“The Empowerment Of The Big Five Countries Within The United Nations”

Ambhara Reyhan Anfeis1

ABSTRAK

Saat ini Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa tampaknya memiliki masalah besar dalam struktur organisasinya,
keberadaan negara – negara Big Five di Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa membuat beberapa publik berasumsi
bahwa kinerja Persatuan Bangsa-Bangsa untuk memenuhi tujuan utama mereka dari mengapa mereka
dibentuk sebelum tidak akan terwujud. Alasan utama adalah kedigdayaan negara – negara Big Five didalam
pelaksanaan tugas dan fungsi PBB, PBB menjadi sangat subyektif dalam menangani beberapa masalah dan
kasus karena sering dalam pengambilan keputusan bahwa PBB harus mengambil tergantung pada
kepentingan negara – negara Big Five, Beberapa contohnya seperti kasus Palestina, Suriah, Israel dan Afrika.
Itu sebabnya saya tertarik membahas topik ini di jurnal saya.

KEYWORD : Big Five, Hak Veto, Kedigdayaan, Subjektif, PBB.

“The Empowerment Of The Big Five Countries Within The United Nations”
ABSTRACT

Nowadays United Nations seems to have a big problem in they organizational structure, the existence of Big
Five country in United Nations make some public assume that the performence of Unite Nations to fulfill their
main objectives off why they were formed before will not be realized. The main reason is the empowerment of
the big five country in the implementation of duties and functions of United Nations, United Nations become
very subjective in handling some problem and cases because oftenly in decision making that United Nation
should take depend on he interests of the big five countries, Some example like the case of Palestine, Syria,
Israel and Africa. That’s why i was interested in discussing this topic in my journal.

KEYWORD : Big Five, Veto, Empowerment, Subjective, United Nations.

A. Introduction
History has shown that the development of international organization, has in the main resulted
from international intercourse. This international intercourse is in the sense of the development of
relations between different actors; private or public, natural or legal, advances in the mechanics of
transport and communications, the desire for trade and commerce and the need for peace and
security. These have produced degrees of interactions that ultimately resulted in the formation of
public international organizations foremost of which is the United Nations Organization.2
The United Nations Organization (the UN) is the successor of the League of Nations. The League
of Nation was a public international organization dedicated to the maintenance of international
peace and security. It recorded some astounding achievements and failures. It greatest failure was
its inability to prevent the Second World War. However, even though the League failed, it was
recognized during the Second World War that the only effective way to maintain international peace
and security was an international organization patterned after the League of Nations. Thus the UN
was formed, with adjustment in the structure, to take over the task of maintaining world peace and
security. In the main, the UN has succeeded where the League failed. For seven decades, the UN
have been able to ensure that there has been no world war. However, a major criticism of the UN

1 Mahasiswa Starta-1 Fakultas Hukum Universitas Padjadjaran, Jl. Raya Bandung Sumedang KM.21, NPM 110110160019,
ambhara113@gmail.com.
2 Phillipe Sands and Pierre Klein, Bowett’s Law of International Institutions, 6thedition, London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2009, P. 1.
is that the United Nations Organization is all about the permanent members of the Security Council
(the ‘big five’). Their presence and overwhelming influence can be felt everywhere in the UN system.
This work embarks on a critique of the domination of the ‘big five’ in the UN system and attempts a
justification for their presence and overwhelming influence in its chief enforcing organ (the UN
Security Council).3
Despite the problems encountered by the League of Nations in arbitrating conflict and ensuring
international peace and security prior to World War II, the major Allied powers agreed during the
war to establish a new global organization to help manage international affairs. This agreement was
first articulated when U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston
Churchill signed the Atlantic Charter in August 1941. The name United Nations was originally used
to denote the countries allied against Germany, Italy, and Japan. On January 1, 1942, 26 countries
signed the Declaration by United Nations, which set forth the war aims of the Allied powers. The
United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union took the lead in designing the new
organization and determining its decision-making structure and functions. Initially, the “Big Three”
states and their respective leaders (Roosevelt, Churchill, and Soviet premier Joseph Stalin) were
hindered by disagreements on issues that foreshadowed the Cold War. The Soviet Union demanded
individual membership and voting rights for its constituent republics, and Britain wanted assurances
that its colonies would not be placed under UN control. There also was disagreement over the voting
system to be adopted in the Security Council, an issue that became famous as the “veto problem.”4
The first major step toward the formation of the United Nations was taken August 21–October
7, 1944, at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference, a meeting of the diplomatic experts of the Big Three
powers plus China (a group often designated the “Big Four”) held at Dumbarton Oaks, an estate in
Washington, D.C. Although the four countries agreed on the general purpose, structure, and
function of a new world organization, the conference ended amid continuing disagreement over
membership and voting. At the Yalta Conference, a meeting of the Big Three in a Crimean resort city
in February 1945, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin laid the basis for charter provisions delimiting the
authority of the Security Council. Moreover, they reached a tentative accord on the number of
Soviet republics to be granted independent memberships in the UN. Finally, the three leaders
agreed that the new organization would include a trusteeship system to succeed the League of
Nations mandate system. The Dumbarton Oaks proposals, with modifications from the Yalta
Conference, formed the basis of negotiations at the United Nations Conference on International
Organization (UNCIO), which convened in San Francisco on April 25, 1945, and produced the final
Charter of the United Nations. The San Francisco conference was attended by representatives of 50
countries from all geographic areas of the world: 9 from Europe, 21 from the Americas, 7 from the
Middle East, 2 from East Asia, and 3 from Africa, as well as 1 each from the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist
Republic and the Belorussian Soviet Socialist Republic (in addition to the Soviet Union itself) and 5
from British Commonwealth countries. Poland, which was not present at the conference, was
permitted to become an original member of the UN. Security Council veto power (among the
permanent members) was affirmed, though any member of the General Assembly was able to raise
issues for discussion. Other political issues resolved by compromise were the role of the
organization in the promotion of economic and social welfare; the status of colonial areas and the

