I. Structure and Organization of the United...

I. Structure and Organization of the United Nations

A. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

1. Charter Provisions

The General Assembly may discuss any ques-tions or matters within the scope of the UnitedNations Charter or relating to the powers andfunctions of any organ provided for in the Char-ter. It may make recommendations to Membersof the United Nations or to the Security Councilor to both on any such questions or matters,except on disputes or situations in respect ofwhich the Security Council is currently exercisingits functions.

Decisions of the General Assembly on impor-tant questions are made by a two-thirds majorityof the Members present and voting and on otherquestions by a simple majority. Categories ofquestions requiring a two-thirds majority arelisted in Article 18 of the Charter; the Articlefurther provides that additional categories requir-ing such a majority are determined by a simplemajority.

The Charter provisions concerning the GeneralAssembly are contained in Chapter IV (Articles9-22) which defines the composition, functionsand powers, voting and procedure of the Assem-bly. Other provisions relating to the Assemblyare contained in Articles 1, 2, 4-7, 23, 24, 35,60-64, 66, 85-88, 93, 96-98, 101, 105, 108 and109 of the Charter and Articles 4, 7-15, 32, 33and 69 of the Statute of the International Courtof Justice.1

2. Members

All Members of the United Nations are repre-sented in the General Assembly; at the end of1953 there were 60 United Nations Members.2

3. Structure3

Under the General Assembly's rules of pro-cedure, three types of committees are established:(1) Main Committees; (2) Procedural Commit-tees; and (3) Standing Committees. The Assem-bly may also establish such other subsidiary bodiesas it deems necessary for the performance of itsfunctions.

a. MAIN COMMITTEESEach Member may be represented by one

person on each Main Committee.(1) First Committee—Political and Security (in-

cluding the regulation of armaments)(2) Second Committee—Economic and Financial(3) Third Committee—Social, Humanitarian and

Cultural(4) Fourth Committee—Trusteeship (including Non-

Self-Governing Territories)(5) Fifth Committee—Administrative and Budgetary(6) Sixth Committee—Legal

On 15 September, by resolution 801 (VIII),the General Assembly established for the durationof the session an Ad Hoc Political Committeeon which each Member was entitled to berepresented.

b. PROCEDURAL COMMITTEES(1) General Committee(2) Credentials Committee

c. STANDING COMMITTEES(1) Advisory Committee on Administrative and

Budgetary Questions(2) Committee on Contributions

d. OTHER SUBSIDIARY BODIESAt the end of 1953 the General Assembly had

the following subsidiary bodies:1 A summary of the Charter provisions concerning

the Assembly is to be found in Y.U.N., 1951, pp. 9-11. The text of the Charter and of the Statute of theCourt is reproduced in Y.U.N., 1952, pp. 10-26.

2 For a list of United Nations Members, see underRoster of the United Nations.

3 This section lists the subsidiary bodies of the Gen-eral Assembly during 1953. The terms of referenceare given only for new bodies established during theyear or where there have been changes in the functionsof existing bodies. For the terms of reference of sub-sidiary bodies previously established, see Y.U.N., 1950,pp. 16-24; Y.U.N., 1951, pp. 14-16 and Y.U.N., 1952,pp. 30-34. The terms of reference of all subsidiarybodies existing in January 1954 are also given inStructure of the United Nations (Seventh Revision)January 1954 (ST/DPI/8). Members of subsidiarybodies and representatives serving on them during 1953are listed in Appendix I, with the exception of theGeneral and Credentials Committees, the membershipof which is given under Sessions and Officers.

GENERALASSEMBLY

Structure and Organization of the United Nations

(1) Interim Committee of the General Assembly(2) Disarmament Commission4

(3) Peace Observation CommissionBalkan Sub-Commission

(4) Collective Measures CommitteePanel of Military Experts

(5) Committee of Good Offices on the Admissionof New Members

(6) United Nations Commission to Investigate Con-ditions for Free Elections in Germany

(7) United Nations Commission for the Unificationand Rehabilitation of Korea

(8) United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency(9) United Nations Conciliation Commission for

Palestine(10) United Nations Relief and Works Agency for

Palestine Refugees in the Near East(11) Negotiating Committee for Extra-Budgetary

Funds(12) United Nations Good Offices Commission (on

the question of the treatment of people of Indian originin the Union of South Africa)

(13) United Nations Commission on the RacialSituation in the Union of South Africa

(14) United Nations Tribunal in Libya(15) United Nations Tribunal in Eritrea(16) Office of the United Nations High Commis-

sioner for Refugees(17) Ad Hoc Commission on Prisoners of War(18) United Nations Advisory Council for the Trust

Territory of Somaliland under Italian Administration(19) Committee on South West Africa(20) Committee on Information from Non-Self-

Governing Territories(21) Sub-Committee on the Revision of the Ques-

tionnaire (relating to Trust Territories)(22) Board of Auditors(23) United Nations Administrative Tribunal(24) United Nations Staff Pension Committee(25) Investments Committee(26) International Law Commission

During the period under review, the follow-ing subsidiary bodies were discontinued, eitherthrough the completion of their mandate, or byspecific action of the General Assembly:

(1) Special Committee on Admission of New Mem-bers

(2) Negotiating Committee for Extra-BudgetaryFunds5

(3) Committee of Experts on Commodity Trade andEconomic Development

(4) Ad Hoc Committee on South West Africa(5) Ad Hoc Committee on Factors (Non-Self-Gov-

erning Territories)(6) Committee on Special Administrative Questions(7) 1953 Committee on International Criminal

Jurisdiction(8) Special Committee on the Question of Defining

Aggression(9) Special Committee on Measures to Limit the

Duration of Regular Sessions of the General Assembly

The following is a summary of the functionsof the new bodies established during the periodunder review, together with a summary of changesin the functions of existing bodies:

(1) Collective Measures Committee

In accordance with Assembly resolution 703 (VII) of17 March 1953, the Collective Measures Committee,which has already submitted two reports to the GeneralAssembly and the Security Council, was called uponto continue its work, to pursue such studies as it maydeem desirable to strengthen the capability of theUnited Nations to maintain peace, taking into accountthe resolutions establishing and continuing it (337 A(V), 503(VI) and 703(VII)), and to continue theexamination of information received from States pur-suant to these resolutions. The Committee was asked,in the light of its studies, to suggest to the SecurityCouncil and to the General Assembly such specificways and means as it may deem appropriate to en-courage further preparatory action by States. The Com-mittee was directed to report to the Security Counciland to the General Assembly not later than the Assem-bly's ninth session.

(2) Committee of Good Offices on the Admissionof New Members

This Committee was established by the GeneralAssembly by resolution 718(VIII) of 23 October 1953to consult with members of the Security Council withthe object of exploring the possibilities of reaching anunderstanding which would facilitate the admission ofnew Members in accordance with Article 4 of theCharter. The Committee was requested to report to theAssembly during the eighth or, at the latest, at theninth session.

(3) Negotiating Committee for Extra-Budgetaryfunds

The terms of reference of this Committee, estab-lished by General Assembly resolution 759(VIII) of5 October 1953, were the same as those of the Nego-tiating Committee which had been established by theGeneral Assembly at its seventh session.

(4) United Nations Good Offices Commission(on the question of the treatment of

people of Indian origin in theUnion of South Africa)

The Commission was established by the GeneralAssembly by resolution 615(VII) of 5 December 1952,and continued by resolution 719(VIII) of 11 Novem-ber 1953, to arrange and assist in negotiations betweenthe Government of the Union of South Africa andthe Governments of India and Pakistan for a satisfactorysolution of the question of the treatment of people ofIndian origin in the Union of South Africa.

In resolution 719(VIII), the Assembly requested theCommission to report to its ninth session on the extentof progress achieved, together with its own views onthe problem, and any proposals which it thought mightlead to a peaceful settlement of the problem.

4 See under The Security Council.

5 For new Negotiating Committee, established at the

eighth session, see below.

5

GENERAL ASSEMBLY


(5) United Nations Commission on the RacialSituation in the Union of South Africa

The Commission was established by General Assem-bly resolution 616 A (VII) of 5 December 1952, andcontinued by resolution 721 (VIII) of 8 December1953, to study the development of the racial situationin the Union of South Africa. The Commission wasrequested in resolution 721(VIII) to continue thisstudy with reference to the various implications of thesituation on the populations affected and in relationto the provisions of the Charter, in particular Article14 (which empowers the Assembly to recommendmeasures for the peaceful settlement of disputes deemedlikely to impair the general welfare or friendly rela-tions among nations). It was asked to suggest measureswhich would help to alleviate the situation and promotea peaceful settlement and to report to the GeneralAssembly at its ninth session.

(6) Committee on South West Africa

By General Assembly resolution 749 A (VIII) of28 November 1953, the Committee was establisheduntil such time as agreement on this question is reachedbetween the United Nations and the Union of SouthAfrica. It was requested to:

(a) examine, within the scope of the Questionnaireadopted by the Permanent Mandates Commission ofthe League of Nations in 1926, available informationand documents in respect of the Territory of SouthWest Africa;

(b) examine, as far as possible in accordance withthe procedure of the former Mandates System, reportsand petitions submitted to the Committee or the Sec-retary-General;

(c) report to the Assembly concerning conditionsin the Territory, taking into account, as far as possible,the scope of reports of the League of Nations Perma-nent Mandates Commission; and

(d) prepare for the Assembly's consideration a pro-cedure for the examination of reports and petitionsconforming, as far as possible, to the procedure fol-lowed by the relevant League of Nations organs.

The Committee was authorized to continue negotia-tions with the Union of South Africa in order toimplement fully the advisory opinion of the Inter-national Court of Justice regarding South West Africa.It was requested to report to the regular sessions ofthe Assembly.

(7) Sub-Committee on the Revision of theQuestionnaire (relating to Trust Territories)

The Sub-Committee was established by the GeneralAssembly by resolution 751(VIII) of 9 December 1953to examine the Questionnaire formulated by the Trustee-ship Council, to study such changes as might benecessary to adapt it to the special conditions of eachTerritory and to submit its conclusions to the Trustee-ship Council.

4. Sessions and Officers

a. SEVENTH SESSIONThe seventh regular session of the General

Assembly (which opened at United Nations

Headquarters on 14 October 1952 and adjournedon 22 December of that year) was resumed on24 February 1953, recessed on 23 April, resumedon 17 August and was formally brought to aclose on 28 August.6 The only Main Committeeswhich met during this period were the First Com-mittee and the Fifth Committee.

b. EIGHTH SESSIONThe eighth regular session opened at United

Nations Headquarters on 15 September andrecessed on 9 December. The President was re-quested to reconvene the session, with the con-currence of the majority of Members, if, in heropinion, developments in Korea warranted suchreconvening or it was requested by one or moreMember States by reason of developments inrespect of the Korean question.

The following were the officers of the Assem-bly during this session:President: Mrs. Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit (India)

6 For officers of the Assembly during the seventhsession, see Y.U.N., 1952, pp. 51, 52.

7 The Chairmen of the respective Delegations fillthese posts.

7

USSRUnited KingdomUnited States

Vice-Presidents:7

ChinaFranceIsraelMexico

FIRST COMMITTEE

Chairman: Fernand van Langenhove (Belgium)Vice-Chairman: Francisco Urrutia (Colombia)Rapporteur: Thor Thors (Iceland)

AD HOC POLITICAL COMMITTEE

Chairman: Miguel Rafael Urquía (El Salvador)Vice-Chairman: Salvador P. Lopez (Philippines)Rapporteur: William D. Forsyth (Australia)

SECOND COMMITTEE

Chairman: Leo Mates (Yugoslavia)Vice-Chairman: Ernest G. Chauvet (Haiti)Rapporteur: Omar Haliq (Saudi Arabia)

THIRD COMMITTEE

Chairman: G. F. Davidson (Canada)Vice-Chairman: Miss Minerva Bernardino (Domin-

ican Republic)Rapporteur: Abdul Rahman Pazhwak (Afghanistan)

FOURTH COMMITTEE

Chairman: Santiago Pérez Pérez (Venezuela)Vice-Chairman: Oldrich Kaisr (Czechoslovakia)Rapporteur: Najmuddine Rifai (Syria)

8 Yearbook of the United Nations

FIFTH COMMITTEE

Chairman: Awni Khalidy (Iraq)Vice-Chairman: W. H. J. van Asch van Wijck

(Netherlands)Rapporteur: Hakim Mohammed Ahson (Pakistan)

SIXTH COMMITTEE

Chairman: Juliusz Katz-Suchy (Poland)Vice-Chairman: Abdul Hakim Tabibi (Afghanistan)Rapporteur: Jean Spiropoulos (Greece)

The General Committee, in accordance with the rulesof procedure, consisted of the President of the GeneralAssembly, as Chairman, the Vice-Presidents of theGeneral Assembly and the Chairmen of the six MainCommittees. The Chairman of the Ad Hoc PoliticalCommittee was, by General Assembly resolution 801(VIII), accorded for the eighth session full rights ofmembership in the General Committee, including theright to vote.

The Credentials Committee was composed of: NewZealand, Cuba, Iceland, Indonesia, Peru, Syria, USSR,United Kingdom and United States. The representativeof New Zealand was Chairman.

5. Meetings of Subsidiary Bodies

In addition to meetings of sessional committees,the subsidiary bodies of the General Assemblyheld the following meetings8 during the year:

Balkan Sub-Commission: 12 May, 23 June and 21December, at Headquarters.

Special Committee on Admission of New Members:eleven meetings from 31 March to 15 June, atHeadquarters.

Committee of Good Offices on the Admission ofNew Members: 10 December, at Headquarters.

United Nations Commission for the Unification andRehabilitation of Korea: 76 meetings at Pusan, Korea,from 28 August 1952 (when it submitted its reportto the Assembly's seventh session) to 14 August 1953(when it submitted its report to the Assembly's eighthsession).

United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency: incontinuous operation during 1953 on the basis ofagreements with the Unified Command.

United Nations Conciliation Commission for Pales-tine: eighteen meetings from 28 January to 17 Decem-ber, at Headquarters.

United Nations Relief and Works Agency forPalestine Refugees in the Near East: in continuousoperation during 1953.

Negotiating Committees for Extra-Budgetary funds:19 meetings from 20 January to 10 December, atHeadquarters.9

United Nations Good Offices Commission (on thequestion of the treatment of people of Indian originin the Union of South Africa): 20 March to 14 Sep-tember, at Headquarters.

United Nations Commission on the Racial Situationin the Union of South Africa: 13 May to 3 October,at Geneva.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner forRefugees: in continuous operation during 1953.

Ad Hoc Commission on Prisoners of War: fourthsession—24 August to 11 September, at Geneva.

Committee of Experts on Commodity Trade andEconomic Development: 15 September to 9 November,at Headquarters.

United Nations Advisory Council for the TrustTerritory of Somaliland under Italian Administration:21 meetings, the majority at the Council's headquartersat Mogadiscio.

Ad Hoc Committee on South West Africa: sixmeetings from 26 January to 6 November, at Head-quarters.

Committee on Information from Non-Self-GoverningTerritories: fourth session—18 August to 8 September,at Headquarters.

Ad Hoc Committee on factors (Non-Self-GoverningTerritories): eight meetings from 21 to 30 July, atHeadquarters.

Committee on Special Administrative Questions: 4and 8 May and 3 August, at Headquarters.

United Nations Administrative Tribunal: 17 to 23July, at Headquarters; 4 to 21 August, at Geneva;12 and 13 October, at London; 25 November to 8December, at Headquarters.

United Nations Staff Pension Committee: fourthsession—15 to 23 April, at Rome.

International Law Commission: fifth session—1 Juneto 14 August, at Geneva.

1953 Committee on International Criminal Jurisdic-tion: 23 meetings from 27 July to 20 August, atHeadquarters.

Special Committee on the Question of DefiningAggression: 24 August to 21 September, at Head-quarters.

Special Committee on Measures to Limit the Durationof Regular Sessions of the General Assembly: thirteenmeetings from 25 May to 22 June, at Headquarters.

8

sidiary bodies are given. In certain cases no dates aregiven because the subsidiary body concerned either wasin continuous session, met sporadically or held no meet-ing during the year.

9 Including meetings of the Negotiating Committeesestablished at both the seventh and eighth sessions.

Where possible, actual dates of meetings of sub-


6. Matters on the Agenda of the General Assembly

a. MATTERS CONSIDERED DURING THE SEVENTH REGULAR SESSIONFROM 24 FEBRUARY TO 23 APRIL

Agenda Item10

3. Appointment of a Credentials Committee

16. Korea:(a) Reports of the United Nations Commission

for the Unification and Rehabilitation ofKorea

(b) Reports of the United Nations Agent Generalfor Korean Reconstruction

17. Regulation, limitation and balanced reduction ofall armed forces and all armaments: report of theDisarmament Commission

18. Methods which might be used to maintain andstrengthen international peace and security in ac-cordance with the Purposes and Principles of theCharter: report of the Collective Measures Com-mittee

66. The question of race conflict in South Africaresulting from the policies of apartheid of theGovernment of the Union of South Africa

70. Complaint of non-compliance of States still detain-ing members of the Greek armed forces with theprovisions of resolution 382 A (V), adopted bythe General Assembly on 1 December 1950,recommending "the repatriation of all those amongthem who express the wish to be repatriated"

71. Interference of the United States of America inthe internal affairs of other States as manifestedby the organization on the part of the Governmentof the United States of America of subversive andespionage activities against the Union of SovietSocialist Republics, the People's Republic of China,the Czechoslovak Republic and other People'sDemocracies

72. Measures to avert the threat of a new world war

and measures to strengthen peace and friendshipamong the nations

73. Question of impartial investigation of charges ofuse by United Nations Forces of bacteriologicalwarfare

74. Appointment of the Secretary-General of theUnited Nations

75. Report of the Secretary-General on personnelpolicy

77. Complaint by the Union of Burma regardingaggression against it by the Government of theRepublic of China

Consideration and Action Taken(Consideration of Committee's third report) Plenary

meetings 425, 430. Resolution 700(VII)

General Committee meeting 86. First Committee meet-ings 557-569. Plenary meetings 414, 420, 423.(See below Resolution 705(VII))

First Committee meetings 557-569. Plenary meeting414. Resolution 701 (VII)

First Committee meetings 577-581. Plenary meeting424. Resolution 704(VII)

First Committee meetings 573-576. Plenary meeting415. Resolution 703(VII)

Plenary meeting 417. (Notification by President ofmodification in membership of the Commission estab-lished in accordance with resolution 616(VII))

First Committee meetings 557, 570-572. Plenary meet-ings 415, 428. Resolution 702(VII)

First Committee meetings 582-589. Plenary meeting:425. (No resolution was adopted)

First Committee meetings 594-604. Plenary meeting427. Resolution 705(VII)11

First Committee meetings 590-593. Fifth Committeemeeting 376. Plenary meetings 427, 428. Resolution706(VII)

Plenary meeting 423. Appointment by secret ballotand Resolution 709(VII)

Plenary meetings 413, 416-422. Resolution 708(VII)

General Committee meeting 86. First Committee meet-ings 605-612. Plenary meetings 420, 428. Resolution707(VII)

b. MATTERS CONSIDERED DURING THE SEVENTH REGULAR SESSIONFROM 17 TO 28 AUGUST

13

3. Appointment of a Credentials Committee

16. The Korean Question

10 Unless otherwise indicated these items formed part of the agenda of the seventh regular session at the timeof its recess on 21 December 1952. For consideration of the items before the recess in 1952, see Y.U.N., 1952,pp. 54-59.

11

13

12 Included in the agenda at the 420th plenary meeting on 31 March.

1

Reconvened in accordance with resolution 705(VII) to resume consideration of the Korean question. At thefinal meeting on 28 August there was a brief discussion regarding the opening date of the eighth regular session.

9

(Consideration of Committee's fourth report) Plenarymeeting 430. Resolution 710(VII)

First Committee meetings 613-625. Plenary meetings430, 431. Resolutions 711, 712(VII)

See also under item 16.

12

c. MATTERS CONSIDERED DURING THE EIGHTH REGULAR SESSION

Agenda Item1. Opening of the session by the Chairman of the

delegation of Canada2. Minute of silent prayer or meditation3. Appointment of a Credentials Committee

4. Election of the President5. Constitution of the Main Committees and election

of officers

6. Election of Vice-Presidents7. Notification by the Secretary-General under Article

12, paragraph 2, of the Charter8. Adoption of the agenda

9. Opening of the general debate10. Report of the Secretary-General on the work of

the Organization11. Report of the Security Council12. Report of the Economic and Social Council

13. Report of the Trusteeship Council

14. Election of three non-permanent members of theSecurity Council

15. Election of six members of the Economic andSocial Council

16. Election of two members of the TrusteeshipCouncil

17. Election of the members of the International LawCommission

18. The Korean question:(a) Report of the United Nations Commission

for the Unification and Rehabilitation ofKorea

(b) Report of the United Nations Agent Generalfor Korean Reconstruction

19. Report of the Director of the United NationsRelief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugeesin the Near East

20. Treatment of people of Indian origin in the Unionof South Africa: report of the United NationsGood Offices Commission

21. The question of race conflict in South Africa re-sulting from the policies of apartheid of theGovernment of the Union of South Africa: reportof the Commission appointed to study the racialsituation in the Union of South Africa

22. Admission of new Members: report of the SpecialCommittee

23. Regulation, limitation and balanced reduction ofall armed forces and all armaments: report ofthe Disarmament Commission

24. Question of impartial investigation of charges ofuse by United Nations forces of bacterial warfare

Consideration and Action Taken

Plenary meeting 432

Plenary meeting 432Plenary meetings 432, 449, 468. Resolutions 713, 800

(VIII)Plenary meeting 432First Committee meetings 626, 627. Ad Hoc Political

Committee meetings 1, 2. Second Committee meet-ings 247, 248. Third Committee meetings 483, 484.Fourth Committee meetings 315, 316. Fifth Com-mittee meetings 377, 378. Sixth Committee meet-ings 358, 359. Plenary meeting 433. Resolution

Plenary meeting 433Plenary meeting 435

General Committee meetings 87-91. Plenary meetings435, 440, 457, 469

Plenary meetings 434, 436-449

Plenary meeting 455. Resolution 803(VIII)Second Committee meetings 279-283, 285. Third Com-

mittee meetings 502-529. Fifth Committee meeting403. Plenary meetings 460, 468, 471. Resolutions733-739(VIII)

Fourth Committee meetings 377-394. Plenary meeting471. Resolutions 751-758(VIII)

Plenary meeting 450

Plenary meetings 450, 451

Plenary meeting 451


First Committee meetings 680-682. Plenary meeting470. Resolution 716(VIII)

Second Committee meetings 283, 284. Plenary meeting468. Resolution 725(VIII)

Ad Hoc Political Committee meetings 23-30. Plenarymeeting 458. Resolution 720(VIII)

General Committee meeting 87. Ad Hoc Political Com-mittee meetings 13-22. Fifth Committee meeting403. Plenary meetings 435, 457. Resolution 719(VIII)

General Committee meeting 87. Ad Hoc Political Com-mittee meetings 31-43. Plenary meetings 435, 469.Resolution 721(VIII)

Ad Hoc Political Committee meetings 3-12. Plenarymeeting 453. Resolution 718(VIII)




Structure and Organization of the United Nations 11

Agenda Item

25. Complaint by the Union of Burma regardingaggression against it by the Government of theRepublic of China: report of the Government ofthe Union of Burma

26. Economic Development of under-developed coun-tries:(a) Question of establishing a special fund for

grants-in-aid and for low-interest long-termloans: report of the Economic and SocialCouncil

(b) Status of the proposal for the establishmentof an international finance corporation: reportof the Economic and Social Council

27. Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance forthe economic development of under-developed coun-tries: report of the Economic and Social Council

28. Work of the Office of the United Nations HighCommissioner for Refugees:(a) Report of the United Nations High Com-

missioner for Refugees(b) International action on behalf of refugees:

memorandum by the Secretary-General(c) Question of the continuation of the Office

of the United Nations High Commissionerfor Refugees

29. Continuation on a permanent basis of the UnitedNations International Children's Emergency Fund

30. Transfer to the United Nations of functions andpowers exercised by the League of Nations underthe Slavery Convention of 25 September 1926:draft protocol prepared by the Secretary-General

31. The Ewe and Togoland unification problem:special report of the Trusteeship Council

32. Information from Non-Self-Governing Territoriestransmitted under Article 73e of the Charter:reports of the Secretary-General and of the Com-mittee on Information from Non-Self-GoverningTerritories:(a) Information on educational conditions(b) Information on other conditions(c) Transmission of information(d) Participation of Non-Self-Governing Terri-

tories in the work of the Committee onInformation from Non-Self-Governing Ter-ritories: recommendations of the Committee

33. Factors which should be taken into account indeciding whether a territory is or is not a territorywhose people have not yet attained a full measureof self-government: report of the Ad Hoc Com-mittee on Factors (Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories)

34. Cessation of the transmission of information underArticle 73e of the Charter: reports of the AdHoc Committee on Factors (Non-Self-GoverningTerritories) and of the Committee on Informationfrom Non-Self-Governing Territories:(a) Netherlands Antilles and Surinam

(b) Puerto Rico

35. Election of two members of the Committee onInformation from Non-Self-Governing Territories

36. Question of South West Africa: report of the AdHoc Committee on South West Africa


First Committee meetings 653-657, 677-679. Plenarymeeting 470. Resolution 717(VIII)

Second Committee meetings 257-282, 285. Plenarymeeting 468. Resolution 724(VIII)

Fifth Committee meeting 419


Third Committee meetings 497-502. Plenary meetings453, 454. Resolutions 727, 728(VIII)

Plenary meetings 451, 452. Resolution 802(VIII)

Sixth Committee meetings 369, 370. Plenary meeting453. Resolution 794(VIII)

Fourth Committee meetings 365-377, 392. Plenarymeeting 469. Resolution 750(VIII)

Fourth Committee meetings 324, 331-343, 356, 361,395. Plenary meeting 459. Resolutions 743-746(VIII)

Fourth Committee meetings 317, 322-331, 356, 361.Plenary meeting 459. Resolution 742(VIII)

Fourth Committee meetings 343-347, 356, 361. Plenarymeeting 459. Resolution 747(VIII)

Fourth Committee meetings 348-356, 361. Plenarymeeting 459. Resolution 748(VIII)

Fourth Committee meeting 395. Plenary meeting 470

Fourth Committee meetings 357-364, 377, 382. Plenarymeetings 460, 467. Resolution 749(VIII)


Agenda Item37. Financial reports and accounts, and reports of the

Board of Auditors:(a) United Nations, for the financial year ended

31 December 1952(b) United Nations International Children's Emer-

gency Fund, for the financial year ended 31December 1952

(c) United Nations Relief and Works Agency forPalestine Refugees in the Near East, for thefinancial year ended 30 June 1953

(d) United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agen-cy, for the financial year ended 30 June 1953

38. Supplementary estimates for the financial year 1953

39. Budget estimates for the financial year 1954

40. Appointments to fill vacancies in the membershipof subsidiary bodies of the General Assembly:(a) Advisory Committee on Administrative and

Budgetary Questions(b) Committee on Contributions

(c) Board of Auditors

(d) Investments Committee: confirmation of theappointment made by the Secretary-General

(e) United Nations Administrative Tribunal

(f) United Nations Staff Pension Committee

41. Headquarters of the United Nations: report of theSecretary-General

42. Scale of assessment for the apportionment of theexpenses of the United Nations: report of theCommittee on Contributions

43. Review of audit procedures of the United Nationsand the specialized agencies: reports of the Sec-retary-General and of the Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions

44. Report of the Negotiating Committee for Extra-Budgetary Funds

45. Administrative and budgetary co-ordination be-tween the United Nations and the specializedagencies: reports of the Secretary-General and ofthe Advisory Committee on Administrative andBudgetary Questions

46. Audit reports relating to expenditure by specializedagencies of technical assistance funds allocatedfrom the Special Account

47. United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund:(a) Annual report of the United Nations Joint

Staff Pension Board for the year ended 31December 1952

(b) Acceptance by the specialized agencies of thejurisdiction of the United Nations Admin-istrative Tribunal in matters involving appli-cations alleging non-observance of PensionFund regulations: report of the Secretary-General

(c) Amendments to the regulations for the UnitedNations Joint Staff Pension Fund: report ofthe United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board


Fifth Committee meetings 378, 380. Plenary meeting451. Resolution 760(VIII)




Fifth Committee meetings 420-423, 425-427, 429.Plenary meeting 471. Resolution 785(VIII)

Fifth Committee meetings 379-391, 396-401, 403-406, 411, 424, 426. Plenary meeting 471. Resolu-tions 786-790(VIII)



Fifth Committee meeting 405. Plenary meeting 471.Resolution 776(VIII)

Fifth Committee meeting 403. Plenary meeting 471.Resolution 777(VIII)


(At the 471st plenary meeting the President of theGeneral Assembly pointed out that, inasmuch as novacancy had occurred in this Committee, no actionwas required by the Assembly)

Fifth Committee meetings 405, 426, 428. Plenarymeeting 471. Resolution 780(VIII)

Fifth Committee meetings 393-396, 410. Plenary meet-ing 458. Resolution 765(VIII)







Fifth Committee meetings 380, 402, 410. Plenarymeeting 458. Resolutions 772, 773(VIII)


Agenda Item

48. Organization of the Secretariat: reports of theSecretary-General and of the Advisory Committeeon Administrative and Budgetary Questions

49. Report of the Committee on Special AdministrativeQuestions

30. Staff Regulations of the United Nations. Questionof a probationary period: reports of the Secretary-General and of the Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions

51. Personnel policy: reports of the Secretary-Generaland of the Advisory Committee on Administrativeand Budgetary Questions

52. Question of a change in the opening date ofregular sessions of the General Assembly: reportof the Secretary-General

53. Report of the International Law Commission onthe work of its fifth session

54. Measures to limit the duration of regular sessionsof the General Assembly: report of the SpecialCommittee

55. Question of the continuation of the functions ofthe United Nations Tribunal in Libya

56. The Tunisian question

57. The question of Morocco

58. Publication of documents concerning the draftingand application of the Charter14

59. Election of a member of the International Courtof Justice to fill the vacancy caused by the resigna-tion of Judge Sergei Aleksandrovich Golunsky

60. Question of assistance to Libya

61. Technical assistance in public administration

62. Technical assistance in promoting and safeguardingthe rights of women

63. Technical assistance in the fields of prevention ofdiscrimination and protection of minorities

64. Invitation to non-member States to become Partiesto the Convention on the Political Rights ofWomen

65. Development of political rights of women in ter-ritories where these rights are not fully enjoyed

66. Programme of concerted practical action in thesocial field of the United Nations and thespecialized agencies

67. Appeal to States to accelerate their ratifications of,or accessions to, the Convention on the Preventionand Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, andmeasures designed to ensure the widest possiblediffusion of the nature, contents and purposes ofthe Convention

68. Narcotic drugs:(a) Assumption by organs of the United Nations

of functions and responsibilities assigned tothem under the terms of the Protocol forLimiting and Regulating the Cultivation of


Fifth Committee meetings 427-429. Plenary meeting471. Resolution 784(VIII)



Fifth Committee meetings 406-422, 426. Plenary meet-ing 471, Resolution 782(VIII)


Sixth Committee meetings 381-389, 392-394. Plenarymeeting 468. Resolutions 797-799(VIII)

Sixth Committee meetings 360-366. Plenary meeting453. Resolution 791(VIII)

Sixth Committee meetings 367, 368. Plenary meeting453. Resolution 792(VIII)

First Committee meetings 641-647. Plenary meetings455-457

First Committee meetings 629-640. Plenary meeting455

Fifth Committee meeting 412. Sixth Committee meet-ings 371-380. Plenary meeting 458. Resolution796(VIII)

Plenary meeting 458

Second Committee meetings 285-287. Plenary meeting469. Resolution 726(VIII)


Third Committee meetings 485, 486. Fifth Committeemeeting 392. Plenary meeting 453. Resolution729(VIII)

Third Committee meetings 487-489. Fifth Committeemeeting 392. Plenary meeting 453. Resolution730(VIII)

Sixth Committee meeting 367. Plenary meeting 453-Resolution 793(VIII)

Third Committee meetings 490-492. Plenary meeting454. Resolution 731 (VIII)

Third Committee meetings 492-496. Plenary meeting454. Resolution 732(VIII)

Sixth Committee meeting 368. Plenary meeting 455.Resolution 795(VIII)

Fifth Committee meetings 403, 412. Plenary meeting458. Resolutions 774, 775(VIII)

Agenda items 58, 70 and 72 were considered simultaneously.14


Agenda Item

the Poppy Plant, the Production of, Inter-national and Wholesale Trade in, and Useof Opium, 1953, and of the financial burdensresulting therefrom

(b) Question of the remuneration of members ofthe Permanent Central Opium Board and theDrug Supervisory Body

69. Evidence of existence of forced labour

70. Preparatory work with regard to the possibleholding of a General Conference of the Membersof the United Nations in accordance with Article109 of the Charter14

71. Measures for the peaceful solution of the problemof prisoners of war

72. Amendment of the Charter: election of a technicalcommittee to study and report on the amendmentof the Charter on the basis of proposals to besubmitted by Member States14

Additional Items:

73. Measures to avert the threat of a new world warand to reduce tension in international relations

74. Question of atrocities committed by the NorthKorean and Chinese Communist forces againstUnited Nations prisoners of war in Korea

75. Application of Japan to become a party to theStatute of the International Court of Justice

76. Application of San Marino to become a party tothe Statute of the International Court of Justice


Third Committee meetings 529-536. Plenary meeting468. Resolution 740(VIII)

General Committee meeting 87. Fifth Committee meet-ing 412. Sixth Committee meetings 371-380. Plenarymeetings 435, 458. Resolution 796(VIII)

General Committee meeting 87. Third Committee meet-ings 537-542. Plenary meetings 435, 468. Resolu-tion 741(VIII)

General Committee meeting 87. Fifth Committee meet-ing 412. Sixth Committee meetings 371-380. Plenarymeetings 435, 458. Resolution 796(VIII)

General Committee meeting 89. First Committee meet-ings 670-677. Plenary meetings 440, 461

General Committee meeting 90. Plenary meetings 457,462-467. Resolution 804(VIII)

General Committee meeting 91. Plenary meetings 469,471. Resolution 805(VIII)

General Committee meeting 91. Plenary meetings 469,471. Resolution 806(VIII)

The following item was also proposed for inclusion in the agenda of the eighth regular session:

Note by the Secretary-General concerning theimplementation of General Assembly resolution711 C (VII) adopted on 28 August 1953: itemproposed by the USSR (A/2484)

At its 88th meeting the General Committee decidedto recommend against the inclusion of this item inthe agenda; the Assembly adopted the Committee'srecommendation at its 440th plenary meeting by 40votes to 8, with 10 abstentions

7. Participants in the General Debate at the Assembly's Eighth Session

CountryArgentinaAustraliaBelgiumBrazilBurmaByelorussian SSRCanadaChileChina

Meeting447436445446446446441436440

Date28 Sept.18 Sept.25 Sept.25 Sept.25 Sept.25 Sept.23 Sept.18 Sept,22 Sept.

