Examples of using Charter amendment in English and their translations into Arabic
{-}
-
Political
-
Colloquial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
Namibia fully supports the position of the Non-Aligned Movement that any resolution with Charter amendment implications must be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the United Nations membership, as referred to in Article 108 of the Charter. .
We do not contemplate any Charter amendment, but rather practical measures to restore its status and role, which might require some changes in the rules of procedure.
In my view, resolution 50/52 did have clear Charter amendment“implications”, but correctly deferred the application of Article 108 to the next stage of amending the Charter in concreto.
If for a vote on an important resolution which does not contain a Charter amendment 180 Member States are present and 170 of them vote, the necessary majority will be 114, which is two-thirds of 170.
The standardization of these so-called soft options should not in any way imply that the more radical changes necessitating Charter amendment should be set aside or delayed.
cosmetic changes have been resisted, even though the most interesting and useful proposals would not require any Charter amendment or in any way compromise the authority of the permanent members.
decisions must be taken by the General Assembly, does not address decisions with Charter amendment implications.
It relates to procedure, animated by the principles espoused by the founders of the United Nations- that is, that any Charter amendment must be adopted by two thirds of the membership of the United Nations.
We firmly believe that any decision to reform the Council in terms of the size, composition and distribution of its membership entails Charter amendment, and as such it would require the two-thirds majority of the entire membership under Article 108 of the Charter. .
Even if the Working Group did accept the New Zealand position, the political facts of life are such that we know full well that such a Charter amendment would not be ratified by all the necessary legislatures.
That is why my delegation attaches particular importance to the provisions contained in Article 108 of the United Nations Charter, and believes that a“minimum quorum” of a two-thirds majority of Member States should also apply to all decisions which may have Charter amendment implications.
As to the method we should follow to get there, we believe that on a matter of such crucial importance it is essential that any decision with Charter amendment implications should be adopted by a majority of two thirds of all Member States, as prescribed by
as stipulated in Article 108 of the Charter, since any reform package will require Charter amendment.
as well as the opposition or reservations of some of the five permanent members, it is highly unlikely that a Charter amendment based on the approach of the group of four would ever come into effect.
they reaffirmed their determination to comply faithfully with the provisions of Article 108 of the Charter with respect to any resolution with Charter amendment implications”.
Most notably, we favour enlargement in the categories of both permanent and non-permanent members, as well as some reduction in areas where the veto can be applied, possibly through voluntary commitments by permanent members, and other steps which do not necessarily require Charter amendment.
as in 1965 when the membership of the Council was expanded from 11 to 15 by Charter amendment and the minimum number of votes needed for the Council to act was raised from 7 to 9.
equitable representation in one breath while in another advancing proposals knowing that they stand very little chance of obtaining a general agreement, a prerequisite for Charter amendment as stipulated in Article 108.
In particular, if we look at Oppenheim ' s extremely authoritative International Law: A Treatise, it clearly says that if a permanent member were to use the veto to prevent a Charter amendment for which well above a two-thirds majority of the membership has voted-- and which is therefore in the interests of the international community-- that would be an abuse of the veto.
For instance has a resolution like the one the Sixth Committee- our lawyers- adopted on 6 December 1995, with the positive votes of Italy and Mexico and as many as 92 countries of the Non-Aligned Movement, among them Egypt and Pakistan, had Charter amendment“implications”? When I read the resolution I found that by it the General Assembly recognizes that.