On Feb 6 1968 in Washington D.C, Martin Luther King jr was delivering a speech on "A proper sense of priorities". In his closing remarks, he said "On some positions cowardice asks the question, is it safe? Expediency asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? But conscience asks the question, is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right." Surely, this speech was delivered to express his opposition to the Vietnam war, which ravaged Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam very badly. But his emphasis on the word "Conscience" was relevant then and relevant now. A global institution like United Nations was set up in 1945 in the backdrop of the second world war, to maintain and promote international peace and security, develop cordial relationships among nations, address issues and achieve international coordination, and many other things. Basically, global institutions were established to make this world a utopian world. But our conscience should ask, whether global institutions like, UN, UNSC, WHO, etc have done their duty or not? Have they achieved everything, for what they were established decades ago? I would argue, no. The larger question is not about trust or confidence in these institutions but about the working and operationalization of these institutions. Democratic but not democratic nature has made these global institutions prone to blunders. When it comes to the democratization of global institutions, they don't follow democratic principles at all. One of the biggest examples of this is UNSC. UNSC is one of the six main organs of the UN. But the irony is that all the powers are vested in only 5 countries, who were part of allied powers in the Second world war. Many a time, global institutions have tried to encroach upon the sovereignty of many countries. UN portrays itself as the torchbearer of democratic principles and free speech and expressions, but since its inception in 1945, it never acted as a prudent body. When these institutions sway away from their spirit, the role of sovereign nations becomes more important. The onus falls on independent nations to act strongly with or without any prejudice. In this pandemic, the role of WHO and its authenticity and credibility is getting questioned day by day. When the whole of humanity is ravaged by the pandemic, and in this grave time, if the role of WHO is getting questionable for defending China every time, then nothing could be more grave than this. The recent coup in Myanmar exposes the role of all the global institutions across the world. All the global institutions have to understand that all the powers cannot be vested in few countries. It's time for countries to stand up together and challenge these global institutions for their biases and prejudices. It's always important to know about another side of the coin, but it seems, for global institutions, only one side of the coin fulfills their bag of decisions. There can't be another example other than the Israel-Palestine conflict. Probe against only Israel signifies the mindset, that many countries and global institutions possess against Israel. It's like saying, I am anti-zionist but not anti-semitic. We all know, how easily terrorism is spreading across the world. After a neverending war in Afghanistan, the powers are again getting transferred to the Taliban, a terrorist group. Unfortunately, a ray of hope or peace doesn't exist in Afghanistan or any other country, where terrorist groups are spreading their web day by day. Sooner or later, we all have to agree that Global institutions have failed to fulfill their promise and duty. It's better to get away with the membership of the global institutions. Change is constant.