CountryColombiaCosta RicaCubaCzechoslovakiaDominican RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEthiopiaFranceGreeceGuatemalaIcelandIndiaIndonesiaIraqIsraelLebanonLiberiaMexico

Meeting446446441444444442446444442445439442444448437448449447438447

Date25 Sept.25 Sept.23 Sept.24 Sept.24 Sept.23 Sept.25 Sept.24 Sept.23 Sept.25 Sept.21 Sept.23 Sept.24 Sept.28 Sept.18 Sept.28 Sept.29 Sept.28 Sept.21 Sept.28 Sept.

14

Agenda items 58, 70 and 72 were considered simultaneously.

Representatives of 44 Member States took partin the general debate at the opening of theGeneral Assembly's eighth session. The debatebegan at the 434th plenary meeting on 17 Sep-tember and was concluded at the 449th plenarymeeting on 29 September.

The following were the Member States takingpart, with the meetings at which they spoke:

14


CountryNetherlandsNew ZealandPakistanPeruPhilippinesPolandSwedenSyriaUkrainian SSRUnion of South AfricaUSSRUnited KingdomUnited StatesVenezuelaYugoslavia

Date24 Sept.18 Sept.18 Sept.21 Sept.28 Sept.23 Sept.24 Sept.25 Sept.23 Sept.23 Sept.21 Sept.24 Sept.17 Sept.24 Sept.24 Sept.

At the 451st plenary meeting on 5 October,the General Assembly was addressed by theDirectors-General of the World Health Organiza-tion and the United Nations Educational, Scien-tific and Cultural Organization.

The General Assembly was also addressed bythe following distinguished guests:

Colonel Jose Antonio Remón Cantera, Presi-dent of the Republic of Panama, at the 450thplenary meeting on 5 October

His Majesty King Paul of the Hellenes, at the456th plenary meeting on 3 November

Dwight D. Eisenhower, President of theUnited States, at the 470th plenary meeting on8 December.

8. Organizational Questions

a. MEASURES TO LIMIT THE DURATIONOF GENERAL ASSEMBLY SESSIONS

At its seventh session, by resolution 689 (VII)of 21 December 1952, the General Assemblyestablished a special committee to consider thequestion of measures to limit the duration ofits regular sessions. The Committee was to takeinto account the Secretary-General's memoran-dum (A/2206)15 on the subject and any otherrelevant information communicated by MemberStates and to report to the Assembly's eighthsession.

The Special Committee16 met at Headquartersfrom 25 May to 22 June 1953. In its report(A/2402), dated 26 June 1953, the Committeestated that "the best interest of the GeneralAssembly, not the length of the session as such,must remain the overriding consideration inany study of measures designed to limit theduration of the regular sessions". Difficultiesrelated to the duration of the regular sessions,the Committee considered, should not be resolvedat the expense, either of the effectiveness of the

General Assembly, or of the right of any rep-resentative freely to express the attitude of hisgovernment on problems before the Assembly.The Special Committee felt, however, that theAssembly, through the co-operation of its Mem-bers, could strengthen or initiate certain prac-tices so as to expedite and simplify the conductof business.

The report reviewed Assembly practice withregard to such matters as: the agenda; reportsof Councils; debate in Committees; limitationof debate; points of order; consideration of itemsin plenary meetings without reference to Com-mittees; and the schedule of meetings. The Com-mittee recommended that an outline of these prac-tices should be included in a consolidated annexto the rules of procedure of the General Assembly.It also made two specific recommendations:

(1) that rule 38 of the Assembly's rules of pro-cedure (dealing with the composition of the GeneralCommittee) should be amended to provide that theChairman of the Ad Hoc Political Committee, whenestablished, would participate with vote in the GeneralCommittee; and

(2) that rule 73(113) of the rules of procedure(dealing with the procedure to limit the time of aspeaker and the number of times each representativecan speak on a question) be amended to provide that,in addition to the proposer of a motion to that effect,two representatives might speak in favour of the motionand two against, after which the motion would im-mediately be put to the vote.

At the Assembly's eighth session, the questionwas considered by the Sixth Committee at its360th to 366th meetings from 29 September to7 October 1953.

The Committee had before it a Norwegiandraft resolution (A/C.6/L.292/Rev.1) which inits operative part would have the Assembly:

(1) adopt the amendments proposed by the SpecialCommittee to rules 38 and 73(113) of the rules ofprocedure; (2) annex to the rules of procedure theoutline of practices as recommended by the SpecialCommittee; and (3) request the Secretary-General toconsider the question of consolidating this annex andthe current annexes and to publish a new edition ofthe rules of procedure containing the consolidatedannex.

The following amendments were submitted tothis draft resolution:

(1) a joint amendment by Brazil and France (A/-C.6/L.293) which, in effect, would delete the pro-visions regarding the annex.

(2) a United Kingdom amendment (A/C.6/L.295)which would add to the Norwegian proposal provisionsfor: (a) amending rule 39 of the Assembly's rules ofprocedure to provide for the designation of the Vice-Chairman of the Ad Hoc Political Committee as a

See Y.U.N., 1952, pp. 68-69.16 For members of the Committee, see Appendix I.

Meeting443436437439448441443445442442438443434444443

15


substitute for its Chairman in the latter's absence; and(b) providing that each Main Committee, in orderingits priorities, would take into account the closing datefor the session fixed by the Assembly.

An amendment to the joint French-Brazilian amend-ment was proposed by Ecuador and Guatemala (A/-C.6/L.296). It would have the effect of deleting allthe recommendations of the Norwegian draft resolutionexcept that relating to the amendment of rule 38 ofthe Assembly's rules of procedure.

During the discussion in the Committee, therepresentatives of Afghanistan, Argentina, theByelorussian SSR, Colombia, Czechoslovakia,Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, India,Indonesia, Iraq, Lebanon, Liberia, Mexico, Pakistan,Peru, Poland, Syria, the Ukrainian SSR, the USSRand Uruguay opposed the amendment to rule73(113) proposed by the Special Committeeand in the Norwegian draft resolution.

These representatives considered that the pro-posed amendment would restrict the right ofsovereign States to express freely the views oftheir governments. They contended that theexisting rules of procedure already provided, underrules 75(115) and 76(116), relating to adjourn-ment and closure of debates, means for limitingthe time of a speaker and the number of timesa representative could speak on a question. Theamendment suggested would, they held, intensifythat restriction. Moreover, it was considered, theproposed measure could not in any way limit theduration of the regular sessions of the GeneralAssembly because the length of the sessions couldnot be reduced by technical devices but dependedon the nature of the problems being discussedat a particular session and by the prevailingpolitical climate.

In this connexion, the representative of Syriastated that, for example, the repeated discussionof Korean items by the First Committee couldnot be stopped by such considerations as the needto limit the duration of Assembly sessions. Therepresentative of Uruguay said that the adoptionof the amendment would also involve practicaldifficulties. For example, what test would theChairman apply if several representatives raisedtheir hands to speak on a motion? He would inmost instances have to rely on an arbitrary decisionin giving the floor to a speaker in such a case, therepresentative of Uruguay said.

These representatives also opposed the pro-vision in the Norwegian draft resolution regard-ing the annex, stating that such an annex wouldhave no legal validity. The representative of theUSSR considered that the proposed annex wouldadd to prolonged procedural discussions, as it wasbound to give rise to varying interpretations ofthe rules.

The representatives of India, Indonesia, Iraq,Pakistan, Peru, Syria and Uruguay also opposedthe provision regarding the amendment of rule38 to enable the Chairman of the Ad HocPolitical Committee to participate in the Gen-eral Committee. The recommendation, it wasstated, was entirely unrelated to the question oflimiting the duration of sessions and was out-side the terms of reference of the Special Com-mittee. It was a matter, the representatives ofSyria and Uruguay, in particular, argued, for aseparate decision by the General Assembly andshould not be considered in connexion with theSpecial Committee's report.

The representatives of Australia, Belgium,Burma, Chile, China, Denmark, France, Greece,the Netherlands, Norway, the Philippines, Sweden,the Union of South Africa, the United Kingdomand the United States supported the two amend-ments recommended by the Special Committeeto rules 38 and 73(113) of the Assembly's rulesof procedure. They also expressed the view thatthe excessively long sessions of the General Assem-bly entailed expense for all States and led to thedeterioration of the quality of delegations, sinceno government could spare its top-ranking states-men and diplomats for long periods. The pro-posed amendment to rule 38, they said, wasdesigned only to confirm an existing practice.

As regards rule 73(113) it was argued, inparticular by the representatives of China andGreece, that the proposed amendment would inno way affect discussions of agenda items butwould restrict prolonged procedural discussionson motions to limit the time of a speaker. It didnot limit the rights of representatives but, saidthe representative of China, it sought to "limitthe time of speakers who wanted to limit thetime of other speakers". These representativesfelt that the adoption of the amendment wouldaid efficiency and orderliness in the conduct ofbusiness.

Some of these representatives, however, wereopposed to the provisions regarding the annex.The representatives of France and Greece, forexample, objected that the proposed annex wasnot a codified body of rules but only a numberof suggestions which were not of a bindingnature.

In reply, the representatives of Norway, theUnited Kingdom and the United States said thatthe status of the proposed annex would be exactlysimilar to that of the existing annex to theAssembly's rule of procedure which also consistedof recommendations of a Special Committee. Byannexing to its rules of procedure the recom-


mendations of the current Special Committee theAssembly would have a ready reference andguide.

At the 366th meeting of the Committee, theamendments proposed by Ecuador and Guatemalawere adopted by votes ranging from 24 to 21,with 3 abstentions, to 31 to 6, with 8 abstentions.The two United Kingdom amendments wereadopted by 31 votes to none, with 18 abstentions,and 30 votes to 1. with 17 abstentions, respec-tively.

The second paragraph of the French-Brazilianamendment, by which the Assembly would takenote of the report of the Special Committee, wasadopted by 45 votes to 1, with 1 abstention.

The Norwegian draft resolution, as a whole, asamended, was adopted by 44 votes to none, with2 abstentions.

The report of the Sixth Committee (A/2512 &Corr.1) was considered by the General Assem-bly at its 453rd plenary meeting on 23 October1953. The draft resolution recommended by theSixth Committee was voted on in paragraphs.The preamble and paragraph 1 were adoptedunanimously; paragraph 2 by 49 votes to none,with 5 abstentions; and paragraph 3 by 51 votesto none, with 5 abstentions. The draft resolution,as a whole, was adopted (791(VIII)) unani-mously. It read:

"The General Assembly,"Having regard to General Assembly resolution 689

(VII) of 21 December 1952,"Having regard to the report of the Special Com-

mittee on Measures to Limit the Duration of RegularSessions of the General Assembly,

"1. Takes note of the above-mentioned report;"2. (a) Amends rule 38 of its rules of procedure

to read as follows:'The General Committee shall comprise the Pres-

ident of the General Assembly, who shall preside,the seven Vice-Presidents, the Chairman of the sixMain Committees and the Chairman of the Ad HocPolitical Committee when one is established. No twomembers of the General Committee shall be mem-bers of the same delegation, and it shall be soconstituted as to ensure its representative character.Chairmen of other committees upon which all Mem-bers have the right to be represented and which areestablished by the General Assembly to meet duringthe session, shall be entitled to attend meetings ofthe General Committee and may participate withoutvote in the discussions';"(b) Amends the second sentence of rule 39 of its

rules of procedure to read as follows:'The Chairman of a Main Committee or of the

Ad Hoc Political Commitee shall, in case of absence,designate the Vice-Chairman of the Committee ashis substitute';"3. Amends rule 98 of its rules of procedure to read

as follows:

'Each Main Committee, taking into account theclosing date for the session fixed by the GeneralAssembly on the recommendation of the GeneralCommittee, shall adopt its own priorities and meetas may be necessary to complete the considerationof the items referred to it,'"

b. QUESTION OF A CHANGE IN THE OPENINGDATE OF REGULAR SESSIONS OFTHE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

The General Assembly considered this ques-tion at the 405th meeting of its Fifth Committeeon 16 November and its 471st plenary meetingon 9 December 1953. In accordance with resolu-tion 692(VII),17 it had before it a report bythe Secretary-General on the practical consequencesof a change in the opening date of the Assembly'sregular sessions (A/2436), together with theobservations and recommendations of the AdvisoryCommittee on Administrative and BudgetaryQuestions (A/2553).

The Secretary-General in his report stated thatit would seem probable that an opening dateduring the first half of the year would reducethe risk of postponements followed by a disrup-tion of the work of the Assembly. If any advantagewas to be gained, he stated, consideration shouldbe given to a convenient date between the be-ginning of the year and the early summer months,for example 20 April. This would eliminatethe necessity of dividing the regular sessionsinto two parts and would allow the Assemblyto complete a session of normal length by thebeginning of summer. The report examined indetail the effect that any such change in datewould have on the pattern of conferences ofother United Nations organs and of the specializedagencies. From an administrative point of view,the Secretary-General pointed out that a changein the opening of Assembly sessions to the monthof April would carry with it important implica-tions for the financial arrangements of theOrganization, with particular regard to the budget,the reports of the Board of Auditors, the con-tributions of Members and the Working CapitalFund. These factors also raised the questionwhether a change in the financial year would nothave to be considered. In conclusion, the Secretary-General reviewed the situation which would arise,on the one hand, if the financial year wereunchanged and, on the other, if it were changed.

The Advisory Committee, while agreeing thata change in date would reduce the risk of post-ponement of the Assembly session, emphasized, onthe other hand, that the risk of interruption ofthe session would merely be reduced, not elimi-

17

See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 76.


nated, by such a change. Noting that no specificproposal had been made, either by the Secretary-General or by any delegation, the Advisory Com-mittee stated that it did not recommend a changefor the following reasons:

(1) in a majority of States the period prior to 20April was normally a period of important parliamentaryactivity;

(2) the Assembly sessions of the World HealthOrganization (WHO) and the International LabourOrganisation (ILO) were normally held in May andJune and this might, among other things, cause incon-venience to Treasuries and other government depart-ments;

(3) a large-scale readjustment of the conferenceprogramme would be called for; and

(4) in the event of a change in the opening date,there were serious drawbacks or risks regarding thefinancial arrangements of the United Nations whetherthe financial year was altered accordingly or maintained.

For these reasons, the Advisory Committeerecommended (A/2553) that the existing provi-sion concerning the opening date of the Assem-bly sessions should be maintained. The Commit-tee suggested, however, though without makinga firm recommendation, that a deferment of theopening date, possibly by two weeks, until thefirst Tuesday in October might be considered,in order to afford more time for preparatory workand in particular for the drafting and printingof the annual report of the Economic and SocialCouncil.

During the debate in the Fifth Committee, anumber of representatives, including those ofCuba, Egypt and the United States, expressedsupport of the Advisory Committee's suggestionthat regular sessions of the General Assemblyshould not open until the first Tuesday in October,on the understanding, however, that this wouldbe on an experimental basis for 1954 and thatit would not involve a change, at least for thetime being, in the existing rules of procedure.Other representatives, among them those ofCanada, China, India, Pakistan and the Union ofSouth Africa, while recognizing the advantagesof affording more time for completion of pre-paratory work, considered that such advantageswould be outweighed by the risk of a split session.The desirability of completing the session in timeto allow delegations to return home for Christmaswas particularly stressed.

The representatives of Belgium and Francestated that it should not be unduly difficult forthe General Assembly to complete its workbetween the first Tuesday in October and themiddle of December, thus allowing for a ses-sion of ten weeks. This would be especially soif delegations were to be furnished with better

documentation and furnished with such documen-tion in good time. Moreover, deferment of theopening date by two weeks would tend to facilitatethe attendance of important government leaders.There was no valid reason, these representativesconsidered, for assuming that sessions of theAssembly should necessarily last three months;if delegations exercised adequate self-discipline,it should be feasible to begin sessions early inOctober and to adjourn in sufficient time toenable representatives to return home beforeChristmas. Indeed, a slightly later opening datemight prove in itself an effective means ofensuring that the duration of ordinary sessionswas not unnecessarily prolonged.

Still other representatives, including those ofAustralia, Denmark, New Zealand and the UnitedKingdom, argued that, even if regular sessionswere to open two weeks later, delegations wouldnot necessarily be in possession of all relevantdocumentation, nor were there valid grounds forbelieving that Main Committees would begintheir work immediately or that they would workmore efficiently and expeditiously. No valid con-clusions, moreover, could be drawn from anexperiment which would be based on the experi-ence of one session only. Indeed, the Assemblyhad experimented frequently in the past andshould now make a serious effort to adhere strictlyto its own rules of procedure.

The representatives of New Zealand and Aus-tralia also stated that, while a session beginningin April would have many advantages from thepoint of view of their respective Governmentsand would make it possible for them to pay theircontributions earlier in the financial year, theywould not press the point, although they con-sidered that the difficulties mentioned were notinsurmountable.

An oral proposal by Cuba that the openingdate of the ninth session should be deferred untilthe first Tuesday in October on an experimentalbasis was rejected by 25 votes to 14, with 8abstentions. The Committee also rejected, by 24votes to 19, with 4 abstentions, an oral proposalby Iraq that the opening date of the ninth ses-sion should be deferred until the fourth Tuesdayin September.

The Fifth Committee, by 47 votes to none,with 1 abstention, and, on the Committee'srecommendation (A/2620), the General Assem-bly, at its 471st plenary meeting on 9 Decem-ber 1953, unanimously adopted a resolution(783(VIII)) in which the Assembly noted theSecretary-General's report and the Advisory Com-mittee's observations and concurred in the Advi-


sory Committee's recommendation that the exist-ing provision in the rules of procedure con-cerning the opening date of regular sessions ofthe General Assembly should be maintained.

c. ELECTION OF MEMBERS OFSUBSIDIARY BODIES18

(1) The International Law Commission

At its 453rd and 454th plenary meetings on23 October, the General Assembly elected thefifteen members of the International Law Com-mission for a three-year term beginning 1 Jan-uary 1954.

The Assembly had before it the list of candi-dates nominated by Member States with state-ments of their qualifications (A/2399 & Corr.1,Add.1, Add.2/Rev.1 & Add.3 & 4; A/2500/-Rev.1). It elected fourteen candidates on thefirst ballot and the fifteenth candidate on thefourth ballot.

The following were the votes received by thoseelected on the first ballot: Gilberto Amado (Brazil)—49; Roberto Cordova (Mexico)—49; Jean Spiropoulos(Greece)—47; Georges Scelle (France)—46; HerschLauterpacht (United Kingdom)—44; Sergei BorisovichKrylov (USSR)—42; A. E. F. Sandström (Sweden)—42; John Johnston Parker (United States)—41; ShuhsiHsu (China)—39; Francisco U. García-Amador (Cuba)—37; Radhabinod Pal (India)—37; Faris El-Khouri(Syria)—33; Jaroslav Zourek (Czechoslovakia)—33;J. P. A. François (Netherlands)—32.

On the first ballot, Maurice Bourquin (Belgium)received 29 votes and Carlos Salamanca Figueroa (Bo-livia) and Jesus Maria Yepes (Colombia) received28 votes each. On the fourth ballot, Mr. Salamancawas elected; he received 34 votes and Mr. Bourquin 24.

(2) Committee on Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories

At its 395th meeting on 7 December, theFourth Committee elected Guatemala and Burmaas members of this Committee for a three-yearterm beginning 1 January 1954, to replace Cubaand Pakistan, retiring members.

Both were elected on the first ballot, the votingbeing as follows: Guatemala—29; Burma—25; USSR—20; Colombia—13; Philippines—4; Thailand andPakistan—one vote each.

The General Assembly took note of the elec-tion at its 470th plenary meeting on 8 December.

(3) Negotiating Committee for Extra-BudgetaryFunds

At the 451st plenary meeting on 5 October,the President announced that, in accordance withAssembly resolution 759(VIII), she had appointedthe following Member States to the NegotiatingCommittee established by that resolution:

Australia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, France, Lebanon,Pakistan, United Kingdom, United States.

(4) Advisory Committee on Administrativeand Budgetary Questions

On the recommendation of the Fifth Commit-tee (A/2537), the General Assembly, at its 456thplenary meeting on 3 November, without objec-tion, appointed Rafik Asha, André Ganem andG. R. Kamat to the Advisory Committee for athree-year term beginning 1 January 1954 (resolu-tion 762(VIII)). The retiring members of theCommittee were Rafik Asha, André Ganem, andBraj Kumar Nehru.

(5) Committee on Contributions

On the recommendation of the Fifth Com-mittee (A/2538), the General Assembly, at its456th plenary meeting on 3 November, withoutobjection, appointed O. Strauch, A. H. Cloughand K. E. Book to the Committee on Con-tributions for a three-year term beginning 1 Jan-uary 1954 (resolution 763(VIII)). The retiringmembers of the Committee were A. H. Clough,A. Nass and Miss Maria Z. N. Witteveen.

(6) Board of Auditors

On the recommendation of the Fifth Com-mittee (A/2561), the General Assembly, at its471st plenary meeting on 9 December, reap-pointed, without objection, the Auditor-General(or officer holding equivalent title) of Colombiafor a three-year term beginning 1 July 1954(resolution 776(VIII)).

(7) Investments Committee

On the recommendation of the Fifth Com-mittee (A/2560), the General Assembly, at its471st plenary meeting on 9 December, confirmed,without objection, the reappointment of JacquesRueff as a member of the Investments Committeefor a three-year term beginning 1 January 1954(resolution 777(VIII)).

(8) United Nations Administrative Tribunal

On the recommendation of the Fifth Com-mittee (A/2618), the General Assembly, at its471st plenary meeting on 9 December, withoutobjection, appointed the Rt. Hon. Lord Crookand Jacob Mark Lashly to the AdministrativeTribunal for a three-year term beginning 1 Jan-uary 1954 The retiring members were LordCrook and Vladimir Outrata.

18 For the election by the General Assembly at its

eighth session of three non-permanent members of theSecurity Council (450th plenary meeting), six mem-bers or the Economic and Social Council (450th and451st plenary meetings), two members of the Trustee-ship Council (451st plenary meeting) and one memberof the International Court of Justice (458th plenarymeeting), see under these organs.

SECURITYCOUNCIL

B. THE SECURITY COUNCIL

21


The Members of the United Nations have con-ferred on the Security Council the primary respon-sibility for the maintenance of internationalpeace and security. The functions of the Coun-cil fall mainly under two headings: the pacificsettlement of disputes and action with respect tothreats to the peace, breaches of the peace andacts of aggression.

Decisions of the Council on procedural mattersare made by an affirmative vote of any sevenmembers. Decisions on other matters are madeby an affirmative vote of seven members, includ-ing the concurring votes of the five permanentmembers of the Council, provided that a partyto a dispute shall abstain from voting with respectto measures for the pacific settlement of thatdispute.

The Charter provisions relating to the SecurityCouncil are contained in Chapter V (Articles23-32) which defines the composition, func-tions and powers, voting and procedure of theCouncil; Chapter VI (Articles 33-38) whichdeals with the pacific settlement of disputes;Chapter VII (Articles 39-51) which deals withaction with respect to threats to the peace, breachesof the peace and acts of aggression; Chapter VIII(Articles 52-54) which relates to regionalarrangements; and Articles 76 and 82-84 of Chap-ter XII which relate to strategic areas in TrustTerritories. Other provisions are to be found inArticles 1, 2, 4-7, 10-12, 15, 18, 20, 65, 93, 94,96-99, 106, 108 and 109 of the Charter andArticles 4, 7-15, 35, 41 and 69 of the Statute ofthe International Court of Justice.19

2. Structure20

Organs reporting to the Security Council dur-ing 1953 were:

a. MILITARY STAFF COMMITTEE

b. DISARMAMENT COMMISSION

c. COLLECTIVE MEASURES COMMITTEE21

d. STANDING COMMITTEES(1) Committee of Experts

(2) Committee on the Admission of New Members

e. Ad Hoc COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS(1) United Nations Commission for Indonesia(2) Chief of Staff of the United Nations Truce

Supervision Organization in Palestine

(3) United Nations Representative for India andPakistan.

4. Meetings of the Council and MattersConsidered during 1953

The Security Council is organized to functioncontinuously.

During 1953 it held 43 meetings, its 612th to654th, between 11 March and 29 December. Allthe meetings were held at United Nations Head-quarters. The following were the questions con-sidered:

the Security Council is to be found in Y.U.N., 1951,pp. 38-41. The text of the Charter and of the Statuteof the Court is reproduced in Y.U.N., 1952, pp. 10-26.

Security Council during 1953. As no new subsidiarybodies were established during the year, terms ofreference are not given here; they may be found inY.U.N., 1950, pp. 47-50 and Y.U.N., 1951, p. 42, orin Structure of the United Nations (Seventh Revision)January 1954 (ST/DPI/8). Members of subsidiarybodies and representatives serving on them during 1953are listed in Appendix II.

See under The General Assembly.

JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember

GreeceLebanonPakistanUSSRUnited KingdomUnited StatesChileChinaColombiaDenmarkFranceGreece

Alexis KyrouCharles MalikAhmed S. BokhariAndrei Y. VyshinskySir Gladwyn JebbHenry Cabot Lodge, Jr.Rudecindo Ortega MassonTingfu F. TsiangFrancisco UrrutiaWilliam BorbergHenri HoppenotAlexis Kyrou

3. Members and Presidents

The Security Council consists of eleven mem-bers, five permanent and six non-permanent electedfor a two-year term by the General Assembly.

The following were the members of theSecurity Council during 1953:

PERMANENT MEMBERS

China, France, USSR, United Kingdom, United States

NON-PERMANENT MEMBERS

Elected to serve until 31 December 1953: Chile,Pakistan, Greece

Elected to serve until 31 December 1954: Colombia,Denmark, Lebanon

The Presidency of the Council is held in turnby Member States in the English alphabeticalorder of their names, each President holding officefor one month. The following representativesheld the office of President during 1953:


A summary of the Charter provisions concerning

This section lists the subsidiary bodies of the

21

20

19


Meeting

612th

613th

614th

615th

616th

617th

618th

619th

620th

621st

622nd

623rd

624th

625th

626th

627th

628th

629th

Subject DateMarch

Recommendation for the appointment 11of the Secretary-General of theUnited Nations (closed meeting)





Recommendation for the appointment 31of the Secretary-General of theUnited Nations (dosed meeting)

August

Consideration of the report of the 12Security Council to the GeneralAssembly (closed meeting)

The date of election to fill a vacancyin the International Court of Justice

The Moroccan question (question of 26adoption of the agenda)



SeptemberThe Moroccan question (question of 1

adoption of the agenda)The Moroccan question (question of 2

adoption of the agenda)The Moroccan question (question of 3

adoption of the agenda)October

Appointment of a Governor of the Free 15Territory of Trieste

The Palestine question: (a) Letters 19dated 17 October 1953 from therepresentatives of France, UnitedKingdom and United States addressedto the President of the SecurityCouncil (question of adoption of theagenda)

The Palestine question: compliance 20with and enforcement of the GeneralArmistice Agreements, with specialreference to recent acts of violence,and in particular to the incident atQibya on 14-15 October: report bythe Chief of Staff of the Truce Super-vision Organization (question of theadoption of the agenda)

Appointment of a Governor of the Free 20Territory of Trieste (question of theadoption of the agenda)

The Palestine question: Complaint by 27Syria against Israel concerning work

Subject DateOctober

on the west bank of the River Jordanin the Demilitarized Zone

The Palestine question (Qibya incident) 27The Palestine question (complaint by 27

Syria)The Palestine question (Qibya incident) 29The Palestine question (complaint by 30

Syria)November


The Palestine question (Qibya incident) 9The Palestine question (complaint by 10

Syria)The Palestine question (Qibya incident) 12The Palestine question (Qibya incident) 16The Palestine question (complaint by 18

Syria)The Palestine question (Qibya incident) 20Application by Japan to become a party 23

to the Statute of the InternationalCourt of Justice

Application by San Marino to become aparty to the Statute of the Inter-national Court of Justice

Appointment of a Governor of the FreeTerritory of Trieste

The Palestine question (Qibya incident) 24The Palestine question (Qibya incident) 25Election of a member of the Interna- 27

tional Court of Justice to fill thevacancy caused by the resignation ofJudge Sergei Aleksandrovich Golun-sky

DecemberApplication by Japan to become a party 3

to the Statute of the InternationalCourt of Justice

Application by San Marino to become aparty to the Statute of the Inter-national Court of Justice

The Palestine question (complaint bySyria)

The Palestine question (complaint by 11Syria)









Meeting

630th631st

632nd633rd

634th

635th636th

637th638th639th

640th641st

642nd643rd644th

645th

646th

647th

648th

649th

650th

651st

652nd

653rd

654th


5. Meetings of Subsidiary Bodies

In addition to those organs which functionedcontinuously throughout the year, the Council'ssubsidiary bodies held the following meetings:

Military Staff Committee: bi-weekly meetings through-out the year; the first meeting was held on 8 Januaryand the last on 23 December.

Disarmament Commission: 20 August at Head-quarters.

6. Organizational Questions22

a. ELECTION BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLYOF THREE NON-PERMANENT MEMBERSOF THE SECURITY COUNCIL

At its 450th plenary meeting on 5 October,the General Assembly elected Brazil, New Zealandand Turkey as non-permanent members of theSecurity Council for a two-year term beginning

1 January 1954 to replace Chile, Greece andPakistan, retiring members.

Brazil and New Zealand were both elected on thefirst ballot, receiving 56 and 48 votes, respectively.

Other votes obtained on this ballot were: Turkey—32; Poland—18; Philippines—17; Czechoslovakia—2;Ecuador—2; Mexico—1.

Following six further, inconclusive, ballots, Turkeywas elected, having obtained the required two-thirdsmajority. Voting on the final ballot was: Turkey—40votes; Poland—19 votes.

b. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COUNCILTO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

The annual report of the Security Council tothe General Assembly (A/2437), covering theperiod from 16 July 1952 to 15 July 1953, wasadopted by the Council at its 618th meeting(closed) on 12 August 1953. The Assembly, atits 455th plenary meeting on 3 November 1953,adopted, without objection, a resolution (803(VIII)) taking note of the report.

C. THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL


The Economic and Social Council is responsible,under the General Assembly's authority, for pro-moting: higher standards of living; full employ-ment and conditions of economic and social pro-gress and development; solutions of internationaleconomic, social health, and related problems;international cultural and educational co-opera-tion; and universal respect for, and observanceof, human rights and fundamental freedoms forall without distinction as to race, sex, languageor religion.

It makes or initiates studies and reports withrespect to international economic, social, cultural,educational, health, and related matters. It makesrecommendations on such matters to the Gen-eral Assembly, to the Members of the UnitedNations and to the specialized agencies concerned.It also makes recommendations for the purposeof promoting respect for and observance of humanrights.

It prepares draft conventions for submissionto the Assembly on matters within its competenceand calls international conferences on such matters.

It enters into agreements with specialized agen-cies, and makes arrangements for consultation withnon-governmental organizations.

The Council's decisions are taken by a simplemajority of the members present and voting.

The Charter provisions relating to the Eco-nomic and Social Council are contained in Chap-

ter IX (Articles 55-60) which sets forth theobjectives and functions of the United Nationsin the sphere of international economic andsocial co-operation, and Chapter X (Articles61-72) which defines the composition, functionsand powers, voting and procedure of the Council.Other provisions are to be found in Articles 1,2, 7, 15, 17, 18, 91, 96, 98 and 101.23

2. Structure24

Subsidiary organs reporting to the Economicand Social Council are of five types:

a. Functional commissions and sub-commissionsb. Regional economic commissionsc. Standing committeesd. Special bodiese. Ad hoc committees

22 For the election by the Security Council of amember of the International Court of justice, see underthat heading.

23 A summary of the Charter provisions concerningthe Economic and Social Council is to be found inY.U.N., 1951, pp. 47-49. The text of the Charter isreproduced in Y.U.N., 1952, pp. 10-20.

