Symposium by GQUAL on CEDAW’s GR40: Appointing Madame Secretary-General — A Legal Obligation?

[Natalie Samarasinghe is a Co-Founder of 1 for 8 Billion, which advocates for a fair, open and inclusive process to appoint the first woman UN chief, and the former CEO of the United Nations Association (UK).]

In 2026, UN member states will select the organization’s 10th Secretary-General (SG). Since the position’s establishment in 1945, it has been held exclusively by men and calls to appoint the first woman look set to shape the race, which is expected to begin at the end of this year.  

Speculation on candidates is already rife — and predominantly focused on women. In 2024, 78 countries demanded “better representation of women in multilateralism, including at the UN” during a General Assembly discussion on the appointment. The 27-member Accountability, Coherence and Transparency coalition went further, saying: “We cannot miss the transformative opportunity to appoint the UN’s first woman SG.”  

Countries such as Brazil and the Maldives have issued similar calls in their national capacities, joining influential voices such as the Group of Women Leaders (GWL) and The Elders, as well as thousands of activists and organizations across the world. Even the G20 has opined on the subject. The Rio de Janeiro Leaders’ Declaration urged states to increase “the nomination of women for senior positions, including Secretary-General.” Two months earlier, all 193 UN members endorsed the Pact for the Future, which incorporated language from previous General Assembly resolutions encouraging states to propose women candidates. 

When making these calls, states and campaigners rightly invoke commitments to gender equality. They have framed the appointment of a woman SG as a moral imperative, “operational necessity,” powerful symbol, and means to revitalise and the UN.  

Could it also be a legal obligation that states have long flouted and must now fulfil? 

This argument has not yet gathered steam, no doubt due to concerns about the political blowback. However, it is a tactic worth having in the proverbial back pocket if it looks like states — particularly the five permanent members (P5) of the Security Council, who have traditionally controlled the selection process — are bent on extending the position’s male stranglehold. 

In this scenario, General Recommendation No. 40 (GR40) by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women would provide a strong foundation to make the case for states’ legal obligation to appoint a woman. GQUAL, a civil society campaign that played a key role in GR40’s adoption, has called it a “paradigm shift.” 

Issued last year, GR40 affirms that “women have the right to equal and inclusive representation in all decision-making systems” as per Articles 7 and 8 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Like so many advances in women’s rights, GR40 is both groundbreaking and frustrating.  

It is groundbreaking in that it categorically asserts that equality means “fifty-fifty parity” and that targets like 30 per-cent representation of women in decision-making are “incompatible with CEDAW’s core aim” because they inadvertently reinforce the perception that inequality between women and men is somehow justifiable. GR40 also clarifies that parity applies to multilateral spaces and provides comprehensive, practical guidance to State parties on implementation — for instance, by integrating the GR40 framework into future resolutions of the Security Council, General Assembly, and Human Rights Councils. 

Such guidance is sorely needed. According to UN Women figures published in October 2024, just 29 countries had women heads of state or government. Only 15 countries had reached parity in their cabinets — a figure that drops to six when it comes to national parliaments. Thousands of academic articles on women’s rights use the phrase “one step forward, two steps back” with good reason. The 2024 SDG Gender Index reported stagnation or decline in nearly 40% of countries.  

However, it is frustrating that the Committee had to re-affirm such longstanding, widely adopted obligations.  

GR40 is anchored in CEDAW, one of the most ratified human rights treaties. All UN Member States, except Iran, Palau, Somalia, Sudan, Tonga and the United States have agreed to be bound by its provisions. Women’s equal right to participate in decision-making is also enshrined in other treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; and in regional instruments such as the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. This right is affirmed in unanimously adopted frameworks such as the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, and States parties are obligated to incorporate CEDAW into national laws and policies (although a whopping 79 states have issued declarations and reservations). 

It is particularly frustrating that the Committee had to clarify that CEDAW’s provisions apply to multilateral spaces, when Article 8 clearly cites “international organizations.” Yet despite this explicit exhortation, States parties have collectively failed to offer a single woman the opportunity to serve at the highest level of the UN.  

