Top UN Secretary-General Candidate Stands on Abortion Rights Until Birth

Michelle Bachelet’s candidacy—experience and controversies

The selection process for a new UN Secretary-General is underway. Michelle Bachelet’s candidacy has drawn particular attention from commentators; lately, her name has most often been mentioned as a potential successor who would carry forward the legacy of the incumbent UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, a former president of the Socialist International from Portugal.

The former President of Chile and former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights is one of the most recognizable figures on the international stage. Her experience includes both leading a country and working within the United Nations system, which makes her a candidate who meets the key formal criteria.

At the same time, her profile is controversial. During her tenure as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, she was actively involved in promoting the so-called reproductive and sexual rights, which include, among other things, abortion —at least in the eyes of the abortion lobby, which for years has been using the concept of “sexual and reproductive health and rights” to try to sneak the so-called right to abortion into international law. In 2022, she claimed: “Access to safe, legal, and effective abortion is firmly rooted in international human rights law and is at the core of women’s and girls’ autonomy and ability to make their own choices about their bodies and lives, free of discrimination, violence, and coercion.” During a recent press conference after the hearing before the General Assembly, she announced that, while serving as Secretary-General, she would push for the right to abortion on demand up to birth, emphasizing the need to implement the decisions of the CEDAW Committee. This UN body is calling for the decriminalization of abortion in all cases, its public funding, and access for transgender people—including children—to gender-transition procedures and privileges associated with their preferred identity. Bachelet knowingly invoked CEDAW twice, even though UN treaties do not recognize abortion as a human right. A group of 28 American congressmen and senators from the Republican Party sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in which they strongly oppose the candidacy of Michelle Bachelet for the position of UN Secretary-General. The petition’s authors argue that Bachelet is an “unsuitable candidate,” calling her a “pro-abortion zealot” who uses her political influence to push radical agendas and undermine the sovereignty of states.

In a letter, Republicans point to two main areas of concern. The first is the promotion of abortion as a human right. The signatories of the letter, including Congressman Christopher Smith, criticize Bachelet for describing the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson as a “blow to women’s human rights” and for regularly promoting the abortion agenda in her earlier roles within the UN system (including as head of UN Women and as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights). Members of Congress also accuse her of failing to make an honest assessment of human rights violations committed by the Chinese Communist Party, particularly with regard to the Uyghur minority, which, in their view, shows a lack of objectivity on her part.

Republicans are demanding that President Trump’s administration use the United States’ veto power in the UN Security Council to block her possible nomination. The new government of her country, Chile, which advocates the protection of life, also withdrew its support for her candidacy. Additionally, questions are arising about her ability to maintain a balance between different blocs of states amid growing geopolitical tensions. The Secretary-General, to perform his or her duties effectively, must be seen as someone capable of mediating and forging compromises, which in practice means the need to exercise great caution in politically sensitive matters.

The beginning of the electoral process and its significance

The selection process for the new Secretary-General of the United Nations for the term beginning on January 1, 2027, formally began in 2025, with the launch of the nomination process and the organization of public hearings in New York. In line with the UN’s established practice, the culmination of the process is expected in the second half of 2026, when the Security Council should select a single candidate and present that candidate to the General Assembly for approval. Even at this stage, however, it is clear that this choice—though formally based on certain principles of international law—is primarily political in nature and the result of negotiations among the world’s largest countries.

The post of the United Nations Secretary-General is one of the most important positions in the international system. The person holding the position serves not only as the organization’s highest official, but also as a mediator, an initiator of political action, and the symbolic representative of the international community. Amid rising geopolitical tensions, ideological disputes, and global crises, this choice assumes special significance, shaping how the entire UN system functions.

Legal basis and the actual course of the procedure

In accordance with Article 97 of the Charter of the United Nations, the Secretary-General is appointed by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. This framework suggests a balance among the UN organs, but in practice, the position of the Security Council is decisive, particularly that of its five permanent members: the United States, the Russian Federation, the People’s Republic of China, France, and the United Kingdom. Each of these countries has veto power, which means it can block any nomination.

The selection procedure is multi-stage and only partially public. Candidates are nominated by Member States and present their programs during public hearings organized by the General Assembly. This element of the process, introduced after 2015, was intended to increase its transparency and enable states and the public to learn about each candidate’s vision.