24 This section lists the subsidiary bodies of theEconomic and Social Council during 1953. The termsof reference are given only for new subsidiary organsestablished during 1953; for the terms of referenceof subsidiary organs previously established, see Y.U.N.,1950, pp. 60-66, Y.U.N., 1951, pp. 49-53 and Y.U.N.,1952, pp. 39-40. The terms of reference of subsidiarybodies existing in January 1954 are also given inStructure of the United Nations (Seventh Revision)January 1954 (ST/DPI/8). Members of subsidiarybodies and representatives serving on them during 1953are listed in Appendix III.

G E N E R A L A S S E M B L Y


The Council has, in addition, various sessionalcommittees such as the Economic, Social andCo-ordination Committees.

a. FUNCTIONAL COMMISSIONSAND SUB-COMMISSIONS

(1) Transport and Communications(2) Fiscal(3) Statistical(4) Population(5) Social(6) Human Rights

Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimina-tion and Protection of Minorities

(7) Status of Women(8) Narcotic Drugs

b. REGIONAL ECONOMIC COMMISSIONS(1) Economic Commission for EuropeThe Commission has established the following

principal subsidiary organs:(a) Committee on Agricultural Problems(b) Coal Committee(c) Committee on Electric Power(d) Industry and Materials Committee(e) Inland Transport Committee(f) Committee on Manpower(g) Steel Committee( h ) Timber Committee(i) Committee on the Development of Trade

Some of these Committees have established sub-sidiary bodies, including standing sub-committees andad hoc working parties.

(2) Economic Commission for Asia and the VarEast

The Commission has established the followingprincipal subsidiary organs:

(a) Committee on Industry and Trade(b) Inland Transport Committee

The Committee on Industry and Trade has standingsub-committees on iron and steel and on electric power,and the Inland Transport Committee has inland water-way, railway and highway sub-committees. In addition,there are various ad hoc working parties.

(3) Economic Commission for Latin AmericaThe Commission has established the following

principal subsidiary organ:Committee on Economic Co-operation in Central

AmericaThis Committee has a Sub-Committee on Central

American Trade, formerly called the Sub-Committee onthe Unification of Central American Tariff Nomen-clature.

c. STANDING COMMITTEES(1) Technical Assistance Committee of the Council(2) Committee on Negotiations with Inter-Govern-

mental Agencies(3) Council Committee on Non-Governmental Or-

ganizations(4) Interim Committee on Programme of Confer-

ences

d. SPECIAL BODIESUnder this heading may be placed the following:(1) Permanent Central Opium Board(2) Drug Supervisory Body(3) United Nations Children's FundThe principal subsidiary bodies established by the

Executive Board of the United Nations Children's Fundare:

(a) Programme Committee(b) Committee on Administrative Budget

(4) Administrative Committee on Co-ordinationOperating within the framework of this Committee

are consultative committees on administrative questions,on statistical matters and on public information. Otherbodies are established as the need arises.

(5) Interim Co-ordinating Committee for Interna-tional Commodity Arrangements

(6) Technical Assistance Board

e. Ad Hoc COMMITTEESThe following ad hoc Committees either met or were

created during 1953:(1) Ad hoc Advisory Committee of Experts on the

Prevention of Crime and the Treatment ofOffenders

This Committee was established under GeneralAssembly resolution 415(V) of 1 December 1950 toadvise the Secretary-General and the Social Commissionin devising and formulating programmes for study onan international basis and policies for internationalaction in the field of prevention of crime and treatmentof offenders.

(2) Ad hoc Committee on Iron Ore Resources(3) Ad hoc Committee on Forced Labour(4) Ad hoc Committee on Restrictive Business Prac-

tices(5) Committee of Nine (appointed by the Secretary-

General under Council resolution 416 A (XIV)to prepare a report on a special United Nationsfund for economic development)

(6) Special Rapporteur (on matters relating toFreedom of Information)

In resolution 477(XV) of 10 April, the Economicand Social Council requested the Secretary-General toappoint an international committee of three chemicalexperts to report on whether methods of determiningthe origin of raw opium by chemical or physical meansare sufficiently advanced to admit of their practicalapplication.

In resolution 468 G (XV) of 15 April, it asked himto appoint a committee of nine25 qualified experts, fromcountries having a substantial interest in the inter-national transport of dangerous goods, to make a studyof this question and to report to the Transport andCommunications Commission.

In resolution 502 H (XVI) of 3 August, the Councilapproved the appointment26 of M. R. Masani as SpecialRapporteur in connexion with the study of discrimina-

25

When reviewing the budget, the General Assemblysubsequently reduced the number of experts to five.

26 Appointed by the Sub-Commission on Preventionof Discrimination and Protection of Minorities on10 October 1952.


tion in the field of education to formulate a provisionalplan of work and to submit an interim report to thesixth session of the Sub-Commission on Prevention ofDiscrimination and Protection of Minorities.

3. Members and Officers

The Economic and Social Council consists ofeighteen members elected by the General Assem-bly for a three-year term of office.

The following were the members of the Coun-cil during 1953:Elected to serve until 31 December 1953: Philippines,

Poland, Sweden, USSR, United Kingdom, UruguayElected to serve until 31 December 1954: Argentina,

Belgium, China, Cuba, Egypt, FranceElected to serve until 31 December 1955: Australia,

India, Turkey, United States, Venezuela, Yugoslavia

The officers of the Council were as follows:President: Raymond Scheyven (Belgium)first Vice-President: Rodolfo Muñoz (Argentina)Second Vice-President: Henryk Birecki (Poland)27

4. Sessions of the Council and itsSubsidiary Bodies

The Economic and Social Council held thefollowing sessions during 1953:fifteenth Session—31 March to 28 April, at United

Nations Headquarters.Sixteenth Session—30 June to 5 August, at Geneva.Sixteenth Session (resumed)—30 November to 7 De-

cember, at United Nations Headquarters.

In addition to sessional committees, the Coun-cil's subsidiary bodies and other special bodiesreporting to it held the following sessions dur-ing 1953:

a. FUNCTIONAL COMMISSIONSTransport and Communications Commission: sixth

session—2 to 11 February, at Headquarters.Fiscal Commission: fourth session—27 April to 8

May, at Headquarters.Statistical Commission: seventh session—2 to 13

February, at Headquarters.Population Commission: seventh session—19 to 30

January, at Headquarters.Social Commission: ninth session—4 to 20 May, at

Headquarters.Commission on Human Rights: ninth session—7

April to 30 May, at Geneva.Commission on the Status of Women: seventh session

—16 March to 3 April, at Headquarters.Commission on Narcotic Drugs: eighth session—30

March to 24 April, at Headquarters.

b. REGIONAL ECONOMIC COMMISSIONSECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE: eighth session

—3 to 18 March, at Geneva.

Coal Committee: 27th session—24 February, atGeneva; 28th session—28 and 29 May, at Geneva;29th session—25 and 26 August, at Geneva; and30th session—2 and 3 December, at Geneva.

Committee on Electric Power: tenth session—8to 10 June, at Geneva.

Inland Transport Committee: tenth session—26to 30 May, at Geneva.

Steel Committee: tenth session—19 to 21 January,at Geneva; eleventh session—28 and 29 September,at Geneva.

Timber Committee: eleventh session—5 to 12October, at Rome.In addition various sub-committees and working

groups held meetings during the year.

ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR ASIA AND THE FAREAST: ninth session—6 to 14 February, at Bandung,Indonesia.

Committee on Industry and Trade: fifth session—26 January to 2 February, at Bandung.

Sub-Committee on Electric Power: third session—5 to 9 October, at Bangkok, Thailand.

Inland Transport Committee: second session—19to 21 January, at Bandung.

Sub-Committee on Iron and Steel: fifth session—31 August to 3 September, at Bangkok.

Railway Sub-Committee: first session—14 to 17January, at Bandung; second session—5 to 10 Octo-ber 1953, at Paris.

Highway Sub-Committee: second session—14 to19 September, at Bangkok.

Inland Waterways Sub-Committee: first session—14 to 17 January, at Bandung.

ECAFE/ILO/UNESCO Inter-Secretariat WorkingParty on Trained Personnel for Economic Develop-ment: third session—7 to 14 September, at Bangkok.In addition, various ad hoc working groups held

meetings during the year.

ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR LATIN AMERICA: fifthsession—9 to 25 April, at Quitandinha, Brazil.

Committee on Economic Co-operation in CentralAmerica: second session—13 to 16 October, at SanJose, Costa Rica.

Inter-Agency Regional Co-ordination Committeeon Migration: fourth session—11 to 13 April, atPetrópolis, Brazil.In addition, various ad hoc working groups held

meetings during the year.

c. STANDING COMMITTEES

Technical Assistance Committee of the Council: 23March to 2 April, at Headquarters; 22 July to 5August, at Geneva; 15 and 19 October, 25 November,at Headquarters.

Council Committee on Non-Governmental Organi-zations: 19 February, 6 to 27 April, at Headquarters;3, 6 and 22 July, at Geneva.

Interim Committee on Programme of Conferences:1 August, at Geneva.

27 Owing to ill health, Mr. Birecki did not attend the

sixteenth session.


d. SPECIAL BODIESPermanent Central Opium Board: 62nd session—6

to 11 July; 63rd session—9 to 13 November, atGeneva.

Drug Supervisory Body: 39th meeting—16 July;40th meeting—26 to 30 October and 6 November, atGeneva.

Permanent Central Opium Board and Drug Super-visory Body: ninth session—13 to 15 and 17 July; tenthsession—2 to 6 November, at Geneva.

United Nations Children's Fund—Executive Board:19 to 26 March, 8 to 16 September, 27 October, atHeadquarters; Programme Committee: 21 and 24 March,11, 12 and 14 September, at Headquarters; Committeeon Administrative Budget: 18 and 24 March, 10 Sep-tember, at Headquarters.

Administrative Committee on Co-ordination: six-teenth session—25 to 27 May, at Geneva; seventeenthsession—6 to 8 October, at Headquarters.

Interim Co-ordinating Committee for InternationalCommodity Arrangements: 9 to 12 December, atGeneva.

Technical Assistance Board: 23rd meeting—16 to 26March, at Headquarters; 24th meeting—18 to 27 May,at Geneva; 25th meeting—16 July to 6 August, atGeneva; 26th meeting—14 to 16 September, at Paris;27th meeting—7 to 19 December, at Headquarters.

e. Ad Hoc COMMITTEESAd hoc Advisory Committee of Experts on the Pre-

vention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders: 15to 24 June, at Headquarters.

Ad hoc Committee on Iron Ore Resources: pre-liminary meeting—15 to 19 June, at Headquarters.

Ad hoc Committee on forced Labour: fourth session—17 April to 27 May 1953, at Geneva.

Ad hoc Committee on Restrictive Business Practices:fourth session—12 January to 21 February, at Head-quarters.

Committee of Nine (Appointed by the Secretary-General under Council resolution 416 A (XIV) toprepare a report on a special United Nations fundfor economic development): 21 January to 6 March,at Headquarters.

f. CONFERENCESThird United Nations Technical Assistance Con-

ference: 26 and 27 February, at Headquarters.Fourth United Nations Technical Assistance Con-

ference: 12 and 13 November, at Headquarters.United Nations Opium Conference: 11 May to 23

June, at Headquarters.United Nations Sugar Conference: 13 July to 24

August, at London.United Nations Tin Conference: second session—16

November to 9 December, at Geneva.

5. Matters Considered by the Council at its Fifteenth and SixteenthRegular Sessions

a. FIFTEENTH SESSIONAgenda Item

1. Election of the President and Vice-Presidents for1953

2. Adoption of the sessional agenda3. World economic situation (General Assembly res-

olution 118(II))4. Economic development of under-developed coun-

tries: integrated economic development—workingpaper by the Secretary-General under Councilresolution 416 F (XIV)

5. Annual report of the Economic Commission forAsia and the Far East

6. Report of the Transport and CommunicationsCommission (sixth session)

7. International action for conservation and utilizationof non-agricultural resources: report by the Sec-retary-General (Council resolution 345 A (XII),paragraph 1 (e))

8. Procedure for the convening of study groups andinternational commodity conferences (Council res-olution 373(XIII))

9. Report of the International Monetary Fund10. Report of the International Bank for Reconstruc-

tion and Development11. Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance:

report of the Technical Assistance Committee andGeneral Assembly resolution 621(VII)

Consideration and Action TakenPlenary meeting 672

Plenary meeting 673Plenary meetings 688-694, 697, 698. Resolution 460

(XV)Plenary meetings 694-697. Resolution 461(XV)

Plenary meetings 699-701. Resolution 464(XV)

Economic Committee meetings 125, 126, 129. Plenarymeetings 687, 689. Resolution 468(XV)

Plenary meetings 689, 690. Resolution 463(XV)

Economic Committee meetings 127-130. Plenary meet-ing 702. Resolution 462(XV)

Plenary meetings 682, 683. Resolution 467(XV)Plenary meetings 684, 685. Resolution 466(XV)

Technical Assistance Committee meetings 29-37.Plenary meeting 687. Resolution 470(XV)


Agenda Item

12. Report of the Fiscal Commission (fourth session)

13. Report of the Statistical Commission (seventhsession)

14. Report of the Population Commission (seventhsession)

15. Recommendations concerning international respectfor the right of peoples to self-determination(General Assembly resolution 637 C (VII))

16. Interim report of the Rapporteur on Freedom ofInformation

17. Allegations regarding infringements of trade unionrights received under Council resolution 277 (X)

18. Slavery: report by the Secretary-General underCouncil resolution 388(XIII)

19. Recognition and enforcement abroad of mainten-ance obligations (Council resolution 390 H (XIII))

20. Relief and rehabilitation of Korea (GeneralAssembly resolution 410(V), section A, paragraphs5 (d) and 13)

21. Inter-governmental organizations (Council resolu-tions 262(IX) and 412(XIII))

22. International co-operation on cartography: reportby the Secretary-General and replies by govern-ments (Council resolution 261(IX))

23. United Nations Narcotics Laboratory (Councilresolution 436 F (XIV))

24. Non-governmental organizations:(a) Applications and re-applications for consulta-

tive status;(b) Hearings by the Council Committee on Non-

Governmental Organizations under rules 84and 85 of the rules of procedure of theCouncil and applications for hearings by theCouncil under rule 86;

(c) Other matters reported on by the CouncilCommittee on Non-Governmental Organiza-tions

25. Amendment of the rules of procedure of the Coun-cil and its functional commissions (GeneralAssembly resolution 664(VII))

26. Calendar of Conferences for 195327. Confirmation of members of functional commis-

sions of the Council28. Financial implications of actions of the Council29. Consideration of the provisional agenda for the

sixteenth session of the Council30. Question of inviting Libya, Spain, Nepal and the

Republic of Korea to the International Conferenceon the Limitation of the Production of Opium tobe convened at Headquarters on 11 May 1953

31. Application of Afghanistan for membership in theEconomic Commission for Asia and the Far East

32. Accession of Italy to the Convention on theDeclaration of Death of Missing Persons

33. Election of members of the Council Committee onNon-Governmental Organizations

34. Admission of the Representative of the Women'sInternational Democratic Federation for participa-tion in the Commission on the Status of Women,in accordance with the resolution adopted by theCommission


Plenary meeting 673. Consideration postponed to six-teenth session

Economic Committee meetings 126, 129. Plenary meet-ing 702. Resolution 469(XV)

Social Committee meetings 227, 228. Plenary meeting685. Resolution 471(XV)


Plenary meeting 677. Resolution 473(XV)


Social Committee meetings 228-233. Plenary meeting702. Resolution 475(XV)

Plenary meeting 673. Consideration postponed to seven-teenth session

Plenary meeting 673. Consideration postponed to six-teenth session

Plenary meeting 676



Council NGO Committee meetings 123, 124, 127.Plenary meetings 678, 702, 704. Resolution 480(XV)

Council NGO Committee meetings 125, 126. Plenarymeeting 678


Plenary meeting 683Plenary meetings 681, 704

Plenary meeting 704Council NGO Committee meetings 127-128. Plenary

meetings 703, 704Plenary meetings 673, 675, 676. Resolution 478(XV)



Plenary meeting 702

Plenary meetings 673, 675-677, 679, 686, 687, 694,701, 702, 704


b. SIXTEENTH SESSIONAgenda Item

1. Adoption of the sessional agenda

2. Full employment:

(a) Reconversion after the rearmament period(Council decision of 28 April 1953);

(b) Consideration of replies from governmentsto the questionnaire on full employment;

(c) Report of the International Monetary Fundunder Council resolution 427(XIV), para-graph 6;

(d) Report by the Secretary-General under Coun-cil resolution 426 B (XIV)

3. Economic development of under-developed coun-tries:(a) Report on a Special United Nations Fund for

Economic Development, submitted by a com-mittee appointed by the Secretary-General(Council resolution 416 A (XIV), GeneralAssembly resolution 622 A (VII));

(b) Report of the International Bank for Recon-struction and Development on the questionof creating an international finance corpora-tion (Council resolution 416 C (XIV),General Assembly resolution 622 B (VII));

(c) Question of methods to increase worldproductivity (Council resolution 416 E(XIV));

(d) Report by the Secretary-General under Coun-cil resolution 427(XIV), paragraph 7, andGeneral Assembly resolution 623(VII)

4. Annual report of the Economic Commission forEurope

5. Annual report of the Economic Commission forLatin America

6. Question of admission to membership in theregional economic commissions of States not mem-bers of the United Nations (Council decision of28 April 1953)

7. Restrictive business practices: reports of the AdHoc Committee on Restrictive Business Practicesand of the Secretary-General under Council resolu-tion 375 (XIII)

8. Technical assistance:(a) Regular Programme of Technical Assistance

(General Assembly resolutions 200(III),246(III) and 418(V));

(b) Technical assistance in public administration;(c) Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance:

report of the Technical Assistance Committee28

9. Report of the Fiscal Commission (fourth session)

10. Programme of concerted practical action in thesocial field of the United Nations and the special-ized agencies (Council resolution 434 (XIV), Gen-eral Assembly resolution 535 (VI))

11. Report of the Social Commission (ninth session)(Council resolution 434(XIV), General Assemblyresolution 642(VII))

12. Reports of the Executive Board of the UnitedNations International Children's Emergency Fund

Consideration and Action TakenPlenary meetings 705, 706Economic Committee meetings 133-137. Plenary meet-

ings 720-724, 748, 749. Resolution 483(XVI)

Economic Committee meetings 138, 139. Plenary meet-ings 725-731, 749. Resolution 482 A (XVI)

Economic Committee meetings 139, 140. Plenary meet-ings 725-731, 749. Resolution 482 B (XVI)

Economic Committee meeting 140. Plenary meetings725-731, 749


Plenary meetings 716, 717. Resolution 484(XVI)

Plenary meetings 718, 719, 721. Resolution 485(XVI)



Plenary meeting 747. Resolution 492 A (XVI)

Plenary meetings 747, 748. Resolution 492 B (XVI)Technical Assistance Committee meetings 38-53.

Plenary meeting 751. Resolution 492 C (XVI)Economic Committee meetings 131, 132. Plenary meet-

ings 710-712, 719. Resolution 486(XVI)Plenary meetings 734-736, 738, 739, 744. Resolution

496(XVI)

Social Committee meetings 234-236. Plenary meeting736. Resolution 494(XVI)


28 See also resumed sixteenth session, below.


Agenda Item13. Report of the Commission on Human Rights

(ninth session)14. Prevention of discrimination and protection of

minorities: report of the Commission on HumanRights (ninth session) (Council resolution 443(XIV))

15. Freedom of information (Council resolution 442(XIV), General Assembly resolutions 631 (VII)and 633(VII)):(a) Report of the Rapporteur on Freedom of

Information;(b) Encouragement and development of inde-

pendent domestic information enterprises16. Forced labour: reports of the Ad hoc Committee

on Forced Labour (Council resolution 350(XII))17. Allegations regarding infringements of trade union

rights received under Council resolutions 277(X)and 474(XV)

18. Report of the Commission on the Status of Women(seventh session)

19. Annual report of the United Nations High Com-missioner for Refugees (General Assembly resolu-tion 428(V), Annex, Chapter II)

20. Narcotic Drugs:(a) Report of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs

(eighth session);(b) Report of the Permanent Central Opium

Board;(c) Report by the Secretary-General on the

United Nations Opium Conference (Councilresolution 436 A (XIV))

(d) Problem of the coca leaf (Council resolution436 E (XIV))

21. Question of assistance to Libya (General Assemblyresolution 515(VI))

22. Report of the International Labour Organisation23. Report of the Food and Agriculture Organization

of the United Nations24. Report of the United Nations Educational, Scien-

tific and Cultural Organization25. Report of the World Health Organization26. Report of the International Civil Aviation Organi-

zation27. Report of the Universal Postal Union

28. Report of the International TelecommunicationUnion

29. Report of the World Meteorological Organization30. Co-ordination of the work of the United Nations

and the specialized agencies:(a) Reports of the Administrative Committee on

Co-ordination;(b) Review of 1954 programmes and of the list

of United Nations priority programmes inthe economic and social fields (Council reso-lution 451 A (XIV))

31. Relief and rehabilitation of Korea (General Assem-bly resolution 410(V), Section A, paragraphs5 (d) and 13)

Consideration and Action TakenSocial Committee meetings 236-240, 256. Plenary

meeting 746. Resolution 501 (XVI)Social Committee meetings 250-256. Plenary meeting

746. Resolution 502(XVI)




Social Committee meetings 241-245, 248. Plenary meet-ing 736. Resolution 504(XVI)

Plenary meetings 713-715. Resolution 500(XVI)

Social Committee meetings 246, 249. Plenary meeting739. Resolution 505 A-E (XVI)

Social Committee meetings 246, 247, 249. Plenarymeeting 739. Resolution 505 F (XVI)

Social Committee meetings 247, 249. Plenary meeting739. Resolution 505 G-1 (XVI)

Social Committee meeting 247. Plenary meeting 739.Consideration postponed to seventeenth session


Plenary meetings 708, 709. Resolution 498(XVI)Plenary meetings 709, 710. Resolution 488(XVI)


Plenary meetings 707, 708. Resolution 499(XVI)Plenary meeting 716. Resolution 489(XVI)

Plenary meeting 715. Resolution 490(XVI)

Plenary meetings 706, 707. Consideration postponed toseventeenth session

Plenary meetings 715, 716. Resolution 491(XVI)Plenary meetings 740, 741. Resolution 497(XVI)

Plenary meeting 750. Consideration postponed to afuture session

29 At the 706th and 718th plenary meetings the Council discussed the position of Mr. Lopez (Philippines), rap-porteur on freedom of information, whose country would no longer be a member of the Council at the time ofthis session.

29


Agenda Item32. Non-governmental organizations:

(a) Hearings by the Council Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations under rules 84and 85 of the rules of procedure of theCouncil and applications for hearings by theCouncil under rule 86;

(b) Other matters reported on by the CouncilCommittee on Non-Governmental Organiza-tions

33. Question of access to Headquarters of representa-tives of non-governmental organizations in con-sultative status: report by the Secretary-General onthe result of his negotiations with the UnitedStates Government (Council decision of 28 April1953)

34. Calendar of conferences for 1953 (Council decisionof 19 December 1952)

35. Calendar of conferences for 1954 (Council resolu-tion 174(VII), General Assembly resolution 694(VII))3 0

36. Elections:(a) Election of one-third of the membership of

the functional commissions of the Council;(b) Election of members of the Executive Board

of the United Nations International Children'sEmergency Fund (General Assembly resolution417(V))

37. Confirmation of members of functional commis-sions of the Council31

38. Financial implications of actions of the Council(rule 34 of the rules of procedure)

39. Arrangements regarding the report of the Councilto the General Assembly (General Assembly reso-lution 628 (VII))

40. Work of the Council in 1954:(a) Basic programme for 1954 (rule 9 of the

rules of procedure);(b) Provisional agenda for the first regular session

of 1954 (rule 11 of the rules of procedure)41. Disposal of items arising out of the eighth regular

session of the General Assembly32

42. Accession of Vietnam and the Vatican City Stateto the Convention on Road Traffic of 19 September1949

Additional Item:

43. Accession of the Federal Republic of Germany tothe Convention on Declaration of Death of Miss-ing Persons

c. RESUMED SIXTEENTH SESSION1. Work of the Council in 1954:

(a) Basic programme for 1954;(b) Provisional agenda for the seventeenth regular

session of the Council and fixing of dates forcommencement of discussion of groups of re-lated items [40]33


Council NGO Committee meetings 130-132. Plenarymeeting 714

Council NGO Committee meeting 132. Plenary meeting747


Plenary meeting 707

Interim Committee on Programme of Conferencesmeeting 33. Plenary meeting 749


Plenary meeting 749

Plenary meeting 750

Plenary meeting 751

Plenary meeting 750

To be considered at the resumed sixteenth session (seebelow)

To be considered at the resumed sixteenth session (seebelow)

Plenary meetings 706, 715. Resolutions 506, 507(XVI)

Plenary meeting 750. Resolution 508(XVI)

Plenary meetings 752-754. Resolutions 510, 511(XVI)

30 See also resumed sixteenth session, below.31 During the resumed sixteenth session, at the 754th plenary meeting, the Council confirmed further nominations.3 Considered under Item 1 of the agenda for the resumed sixteenth session.32

33

sixteenth session. The numbers in square brackets refer to the numbers of the items as they appeared in the agenda for the


Agenda Item2. Calendar of Conferences for 1954: Argentine pro-

posal that one of the sessions of the Council beheld at Buenos Aires in 1954 [35]

3. Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance:report of the Chairman of the Technical AssistanceCommittee under paragraph 7 of Council resolu-tion 492 C II (XVI) [8(c)]


Plenary meeting 752

Plenary meeting 752


a. ELECTIONS(1) Election of Six Members of the Council

At its 450th and 451st plenary meetings on5 October, the General Assembly re-elected theUSSR and the United Kingdom and electedCzechoslovakia, Ecuador, Norway and Pakistanfor a three-year term beginning 1 January 1954,to replace the Philippines, Poland, Sweden andUruguay, retiring members.

The United Kingdom, Ecuador, the USSR, Czecho-slovakia and Norway were elected on the first ballot.The voting on this ballot was as follows: United King-dom—47; Ecuador—45; USSR—45; Czechoslovakia—42; Norway—42; Indonesia—36; Pakistan—33; Afgha-nistan—28; Philippines—7; Colombia—2; and Burma,Haiti, Israel, New Zealand, Peru, Poland, Thailand andUruguay one vote each.

Following four further, inconclusive, ballots, Pakistanwas elected, having obtained the required two-thirdsmajority; on this ballot Pakistan received 38 votes andIndonesia 17.

(2) Vacancies in Membership of Subsidiary Bodiesof the Council

At its sixteenth session, at the 747th and 749thplenary meetings on 3 and 4 August 1953, theEconomic and Social Council held its annual elec-tions for one thud of the membership of thefunctional commissions (exclusive of the Com-mission on Narcotic Drugs, for which see below).

The following were elected (asterisk indicatesmember re-elected):

Transport and Communications Commission: Byelo-russian SSR*, Egypt*, USSR*, United States*, Vene-zuela (replacing Brazil).

Fiscal Commission: China*, France*, India*, Tur-key*, United Kingdom*.

Statistical Commission: Denmark*, France*, Pana-ma*, United Kingdom*, Yugoslavia (replacing Egypt).

Population Commission: Argentina, Belgium*, Bra-zil*, Canada, Syria. (The three retiring members re-placed were Australia, Peru, Yugoslavia.)

Social Commission: Australia, Belgium*, ByelorussianSSR*, China*, Israel*, Uruguay. (The two retiringmembers replaced were Canada and Ecuador.)

Commission on Human Rights: Australia*, Chile*,Greece, Pakistan*, Turkey, United States*. (The tworetiring members replaced were Sweden and Yugo-slavia.)

Commission on the Status of Women: Cuba*, Do-minican Republic*, France*, Poland*, Sweden, Yugo-slavia. (The two retiring members replaced were theNetherlands and New Zealand.)

Commission on Narcotic Drugs: At its 749th plenarymeeting, the Council also elected the five members ofthe Commission on Narcotic Drugs which are electedevery three years (the remaining members serving foran indefinite period). It re-elected Egypt, Iran, Mexicoand Poland and elected Greece to replace the Nether-hinds.

United Nations Children's fund (UNICEF): Mem-bers of the Social Commission being ex officio membersof the Executive Board of UNICEF, the Council, inelecting members of this Commission (see above),automatically elected them as members of the Board.At its 749th plenary meeting it re-elected Italy andSwitzerland and elected Ecuador to replace Uruguay,as members of the Board.

Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination andProtection of Minorities

At its ninth session, held from 7 April to 30 May,the Commission on Human Rights elected new mem-bers of this Sub-Commission for a term of office com-mencing on 1 January 1954 and terminating on 31December 1956. The new members, elected by theCommission subject to the consent of their Govern-ments, were: Charles D. Ammoun (Lebanon); JorgeBocobo (Philippines); P. Chatenet (France); NikolaiP. Emelyanov (USSR); R. Hiscocks (United King-dom); Mrs. Oswald B. Lord (United States); M. R.Masani (India); M. A. Mohammed (Egypt); H. Roy(Haiti); Hernán Santa Cruz (Chile); Max Sorensen(Denmark); Joseph Winiewicz (Poland).

b. AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES OFPROCEDURE OF THE COUNCIL ANDITS SUBSIDIARY BODIES

The Economic and Social Council had beforeit, at its 674th and 675th plenary meetings on1 April 1953, a note by the Secretary-General(E/2355) on this subject.

Part I of the note contained the amendmentsproposed to the rules of procedure consequentupon the Assembly's endorsement (664(VII)) ofthe Council's opinion (456 C (XIV)) thatSpanish should be adopted34 as a working languageof the Council and its functional commissions,namely rules 35 to 38 of the Council and rules29 to 32 of its functional commissions.

34 See Y.U.N., 1952, pp. 76-79.


In Part II of the note the Secretary-Generalproposed that rule 37 of the functional com-missions concerning records should be amendedon the basis of the corresponding rule 43 of theCouncil which had been revised at the fourteenthsession (456(XIV)).35 As revised, this rulewould provide that participants in the discussionswould have three working days, instead of 48hours, to submit corrections to provisional sum-mary records for incorporation in the final textand that separate corrigenda would not normallybe issued.

A proposal by the USSR representative (E/-L.476) that the Council should also request theAssembly to give favourable consideration to thequestion of adopting Russian as a working lan-guage of the Council and its functional com-missions was rejected by 10 votes to 4, with 4abstentions.

The Council, at its 675th plenary meeting on1 April, on the basis of a draft resolution byArgentina, Cuba, Venezuela and Uruguay (E/-L.477) adopted (481(XV)) the revised rulesof procedure as contained in the note by theSecretary-General.36

The Economic Commission for Asia and theFar East, at its ninth session from 6 to 14 Feb-ruary 1953, decided to amend rule 5, paragraph(c) of its rules of procedure so that the provi-sional agenda for its sessions might include itemsproposed by any associate member of the Com-mission.

The Economic Commission for Latin America,at its fifth session from 9 to 25 April 1953,decided (E/2405) to amend its rules of pro-cedure37 with respect to the consultative statusof non-governmental organizations in accordancewith the recommendations of Council resolution414 C.1 (XIII),38 adopted on 18 September 1951.

c. QUESTION OF ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIPIN THE REGIONAL ECONOMIC COMMIS-SIONS OF STATES NOT MEMBERSOF THE UNITED NATIONS

The Council at its fifteenth session had beforeit an application from the Government of Afgha-nistan for the admission of that country tomembership in the Economic Commission forAsia and the Far East (ECAFE). The Council,at its 700th plenary meeting on 24 April 1953,adopted by 17 votes to none, with 1 abstention,a draft resolution by India (E/L.501). By thisresolution (465(XV)), the Council amended thelist of member States in the Commission's termsof reference to include Afghanistan as a member.

At its ninth session, from 6 to 14 February1953, ECAFE had had before it proposals toadmit certain associate members to full member-ship. The Commission adopted a resolution (E/-CN.11/370) recommending that the Council takeearly and full cognizance of the views of theCommission in the matter and admit to mem-bership of the Commission those associate mem-bers who are responsible for their own inter-national relations and who apply to the Com-mission for such membership.

The Council at its fifteenth session, at its 699thto 701st plenary meetings on 24 and 27 April,also had before it communications from the Gov-ernments of Cambodia (E/2400), Laos (E/2399)and Vietnam (E/2398), referring to the above-mentioned resolution of the Commission andapplying for membership in ECAFE.

In place of the draft resolution recommendedby ECAFE (E/2374),39 a draft resolution toadmit Cambodia, Ceylon, Japan, the Republic ofKorea, Laos, Nepal and Vietnam as members ofthe Commission was submitted jointly by Franceand the United States (E/L.504). Paragraph (b)of the draft resolution was modified by an amend-ment submitted by Australia (E/L.505) andaccepted by the sponsors. The draft resolution, asmodified, proposed:

"(a) to amend paragraph 3 of the terms of refer-ence of the Economic Commission for Asia and theFar East to include Cambodia, Ceylon, Japan, theRepublic of Korea, Laos, Nepal and Vietnam as mem-bers of the Commission, provided that in each case theStates agree to contribute annually such equitableamounts as the General Assembly shall assess fromtime to time in accordance with procedures establishedby the General Assembly in similar cases; and

"(b) to amend paragraph 4 to delete the above-mentioned countries from this paragraph as and wheneach country named in paragraph (a) becomes a fullmember of the Commission".40

A number of objections were raised against thedraft resolution. Some representatives, includingthose of India, Sweden and Yugoslavia, were doubt-ful as to whether the Council had the power underArticle 69 of the Charter to grant full member-ship or voting rights to States not Members ofthe United Nations in its regional economic com-

of the Economic and Social Council, Fifteenth Session,Supplement No. 1, Resolution 481(XV).

of these rules of procedure see Official Records of theEconomic and Social Council, Sixteenth Session, Sup-plement No. 3, Appendix D.

