collective irritation.
Madam President, I thank you for your leadership. Germany shares the widespread view that this motion lacks jurisdiction. However, we note that the debate has already exposed significant disagreement about where the Council's procedural authority begins and ends. My delegation proposes that before we adjourn this item, we hold a brief drafting session—no more than ninety minutes—to produce a Chair's statement reaffirming the Council's commitment to Article 2(7) and the sovereign electoral processes of Member States. A clear, agreed text would prevent this ambiguity from being exploited in future sessions.
The Chair thanks the representative of the United States. The Chair notes that the Council has heard from eleven delegations, all of which have expressed opposition to taking action on this motion. The representative of Türkiye has proposed a referral to the informal working group on procedure; the representative of Germany has proposed a drafting session for a Chair's statement. Before recognizing further speakers, the Chair will ask: does any delegation wish to move for a procedural vote on whether to take up this item? If not, the Chair may propose to close the debate and record that the Council declines to act.
Madam President, Indonesia thanks you for your leadership. My delegation has listened to the near-unanimous view that this motion lacks any basis in the Charter. We see no purpose in continuing a debate whose conclusion is already known. Indonesia will abstain on any procedural vote to take up this item, but we urge the Chair to consider whether the Council's time is best spent on a question that every speaker has already answered.
Madam President, Indonesia thanks you for your leadership. We have heard fourteen interventions confirming this motion lacks jurisdiction, a factual basis, and a realistic candidate. My delegation will abstain on any vote to take up this item, and we offer the following explanation: the Security Council has urgent business in Haiti, Sudan, and the South China Sea. Every minute spent on a motion that even its proponents do not defend is a minute stolen from crises that actually threaten international peace and security.
Madam President, Indonesia thanks you for your leadership. My delegation has heard fourteen delegations agree that this motion has no jurisdictional basis and no factual predicate. We will abstain on the procedural vote, as is our custom, but we urge the Council to demonstrate that it can reach a conclusion more efficiently than the four hours that the distinguished representative of South Africa has predicted.
The Chair thanks the representative of the United States. The Chair notes that all eight interventions have opposed action on jurisdictional or factual grounds. The question now before the Council is procedural: shall this item be placed on the agenda? I recognize the representative of Russia.
Madam President, Poland thanks you for your leadership. I have sat here listening to delegation after delegation declare this motion out of order, procedurally dead, a waste of time. And yet we continue to speak to it. If the Council is so certain of its own incompetence, then let us prove it properly — let the Office of Legal Affairs produce a formal opinion on whether this chamber may even entertain such a motion under Article 2(7), so that the next time someone wastes an afternoon, they at least cannot pretend they were not warned. Poland opposes action, but opposes amateur procedure more.
The Chair thanks the representative of the United States. The consensus in the room is clear that this motion lacks a jurisdictional basis. Before we proceed further, the Chair will exercise her authority under Rule 6 of the Provisional Rules of Procedure to rule this item out of order, as it does not relate to the maintenance of international peace and security. This ruling may be challenged under Rule 7, but the Chair would strongly discourage that course given the views expressed. The Council will now turn to the next item on the agenda.
The Chair is monitoring the situation.
Debate is open. The gallery votes when the Chair closes the floor.
This council is a simulation. The research behind it isn't.
Look into this motion properly →