This paper discusses how the general and abstract concept of international legitimacy applies to the institution of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). On our account the evaluation of the UNSC legitimacy requires taking into account three significant and interrelated aspects: First, in order to determine the appropriate standard of international legitimacy for the UNSC it is necessary to determine its rule-setting competences conferred to the institution by means of treaty law and its specific purpose. Therefore, we discuss the UNSC as an evolving practice. While aiming at inter-state conflicts, the UNSC has resorted to Chapter VII of the UN Charter to treat intra-state or international conflicts since the 1990’s across a variety of domains. A clear re-formulation of the UNSC’s specific purpose is required to evaluate first, whether the purpose of the UNSC fulfils minimal moral standards and second, an assessment of its effectiveness and comparative benefit to other feasible institutions. We consider two possible interpretations of the UNSC’s purpose: on the one hand, it can be understood to be restricted to maintaining peace and security, on the other hand, a broader reading includes the respect for human rights. We discuss how these two understandings of the UNSC’s purpose might lead to different evaluations of its legitimacy. Second, we discuss procedural standards for international legitimacy, specifically broad transparency as well as deliberation. In particular we focus on the revisability of the terms of accountability themselves. Finally, we argue that international transparency and accountability directly depends on the internal arrangements of sovereign states and hence upon minimal respect for the democratic process.