For discussion of annual report of ECAFE, seeunder Activities of the Regional Economic Commissions.

40 Words in italics indicate text as amended byAustralia.

See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 79. For text of the revised rules, see Official Records

Rules 8, 9, 9a (new rule), 38, 49, 50. For text

See Y.U.N., 1951, pp. 66-67.38

36

37

39

35


missions. The Indian representative also con-sidered the proposal premature. The representa-tives of Argentina, Egypt, India, the USSR andYugoslavia expressed the view that the Councilshould decide the question of granting member-ship to States not Members of the United Nationsby means of a general rule applicable to allregional commissions and felt that the draftresolution was not consistent with the Council'sprevious decision regarding voting rights for non-members of the United Nations participating ina consultative capacity in the Economic Com-mission for Europe (ECE). Doubts were alsoexpressed by the representatives of Poland, theUSSR and Yugoslavia as to whether certain of theStates recommended for membership in ECAFEin the draft resolution were responsible for theirown international relations.

On the other hand, the representatives of China,France, the United Kingdom and the UnitedStates were of the opinion that the Council wascompetent to act on this matter. They referredto a formal legal opinion given by the Secretariatat the Council's thirteenth session that the Coun-cil was competent to invite States not Membersof the United Nations to participate as full mem-bers in the regional commissions. Furthermore,the action proposed in the draft resolution wouldnot be inconsistent with what had been donewith regard to membership in ECE, since theproposal in that connexion had been that all thenon-member countries participating in the workof ECE in a consultative capacity should be givenfull voting rights en bloc without reference tothe merits of each individual case. It would alsobe possible to take a separate decision regardingeach individual State. With regard to the ques-tion of whether or not certain States were respon-sible for their own international relations, these

representatives drew the Council's attention tothe General Assembly's resolution 195(III),regarding the Government of the Republic ofKorea, and resolution 620(VII), which expressedthe General Assembly's opinion regarding theposition of Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam.

The Council, at its 701st plenary meeting on27 April, decided by 9 votes to 8, with 1 absten-tion, to adjourn to its sixteenth session the dis-cussion of the question of admission to mem-bership in the regional economic commissions ofStates not Members of the United Nations. Atits sixteenth session the Council deferred thequestion to its seventeenth session.

d. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COUNCILTO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

The Economic and Social Council, at its 750thplenary meeting on 5 August 1953, discussed thearrangements for its annual report to the Gen-eral Assembly and decided to follow the usualpractice of authorizing its President to prepareits report in consultation with the two Vice-Presidents and the Secretariat.

The Council's report (A/2430), which coveredthe period from 2 August 1952 to 5 August 1953,was divided into nine chapters: Chapter I (Con-stitutional and organizational questions); Chap-ter II (General economic questions); Chapter III(Economic development of under-developed coun-tries); Chapter IV (Social questions); Chapter V(Human rights); Chapter VI (General ques-tions); Chapter VII (Questions, of co-ordinationand relations with specialized agencies); ChapterVIII (Non-Governmental organizations); ChapterIX (Financial implications of the actions takenby the Council). The General Assembly at itseighth session considered the report in connexionwith the various substantive questions.41

D. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUSTEESHIP SYSTEMAND THE TRUSTEESHIP COUNCIL


The United Nations Charter contains a gen-eral "Declaration Regarding Non-Self-Govern-ing Territories" under which all Members of theUnited Nations responsible for administering suchTerritories undertake certain obligations.

For those Non-Self-Governing Territories notplaced under the International Trusteeship System,they undertake to transmit to the Secretary-Gen-eral information concerning economic, social andeducational conditions in the Territories. (Sum-maries and analyses of this information are con-

sidered by a committee of the General Assembly,the Committee on Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories).42

The International Trusteeship System applies tothose Non-Self-Governing Territories placed underit by individual Trusteeship Agreements. Thebasic objectives of the System are:

(1) to further international peace and security;(2) to promote the political, economic, social and

educational advancement of the inhabitants of the Trust41

See under appropriate headings.42

For the functions of this Committee, see Y.U.N.,1951, p. 81; for its members in 1953, see under

General Assembly's subsidiary bodies, Appendix I.


Territories and their progressive development towardsself-government or independence;

(3) to encourage respect for human rights andfundamental freedoms for all without distinction andto encourage recognition of the interdependence of thepeoples of the world; and

(4) to ensure equal treatment to Members of theUnited Nations and their nationals in social, economicand commercial matters and in the administration ofjustice.

The System applies to Territories in the follow-ing categories placed under it by individualTrusteeship Agreements:

(1) Territories held under Mandate;(2) Territories detached from enemy States as a

result of the Second World War; and(3) Territories voluntarily placed under the System

by the States responsible for their administration.The functions of the United Nations with re-

gard to Trusteeship Agreements for all Trust Ter-ritories not designated as strategic areas areexercised by the General Assembly with theassistance of the Trusteeship Council. For areasdesignated as strategic, these functions are theresponsibility of the Security Council.

The Trusteeship Council, under the Assembly'sauthority:

(1) considers reports submitted by the Administer-ing Authorities of the Trust Territories on the basisof a questionnaire prepared by the Council;

(2) accepts petitions and examines them in con-sultation with the Administering Authorities;

(3) provides for periodic visits to the Territories;and

(4) takes other actions in conformity with theterms of the Trusteeship Agreements.

Chapter XI of the Charter (Articles 73 and74) contains the Declaration Regarding Non-Self-Governing Territories.

Chapter XII (Articles 75-85) and ChapterXIII (Articles 86-91) deal with the InternationalTrusteeship System. Chapter XII establishes thisSystem and Chapter XIII defines the composition,functions and powers, voting and procedure of theTrusteeship Council. Other provisions relating tothe Council are to be found in Articles 1, 2, 7,15, 16, 18, 96, 98 and 101.43

2. Trusteeship Agreements

Trusteeship Agreements placing the followingTerritories under the International TrusteeshipSystem have been approved; the AdministeringAuthorities are designated in the Agreements.

AdministeringAuthorityFrance

Italy

New ZealandUnited Kingdom

United Kingdom

United KingdomUnited Kingdom,

New Zealandand Australia(administeredby Australia)

United States

Togoland underFrench Admin-istration

Somaliland underItalian Admin-istration

Western SamoaCameroons under

British Admin-istration

Togoland underBritish Admin-istration

TanganyikaNauru

(StrategicArea)

Trust Territoryof the PacificIslands

Approved bySecurityCouncil

2 April 1947

Although the terms of the Trusteeship Agree-ments vary, all contain provisions defining theTerritory to which the Agreement applies, desig-nating the Administering Authority and statingthe obligations and rights of the AdministeringAuthority. The Agreement for the strategic areaTrust Territory of the Pacific Islands and theAgreement for Somaliland under Italian Admin-istration differ in certain respects from the otherTrusteeship Agreements.44

3. Structure45

a. STANDING COMMITTEES(1) Standing Committee on Administrative Unions(2) Standing Committee on Petitions

43 A summary of the Declaration Regarding Non-Self-Governing Territories is given in Y.U.N., 1951,pp. 80-81, and the Charter provisions covering theInternational Trusteeship System and the TrusteeshipCouncil are summarized in Y.U.N., 1951, pp. 83-85.The text of the Charter is reproduced in Y.U.N., 1952,pp. 10-20.

ments is given in Y.U.N., 1952, pp. 40-42.45 This section lists the subsidiary bodies of the

Trusteeship Council during the year. The terms ofreference are given only for subsidiary bodies estab-lished during 1953 or where there has been a changein the functions of existing bodies; for the terms ofreference of bodies previously established, see Y.U.N.,1951, pp. 85-87 and Y.U.N., 1952, p. 42. The termsof reference of subsidiary bodies existing in January1954 are also given in Structure of the United Nations(Seventh Revision) January 1954 (ST/DPI/8). Mem-bers of subsidiary bodies and representatives servingon them during 1953 are listed in Appendix IV.

13 Dec. 1946

2 Dec. 1950

13 Dec. 194613 Dec. 1946

13 Dec. 1946

13 Dec. 19461 Nov. 1947

TrustTerritory

AgreementApproved by

General Assembly

AdministeringAuthorityAustraliaBelgiumFrance

New GuineaRuanda-UrundiCameroons under

French Admin-istration

TrustTerritory

13 Dec. 194613 Dec. 194613 Dec. 1946

AgreementApproved by

General Assembly

44

A summary of the main provisions of the Agree-

TRUSTEESHIPCOUNCIL


b. Ad Hoc COMMITTEES(1) Committee on Rural Economic Development of

the Trust Territories(2) Committee on Participation of Indigenous

Inhabitants in the Work of the Trusteeship Council

c. VISITING MISSIONSDuring 1953 a visiting mission of the Trustee-

ship Council went to the Trust Territories in thePacific.

The terms of reference of the Standing Com-mittee on Administrative Unions were alteredduring 1953 and the terms of reference of theCommittee on Participation of Indigenous Inhab-itants in the Work of the Trusteeship Councilestablished as follows:

(1) Standing Committee on AdministrativeUnions

The terms of reference of this Committee were en-larged by the Council at its twelfth session (resolution645(XII)) to permit it to study administrative unionsnot only with regard to the four safeguards enumeratedin Council resolution 293(VII)46 but also with regardto the interests of the inhabitants of the Territory andthe terms of the Charter and the Trusteeship Agree-ment, as well as any other matters which it may deemappropriate.

(2) Committee on Participation of IndigenousInhabitants in the Work of the

Trusteeship Council

This Committee was established by the Council on15 July by resolution 647(XII) to examine the ques-tion of participation of the indigenous inhabitants ofthe Trust Territories in the work of the TrusteeshipCouncil in the light of General Assembly resolution653(VII) and to report to the Council at its thirteenthsession.


The Trusteeship Council consists of:(1) Members of the United Nations administering

Trust Territories;

(2) Permanent members of the Security Councilwhich do not administer Trust Territories; and

(3) As many other members elected for a three-year term by the General Assembly as will ensure thatthe membership of the Council is equally dividedbetween Members which administer Trust Territoriesand Members which do not.

The following were the members of the Trustee-ship Council during 1953:Members Administering Trust Territories

Australia, Belgium, France, New Zealand, UnitedKingdom, United StatesPermanent Members of the Security Council not Admin-istering Trust Territories

China, USSRMembers Elected by the General Assembly

Dominican Republic, Thailand (to serve until 31December 1953); El Salvador, Syria (to serve until31 December 1955)

The officers of the Council, elected at the open-ing of the Council's twelfth session on 16 June1953, were:President: Leslie Knox Munro (New Zealand)Vice-President: Miguel Rafael Urquía (El Salvador)

5. Sessions of the Council and itsSubsidiary Bodies

The Trusteeship Council held its twelfth ses-sion from 16 June to 21 July at United NationsHeadquarters.

The Council's subsidiary organs held the fol-lowing meetings during the year:

Standing Committee on Administrative Unions: 7and 14 July, at Headquarters.

Standing Committee on Petitions: 17 March to 20July, 10 September, at Headquarters.

Committee on Rural Economic Development of theTrust Territories: 15 July, at Headquarters.

Committee on the Participation of Indigenous In-habitants in the Work of the Trusteeship Council: 2,12 and 6 February and 11, 15 and 17 March, atHeadquarters.

6. Matters Considered by the Council at its Twelfth Regular Session

Agenda Item1. Adoption of the agenda2. Report of the Secretary-General on credentials3. Election of a President and Vice-President4. Examination of annual reports of Administering

Authorities on the administration of Trust Terri-tories:(a) Somaliland under Italian administration, 1952(b) Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, year

ended 30 June 1952(c) New Guinea, year ended 30 June 1952

Consideration and Action TakenPlenary meeting 461Plenary meetings 461, 482Plenary meeting 461

Plenary meetings 462-467, 475, 483Plenary meetings 466-470, 479, 483

Plenary meetings 471-475, 482, 48346

See Y.U.N., 1950, p. 795.


Agenda Item(d) Nauru, year ended 30 June 1952(e) Western Samoa, 1951 and 1952

5. Examination of petitions

6. Reports of the United Nations Visiting Missionto Trust Territories in West Africa, 1952

7. Reports of the United Nations Visiting Missionto Trust Territories in the Pacific, 1953

8. Report of the Committee on Rural EconomicDevelopment of Trust Territories

9. Trusteeship Council resolution 467(XI): Generalprocedure of the Trusteeship Council

10. General Assembly resolution 649(VII): Admin-istrative unions affecting Trust Territories

11. General Assembly resolution 652(VII): The Eweand Togoland unification problem

12. General Assembly resolution 653(VII): Participa-tion of the indigenous inhabitants of the TrustTerritories in the government of those Territoriesand in the work of the Trusteeship Council

13. General Assembly resolution 654(VII): Reportof the Trusteeship Council

14. General Assembly resolution 655(VII): Hearingof petitioners from the Trust Territory of theCameroons under French administration

15. General Assembly resolution 656(VII): Hearingof petitioners from the Trust Territory of Somali-land under Italian administration

16. Educational advancement in Trust Territories:report of the Secretary-General on offers of fellow-ships, scholarships and internships for inhabitantsof Trust Territories made in pursuance of GeneralAssembly resolution 557(VI)

17. Provision of information on the activities of theUnited Nations in Trust Territories: report of theSecretary-General on the implementation of theprovisions of Trusteeship Council resolution 36(III)

18. Adoption of the report of the Trusteeship Councilto the General Assembly

Consideration and Action TakenPlenary meetings 470-472, 479, 483Plenary meetings 475-479, 482, 483Standing Committee on Petitions meetings 43-96.

Plenary meetings 461, 462, 469, 474, 479, 480,482, 483. Resolutions 649-865 (XII)

Plenary meeting 480. Further consideration postponedto thirteenth session

Plenary meetings 466-479, 482. Resolution 648(XII)

Committee on Rural Economic Development meeting12. Plenary meeting 482

Plenary meeting 482

Standing Committee on Administrative Unions meetings43, 44. Plenary meeting 477. Resolution 645(XII)


Plenary meetings 480, 481. Resolution 647(XII)

Plenary meeting 480

Plenary meeting 480. Consideration postponed tothirteenth session

Plenary meetings 465, 466, 475-477. Resolution 644(XII)

Plenary meeting 480. Resolution 646(XII)

Plenary meeting 482

Plenary meeting 483

7. General Discussion of Conditions in Trust Territories

At the General Assembly's eighth session, theFourth Committee held a general discussion ofconditions in Trust Territories at its 379th to386th meetings from 24 November to 1 Decem-ber. The following list shows the participation ofMembers in the general debate47 on the reportof the Trusteeship Council (A/2427) and themeetings at which they were heard. The views ofMembers on individual questions are dealt withunder the appropriate subject headings.

CountryDominican RepublicEgyptEl SalvadorFranceGuatemalaHaitiIndiaIndonesiaLebanonLiberiaNew ZealandPakistanPhilippinesPolandSaudi Arabia

Meeting381386384386384380380383383381383383385386385

Date27 Nov.1 Dec.

30 Nov.1 Dec.

30 Nov.25 Nov.25 Nov.30 Nov.30 Nov.27 Nov.30 Nov.30 Nov.

1 Dec.1 Dec.1 Dec.

47 The list refers to general statements by delegationsand does not show interventions by representatives onindividual points.

CountryAustraliaBrazilBurmaByelorussian SSRColombiaCzechoslovakia

Meeting381386386385379384

Date27 Nov.

1 Dec.1 Dec.1 Dec.

24 Nov.30 Nov.


CountrySyriaUkrainian SSRUSSRUnited KingdomUnited StatesUruguay

Yugoslavia

Meeting384384383386386385380381

Date30 Nov.30 Nov.30 Nov.1 Dec.1 Dec.1 Dec.

25 Nov.27 Nov.


a. ELECTIONS(1) Election by the General Assembly of Two

Members of the Trusteeship Council

At its 451st plenary meeting on 5 October, theGeneral Assembly elected India and Haiti asmembers of the Trusteeship Council for a three-year term, beginning 1 January 1954, to replacethe Dominican Republic and Thailand, retiringmembers.

India and Haiti were elected on the first ballot,receiving 55 and 51 votes, respectively. Othervotes obtained were: Indonesia—12; Thailand,the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Norway andthe Philippines—one vote each.

(2) Election of Subsidiary Bodies of the Council

At its 482nd plenary meeting on 20 July, theCouncil appointed Australia, Belgium, the UnitedKingdom (representatives of Members administer-ing Trust Territories), El Salvador, Syria and theUSSR (representatives of Members having noadministering responsibilities) to serve on theStanding Committee on Petitions until the closeof the thirteenth regular session in 1954.

By resolution 647 (XII), the Council, at its481st plenary meeting on 15 July, decided thatthe Committee on the Participation of IndigenousInhabitants in the Work of the Trusteeship Coun-cil should be composed of representatives of ElSalvador, Syria, the United Kingdom and theUnited States.

b. PROCEDURES OF THE COUNCIL

By resolution 467 (XI), the Council at itseleventh session decided to adopt provisionallya number of amendments to several of its rulesof procedure and to reconsider them in the lightof experience at its twelfth session. It also invitedthe Standing Committee on Petitions to reportto it at its twelfth session on the effectiveness ofthe new rules of procedure affecting the handlingof petitions.

At its 482nd meeting on 20 July, the Councilconsidered the report of the Standing Committee

on Petitions (T/L.392), in which the Committeenoted, inter alia, that since the Council had madeits request it had held only one session. TheCommittee expressed the opinion that it wouldbe advantageous to defer consideration of theprocedural question until the new rules had beenin operation for a period covering a full cycleof two sessions of the Council, in order thatgreater experience of their operation might beobtained.

Consequently, the Committee recommended,and the Council decided, without objection, thatthe time limit for the submission of the reportof the Committee on the question should beextended to the thirteenth session of the Council.

At the same meeting, the Council also con-sidered a report (T/1044 & Corr.1) on proceduresof visiting missions submitted by the UnitedNations Visiting Mission to Trust Territories inWest Africa, 1952. In its report, the VisitingMission suggested that more flexibility shouldbe permitted to a visiting mission in drawing upits itinerary and work programme. On the ques-tion of communications and petitions, the sameVisiting Mission, which was the first mission tovisit Trust Territories after the revision of theCouncil's rules of procedure relating to petitions,stated that, from its own experience, the changesmade by the Council were timely. In order toensure that the new procedure was most effectivelyapplied, it recommended that, in preparing theitinerary of future visiting missions, fixed periodsshould be set aside at regular intervals throughoutthe visit for the primary purpose of enablingeach mission to review the communications andother information it had received and to formulateappropriate inquiries and carry out necessaryinvestigations into the more important petitions.

The Council decided that it would take thesesuggestions into account when making arrange-ments for its future visiting missions and thatit would direct the next visiting mission to con-sider the suggestions when preparing its itinerary.

c. THE QUESTION OF PROCEDURE FOR ORALHEARINGS BY THE FOURTH COMMITTEE

Recalling that at the seventh session of theGeneral Assembly his delegation had submitted adraft resolution (A/C.4/L.240/Rev.1)48 on thequestion of oral hearings of petitioners by theFourth Committee, the representative of theDominican Republic stated at the 317th meetingof the Fourth Committee, at the Assembly's eighthsession, on 25 September that a general decision

48 See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 85.


would have to be reached on how to deal with theproblem of deciding which petitions warrantedoral presentation in the Fourth Committee.

The United Kingdom representative, at the318th meeting on 28 September, proposed (A/-C.4/L.271) that a sub-committee be establishedto make recommendations concerning the pro-cedure to be followed in considering applicationsfrom petitioners for hearings, including the con-siderations to be taken into account by the FourthCommittee in reaching decisions in individualcases. The proposal recommended that the sub-committee should consist of eight members, fourof whom would be members of the TrusteeshipCouncil—two administering and two non-admin-istering. The representative of the United King-dom stated that the proposal was in no wayintended to restrict the right of petition of theinhabitants of the Trust Territories. It was imper-ative, however, that some general rules shouldbe adopted by the Committee in the interests oforderly procedure.

The United Kingdom proposal was subsequentlyrevised (A/C.4/L.271/Rev.1). The provisionwhich would require half the members of theCommittee to be members of the TrusteeshipCouncil was deleted. A provision was added thatthe proposed Committee should submit its reportwithin fourteen days of the appointment of itsmembers.

Support for the United Kingdom proposal wasexpressed by the representatives of Belgium,Colombia, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, France,Greece, Israel, the Netherlands and the Union ofSouth Africa, among others. Those opposing thedraft, with or without reservations, included therepresentatives of Argentina, Bolivia, Burma,Chile, Czechoslovakia, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Guate-mala, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Liberia, Mexico,Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Syria, theUSSR, Uruguay, Yemen and Yugoslavia. Gen-erally speaking, these representatives did not feelthat the number of requests for oral hearingswarranted making provision for a procedure con-cerning the hearing of petitioners by the FourthCommittee; they also felt that it was desirablenot only that petitioners should have direct accessto the General Assembly but that the Assemblyshould avail itself of the opportunity of hearingpetitioners in order to aid it in its considerationof questions before it

At the 320th meeting on 29 September, theUnited Kingdom proposal was put to the vote,22 votes being cast in favour, 23 against, and 12abstentions. The proposal was accordingly rejected.

d. ANNUAL REPORTS OF THE COUNCIL

(1) Report to the General Assembly

The annual report of the Trusteeship Councilto the General Assembly (A/2427), covering theperiod from 4 December 1952 to 21 July 1953,was adopted by the Council at its 483rd plenarymeeting on 21 July 1953 by 11 votes to none, with1 abstention.

Under the agenda item "Report of the Trustee-ship Council", the General Assembly considered,among other things, the questionnaire for theTrust Territories; measures taken or planned byAdministering Authorities to bring Trust Ter-ritories toward self-government or independence;the use of scholarships for the advancement ofeducation in the Trust Territories; the spread ofinformation about the United Nations in thoseTerritories; the preparation of Somaliland underItalian Administration for its coming independ-ence in 1960; the possibility of appointing UnitedNations representatives to the Trust Territories;and assistance to the people of the Ngoa-EkeleCommunity in the Cameroons under FrenchAdministration, whose land had been expro-priated.49

At its 392nd meeting on 4 December the Gen-eral Assembly's Fourth Committee adopted (A/-2608 G), by 45 votes to none, with 5 abstentions,a draft resolution by Denmark (A/C.4/L.326)taking note of the report. The resolution was, inturn, adopted by 48 votes to none, with 3 absten-tions, at the Assembly's 471st plenary meeting on9 December 1953, as resolution 746(VIII). Bythis resolution, the Assembly took note of theCouncil's report and recommended that theTrusteeship Council, in its future deliberations,take into account the comments and suggestionsmade in the course of the discussion of thereport at the Assembly's eighth session.

(2) Report to the Security Council

In accordance with Article 83 of the Charterand with the agreement reached in 1949 by theTrusteeship and Security Councils concerningtheir respective functions as regards strategic areasunder Trusteeship, the Trusteeship Council, atits 466th to 470th and 479th plenary meetingsheld from 23 to 29 June and 13 July, examinedthe annual report (T/1047) of the Governmentof the United States on its administration of theTrust Territory of the Pacific Islands for theyear ended 30 June 1952. The Council, at its483rd plenary meeting on 21 July, adopted a

49 These items are dealt with under the respectiveheadings.


report (S/3066, Part II) on the exercise of itsfunctions in respect of this strategic area for theperiod 2 April 1952 to 21 July 1953. This report

was transmitted by the Secretary-General to theSecurity Council but was not discussed by theSecurity Council during 1953.

E. THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

1. Provisions of the Charter and theStatute of the Court

The Court is the principal judicial organ ofthe United Nations. It functions in accordancewith its Statute, which is an integral part of theUnited Nations Charter.

The Court's function is to decide in accordanceWith international law such disputes as are sub-mitted to it. It applies: international conventionsestablishing rules expressly recognized by the con-testing States; international custom, as evidenceof a general practice accepted as law; the generalprinciples of law recognized by civilized nations;judicial decisions and the teachings of the mosthighly qualified publicists of the various nations,as subsidiary means for the determination of therules of law.

It also gives advisory opinions to the GeneralAssembly and the Security Council on any legalquestion, and opinions on legal questions arisingwithin their activities to other organs of theUnited Nations and specialized agencies whichare authorized by the Assembly to request them.

The Charter provisions concerning the Courtare contained in Chapter XIV (Articles 92-96)which defines the position of the Court in theUnited Nations organization, the obligations ofMembers of the United Nations with respect tothe Court and the relationship between the Courtand the other organs of the United Nations. TheStatute of the Court, which forms an integral partof the Charter, contains five Chapters. Chapter Ideals with the Court's organization; Chapter IIdefines its competence; Chapter III sets forth itsprocedure; Chapter IV lays down the conditionsunder which the Court may give advisory opinions;and Chapter V contains provisions for amend-ments to the Statute.50

2. Parties to the Statute of the Court

All Members of the United Nations ate ipsofacto parties to the Court's Statute. In accordancewith Article 93 of the Charter, non-UnitedNations members may become parties in accord-

ance with conditions determined in each caseby the General Assembly on the recommenda-tion of the Security Council.

Under this provision Switzerland became aparty to the Court's Statute on 28 June 1948 andLiechtenstein on 29 March 1950. The conditions,which were identical in each case, provided forthe deposit with the Secretary-General of theUnited Nations of an instrument containing:

acceptance of the Statute; acceptance of the obliga-tions under Article 94 of the Charter; and an under-taking to contribute to the expenses of the Court anequitable amount assessed by the Assembly from timeto time after consultation with the government con-cerned.

a. APPLICATIONS OF JAPANAND SAN MARINO

During 1953, Japan on 26 October (S/3126)and the Republic of San Marino on 6 November(S/3137) applied to become parties to theStatute.

On the recommendation of its Committee ofExperts (S/3146 & S/3147), the Security Coun-cil, at its 645th plenary meeting on 3 Decem-ber, recommended to the General Assembly (A/-2600 & A/2601) the conditions on which eachof the two States might become a party. In eachcase the Council's recommendation was adoptedby 10 votes to none, with 1 abstention.

The Security Council's recommendations, asembodied in draft resolutions by Lebanon (A/-L.174) in regard to Japan and by Chile (A/-L.175) in regard to San Marino, were adoptedby the General Assembly at its 471st plenarymeeting on 9 December 1953, each by 51 votesto none, with 5 abstentions.

By these resolutions (805(VIII) and 806(VIII)), the Assembly kid down conditions iden-tical with those previously established for Switzer-land and Liechtenstein.51

50

A summary of the main provisions concerning theCourt is given in Y.U.N., 1951, pp. 102-106. Thetext of the Charter and of the Statute is reproducedin Y.U.N., 1952, pp. 10-26.

51 San Marino deposited its instrument of ratificationon 18 February 1954 and Japan on 2 April 1954,thereby becoming parties to the Statute on those dates.


Registrar: Edvard Hambro (Norwegian)

54

Deputy-Registrar: Jean Garnier-Coignet (French)

a. ELECTION OF JUDGE KOZHEVNIKOVThe General Assembly at its 458th plenary

meeting and the Security Council at its 644thplenary meeting, the meetings being held con-currently on 27 November, elected Feodor Ivano-vich Kozhevnikov (USSR) to fill the vacancycaused by the resignation of Judge Sergei A.Golunsky. Judge Kozhevnikov's term of office,which is the unexpired term of Judge Golunsky,will expire on 5 February 1961.

The Assembly and the Council had before themthe list of candidates nominated by nationalgroups (A/2521 & Corr.1 & Add.1 & 2; S/3127& Add. 1 & 2) and a note by the Secretary-Gen-eral (A/2574 & S/3144) containing an explana-tion of the voting procedure. It was noted thatthe candidatures of Choucri Kardahi (Lebanon),Charles de Visscher (Belgium) and Jean Spiropou-los (Greece) had been withdrawn.

In accordance with General Assembly resolu-tion 264(III), Liechtenstein and Switzerland,parties to the Statute of the Court but not Mem-bers of the United Nations, participated in theelection in the General Assembly.

Mr. Kozhevnikov received an absolute majorityon the first ballot in both the General Assemblyand the Security Council. The voting was asfollows:

General Assembly—Mr. Kozhevnikov 52 votes;Ernesto Dihigo (Cuba) and Juan Bautista de Lavalle(Peru) one vote each; Security Council—Mr. Kozhev-nikov 9 votes; Mr. de Lavalle one vote, one ballot paperbeing blank.

4. Chamber of Summary Procedure

The members of the Chamber of SummaryProcedure, elected for one year, beginning 13May 1953 were:

MEMBERS: President: Sir Arnold Duncan McNair;Vice-President: Jose Gustavo Guerrero; Judges Basde-vant, Hackworth and Hsu; Substitutes: Judges Klaestadand Badawi.

5. Matters Considered by the Courtduring 1953

During 1953 the Court dealt with the followingmatters:

Minquiers and Ecrehos CaseAmbatielos Case (Merits: Obligation to arbitrate)Nottebohm Case (Preliminary Objection)Case of the Monetary Gold removed from Rome in

1943 (Determination of time-limits)Electricité de Beyrouth Company Case (Determina-

tion of time-limits)Election of the members of the Chamber of Summary

ProcedureAdministrative matters

6. States Accepting the CompulsoryJurisdiction of the Court

Declarations made by the following Statesaccepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the Inter-national Court of Justice (or made under theStatute of the Permanent Court of InternationalJustice and deemed to be an acceptance of thejurisdiction of the International Court for theperiod for which they still have to run) had notceased to be in force in accordance with theirterms at the end of 1953:AUSTRALIACANADACHINACOLOMBIA

DENMARKDOMINICAN

REPUBLICEL SALVADOR

FRANCEHAITIHONDURASINDIA

November to fill the unexpired term of Judge Golunsky(USSR) who resigned by letter dated 18 July 1953.

Was succeeded on 1 January 1954 by Julio LópezOliván.

1955

1955195519551961195819581961195819581958195519611961

1961

Sir Arnold Duncan McNair (British) (President)Jose Gustavo Guerrero (El Salvadorean)

(Vice-President)Alejandro Alvarez (Chilean)Jules Basdevant (French)Green H. Hackworth (United States)Bohdan Winiarski (Polish)Milovan Zoricic (Yugoslav)Helge Klaestad (Norwegian)Abdel Hamid Badawi (Egyptian)John E. Read (Canadian)Hsu Mo (Chinese)Levi Fernandes Carneiro (Brazilian)Sir Benegal N. Rau (Indian)52

E. C. Armand Ugon (Uruguayan)Sergei A. Golunsky (USSR)53

Feodor Ivanovich Kozhevnikov (USSR)


The Court consists of fifteen judges electedby the General Assembly and the Security Coun-cil, proceeding independently. They serve nineyears and are eligible for re-election. Their termof office begins on the date of the first election,6 February.

The names and nationality of the judges serv-ing during 1953, in order of precedence, with theyear their term of office ends were:

Died on 30 November 1953. Judge Kozhevnikov (USSR) was elected on 27

52

53


ISRAELLIBERIALIECHTENSTEINLUXEMBOURGMEXICONETHERLANDSNEW ZEALAND

NICARAGUANORWAYPAKISTANPANAMAPARAGUAY55

PHILIPPINESSWEDEN

SWITZERLANDTHAILANDUNION OF SOUTH

AFRICAUNITED KINGDOMUNITED STATESURUGUAY

Most of these declarations are for a specifiedperiod56 and are made on condition of reciprocity;most of them have reservations attached.57

7. Organs Authorized to RequestAdvisory Opinions from

the Court

By the end of 1953 the following were author-ized to request advisory opinions from the Court:

Authorized in the Charter to request advisoryopinions on any legal question:

General AssemblySecurity CouncilAuthorized by the General Assembly in accordance

with the Charter to request advisory opinions on legalquestions arising within the scope of their activities:

Economic and Social CouncilTrusteeship CouncilInterim Committee of the General AssemblyInternational Labour OrganisationFood and Agriculture Organization of the United

NationsUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

OrganizationInternational Civil Aviation OrganizationWorld Health OrganizationInternational Bank for Reconstruction and Develop-

mentInternational Monetary FundInternational Telecommunication UnionWorld Meteorological Organization

F. THE SECRETARIAT


The Secretariat consists of a Secretary-Generaland such staff as the Organization may require.

The main Charter provisions concerning theSecretariat are contained in Chapter XV (Articles97-101). Other provisions are to be found inArticles 7, 12, 20, 73, 102, 105 and 110 of theCharter, and Articles 5, 7, 13, 14, 18, 36, 40, 67and 70 of the Statute of the Court.58

2. Appointment of the Secretary-General

In letters dated 6 and 7 March 1953 (S/2948& S/2947) the representatives of France and theUnited Kingdom requested that a meeting of theSecurity Council be held to consider the recom-mendation to be made by the Council to theGeneral Assembly concerning the replacement asSecretary-General of Trygve Lie, who had tenderedhis resignation.59

At its 612th to 617th meetings, held in privatebetween 11 and 31 March 1953, the SecurityCouncil considered this question.