3
Edward Benes, “The League of Nations: Successes and factures,” available at http://www.foreign affairs com/articles 09293/Edward-
benes/the league-of-nations-successes-omd-factures. last visited 22/12/2018.
4 Karen Mingst, Jacques Fomerand, and Cecelia M. Lynch, United Nations international organization, available at

https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-Nations, last visited 22/12/2018.

distribution of trusteeships; the status of regional and defense arrangements; and Great Power
dominance versus the equality of states. The UN Charter was unanimously adopted and signed on
June 26 and promulgated on October 24, 1945.5
The United Nations’ Charter is the basic constitutional document of the United Nations
Organization. Article 1 of the charter; stipulates the purposes of the United Nations thus:6
“To maintain international peace and security and to that end; to take effective collective measures
for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression
or other breaches of peace and to bring about by peaceful means and in conformity with the
principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or
situations which might lead to a breach of the peace
To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and
self determination of peoples and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.
To achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social,
cultural, or humanitarian character and in promoting and encouraging respect for human right and
for fundamental freedom for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion; and to be a
centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.”
However, the main objective of the existence of the United Nations was not fully implemented,
due to the fact that it was agreed on the ground that the UN. The United Nations will tend to put
the problem first - which is of great importance to the top five countries. Plus the empowerment of
the big five countries can influence the actions that will be taken by the United Nations if they harm
them. Of course this does not reflect the value of justice that exists within the UN because of the
existence of countries from five major countries that need to be revised. Furthermore, the reasons
for the big five countries have absolute power within the United Nations related to Veto Rights that
they need more than the United Nations which is an organization that seeks to increase
international income.
B. Discussion and Analysis
1.1 The Empowerment Of The Big Five Countries Within The United Nations
The domination of the ‘big five’ in the United Nations’ system is more evident in the ICJ than
elsewhere. It is reflected in its composition, powers and functions. Article 23 of the United Nations
Charter states the composition of the Security Council thus:7
“The Security Council shall consist of fifteen members of the United Nations. The Republic of China,
France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and United States of America shall be permanent members of the Security Council. The
General Assembly shall elect ten other members of the United Nations to be non permanent
members of the Security Council, due regard being specially paid in the first instance to the
contribution of members of the United Nations to the maintenance of international peace and

5 Ibid.
6 Article 1 of the United Nations Charter.
7 Article 23 of the United Nations Charter.
security and to the other purposes of the organization and also to equitable geographical
distribution.”
From the above provision, the big five enjoy an exceptional status by virtue of the permanency
of their seats, unlike the non permanent members that are elected for a term of two years only. In
addition to this exceptional status, the members of the big five enjoy special voting rights called the
power of veto. Although the word veto cannot be found anywhere in the Charter, it can be made
out of the provision of article 27 of the Charter. The said article provides:8
Each member of the Security Council shall have one vote.
 Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters shall be made by an affirmative vote
of nine members.
 Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative vote
of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that in decision
under chapter vi, and under paragraph 3 article 52, a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting.
The above provision distinguishes between procedural and non-procedural (substantive)
matters. On procedural matters, decisions are taken on the basis of an affirmative vote of at least 9
members out of the 15 members of the Security Council irrespective of whether or not members of
the big five are included in the affirmative vote. Whereas, on non procedural or substantive matters,
the nine affirmative votes must of necessity include those of the big five. Thus, with the provision
of article 27 of the Charter, the sponsoring government overruled the principle of equality and
installed a veto right to shield their national interests from any obstructions.9 At its formation, the
justification for granting this exceptional status to the big five was the inescapable fact of power
differentials. In other words, the big five were considered great powers and the basic premise was
that the brunt of the responsibility for maintaining international peace and security would fall on
them and as a result, it was considered fair that they should be given the final decisive vote in
determining how that responsibility should be exercised.10
The situation is worsened by the fact that the procedure for amending the Charter under Articles
107 and 108 are cumbersome as they require the consent of the big five to any amendment.
Although since 1993, there have been discussions on altering the balance of representation of the
Security Council, the fact that over a decade have passed and this is yet to be achieved, shows how
unrealistic it is to expect that a member of the big five will vote itself out of that status.11 Some
though seem hopeful that as impossible as it may seem, we may yet see that day. Still for the
moment, one thing is certain, the United Nations Security Council does not reflect the actual
distribution of 21st century power, and as such, the Security Council is not representative of today’s
world for it lacks adequate representation of developing nations that account for far more than half
of the world’s population. More so, the non-proportional representation of the non-permanent

