We the Peoples, Shaping the Future of the UN (HLPF Special Event)

That I.
Everyone, if you could start to take your seats.
The program will begin very shortly.
Thank you.
Lost.
Hello, everyone.
Hello to you in the room.
Hello to you if you're watching on the livestream wherever you are in the world.
To the United Nations headquarters and a special event during the high level political forum called We the Peoples Shaping the future of the United Nations.
You should feel free to do that a lot during the afternoon.
I'm your host today, Rajesh Merchandani, and I'm a storyteller.
I spent 20 years telling stories for the BBC and another ten for nonprofit organizations, including for the UN Foundation.
Now I help organizations and leaders find the stories that build human connection and drive impact.
That's a little of what I want to do here today.
What is the story of the future of the United Nations? What is your role in shaping that story? We're also going to be thinking about what is the role of the Pact for the future and the UN 80 initiative? Those are key milestones in the UN's recent reform and renewal trajectory.
Today, we're going to take stock of them and how they fit into the story of the next era for the UN.
In our conversations, we're going to surface priorities for that next era and come up with practical tools for how civil society can stay engaged with the UN.
We're going to do that with three conversations with experts from diverse regions and constituencies and with the Secretary-General himself.
Throughout, you'll have a chance to ask questions to our panelists.
First, I'm going to ask you all a question too.
Don't answer it just yet.
Just think about your answer.
You'll get a chance to share it soon.
The question is this, and also don't overthink it.
If I do call on you, you'll only have 20 seconds.
What is your vision of the UN of the future? What is different about it in the story that you want to be able to tell in years to come? It could be a really big thing, it could be a tiny thing.
You might want to say the chairs need to be more comfortable.
That's fine.
Like I said, don't overthink it.
But just think about it for now.
Let's kick off this afternoon's proceedings now by inviting you to join me as we welcome Secretary-General António Guterres.
In six months time.
I really intend to go back to the civil society.
I don't know yet in what kind of organization, but some of them I'm still a member.
I started when I was a student in university in the times of Solazide and of Marcel Canyon, the dictator.
I started as a volunteer in the slums of Lisbon, and then I was co founder and I'm still, I think, associate number one of the Portuguese Association of Consumers.
Then when I left government and before coming to the UN, I was essentially involved in organizations, one of migration and the other of refugees, particularly committed to the questions of displacement that are so relevant in today's society.
And so I have no idea about what I've been doing in the 2nd of January, but one thing I know, I will go back to be a an active member of the civil society.
This is the last chance you've had.
This is the last chance you have to talk with me as Secretary-General because if there is a next meeting, I will be on their side of the room.
I'm delighted to see such broad participation in this chamber today.
Civil society organizations, large and small, women and young people out in force, voices from every region, you reflect the true spirit of we the peoples.
I commend your tireless principled work, pushing for peace, for human rights, for equality, calling for a revitalized multilateralism with people at its center and demanding a more inclusive and effective United Nations.
Dear friends, I hear you.
We must renew our organization to deliver better for people.
That is why we launched the UN 80 Initiative.
Building on earlier reforms, it offers a bold set of proposals to make the UN more coherent, more fit for purpose, and more effective.
It calls for change that is meaningful, action that is concrete, and most of all, impact that people can see, feel, and believe in, and impact that translates itself into more effective action in relation to the people we serve.
UNAT is vital to our ability to succeed in an age of profound instability.
Across our world, we see trust eroding and divisions deepening, conflicts causing death and destruction on a shocking scale, and communities starve the resources for development and resilience.
Climate action is delayed and climate justice is denied.
New technologies racing ahead without proper guardrails represent a threat to us all.
These challenges are complex, but they point to a simple truth.
The United Nations can only deliver on its promise if we dare to evolve.
Dear friends, renewal means earning trust through results, and that's what UNAy is all about.
Above all, it must strengthen our ability to realize existing commitments.
I'm thinking of commitments like the sustainable development goals.
The SDGs are our shared promise to people and planet and the focus of the high level political forum now underway.
But with less than five years to go, just 36% of the targets are on track or making moderate progress, and 15% have gone into reverse.
We must correct course and pick up the pace.
Unity can help through stronger coordination and enhanced country level delivery.
I'm also thinking of commitments like the Pact for the future, our global pledge to tackle shared challenges together.
The Pact spells out concrete actions to turbocharge the SDGs, which I believe you are fully aware of.
These include urgent steps to strengthen peace and security, accelerate sustainable development and tackle climate change, share the benefits of science and technology more equitably while reaming in the risks, empower youth and future generations, and transform global governance so it's more inclusive and effective.
UN 80 puts us in a much stronger position to deliver on these commitments through greater efficiencies, stronger synergies within and across pillars, easier access for our partners, and closer proximity to those we serve.
Dear friends, I will never forget the pivotal where civil society has already moved the needle, driving local action to advance the SDGs, bringing energy and ideas when we met two years ago in Nairobi, building momentum ahead of the summit of the future, persuading member states to approve the pact and supporting its implementation on the ground.
Because of you, we have made real headway despite fierce geopolitical headwinds and you remain indispensable as a partner, bringing frontline knowledge and capacity, as a watchdog, strengthening accountability and demanding follow through, and as a bridge connecting global decisions with local realities.
With your continued meaningful engagement, we can turn ambition into action and action into impact.
Dear friends, UNIT will only succeed if it strengthen our ability to deliver on the SDGs, implement the Pact for the future, and work in partnership with civil society and how we work together truly matters.
You have shown us that genuine engagement must be structured, sustained, and linked to decision making.
That means moving from participation to partnerships and from consultation to creation.
That is why we are strengthening our interagency civil society focal point network to better facilitate our work together and soon they will cover the whole of the UN system and all our agencies, funds and programs, and other UN institutions.
I'm honored to join this dialogue with civil society leaders from so many regions and constituencies.
I'm eager to hear your priorities, your proposals, and your concerns.
I think probably people told you that you should ask me questions.
I would strongly suggest that you can ask me all the questions you want.
But beyond asking questions, please tell me what you think is wrong in what the UN is doing and what we should do in order to correct it and how we can improve our deliver to the people we care for.
So don't worry with the script.
The script can be changed at any moment.
Please do spontaneously what you believe I need to hear independently of the questions that you can see that you need to ask.
I indeed welcome your ideas for strengthening our cooperation.
Multilateralism works best when it draws on the collective strengths of our key partners, including civil society.
Only together can we build a peaceful, just, and sustainable future for all.
Thank you very much for your patience.
All.
Thank you.
Also applies to.
Thank you, Mr.
Secretary-General and a very good way of trying to avoid being asked questions.
By the way.
We have a stage full of civil society activists by the sounds of it.
Let's use you in your capacity as Secretary-General before you chain yourself to any railings in a few months' time and let's begin our conversation.
Our first conversation brings in a range of regional perspectives to give us a sense from around the world of what the UN's future priorities should be.
And the different challenges and opportunities that your different regions offer.
Let's say hello to our panelists.
I'm going to introduce them one by one, and then maybe when I've introduced all four of our panelists, we can give them a round of applause to welcome them.
First, we'll go down this order.
Co Sara Geng is the Executive Director of the Center for Global South Initiatives and Development in Kenya.
She's a human rights lawyer and gender expert who helped create the UN working group on discrimination against women and girls.
She also empowered more than 300 African women lawyers through her advocacy and training.
Sito Pérez is the Executive Director of the Center for Women Resources in the Philippines, which supports movement building initiatives in grassroots women's communities.
She also leads the Asia Pacific CSO Regional Engagement Mechanism.
Rosario del Pilar Diazcbto is the founder and executive director of the Millennials movement in Peru and co facilitator of the Lack Impact Coalition for the PA for the Future and the Latin American and Caribbean Civil Society mechanism.
She's also a member of several youth boards on human rights.
Doctor Nelio Laquiimov is a sustainability expert and civil society leader working to advance the 2030 agenda, including through supporting the 2027 Global Sustainable Development Report and strengthening civil society participation in VNRs and she's also the Executive Director of the RAD platform, which stands for research, advocacy and development.
What an amazing panel.
Let's please welcome them.
So Panel, we did send you beforehand some guiding questions for our conversation.
You don't need to follow them.
Even better.
But I will just stray from the script for a second because I want to ask you all in turn.
Again, 20 seconds, don't overthink this.
The question that I asked everybody at the beginning.
What is your vision of the UN, of the future? Carol, you want to go first? I'm going to save you for the end, Mr.
SG, unless you want to go now.
The UN for the future, I hope will be the multilateral organization that unites the world, in which power relations have completely changed, a world that is no longer dominated by one power or divided between two powers, but in which there is equilibrium and there is a multipolarity that creates conditions for justice that today is impossible and allows multilateralism to be effective what today is very difficult because of the geopolitical divides and because of the power relations that are deeply unfair.
Anybody want to follow the SG? Sorry, I'm I will carry on? Yes, go.
I was just asking if anybody dared to follow the SG.
Well, that's to follow.
But talking of, I think thinking of the UN un imagine that we're in on a stage like we are right now, and when the credits run, then everybody should be in the credits so that it is not dominated by one particular group of people and that the power dynamics are horizontalized, if I may use a words such as that.
They're interesting.
It's quite similar.
Okay.
Well, I think for me, what I want to see as the UN in the next era is a UN that champions development justice.