At the 612th meeting three persons were sug-gested for recommendation by the Council. Therepresentative of the United States proposedBrigadier General Carlos P. Rómulo, the rep-resentative of the USSR proposed StanislawSkrzeszewski and the representative of Denmark

proposed Lester B. Pearson. These three proposalswere voted upon by secret ballot at the 613thmeeting, and all failed of adoption. The UnitedStates proposal received 5 votes in favour, 2against, and 4 abstentions, and the USSR proposalreceived 1 vote in favour, 3 against, and 7 absten-tions; both were not adopted because they failed toreceive seven affirmative votes. The Danish pro-posal received 9 votes in favour, 1 against, and 1abstention, and was not adopted owing to thenegative vote of a permanent member.

The Security Council then requested the per-manent members to hold consultations concern-ing the recommendation for the appointment ofthe Secretary-General.

At the 6l4th meeting on 19 March, the re-presentative of the USSR proposed that the Coun-cil should recommend the appointment of Mrs.Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit. The USSR proposal, votedon by secret ballot at the same meeting, wasnot adopted, receiving 2 votes in favour, 1 against,and 8 abstentions. The permanent members were

55 Paraguay's declaration was made without limitationof duration. It was withdrawn by Paraguay by a decisionof 26 April 1938.

Fopp. 123-24.

For details concerning declarations, including con-ditions, see I.C.J. Yearbook, 1951-1952, pp. 186-197.

58 A summary of the relevant Charter provisions is

contained in Y.U.N., 1951, p. 107. The text of theCharter and of the Statute is reproduced in Y.U.N.,1952, pp. 10-26.

59 See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 90.

r duration of declarations, see Y.U.N., 1950,

57

55


requested to continue their consultations on thematter.

No nominations were made at the 615th and616th meetings and the consultations among thepermanent members continued.

At the 617th meeting on 31 March, the repre-sentative of France proposed that the Council re-commend the appointment of Dag Hammarskjold,Swedish Minister of State, as Secretary-General.This proposal was voted upon by secret ballot andwas adopted by 10 votes to none, with 1 absten-tion.

The President of the Security Council, in a let-ter dated 31 March (S/2975), informed thePresident of the General Assembly of the Coun-cil's recommendations. He also addressed a cable-gram to Mr. Hammarskjold informing him of therecommendation and expressing the hope of themembers of the Council that, in view of the im-mense importance of the post, especially at thattime, he would agree to accept the appointmentif it were made by the General Assembly.

At its 423rd plenary meeting on 7 April 1953,the General Assembly considered the question ofthe appointment of the Secretary-General. ThePresident stated that in taking up this item theAssembly accepted with great regret the resigna-tion of Mr. Lie, to whom he expressed a sense ofdeep gratitude. He then read to the Assembly theletter from the President of the Security Council(S/2975 & A/2380).

The Assembly unanimously adopted a Canadiandraft resolution (A/L.150) providing that theterms of appointment of the second Secretary-General should be the same as those of the firstSecretary-General (resolution 709(VII)).60

Voting by secret ballot, the Assembly thenadopted by 57 votes to 1, with 1 abstention, therecommendation of the Security Council for theappointment of Mr. Hammarskjold.

At the 426th plenary meeting on 10 April 1953,Mr. Hammarskjold took the oath of office.

3. Administrative Organizationof the Secretariat

At the end of 1953, the Secretariat was or-ganized in the following principal units.61

SECRETARY-GENERAL

Executive Office of the Secretary-GeneralOffice of the Executive AssistantGeneral Assembly Affairs and Administrative Sec-

tionProtocol and Liaison Section

Office of the Director of Co-ordination for Spe-cialized Agencies and Economic and SocialMatters

Library

Department of Political and Security Council AffairsOffice of the Assistant Secretary-GeneralGeneral Political DivisionAdministrative and General DivisionDisarmament Affairs Group

Military Staff Committee SecretariatDepartment of Economic Affairs

Office of the Assistant Secretary-GeneralDivision of Economic Stability and DevelopmentFiscal DivisionDivision of Transport and CommunicationsStatistical Office

Economic and Social Council Secretariat62

Secretariats of the Economic Commission forEurope, for Asia and the Far East, and forLatin America

Technical Assistance AdministrationOffice of the Director-GeneralExecutive OfficeProgramme DivisionPublic Administration Division

Department of Social AffairsOffice of the Assistant Secretary-GeneralCartographic OfficeDivision of Human RightsDivision of Narcotic DrugsPopulation DivisionDivision of Social Welfare

Department of Trusteeship and Information fromNon-Self-Governing Territories

Office of the Assistant Secretary-GeneralDivision of TrusteeshipDivision of Information from Non-Self-Govern-

ing TerritoriesDepartment of Public Information

Office of the Assistant Secretary-General andExternal Services63

Management and Circulation DivisionPress and Publications BureauRadio DivisionFilms and Visual Information DivisionSpecial Services Division

Legal DepartmentOffice of the Assistant Secretary-GeneralGeneral Legal DivisionDivision for the Development and Codification of

International LawDivision of Immunities and Treaties

Conference and General ServicesOffice of the Assistant Secretary-General

Conference Section

is reproduced in Y.U.N., 1946-47, p. 82.

ments, the Executive Office of the Secretary-Generaland the Technical Assistance Administration is con-tained in Y.U.N., 1952, pp. 45-51.

of Social Affairs. For United Nations Information Centres which

come under this Office, see list at end of volume.

See resolution 11(I) of 1 February 1946; this text

A summary of the functions of the eight depart-

Jointly under the Departments of Economic and

61

60

63

62


Bureau of General ServicesPurchase and Transportation DivisionCommunications and Records DivisionTelecommunications ServiceUnited Nations Postal AdministrationBuildings Management Service

Bureau of DocumentsDocuments Control DivisionLanguage Services DivisionPublishing DivisionStenographic Service

Administrative and financial ServicesOffice of the Assistant Secretary-General

Secretariat of the Advisory Committee on Ad-ministrative and Budgetary Questions

Secretariat of the Administrative TribunalSecretariat of the Joint Appeals Board and

Joint Disciplinary CommitteeSecretariat of the Joint Staff Pension Board and

the United Nations Staff Pension CommitteeBureau of Finance

Budget Division

Accounts DivisionTreasury

Bureau of PersonnelAppointments and Staff Relations DivisionPolicy, Training and Examination DivisionTechnical Assistance Recruitment Office

Inspection ServiceHealth ServiceUnited Nations Field Operations Service

European Regional Office of the United NationsIn addition, there were portions of the secretariats

of the Technical Assistance Board, the United NationsChildren's Fund and the United Nations Korean Re-construction Agency, as well as liaison officers for theOffice of the United Nations High Commissioner forRefugees and for the United Nations Relief and WorksAgency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, withoffices at Headquarters which form part of the UnitedNations Secretariat but do not administratively comeunder any of the eight Departments or the TechnicalAssistance Administration.

G. CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS

1. Preparatory Work for the PossibleHolding of a General Conference

for Charter Review

a. STATEMENTS AT THE OPENING OF THEGENERAL ASSEMBLY'S EIGHTH SESSION

Article 109 of the Charter provides that a pro-posal to call a General Conference for the pur-pose of reviewing the Charter shall be placed onthe agenda of the tenth annual session of theGeneral Assembly if such a conference has notbeen held before. References to the preparatorymeasures for such a conference and to the re-vision of the Charter were made during the gen-eral debate at the opening of the eighth session ofthe General Assembly. A number of representa-tives, including those of Egypt, the Netherlands,New Zealand and the United Kingdom, while notcommitting their Governments on the questionof Charter revision or of the calling of a con-ference, expressed the view that preparatorystudies should be undertaken by the Secretariatin case the Assembly at its tenth session did de-cide to hold such a conference.

The representatives of Brazil, the DominicanRepublic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Panama, Peru andVenezuela, among others, expressed views in fa-vour of calling such a conference and in favourof revising the Charter.

The representative of the United States saidthat the Charter should be reviewed in the lightof experience. He referred to a resolution adoptedby the United States Senate in 1948 calling for

the elimination of the rule of unanimity in theSecurity Council from all questions involving thepacific settlement of disputes and the admissionof new Members.

The representative of Sweden stated that nodifficulties could be solved by the mere amend-ment of a document. The "veto", he said, merelyreflected the fact that no Great Power wouldagree to be bound by decisions unacceptable toit. It was not practicable, at present, to think interms of a world government and, in his view,there was no immediate need to revise the Charter.

The representative of Colombia, while agreeingwith the view that the Charter might be im-proved, cautioned against any step which mightharm the United Nations as a whole. The repre-sentative of Israel questioned whether the effec-tiveness of the Organization would be increasedby a review of the Charter.

The representatives of the Byelorussian SSR,Czechoslovakia, Poland, the Ukrainian SSR andthe USSR opposed categorically the idea of revis-ing the Charter in the present state of interna-tional tension. They characterized the suggestedpreparatory measures as part of a campaign di-rected, mainly by the United States, against thefundamental principles of the Charter, particular-ly against the rule of unanimity of the permanentmembers in the Security Council.

b. CONSIDERATION BY THESIXTH COMMITTEE

At its 435th plenary meeting on 17 September1953, the General Assembly referred to the Sixth


Committee the following three items:(1) An item proposed by Argentina (A/2415) en-

titled: "Publication of documents concerning the draft-ing and application of the Charter". In its explanatorymemorandum, Argentina stated that since some pro-visions of the Charter had given rise to varyinginterpretations it was necessary to refer to the pre-paratory work in connexion with the drafting of theCharter. It was also important to know the interpreta-tion given and the practice followed by the UnitedNations. The Argentine delegation therefore proposedthat the Secretary-General be given the means toprepare and publish:

"(a) a systematic compilation of the documents ofthe San Francisco Conference not yet published;

"(b) a complete index of all the documents of theSan Francisco Conference;

"(c) a systematic and comprehensive study of thelegislative history of the Charter; and

"(d) a repertory of the practice followed by themain organs of the United Nations on given subjects."

(2) An item proposed by the Netherlands (A/2442)entitled: "Preparatory work with regard to the possibleholding of a General Conference of the Members ofthe United Nations in accordance with Article 109 ofthe Charter". In its explanatory memorandum, theNetherlands delegation stated that, under paragraph3 of Article 109, a proposal to call a General Con-ference of the Members of the United Nations for thepurpose of reviewing the present Charter shall be placedon the agenda of the tenth session of the GeneralAssembly, if such a conference has not been heldbefore. In order to facilitate the examination at theAssembly's tenth session of the question whether toconvene such a conference, the Netherlands proposedthat preparatory work be undertaken by the Secretary-General and by individual Member States. The Nether-lands memorandum stated that part of its proposalcould be covered by the repertory of practice con-templated in the Argentine memorandum if such aa study were undertaken with due regard to Article109. The Netherlands proposal also envisaged an invi-tation to Member States to submit their views withregard to Charter revision prior to the tenth session.

(3) An item proposed by Egypt (A/2466/Add.1)entitled: "Amendment of the Charter; election of atechnical committee to study and report on the amend-ment of the Charter on the basis of proposals to besubmitted by Member States". The explanatory memo-randum by Egypt stated that the United NationsCharter needed revision, having been drafted in specialcircumstances which no longer prevailed. The memo-randum then referred to the General Conference en-visaged in Article 109 and proposed the election of atechnical committee to prepare the preliminary work inconnexion with Charter revision. It stated that theproposal was complementary to those of Argentina andthe Netherlands and that the three proposals could belinked together.

(1) Memorandum by the Secretary-General

The Secretary-General submitted a memoran-dum (A/C.6/343) to the Sixth Committee con-taining a detailed description of the official re-cords of the San Francisco Conference and in-dicating, in particular, that the only official re-

cords not published up to the present time werethe documents of the Co-ordination Committee,including the summary reports of the AdvisoryCommittee of Jurists. The memorandum outlinedthe manner in which a chronological and synop-tical index of the documentation of the Confer-ence could be prepared by the Secretariat and in-dicated that the preparation of a systematic andcomprehensive study of the legislative history ofthe Charter, previously undertaken, had had to bedeferred in order to give priority to the prepara-tion of a repertory of the practice of the UnitedNations under the Charter. The Secretary-Generalsuggested that the main purpose of publishing alegislative history of the Charter might beachieved by the preparation of a comprehensiveindex to the San Francisco documentation.

The memorandum also contained a report onthe initial steps taken within the Secretariat witha view to a preparation of a co-ordinated historyof the application of the Charter provisions. Thisstudy, the Secretary-General noted, would corres-pond closely to the Argentine and the Nether-lands proposals.

A summary of the financial implications of theArgentine proposals stated that the total mini-mum expense would be $99,115 and the maxi-mum $120,000. The expected revenue was be-tween $1,250 and $5,000, the Secretary-Generalconcluded.

(2) Proposals before the Sixth Committee

The Sixth Committee considered the three itemsjointly at its 371st to 380th meetings from 19October to 4 November. The following draft reso-lutions were submitted:

(1) A draft resolution by Argentina (A/2415/Add.1),which in its operative part would provide for theSecretary-General to publish before the end of 1954the studies enumerated in the Argentine memorandum(see above).

(2) A draft resolution by Costa Rica and Egypt (A/-C.6/L.305), under which the General Assembly would:(a) request the Secretary-General to prepare all therelevant documents and materials necessary for thepreparatory work for a General Conference; (b) estab-lish an advisory committee of fifteen members to assistthe Secretary-General in the preparatory work; (c)request the committee to prepare a questionnaire to becirculated to Member States to ascertain their pre-liminary views; and (d) request the committee furtherto receive, examine, analyse and co-ordinate the viewsexpressed by the Member States and report to theGeneral Assembly not later than 30 June 1955. Underthe draft resolution, the General Assembly would inviteMember States to submit their views on the question-naire prepared by the committee.

(3) A draft resolution submitted jointly by Argentina,Canada, Cuba, the Netherlands, New Zealand andPakistan (A/C.6/L.306/Rev.2), which would refer in


the preamble to the provisions of Article 109 of theCharter and state: (a) that the examination of a proposalto hold a General Conference would require consider-able preparation on the part of both the Secretary-General and Member States; and (b) that a study ofthe legislative history of the Charter and of the practicefollowed by the various organs of the United Nationswould be one of the best methods of acquiringknowledge of the Charter and would greatly facilitatethe Assembly's consideration, at its tenth annual session,of the question of calling a General Conference.

Under paragraph 1 of the operative part of thisdraft resolution, the General Assembly would requestthe Secretary-General to prepare and publish during1954, or shortly thereafter: (a) a systematic compilationof the documents of the United Nations Conference onInternational Organization not yet published; (b) acomplete index of all the documents of that Conference;(c) a systematic and comprehensive study of thelegislative history of the Charter; and (d) a repertoryof the various provisions of the Charter, taking intoaccount their application by the various organs of theUnited Nations and the interpretations to which theyhad given rise. Under paragraph 2, the General Assem-bly would invite Member States to submit, preferablynot later than 31 March 1955, their preliminary viewswith regard to the possible review of the Charter, and,under paragraph 3, it would request the Secretary-General to circulate these preliminary views to MemberStates as soon as they had been submitted.

The following amendments were submitted tothe draft resolution of Argentina, Canada, Cuba,the Netherlands, New Zealand and Pakistan:

(1) An amendment by Belgium, Colombia, Franceand Mexico (A/C.6/L.307), which proposed to re-place the preamble of the six-Power draft resolutionwith a statement: (a) that any measure likely to leadto a more thorough knowledge of the Charter wouldbe conducive to the efficient functioning of the UnitedNations; (b) that a study of the preparatory work onthe Charter and of the practice followed by the variousorgans of the United Nations would be one of the bestmeans of acquiring knowledge of the Charter; and(c) that such a study might be made with the helpof the official documents by the Secretary-General. Theamendment would delete paragraphs 2 and 3 of theoperative part of the draft resolution calling for thepreliminary views of Member States and for theircirculation by the Secretary-General.

(2) An amendment by Australia and the UnitedKingdom (A/C.6/L.308/Rev.1), which would: (a) adda reference in the preamble of the six-Power draftresolution to the memorandum by the Secretary-Gen-eral; (b) add further that the index to the San Franciscodocuments would be on the lines envisaged in theSecretary-General's memorandum; (c) delete the pro-vision in the draft resolution for a legislative historyof the Charter; and (d) replace the proposed "repertoryof the various provisions of the Charter" by "a repertoryof the practice of the United Nations organs appro-priately indexed".

(3) An amendment by El Salvador (A/C.6/L.309/-Rev.2) proposing, inter alia, that in paragraph 1 of theoperative part of the six-Power draft, the Secretary-General be asked not only to prepare and publish thedocumentation requested but also to circulate it amongMember States.

(4) An amendment by Panama (A/C.6/L.310), whichproposed: (a) to replace paragraph 2 of the operativepart of the six-Power draft resolution by a paragraphinviting the Member States to submit, preferably notlater than 31 March 1955, their objections to theCharter and their views with regard to the possiblereview of the Charter; (b) to replace paragraph 3 ofthe operative part by a request to the Secretary-Generalto circulate these objections and preliminary viewsto Member States as soon as they had been submittedso that each Member State could express its opinionthereon; and (c) to add a fourth paragraph instructingthe Secretary-General to submit all the documentationwhich he would prepare in accordance with the resolu-tion to the General Assembly at its session in 1955so that the Assembly could consider whether a GeneralConference should be convened to take a definitivedecision regarding such amendments to the Charter asmight be necessary and advisable.

(5) An amendment by Czechoslovakia (A/C.6/-L.312), which proposed to delete the provisions forthe preparation of a legislative history and a repertoryof Charter provisions.

(3) Views Expressed in the Sixth Committee

During the discussion in the Committee, therepresentatives of Australia, Canada, Denmark,Ethiopia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,Pakistan, the Philippines, Sweden, Thailand andTurkey, while not committing themselves on thesubstance of the question of Charter revision oron that of calling a General Conference for thatpurpose, supported the six-Power draft resolu-tion in its entirety. They considered that, shouldthe General Assembly decide, at its tenth session,to hold a General Conference for Charter review,it would be necessary and useful to have full doc-umentation on the subject. They also consideredthat the provisions in paragraphs 2 and 3 of thedraft resolution concerning the eliciting of pre-liminary views of Member States would facilitatethe exchange of views and stimulate discussionon the subject.

Full support for the six-Power draft resolutionwas also expressed by a number of other delega-tions who affirmed the desirability or even thenecessity of some form of Charter revision. Therepresentatives of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Cuba,Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Pan-ama, Peru and Uruguay expressed the view thatthe present Charter suffered from serious short-comings which should be remedied. Among suchshortcomings they instanced the incorporation ofthe principle of the unanimity of permanentmembers in the Security Council which, it wasstated, was contrary to the principle of the sov-ereign equality of nations. The exercise of the"veto" even on such questions as admission of newMembers had, it was maintained, prevented anumber of fully deserving States from participat-


ing in the work of the United Nations. Amongother alleged shortcomings of the Charter wasits lack of clarity regarding the powers of theGeneral Assembly in relation to the maintenanceof peace and regarding the scope of Article 2,paragraph 7, providing for non-interference in thedomestic affairs of States. These representatives,therefore, supported the six-Power draft resolu-tion and opposed the four-Power amendments.

Explaining their amendments — the effect ofwhich would have been to eliminate from thejoint draft resolution of the six Powers any refer-ence to the revision of the Charter — the repre-sentatives of Belgium, Colombia, France and Mex-ico maintained that under Article 109, paragraph3, all that the General Assembly was empoweredto do was to fix the date and the place of theGeneral Conference. The General Conference it-self would then consider any proposals whichmight be submitted to it including those relatingto the expression of views by Member States.

Apart from this purely technical objection,these representatives also considered it politicallyunwise to call for the views of governments twoyears in advance of the Conference. This, theysaid, would lead to the adoption of rigid attitudeswhich would be difficult to change in the Con-ference. The representative of France said that,while the six-Power proposals were apparentlyprocedural, they actually raised the substantivequestion of revision.

In regard to the reference to Article 109 in thepreamble of the six-Power draft resolution, therepresentative of France said that the Secretariat,in undertaking the proposed studies, should nothave Charter revision particularly in mind sincethere was no necessary connexion between docu-mentation and Charter revision.

Similar statements in support of the four-Poweramendments were made by representatives of Af-ghanistan, Burma, Guatemala, India, Indonesia,Iraq, Liberia and Syria. Speaking on the substanceof Charter revision, the representative of Syriaexpressed regret at the "revisionist" tendencywhich had appeared in certain countries, partic-ularly in connexion with the "veto". He statedthat the League of Nations had failed because,among other things, the United States had notparticipated in it and the USSR had joined it verylate. He warned that any situation which wouldresult in further division of the Great Powers inthe United Nations would be detrimental to theOrganization.

The four-Power amendments were also sup-ported by the representatives of the Byelorussian

SSR, Czechoslovakia, Poland, the Ukrainian SSRand the USSR whose statements, however, wereprimarily concerned with the substantive aspectsof Chatter revision. These representatives con-sidered that the entire question of preparatorywork for review of the Charter was pan of aUnited States campaign against the basic princi-ples of the Charter. They held that, as early as1948, the United States had called for modifica-tion of the principle of unanimity of the fivepermanent members of the Security Council inall matters covering the peaceful settlement ofdisputes and the admission of new Members. In1953, a special committee of the United StatesSenate had been set up to study the proposals forCharter revision. The Chairman of that committeehad said that he regarded the principle of unani-mity as a great weakness in the Organization. Inaddition, it was stated, the United States Secretaryof State, John Foster Dulles in a speech deliveredin Boston on 26 August 1953, had stated that theCharter was out of date and that the principle ofunanimity failed to meet the present day needsof the United Nations. The aim of the UnitedStates attack on the principle of unanimity was,these representatives held, to use the United Na-tions as an instrument in achieving world domin-ation.

It was stressed that violations of the presentCharter and not its alleged shortcomings were atthe root of international tensions. Among theviolations alleged were the setting up of the NorthAtlantic Treaty Organization, the intervention inKorea, the institution of the Marshall Plan andthe non-representation of the People's Republic ofChina in the United Nations.

The representatives of the Byelorussian SSR,Czechoslovakia, Poland, the Ukrainian SSR andthe USSR considered that at the present time anywork preparatory to Charter review could be usedby aggressive Powers against the interests of peace.They stated that they would vote against the six-Power draft resolution. They agreed, however,with the amendments proposed by the represen-tatives of Belgium, Colombia, France and Mexicoand with the legal position outlined by thoserepresentatives.

Without taking any position on the question ofCharter revision or on the holding of a GeneralConference to review the Charter, the represen-tative of the United Kingdom stated that theproblem before the Sixth Committee was a techni-cal one. He expressed agreement with the ob-jective of the six-Power draft resolution as regardsthe preparation of studies but considered thatthe preparation of a comprehensive legislative


history of the Charter would impose too heavy aburden on the Secretariat both financially and interms of the workload involved. Further, the com-plete objectivity of such a history would be opento question from many delegations. A good indexto the San Francisco documents, would, in hisopinion, be far more useful. The amendment con-cerning the repertory had also been proposed, hesaid, in deference to the remarks of the Secretary-General in his memorandum.

Referring to the amendments proposed by Bel-gium, Colombia, France and Mexico, the repre-sentative of the United Kingdom stated that hewas not in principle opposed to the deletion fromthe joint draft resolution of provisions concern-ing the eliciting of views of States. However, heconsidered, reference to Article 109 of the Char-ter in the preamble of the draft resolution shouldbe retained, inasmuch as it reflected the true na-ture of the discussions in the Committee and theagenda item under consideration.

The representative of the United States saidthat his Government favoured the holding of aGeneral Conference and would regard it as anopportunity to work for a peaceful world order,representing the true interests of all nations. Hesupported the six-Power draft resolution and, inparticular, its provision regarding the submissionof preliminary views by governments. He hopedthat States whose applications for membership inthe United Nations were still pending would alsosubmit their views. His Government, however,had an open mind on the question of Charter re-vision and its aim would be to build up the Or-ganization rather than to tear it down. In anotherintervention, the representative of the UnitedStates supported the reference in the six-Powerdraft resolution to Ankle 109 and the invitationto States to submit their preliminary views; he op-posed the four-Power amendments calling for thedeletion of these provisions. He indicated thathe would vote for the technical amendments sub-mitted by the United Kingdom and Australia.

While agreeing with the draft resolution sub-mitted by the six Powers, the representative ofIsrael reserved his position with regard to theuse of the travaux préparatoires of the San Fran-cisco Conference for the purpose of interpretingthe Charter, and with regard to the holding of aGeneral Conference. The General Conferencemight not produce good results and this wouldbe harmful to the United Nations. However, ifit did produce positive results, the amendmentsadopted by the Conference might remain with-out effect for an indefinite period since theywould be subject to ratification. The co-existence

of the original Charter and a revised text await-ing ratification might, he said, harm the legalstanding of the instrument. Examining the tech-nical aspects of the studies contemplated in thesix-Power draft resolution, the representative ofIsrael said that the publication of unpublishedSan Francisco documents would be useful As re-gards an index, he recalled that an index to thedocuments had been prepared by Mr. Zeydel64 andanother was contained in volume 16 of the pub-lished documents of the San Francisco Confer-ence. As the index prepared by Mr. Zeydel was nolonger available, the representative of Israel feltthat a new index covering the complete set ofSan Francisco documents would be useful if it wasbetter than existing indexes. He fully supportedthe proposal for the preparation of a repertoryof the practice of the United Nations. With agood index, he considered, it would be possibleto do without a legislative history of the Charterwhich would be both difficult and expensive toprepare.

The representative of Yugoslavia stated thathe was opposed to extreme trends either favour-ing a revision of the Charter according to certainpolitical concepts or rejecting any revision of theCharter whatever. The best approach to revision,in his opinion, was to review the past experienceof the United Nations in applying the Charter.He supported both the six-Power draft resolutionand the joint Egyptian-Costa Rican draft resolu-tion.

There was a general lack of support in theCommittee for the joint draft resolution submit-ted by Costa Rica and Egypt, a majority of repre-sentatives supporting the view that the election ofa technical committee at the present stage waspremature and that, instead of assisting the Sec-retary-General, the Committee might actuallyhinder the work and affect the objectivity of thestudies contemplated. The representatives of CostaRica and Egypt therefore withdrew their draftresolution.

The representative of Argentina withdrew hisdraft resolution in favour of the six-Power draftresolution.

In reply to questions raised in the Sixth Com-mittee, the representative of the Secretary-Generalexplained that existing staff would be inadequatefor the preparation of a legislative history of theCharter. A concise study would lay a heavierworkload on the Secretariat and would require

64 Walter H. Zeydel, Annotation of the Charter ofthe United Nations and the Statute of the InternationalCourt of Justice, Carnegie Endowment for InternationalPeace, 1947, Washington, D. C.

49


the same staff (five research assistants) as a com-prehensive study, but the printing costs would beless. As regards the proposed index, the debatehad made it clear that the index would have to bemore complete than had been expected, and theservices of an indexer with legal training wouldbe required. With respect to the repertory of thepractice of United Nations organs, each depart-ment of the Secretariat would be responsible forthe section which was its own special concern;two additional staff members working under aSecretariat committee would be necessary for co-ordination and editorial presentation.

In regard to the time schedule, the representa-tive of the Secretary-General noted that publica-tion of the Co-ordination Committee documentsand of the index would be completed within oneyear. The repertory of the practice of the UnitedNations would be substantially prepared by thattime but it was unlikely that it could be com-pleted within a year, particularly since transla-tion and publication would require additionaltime, the representative of the Secretary-Generalconcluded.

At its 379th and 380th meetings, the Commit-tee voted on the six-Power draft resolution (A/-C.6/L.306/Rev.2) and the amendments submit-ted to it.

The part of the four-Power amendment (A/-C.6/L.307) proposing the deletion of the provi-sion regarding the invitation to States to submitpreliminary views was adopted by 24 votes to 23,with 5 abstentions. An Argentine proposal to takeanother vote on the amendment, put to the voteunder rule 122 of the rules of procedure, wasvoted on by roll-call and received 25 votes in fa-vour, 24 against, and 5 abstentions. Having failedto receive the two-thirds majority necessary forthe reconsideration of the decision, the proposalwas defeated.

By 27 votes to 16, with 2 abstentions, the Com-mittee decided that no vote was necessary on thepart of the four-Power amendment proposingthe deletion of the provision regarding the cir-culation of the views of Member States; this pro-vision was considered as deleted from the draftresolution.

In view of the deletion of paragraphs 2 and 3of the six-Power draft resolution, a vote on theamendment by Panama (A/C.6/L.310) to alterthose paragraphs and to add a paragraph provid-ing for the submission to the Assembly of theviews and comments of Members was renderedunnecessary.

The two Czechoslovak amendments (calling forthe deletion of the provisions regarding the pre-paration of a legislative history and a repertoryof Charter provisions) were rejected, respectively,by 20 votes to 18, with 7 abstentions, and 24 votesto 8, with 5 abstentions.

The amendment by El Salvador asking theSecretary-General to circulate the documents pre-pared to Member States was adopted by 39 votesto 5, with 5 abstentions.

The amendments by Australia and the UnitedKingdom (A/C.6/L.308/Rev.1) (see above)were adopted by votes ranging from 29 to 17,with 4 abstentions, to 23 to 16, with 7 absten-tions.

The various paragraphs of the joint six-Powerdraft resolution, as amended, were adopted byvotes ranging from 44 to 5 to 38 to 5, with 3abstentions.

The draft resolution, as a whole, as amended,was adopted by 48 votes to 5.

c. CONSIDERATION BY THE GENERALASSEMBLY IN PLENARY SESSION

The Sixth Committee's report (A/2559) wasconsidered by the General Assembly at its 458thplenary meeting on 27 November 1953.

The representatives of Czechoslovakia, Polandand the USSR reiterated the point of view thatthe question had been brought before the Gen-eral Assembly as part of a United States cam-paign against the fundamental provisions of theCharter. What was needed was not a revision ofthe Charter but a strict adherence to its provi-sions. They repeated charges made in the SixthCommittee that the United States and its sup-porters had violated the provisions of the Char-ter. They opposed the preamble of the draft res-olution on the ground that it referred to possiblerevision of the Charter. Sixteen delegations, it waspointed out, had voted against this provision inthe Sixth Committee. They also opposed the par-agraph requesting the Secretary-General to pre-pare a repertory of the practice of the UnitedNations organs, stating that this imposed on himan obligation which it was not within his com-petence to fulfil since it entailed a type of re-search which would unavoidably imply commenton the decisions taken by the United Nationsorgans.

The representatives of the Netherlands andNew Zealand emphasized that the draft resolu-tion adopted by the Sixth Committee was the


result of a compromise. Although they had fav-oured the proposal to invite the preliminary viewsof governments on possible revision of the Chart-er, they would not reintroduce it in the Assembly.

Replying to certain points raised, the repre-sentative of the United States said that it was in-deed true, as stated by representatives of the"Soviet bloc", that there was need for scrupulousadherence to the present Charter. However, hesaid, it was the "Soviet bloc" which had beenguilty of Charter violations including illegaland aggressive intervention in Greece andCzechoslovakia. It had flouted Security Council andAssembly decisions on Korea and had sabotagedUnited Nations efforts in the economic and so-cial fields and through the specialized agencies.He said that he supported the draft resolutionrecommended by the Sixth Committee because itwas purely procedural in character and did notprejudge the issue of possible Charter revision.

The draft resolution was voted on by para-graphs and was adopted in votes ranging from52 to 5, to 52 to none, with 5 abstentions. Itwas adopted as a whole by 54 votes to 5, as reso-lution 796(VIII). It read:

"The General Assembly,

"Having regard to the provisions of Article 109 ofthe Charter under which a proposal to hold a GeneralConference of the Members of the United Nations forthe purpose of reviewing the Charter is to be placedon the agenda of the tenth annual session of the Gen-eral Assembly if such a conference has not been heldbefore that session,

"Considering that the examination of such a proposalwill require considerable preparation on the part ofboth the Secretary-General and Member States,

"Considering that study of the legislative history ofthe Charter and of the practice followed by the variousorgans of the United Nations is one of the best methodsof acquiring knowledge of the Charter and will greatlyfacilitate the General Assembly's consideration, at itstenth annual session, of the question of calling a Gen-eral Conference,

"Having regard to the memorandum by the Secretary-General,

"Requests the Secretary-General to prepare, publishand circulate among the Member States during 1934,or shortly thereafter:

"(a) A systematic compilation of the documents ofthe United Nations Conference on International Or-ganization not yet published;

"(b) A complete index of the documents of thatConference on the lines envisaged in part II and partIII C of the memorandum by the Secretary-General;

"(c) A repertory of the practice of United Nationsorgans appropriately indexed."

2. The Question of ChineseRepresentation

At the opening (432nd) plenary meeting ofthe General Assembly's eighth session, on 15September 1953, the representative of the USSRraised a point of order regarding the question ofthe representation of China in the United Na-tions, and submitted a draft resolution (A/L.162)proposing that the representatives of the ChinesePeople's Republic, appointed by the CentralPeople's Government, should "take the lawful seatof China in the General Assembly and in theother organs of the United Nations."

