No transparency in UN Security Council's Sanctions panels: India

United Nations: India has strongly criticised the lack of transparency in the procedures of decision-making by the UN Security Council's Sanctions Committees, and said the practice of keeping in secrecy the failed efforts of proscribed terrorists to get themselves removed from the world body's list of designated entities has no legal

sanction.

Last month, government sources in New Delhi said that the United Nations rejected an appeal of 2008 Mumbai terror attack mastermind Hafiz Saeed to remove his name from its list of banned terrorists.

Saeed, chief of UN-designated terrorist organisation Jamaat-ud-Dawa, was banned on December 10, 2008 by the United Nations Security Council after the Mumbai terror attacks in which 166 people were killed.

Saeed had filed an appeal with the UN through Lahore-based law firm Mirza and Mirza in 2017, while he was still under house arrest in Pakistan, for removal of the

ban.

Participating in the informal meeting of the Plenary on the Intergovernmental negotiations on equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council, India's Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Syed Akbaruddin said here

Thursday.

An area that we haven't been able to focus adequately in the past is the matter of the working methods of the subsidiary bodies of the Security Council. These bodies have grown in number and importance,

Akbaruddin said the work of the subsidiary bodies of Security Council is consequential for all member states but added that the Working Methods of the Council's Subsidiary bodies suffer from an Attention Deficit

Syndrome.

He said it is assumed that given the numerous decisions being made by the Council's subsidiary bodies, referred to as the Subterranean Universe of the Council, their rules will be meticulous, transparent, listed and consistent but there is lack of consistency in the guidelines and practices being followed, without any clarity of their legal basis.

Akbaruddin cited the example of the aspect of procedures of decision-making by the Sanctions'

Committees.

These are an interesting case study as a starting point for understanding how broke the system is, he said, adding that these bodies have given each member a veto and all members therefore are now equal, meaning unless consensus is achieved no action can proceed.