Pakistan, member of the Uniting for Consensus (UfC) group which opposes new permanent members in the U.N. Security Council, has reaffirmed its demand for adding more non-permanent seats to the 15-member body so as to make it more effective, representative and accountable. “The UfC continues to believe that its proposal for an expansion of Security Council membership to 26 or 27, with the addition of 11 or 12 new non-permanent members, offers the best basis for Security Council reform,” Ambassador Munir Akram, permanent representative to the UN, told delegates when the deadlocked Inter-Governmental Negotiations (IGN) aimed at restructuring the Council resumed on Tuesday. The UfC’s proposal to add only non-permanent members, elected periodically by the General Assembly, is “democratic and consistent” with the Charter’s prescription that the Council “acts on behalf” of the entire membership, he said, adding it will also ensure “equitable representation” – the key objective of the Council reform process. Full-scale negotiations to reform the Security Council began in the General Assembly in February 2009 on five key areas — the categories of membership, the question of veto, regional representation, size of an enlarged Security Council, and working methods of the council and its relationship with the General Assembly. Progress towards reforming the Security Council remains blocked as G-4 countries — India, brazil, Germany and Japan — continue pushing for permanent seats in the Council, while the Italy/Pakistan-led UfC group opposes any additional permanent members. As a compromise, UfC has proposed a new category of members — not permanent members — with longer duration in terms and a possibility to get re-elected. The Security Council is currently composed of five permanent members — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States — and 10 non-permanent members elected to two-year terms. Participating in a discussion on the ‘Categories of Membership and Cross-regional Representation’, Ambassador Akram rejected claims by the aspirants of permanent membership about their reference to ‘new realities’, saying that there are more than four or six states, possibly 20, which are making greater contribution to peace and security than the four pushing for the permanent category. There was no justification for the creation of “new centres of privilege” (permanent members) within the UN, and there were no States which could justifiably claim such unequal status under the UN Charter, he said. “Any country seeking a more frequent presence on the Security Council should do so by subjecting itself to the democratic process of periodic election by the General Assembly,” the Pakistani envoy said. “Today, with deep divisions among the permanent members, it is the E-10 — the non-permanent members — which have taken the lead in fulfilling the responsibilities of the Security Council”, he said, noting that this validates the UfC’s position that a larger number of non-permanent members will add dynamism to the Council’s work and bridge the differences between the permanent members. Also, Ambassador Akram said if the six additional permanent members are included in the Council, it would reduce the prospects for representation for the rest of the 182 UN Member States, undermining equitable regional representation. “Indeed, new individual permanent members would expand the ‘game of thrones’ in the Security Council and intensify the prospects of its paralysis and dysfunction,” he said. The UfC was supportive of Africa’s quest to rectify the “historic injustice” against the continent, the Pakistani envoy said, pointing out that their proposal regarding “regional representation” could contribute to redressing the aggrieved regions, enabling them to determine the modalities for nominating their representatives in the Council and their fair rotation. “The UfC’s framework could also accommodate the adequate representation of the cross-regional groups – such as the Arab and OIC Groups and the SIDS (Small Island Developing Countries),” he said.