Development justice.
At the time that we're seeing a lot of injustices and perhaps later we'll be hearing stories of injustices.
What we want to see is a UN that is people centered, not profit driven, and is really pursuing development justice, mostly for the marginalized.
I guess in my case, I would say that I would like the UN to be the institution that keeps giving hope that brings hope to people, you know, it gave me hope when I started my advocacy.
The institution that brings fairness in the world, the institution that allows our voices to have a platform, the institution that helped us to build the world we all envision together.
That is the UN I want.
The UN ambition is the one where every person can feel and see represented, and where they can hear their voices, and they can also envision a future, their own future through the work of the UN.
That's the UN ambition.
Well, I Yeah, I probably will be a bit more practical because we are in the regional session right now.
I think it's really important that we actually strengthen regional work.
Of course, I agree with everything what has been said already, but we are all representative of regional engagement mechanism here, all the panelists.
I think what we are seeing that, for example, when we work with regional commissions, it's already a great example, but which can be even improved and make UN accessible for civil society, for when we work with member states and so on and so forth.
We already know that it's possible.
There are already established connections which are already working.
I think it's really important that in the near future, we continue this practice and even grow that.
Just another example I want to bring which I think is really important, again, because you are talking about UN A and of course, we are all following the process and trying to understand what is good, what is not so good.
I think what is really important for us to see what is happening with UN AIDS, and I think at the same time, UN AIDS is a great example of regional engagement of civil society because in the coordinating board of UN Aids there are five civil society representatives which have the same power as member states.
We know the process.
It was established in 1995.
It's a long term ego, but it was possible.
Can we make UN in the future the same? Can we actually make that we can actually be that right holders and be equal with member states? This is what I want to see in the future of the UN.
Okay.
Neilia Rakimov, you've skillfully connected all three of our panels with your answer there.
When over 20 seconds, I'll just notice, but that's fine.
But can we just acknowledge what an inspiring first round of responses and visions for the future of the UN everyone gave us? I But let's get practical to quote you, Nella.
What are your regions telling us that the UN needs to understand better, needs to prioritize and needs to do differently in order to help deliver those visions of the future? Who wants to go first? Well, actually, why don't you let someone else start? Actually, why don't you let someone else start? I'll come back to you on this point if that's all right.
Just because you have the last say in the last question.
Who wants to start? A Africa is sending a clear message.
I think that the UN developmental efforts must be grounded in local realities and these realities must be shaped by leadership that is accountable, that is accessible, and that is representative.
But also that Africa is not one big country.
Africa is diverse and that diversity needs to be represented in terms of the political, economic and cultural contexts.
Africa is also home to a lot of policies and practices that need to begin to reflect more vibrantly in the UN.
Um, and this can only be done if it's done in partnership.
To borrow from what the Secretary-General has just said, we need to move from participation to partnership because there's been a lot of participation of African entities, African civil society, but we don't want to just participate.
We want to work in partnership because if you look at it realistically, from a democratic point of view, civil society is the majority compared to the member states.
But where is our majority voice? It needs to reflect a little more.
Those are priorities shifting from aid dependency towards investment in capacity.
This is broad because we're looking at building structures for education that will sustain development rather than giving popcorn aid that withers away and when there's a policy shift somewhere, then it affects whole health systems, it affects whole education system.
We need to go to the root and build these systems from the root up.
Those I think are priorities that we need to look at.
Finally, as I close this part, to also say that it must also come from a place of accountability.
Civil society has been agitating for accountability for very long time.
And I think that the UN can support civil society in the push for accountability.
Africa is a very rich continent and can be self sufficient, but Africa is buckling under the weight of corruption and mismanagement and the UN can do something to help Africa manage its resources better.
Okay, Carol, thank you.
You want to pass the mic along.
You want to go next? Yes, of course.
I think building on that, I think to do that, we need to be addressing the systemic and structural barriers that impede sustainable development.
In Asia Pacific region, we're seeing a lot of this.
There's the unjust debt, there's an unequal trade and investment and financial systems, climate injustice, there's corporate capture, militarism, shrinking civic space and the persistent, ever persistent and equal power between the North and the South.
I think it's about time that we address that and we see that the UN has a really big role in doing this for a reason that is our priority to address the systemic barriers, structural issues that impede sustainable development.
Okay.
How can the UN How? Very important questions.
Civil Society, people's organizations on the ground have been telling us how.
If you look at our policy recommendations, you'd see that.
If you go to the communities, they are actually already doing that.
People have solutions on the ground, agroecology, food sovereignty, community based renewable energy systems.
They are already doing that.
Perhaps it's about time that UN Learn from that.
The UN has been doing that already, but I think partnerships is ever more important.
Financing that is ever more important now and really learning from how we do that in the community.
We're here talking about high level priorities, which frankly should be ground level conversations.
That needs to happen.
Bringing Those ground level conversations to the UN and the UN really going to the ground and seeing how we do it and learning from it.
Terrific.
Thank you so much.
Okay.
I'm definitely hearing a theme here, global decisions, local realities.
Rosario Elia Ou.
Yes, I think something that needs to be prioritized from now on is also fair multilateralism.
We need to build it.
We need to see how we can achieve a multilateralism that is representative, but also that is coherent among regions, so we can all achieve development.
In the same path, we are coming from different starting points.
We have different agencies, different structures, realities and whenever we think about what we need to prioritize is, how do we build this fair multilateralism? Also, I think the narrative, the narrative of the UN needs to be the one that correlates with the people, with the UN charter from bottom up.
Where the people is engaged, where the people know what is the UN, what it's doing, how to engage, and how to also demand their decision makers to ensure that the UN has all the resources and the capacities and the leverage to keep working and have the agency to create change.
Finally, I think also, it's important to prioritize how do we build these? How do we focus on fair multilateralism, while we create safe spaces for civil society and for people to participate? How do we create that fair multilateralism that is accessible, intergenerational, where everyone can come here and share their voices.
I think that is something that is important and just regarding my region that is Latin America and the Caribbean, I think two big priorities would be also considering how do we address inequalities? We are the most unequal region in the world, but also we are the most violent region in the world.
How do we address that violence that perhaps is not defined by a declared conflict, but it is really affecting the life of millions of people.
Okay.
All right.
E.
Yeah, since there is no script, I will a bit twist the question.
I actually want to say what I think region need to learn from the UN with you.
Because the point is that Europe and I more represent UNIC region, which includes North America, Europe and Central Asia and some more random countries.
A even in this most prosperous countries, when pandemic, when armed conflict comes, and so on and so forth, we'd see that the system is not resilient and we need such kind of institutions.
The point is that we know that at the same time, our region is responsible for more than 50% of regular budget of the UN.
What is happening right now again, who is responsible for this reform for this shrinking of UN processes, also of shrinking civic space within the UN.
We understand that sometimes our colleagues who work with the Secretariat trying to make their best actually to include us, but it's just not possible because they are out of capacities.
I just want to say that like dear member states, you need to learn something.
We had already in the past with League of Nations.
Do we want to repeat it? Or we actually learned something from this process.
Now when we are in this type of crisis, when I don't know, 2.9 trillion spent on military just last year, when European countries are growing their defense budgets again and again, shrinking civic space, underfunding development, sustainable development goals, and we are seeing it happening in front of our eyes so fast.
Do we really want to live in this world? Do we want our children to live in this world? I don't want my child to live in this world, but unfortunately, there is no alternative.
But this is my question.
Where do we spend our money? Where does it go? At the same time, as I mentioned already, we have shrinking civic space.
As you mentioned, I am facilitating with other colleagues, stakeholder engagement around voluntary national review right now here at HLPF.
From year to year, we bring less people.
We don't have money, we have visa issues.
We cannot bring people to this country.
We actually even sometimes people come here, they are afraid to speak because they need to come back.
So this is really the reality.
I just in last years, we observe I'm trying to monitor this count how many speakers you first to speak, how many speakers didn't come, and so on and so forth.
But this is what we are really observing.
My question is really to member states.
You usually say, we are committed, we want civic space, we want civil society, but in reality, we observe a completely different picture.
How would you change that? This is a really interesting question.
Of course, we try to do advocacy at the national level where it's possible because this is not possible everywhere.
In some context, there is no civic space, but even where it's possible, it's still super difficult because we of course, understand the realities and that we cannot just you know, push for our agenda and ignoring everything what is happening in the world.
But of course, we need to find the balance.
We need to keep UN alive and efficient.
We need to keep UN as an institution that provides safe space for civil society.
Because if we are losing this space here, I don't know where we will have it because we all coming in from different realities and in some countries, there is no space left and people come here actually to speak and raise their voices the last opportunity to actually do something.
If we are losing this space, then we really have a problem.
Thank you.
Great point.
In a moment, I'm going to open up for a couple of questions from the audience, but I want to pick up on something that several of you have said, and it's this idea of global decisions that are grounded in local realities.
In your regions, what does that look like? What is an example that you can hold up that everyone can learn from and say, this is an example of where it works.
Anyone got one for me? I want to change your question a bit and build on something that N just said and maybe we come back to that.
Okay.
I'll speak about the Commission on the status of women, for example, that addresses the issues of women around the world.
It's held here in New York every year, but access is denied to a lot of women from around the world.
Maybe it's time to move the UNCSW away from New York.
And have it held in Africa, for example, that's a solution.