In support of this draft resolution, the repre-sentatives of the Byelorussian SSR, Czechoslo-vakia, Poland, the Ukrainian SSR and the USSRmaintained that the United Nations Charter andthe rules of procedure of the General Assemblywere being violated because there were includedas representatives of China persons having neitherpolitical, legal nor moral rights to represent thatState and since, on the other hand, the represen-tatives appointed by the legal government of thatcountry were excluded from the United Nations.The absence of the People's Republic of Chinafrom the United Nations, they said, constituteda serious hindrance to the speedy and successfulsolution of important problems affecting themaintenance of peace and security. Moreover, thesituation with regard to the People's Republic ofChina had encouraged the "Kuomintang clique"to undertake various adventures threatening thepreservation of peace in the Far East. The worknot only of the General Assembly but also ofother United Nations organs and agencies affiliatedwith the United Nations was adversely affectedby the absence of the People's Republic of China.A just decision to recognize the lawful rights ofthe Chinese people in the United Nations wouldbe in the interest of all peace-loving peoples,would increase the authority of the United Na-tions and would go a long way towards relievingthe existing tension in the Far East and helpingto strengthen international peace and security,these representatives said.

Opposing the draft resolution, the represen-tative of China stated that admission of theChinese People's Republic to the United Nationswould be the consummation of more than 30 yearsof intrigue and aggression by the Soviet Unionagainst the Republic of China. He expressed theview that the Chinese Communist regime was un-Chinese in its origin and also in its nature, andcould therefore not endure. Moreover, it had re-


verted to a policy of imperialism threatening allof South East Asia.

The representative of the United States movedthat the Assembly postpone for the duration ofits eighth session in the year 1953 considerationof all proposals to exclude the representatives ofthe Government of the Republic of China and toseat representatives of the Central People's Gov-ernment of the People's Republic of China. Threeyears previously, he said, the Chinese Commun-ists had intervened as aggressors and as partici-pants in a scheme to overpower the Republic ofKorea. Although an armistice had been signedpeace had not yet been secured. The ChineseCommunists had not shown convincing evidenceof a genuine intention to make peace and theiractions elsewhere in Asia were far from reassur-ing. He therefore did not consider that as mattersstood any proposals for the representation of theChinese Communists in the Assembly should beconsidered.

The representative of the United Kingdomsupported the United States proposal for post-ponement of the question. He said that the con-clusion of the armistice in Korea had createdhopes that it would be faithfully observed andthat progress towards a satisfactory political settle-ment would follow the armistice, and, conse-quently, hopes that the day for settling the ques-tion of Chinese representation would have beenbrought nearer by the signature of the armistice.

Following the discussion of these two pro-posals, the Assembly decided by 40 votes to 8,with 8 abstentions, to give priority to the UnitedStates draft resolution. That proposal was thenadopted by 44 votes to 10, with 2 abstentions (seebelow).

After the adoption of this resolution, therewas a procedural discussion as to whether theAssembly should vote on the USSR draft resolu-tion. An appeal by the United States represen-tative against a ruling of the Temporary Presidentthat the Assembly should vote on the USSR draftwas rejected by 13 votes in favour of the appeal,22 against, and 13 abstentions. In accordance witha motion by the representative of Thailand, theAssembly then voted, under rule 91 of its rules ofprocedure, on whether a vote should be taken onthe USSR draft resolution; it decided, by 35 votesto 11, with 11 abstentions, not to take such avote.

The resolution adopted by the Assembly (800(VIII)) read:

"The General Assembly"Decides to postpone for the duration of its eighth

regular session in the current year consideration of all

proposals to exclude the representatives of the Govern-ment of the Republic of China and to seat representa-tives of the Central People's Government of the People'sRepublic of China."

At the 22nd meeting of the Credentials Com-mittee of the Assembly on 22 September, the re-presentative of the USSR stated that, in the viewof his delegation, the credentials of the represen-tative of China should not be considered valid.The Chairman ruled that in view of the resolu-tion adopted by the General Assembly at the432nd meeting (see above), the discussion of thequestion was out of order. The Chairman's rulingwas challenged by the USSR representative, butwas upheld by 5 votes to 1, with 1 abstention.

During 1953, the delegation of the USSR andcertain other delegations raised the question ofrepresentation of China in various other organsand bodies of the United Nations.

At the opening (484th) meeting of thetwelfth session of the Trusteeship Council, on 28January 1953, the representative of the USSRproposed (T/L.349) that the representative ofthe Republic of China should be excluded fromthe Council and a representative of the People'sRepublic of China, appointed by the CentralPeople's Government of the People's Republicof China, should be invited to participate in theproceedings of the Trusteeship Council. TheCouncil decided, by 10 votes to 1, with 1 absten-tion, to postpone indefinitely consideration of theUSSR proposal.

At the fifteenth session of the Economic andSocial Council (672nd plenary meeting on 31March 1953) the representative of the USSR sub-mitted a similar proposal (E/L.473). The Coun-cil, however, by 14 votes to 4, adopted a UnitedStates proposal for adjournment of the debateunder rule 50 of the rules of procedure.

At the sixteenth session of the Council (708thplenary meeting on 2 July 1953) the representa-tive of Poland, speaking on a point of order andsupported by the representatives of India and theUSSR, stated that his Government could recog-nize as the representative of China only a per-son having credentials signed by the CentralPeople's Government of the People's Republic ofChina. The President stated that the credentials inquestion had been presented in due form. Hesuggested that the incident be considered asclosed. Subsequently, in this connexion, when thePresident and the First Vice-President reported(E/2487) that they had found that proper cre-dentials had been communicated by the repre-


sentatives of all members of the Council, therepresentatives of Poland and the USSR addressedcommunications (E/2493 and E/2494) to thePresident of the Council questioning the validityof the credentials of the Chinese delegation.

At the 29th meeting of the Technical Assis-tance Committee on 23 March 1953, the repre-sentative of the USSR moved a draft resolutionto exclude the representative of the "Kuomintanggroup" from the Committee and to invite a re-presentative of the Central People's Governmentof the People's Republic of China to participatein the Committee. The Chairman ruled that theCommittee was not competent to effect the changein its membership. The Committee upheld theChairman's ruling.

Similar motions were put forward in the func-tional commissions listed below. The ActingChairman of those bodies, in ruling that the Com-missions were not competent to effect changesin their membership, recalled the terms of refer-ence of the functional commissions, according towhich the functional commissions (with the ex-ception of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs,of which the members are States) consist of onerepresentative from each Member State of theUnited Nations selected by the Council; the Sec-retary-General consults with the governments thusselected before the representatives are finallynominated by these governments and confirmedby the Council.

Transport and Communications Commission (sixthsession, 54th meeting on 2 February 1953) (E/CN.2/-L.7, E/CN.2/L.22). The Commission adopted a pro-posal of the United States representative under rule52 of the rules of procedure of the functional com-missions of the Council, to the effect that the proposalof the representative of the USSR should be declaredout of order.

Fiscal Commission (fourth session, 24th meeting on27 April 1953) (E/CN.8/L.2). The Chairman ruledthat the draft resolution submitted by the USSR repre-sentative was out of order inasmuch as the nominationof the members of the Commission had been confirmedby the Economic and Social Council and accordinglythe representative of China had been designated legally.The Chairman's ruling was upheld.

Statistical Commission (seventh session, 84th meetingon 2 February 1953) (E/CN.3/L.13). The Chairmanruled that the Commission was not competent to take

a decision on the question raised by the USSR repre-sentative. The Chairman's ruling was upheld.

Population Commission (seventh session, 75th meet-ing on 19 January 1953). The Chairman ruled thatin view of General Assembly resolution 396(V), whichlaid down that questions relating to the representationof a Member State in the United Nations were to beconsidered by the General Assembly or by the InterimCommittee when the General Assembly itself was notin session, the Commission was not competent to con-sider the draft resolution presented by the USSRrepresentative. The Chairman's ruling was upheld.

Social Commission (ninth session, 198th meeting on4 May 1953) (E/CN.5/L.177). The Acting Chairmanruled the draft resolution submitted by the USSRrepresentative out of order on the grounds that theCommission was not competent to decide on its mem-bership. The Chairman's ruling was upheld.

Commission on Human Rights (ninth session, 339thmeeting on 7 April 1953) (E/CN.4/L.219). The Chair-man ruled that the draft resolution submitted by theUSSR representative was out of order on the groundsthat the Commission was not the appropriate bodyfor considering the question of the representation ofChina on the Commission. An appeal by the repre-sentative of the USSR against the ruling of the Chair-man was rejected.

Commission on the Status of Women (seventh ses-sion, 123rd meeting on 16 March 1953). The Chairmanstated that the question raised by the USSR representa-tive was outside the Commission's competence. No votewas taken by the Commission.

Commission on Narcotic Drugs (eighth session,189th meeting on 30 March 1953). The representativeof the United States moved that the Commissionadjourn debate on the representation of China, underrule 45 of the rules of procedure of the functionalcommissions. The Chairman stated that, under rule 50of the rules of procedure, motions for adjournmenthad priority over all other proposals. The Chairman'sruling was upheld and the Commission adopted theUnited States proposal.

Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East(ninth session, 107th meeting on 6 February 1953)(E/CN.11/363). The Commission adjourned until itsnext session the debate on the subject, under rule 26of its rules of procedure.

Executive Board of the United Nations InternationalChildren's Emergency Fund. The question of the repre-sentation of China was also raised at the meetingsof the Executive Board of UNICEF. At the 103rd meet-ing on 19 March the Board adopted a motion, underrule 25 of the Executive Board's rules of procedure, toadjourn the debate on the question of the representationof China for the current session.


H. ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS65

1. Organization of the Secretariat

The General Assembly, by resolution 681 A(VII)66 adopted on 21 December 1952, had re-quested the Secretary-General to present a re-port at its eighth session on the question of or-ganization of the Secretariat.

The Secretary-General stated (A/2554) thathe had arrived at two main conclusions: (1) thata streamlining of the Secretariat leading to sub-stantial economies was not possible without areview of its substantive tasks; and (2) that nosuch economies were possible without the de-velopment of a wider degree of flexibility in theuse of staff, both within and among the variousorganizational units.

The Secretary-General proposed that three fur-ther offices should be given a similar position tothat occupied by the Executive Office of the Secre-tary-General, i.e., as offices under his immediateand personal direction. The three offices concernedwould be a Personnel Office to replace the Bureauof Personnel, a Finance Office to replace theBureau of Finance and a Legal Office to replacethe Legal Department. The existing Departmentof Administrative and Financial Services, as such,would disappear. Under the suggested arrange-ment, he considered, the control of the Secretary-General over personnel and financial matterswould become more direct, and the position ofthe officials responsible for these matters, whowould act directly on his behalf, would be clar-ified and strengthened. Similarly, the change fromLegal Department to Legal Office would reflectmore clearly its role in providing legal advice tothe Secretary-General and in acting on his behalfin legal matters. The concentration of administra-tive responsibility at the centre should lead, hesaid, to a simplification of procedures and have agood effect in the day-to-day administration.

He suggested the following arrangements withrespect to the other departments: (1) the De-partments of Economic Affairs and Social Affairsto be amalgamated into one department; (2) theDepartment of Conference and General Servicesto be divided into two units, a Department ofConference Services and an Office of General Ser-vices; (3) the Department of Political and Se-curity Council Affairs, the Department of Trus-teeship and Information from Non-Self-Govern-ing Territories and the Department of Public In-formation to be maintained as separate depart-ments; (4) the Technical Assistance Administra-

tion to be maintained as an independent unit, andits close co-ordination with the new Departmentof Economic and Social Affairs to be superviseddirectly by the Secretary-General.

As currently organized at its top levels the Sec-retariat had two top echelons under the Secretary-General, one consisting of Assistant Secretaries-General and one of Principal Directors. The orig-inal intention, the Secretary-General stated, hadbeen to create in the Assistant Secretaries-Generala group of officials broadly representative of theMember States, on the highest responsible level,who, in addition to being heads of departments,would serve the Secretary-General in a representa-tive capacity with individual Member countriesand groups of countries. Under them, the PrincipalDirectors were intended to function as the admin-istrative officials charged with the conduct of op-erations of the various departments. The Secre-tary-General, however, found the arrangement, asit had developed, difficult to justify.

He believed that the reconstituted departmentsshould be headed by one echelon of officials in-stead of two, namely, Under-Secretaries. Theirresponsibilities, as in the case of the Principal Di-rectors, would be essentially administrative. Suchpolitical responsibilities as they might be requiredto exercise in particular areas or on particular is-sues would be theirs by delegation from the Sec-retary-General and exercised on his personal re-sponsibility. In exceptional cases it might be nec-essary to give them the assistance of DeputyUnder-Secretaries. He suggested that there mightalso be a need for one or two Under-Secretarieswithout portfolio to serve as advisers to the Sec-retary-General on special questions. If experiencewere to show that the proposed arrangement ofthe Under-Secretaries imposed too heavy a burdenon the time of the Secretary-General, it might bedesirable, he suggested, to create one post of Dep-uty Secretary-General.

On the basis of the policies and arrangementsset forth in his report, the Secretary-Generalhoped to be able to achieve a reduction in theover-all budget of the United Nations of onemillion dollars over the coming fiscal year. Theincidence of this saving, he added, could only bedetermined as the review of the Secretariat opera-tions proceeded and in the light of the decisionsof other organs of the United Nations as they af-

65 For appointment of the Secretary-General, see

under The Secretariat.66

See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 94.


fected the work-load. He further suggested thatthe abolition of posts involved need not affectthe existing staff to any important extent as mostof the abolitions could be absorbed by the normalturnover.

The Advisory Committee on Administrativeand Budgetary Questions, in its 36th report tothe Assembly's eighth session (A/2606), stated itsgeneral agreement with the broad outlines of theSecretary-General's suggested programme, whilerecognizing the tentative character of that pro-gramme. It considered, nevertheless, that certainsubstantial changes might be introduced during1954 in the administrative structure of the Sec-retariat and that, in consequence, the General As-sembly should study the proposals as carefully aspossible in the time remaining at the eighth ses-sion. It had therefore limited its observations tothose specific questions which the Secretary-General, recognizing their significance, had him-self raised, and upon which he was looking to theGeneral Assembly for its views and guidance.

The Advisory Committee concurred in the pro-posal to substitute for the two highest levels underthe Secretary-General a single supervisory level.At the same time it recognized that the structureof the Secretariat at the highest levels, togetherwith problems connected with the geographicaldistribution of the staff, might raise important is-sues of a political nature.

There was good ground, the Advisory Commit-tee considered, for the conversion of the LegalDepartment into a Legal Office under the im-mediate, personal direction of the Secretary-General. On the other hand, a similar action inrespect of Administrative and Financial Servicesseemed open to certain doubts if there were anyrisk that the authority of those functions mightbe reduced. Similarly, the Advisory Committeehad doubts about the continued separation of theTechnical Assistance Administration from theunified Department of Economic and Social Af-fairs, in that the Administration seemed to form anatural and integral part of its substantive counter-part in economic and social affairs.

The reports of the Secretary-General and theAdvisory Committee were considered by the FifthCommittee at its 427th to 429th meetings on 8and 9 December.

The Secretary-General, in introducing his re-port at the Committee's 427th meeting, expressedhis satisfaction at the essential agreement betweenthe Advisory Committee and himself on the pro-posals as a whole. Amplifying his report, he stated

that, in making his proposal for the abolition ofthe existing two top levels in the Secretariat andthe introduction of a new unified top level, hewas faced with two possibilities—either he couldstart out from the political angle, consulting thegovernments most directly concerned, and framehis proposals upon that basis, or he could outlinewhat seemed to him to be the most rational ad-ministrative arrangement, submit it to the Gen-eral Assembly for preliminary consideration andenter into consultations with governments on thebasis thus established. He had chosen the lattercourse because otherwise it would have been dif-ficult to have presented to the Assembly a planwhich set out in clear terms what was in his opin-ion the best possible administrative plan. Hisnext step would necessarily be to undertake suchconsultations as might be necessary in order tosee how the main political considerations couldbe taken into account and to what extent his op-timum plan would have to be adjusted in orderto meet those considerations. If he then found itimpossible to establish what he considered to bea proper balance on the top level in respect ofnational representation, he would have to presentto the Assembly's ninth session definite plans forthe organization of the Secretariat which mightdepart from his present proposals. In such a casehe would inform the Assembly of the reasons forany deviations. He emphasized, however, that,under the Charter, it was for him to decide on therecruitment of persons filling top level posts inthe Secretariat as well as on the distribution ofresponsibilities between officials at that level.

The Secretary-General emphasized that at thisjuncture he was requesting of the Assembly onlyits preliminary consideration and advice; a finaldecision would have to be taken on the basis ofhis proposals in the 1955 budget. But if the FifthCommittee and the Assembly were to endorse thegeneral attitude of the Advisory Committee, thenhe would go ahead with his organization plans tothe extent that this could be done without en-croaching on the rights of the Fifth Committeeor the Assembly to decide finally on such matters.

The majority of the representatives supportedthe Secretary-General's proposals and consideredthat they represented a constructive step towardssecuring improvements in the organization andstructure of the Secretariat.

Representatives who participated in the discus-sion unanimously expressed their confidence inthe capacity of the Secretary-General to carrythrough his reforms in a manner which wouldmeet with the approval of Member States and


which would lead to substantial economies. Therepresentative of the United Kingdom, in particu-lar, urged that the Secretary-General should begiven full authority to proceed along the lines hehad tentatively suggested without necessarilywaiting for the Assembly at its ninth session topass in detail upon arrangements which, in anyevent, fell largely within his administrative juris-diction. The representative of the United Statessuggested that the detailed implementation ofthe broad plans which the Secretary-General hadoutlined in his report could best be left to theSecretary-General himself in consultation fromtime to time with the Advisory Committee.

Most representatives welcomed the proposal formerging the two highest levels immediately belowthe Secretary-General into a single supervisorylevel. The representatives of Czechoslovakia andthe USSR, however, while in general agreementwith the other main features of the proposed re-organization, voiced their objection to the aboli-tion of the post of Assistant Secretary-General.Such a change, they contended, would be in vio-lation of the gentleman's agreement made in 1946for the distribution of top level posts among na-tionals of Member States; nor would it be in con-formity with the decisions taken by the GeneralAssembly itself, as embodied in resolutions of thefirst session, relating to the structure and staffingof the Secretariat. It would be a mistake, theyargued, to change so radically the functions androles of the Assistant Secretaries-General by re-placing them with Under-Secretaries, whose re-sponsibilities would be of an essentially admin-istrative character. The representative of Francelikewise had serious misgivings about the pro-posal to abolish the posts of Assistant Secretary-General and Principal Director; political and geo-graphical factors, he said, should be taken intoaccount.

The Secretary-General explained at the 428thmeeting that the functions and rights of the newUnder-Secretaries would be almost identical withthose of the Assistant Secretaries-General. Asmatters stood, the Assistant Secretaries-Generaldid not have the wide powers envisaged at theSan Francisco Conference. The Under-Secretarieswould retain the powers delegated to them by theSecretary-General. It was not open to the Secre-tary-General to delegate the wide political powersvested in him by the Charter, by setting up asort of international cabinet.

The representatives of China, the Netherlands,New Zealand and Turkey, among others, expressedconcern lest the proposed arrangements, particu-

larly the additional responsibilities which woulddevolve upon the office of the Secretary-General,might prove too heavy and time-consuming byadding unduly to the Secretary-General's admin-istrative burdens at the expense of his politicalresponsibilities. Some representatives, in partic-ular the representative of New Zealand, expressedtheir readiness to give sympathetic considerationto any request which the Secretary-General mightlater feel obliged to make for the appointment ofa Deputy.

The merger of the Departments of Economicand Social Affairs was, in general, welcomed. Sev-eral representatives, however, regretted that theproposed merger did not also include the Techni-cal Assistance Administration since, they held, themaintenance of this department as a separate unitwould inevitably make for a good deal of dupli-cation. The hope was expressed that the Secretary-General would find it possible to bring aboutthe closest possible association between the De-partment of Economic and Social Affairs, on theone hand, and the Technical Assistance Admin-istration, on the other.

During the discussions, many representativesstressed the necessity of paying particular attentionto the problem of ensuring wide geographical dis-tribution of posts in the higher policy-makinglevels, no less than throughout the Secretariat asa whole. In this connexion, the representatives ofArgentina, Syria and Turkey, among others, ex-pressed the hope that the Secretary-General wouldbear in mind the interests of the smaller MemberStates no less than those of the larger Powers.At the same time, the representative of the UnitedStates, in particular, emphasized the importanceof taking advantage of any general reorganizationto improve the quality, no less than the geograph-ical distribution, of the staff. The representativeof Belgium declared that the mere desire to applythe principle of geographical distribution mustnot result in a lowering of the standards of re-cruitment. Should any conflict arise between theprinciple of geographical distribution and that ofcompetence, the latter principle, he argued, mustprevail.

Most representatives associated themselves withthe Secretary-General's two main conclusions, asset down in his report. It was generally agreedthat the economies aimed at and anticipatedshould be the expression not of a policy of con-traction, but of one aimed at fulfilling, at the leastpossible expense, the tasks of the Secretariat asthey arise out of the general development of theUnited Nations.


At its 429th meeting on 9 December, the FifthCommittee adopted, by 40 votes to 5, an oral draftresolution proposed by the Committee Chairman.

This draft resolution (A/2625) was consideredby the General Assembly at its 471st plenary meet-ing on 9 December, when the USSR representa-tive repeated the arguments he had advanced inthe Committee against the Secretary-General'sproposal to abolish the office of Assistant Secre-tary-General and said he would vote against thedraft resolution.

The draft resolution was adopted, without fur-ther discussion, by 53 votes to 5, as resolution 784(VIII).

By it, the Assembly took note of the proposalsof the Secretary-General in his report and ofhis statement to the Fifth Committee at its 427thmeeting. The Assembly recommended that theSecretary-General should, to the extent possible,proceed along the lines he had proposed andprepare his 1955 budget estimates within thebroad framework of these proposals, takingaccount of the observations and suggestions of theAdvisory Committee and of the views expressedin the Fifth Committee at its 427th and 428thmeetings on 8 December.

2. Report of the Committee on SpecialAdministrative Questions

On 21 December 1952, the General Assemblyadopted resolution 681 B (VII)67 which, interalia, provided for the establishment of a Com-mittee on Special Administrative Questions tostudy certain parts of a memorandum (A/2214)on the administration of the United Nations whichthe Secretary-General had submitted to the Assem-bly's seventh session.

The Committee held two meetings on 4 and 8May 1953 and a third meeting on 3 August. Ithad before it a memorandum by the Secretary-General (A/AC.68/1). With respect to the firsttask of the Committee, namely, to study the Sec-retary-General's suggestion that membership of theAdvisory Committee on Administrative andBudgetary Questions should disqualify a personfrom service as a member or alternate in the FifthCommittee and that membership of the Admin-istrative Tribunal should disqualify a person fromservice as a governmental representative on legis-lative committees of the General Assembly, theSecretary-General stated that, after further studyof the question, he had found himself unableto maintain that suggestion. With regard tothe second task, namely, to study the Assembly's

rules of procedure concerning the Advisory Com-mittee, the memorandum stated that the Secretary-General, after consideration of the matter, hadno suggestion to make. As to the Committee'sthird task, namely, to study the Statute of theAdministrative Tribunal, the memorandum statedthat the Secretary-General believed it prematureto consider amendments to the Statute of theAdministrative Tribunal, and neither the Pres-ident of the Tribunal nor the Secretary-Generalhad any suggestions of a major or urgent naturewhich would warrant consideration by a com-mittee. No proposals on any of the Committee'stasks had been made by governments.

On 8 May, the Committee, after noting thatno proposal had been submitted by the Secretary-General or by Member States, invited the Sec-retary-General to report to the Committee anyproposal he might wish to make or which mightbe made by Member States. At its third meetingon 3 August, the Committee noted that no pro-posals had yet been received from Member States,nor had any proposal been submitted by theSecretary-General. In the circumstances, the Com-mittee decided not to make any recommendation inits report (A/2429) to the General Assembly onthe substance of the matters referred to it, butto allow all Members and the Secretary-Generaltime to study the question further.

The Committee's report was considered by theFifth Committee at its 392nd meeting on 19October. The Fifth Committee also had before it amemorandum from the Secretary-General (A/-2464), stating that the Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions had nocomments to offer pending the further actioncontemplated. The Fifth Committee, without dis-cussion or objection, and the General Assembly,on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee(A/2539), at its 456th meeting on 3 Novemberadopted, without discussion or objection, resolution764(VIII) on the matter. By this resolution, theAssembly took note of the report of the Commit-tee on Special Administrative Questions and ofthe observations on the report by the AdvisoryCommittee.

3. Personnel Policies of theUnited Nations

a. CONSIDERATION BY THE GENERALASSEMBLY AT ITS SEVENTH SESSION

At the request of the Secretary-General (A/-2327) and on the recommendation of the General

67 See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 94.


Committee (A/2330), the General Assembly atits 406th plenary meeting on 18 December 1952decided to include in the agenda of its seventhsession the item "Report of the Secretary-Generalon Personnel Policy".68 The Secretary-General'sreport (A/2364), which was dated 30 January1953, was considered at the resumed seventhsession of the Assembly, without reference to aCommittee, at the 413th and 4l6th to 422ndplenary meetings on 10 March and from 28March to 1 April 1953.

The report dealt with the basic principles gov-erning general personnel policy and their admin-istrative application and gave an account of theproblem of alleged subversive activities by staffmembers against Member States.69 It reviewedbriefly the sources and nature of the privilegesand immunities of the United Nations as theyrelated to recent developments.

Among the documents attached to the reportwas the opinion of the Commission of Juristsappointed by the Secretary-General to advise himon questions relating to subversive activities andother matters; a Bill relating to employment bythe United Nations of United States citizens,recently introduced in the United States Senate,and the United States Executive Order 10422concerning the investigation by United Statesauthorities of all United States staff members ofthe United Nations.

(1) Statement by the Secretary-General

Introducing his report, the Secretary-Generalstated that the Charter had conferred upon theSecretary-General and his staff exclusively inter-national responsibilities in contrast to those ofrepresentatives on United Nations bodies whomust represent national interests. In accordancewith that principle, the General Assembly hadaffirmed the exclusive and independent authorityof the Secretary-General for the selection of per-sonnel and administration of policies kid downby the General Assembly. He said that, in a worldof mounting political tensions aggravated by thepolitical and ideological conflict between the West-ern world on the one hand and the USSR and itssupporters on the other, the task of a Secretariatserving both sides had been an extremely difficultone. Among additional factors having a bearingon the question, the Secretary-General brought tothe attention of the Assembly the following:

(1) That the United Nations Headquarters werelocated within the borders of one of the most powerfulprotagonists in the East-West conflict.

(2) That, among Member States, the concepts re-garding the rights and status of any civil service

differed and therefore the staff regulations approvedby the General Assembly in resolution 590(VI)70 weresubject to diverse interpretations.

(3) That in 1946 and 1947, it had been necessaryto recruit large numbers of staff very rapidly and therewas no time to go through the careful processes offull international recruitment which had since beendeveloped.

(4) That in the appointment and retention of staff ithad often been necessary for the Secretary-General toseek the assistance of Member States in checking thecharacter and record of applicants and staff membersand that, in the Secretary-General's opinion, seekingsuch assistance did not derogate from his authority.

It was within this framework, the Secretary-Gen-eral said, that he had sought to uphold and makemore solid the constitutional position of theSecretary-General and the Secretariat in bothadministrative and political matters. In admin-istrative matters he had resisted strong requests,and in some cases pressures, in the appointmentor replacement of Secretariat officials. For example,he said, he had refused to replace qualified andcompetent staff simply because revolutions orcoups d'état involving a change in governmenthad occurred in their countries.

As far as political matters were concerned, theSecretary-General referred to the stand taken byhim on such questions as those of Iran, the rep-resentation of China, the Secretary-General's ten-point peace programme and Korea as evidenceof his desire to uphold and strengthen the con-stitutional position of the office of the Secretary-General in political matters. He further statedthat, because of the stand taken by him in sup-port of the United Nations action in Korea, theUSSR and the four States supporting it hadrefused to recognize him as the Secretary-Generaland had brought to bear upon him the "crudestform of pressure". It was due to a large extentto the attitude of the USSR that he had offeredhis resignation and requested the Assembly toappoint his successor at the present (seventh)session.

71

The Secretary-General then referred to the prob-lem of the Secretariat as it related to the UnitedStates. The Secretary-General as one of his firstacts had requested the help of the United StatesGovernment in finding well-qualified personnel

tion Committee and the problem of alleged subversiveactivities of staff members during 1952, as included inthe Secretary-General's report, see Y.U.N., 1952, pp.95-98.

70 For text see Y.U.N., 1951, pp. 117-22. See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 90.

See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 98. For information concerning the work of the Selec-

68

69


of United States nationality, but this request hadnot been complied with. The United States hadafter 1949 provided some assistance, but althoughthis was helpful in some respects it was not satis-factory because in most cases the Secretary-Gen-eral was not given sufficient information to enablehim to take action. In 1952, in an atmosphere ofgrowing concern in the United States respectinginternal subversion, an investigation of the UnitedStates staff members of the United Nations Sec-retariat was begun by two United States Govern-ment agencies. One was the Federal Grand Jury,meeting in New York. The other was the UnitedStates Senate Internal Security Sub-Committee.Grand Jury proceedings, the Secretary-Generalstated, were secret and although reports reachedhim that some United States staff members wererefusing to answer questions under the FifthAmendment to the United States Constitution,which provides that a witness cannot be com-pelled to answer questions which might tend toincriminate him, the United States Governmentrefused to supply the Secretary-General withinformation on the ground that the proceedingswere secret.

However, in the hearings of the Senate Inter-nal Security Sub-Committee held in 1952 andone held in February 1953, eighteen staff mem-bers refused to answer questions about past orpresent membership in the American CommunistParty on the grounds of possible self-incrimina-tion. Most of these staff members had beenoriginally appointed in 1946 and 1947 at thetime of very rapid recruitment. In addition, fiveformer staff members, who had previously resignedor whose appointments had been terminated,refused to answer questions on the same grounds.

Explaining his position concerning the con-duct of staff members toward the Governments ofMember States, the Secretary-General said that,first of all, no staff member should engage insubversive activities against his own Governmentor the Government of any Member State. Secondly,with regard to United States nationals in theSecretariat, the Secretary-General believed that, inview of the existing laws and regulations of theUnited States toward the American CommunistParty and verdicts of the courts on the leadershipof that party, no United States national who wasa member of the Communist Party and who was,thereby; barred from employment in the serviceof his own Government, should, as a matter ofpolicy, be employed in the Secretariat. A majorconsideration for such a policy was, of course,the fact that the United States was the host coun-try to the United Nations Headquarters.

In the light of these principles and policies,the Secretary-General considered that a UnitedNations staff member refusing to answer questionson the ground that they might tend to establishthat he was guilty of a crime, drew upon himselfgrave suspicion of being a danger to the securityof a Member State. Therefore, he felt that sucha staff member committed a grave breach of thestaff regulation concerning the conduct requiredof staff members. Furthermore, the attitude takenby these witnesses tended to discredit and castunjustified suspicion upon their fellow staff mem-bers and even to imperil the position of the wholeOrganization in the host country.

The Secretary-General stated that nine of thosewho refused to answer questions held permanentappointments. For that reason, and because ofthe growing complexities and dangers involvedfor the United Nations in its relationship withthe United States, he had appointed the Commis-sion of Jurists to advise him on the question.

Referring to the opinion of the Jurists, he saidthat he had accepted only some parts of it andthese were contained in part II of his report(A/2364). In particular, he had accepted the find-ing that refusal by United States staff membersto answer questions about membership in theAmerican Communist Party or any subversiveactivity on the ground of possible self-incrimina-tion constituted a fundamental breach of the staffregulations. He also accepted their judgment thatin such circumstances of fundamental breach ofcontract he had the power, under the present staffregulations, to terminate the appointments of staffmembers holding permanent contracts.

The Secretary-General stated that although theJurists had recommended dismissal, he had decidedthat the staff members involved should be givena second chance. He had therefore notified thestaff of his acceptance of the above findings ofthe Jurists and had notified those concerned thathe would be compelled to dismiss them for afundamental breach of staff regulations unless,within three days, they informed him that they hadnotified the appropriate United States authoritiesof their intention to withdraw the plea of privilegeand to answer the pertinent questions put to them.Their refusal to do so constituted, in the opinionof the Secretary-General, a clear case for dismissalfor misconduct under article X of the staff regu-lations. Nevertheless, the Secretary-General stated,he had chosen a less severe method of termination,one that would entitle them to the normal indem-nities and severance pay, so that they might havea less difficult time while seeking other employ-ment.


The Secretary-General stated that, with twoexceptions, no United States staff members werecalled before the United States Senate InternalSecurity Sub-Committee in open hearings unlessthey had either refused to answer questions aboutCommunist Party membership or had admittedpast membership. Although these witnesses rep-resented only about 1 per cent of the UnitedStates nationals employed by the United Nations,the impression conveyed to the public, whetherintentionally or not, had been that the UnitedNations was employing a large number of UnitedStates nationals who were either Communists,former Communists, or had something to hide.

In December 1952, the Grand Jury, withoutreturning a single indictment, had issued a pre-sentment which had been given very wide pub-licity. It charged that there was "infiltration intothe United Nations of an overwhelmingly largegroup of disloyal United States citizens" and thatthis situation constituted a "menace" to theUnited States Government. The Secretary-Generalstated that, in view of the serious effects of thissituation on the relationship of the United Nationswith the host country, he had requested the UnitedStates, in fairness to himself and to his staff, toprovide him with evidence against which thejustice of the Jury's conclusions could be weighed.This request was again denied on the ground thatthe proceedings of the Jury were secret under thelaw.