8 Article 27 of the United Nations Charter.

9 Kochler, H. “The voting procedure in the United Nations Security Council Examining a normative contradiction in the UN charter and its
consequences on International Relations, 1991, p. 2. available at http://enwikibooks/org/wiki/SCCE-modern-History, last visited
20/12/2018.
10 Phillipe Sands and Pierre Klein, Op. Cit., P. 38.
11 Weiss T.G, “The Illusion of the UN Security Council Reform”, The Washington Quarterly Autumn, 2003, 151.
members in the Security Council gives them less ownership in the maintenance of peace and
international security as stipulated in the Charter.12
The big five wields great power here, just as they do in the Security Council. First, they each have
a representative judge on the court and second, they also play a dominant role in the determination
of the efficiency of the court. As noted by Bowett, the power of enforcement is crucial to the
effectiveness of the process for judicial settlement. Thus, the ability to enforce its decision
determines the level of confidence in any judicial organ. This is no less so, even for an international
institution. Thus, the domination or power, of the big five here is evident since the United Nations
Security Council where they enjoy special status and privilege, acts as the chief enforcer of the
decisions of the court. Article 94(2) of the Charter provides as follows:13
“If any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered
by the court, the other party may have recourse to the Security Council which may if it deems
necessary, make recommendations, or decide upon measures to be taken to give effect to the
judgment.”
Thus, as permanent members with the veto power, the influence of the big five in the Security
Council can tremendously impact the enforcement of the ICJs decisions. It has been contended and
rightly so, that it is prima facie untidy for the same big five to wield enormous powers both in the
Security Council and the ICJ. Such dominance perceptively impacts the ICJs image of impartiality.14
1.2 Excessive Use Of The Veto By Big Five Countries
The five permanent members have veto powers, enabling them to prevent the adoption of any
"substantive" draft Council resolution, regardless of the level of international support for the draft.
The rationale for the P5 veto power was to ensure that the UNSC did not suffer the same fate as its
predecessor the League of Nations. In essence, the veto power was granted to the P5 as reassurance
that their interests would not be ignored and in the hope that it would ensure their participation in
the new organization. The veto power was designed ‘to transform a wartime alliance into a big-
power oligarchy to secure the hard won peace that would follow. In the world’s eyes, the UNSC that
is supposed to be a world organization seems change into ‘the king of the nations’. The permanent
members (P5) seem like they have control over this organization, especially with their veto powers.
As we can see The UNSC action has become rare in recent decades with the last occasion being in
1997 to take action against Israel.15
The first veto was cast in February 1946 by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) and since
then the big five have used the veto power a total of 263 times. During the Cold War, the Security
Council was often left dead locked and incapacitated, as a result of the use of the veto power by the