Research by GWL Voices shows that, of 54 multilateral organizations, 21 have never had a woman in charge (including the International Labour Organization and all the development banks), and 15 have only had one woman leader. 

However, the UN stands out because of its unique normative power and role as a custodian of international law. Treaties are “deposited” with the Secretary-General. The SG serves as the face of the UN and a symbol for international cooperation. They have a responsibility to speak out when human rights are violated and a duty to encourage states to make progress on gender equality. They also make consequential appointments, such as the High Commissioner for Human Rights and Emergency Relief Coordinator. At a time when the relevance, impact, and patriarchal and colonial origins of the UN are under scrutiny, it is no surprise that campaigners are calling for a woman Secretary-General who represents the UN — and the future — we want. 

So how can GR40 help to smash this egregious glass ceiling? 

GR40 reaffirms GR5 and GR25 on temporary special measures, such as positive action, preferential treatment, or quotas. To date, General Assembly resolutions have shied away from asking states to nominate only women. Even states actively calling for a woman SG have been reluctant to take this step. GR40 reiterates that non-identical treatment of women and men does not always conflict with constitutional equality or merit-based systems and is “sometimes necessary to address socially and culturally constructed inequalities.”.  

States would therefore be implementing CEDAW and other relevant instruments by agreeing to present only women candidates and by asserting that the 10th SG must be a woman. In theory, they could argue that after nine male incumbents, states should agree that the next nine SGs will be women. A more realistic option might be to alternate the position going forward, similar to the informal practice of ‘regional rotation.’ 

GR40 also encourages states to “adopt a parity strategy” for all spheres of decision-making, and to ensure “parity, transparency and integrity in nomination and selection processes.”  

1 for 8 Billion has long called for a fair, open, and inclusive process to appoint the SG. When I co-founded the campaign in 2014, the selection process was more opaque and archaic than the papal conclave (the latter was reformed in 2007 and 2013). Governed by a single line in the UN Charter — that the General Assembly makes the appointment on the recommendation of the Security Council — there was no job description, timeline or list of candidates, nor opportunities to engage with them. The wider UN membership was confined to rubber-stamping whoever the P5 agreed was least objectionable and suited to their interests. Even other members of the Security Council were in the dark, not privy to the P5’s secret bargaining.  

Through close collaboration with states and civil society partners, 1 for 8 Billion managed to change that. Ahead of the last appointment, the Presidents of the General Assembly and Security Council issued a joint letter that set out a process for the first time, including a formal list of candidates, the submission of vision statements and public dialogues in the General Assembly that included (modest) civil society participation. Seven of the 13 candidates were women — a big step forward considering only three women in the previous 70 years had been seriously considered. 

This time around, campaigners can use GR40 to argue that the General Assembly should treat the process established in 2015 as a baseline and build on it. The Assembly should urge states to adopt a parity strategy for their SG nominations, and ensure that national processes are also transparent, inclusive, and merit-based. This includes giving due consideration to intersectionality, in line with GR33, GR35 and GR40. For instance, to date, four of the nine Secretaries-General have been from Western Europe while no woman of African descent has been a formal candidate.  

Finally, states should be willing to explore enforcement measures if the above is not implemented. If the Security Council insists on selecting another man, the General Assembly has the power to assert its primary role in the appointment process by rejecting him. This possibility has already been discussed by ambassadors in New York. Meanwhile, parliamentarians and campaigners could invoke CEDAW at the national level if their governments fail to nominate or support women candidates (a far more remote, but still plausible, option would for one state party to take another to the International Court of Justice). 

1 for 8 Billion hopes that existing arguments will prevail, grounded in moral and legal obligations; in the overwhelming evidence of the importance of women’s leadership to all aspects of the UN’s remit; and in the need to restore trust in, and enthusiasm for the organization. However, campaigners and states must be willing to think creatively and draw on instruments such as CEDAW and GR40 to ensure we can finally say the words: Madame Secretary-General.