The Secretary-General called the attention ofthe Assembly to the fact that "not a single UnitedStates staff member of the United Nations Sec-retariat has ever, in the whole history of theOrganization, been charged in any court of theUnited States—much less convicted—of espionageor any act of subversion or sabotage". He em-phasized that, since almost all the documentationand meetings of the United Nations were open,the United Nations was not a profitable place forspies. Because of the very nature of the Organiza-tion no Government gave the United Nationsany information which it would withhold ongrounds of security.

There were indications that the situation mightgo from bad to worse in the atmosphere of sus-picion which had been created. The Secretary-General referred to a Bill introduced in theUnited States Congress by the former Chairmanof the United States Senate Internal Security Sub-committee included in annex IV of the Secretary-General's report. The Bill would make it a crimesubject to five years in prison for United Statesnationals to work in the United Nations unless

they fulfilled conditions laid down therein. It wasalso evident, he said, that investigations in searchof alleged subversives in the employment of theUnited Nations and the specialized agencies wouldalso be continued and these, he reported, hadsubsequently taken place.

In these circumstances, the Secretary-Generalsaid, the United States Government decided toissue its Executive Order of 9 January 1953requiring a full investigation by the United StatesFederal Bureau of Investigation of all UnitedStates citizens employed on the professional staffof the United Nations, and a less extensiveinvestigation by the Civil Service Commission ofall other United States citizens employed by theUnited Nations. The Secretary-General emphasizedthat the Executive Order was not promulgated asthe result of any agreement between the UnitedStates Government and the Secretary-General. Itwas an action of the United States Governmentalone. The Secretary-General had, however,co-operated in its implementation, he stated, andhad welcomed it as a step forward in establishingorderly procedures. He considered that it was inthe interest of the staff that these investigationsshould be completed as soon as possible. In thisconnexion, the Secretary-General stated that hewould offer those staff members whose serviceshad been terminated as a result of their refusalto answer questions on the ground of self-incrimination, this opportunity of having them-selves cleared through the investigations to bemade under the Executive Order.

If, as a result, they were cleared, he would beprepared to consider them for re-employment, hestated.

In order not to delay the investigations theSecretary-General had permitted the use by inves-tigating officials of the United Nations Head-quarters for fingerprinting and other processes,he stated. To do otherwise would have delayedthe investigation by months and would havestill further undermined the position and themorale of the Secretariat. The Secretary-Gen-eral stated that no staff members of any nationalityexcept United States nationality were subject toinvestigation under the Executive Order. In con-clusion, the Secretary-General appealed to States,including the United States, which had not ratifiedthe Convention on Privileges and Immunities, toratify it. Non-ratification of the Convention, hestated, undermined the constitutional position ofthe United Nations and impeded the effective per-formance of its work. He reminded the Assemblythat the Convention did not provide immunity


from legal processes for staff members in regardto their private activities.

(2) Proposals before the Assembly

The following proposals were submitted.

A draft resolution was proposed by France, theUnited Kingdom and the United States (A/-L.146).

In the preamble it would quote Articles 100 and10172 of the Charter dealing with the principles gov-erning the appointment and duties of the UnitedNations staff and state that the Assembly had consideredand reviewed the Secretary-General's report on personnelpolicy. In the operative part it would express theconfidence of the General Assembly that the Secretary-General would conduct his personnel policy with thoseconsiderations in mind and call upon Member Statesto assist him in the discharge of his responsibilities aschief administrative officer of the United Nations.

An amendment to this draft resolution wassubmitted by Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg,the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden (A/-L.147).

It would add provisions to invite the Secretary-General to submit to the next session of the Assemblya new report on the progress made in the conduct anddevelopment of personnel policy, together with thecomments of the Advisory Committee on Administra-tive and Budgetary Questions thereon. The amendmentwould also invite the Secretary-General and theAdvisory Committee to consult with the administrativeheads of the United Nations specialized agencies andthen to submit "their recommendations as to anyfurther action that may be required of the GeneralAssembly".

This amendment was accepted by the sponsorsof the three-Power draft resolution.

As amended by the five Powers, the three-Powerdraft resolution was finally sponsored by the fol-lowing thirteen Powers: Belgium, Colombia, Cuba,Denmark, Ecuador, France, Luxembourg, theNetherlands, Norway, Paraguay, Sweden, theUnited Kingdom and the United States (A/-L.146/Rev.1).

A draft resolution was proposed by Afghani-stan, Burma, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq,Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria andYemen.

In its final revision (A/L.145/Rev.4) it would referto the report of the Secretary-General, take note ofthe satisfaction reported by the Secretary-General withrespect to the efficiency and integrity of the Secretariat,state the importance of maintaining and developingan international civil service in accordance with thepurposes and provisions of the Charter, and statefurther that the problem called for a close and detailedstudy. Under this draft resolution, the General Assem-bly would: (1) resolve to appoint a committee com-posed of fifteen members to be nominated by thePresident, to study the report of the Secretary-General

on personnel policy in all its implications and to reportto the General Assembly at its eighth session; and(2) request the Secretary-General to communicate thereport of the committee to Member States.

(3) Statement of the United States Representative

The United States representative stressed theimportance attached to the United Nations byhis Government in the conduct of its foreignpolicy. However, if the United Nations was tobe an effective force, it must have the full sup-port of world public opinion. Public opinion inthe United States was concerned that the effective-ness of the United Nations might be impairedbecause of the existence of a serious personnelproblem; this view, he said, had been summed upby Senator Wiley, Chairman of the United StatesSenate Foreign Relations Committee, when hesaid: "There is absolutely no place in the inter-national Secretariat for a single American Com-munist, or any American of doubtful loyalty ...The United Nations should not become a havenfor disloyal Americans or for espionage." The rep-resentative of the United States observed that this"essentially administrative problem" was one ofthe main obstacles in the United States to increasedconfidence in the United Nations.

To meet the problem, the Secretary-General haddismissed individuals whose actions he regardedas failing to meet the obligations of internationalcivil servants. He had also asked the UnitedStates Government to furnish him with fullinformation concerning both present and pro-spective United States members of his staff so thathe could ensure that the Charter standards weremet. The United States Government had agreedto undertake investigations necessary to supplythe needed information and these were now

72 Article 100 of the Charter states:

"1. In the performance of their duties the Secretary-General and the staff shall not seek or receive instruc-tions from any government or from any other authorityexternal to the Organization. They shall refrain fromany action which might reflect on their position asinternational officials responsible only to the Organiza-tion.

"2. Each Member of the United Nations undertakesto respect the exclusively international character ofthe responsibilities of the Secretary-General and thestaff and not to seek to influence them in the dischargeof their responsibilities."

Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 101 state:"1. The staff shall be appointed by the Secretary-

General under regulations established by the GeneralAssembly.

"3. The paramount consideration in the employ-ment of the staff and in the determination of the con-ditions of service shall be the necessity of securing thehighest standards of efficiency, competence, and integrity.Due regard shall be paid to the importance of recruit-ing the staff on as wide a geographical basis aspossible."


proceeding rapidly. These investigations involvednearly 1,800 persons who had filed the requisiteforms and it was hoped that the Secretary-Gen-eral would have been furnished with the infor-mation he had requested by the Assembly's nextsession. The United States Government, he said,regarded the information provided as advice onlyand recognized that the responsibility for finaljudgment rested with the Secretary-General.

In sharing the general concern for the main-tenance of an independent Secretariat, the UnitedStates, its representative said, realized that, inorder for this to be accomplished, employeesshould not be penalized simply because they mightnot agree with the policies of the particularregime in power in the country of their citizen-ship. His Government had no interest in knowingwhether any American in the Secretariat was aDemocrat or a Republican or an Independent, solong as he met the Charter requirements of effi-ciency, competence and integrity, but it had aninterest in knowing whether he was a memberof a conspiracy dedicated to the overthrow of thedemocratic form of government of the UnitedStates. Since the power of selection rested solelywith the Secretary-General and since it seemedclear from his report that the standards the Sec-retary-General proposed to apply would protectstaff members against inadequately supported orunreliable representations from Member Govern-ments, the continued independence of the Sec-retariat should be assured and individual rightssafeguarded.

His Government, he continued, considered thereport of the Secretary-General on personnel policyto be, on the whole, acceptable. He was notopposed to a full discussion of the report butconsidered that such a discussion could have nobearing on the practical situation.

His Government had therefore co-sponsoreda draft resolution on personnel policy (A/L.146).It believed that at this time the Assembly shouldtake no action which would hinder the Secretary-General in taking whatever action might be neces-sary to deal with the situation. The United Statesrepresentative maintained that the establishmentof the committee proposed in the joint twelve-Power draft resolution would make it impossiblefor the Secretary-General to deal adequately withthe personnel problem confronting the Organi-zation.

In summarizing the United States position onthe question, its representative commended theSecretary-General's policies as "measures designedto strengthen the Secretariat and the United

Nations itself, to meet challenges which face usin the unknown future". He endorsed the Sec-retary-General's position on the following majorpoints: (1) that refusal to testify on grounds ofpossible self-incrimination was not consistent withthe obligations of United Nations staff members;and (2) that the Secretary-General might dismissa staff member if he had reasonable grounds forbelieving that the member was engaging, or waslikely to engage in subversive activities againstthe Government of any Member State.

The representative of the United States thenemphasized that his Government would do allin its power to provide the Secretary-General withthe information necessary to enable him to makea determination on that matter. That did not,however, constitute dictation to the Secretary-General or to Member Governments.

(4) Discussions in the Assembly

The debate in the General Assembly was con-cerned mainly with the basic conceptions of aninternational secretariat, the general principleswhich should govern personnel policy, the prob-lem of alleged subversive activities against Mem-ber States, the questions raised by the refusal bystaff members, on the ground of possible self-incrimination, to answer questions asked by UnitedStates investigating organs, the question of therelationship of the Organization to the host coun-try as dealt with in the report of the Commis-sion of Jurists (A/2364, Annex III) appointedby the Secretary-General and the question ofpossible dismissal of staff members on the "like-lihood" of their future participation in subversiveactivities, as envisaged in the report of the Jurists.

There was general agreement in the Assemblythat the Secretary-General and his staff had exclu-sively international responsibilities and that theappointment and removal of the staff was solelywithin the competence of the Secretary-Generalwhose independence was guaranteed under Arti-cles 100 and 101 of the Charter. However, thatcompetence, it was stated, was to be exercisedwithin the limits imposed by the Charter arid thestaff regulations laid down by the General Assem-bly. In this connexion, reference was frequentlymade to the basic conceptions of an internationalsecretariat contained in the recommendations ofthe Preparatory Commission which state (PC/20)that "for the duration of their appointments, theSecretary-General and the staff will not be the ser-vants of the State of which they are nationals,but the servants only of the United Nations".

Further, it was stated, the report of the Prepara-tory Commission contained the following para-


graph which showed that the obligations of UnitedNations officials were not purely negative: "It isessential that officials should be inspired by asense of loyalty to the United Nations and devotionto the ideal for which it stands, and that theyshould develop an esprit de corps and a habit ofdaily co-operation with persons of other countriesand cultures...Loyalty to the Organization is inno way incompatible with an official's attachmentto his own country, whose higher interests he isserving in serving the United Nations. It clearlyinvolves, however, a broad international outlookand a detachment from national prejudices andnarrow national interests." These recommen-dations, it was stated, were adopted by the Gen-eral Assembly by large majorities and continuedto retain their validity in the organization of theSecretariat.

There was also general agreement that any staffmember who violated article 1.473 of the staffregulations by engaging in subversive activitiesagainst any Member State or indeed against anyState at all, committed serious misconduct andwarranted dismissal.

With these general considerations in view, therepresentatives of Cuba, the Dominican Republic,Ecuador, Greece, Panama, Sweden, the Union ofSouth Africa, the United Kingdom and the UnitedStates, among others, expressed confidence in theSecretary-General and the general policy followedby him in matters of personnel, as outlined in hisreport, with which they were in general agree-ment. Tributes were also paid to the efficiency,integrity, impartiality and high moral standards ofthe Secretariat. Reference was frequently made tothe fact that, despite the unfavourable publicitywhich had been given to the cases of certainindividuals, no staff member, with a single excep-tion, had ever been convicted by a court of lawof any offence involving espionage or other sub-versive activities. In the case of the United Statesstaff members not a single indictment had beenreturned or conviction obtained. Some represent-atives, including those of France and the UnitedKingdom, emphasized that the United Nations didnot offer opportunities for any kind of espionagesince the documentation and the activities of theUnited Nations were open and governments didnot entrust their secrets to the United Nations.This was a factor which, they stated, should alwaysbe borne in mind when measures to deal withsubversive activities were being considered.

All these representatives supported the thirteen-Power draft resolution (A/L.146/Rev.1) which,they stated, did not take a position on the report

of the Secretary-General but left him unfetteredin the performance of his duties. At the same timeit provided for a study of the problem by anexpert body and for further consideration of thequestion at the eighth session.

All these representatives opposed the twelve-Power draft resolution which, in their view, under-mined the position of the Secretary-General andcast doubt on his authority to act on personnelmatters.

However, there was considerable divergence ofopinion on the question as to whether staff mem-bers of United States nationality who refused, onthe ground of possible self-incrimination, toanswer certain questions asked by United Statesinvestigating organs drew upon themselves thesuspicion of guilt and were thus liable to automaticdismissal. On this question, the representatives ofCuba, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador,Greece, Panama and the United States, amongothers, agreed with the position outlined by theSecretary-General on the basis of the report ofthe Jurists.

Some of these representatives took the viewthat it was inconceivable that, in the investigationof cases which might lead to the discovery ofoffences against the security of the State, anational of that State, if he were really innocent,would avail himself of the constitutional privilegegranted under the Fifth Amendment to the UnitedStates Constitution. It was more reasonable, theyconsidered, to suppose that an innocent personwho found himself falsely involved or accused ofdisloyalty to his Government would deny suchaccusations as soon as possible. It was maintainedby others, moreover, that the techniques for carry-ing on highly criminal and subversive activitieshad advanced farther than the techniques fordetecting them, even where the great resources ofnational governments were available. The UnitedNations, having no such resources, had thereforeto be doubly cautious in this respect and couldnot afford to have on its staff persons who drewsuspicion of guilt upon them. These representa-

73 This article stated: "Members of the Secretariat

shall conduct themselves at all times in a mannerbefitting their status as international civil servants. Theyshall not engage in any activity that is incompatiblewith the proper discharge of their duties with theUnited Nations. They shall avoid any action and inparticular any kind of public pronouncement whichmay adversely reflect on their status. While they arenot expected to give up their national sentiments ortheir political or religious convictions, they shall at alltimes bear in mind the reserve and tact incumbentupon them by reason of their international status." Fortext of the article, as amended at the eighth session,see p. 78.


tives believed that, in certain cases, such subversiveactivities might be incapable of proof. They agreedwith the view expressed by the Commission ofJurists that staff members refusing to answer ques-tions on the ground of self-incrimination should bedismissed and they fully supported the action thatthe Secretary-General had taken on the basis ofthat opinion.

On this specific question, the representatives ofBelgium, Canada, France, India, Indonesia, Mexico,the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway andSweden, among others, took the stand that theautomatic dismissal of staff members refusing toanswer questions on the plea of constitutionalprivilege would amount to the automatic accept-ance of a purely national criterion. They con-sidered that any attitude which amounted to theautomatic application of national standards to thepersonnel policies of the United Nations wouldinfringe the fundamental requirements of Articles100 and 101 of the Charter which laid downuniversally applicable and indivisible criteria. Theymaintained that it was impossible to establish anyhard and fast rule which would be valid in allcases where a United States national refused toanswer a question on the ground of self-incrimination. While the United States citizensin the United Nations were certainly not immuneto interrogation and investigation by their Gov-ernment, the United Nations had a duty to protectthem against unjust or unwarranted dismissal. Noemployee, it was stated, should be dismissed atthe mere request of the government of a countrywhere the United Nations or any of its agencieswas operating. The United Nations or the agencyconcerned must determine for itself whether ornot just cause for dismissal existed. It thereforefollowed that the effect of a refusal to answerquestions on the ground of self-incrimination mustbe determined by the Secretary-General through acomplete evaluation of each individual case.

In this connexion, the representative of Norwayenumerated some of the factors which, in his view,should be taken into account. Did the staff mem-ber stand on his constitutional right in a court oflaw where he was protected by all the rules ensur-ing him the due process of law? Or was he ques-tioned by an investigating committee functioningin an inquisitorial manner, without benefit ofadvance preparation for the questions put to himand without benefit of legal counsel? Was theCommittee bound by any acceptable law ofevidence? Were the questions put to the witnessof a concrete and limited nature and so phrasedthat the answers might result in criminal prose-cution? Or were they vague and general in nature

and did they deal with facts which were not inthemselves of a criminal nature—for instance thepolitical beliefs and opinions of the witness? Toconstrue a refusal to answer as in itself a formof misconduct which would automatically involvedismissal from the United Nations Secretariatwould be, in the opinion of the representative ofNorway, contrary to the principles of law andjustice accepted by most countries.

While agreeing with the general principle thatdismissal should not be automatic, the represent-ative of Australia stated that there might be caseswhere the refusal to answer questions on theground of self-incrimination would justify dis-missal. For example, it would be unthinkable toretain in United Nations employment any personwho refused to answer the question as to whetherhe was engaged in "espionage". While the refusalwould not lead to an inference of guilt, it wouldcertainly draw upon the witness the suspicion ofbeing a danger to the security of a State andnecessitate his dismissal as a matter of policy.However, the representative of Australia doubtedwhether the same considerations would followwhere the question related to "subversive activ-ities"—a term much less finite in its content thanthe term "espionage". He however agreed that ifa precise and agreed definition was given to thatterm, dismissal would be warranted if a staffmember claimed privileges in relation to a ques-tion intended to establish "subversive activities".

The representative of Australia felt that whilerefusal to answer a question intended to establishcurrent subversive activity would justify dismissal,if that refusal related merely to past activity therewould be no reasonable ground for dismissal andno ground for the presumption that the witnesswould be likely to engage in subversive activitiesin the future. Stating that "deep cleavage ofjudicial opinion" existed on the question, therepresentative of Australia referred to case's wherepersons had claimed the constitutional privilege,not because they feared that answers to a specificquestion might incriminate them but becauseanswering a single question might in some casesconstitute the waiver of the claim to constitutionalprivilege in respect of a whole series of otherquestions.

He expressed his disagreement with the Sec-retary-General's contention that refusal on thepart of staff members to withdraw the plea ofprivilege in respect of questions relating tosubversive activities amounted to misconduct. Thatproposition he considered was entirely unsup-portable as a matter of law. He could not under-


stand how availing oneself of a constitutionalprivilege could ever amount to misconduct.Refusal to answer a question might, he said, havea bearing on the suitability of a staff member forcontinued employment but it could not be invokedas a ground for dismissal for misconduct.

While agreeing with the principle that a staffmember pleading constitutional privilege was notautomatically liable to dismissal, the representativeof the United Kingdom expressed the view thatthe Secretary-General's report did not provide forautomatic dismissal. According to paragraph 87of that report, much would depend on the typeof the question to which an answer was refused.That, he said, was an important qualification whichshould not be overlooked. It was also possible thatsome of the staff members who had invoked thatprivilege might have done so, not because theyhad some guilty secret to conceal but from entirelyhonourable motives, such as the desire to protectthe reputation of their friends or acquaintances.He considered that it would be difficult to main-tain the high repute of the United NationsSecretariat if it included members who hadinvoked that privilege and his Government wastherefore inclined to support the position thatthe Secretary-General had taken on that question.

The sponsors of the thirteen-Power draftresolution and their supporters felt, also, thatmost of the difficulty attending the problem posedby the refusal of United States staff members toanswer questions on the ground of self-incrim-ination would be solved by the Executive Orderof the United States which the Secretary-Generalhad welcomed in his report. The Order, it wasstated, was designed to furnish information anddid not say that the Secretary-General must dis-miss any United States staff member against whomUnited States authorities expressed an adverseopinion. Therefore, there was no question ofthe Secretary-General being asked to abdicate hisresponsibility.

However, representatives generally expressedsatisfaction that the Commission of Jurists hadrecommended the establishment of an advisorypanel of high Secretariat officials and that theSecretary-General had accepted the recommenda-tion. The panel, it was stated, had been establishedunder the Chairmanship of a Canadian jurist andwould examine individual cases of staff membersagainst whom derogatory opinion had been sub-mitted by a government. The panel would advisethe Secretary-General on each case. This, it wasstated, would afford the staff some guarantee offairness and impartiality. In this connexion, the

representative of the Netherlands expressed thehope that the panel would not detract from thefunctions and powers of existing machinery, suchas the Administrative Tribunal. He observed thatany material which had been submitted to thepanel should not be withheld from the Tribunalwhen it received a case which had first been dealtwith by the panel.

Considerable discussion in the Assembly wasdevoted to the report of the Commission of Juristsappointed by the Secretary-General. The rep-resentative of India dealt primarily with thereport of the Commission and, in particular, withthe opinion expressed in its report assigning aspecial position to the host country in which theUnited Nations maintained its Headquarters. Heconsidered that, while the Secretary-General hadnot accepted the report in its entirety, he appearedto have considered it, on the whole, as a validinterpretation of the relevant provisions of theCharter and of the staff regulations. A documentof such far-reaching importance, the representativeof India considered, deserved greater study thanwas possible in a plenary meeting of the Assembly.

The position of the Jurists, the representativeof India said, was that a country had specialprivileges in respect of its own nationals in theUnited Nations when those nationals wereemployed within its own territory. Thus, as theHeadquarters of the United Nations were locatedin the United States, United States nationals atHeadquarters should be accepted according tothe standards of security which the United Statesapplied for employment in its own Government.This principle, the Jurists held, was to apply tonationals of the host country only, and not toUnited Nations employees of other nationalities.This principle of the "host country", he submitted,was a new consideration among the criteria gov-erning United Nations recruitment and employ-ment.

India, he said, considered this principle to beof doubtful validity. It would be difficult andnot wholly desirable to apply that principle everytime the United Nations met in a country, orcarried out humanitarian or economic work inanother country. He maintained that the applica-tion of the principle would seriously restrict themobility of the Organization and its capacity toemploy personnel of its choice at the point whereit felt they would be most effective. This and otherproblems raised in the report of the Jurists, suchas those relating to the functions and powers ofthe Joint Appeals Board and the AdministrativeTribunal, the question of staff members invoking


constitutional privilege in refusing to answer ques-tions and questions concerning the privileges andimmunities of the United Nations, deserved moredetailed study. He therefore urged support for thetwelve-Power draft resolution which, he empha-sized, did not attempt to pass judgment butmerely invited study by a competent body set upby the Assembly.

The representative of Syria expressed doubtsas to the necessity for the appointment of theCommission of Jurists by the Secretary-Generalwho, he said, had had the Charter and the GeneralAssembly to guide him. The representative ofSyria said that the report submitted by the Juristswas confused and contradictory. Thus, while stat-ing that the Secretary-General's questions to theCommission related exclusively to nationals ofthe United States, the Jurists had either delib-erately or otherwise extended the scope of inves-tigation regarding subversive activity to non-American members of the staff.

In view of the fact that the Secretary-Generalhad stated in paragraph 63 of the report that heintended to base his personnel policy on theconclusions of the Jurists, it was important thatthe report of the Jurists should be given morestudy. The representative of Syria agreed withthe position adopted by the Indian representativeon the principle of the "host country". He alsostated that the receiving of information from gov-ernments in connexion with recruitment amountedto receiving instructions, which was contrary tothe provisions of Article 100 of the Charter.Therefore, the representative of Syria concluded,he had joined in sponsoring the twelve-Powerdraft resolution which called for the appointmentof a committee to study the problem and report tothe Assembly. The final word on personnel policy,he emphasized, should rest with the MemberStates.

Among other representatives who commentedon the opinion of the Commission of Jurists, therepresentatives of Canada, Sweden and the Unionof South Africa agreed that it was obsolete in viewof the fact that the Secretary-General had notaccepted it in its entirety and had not submittedit for consideration by the General Assembly, buthad instead submitted his own report.

The representatives of Mexico, New Zealandand the United Kingdom, however, dealt specifi-cally with certain aspects of the Jurists' opinionwith which they were not in agreement. The rep-resentative of Mexico said that he had seriousdoubts about the validity of the opinion—a feelingstrengthened by the fact that the Jurists had been

obliged to issue a well-known corrigendum totheir opinion (A/INF/51/Corr.1) from which itappeared that in their opinion they had used, assynonymous, terms such as "disloyalty" and "sub-versive activities" which should be very carefullydefined. Another "fundamental defect" of theiropinion was, the representative of Mexico stated,that they had exceeded their terms of reference.The Secretary-General had requested their opinionsolely "with respect to staff members of UnitedStates nationality" while the Jurists had, in fact,gone so far as to include staff members of allnationalities. After stating his disagreement withthe principle that staff members should be dis-missed for refusing to answer questions on theground of self-incrimination, the representative ofMexico stated also his "serious reservations"regarding the principle recommended in theJurists' opinion that one of the motives of dis-missal might be the "likelihood" of a staff mem-ber engaging in subversive activities against anyState.

The representative of New Zealand stated thatthe Jurists, who had made no distinction betweennew appointments and the retention of existingstaff, were applying United States standards toUnited Nations requirements by accepting "like-lihood of engaging in subversive activities" as acriterion for the dismissal of an established staffmember. He said that the "Jurists' talk" of "likeli-hood" must be regarded as a "gloss over the staffregulations".

While he did not question the Secretary-Gen-eral's decision to appoint the Commission ofJurists, the representative of the United Kingdomstated, their opinion laid greater stress on theobligations of the United Nations towards thehost country than on the obligations of the hostcountry towards the United Nations. He also feltthat the report was perhaps rather too emphaticabout the allegiance of international civil servantsto their own governments and made too littleallowance for their allegiance to the internationalorganization in which they worked. Finally, hestated, the report suggested that an internationalorganization must in all cases accept without ques-tion any definition of subversion or espionagewhich the host country might adopt—a principlewhich, if carried to extremes, could, in his opinion,make it impossible for any international organi-zation to exist in certain countries.

The representative of Indonesia regretted thepublicity that had attended the recent dismissalsin the United Nations. He expressed concern overthe "open hostility" which had been directed


against the United Nations in the host country.Some European papers, he said, had commentedthat the United Nations had taken to "witch-hunting". He regretted the fact that some keymembers of the Secretariat had been dismissedwithout conclusive evidence to support the chargeslevelled against them.

The representatives of the Byelorussian SSR andPoland stated that the "illegal policies" followedby Trygve Lie over the past few years had harmedthe independent character of the United Nations.The Secretariat, they stressed, should not be atool in the hands of any State or group of States.But the Secretary-General's actions, they charged,had been directed towards undermining its inter-national character and its independence of externalinfluences. A purge had been carried out in theSecretariat on the mere suspicion of subversiveactivities. The United States had been allowedto take fingerprints of staff members in the UnitedNations Headquarters, thus transforming thebuilding into a police station. It was quite clear,they stated, that these illegal activities of theSecretary-General had been designed to intimidatemembers of the staff, to root out the slightestprogressive trends in the staff and to get rid ofall progressive-minded staff members. The Sec-retary-General, it was stated, had used every effortto break the back of the Staff Council. As longago as 1950, three members of that body, includ-ing its president and secretary, had been dis-missed. The annual report of the Staff Associationof that year had accused the Secretary-General ofengaging in "union busting". In several cases,the Administrative Tribunal had ruled that dis-missals were illegal and had granted the employeesconcerned substantial compensation. These rep-resentatives considered that the policy followedby the Secretary-General represented a threat tothe independence of the Secretariat and wasdesigned to transform an international staff intoa national one—composed of the nationals of the"host country".

The representative of Poland, in particular,referred to the opinion of the Commission ofJurists, stating that the theory of the "host coun-try" had been invented to legalize the violationof the principles of the Charter with regard topersonnel policies. That fact, he said, was provedby the action that was being taken in the special-ized agencies with headquarters outside the UnitedStates.

Towards the close of the debate, the representa-tives of India and Uruguay drew attention to anew factor in the situation—the appointment ofa new Secretary-General. The representative of

Uruguay suggested that the presence of a newSecretary-General might considerably modify theterms of the question and therefore it might bebetter not to adopt any resolution.

In a final statement, the Secretary-Generalreferred to some of the criticism that had beenmade in the Assembly of the Jurists' opinion, stat-ing that he had not accepted their opinion in itsentirety and that the basis of the discussion shouldhave been his own report. He said that therecommendation of the Jurists regarding thespecial privileges of the host country had notbeen accepted by him. As regards the possible dis-missal of staff members invoking the constitutionalprivilege against self-incrimination, he said thatthe Executive Order of the United States madeit unlikely that the question would recur. Asregards the objections taken to the use of theHeadquarters premises for investigatory purposes,he said that he had granted that permission in theinterest of expediting the investigations. He notedthat security police were admitted to the Head-quarters during Assembly sessions in Paris andLondon.

(5) Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly

At the 422nd plenary meeting on 1 April, thetwo draft resolutions were put to the vote. Thetwelve-Power draft resolution (A/L.145/Rev.4)was rejected by 29 votes to 21, with 8 abstentions.

The thirteen-Power draft resolution (A/L.146/Rev.1) was voted on by paragraphs and adoptedas follows:

The first paragraph of the preamble was adoptedunanimously and the second paragraph by 41votes to 10, with 5 abstentions. The first operativeparagraph was adopted by 40 votes to 13, with 7abstentions; the second operative paragraph by44 votes to 3, with 11 abstentions; the thirdoperative paragraph by 41 votes to 3, with 15abstentions; and the fourth operative paragraphby 54 votes to 5, with 1 abstention.

The draft resolution as a whole was adoptedby 41 votes to 13, with 4 abstentions. It read(resolution 708(VII)):


"Recalling the following provisions of Articles 100and 101 of the Charter:

'Article 100

'1. In the performance of their duties the Sec-retary-General and the staff shall not seek or receiveinstructions from any government or from any otherauthority external to the Organization. They shallrefrain from any action which might reflect on theirposition as international officials responsible only tothe Organization.


'2. Each Member of the United Nations under-takes to respect the exclusively international characterof the responsibilities of the Secretary-General andthe staff and not to seek to influence them in thedischarge of their responsibilities.

'Article 101

'1. The staff shall be appointed by the Secretary-General under regulations established by the GeneralAssembly.

'3. The paramount consideration in the employ-ment of the staff and in the determination of theconditions of service shall be the necessity of securingthe highest standards of efficiency, competence andintegrity. Due regard shall be paid to the importanceof recruiting the staff on as wide a geographical basisas possible.',"and"Having reviewed and considered the report of the

Secretary-General on personnel policy,"1. Expresses its confidence that the Secretary-Gen-

eral will conduct personnel policy with these considera-tions in mind;

"2. Requests the Secretary-General to submit to theGeneral Assembly at its eighth session a report on theprogress made in the conduct and development ofpersonnel policy, together with the comments of theAdvisory Committee on Administrative and BudgetaryQuestions thereon;

"3. Invites the Secretary-General and the AdvisoryCommittee on Administrative and Budgetary Questionsto submit, after appropriate consultations with theadministrative heads of the specialized agencies, theirrecommendations as to any further action that may berequired of the General Assembly;

"4. Calls upon all Members of the United Nationsto assist the Secretary-General in the discharge of hisresponsibilities as chief administrative officer of theUnited Nations."

b. CONSIDERATION BY THE GENERALASSEMBLY AT ITS EIGHTH SESSION

Pursuant to resolution 708(VII) of 1 April1953, the Secretary-General submitted his reporton personnel policy (A/2533) to the GeneralAssembly on 2 November 1953. He explainedthat at meetings of the Administrative Commit-tee on Co-ordination on 7 October 1953, he hadconsulted with the administrative heads of thespecialized agencies or their representatives on thesubject matter of the report, though not on its text.The Secretary-General noted that the representa-tives of the specialized agencies were in generalagreement with him on the basic objectives tobe sought and fully understood the reasons for hisconclusions that a change in the staff regula-tions and an increase in the powers of the Sec-retary-General, subject to appropriate safeguards,were necessary to meet the administrative needs ofthe United Nations. It was also agreed that it wasdesirable that there should be as much uniformity

in personnel policy as might be found practicable,although each organization would have to frameits own policy in the light of its special circum-stances.

The report of the Secretary-General was dividedinto two parts: the first part contained his recom-mendations concerning proposed amendments tocertain articles of the staff regulations and to onearticle of the Statute of the Administrative Tri-bunal and the reasons which had led him to makethose recommendations; the second part dealt withcertain other developments of personnel policywhich did not require amendments to the staffregulations, but which were submitted to the Gen-eral Assembly for its approval or for its infor-mation.

Under the first part of the report, the Secretary-General pointed out that, in the course of hisreview of the administrative system and the rulesapplying to service in the United Nations, he hadfound that the staff regulations suffered fromambiguities and omissions which made certainrevisions essential if he were to have the powersnecessary to fulfil his obligations under the Char-ter. He further explained that his proposals werebased on considerations of a. general nature andwere in no way adjusted to special circumstancesprevailing at a particular time and in relation to aparticular country. The objective of a reconsidera-tion of the staff regulations, he added, should be torevise the regulations in the light of the Charter,so that they would provide a just and legalfoundation for sound administration, taking intoaccount the equal importance of the independenceof the staff and of the effective functioning of theOrganization.

The Secretary-General proposed amendments tostaff regulations: 9.1(a) regarding termination ofpermanent appointments; 1.4 relating to conductreflecting on integrity, independence and impar-tiality; and 1.7 relating to political activities onthe part of staff members. He also proposed to addto the present staff regulation 9.3 a new provisionand recommended amending article 9 of the Stat-ute of the Administrative Tribunal.