Africa does not lack the space to hold.
Noda and I held a successful conference two years ago, bring it to Nairobi or take it somewhere else.
But I think we cannot be having conversations where half of the participants again are missing.
They are not partnering.
Then in terms of local solutions, let me speak to the youth of Africa.
Everyone talks about the youth of Africa, but we speak about the youth of Africa like it's just a good thing to have.
What are we leaving the youth of Africa? Where are we taking their creativity, their innovation? Where are we taking their energy if we only use them as a statistic to show that Africa is a young continent.
I think some of the local solutions would mean using that resource that is on the ground in the form of the young people of Africa.
But the other solution is using the resources that sit in Africa, not exploiting at the expense of the African people, but using the resources to build On the infrastructure to build and on sustainable development imperatives for Africa.
Okay.
Thank you.
Rosaria, go ahead.
Well, I really resonate with Carol on that because I think it's moment for our regions to have agency, to build our agency and regional responses.
And when you made a question on something that were originally, I was just thinking, what can I bring to the conversation? But I thought about the COVID response that really didn't work much in our region because we didn't our nations didn't really work together.
You know.
And we were on the last in the last part of the queue for vaccinations, for masks, for respirators because we were not working originally.
You know, even though we have a diverse scope because the region is quite diverse and we might have different threads of thought, I guess, perhaps polarization didn't allow us to work together and build that agency, an original response to that situation that took the lives of many people.
I also just wanted to point or I was listening to Nelia and she said that, about the financing, you know, I think that sometimes we tend to listen that there is no money.
But in fact, there is money.
This year, we just saw one person become a trillionaire.
There is money.
It's not well allocated, is not well distributed among people to respond to their needs and to the work that needs to be done in our territories and our nations and to support institutions such as the UN to keep working to respond to those needs.
I guess that's where I stopped.
Terrific.
I actually want to invite any members of the audience who have a question for our panelists to put up your hand.
Now, if you do, I think we probably have time for maybe just depending on, one question.
Lots of great points being made.
Now, if I call on you, here's what I want.
I want you to stand up, a microphone will come to you.
I want you to say your name.
I want you to say where you're from.
I don't want any speeches.
No, thank you for being here.
We know that you're happy to be here.
I want you to respond to the question I asked you at the beginning in 20 seconds.
What is your vision of the future of the UN? Then I want you to ask your question and I'm going to be listening to make sure it ends with a question.
Who has a question? A few hands went down at that point.
This guy in the middle right here in the blue.
You, sir.
I think you had your hand up first.
Let's run him a microphone.
Here it comes.
Remember, name, where you're from.
I'm Ero de Baraco.
I'm from Brazil.
The when I want to for the future is one where hope meets action and we don't make empty promises, but we also deliver accountability and meaningful infrastructure and aid.
Terrific.
That's a textbook response, everyone.
Take note.
Terrific.
Eduardo, what's your question? My question is mostly for Carla D Rozo, sorry for the pronunciation.
In your vision, how do we reshape the bad vision that the Global South has about the United Nations that sometimes they don't privileges us as much as other key players.
How do we avoid that those bad feelings get in the way to avoid good faith negotiations in the future, good deals, et cetera? Great question.
Thank you, Edward.
Give Edward around.
Clear on the question? Yes.
Great.
Thank you, Duardo.
It's difficult to manage the feelings because they will persist so long as the reality does not change.
But we must put the reality on the table.
I think a lot of my colleagues have talked about the evidence from the ground needs to reflect and that evidence needs to cover the five continents.
So that the voices of the global South is heard and it is heard not from tokenistic perspective, but it is heard from a place of informing what will come out of the processes.
The member states of the UN, I think, operate on an equal footing.
That is the textbook understanding that we have.
So we would like that the voices of civil society in the global South and I repeat that civil society is more than member states.
So the voice of civil society needs to be heard and needs to affect the decisions that are coming out of the processes here in the UN.
And we know that for a lot of the processes, including the pact for the future, those space for civil society to bring its voice to the table, and we must continually take advantage of that.
The challenge we have is around the physical presence here in the UN, and that is continually becoming more and more restrictive and that's why we need to find alternatives of where to have the physical meetings.
We also know that civil society space is shrinking around the globe.
I think it behooves the UN to speak truth to these issues so that member states are held accountable in terms of how civil society access is given, how human rights protection is done because we hear very many stories around the globe and in Africa.
We have very many cases of human rights violations.
Yet when the member states come to the UN, we don't see those issues being surfaced in ways that then reflect for civil society back home.
That would be my short response to your question.
That's terrific.
Panel, did you want to add to that reserve? I can give you 30 seconds if you want to, but you don't have to.
Okay.
All right.
Panel, I think we're going to have to wrap it up there.
Mr.
Secretary-General, what have you heard that's triggered something for you that's given you food for thought here? Well, I think that the key mission of the United Nations must be the democratization of power and democratization of power at all levels.
First, this is an intergovernmental organization and governments do whatever they can to limit the participation of civil society.
One thing in my political formation, I was very influenced by Abermas and Abermas used to say that or wrote that what is typical of democracy more than elections or is the permanent interflow of communication between the political society and the civil society and the fact that the civil society has an influence on the decisions that are taken.
This is the question that we need to fight for within the UN and at the level of the different countries in a moment in which we are seeing a pushback against this capacity of the civil society to have a real influence in the way decisions are making and be, I would say the destination of the accountability that governments should be entitled to respect.
This is The question we are fighting and in the pact for the future, we strengthen the role of civil society within the mechanisms that we were able to create.
We also insisted on the power of the cities and regional organizations within the UN system.
Again, big resistance from member states, but we need to decentralize power at that level.
Second level of decentralization of power that was mentioned here, democratization of power is the primacy giving to the local and the regional.
Because it is at the local and regional that problems are felt and at the local and regional level that problems are solved.
And that is the reason why the central aspect of the reform that we are proposing UN 80 is the strengthening the UN capacity at country level and at regional level because we were not very well organized, let's be honest, and not able to do the request for accountability at local level in relation to the governance, but also at regional level and at the same time to have an influence coming from our country teams in the policies that the UN defines at global level.
And then there is a third question of power that is extremely important, which is the power that is very concentrated in relation to a group of countries that is dominant in today's world.
It's not only the North South relation, it's more than that, but it's essentially still a North South relation.
There I must say that was our big fight in the PC for the future.
We fought for the reform of the Security Council, and we are fighting for the reform of the Bretton Woods institutions.
If you look at the World Bank and the IMF and the Security Council, they represent the world of 1945, not the world of today, and developing countries have a much smaller role than developed countries in the Security Council and also in the World Bank or in the IMF or in many other international institutions.
At the same time, the way markets are organized is such that it makes developing countries have a lot of obstacles to be able to develop.
For instance, in my country, if you want to invest, we pay interests that are one third of the interest paid by countries in Africa that have the same rigorous policy that I believe still exists in my country.
I'm not there now.
But this is the truth.
The economic power is concentrated on a reduced number of countries and we must democratize the economic power.
Then gender power.
It's a question of power.
Women and men, they must have the same level of power and we managed in the UN to have full parity in 160 ranking leaders of the UN our country teams, the resin coordinators, more than 50% are women.
They were 30 something just a few years ago and the same apply today of the whole international staff, 47% is already women.
This was a determined policy in order to give women opportunities.
We did not discriminate in favor of women.
What we discovered is if there are real opportunities for women, the women candidates tend to get a very fair share in the way organizations are compounded.
Then fight for power in relation to the protection of the planet.
Just one week and a half or two weeks ago, I made a very strong intervention in which I put into question the power of fossil fuel industry that is being seen as a tremendous obstacle to the transition that is necessary to rescue the planet.
Just a few days ago in the AI summit, I the question of the power of a small group of countries and the small group of companies that are having the capacity to decide things about our lives that sometimes we don't even notice that this is happening.
I think one of the roles of the UN is on all these fronts and inside to fight for a real democratization of power, power in relation to the guarantees of the civil society intervention as partners and not only as, I would say participants, power in relation to the from bottom up capacity to take decisions, power in relation to equity and justice in relation to the inequalities that exist in the world, power in gender, power in the protection of nature against the fossil fuels, and power in the protection of ourselves in relation to the power that today is exercised by a small number of companies in a small number of counties with the use of artificial intelligence I.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to invite you to say a big thank you to our first panel and panel.
I'm going to invite you to step off the stage now.
Let's thank them.
No, you stay.
We'll bring our second panel onto the stage and then while we do that, Mr.
Secretary-General, seeing as it's just you and I right now.
I was talking to a couple of people before this event and people are dying to know.
What are you most looking forward to doing on January 1st, 2027? I have no idea.
I have no idea.
Are you looking forward to switching off your concentrated in the pre 31st of December.
If I start thinking now about what I will do after the 1st of January, I will fail in what needs to be done now until the 31st of December.
Very skillfully done.
Thank you.
It's not skillful, it's true.
Even more skillful.
Our second panel has joined us.
So in this conversation, we're going to take a look now at the three pillars of the UN sustainable development, human rights, and peace and security, and how more systematic collaboration with civil society can support better integrated action across those pillars.
In our first panel, we talked about democratization of power, democratization of decision making, making sure that civil society voices were not tokenistic at the UN.
Let's think about how more systematic collaboration could actually help deliver across the three pillars.