12 C. Edurando vargas Toro, “UN Security Council Reform: Unrealistic Proposal and Viable Reform Options”, Nov. 2008. American
Diplomacy (Commentary and Analysis/foreign service dispatches and periodic report on the US foreign policy) available at
www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/item/2008/2012/comm/vargas-un.html, last visited 20/12/2018.
13
Article 94(2) of the United Nations Charter.
14 S. Gozie Ogbodo, “An Overview of the Challenges Facing the International Court of Justice in the 21st Century”, P. 107.
15 Fadilla Jamila Irbar, Controversy of Veto Power Over The Effectiveness of UNSC, available at
https://www.academia.edu/5066387/Controversy_of_Veto_Power_Over_The_Effectiveness_of_UNSC, last visited 20/12/2018.
members of the big five.16 Thus in November 1950, the United Nations' General Assembly passed
Resolution 377(v), the Uniting for Peace Resolution which reads in part:17
“If the Security Council, because of lack of unanimity of the permanent members, fails to exercise its
primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security in any case where
there appears to be a threat to peace, breach of peace or acts of aggression, the General Assembly
shall consider the matter immediately with a view to make the appropriate recommendations to
members for collective measures, including in the case of a breach of peace or act of aggression to
use armed force when necessary, to maintain or restore international peace and security.”
Since its adoption, the resolution has been used 10 times. First to stop Britain and France from
the occupation of parts of the Suez Canal during the Suez crisis after Britain and France vetoed a
resolution calling for a cease fire put before the Security Council and severally thereafter.18
Before the dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic in 1991 this member of the big
five, took the lead in the use of veto. It vetoed a total of 119 resolutions. Since it’s dissolution in
1991, it has used the power sparingly. However, Russia, which took over the seat of USSR, has
blocked six resolutions, twice jointly with China. Russia vetoed two resolutions on Cyprus when all
the other 14 members of the Council where in support of it. Along with its extended interest in the
Balkan region, Russia vetoed a resolution on Bosnia and Herzegovina and after 2008, Russia-Georgia
crisis, Russia blocked the passage of a resolution that intended to extend the United Nations’
observer mission’s mandate in Georgia and Abkhazia. Together with China, Russia vetoed
resolutions condemning human rights abuses in Burma and Zimbabwe, countries in which they had
important economic interest.19
The second most frequent user of the veto during the period of the Cold War was the United
States of America and in the period after the Cold War, it became the most frequent user of the
veto. The United States of America has vetoed 83 draft resolutions since the establishment of the
United Nations Security Council; 14 of these votes were cast after 1991. Interestingly, 13 out of
these 14 negative votes cast were in relation to Israel and by casting such votes, the United States
provided political cover and protection for Israel, its strategic ally in the volatile region of the Middle
East. The United States has been active in preventing the United Nations Security Council from
adopting resolutions condemning Israeli settlement activities in East Jerusalem, asking for
withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, calling the construction of security wall in the West Bank
illegal and many other cases that involved condemnation of actions carried out by Israel. In all of
the 13 resolutions, the USA was the only country that cast a negative vote. In three instances, all
other 14 members of the Security Council supported the draft.20
In recent times, the use of veto seems to have resurfaced. In February 18, 2011, the United States
blocked a very popular resolution that was co-sponsored by at least 130 countries and intended to
condemn Israeli settlement activities and to demand cessation. In October 4, 2011, China and Russia

16 Okhovat. S, “The United Nations Security Council: its Veto Power and its Reform”, available at
http://www.miat.org.au/articles/UNSC%20FULL%20REPORT%20Sept%202011.pdf, last visited 20/12/2018.
17 Kamrul Hossain, “The Complementary Role of the United Nations General Assembly in Peace Management,” available at

http://www.turkishweekly.net/article/323/the-complementary-role-of-the-unted-nations-general-assembly-in-peace-
management.html, last visited 20/12/2018.
18 Ibid.
19 Okhovat. S, Loc. Cit.
20 Ibid.
vetoed a draft resolution condemning the suppression of protests in Syria. Russia, an ally of Syria
since the Cold War, argued that a United Nations’ Security Council’s resolution on Syria could be
used to justify military action against the government there, whereas, Moscow and Beijing
compared the resolution concerning Syria to that adopted by the United Nations Security Council
and applied in Libya. The veto exercised by Russia and China paralyzed the actions of the United
Nations concerning the repression in Syria and the systematic violations of human rights by the
Syrian authorities and in July 19, 2012, China and Russia again vetoed a resolution threatening
chapter 7 sanctions against Syria. More recently in March 15, 2014, Russia vetoed a resolution
condemning as illegal a referendum on the status of Crimea.21
There are three pillars that need to be emphasized inside of UNSC. The first is the responsibility
of each state to use appropriate and necessary means to protect its own population from the four
crimes as well as from their incitement. The second pillar refers to the commitment that UN member
states will help each other exercise this responsibility. This includes specific commitments to help
states build the capacity to protect their populations from the four crimes and to assist those that
are under stress before crises and conflicts erupt. The third pillar refers to international society’s
collective responsibility to respond through the UN in a timely and decisive manner, using Chapters
VI, VII and VIII of the UN Charter as appropriate, when national authorities are manifestly failing to
protect their populations from the four crimes listed above. Even if the veto power could not be
abolished, UNSC should look for the solution over the controversy that happen for a very long time.
We believe that the veto powers should not been used over the genocide and mass atrocities. The
permanent members should use their veto powers wisely and not use it for diplomatic benefits only,
and taking care of the world’s security as their main goal and basic purpose.22
1.3 French Colonial Tax In Africa
When Guinea demanded independence from French colonial rule in 1958, the French unleashed
their fury with more than 3,000 leaving the country taking their enteire property. In addition, they
destroyed anything that couldn't be taken – destroying schools, nurseries, public administration
buildings, cars, books, medicine, research institute instruments, tractors were crushed and
sabotaged, animals killed and food in warehouses were burned or poisoned. In effect they were
sending a message to all other colonies that the consqueences for rejecting France would be high.
this outrageous tax deprives African economies of much needed funds, exacerbates debt, and strips
their authority over their own natural reserves. But the detriments are more than just economic, as
the ills of colonialism manifest in social ways that are equally devastating to the dignity and identity
of the African people. Sylvanus Olympio, the first president of the Republic of Togo, instead of
signing the colonisation continuation pact with De Gaulle, instead agreed to pay an annual debt to
France for the so called benefits of French colonisation. This prevented the French not destroying
the country before they left however the amount estimated by France was so big that the
reimbursement of the so called “colonial debt” was close to 40% of the country budget in 1963.
Olympio’s dream was to build an independent and self-sufficient and self-reliant country but the
French had him killed by a seargeant who was given a $612 bounty by the French embassy. History
has shown that despite years of African fighting to liberate themselves, France repeatedly used

