IN APRIL, the ongoing campaign to reform the United Nations (UN) received a major push when 541 politicians, academics and business leaders from around the world signed an appeal for the creation of a UN parliamentary assembly, among other things, to overcome the "democratic deficit" in global affairs.

This Germany-based movement has received little global attention, perhaps because the UN has been relegated to a talk-shop with little clout in global affairs and which does the bidding of the permanent members.

The process of reform to the UN, in particular to its Security Council, was set in motion a couple of years ago, but there have been no major changes. The UN must change in ways that would redefine the roles of the small and developing nations.

It is hardly in doubt that the world has been transformed extensively since the world body was formed in 1945. The growth in membership has been accompanied by a diversification of the world's challenges.

While much of the initiative has focused on restructuring the Security Council to reflect current world realities – by adding more permanent members – the UN clearly requires greater efficacy to deal with a multiplicity of issues.

In addressing such global challenges, the movement underscores the urgency of incorporating the views of the people and not just those of national governments. Though the UN has helped to avert and/or end some wars, its primary objective is ensuring peace in zones of conflict and in much humanitarian activity.

Under these circumstances, the UN has not lost its relevance, even as it is found wanting in respect of facing some serious situations like, for instance, the Iraq war, and the Lebanon conflict that followed. Its engagement in Darfur and Myanmar has been ineffective and weak-kneed.

On the plus side, however, its current roles in respect of North Korea, or Iran, have been positive. Notwithstanding, reform is necessary and must, in essence, change the way the Security Council, the most powerful arm of the UN, functions.

When small and developing nations form the bulk of the world body, how would a just world order be ushered in, or maintained, without them having a direct say in matters that have a bearing on the entire humanity? When the UN was formed, the world was still in a colonial mindset. New nations with outstanding records of achievement have since emerged, and still do not count in the decision-making process. This should not be.

The UN acts in the name of principle, not national interest, and should, ideally, be the base from where the entire world takes lessons in justice. That's possible only when membership in organs like the Security Council is truly representative of the different shades and segments that make up the global human society.