Of the UN.
Another terrific panel.
Great to see you.
Thank you for joining us.
Let's meet them one by one.
Renata Gioti has brought her fans with her.
Is a Sustainable Development advisor at Glades Black Women Institute in Brazil and focuses on human rights, sustainable development, inclusive humanitarian communication and disability studies.
She serves as Secretariat for the people of African descent stakeholder group.
Anselmo Lee is regional coordinator of the Asia Civil Society Partnership for Sustainable Development from South Korea.
He has spent three decades working to advance democratic resilience, human rights, peace, and sustainable development.
In May, he was appointed South Korea's first Human Rights Peace and Democracy ambassador.
Asara Idle is from Senegal and France, senior policy advisor with inclusion and disability Sightsavers together 2030.
Her work focuses on advancing disability inclusive policies and strengthening social protection systems, and she supported more than 40 voluntary national reviews.
Emili program Director of familia in Mexico.
How did I do? I She brings an anti colonialist and anti imperialist lens to her work on sovereignty, self sufficiency, and autonomy by and for the Global South and she co leads the ecological and Climate Finance working group in the Civil Society financing for Development mechanism.
What a panel.
Let's welcome them.
Panel, you heard the first set of speakers and you know the first question.
20 seconds each.
Let's go down the line.
What is your vision of the future United Nations? Well, I don't want to sound very repetitive, but, of course, a very inclusive, a participatory UN for all and a co creative UN.
We want the UN that civil society can co create, not only participate, be in the room, but co create with member states, with UN agencies, and inclusive and anti racist mandates.
Summary.
For me, UN needs to be open, inclusive, democratic platform, not controlled by a few powerful countries, open to all the key actors.
As Secretary-General highlighted, it's not only member state, but also local and cities and civil society as well, so it belong to all.
I think that should be the vision of UN in the future.
Great.
Yes.
For me, the idea, the UN of the future is the UN which really starts by the furthest behind, the UN which has asserted itself enough so that when power overrides, it can actually have the authority to stop those powers that overrides and it's a UN which is a lot more powerful because it has completely included civil society in its processes.
Okay.
Thank you.
For me, I envision an institution that is carrying out what I call UN disobedicy against monopoly capital capture, colonialism, imperialism, and that also is not willing to dismember itself in front of and bow down to power.
Great responses panel.
Let's move on to the themes of this discussion.
Really, it's how I introduced it.
How can more systematic collaboration with civil society support integrated action across those three pillars, peace and security, sustainable development, and human rights? If possible, I'd love for you to respond with actual examples, if you have them, of where you've seen it happen successfully or where a lack of it has demonstrated things going backwards.
Who wants to kick off? B, you have a microphone you're nodding.
I think you have something new.
Let's go.
Before I give an example, I would like to just mention that these three pillars, they are currently being treated as separate mandates, but they are lived as one reality, actually, because sustainable development, there is no sustainable development where rights are denied.
And no durable piece where inequality is left unaddressed.
So that must be said before any example.
I will give one example where I is a good practice actually.
I think a good practice is always good to kick off with.
A good practice from a member state from Brazil, the country I come from.
We do have a voluntary SDG.
SDG 18 on racial justice and ethnicy.
This is a good example of a practice for racial justice.
Of course, it must be more promoted globally.
But is an objective of development that is testing the limits of the architecture, the current architecture.
And it has many inequalities, of course, but race is kept as a secondary or diffuse.
That's an example of how address race throughout the whole architecture.
Maybe a good example of practice.
But also race as a gap.
Throughout the sustainable development and something that we need to work on for the post 2030 agenda.
Super interesting.
Thank you.
Let's tell it.
Okay, these three pillars, human rights, this city agenda and values in the United Nations according to Chapter.
But in reality, as you know, security by Security Council and sucain development by Echos and HLPF and Human Rights by Human Rights Council over there in Geneva.
So there's fragmentation.
There's no interconnected of three.
These are one of the challenges we need to address.
For instance, this is a very good forum for dialogue with the Secretary-General.
Can you imagine this type of dialogue with the P five in the Security Council chamber, you know, that I think is one of the challenges we need to address because as many people stress, today, the financing gap for society is one of the key challenges.
But we know where all the money going in.
But since the 2022, the breakout of war in Ukraine, and we see the reduction of ODA and shrinking civic space, and this is the common challenges a global phenomenon.
Unless we address this problem, so called military spending and militarization, I think we cannot address this silo approach of three pillars.
I think we need to strengthen really the role of UN Secretary-General Assembly, which can oversee, three pillars, rather than Security Council control all other pillars.
I think that should be the key challenge we need to address.
Thank you.
That's it.
Thank you.
I think we are at a defining moment with the UNAT reform, the new mandate resolution, and it's really the biggest system reform that we've seen in decades, including for human rights and at the time of heightened geopolitical tension and shrinking resources for human rights, and so With that, I think it's very important to keep the human rights active and at the center from a human rights perspective, integrated action across peace and security, sustainable development.
Human rights can only occur With civil society because it is civil society that connects the pillars together.
It brings ground level evidence on inequality, on exclusion, and rights violations.
It brings early signals in terms of human rights risk and linking those risks to um to conflict, and it also calls for accountability which ultimately strengthens the development outcome.
So for me, we need to start with civil society because it's really what connects the pillars together.
And for that to happen, we need to institutionalized civil society collaboration.
We need to make it permanent and predictable.
What would that mean practically differently? It would mean, putting in place structured and accessible participation channels.
It would mean provide the information which is needed for civil society to engage because you are talking about examples.
Sometimes we don't know when the process is going to start, at which moment we can be part of the process.
That means that we are just relying on a friendly mission to communicate the information.
And so Yes.
We we really need to make the that information circulated and make sure that we can then provide the different inputs that we would like to provide without asking for it every time that we need to do it.
So in some instances, we have co facilitators who are really open and we can submit the input that we would like to submit and it works well.
In some instances, we have to push.
We don't want to push We don't want to push anymore.
We want it to be really a part of the process, as it's been said in the previous panel, we want to have the same strengths as another member states.
Then in terms of the fact that human rights are at risk, we're really calling for the fact that the UN reform must include a nongrs principle and be informed by human rights assessments.
And what does that look like? What does that mean? So for for example, um, within the UNAT process, there is a human rights group that have been founded.
There are TORs that have been issued.
We weren't invited to contribute to those TRs.
We would like this human rights group to work with civil society, not for civil society or worse only for member states.
That's one example.
The other example is Don't worry about that.
Thank you, SG.
But also the UN data Common, we would like it to be an inclusive multi stakeholder public good.
We want inclusion to happen on two level with the UN data Common.
First, citizen generated data, disaggregated ones, age, sex, disability, et cetera.
Second, we want that information to be available for all.
So what does that mean? It's available for the global South.
It's available for the woman with a visual impairment who wants to have access to the data to then influence its own government.
And yes, maybe let's stop here for here.
But really looking at success through the lens of inclusion.
Terrific points.
Amelia.
Thank you.
I think civil society here, despite their better judgment and despite the context, all the people that is here is the big cheerleader for the UN.
We really wanted to see it thrive even in this apocalyptic context in which we are living an economy of war and actually has been denounced an economy of genocide by a human rights rapporteur exactly serving on the UN human rights bodies.
I think it's quite scary to be talking about data and what we want to participate when the world is almost on the verge of of an ecocidal end of the life as we know it, just precisely because of the action of these actors that are just profiting and there is an alliance of power that is very perverse, that is also undermining life here in the UN.
We know that the budget of the UN is five times less just than the city of New York.
With that, it is operating addressing all of the challenges around the world.
So to us, really, we just wanted to say when I was saying about the UN disobedience, is that we know that there is this modus here saying that the UN caters to member states, but at this moment in time, we really want to see that the whole is bigger than the sum of its parts.
We really want to see a UN that stands up to power, that calls out genocidal actors, that really defends rather than undermines the acts, for instance, some people facing HIV AIDS.
This is something that we want to see with hope the UN, but we want to see a UN that is not acting against its own interests.
For instance, in alliance with corporate power or for instance, when it has a mandate on environment and they announced that they're going to open data banks on AI in each region when we know that those banks are depleting water, depleting the land and they're actually demanding an increase on fossil fuel energy.
So the UN has to stick to its values, has to be coherent.
For that, we are just asking for political leadership.
We are asking also to hear that as other panelists have said, that civil society is very much on the side of the UN.
We would wish that it would listen more to citizens than power and money.
Terrific.
Thank you.
I'm going to come to the audience in a second, but I want a quick follow up with our panelists, and you don't all have to respond if you don't want to.
I just wonder if you think that there's anything that civil society organizations need to do differently as well.
Everyone's gone quiet.
I want to say what shouldn't happen in the world in a new order with the UN that is weakened because there is a deference to the AIFIs, the international financial institutions, and we just want to say that even human rights Reeers are in agreement that all of those mandates are regressive and that they are against the human rights mandates of the UN.
Just recently in April of this year, I'm sorry, the Commission on Human Inter American Commission of Human Rights, it literally said it invited States to rebel and to refuse to abide by the recommendations of IFIs, if they are guarding and promoting violations of human rights of the rights of the people that are discriminatory, that are promoting austerity measures, and that are even undermining the life and the fiscal space.