21
Flora Alohan Onomrerhinor, A Critique Of The Domination Of The Big Five In The United Nations System, available at
https://www.academia.edu/15235046/A_CRITIQUE_OF_THE_DOMINATION_OF_THE_BIG_FIVE_IN_THE_UNITED_NATIONS_SYSTEM,
last visited 20/12/2018.
22 Fadilla Jamila Irbar, Loc. Cit.
many exForeign legionnaires to carry out coups against elected presidents. This included Jean-Bedel
Bokassa who assassinated David Dacko, the first President of the Central African Republic. In the
last 50 years, a total of 67 coups has occurred in 26 African countries, of which 16 are ex-French
colonies. This indicates that France is desperate to hold on to whatever land it has in Africa. In March
2008, former French President Jacques Chirac said:23
“Without Africa, France will slide down into the rank of a third [world] power” and that Chirac’s
predecessor François Mitterand already prophesied in 1957 that: “Without Africa, France will have
no history in the 21st century”.
As of January 2014, 14 african countries are obliged by France, through a colonial pact, to put
85% of their foreign reserve into France central bank under French minister of Finance control.They
are effectively putting in 500 Billion dollars every year to the French treasury. African leaders who
refuse are killed or victim of coup. Those who obey are supported and rewarded by France with
lavish lifestyle while their people endure extreme poverty, and desperation. There are a number of
components of the colonisation pact that has been in effect since the 1950's. The main points being
that the African countries should deposit their national monetary reserves in the France Central
Bank. France has been holding the national reserves of fourteen african countries since 1961: Benin,
Burkina Faso, Guinea-Bissau, Ivory Coast, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Togo, Cameroon, Central African
Republic, Chad, Congo-Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea and Gabon. Despite the two main African
banks having African names, they have no monetary policies of their own. In fact France allows them
to access only 15% of the money in any given year. If there is need for any more, they need to
borrow the extra money from their own 65% from the French Treasury at commercial rates. The
fact also included claused that Africa had an obligation to make French the official language of the
country and the language for education and an obligation to use France colonial money FCFA (the
Nordic countries tried unsuccessfully to get rid of this system when they discovered this).Also, they
were obliged to send France an annual balance and reserve report. If they refused to send it, they
would not be entitled to any money. Christof Lehmann wrote for nsnbc.me in 2012, “France is
indebting and enslaving Africans by means of Africa’s own wealth; for example: 12.0000 billion
invested at three percent creates 360 billion in interests which France grants as credits to Africa at
an interest rate of five to six percent or more. The allegory of ‘Bleeding Africa and Feeding France’
is no exaggeration, not alarmist, and not revolutionary.”24
1.4 The Big Five Countries Empowerment In ECOSOC
The Secretary General describes this Economic and Social Council as a "pivot of the economic
and social organization under the auspies of the UN" organization. The United Nations Economic
and Social Council (ECOSOC) is one of the main organs of the United Nations (UN) that connects
various UN entities dedicated to sustainable development, providing guidance and coordination as
a whole. These entities include regional economic and social commissions, functional commissions
that facilitate intergovernmental discussions on important global issues, and special agents,
programs and funds in workplaces throughout the world to realize development commitments into