The actual decision-making process, however, takes place in the Security Council, where informal consultations are held and a series of secret ballots known as “straw polls” is conducted. During these sessions, members of the Council state their position on the candidates, which makes it possible to gradually eliminate candidates with no chance of securing broad support. Of key importance here is the absence of objection from any of the permanent members.

At a later stage, so-called color-coded votes are used, which make it possible to determine whether an objection to a given candidate comes from a state with veto power. If that is the case, such a candidacy is effectively withdrawn. This process continues until a person acceptable to all main actors is selected. Only then does the Security Council formally recommend a single candidate to the General Assembly, which approves the appointment.

Transparency and the realities of international politics

In recent years, efforts have been made to increase transparency in the process of selecting the Secretary-General, but their effectiveness remains limited. Public candidate hearings and the publication of their platforms constitute an important step toward greater transparency, but they do not change the fundamental role of the Security Council as the decision-making body.

Consequently, the electoral process remains an example of contradictions between formal rules and political reality. On the one hand, the UN declares its commitment to the principles of the equality of states and transparency, but on the other hand, key decisions are made through negotiations among the great powers. It is these negotiations, often conducted outside official structures, that determine the final outcome of the elections.

Political criteria: region and gender

At this stage, informal political criteria that influence the evaluation of candidates are of particular importance. One of them is the principle of regional rotation, according to which the post of Secretary-General should be filled, taking geographical balance into account. After two terms served by a representative from Western Europe, expectations are growing that the next Secretary will come from another region, particularly Latin America or Africa.

The second important factor is the call for a woman to be chosen for this position. Despite longstanding declarations about the importance of equality between the sexes, the United Nations has never been led by a woman. Consequently, some Member States and international organizations emphasize the need to change this situation.

These criteria, although they are not formal in nature, play an important role in the negotiation process and influence the assessment of individual candidacies.

A choice that will indicate the UN’s future orientation

The selection of a new UN Secretary-General carries significance that extends beyond the personal dimension. It is a decision that significantly influences the direction of the organization’s development, its priorities, and how international law is interpreted. The Secretary-General plays a crucial role in shaping the UN agenda, initiating political action, and representing the organization on the international stage. In practice, this means that his or her vision and priorities can influence the way UN mandates are implemented as well as the development of international standards.

In the face of the growing ideologization of international structures, the selection of a new UN Secretary-General has ceased to be a routine administrative process, becoming an arena for a fundamental clash over the shape of the future world order. The example of Michelle Bachelet’s candidacy demonstrates this growing ideologization of the UN. This choice is a critical moment in the struggle for the sovereignty of nation-states and the protection of civilizational foundations against the aggressive expansion of radical social agendas, such as the promotion of abortion on demand or gender ideology. In the face of attempts to instrumentalize international law to advance anti-family demands, the appointment to this post will determine whether the UN will further degrade itself into a tool of global lobbying or will attempt to return to protecting the inherent dignity of every human being.

The effect of political reshuffles

The process of selecting the UN Secretary-General shows that, despite formal procedures based on the principles of international law, key decisions are made through political negotiations among countries. Michelle Bachelet’s candidacy illustrates this dynamic as a proposal that responds both to demands for regional and gender representation and to a specific ideological direction.

The final outcome of the elections will depend not only on the candidates’ competence, but above all on their ability to secure the approval of all the permanent members of the Security Council. In this sense, the selection of the next UN Secretary-General will not be merely a procedural decision, but the outcome of political maneuvering that will set the organization’s values-based course for the years ahead. The key question remains whether “compromise” mechanisms will become a facade for imposing top-down-defined “standards” in the area of human rights on member states, which in reality run counter to nations’ sovereign right to protect life from conception and the foundations of the natural family. This choice will therefore be the ultimate test for the Security Council: whether it will allow the further capture of UN agencies by radical ideological currents, or whether it will safeguard respect for a legal order grounded in the objective truth about the human person.

Julia Książek – analyst at the Ordo Iuris Center for International Law.

See also:

• The United Nations Human Rights Council is pushing abortion under the pretext of protecting maternal health
• How the United States Challenges Abortion and Reproductive Rights Language in UN Documents
• “International Law Does Not Guarantee the Right to Abortion”: Argentina’s New Voice at the UN Forum
• Eugenic Abortion Is Discrimination Against People With Disabilities, Says Ordo Iuris in Opinion for the UN

Source of cover photo: iStock