I think the UN has to be very clear that first of all, that we see the struggle within the UN, we would wish that it would hold its own sovereignty and autonomy to struggle within itself and not giving power even those that are undermining the human rights framework and the principles that the UN would uphold.
Second, we would also like to see that the UN would lead on the democratization of the international financial architecture to really deliver on a care economy, on the rights of a healthy environment.
We would like to see that they are working hand in hand with us and we would be there for it rather than criticizing the UN.
I think that would solve this final part of my answer what you're asking.
Okay.
I'm not sure to answer the question though, but great points.
Does anybody want to answer that question about whether there's anything that civil society organizations need to do differently? Of course.
Already, we have been doing differently.
I believe we used to say civil society implements a partner, in fact, implementer, but civil society, this day we are saying we are co creators and we are setting agenda together and also as a strategic partner, but at the same time set agenda for the future.
For instance, today, title of this panel is we the people reshaping the future of UN.
But I'd like to propose to change the title if we do have this session next year with the new Secret gener instead of we the people, we need to add with the people nature, and future generations.
This is in line with the PC for the future.
That means civil society is not to implement what has been agreed, also, we are creating new vision and new agenda for the future.
So that's why I think the government needs to listen to civil society because we are the people who work on the ground to listen to people and also listen to nature and the future generation.
I think that kind of role of civil society needs to be recognized and emphasized by the UN and the member states.
So in other words, because we have also practicing human rights based approach and also sustainability based approach, and also the the conflict sensitive approach.
But this is nothing new.
This has been agreed we and UN agencies, but we are at the forefront to implement those approaches to avoid the silo among the security and sustainability development and human rights.
I think we have a lot of experience, but the question is whether member state listen to our wisdom and solutions.
Okay.
All right.
Thank you.
You wanted to jump in on that? Yeah.
Quickly, just to compliment what my colleagues said.
I think I need a standing channel partnership really collaborative space.
When we say co creation, it's co creation within civil society, UN entities, academia.
It is a true co creation that we can think of means of implementation.
Not only thinking as civil society alone, as un entities alone, as academia alone, but co creating together.
I think that's what we need actually happening and thinking of a framework that will integrate all of that.
Okay.
Terrific.
Thanks panel.
I'm going to open it up to the audience.
I'm going to have time for just one question.
Actually, let's get that young lady right at the back there with the glasses on.
Yes, that's right.
Yeah, you.
Let's see if we can run a mic to microphones.
They're over there.
Do you remember, Edouardo over here did such a great job.
Name, wave from your vision for the future of the UN, and then your question.
Hi everyone.
I'm Omar.
I'm a youth advocate, and I think we've heard a lot of discussions about the vision for the UN in the future, but we haven't talked about youth in the future generation.
What is your vision of that future? I think the future vision of that should be more spaces, more accessible spaces for civil society, including youth to have a space at the table, to be able to talk about the issues that they see in their everyday environments.
We see in New York City and all over the world these youth organizations doing incredible work around climate change and different sustainable development goals.
But they don't have the access that a lot of us privileged youth are able to have in the UN.
My question to the panel as well is also, how do we change the conferences excuse me, conferences like this one, as well as just UN space in general to be more inclusive to youth and to not forget youth and discussions, but making sure that they're included both in official meetings, special events, and in the UN in general.
Okay.
I will just before panel invite any of you to respond to that, I'll just remember back in 2019, when I was at the UN Foundation, it's when we had the Youth Climate Summit.
That was an amazing day with 800 young people from around the world just roaming the halls like they owned the place because they owned the place.
It was such an amazing moment.
That's the kind of thing you'd love to see again.
Okay, Panel, what about some responses to then how do we make the UN more inclusive, more welcoming systematically for young voices? The Pact for the future brings this perspective very clearly the intergenerational aspect and also how important the youth is for the next generations.
But also what we build today will set the tone for these filter generations.
What we do today to set the tone for these generations, for the youth, bringing how also the young colleague said, bringing them to the table, bringing them to the room to be able to co create with us.
That's very important.
But especially, I want to mention especially youth from marginalized groups because they are usually not part of the conversation.
Youth from communities of African descent, disabled youth and indigenous and so on.
That's very important.
Okay.
Very briefly, I stressed the vision of the UN should be the open platform.
So in this, I think I want to highlight two or three how.
Number one is, as Secretary mentioned, next, we are going to have a VnL but at the same time, we have a BLI local review.
That means a lot of cities and local government have been participating in the SGD.
I think we need to encourage more, you know, and also we need to initalize the participation of the local government in the process.
Number two, there has been already campaign by civil society to include the parliamentary.
We have a parliamentary assembly and the people's Assembly, especially the petition.
That means many country already practicing the petition mechanism.
If we bring the voice opinion to UN General Assembly, they should be able to address all the people's voice directly.
I think these are the two concrete examples we have been campaigning, but still the many member states did not listen seriously all this campaign.
Also, The lastly, I'd like to highlight the secretary role of leadership, especially UN Secretary-General.
I was last week in ju forum and the sixth candidate out of seven, they were there.
I was listening with a lot of young people like this and they were very excited because they had a chance to raise the question with six candidates.
But there was Ban on, former UN Secretary, your predecessor.
He said, I'm jealous of you, but also I'm worried about you because once the day one you are elected as selected, you will be the scapegoat.
Secretary-General is a scapegoat.
So he got the warning to the most dangerous job in the world being Secretary-General too.
My point is, but young people are very frustrated after they knew that they cannot influence the UN Secretary selection process.
They knew that it's going to be decided by few powerful countries.
I think I said we need to really democratize the leadership selection process.
I think that's the key to address all these challenges.
Thank you.
Amelia, thank you for waiting patiently.
I think the request of participation is not a matter of format, but of substance.
And if the aging population, the people with chronic illness, the people with disability, if they're demanding access is because the system is not right and those that are here are keep on making the same decisions over and over that are exploiting them and plundering their territories.
So I think it is very important to be mindful Again, what are the ways in which the UN can support the changing of the system? Because inclusion in a system that is ecocidal and genocidal is actually complicity in and of itself.
I just want to really say that, for instance, the youth have been manifesting against genocide across the world and they want to come here to say that the UN, on the one hand has been securitizing every single issue, while at the same time undermining the development agenda.
But they want to say here that there are other ways in which they can feel safe, they can feel at ease in their lands, the same as indigenous people.
Again, our proposal, for instance, last year, the president of Colombia called for a uniting for peaceful solution because they're trying to find ways in which the security council can be unblocked and bring back the democratization and the sovereignty, the power to the General Assembly to decide on so many things and that proposal wasn't take up on.
There are many things that if people want to hear us their voices and then their voices of changing the system and not remaining in the system that keeps on exploiting them.
Is not heard, then the format really doesn't matter.
I think this is an issue again in which the civil society will be rallying along the UN to get the strongest UN as long as the UN is already delivering and not standing complicit with those genocidal and ecocidal actors.
Sara, I can give you 30 seconds if you want to I If I only have 30 seconds, I would say to your question, just continue to do the same.
I want to end up on a positive note and if I compare the first year I came to the UN today, there are a lot of you going around a lot more than other groups.
I think you've done well.
Just continue to push and to implement the same strategies as the one that you've implemented until now and yes, let's continue to push for that co creation to be.
Okay.
Mr.
Secretary-General, what are your thoughts on what you've heard in this panel? Well, first of all, the question of the three pillars.
What is fashionable now is to listen to some countries and to say the UN must concentrate on its core business and the core business of the UN is peace and security.
These questions of development for human rights, they are not for the UN.
The UN must concentrate on peace and security, and this is nonsense.
It's nonsense because peace and security, sustainable and inclusive development, and respect and promotion of human rights are three.
Faces of the same coin if we could have a coin with three faces.
Because there is no way you can guarantee peace and security if there is no development, if the contradictions within countries increase because of the inequalities that exist, because of the exploitation that exists.
Again, there is no development and no peace if human rights are not respected.
But human rights, let's be clear about one thing and it's not always clear.
Human rights are not only civil and political rights.
Human rights are also economic, social and cultural rights.
One of the problems that many times exists, especially in, I would say the western part of the world, is to put a lot of emphasis on the questions of civil and political rights, but to forget the questions of economic, social and cultural rights.
We need to look at human rights in its entirety because they are indivisible and they are totally interconnected.
Now, the Obviously, there is a question which is normally there are people dealing with one issue, people dealing with another and one thing that was said is absolutely true.
Our biggest effort is to bring the pillars together.
One of the objectives of UN 80 is exactly to bring the pillars together at country level, at regional level, and at national level.
It's not easy because people like to be in their chapel.
The idea that they are in the cathedral is not so easy, each chapel by itself, but we need to be all in the same cathedral.
This is the fight we are having now and one of the objectives of UN 80.
There was an observation that I consider extremely important, which is the need to have a coherent anti racism policy.
I Obviously, racism existed during different periods for different reasons, but there is a dominant reason for racism today and that dominant reason has to do with the evolution in the last few centuries and with the colonialism and its consequences.
I am totally at ease because my country was the colonialist country.
I know exactly what I'm talking about.
Of course, colonialism was in itself a Responsible for many aspects, but always submitted to this idea of the superiority of the whites and the superiority of the Christian civilization.
We know that today this doesn't make any sense, but it is still there in the mentality of many people that of course, I am not racist.
But they do not really have an introspection serious enough about that.