23 French colonial tax still enforce

for Africa, available at https://www.worldbulletin.net/africa/french-colonial-tax-still-enforce-for-africa-
h152967.html, last visited 22/12/2018.
24 Ibid.
real change. ECOSOC was established in 1945 based on Chapter X of the Charter of the United
Nations, precisely in Articles 61-72. ECOSOC has several mandates, namely:25
 ECOSOC is the main body for coordination, policy review, policy dialogue and
recommendations on economic, social and environmental issues, and for the implementation of
internationally agreed development goals.
 ECOSOC serves as a central mechanism for the activities of the United Nations system and
its specialized agencies, and oversees subsidiaries and expert bodies in the economic, social and
environmental fields.
 ECOSOC pays special attention to integrated and coordinated implementation, and follow-
up to, the results of all the major UN conferences in the economic, social, environmental and so on.
The function of ECOSOC is to involve various stakeholders - policy makers, parliamentarians,
academics, large groups, foundations, business sector representatives and 3,200+ registered non-
governmental organizations - in productive dialogue about sustainable development through a
programmatic program cycle. ECOSOC work is guided by a problem-based approach, and there is an
annual theme that accompanies each program cycle, which ensures ongoing and focused
discussions among various stakeholders.26 ECOSOC has 54 member countries consisting of 14
African countries, 11 Asian countries, 6 Eastern European countries, 10 Latin American countries
and the Caribbean, and 13 Western European countries. However, this council is too small to
function as a representative forum for discussion of economic and social issues. Many countries in
the G77 do not feel sufficiently represented in it. Conversely, as a coordination and decision-making
body it is too big. Most industrialized countries consider it complicated and ineffective. As a result,
the important development debates of the past decade did not occur at ECOSOC but at the United
Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) conference, and later at the annual
International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank meetings and at the UN international
conference.27
Admittedly, the Economic, Social and Cultural Council (ECOSOC) does not wield as much power
as the United Nations Security Council or even the General Assembly. This is because even though
it is an organ of wide terms of reference, its powers are limited. This is due to the fact that since
much of the economic and social fields fall directly within the competence of the specialized
agencies, the ECOSOC only deals with matters not already covered by these agencies in order to
avoid duplication. A major function of the ECOSOC is providing assistance to these agencies.
Therefore, an examination of the domination of the big five here will essentially entail an
examination of the big five in these agencies. However, an examination of the domination of the big
five here, will be embarked on by looking at the place of the big five in the Bretton Woods
institutions namely the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the
International Monetary Fund (IMF). Although the IMF and the World Bank are structured differently

25 About ECOSOC, available at http://www.un.org/en/ecosoc/about/, last visited 22/12/2018.

26
Ibid.
27 Jens Martens, Global Policy Forum: The Reform of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) A Never-Ending Story?, 2006, available

at https://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic-policy/social-and-economic-policy-at-the-un/reform-of-ecosoc-and-the-social-
and-economic-policy-process-at-the-un/47509.html, last visited 21/12/2018.
from other specialized agencies, they were however established under the Charter of the United
Nations and therefore qualify for an examination under this head.28
1.5 The Big Five Countries Empowerment In The General Assembly
United Nations Charter Article 7 clearly states that the United Nations General Assembly is one
of the 6 main organs of the United Nations, followed by the United Nations Security Council,
Economic and Social Council, Trusteeship Council , The International Court of Justice, and the UN
Secretariat. One of the 6 main organs is the United Nations General Assembly, the UN General
Assembly is the only one of the six main organs of the United Nations that provides an opportunity
for every member of the United Nations to vote in their general assembly regardless of their military
strength, welfare population, extent of power or other characteristics. Under the United Nations
Charter, the UN General Assembly has the capacity to formulate general principles relating to UN
member peace relations or the security council as well as recommendations to UN members
regarding international cooperation in the implementation of basic human rights and freedoms.
Although the United Nations General Assembly is said to be one of the main organs of the United
Nations, the UN General Assembly has a more principal role than the five other organs, the UN
General Assembly has the capacity to consider and make recommendations on the work function of
UN bodies or organs under the UN Charter.29
The UN General Assembly is the main consultative body, policy maker, and representative organ
under the UN mechanism. Along with its development, international law gave birth to a new source
of law, namely the resolution or decision of an international organization which according to
international customs is recognized by countries in the world today. The term "resolution" as used
by the United Nations has a broad meaning, namely not only includes a recommendation but also a
decision.2 In other words, resolution is a result of a decision of a problem that has been agreed
through consensus and voting according to rules and regulations the method set by the
international organization or the relevant body. In practice the United Nations General Assembly
Resolution sometimes has powers that far exceed the formal meaning of the decision as stipulated
in the charter, one example of which is the General Assembly's decision regarding the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights received by the General Assembly on December 10, 1948.3 As a
decision well received by the General Assembly, the principles contained in it inspired the birth of
the constitution of most countries, which states guarantee these human rights. No government in
this world has dared to openly oppose this general statement of human rights.30
Under article 4 of the United Nations Charter the General Assembly has the function or power
of admitting new members but subject to the recommendation of the United Nations Security
Council where the big five dominates. For the purpose of clarity, the said article provides:31
“Membership in the United Nations is open to all peace-loving states which accept the obligations
contained in the present charter and in the judgment of the organization, are able and willing to
carry out these obligations.”

28 Flora Alohan Onomrerhinor, Loc. Cit.

29 Adhigama Andre Budiman, Pidana Mati dan Posisi Indonesia terhadap Resolusi Majelis Umum PBB dan Resolusi Dewan HAM PBB,
Jakarta : Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, 2017, P. 6.
30 Marko Divac Oberg, “The Legal Effect of Resolution of The UN Security Council and General Assembly in The Jurisprudence of The ICJ”,

16 Eur.J.Int’l.L, 2006. P. 879.

31 Article 4 of the United Nations Charter.
“The admission of any such state to membership in the United Nations will be effected by a decision
of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.”
It is, therefore, no brainer to know that the real function lies not in getting the General Assembly
to effect the recommendation, but in getting the Security Council to make such recommendations.
In addition, under article 97 of the Charter, the General Assembly is given the weighty task of
appointing the chief administrative officer of the organization – the Secretary General, who heads
the secretariat and has the power of supervising the international civil servants. However, such
appointment is made by the General Assembly subject to the recommendation of the United
Nations Security Council where the big five enjoy special status and privilege. More so, there are
lots of limits on what the General Assembly can do and even the little it can do often depends on
the reaction or initiative of the Security Council. For instance, the General Assembly can suspend a
member against whom force has been used but this can only be done on the recommendation of
the Security Council. The General Assembly also needs a recommendation from the Security Council
before it can expel a member for persistently violating the principles of the United Nations Charter.32
Furthermore, the domination of the big five in the General Assembly is better appreciated when
looked at from the perspective of their respective functions. First, while the General Assembly
cannot bind its own members by its decision, the Security Council cannot only bind the members of
the General Assembly severally they can also do so collectively and as a matter of fact, the whole
United Nations system. This situation tend to make the General Assembly rather helpless if the
Security Council unanimously decides not to act or takes a stand that is different from that favoured
in the General Assembly. Secondly, while the Security Council may take binding decisions based on
its findings, the General Assembly can only make recommendation to the members of the United
Nations or the Security Council and only as long as the Security Council is not dealing with the same
at the time. From the above, it is evident that the Security Council is the most powerful and decisive
organ of the United Nations and should the need arise, its domination can be felt, even in the United
Nations General Assembly.33
C. Conclusion and Recommendation
In my opinion the power of the Big Five countries within the United Nations is not very good in
the UN net. Moreover, the main function and purpose of the existence of the United Nations is to
realize the peace and prosperity of all people in the world. This empowerment needs to be stopped
even though it sounds difficult and is likely to cause the possibility of World War III occurring. But in
my opinion this fear is merely a paradigm because the times have changed a lot and also the
development of information technology is also very rapid. So that it can't be as easy as that big five
countries can take arbitrary actions plus the number of countries in the world today is very much. If
we see on the other hand the big five countries can continue to run because of the services of
developing countries that exist today so that indirectly the big five countries are not as independent
as we see them. At present each country has its own potential - and because of the potential they
have as a sign of the power of the big five countries not as big as when the UN was first established.
Countries in Asia currently have natural resources that are very much needed in the world on the

32 James Marlow, “Big Five” of World Parley to Dominate Future Peace,” Gettysburg Times, June 27, 1945, available at
http://news.google.com/news papers?, last visited 21/12/2018.
33 Shaw, M. International Law, 4th ed, Cambridge, Cambridge university press 1999, P. 843.
other hand countries in Africa also have natural resources that are no less tantalizing, but of course
the countries in Africa really need equal distribution of welfare and justice.
So far, the United Nations deserve some commendation for averting it for seven decades. Still
the justification of the domination of the big five in the United Nations system, especially its
overwhelming influence in its chief enforcement organ must be balanced against the realities of the
21st century. Many countries in the developing world criticize the Security Council based on the
perception that it is an elite “nuclear club” since the “big five” are the only recognized nations
permitted to have nuclear arms. It has also been criticized for not accurately reflecting the power
and population distribution throughout the world. The structure of the United Nations in relation
to the Security Council’s veto needs to be reformed to fit the challenges of the 21st century.34
The overwhelming influence of the “big five” has given rise to a situation in which there is a
disconnection between the decision making and the implementation ability of the Council. This has
resulted in decreased legitimacy of the United Nations Security Council and the United Nations
Organization as a whole. The rise in criticisms of the United Nations Security Council should not be
ignored. The increased momentum toward a reform demonstrates a decreasing effectiveness of the
United Nations Organization. The fact that powerful countries with the ability to act alone or
together without the United Nations have done so on several occasions as well as the growing
distrust of the efficiency and ability of the United Nations Security Council to act in case involving
the interest of members of the “big five” is a strong indication that the Organization is failing in it
task of protecting international peace and security and indicate an urgent need for reform. In spite
of its achievement, it must therefore be conceded that some of the United Nations Procedures need
to be improved and the standard of financial transparency improved. The answer therefore is to
reform the United Nations Security Council – the chief enforcement organ, by doing away with the
special privilege (veto). In consideration of the contribution of some members of the big five, and
the justification for their present domination in the United Nations system (financial contribution
and otherwise) the permanency of their seats could be retained but on the condition that their
status as “great powers” be maintained. In addition, the members of the Security Council should be
elected by the General Assembly. This way, everyone in the plenary organ will have a stake in the
United Nations Organization. It is the opinion of this writer that merely increasing the seats of the
non permanent members of the United Nations Security Council as was done in the past or
increasing the number of the members of the Permanent members as some are advocating will not
do in this regard.35
Bibliography
Books
Phillipe Sands and Pierre Klein, Bowett’s Law of International Institutions, 6thedition, (London:
Sweet & Maxwell, 2009.
Weiss T.G, “The Illusion of the UN Security Council Reform”, The Washington Quarterly Autumn,
2003.