Of course, the worst part of colonialism was the transatlantic slave trade.
That is one of the reasons why racism is still so intense in a meaningful number of countries.
This is an area that for us is a priority in our work is to fight any form of racism anywhere.
We have our own strategy, but it's not enough because this is a persistent aspect and colonialism has to a certain extent shaped the economies, the structures of the countries that became independent, but they became independent with infrastructure that was not to link the African, for instance, countries among themselves, but to exploit African resources that take them out of the continent.
There were no administrations that were solidly created.
There was no investment in education and health.
The impacts of colonialism last for decades.
The problems of the Afro descendants in the areas where slavery was important also create a structural inequality that tends to persist and needs to be fought with determination.
This is one of our major concerns.
The last point I wanted to make and about what was said in relation to the situations that are in the world.
There is one thing I can tell you.
One thing is the Security Council and the Security Council does what the Security Council can do and I'm not going to enter into many details because you are all aware of what's happening.
But the UN is not the Security Council, and in relation to the things that are happening in Ukraine, or the things that are happening in Gaza, or the things that are happening in Sudan, we have been very clear condemning all violations of territorial integrity of states, condemning all forms of massacre, dramatic violations of human rights.
In some cases with marks of genocide, both the Human Rights commissioner and myself have been very clear recently with what happened in the Middle East in the Security Council, I condemned the attack by the United States and Israel and I also condemned the attack by Iran to the other countries of the Gulf that were not the ones that attacked them.
We have been very careful not to have double standards and to make sure that wherever there is a serious violation of human rights, we are on the right side of history.
I can guarantee that for us, the fidelity to international law, the fidelity to the respect for territorial integrity of states, and the fidelity to the rights of people and the need to preserve, especially the protection of civilians in situations of conflict is something that we have very high in our priorities.
The truth is that we have been very strongly attacked because of the positions we have taken.
If you can read many interesting things wrote myself.
By some countries that I will not mention now, and I don't care because this is the price we pay to be coherent and the same happens to the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
But I believe we must also say that the UN at the level of the Secretariat has consistently been on the right side of history in the dramatic crisis that we have been facing in the last few years.
Okay.
Folks, let's keep it going and let's thank our panel.
What a terrific second panel.
Thank you, please.
Let's bring out our third panel as well for the afternoon.
While they're doing that, Mr.
Secretary-General, some great points made in that panel, and it also just makes me wonder, what is the one thing that you're going to miss most about this place? The one thing I'm going to miss more and I'm already missing because I have done much more when I was Commissioner for refugees, is the capacity to go to the most remote places in the world where people are suffering the most incredible situations and to be able to do something to alleviate their plight.
Well, let's see what you do next.
I have no idea.
Okay.
I didn't get any idea in the last 20 minutes.
You didn't.
Okay.
Our third panel has joined us.
Let me tell you a little about this panel.
This is our chance to think big as we start to approach the end of our time together this afternoon, to think big about the vision for the future of the UN, and then to map out the path from the Pact of the future to UN 80 to get to that vision.
Let's meet our guests, I'll introduce them and then again, I invite you to give some applause once I've introduced them all.
Rashi Maktra' a feminist governance and advocacy leader.
They love you too much.
She's brought her fan club as well.
Let's hold it till the end.
She's the feminist governance and advocacy leader who works to ensure that multilateral spaces are shaped by those most affected by inequality, not just those who govern them.
She's also co chair of the UN major groups and other stakeholders coordination mechanism.
Wambui Kamani from Kenya, Pan African feminist thought leader and the founder of Zamara Foundation, strengthening the voices of women and girls in marginalized communities and also a member of the women's major group on Africa.
I did tell them to clap at any time.
This is my fault.
Ali Jaelani from Pakistan specializes in policy advocacy with a focus on climate justice, decoloniality, democratic governance, human rights, and sustainable development.
He's also a member of the Asia Pacific Regional CSOs Engagement Mechanism.
Ndaa Yusuf is co chair of the Coalition for the UN We Need, a platform of more than 650 organizations and with a track record also of strengthening networks, that want to make multilateralism and the UN more representative.
Now you can clap.
Panel, there are guiding questions for this conversation as well, but as the Secretary-General has told us, we're going to throw the script away.
But I do want to get you all to start off with this one question that I've asked everybody, 20 seconds each.
What is your vision for the UN of the future? Ama, let's start with you.
Yeah, thank you.
My vision for a United Nations of the future is one that truly lives up to the first three words of its charter, which is we the people.
We've spent the last 80 years building this institution around governments alone.
I think somewhere along the way we forgot who it was meant to serve.
Great.
And let's remember it's the people's the people's with theness.
For me, really, my vision of the UN is a place where decisions are made with the peoples and not for the peoples.
Where when you think about a young girl in Kalifi rural area of Kenya, eco feminist in Brazil, a disability rights movement worker in Guatemala, that when they come to the UN, the policies are not already made.
The policies are made for them with their lived realities by their lived realities.
That the young person who spoke here and the 10-year-old who is sitting in this room today can actually see that these policies are for them and by them and they're able to shop them.
That for me is the vision for the UN.
Any of those people who talked about you? Yeah? Me included, of course.
I wondered if maybe you are that 10-year-old.
No, there is a 10-year-old here as well.
Oh Oh.
No.
Okay.
If we have time for any questions at the end, I'm definitely going to come to you as well.
Hold me accountable.
Okay, Ali.
Let me court rules.
Justice is the foremost virtue of social institutions as truth is of systems of thought.
The UN of the future for me would be the one that delivers that justice by dismantling unequal power relations, decolonize global governance, and deliver on its foundational promise across the three players.
That's a great sentence.
Decolonize global governance.
That's a really good sentence.
I like that.
Okay, Var.
Tough act to follow after all of these visions for the clap anyway.
Thank you.
These are friends.
But can I first, Rajsh just add, SG, you are always welcome to civil society if you need a plan for what comes next.
I will say, over the last ten years, I think many people have been working here over the last ten years.
Being able to produce an event like this, which is not so much a farewell, but a welcome to civil society from us, I think is a testament to the avenues that continue to progress.
But of course, there is always room for more.
On your question, Rajt, four very quick things.
One, a UN that recognizes that its comparative advantage in multilateralism is middle power agency.
Two, a UN that is far more future forward.
Three, a UN that is visibly present in people's lives again, and four, a UN that knows when it doesn't need to ask permission.
Interesting.
Terrific.
If we have time, I'd love to unpack that last one.
But let's return to where we started, which is considering the Pact for the future and the UNAT Initiative.
What actions panel, do you think that if they were taken today, can best ensure that we deliver on the visions that you want to see for present and future generations.
We have a roadmap, which is the path for the future, which one of the greatest things about it is that it was actually passed in a time of incredible division, and then the UNA initiative as well.
One of the concrete actions I love you to be as specific as possible, that if we take those now are going to set us on that path for the visions of the future that you want to see.
There's a lot of similarity in the visions that we've heard today for sure.
Who wants to go first on that? No one's jumping in.
Yeah.
Sure.
I can jump in with a couple of thoughts.
Again, I think three general ideas and pathways.
First, one of the brilliant things that the Pact and Summit negotiations did, I think was create a horizontal across civil society beyond the thematic verticals that we're used to organizing around.
But actually, people thinking about UN reform, the future of the UN, the global governance system.
I think that really powerful horizontal constituency needs to be built on and continue to move forward.
Second, I think we need to be careful about not creating competing agendas, but rather thinking about how all of the agendas fit together.
You take the Pact for the future, UN 80, the sustainable development goals.
They're all different parts of the same w.
The SDGs are what we need to deliver for humanity.
The Pac for the future is what multilateralism needs to be to get us there.
UN 80 is what the UN needs to be in that multilateral system.
I think that it's about thinking about how the whole fits together because we're playing for the same objectives.
Finally, I think beyond looking at asking what we need to do, which I think is really important, and civil society has a very powerful role in putting the ask forward.
I think we as civil society need to be very future forward, which requires us to track and monitor and gather the data and plug in gaps where it's missing.
Coalition for the UN Weed and the Global Governance Innovation Network have been tracking and monitoring the pack for the future.
Have many other civil society organizations, those just two I work with.
Um, I think we need to then look at what are member states not yet talking about but will need to talk about like the 2028 review of the Pac for the future.
What is the framework for that? Like what happens when we get to 2027 to 2029 to 2030? I think really, one of the things civil society has is the privilege of long term thinking, which many other actors don't.
I think we really have to be the strategic pillar that's constantly looking forward and getting people to look forward and not just respond to what's already happened.
Really think that civil society organizations have that luxury for at a time when there's such challenge to civil society? I think many of the folks on this panel will speak to this because it is a real concern and the space is being squeezed.
The problem is that Many people in a time of crisis want to see impact and delivery and results, which means the way that we value success is the number of meals delivered, the number of children that receive education.
That's important.
But no one is measuring success through systems design.
No one is measuring success in prevention.
No one is measuring the pandemics and wars that didn't happen, which disadvantages civil society that works on systems, systems that work on systems.
I think it is a call for how do we define success in the 21st century? How do we ensure that, yes, those meals get delivered on the ground, but we're also fixing the food system.
That, yes, there are vaccines delivered and it's great that the Gates Foundation wants to put lots of money into delivering vaccines, but who's fixing the healthcare system and who's funding them to do that? How are we measuring impact in that way? I think that is something that is not a civil society problem, it's not a UN problem.