34 Flora Alohan Onomrerhinor, Loc. Cit.

35 Ibid.
S. Gozie Ogbodo, “An Overview of the Challenges Facing the International Court of Justice in the
21st Century”.
Adhigama Andre Budiman, Pidana Mati dan Posisi Indonesia terhadap Resolusi Majelis Umum PBB
dan Resolusi Dewan HAM PBB, Jakarta : Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, 2017.
Marko Divac Oberg, “The Legal Effect of Resolution of The UN Security Council and General
Assembly in The Jurisprudence of The ICJ”, 16 Eur.J.Int’l.L, 2006.
Shaw, M. International Law, 4th ed, Cambridge, Cambridge university press 1999.
Other
Edward Benes, “The League of Nations: Successes and factures,” available at http://www.foreign
affairs com/articles 09293/Edward-benes/the league-of-nations-successes-omd-factures, last
visited 22/12/2018.
Karen Mingst, Jacques Fomerand, and Cecelia M. Lynch, United Nations international organization,
available at https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-Nations, last visited 22/12/2018.
Kochler, H. “The voting procedure in the United Nations Security Council Examining a normative
contradiction in the UN charter and its consequences on International Relations, 1991, p. 2.
available at http://enwikibooks/org/wiki/SCCE-modern-History, last visited 20/12/2018.
C. Edurando vargas Toro, “UN Security Council Reform: Unrealistic Proposal and Viable Reform
Options”, Nov. 2008. American Diplomacy (Commentary and Analysis/foreign service dispatches
and periodic report on the US foreign policy) available at
www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/item/2008/2012/comm/vargas-un.html, last visited 20/12/2018.
Fadilla Jamila Irbar, Controversy of Veto Power Over The Effectiveness of UNSC, available at
https://www.academia.edu/5066387/Controversy_of_Veto_Power_Over_The_Effectiveness_of_
UNSC, last visited 20/12/2018.
Kamrul Hossain, “The Complementary Role of the United Nations General Assembly in Peace
Management,” available at http://www.turkishweekly.net/article/323/the-complementary-role-
of-the-unted-nations-general-assembly-in-peace-management.html, last visited 20/12/2018.
Okhovat. S, “The United Nations Security Council: its Veto Power and its Reform”, available at
http://www.miat.org.au/articles/UNSC%20FULL%20REPORT%20Sept%202011.pdf, last visited
20/12/2018.
Flora Alohan Onomrerhinor, A Critique Of The Domination Of The Big Five In The United Nations
System, available at
https://www.academia.edu/15235046/A_CRITIQUE_OF_THE_DOMINATION_OF_THE_BIG_FIVE_
IN_THE_UNITED_NATIONS_SYSTEM, last visited 20/12/2018.
French colonial tax still enforce for Africa, available at https://www.worldbulletin.net/africa/french-
colonial-tax-still-enforce-for-africa-h152967.html, last visited 22/12/2018.
Jens Martens, Global Policy Forum: The Reform of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) A
Never-Ending Story?, 2006, available at https://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic-
 policy/social-and-economic-policy-at-the-un/reform-of-ecosoc-and-the-social-and-economic-
policy-process-at-the-un/47509.html, last visited 21/12/2018.
James Marlow, “Big Five” of World Parley to Dominate Future Peace,” Gettysburg Times, June 27,
1945, available at http://news.google.com/news papers?, last visited 21/12/2018.
Legal Documents
Article 1 of the United Nations Charter.
Article 23 of the United Nations Charter.
Article 27 of the United Nations Charter.
Article 94(2) of the United Nations Charter.
Article 4 of the United Nations Charter.