It's an us problem that we have to address together.
Very interesting.
I I'm going to break it up.
I'm going to avoid going down the line again.
You picked up the Mike Reshma, so you go.
I was just going to build a little bit on what Mudara said, which is around, you know, what are the infrastructures that we're building for implementation.
And I think one of those things that I've said earlier, and I've heard all of my colleagues also say is around institutionalizing participation.
We have incredible roadmaps, we have the SDGs, we have the Pact for the future.
We have all of these great ambitions, and right now what we need to do, of course, is implement.
And part of that is recognizing, as the SG also said that we need partnerships, and that means partnerships with civil society.
I think we come to the UN all the time negotiating where we belong in civil society, in every negotiation, whether at the halls of the UN now for the SDGs or the PC for the future, we don't know where we belong, and we need to institutionalize civil society participation at every point of the UN's engagement and in delivery.
I think that's how we're really going to shift this modality from thinking only about governments and bringing it down locally to the people and building that accountability that we need to see.
Objection.
My colleague has sparked a thought in my mind and before I go to answer your question, and she mentioned in terms of what does the UN success really look like and how can you be able to also decolonize what success really looks like? For me, and going back to the first question around what the vision of the UN is.
For me, the vision for the UN that I would want when it comes to measuring of success isn't about how many, protocols or resolutions we have adopted.
It's about are communities safer for the girls walking in the night? You know, are women exercising their bodily autonomy? Is the civic space democratic? Are people able to really engage in their civic spaces within the countries and in this space? If we're able to measure success in that way, we will know that, then we are able to really ensure that then We are really trusting the multilateral system to deliver that.
That then the measuring is not about, are we able to get 1050 adoption of resolutions, but is my sister living in Afghanistan able to actually go to school and sit in class and actually finish education and become a doctor if she wants to do that.
Is my brother able to actually go and enroll in, for example, a police system and he doesn't go to die just because of some of the flawed policies that our countries have.
For me, really, we also need to start decolonizing in terms of how we really do measurement.
But then back to your question around the road to building for parts of the future.
I had three points and I don't want to speak so much, but I'll say for us to be able to deliver UN 80 and the pact of the future, we've already started hearing this conversation around making sure that then the women and girls and gender diverse people are at the center of every reform and every decision.
You know, the first panel spoke about it, the second panel spoke about it and we are also speaking about it.
It means that the reforms that we are happening at the UN system are not really putting women, girls, and peoples with the peoples at the center of us.
So I think it's high time for us to be able to do that if we are to really deliver on the pact of the future.
Secondly, we also must be able to put people at the center of the multilateral system.
What feminists have been saying for such a long time, we like the UN.
We've seen amazing achievement that the UN has done over the years.
But now we know that we have to make reforms and one of the biggest issue has been that people do not trust the UN.
We have lost that trust.
The next 80 years that we are working on this multilateral system, we need to start building that trust back brick by brick.
How are we going to do that? By putting the peoples with the peoples at the center of that.
That's my second point.
Then by the Last point that I have is that, you know, the reform must protect human rights while at the same time really investing in prevention.
Most of the time when human rights are being violated, we work to go and protect the human rights that are already being violated.
We are not putting, you know, time and investment in prevention.
So we want the UN that is more efficient, fit for purpose, but also the UN that really continues to think about the human rights, which they've already done that, but to really strengthen that piece of work.
And last but not least, and I know one of my colleague will call me out if I don't say this.
This is to you really and allow me to read, please because Mr.
Secretary-General, and as my colleague calls you, the feminist in chief.
As you lead this reform, I hope you remember that this legacy is about I hope its greatest legacy will not be remembered for how efficient we reformed the institution.
But for whether we restored the people's confidence that multilateralism can deliver justice, dignity, and hope.
Because ultimately, as you come back to us in 2027, hopefully, the future of the United Nations will not be defined by how long it endures, but whether the people around all over the world once believed again that this UN system, this multilateral system really belongs to them, really believes in their human rights, and really puts their safety, dignity, and justice at the heart of it.
Thank you.
There is that constant battle between measuring output and measuring impact, real impact.
It's not the number of agreements made.
So what happened as a result of that? Totally.
Okay, Ali.
Let me build on that.
So in order to restore the credibility and faith and trust and multilaterlism, that would mean that we need to ensure coherence and complementarity across our views, pillars, and processes.
I'll go to that later, but There are also some inherent contradictions in our critical consciousness as we see the development paradigm being operationalized around the world.
I mean, how can you have a situation where within a decade from Global South, you have 7.8 trillion taken out in illicit financial flows, while in the same time frame, just 1 trillion sent in in development aid.
Those kind of contradictions have to be removed, in essence, for us to be able to operationalize anything genuine.
That is what speaks to the Pact for the future key actions 47 to 52 on the reform of the international financial architecture.
I mean, we've had some very serious examples.
COVID 19 perhaps was the biggest wake up call for us to dismantle business as usual.
However, in that very moment, we saw that in my region, 43 countries were in a situation of near debt distress.
Howsoever, more than 90% of the programs negotiated at that time pushed for further belt tightening measures.
Or when the General Assembly requested the ministerial conference happening in Geneva of WTO requesting that we should apply trade related intellectual property stipulations waiver so that countries like mine in Pakistan where more than 75% of people did not have a single dose of vaccine, and that was the situation common to the entirety of Global South.
But unfortunately, those flexibilities were not allowed.
Waiver was not allowed, and in fact, something was given in the name of trade flexibilities.
Despite In such critical moments, we've seen that there are certain parallel institutions who operate absolutely in contradiction with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter.
That is not a situation that will by any stretch help us in restoring the credibility and faith in multilaterlism.
We need to revive those ideas, those principles of multilateralm in terms of sovereign equality of nations, the rules based order, shared values and collective responsibility.
Until or unless we're able to deliver on that, I think the situation is precarious for all of us, I mean, the people and the planet combined.
Thanks.
I'm going to open up to audience questions in just 1 minute, but Panel, I have one quick follow up for you all, 30 seconds each.
When you come back in five years time, when you are all even more seasoned leaders than you are now, What will one difference be that to you says we're on the right track? Just one.
What's that key metric to quote you, Faro? What is the one thing that will tell you that this organization that the multilateral system at large is on the right track? I'll start because I got excited and forgot the pillars and purvies So I mean, insofar as complimentary would be.
Complementary would be the focus.
In terms of pure, meaning that organizations around the United Nations as well.
I mean, the macroeconomic structure, the international financial architecture.
So how do we ensure coherence and complementarity across the functions there with the United Nations at the heart of it.
Then when it comes to pillars, I mean, of course, there's been much talked about it.
Human rights, peace and security, and sustainable development, visibly something that came out as an emphasis in the UNAT which is humanitarian aspect.
There has to be complementarity across these aspects.
Then in terms of processes, of course, the Agenda 2030, PC for the future, UN 80, and whatever conversations we're going to have around the post 2030 framework, there has to be some level of coherence for us to be able to operationalize genuine transformation that can be tracked in the lived reality of people on the ground.
Okay.
Complementarity across pur views, pillars, and process.
Terrific.
One metric I mean, maybe for me it's less of a metric.
I'll share a quick anecdote from this morning.
I am the co chair of the major groups and other stakeholders coordination mechanism.
We work across 23 different constituencies, people of African descent, women's major group, LGBTI, communities discriminate by work and descent, indigenous folk.
It's always an incredible room of people with diverse backgrounds, with different realities.
But there's one thing we were all discussing.
We had this question earlier today.
What's your vision of the future of the UN? What's working and what's not? What's really interesting is that very much to what Emilia also said.
People believe in multilateralism, people invest and spend their time in coming to the UN in upholding the principles of multilateralism.
But they're losing faith that what they put into it is equalizing to something that's coming out.
They want to see that their voice actually matters, that regardless of who they are, what power they are, where they come from, whether they're indigenous or whether they're living in the Pacific Islands, that their voice matters.
I think that if I come back here in five years, what I hope for is that we've shifted the narrative that we've made sure that we've truly, truly found ways to integrate institutionally how we can protect folks coming to the UN feeling safe, recognizing that their efforts matter and that their vision is leading to the outcomes that we see.
Terrific.
Okay.
Thank you very much.
I think for me really is mirroring what Sasa said that in five years, I want when I come to the UN, the outputs and the outcomes of the UN.
Is it the Agenda 2030, you know, the pact of the future, the UN 80 really speaks to the lived realities of the people, especially for me, I will emphasize adolescent girls and young women in all the diversities and that then also we have them in the room that you know their voices being heard, they know that, you know, they have been listened to.
But also in five years, I'll be so happy if I come to UN and we can mention maybe more than 50 countries that can boastfully realistically say that they have achieved gender equality with no ifs of no birds that you know what? They have achieved gender equalities and we have few of, you know, 50 countries that have done that and that is just a low goal.
But then we hope that we will have more countries that achieved gender equality, but also that more than 100 countries have also achieved the goals of Agenda 2030 and have started implementing the future.
Such a big dream.
Okay.
I want to live in that world too.
For me, personally, In five years, if I can walk into these halls and building on the incredible legacy of 80 years of Secretary-General who have paved the way, there is a powerful, capable woman Secretary-General at the table that 193 countries embrace because that's the key indicator.
It's not so much as having a woman.
It's the fact that 193 countries were ready for that moment.
That gives me trust in multilateralism.
I might venture that I think we may have heard from a few potential women Secretary-General in our panel and amongst our audience today.
We're running out of time.
A couple of quick questions from the audience.
Let's get this gentleman in the front.
We're going to run you a mic.
Then my little 10-year-old friend wanted to ask a question there or she's avoiding don't want to ask a question.
Okay.
I'm not going to embarrass you.
You know the drill, name where you're from, 30 seconds on your vision of the future, and then your question.
A I'm Alberto from Italy.
And the vision, I hope that the UN will be the place where countries come back to talk when there are tensions, when there are troubles and probably find a solution and possibly mitigate these tensions, basically.
Great.
What's your question.
The question is the following.
We as companies and power of Philanthropic Foundation, support the UN Scientific Advisory Board because we believe science is one of the most high impact global public good.
And so my question is, how can the UN help preserve a science as a trusted and safe space for international cooperation and where can philanthropy can make the greatest contribution? Thank you.
Is that to anybody in particular? Probably to the Secretary-General.
The Secretary-General, you want to take that question? Yes, of course.
I can answer immediately.
This is a measure concern we have.
There is a global attack against science, I would say a global attack against truth and we are trying to respond to it in the best possible way.
I have a scientific advisory board with scientists of all areas that is publishing a number of studies in different areas, especially in the frontiers of science.
At the same time, we just created the scientific independent panel on artificial intelligence that we will produce regularly reports about where we are in artificial intelligence, what's happening, and what governments and other entities need to take into account, and we are doing the same in relation to a panel that we created for the rare metals extraction and its problems.
And one of the things we are doing in several and I can name one or two more in these several panels, is that the civil society is always there.
So we do not have the civil society in the Security Council that I can do.
But in the panels that we have been creating, shaping new policies or shaping our attitude in relation to science, there is always a component of the civil society as there is always a component of the academia.
Then of course, there are components of governments and components of the private sector.
But for us, this battle for science and this battle for truth is one of the essential battles of our time.
Because let's be honest, it's sometimes starting to be difficult to distinguish the fake news on the deep fakes than the true things.
Thank you.
Everyone, I'm looking at the everyone's hands have gone up.
Seeing as you are so fast, it has to be quick.
That gentleman over there in the black jacket, has to be quick.
Yes, it will be.
Okay.
Let's get a micro conf to you.
You know, name, where you're from.
I'm going to give you 20 seconds for your vision of the future, and then a short question.
Great.
Hello.
My name is Justin Wang.
I'm from the United States.
To answer your initial question, I want a United Nations that has the courage to say, this worked, this failed, and here's why.
The UN cannot be the global platform for collaboration if people don't trust it and trust only comes from credibility and credibility only comes from being honest about progress and showing the world, this is what we'll do better next time.
Um, which doesn't bring me to my question, but I'll ask you anyway.
When countries voluntarily participate and agree on international goals, but unfortunately, consistently fail to meet them, how should the UN encourage accountability while still respecting national sovereignty? Thank you.
That is quite a question.
Okay.
Hold that question because my panel are holding me accountable.
Exactly.
Yeah.
Okay.
This lady over here in the stripy top.
Yeah.
Thank you so much for giving me the floor.
I'm Rabbani.
I'm from Tunisia.
I'm from the women Major Group.
My vision for the UN in the coming year, more inclusive UN that left no one behind, more inclusive for women specifically.
My question is for the UN Secretary-General.
We are seeing a lot of backlash when it comes to women's rights, especially human rights women defenders.
In your idea, what mechanism, let's say what accountability mechanism should the UN champion to ensure that no lack country rule up on women's rights without consequences.
Thank you so much.
Okay.
Thank you.
Panel, thank you for keeping me accountable.
Mr.
Secretary-General, I think those both questions are probably for you.
The first was not exactly the question.
Well, I think he was asking was more an affirmation, which is real.
The question is the body that is supposed to protect the sovereignty of states is the Security Council.
The problem is that the Security Council with the geopolitical divides and with its structure and the veto power has been completely unable to protect the territorial integrity of states, the sovereignty of states in some of the most dramatic conflicts that we have witnessed.
The second question It was about protecting women's rights around the world at a time when they are under attack.
We have a few instruments with the Human Rights Council and the rapporteurs, we can have fact finding missions, there are commissions of inquiry.
But the point is that the the capacity of these entities to take decisions that translate themselves into true accountability where the perpetrators are punished, that capacity is not there.
That is one of the problems of multilateralism is that multilateralism in general has no teeth and when there is a like the Security Council, there is not much appetite to bite.
That is one of the problems that we face is that in many circumstances, we can denounce, we can to a certain extent reveal the truth, we can condemn, but we have not the power to effectively punish those that undermine basic human rights.
Okay.
I feel bad about my gender imbalance.
I'm going to get one more has to be quick.
Lady with the red hair, actually behind you.
Yeah.
I'm afraid that's going to have to be all the questions.
But thank you for being patient, everyone.
Thank you.
My name is Caroline Walker and I'm the founder of Advancing Youth Vice Initiative.
The question is to the Secretary-General.
If you look around the room, 80 years from now, we're all gone.
I've got two young people here that I brought from Africa to learn what goes on on an international level.
So how would the UN support youth solutions like back home in Nigeria, we create cohorts, and we've been expanding into the 36 states.
We are looking in the next two years to expand into the African continent, empowering young people to participate in leadership and community service.
How would the UN support this youth solutions? Thank you.
Youth led solutions over the last 80 years.
The UN has four phases in its relations with youth.
The first phase was to completely ignore youth.
The second phase was to understand that it's probably better to explain to youth what we are doing and we started to have some propaganda things directed to young people.
The third phase was to say, well, probably it's better to give them the impression that we are listening to them, and so a certain number of mechanisms of participation were created in which young people was convened to discuss.
Now we are trying to enter in the fourth phase.
The fourth phase is to create conditions for the young people to participate in decision making processes.
The first step was done creating our youth office and the youth office that is led by a young assistant Secretary-General as as main obligation to fight in all the fronts of the activities of the UN in order to create effective mechanisms of intervention of young people in decision making.
I have, for instance, two young advisory boards in two crucial areas of policy.
I also always listen to them before I intervene on those issues.
This mechanism needs to be replicated at all levels and have conditions in which the young people can intervene in the moment in which decisions are being taken and the That is the step that we are progressively trying to achieve, but the resistance, I must tell you, is very big.
You know what you said about the four stages, it reminded me of a quote, I think it's by Gandhi, who said, First they ignore us, then they mock us, then they fear us, then we win.
It's very similar.
Okay, folks, we are at time.
No more time for any more questions, I'm afraid.
Sorry, but thank you for your paper.
No more time for any more questions.
Many more people want to ask questions, but we are at time.
Thank you all for being a terrific audience.
I want to invite you to thank our last panel and all our panels for being really, really informative and substantive panels.
So let's.
Thank Secretary-General, I'm just going to offer you a couple of minutes just to tell us what your closing thoughts and reflections are from this afternoon.
Well, I would like to go back to the beginning to the question of power.
We have just heard about the injustices that exists in the economic and financial system and the request for a reform of international financial architecture that we are being making very strongly in the pact for the future.
To show how inequality is embedded in the present system of multilateralism and one of the reasons why we need the reform of that multilateralism is to look, for instance, the way the so called special drawing rights are distributed.
When there is a crisis like the crisis of the COVID, special drawing rights were distributed by the IMF proportionally to the quotas, and the quotas are such that the most rich countries have the biggest quotas.
And even the emerging economies have quotas that are much smaller than their present weight in the global economy.
And so in a moment in which wealth was necessary to be created and distributed, it was distributed essentially to the rich.
This shows how embedded this injustice in our system.
And so the fight for inequality is a central aspect to give credibility to multilateral institutions.
Then I would remind you all of the two existential challenges that we face and say that we are totally mobilized to fight in order to guarantee that we preserve an humankind and to preserve the planet.
First is climate change and we absolutely need to end the addiction to fossil fuels in our societies.
The second is the risks of artificial intelligence.
We are witnessing a transfer of power that has no parallel in history.
This time is not power from one state to another, from one government to another or from governments to other sectors of society, is a power that has been moving from governments governments of the inclusive, the most powerful countries in the world, but their power is being moved to a very small number of companies that tend to concentrate all the information and all the capacity to influence things.
We absolutely need to preserve institutions that guarantee that democratic values can prevail and at the same time, that human agency is never put aside in decisions that are essential for our future.
I had the occasion a few days ago to condemn the robo killers, but beyond what we see in the I mean, battlefields, I think that we need to be aware that we are becoming more and more controlled by a small number of companies and we need to fight in order to make sure that human agency prevails and that things are not done against humanity, but for the future of humanity.
This battle is far from being won as the battle for climate change is far from being won.
We have two existential battles for which multilateral institutions would need to be much more powerful than what they are now.
At the very beginning, Secretary-General, you said that you were looking forward to returning to being a member of civil society.
I think you have found your tribe here in this room.
So everyone, I want to thank you for your time this afternoon for a really rich discussion, thanks to all our panelists, and I want to invite you to thank Secretary-General Antiouerrez.
Thank you for coming out.