The question was considered by the Fifth Com-mittee at its 406th to 422nd and 426th meetingson 18, 19, 23 to 25, 27, 28 and 30 November and1 to 4 and 7 December 1953. The Committee hadbefore it a report by the Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions (A/-2555) on part I of the Secretary-General's report,containing its observations on the amendmentsproposed by the Secretary-General and recom-mending revised texts of certain of these amend-ments. A further report by the Advisory Com-


mittee (A/2581) contained its observations onpart II of the report of the Secretary-General.

The Fifth Committee also had before it theviews of staff representatives set forth in a letterdated 14 November 1953 from the Chairman ofthe Staff Committee of the United Nations Secre-tariat at Headquarters, enclosing a statement bythe Staff Council dated 13 November 1953, and ina letter dated 10 November 1953 from the Chair-man of the Staff Committee of the EuropeanOffice of the United Nations, enclosing a resolutionadopted by the Staff Committee on 9 November1953 (A/C.5/561).

(1) Amendments to the Staff Regulations and theStatute of the Administrative Tribunal

A description of the proposed amendments andthe action taken on them follows.

The Fifth Committee held a general discussionon part I of the Secretary-General's report at its406th to 414th meetings from 18 to 28 Novem-ber. In stating their views on the proposals as awhole, a majority of representatives were in agree-ment that the powers of the office of the Secretary-General should be made commensurate with hisobligations under the Charter. They furtherbelieved that the proposed amendments to thestaff regulations would have this effect. While itwas true that the standards established wouldinvolve subjective judgments, it was pointed outthat such judgments were no more difficult thanthose involved in determining what was unsatis-factory service or serious misconduct and thatadequate safeguards would exist to protect theinterests of the staff.

Several representatives, including those of Chile,Czechoslovakia, Poland, Syria, the Ukrainian SSRand the USSR, maintained that the Secretary-Gen-eral, under the existing staff regulations, alreadyhad adequate powers to ensure respect for theCharter by the staff but that it might be desirableto state these more expressly in order to avoidmisinterpretation in the future, provided that thefundamental character of the regulations was notchanged.

On the other hand, the representatives of Bel-gium, Guatemala, Indonesia, Lebanon, New Zea-land and Uruguay, among others, while expressingfull confidence in the present Secretary-General,believed that the issue should be considered onan institutional rather than on a personal basis.They thought that the proposed amendmentswould give the broadest discretionary power tothe Secretary-General and might be open to abusein the future. They considered that no actionshould be taken which might threaten the security

and morale of the staff or which would lead tothe violation of existing contracts or acquiredrights.

General emphasis was placed on the principlethat decisions should be made solely to ensure thesound administration of the Organization whileprotecting the interests of the staff and avoidingany action which might impair their legitimaterights. Conditions of employment should be suchas to create an efficient, competent and soundSecretariat, independent and international incharacter.

Several representatives supported a suggestionby Brazil that the question be referred to a specialcommittee to meet between the eighth and ninthsessions of the General Assembly. The represent-atives of Burma, Guatemala, Mexico, Uruguay andYugoslavia maintained that the issue involved somany complex questions that it could not beadequately dealt with in the short time availableduring the remainder of the eighth session. Suchreference to a special committee, it was suggested,would also permit consultation with other agenciesand bodies concerned, as well as receipt of thereport of the International Civil Service AdvisoryBoard. However, since there was an apparentmajority which favoured resolving the issue dur-ing the eighth session, those favouring postpone-ment did not insist on a vote.

Amendments to the texts proposed by the Sec-retary-General or recommended by the AdvisoryCommittee were submitted by India, by the UnitedKingdom, jointly by Argentina and Chile, andjointly by Brazil, Egypt, France, India, Indonesia,Lebanon, the Netherlands and Syria (A/C.5/-L.255).74 Additional amendments to the staffregulations and to the Statute of the Administra-tive Tribunal were also proposed jointly by Chileand Argentina (A/C.5/L.256) and draft resolu-tions were submitted by Argentina (A/C.5/-L.257) and by Canada (A/C.5/L-258).

Following a detailed examination of the pro-posed amendments, the Committee at its 422ndmeeting on 4 December approved the texts whichit recommended for adoption by the GeneralAssembly.

In recommending the adoption of the amend-ments to the staff regulations, the Committee hadin mind the statements of the Secretary-Generalmade on 18 and 25 November 1953 (A/C.5/563and 566) and those parts of the Secretary-Gen-eral's report on personnel policy in which he set

74 For the convenience of members of the Committeeamendments and additions as proposed by the Secretary-General, by the Advisory Committee and by variousdelegations were presented in this document.


forth his views on the interpretation and appli-cation of the new regulations. It was also notedthat the Secretary-General had stated that hisdecisions would remain subject to review by theAdministrative Tribunal to the full extent of itsexisting legal authority.

Consideration of the individual proposals andamendments to the staff regulations and to theStatute of the Administrative Tribunal and thetexts approved by the General Assembly are setout below.

(a) AMENDMENTS TO THE STAFF REGULATIONSStaff Regulation 1.4—The Secretary-General proposed

amending this regulation by adding the phrase "or onthe integrity, independence and impartiality which arerequired by that status" to the following sentence:"They [staff members] shall avoid any action and inparticular any kind of public pronouncement whichmay adversely reflect on their status." He explainedthat the amendment was not intended to alter themeaning of the staff regulation, but only to make itmore explicit and to give further clarification con-cerning the types of action by United Nations staffmembers which might adversely reflect on their status.

In its report (A/2555), the Advisory Committeewondered whether the proposed addition was absolutelynecessary. The conduct that befits the status of an inter-national civil servant, it said, is defined, as regardsindependence and impartiality, in staff regulation 1.3and, as regards integrity, in the Charter itself. How-ever, the insertion, the Advisory Committee felt, mightprovide a useful clarification and on that ground itconcurred in the Secretary-General's proposal.

In the Fifth Committee discussion, there wasgeneral agreement on the Secretary-General's proposedamendment to this regulation. The amendment was con-sidered to be a clarification of the present regulationand an express recognition of the principles of theCharter. The amendment was unanimously approved bythe Fifth Committee at its 414th meeting on 28November.

Staff Regulation 1.7—The Secretary-General proposedto replace staff regulation 1.7 with a new provisionrelating to the prohibition of political activities on thepart of staff members. Staff members, he said, shouldobviously not take part in political campaigns, or inpolitical canvassing or management. Some types ofpolitical activities, he went on to say, such as serviceunder ordinary conditions on a school board or towncouncil, could not adversely affect the United Nations.In the implementation of the provision, the staff mem-ber's rights to his religious or political convictions, hesaid, should be fully respected.

The Advisory Committee, while concurring in thesubstitution of a new provision, recommended deletingfrom the Secretary-General's text the qualifying phrase"unless otherwise authorized in accordance with staffrules issued by the Secretary-General."

A text was also submitted by the United Kingdom(A/C.5/L.255) which, with drafting amendments, pro-vided that staff members might exercise the right tovote but should not engage in any political activitywhich was inconsistent with or might reflect upon theindependence and impartiality required by their statusas international civil servants.

The majority of delegations recognized that specialrequirements for members of the international Secre-tariat were necessary to ensure their impartiality, andit was noted that prohibition of political activities hadbeen approved by the representatives of the staff. Otherdelegations, including those of Argentina, India, Le-banon, Uruguay and Yugoslavia, while agreeing inprinciple with the amendment, felt that the term"political activities" should be more clearly defined,particularly as to whether it included passive member-ship in a political party.

The Committee took note of a statement by theSecretary-General (at the 412th meeting on 25 Novem-ber) that it was his intention to implement the regula-tion prohibiting political activities by a staff rule,which, in relation to party membership, would bedrafted along the following tentative lines:

"Membership of a legal political party is permittedprovided that such membership, in the case of the staffmember concerned, does not entail subjection to partydiscipline or action in favour of the party, other thanthe payment of normal financial contributions."

The Committee suggested that the Secretary-General,when drafting a final version of this rule, also considerthe text put forward by the United Kingdom, whichread as follows:

"Membership of a political party is permitted pro-vided that such membership does not entail any positiveaction, current or potential, other than voting or pay-ment of normal financial contributions, contrary to theprovisions of staff regulation 1.7. In any case of doubt,the staff member should consult the Secretary-General."

At its 417th meeting on 1 December 1953, theCommittee approved, by 41 votes to none, with 8abstentions, the amendment to regulation 1.7 as pro-posed by the United Kingdom.

Regulation 9.1(a)—The Committee devoted a majorportion of its debate on personnel policy to the pro-posed changes to this regulation, governing the termina-tion of staff members holding permanent appointments.In his report the Secretary-General asked for power toterminate such appointments:

(i) if the conduct of a staff member did not meetthe high standards of integrity required by the Charter;

(ii) if facts, anterior to the staff member's appoint-ment and relevant to his administrative suitabilityshould come to light, which, if they had been knownshould, under the standards of the Charter, haveprecluded his appointment; or

(iii) if such action would be in the interest of thegood administration of the Organization and in ac-cordance with the standards of the Charter.

No termination under any of these sub-paragraphswould take place until the matter was considered bya special advisory board appointed for that purpose bythe Secretary-General.

Sub-paragraph (i)—The Advisory Committee con-curred in the text for sub-paragraph (i) proposed bythe Secretary-General.

Many representatives pointed out that this sub-paragraph merely incorporated in the regulations thestandard of integrity which was already found in theCharter and considered that it was a natural corollary tothe amendment to staff regulation 1.4. Other repre-sentatives, including those of Belgium, Chile, Guate-mala, Syria and Uruguay, considered the amendmentunnecessary since the standard of integrity was already


covered by the provisions relating to unsatisfactoryservice and to misconduct. They believed that integritywas too indefinite a term, required subjective evaluationand might be subject to political interpretations.

Attention was drawn to the Secretary-General's state-ment that "integrity" applied only to actions andactivities which were morally objectionable, and hadno political connotations.

The representative of India orally proposed a textfor this sub-paragraph which, with accepted amend-ments, provided that the Secretary-General might, bya properly motivated decision, terminate a permanentstaff member if he learned of facts relative to his con-duct during his period of employment in the UnitedNations, if such facts indicated that the staff memberdid not meet the high standards of integrity requiredby the Charter.

Prior to the voting, the representative of the Sec-retary-General accepted the oral suggestion of therepresentative of Israel to change the phrase "the highstandards" to "the highest standards" in accordancewith the wording of Article 101 of the Charter.

The text proposed by the Secretary-General andendorsed by the Advisory Committee was approved atthe Committee's 417th meeting on 1 December 1953 by27 votes to 9, with 2 abstentions.

Sub-paragraph (ii)—The Advisory Committee, afterfirst raising the question as to whether a special pro-vision of this nature in the regulations was required,concluded that, in view of the wide geographical areaof United Nations recruitment, a formal and explicitprovision was necessary, and proposed minor amend-ments, which were accepted by the Secretary-General.

The representative of India, in orally introducing analternative text, considered sub-paragraph (ii) to beallied with sub-paragraph (i) in that it concerned "pastintegrity" and therefore opposed the proposal of theAdvisory Committee to delete the restrictive term "ad-ministrative" where it referred to a staff member'ssuitability.

Those members of the Committee who supported thesub-paragraph considered it a natural corollary to sub-paragraph (i). An employee, they held, was obligatedto disclose any present or past circumstances whichmight lead prospective employers to refuse to employhim.

Some members of the Committee, including therepresentatives of Chile, France, Guatemala, the Nether-lands, Uruguay and Yugoslavia, expressed doubts asto the necessity of the proposal in that it was coveredby the criterion of integrity in the first sub-paragraph,and stated that by applying to past conduct it over-looked the fact that a person could rise above his past.Others, among them the representatives of Czechoslo-vakia, Poland, the Ukrainian SSR and the USSR, con-sidered the text imprecise and open to misunderstanding.

At its 417th meeting on 1 December 1953, the Com-mittee approved, by 27 votes to 9, with 2 abstentions,the text recommended by the Advisory Committee andaccepted by the Secretary-General.

Sub-paragraph (iii)—In its report, the AdvisoryCommittee accepted the text proposed by the Secretary-General subject to an amendment to add a phrase topermit termination if such action would be "in thegeneral interest of the United Nations," and subject tothe further safeguard that the provisions would bereviewed by the General Assembly within two years.

While agreeing that the amendment proposed by theSecretary-General would give very broad powers to theSecretary-General, members of the Committee favouringthe revision believed that the observations and state-ments of the Secretary-General and the Advisory Com-mittee should dissipate any misgivings which existed.They believed that adequate safeguards were provided,and noted the Secretary-General's statement to the effectthat the provision was intended to be used in theinterest of the staff when it was desired not to stigmatizea staff member by termination or dismissal under otherprovisions of the regulations. Several representatives,including those of Canada, Colombia, Cuba, Lebanonand the Netherlands, conditioned their agreement onthe understanding that the power requested would begranted for a period of one or two years only, afterwhich it would be reviewed.

Doubts concerning the appropriateness of the para-graph were raised by the representatives of Belgium,Chile, Czechoslovakia, Egypt, France, Guatemala, India,Indonesia, Israel, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Syria,Turkey, the Ukrainian SSR, the USSR, Uruguay andYugoslavia. Opposition was based, among other things,on the grounds that the power to be granted was sobroad as to render superfluous other provisions withregard to termination; that the Secretary-General wouldbe the sole judge of the requirements of good admin-istration; and that contracts would be liable to termina-tion by unilateral action by one of the contractingparties.

Explaining again, at the Committee's 412th meetingon 25 November, his intention with regard to the useof this sub-paragraph, the Secretary-General suggestedmoving the whole clause to the end of the amendedregulation and adding the words "provided the actionis not contested by a staff member concerned". Thus,he explained, the sub-paragraph would be used onlywith the consent of a staff member, in place of aresignation on request.

The Advisory Committee considered this new versionof the sub-paragraph and concluded (A/C.5/567) thatit would be preferable to delete the sub-paragraphaltogether rather than to adopt the new text suggestedby the Secretary-General. The Secretary-General againclarified his position by stating that he was not formallyproposing the alternative text; however, he wouldaccept it if proposed by a delegation.

The United Kingdom submitted a text (A/C.5/-L.255) providing that the Secretary-General might alsoterminate the appointment of a staff member who holdsa permanent appointment "if, in the considered judg-ment of the Secretary-General, after he has personallyexamined the case, interviewed the staff member con-cerned, and consulted the Advisory Board, such actionwould be in the interests of the Organization and inaccordance with the standards of the Charter". Therepresentative of the United Kingdom believed thatfinal responsibility must be fixed for the interpretationof the words "in the interest of the good administra-tion . . . " as proposed in the Secretary-General's textand the United Kingdom text would lay this responsi-bility upon the Secretary-General.

The Committee, at its 417th meeting on 1 December,after rejecting the Secretary-General's alternative textby 27 votes to 18, with 5 abstentions, and the UnitedKingdom text by 36 votes to 9, with 3 abstentions,approved, at the first reading, the original text of theSecretary-General by 24 votes to 15, with 11 abstentions.


Following the first reading, the Secretary-Generalreceived a letter from the Chairman of the Staff Com-mittee (A/C.5/573), which he transmitted to membersof the Fifth Committee, stating the Staff Committee'spreference for the alternative text suggested by theSecretary-General which, it was stated, would largelyremove staff anxiety regarding this sub-paragraph.

The representative of Belgium, at the Committee's422nd meeting on 4 December, orally proposed thatthe words "provided that the action is not contested bythe staff member concerned" should be added to thetext previously approved at the Committee's first read-ing. This sub-paragraph would then be moved to theend of the amendment, as was suggested by the Sec-retary-General, since reference to a special advisoryboard would no longer apply to this provision. Thisproposal was adopted by the Committee by 36 votesto 14, with 4 abstentions.

Special Advisory Board—The Secretary-General's pro-posal for a special advisory board to consider casesinvolving termination under the new provisions ofregulation 9.1(a) was presented by him as one of thesafeguards for the exercise of his new powers.

Argentina and Chile submitted a text (A/C.5/L.255)covering the composition of the board which, with anaccepted French oral amendment (providing for theboard's chairman being appointed by the President ofthe International Court of Justice), provided that notermination under the new paragraphs should takeplace until the matter had been considered and reportedon by a special board consisting of five members, ofwhom two should be appointed by the Secretary-Generaland two elected by the staff, with the chairman desig-nated by the President of the International Court ofJustice. An alternative proposal submitted orally by therepresentative of the United Kingdom provided thatthe board should consist of a chairman nominated bythe President of the International Court of Justice, twomembers nominated by the Secretary-General fromamong individuals of well-established reputation butnot connected with the United Nations, one member ofthe staff representing the Secretary-General and onemember representing the staff. The United Kingdomrepresentative also proposed that his text should notbe adopted as a staff regulation but included in therapporteur's report as a suggestion for a staff rule.

On the first reading, the Fifth Committee decided,by 21 votes to 15 with 5 abstentions, in favour of theprinciple that the provisions governing the member-ship of the proposed advisory board should be em-bodied in a staff regulation. Following this vote, theUnited Kingdom representative proposed his text asan amendment to the joint Argentine-Chilean proposal.The Committee rejected, by 18 votes to 18, with 11abstentions, the United Kingdom text. The jointamendment was then approved at the Committee's417th meeting on 1 December at the first reading, by28 votes to 11, with 6 abstentions.

Prior to the second reading, the Secretary-Generalsuggested reconsideration of this decision and pro-posed (A/C.5/574) that the board consist of a chair-man appointed by the Secretary-General on the nomina-tion of the President of the International Court ofJustice and of four members appointed by the Secretary-General in agreement with the Staff Council. He furthersuggested that the composition of the board be spelledout in a staff rule rather than in a staff regulation,and proposed the adoption of his original proposalthat the board be appointed by the Secretary-General,

leaving its precise composition to be spelled out in astaff rule along the lines he had suggested.

In a letter from the Chairman of the Staff Committee(A/C.5/262), the view was expressed that the exactmanner in which the staff should choose its repre-sentatives should be left open in the text of the staffregulation.

The proposal of the Secretary-General was approvedby the Committee at its 422nd meeting on 4 Decem-ber by 53 votes to none, with 1 abstention.

Regulation 9.3—As a corollary to his new powersunder the amended regulation 9.1(a), the Secretary-General proposed in his report an amendment toregulation 9.3 authorizing him, when he considered itjustified, to pay to a staff member terminated underregulation 9.1(a) an indemnity payment twice thatwhich would otherwise be payable under the staffregulations.

The Advisory Committee recommended that thepayment of increased indemnities should be limited tocases of staff members terminated under paragraph (iii)of regulation 9.1(a), and that the increase should beno more than 50 per cent higher than that which wouldotherwise be payable.

Several of the representatives who opposed sub-paragraph (iii) of regulation 9.1(a) were also opposedto this amendment. Others, including the representativesof Colombia, the Union of South Africa and the UnitedKingdom, opposed any increase in the present in-demnities which they considered to be sufficient in allcases of termination.

Those supporting the text proposed by the AdvisoryCommittee, among them the representatives of Australia,Cuba, the Dominican Republic and Turkey, believedthat, since regulation 9.1(a) (iii) gave wider discre-tionary powers to the Secretary-General to terminateappointments, he should also have wider discretionarypowers with regard to payment of indemnities forpersons terminated under this provision. They could notagree, however, that there were any grounds for alter-ing indemnity rates already approved by an earlierAssembly session for terminations under existing regu-lations. The Chairman of the Advisory Committeepointed out that, while terminations under 9.1(a) (iii)would be exceptional, the new provisions would entailconsiderable expenditure if it were extended to othercases.

The Committee first voted on an oral United King-dom proposal that no addition should be made toregulation 9.3. This was rejected by 19 votes to 12,with 16 abstentions. The text recommended by theAdvisory Committee was then approved at the Com-mittee's 417th meeting on 1 December by 22 votes to14, with 11 abstentions.

(b) AMENDMENTS TO THE STATUTE OF THEADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

Article 9 of the Statute—In his report, the Secretary-General stated that experience had indicated that, par-ticularly in cases involving termination of appointment,where the Administrative Tribunal found that an appli-cation was well-founded, the payment of compensationshould be the rule rather than (as under the originalArticle 9) the exception. To reinstate an employeewhom the Secretary-General has considered it necessaryto terminate would, he declared, not normally be inkeeping with the interest of good administration. Also,from the point of view of the staff member, it would


not be desirable to require a new finding by the Sec-retary-General that reinstatement was "impossible orinadvisable". From the point of view of financial ad-ministration, the Secretary-General proposed that theTribunal be limited in the amount to be awarded incases of termination or dismissal to the maximum oftwo years' net base salary. These observations were em-bodied in the first paragraph of his proposed amend-ment to Article 9 of the Tribunal's Statute.

The second paragraph of the Secretary-General's pro-posal concerned remanding in case of procedural defectsand compensation for a loss caused by a proceduraldelay; the third paragraph, unchanged in substancefrom the original text, provided that in applicable casescompensation should be fixed by the Tribunal and paidby the organization concerned.

The Advisory Committee concurred in the secondand third paragraphs of the Secretary-General's proposaland recommended a new text for the first paragraph.This new paragraph retained the first sentence of theexisting article 9 of the Statute, while at the same timemeeting the points raised by the Secretary-General. TheAdvisory Committee further suggested that it wasdesirable from the point of view of financial admin-istration to limit the compensation that might beawarded to one year's net base salary, or $10,000,whichever was smaller, and recommended an amendmentto the Secretary-General's text to that effect. The Chair-man of the Advisory Committee explained that thisamount was intended to be in addition to any indemni-ties paid by the Secretary-General under the staff regula-tions at the time of termination.

The Secretary-General accepted the first part of theAdvisory Committee's text, but desired to maintain hisoriginal limit on the amount of compensation which theAdministrative Tribunal might award, which was twoyears' net base salary. It was explained by the repre-sentative of the Secretary-General that, in accordancewith the practice of the Administrative Tribunal, it wasintended that the amount would be less any indemnitiespaid at the time of termination. The Secretary-Generalhad, however, suggested that in exceptional cases theTribunal should be free to recommend the payment ofhigher compensation.

In the Fifth Committee's discussions there was adifference of opinion only on the first paragraph of theSecretary-General's proposal; there was general accept-ance and no debate in substance on paragraphs 2 and 3.

A joint amendment was proposed by Brazil, Egypt,France, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, the Netherlands andSyria (A/C.5/L.255) which, with oral drafting changes,would add to the revised text the provision that theTribunal might, in exceptional cases, when it consideredit justified, order the payment of higher indemnity; astatement of the reasons would accompany each suchorder.

Some representatives, including those of Belgium,Chile, Guatemala, Uruguay and Yugoslavia, opposedany action on this subject on the grounds that it wasundesirable to tamper with the Tribunal's Statute in away which might alter the existing balance between thepower of the Secretary-General and the Tribunal.

The Committee, at its 418th meeting on 2 December,voted on the amended text paragraph by paragraph.The Committee voted on the first paragraph in parts.It adopted the first sentence as recommended by theAdvisory Committee, the second sentence with thelimitation of two years' net base salary, and the eight-

Power proposal concerning higher indemnities in ex-ceptional cases. It then accepted the first paragraph, asa whole, by 34 votes to 13, with 6 abstentions. Thesecond paragraph was approved by 54 votes to none,with 1 abstention, and the third paragraph was ap-proved unanimously.

Article 7 of the Statute—An amendment proposed byArgentina and Chile (A/C.5/255) to Article 7 of theStatute of the Administrative Tribunal, which wouldhave eliminated the provision preventing considerationby the Tribunal of applications unanimously decided bythe Joint Appeals Board to be frivolous, was rejectedby the Committee at its 418th meeting on 2 Decemberby 20 votes to 7, with 22 abstentions. A further amend-ment (A/C.5/255) by these two delegations to deletethe word "activities" in staff regulation 1.2, on theassignment of staff by the Secretary-General "to anyof the activities or offices of the United Nations ..."was withdrawn, following explanations by the repre-sentative of the Secretary-General and comments byvarious delegations.

(2) Provisions for Review

As a result of a suggestion made by the Sec-retary-General in his report, the representative ofCanada proposed (A/C.5/L.258) and the Com-mittee unanimously approved at its 4l6th meetingon 1 December, a draft resolution providing thatthe Assembly undertake at its tenth session in1955, on the basis of a report to be submittedby the Secretary-General and the commentsthereon of the Advisory Committee, a reviewboth of the principles and standards progressivelydeveloped and applied by the Secretary-Generalin his implementation of the staff regulations.

(3) Special Fund for Payment of IndemnitiesIn the course of the discussion of the amend-

ment to staff regulation 9.3, the representativeof Argentina proposed a draft resolution (A/C.5/L.257), requesting the Secretary-General to sub-mit to the Assembly's ninth session a report onthe possibility of establishing a special fund tobe used for the payment of indemnities.

The representative of France suggested, how-ever, that, instead of a resolution on the subject,the report by the Fifth Committee's rapporteurmight contain a request to the Secretary-Generaland to the Advisory Committee to prepare for theninth session a report on the financing of indem-nities, taking into account the views expressed inthe Committee's discussions. The representative ofTurkey believed that the report should also dis-cuss the question as to whether the establishmentof a fund of this kind would be compatible withthe provisions of Article 17 of the Charter (whichstates, inter alia, that the "General Assembly shallconsider and approve the budget of the Organiza-tion"). He explained that, so far as public ac-counts were concerned, the standard practice wasfor the legislature to appropriate funds for a


financial year, and to enact special legislation if itanticipated that expenditure would continue be-yond that year. The General Assembly, he said,could not delegate its powers, not even to theSecretary-General, and could not relinquish itspower to scrutinize expenditure each year. In thisconnexion, the Chairman of the Advisory Com-mittee stated that, without wishing to anticipatethe attitude of the Committee, he believed the es-tablishment of such a fund would raise importantconstitutional issues.

The Secretary-General informed the Fifth Com-mittee that, if it expressed a wish to that effect,he would undertake a study of the possibility anddesirability of the proposal before making budget-ary arrangements for the payment of indemnities.He used the term "budgetary arrangements" as hefelt that various possible solutions should be stud-ied and not merely the proposal for a special fund.The Fifth Committee at its 415th meeting on 30November agreed, without objection, that therapporteur's report should indicate the desire of theCommittee that the Secretary-General should sub-mit the study envisaged to the ninth session of theGeneral Assembly.

(4) Other Personnel Problems

The second part of the Secretary-General's re-port to the Assembly's eighth session (A/2533)dealt with other personnel problems, such as theprogress in reviewing temporary staff, the appoint-ment policy, special categories of staff, and theeffect on United Nations staff members of thecoming into force of the United States Immigra-tion and Nationality Act of 1952.

(a) PROGRESS IN REVIEWING TEMPORARY STAFF

A Selection Committee appointed by the Sec-retary-General under the chairmanship of F. P.Walters, former Deputy Secretary-General of theLeague of Nations, conducted a review of tempo-rary staff at Headquarters in 195275 and in theEuropean Office of the United Nations early in1953. The review was continued at Headquartersin 1953 by two committees, one under the chair-manship of Sir Ramaswami Mudaliar and theother under the chairmanship of Ivan Kerno.

The Secretary-General declared that before theend of 1953 these committees would have com-pleted the review of 1,082 temporary staff mem-bers at Headquarters appointed before 1 January1951, of whom 567 were in the Professional cate-gory and 515 in the General Service category. Tothese numbers at Headquarters there had to beadded 296 staff members, already reviewed, in theEuropean Office of the United Nations.

Early in 1954, the Selection Committee, re-ported the Secretary-General, would undertake thereview of the staff of the Economic Commissionsfor Latin America and for Asia and the Far Eastand of the staff serving in the United NationsInformation Centres.

Simultaneously, a second form of regular reviewof staff members had been in operation in theSecretariat. This was the review, proposed first bythe Preparatory Commission in 1945, of perma-nent staff members who had completed five yearsof service in that status. The first permanent ap-pointments were granted during 1947 and thefirst group of permanent staff members was, there-fore, reviewed in 1952. The Secretary-General hadappointed a Five-Year Review Committee com-posed of senior officials of the Secretariat. At thetime of the Secretary-General's report (2 Novem-ber 1953), the Committee had reviewed 670 per-manent staff members, and the Secretary-Generalhad accepted its recommendations in virtuallyevery case.

(b) APPOINTMENT POLICY

The Secretary-General declared that the basicaim of an appointment policy devised for thepresent needs of the Secretariat was to create themost favourable conditions for the developmentof a body of permanent international civil servantsmeeting the highest standards of efficiency, com-petence and integrity. Under such a policy, out-side recruitment would be conducted mainly forthe purpose of securing replacements, includingcandidates of nationalities not adequately repre-sented, for posts vacated due to the process ofnormal turnover.

Candidates recruited for continuous servicewould be given appointments in probationarystatus, such probation to be of a duration of notless than two years. Toward the end of theirsecond year of service they would be submitted toreview and, as a result, either granted permanentappointments or separated from the service. Inexceptional cases, the period of probation mightbe extended for one additional year.

A special type of appointment, the main char-acteristic of which would consist in a clear stip-ulation that no expectancy of continuous servicewas implied, would be granted to outside assist-ants for work of a temporary nature or limitedduration or to certain recruited persons whom,because of their occupational or personal status,it was not possible or advisable to integrate in thepermanent service.

73

See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 95.


The Secretary-General stated that it would behis policy to grant permanent appointments tostaff members in the Principal Officer and Directorcategory below the rank of Principal Director, tostaff members in the Professional category and tostaff members serving in the intermediate andhigher levels of the General Service category.

As from 1 January 1954, temporary appoint-ments would be divided into two groups: eitherto replace or secure staff for which continuousservice was envisaged (the Probationary appoint-ment and the Regular appointment) or to en-gage temporary staff to whom no expectancy ofcontinuous service could or should be given (theFixed-term and the Indefinite appointment).

The probationary appointment would be givento individuals under 50 years of age at the timeof recruitment when the Secretary-General in-tended that the appointee, if he proved that hehad the required qualifications, should receive aPermanent or Regular appointment.

The Regular appointment would be given tostaff members in the first two salary levels of theGeneral Service category and to manual andskilled trade personnel, after they had served aminimum of two years in Probationary appoint-ments. The Regular appointment would be for anindefinite period which might last until retire-ment age.

The Fixed-term appointment, which would ex-pire automatically on a date specified in the letterof appointment, would be given for periods notto exceed five years to individuals recruited forservice of prescribed duration, including personsseconded by or on leave from national govern-ments and institutions for service with the Secre-tariat.

The Indefinite appointment would be givenonly to: (1) individuals specifically recruited forfield or mission service who did not qualify forFixed-term or Probationary appointment, and (2)those recruited subject to a waiver of medical re-quirements and who were not given a Fixed-termappointment.

An Appointment and Promotion Board com-posed of senior officials would be appointed bythe Secretary-General. The Board would make re-commendations for all appointments of an ex-pected duration of more than one year, with theexception of mission and technical assistance ex-perts appointments, and would consider all pro-posals for promotion.

A Personnel Selection and Review Board, ap-pointed by the Secretary-General, would be com-posed of the following: a chairman, three mem-

bers appointed from among senior officials of theSecretariat, and one member appointed fromamong staff members nominated by the StaffCouncil. The functions of the Board would be:(1) to conduct the review of staff members whobecame eligible for a Permanent or Regular ap-pointment; and (2) to review every five yearsstaff members holding Permanent or Regular ap-pointments and to advise the Secretary-Generalwhether the staff member had maintained thestandards of efficiency, competence and integrityprescribed by the Charter.

The Secretary-General stated that, while itseemed evident that the broad principles of thestaff regulations were meant to be universal andto apply to all members of the staff, he had onoccasions, where the circumstances warranted it,and particularly in the case of staff appointed forspecial service of a non-continuous or purely localcharacter, prescribed conditions of employmentwhich modified to some extent the specific stipu-lations of the staff regulations. This necessary lati-tude in interpreting the applicability of the staffregulations, he said, had proved to be of particularpractical value in setting the conditions of em-ployment in such subsidiary organs created by theGeneral Assembly as the United Nations Reliefand Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in theNear East, the United Nations Korean Recon-struction Agency, the Office of the United NationsHigh Commissioner for Refugees, and also forthe appointment of experts specifically recruitedto serve the Expanded Programme of TechnicalAssistance. He declared that, subject to the agree-ment of the General Assembly, he intended to con-tinue to avail himself of a reasonable latitude ofinterpretation of the applicability of the staff reg-ulations.

(c) THE UNITED STATES IMMIGRATIONAN D NATIONALIT Y AC T OF24 DECEMBER 1952

The Secretary-General stated that, on 24 De-cember 1952, there came into force in the UnitedStates a new Immigration and Nationality Actwhich contained provisions of immediate rele-vance to staff members of the United Nations.Under this Act, the United States authorities couldadjust to non-immigrant status any non-UnitedStates citizen in permanent residence (immi-grant) visa status who had an occupational statuswhich would entitle him to a diplomatic or inter-national organization visa (G-4 visa). The UnitedStates Attorney General would cancel the recordof such person's admission for permanent resi-dence, and his immigrant status would thereforebe terminated. The adjustment of status which


was thus required was made inapplicable by theAct, however, if the individual filed with theUnited States Attorney General a written waiverof all rights, privileges, exemptions, and immu-nities, under any law or any executive order, whichwould otherwise accrue to him because of hishaving an occupational status entitling him to thenon-immigrant status.

According to regulations issued by the UnitedStates Attorney General, no United Nations staffmember would have his residential status changedto G-4 visa status until he had received formalnotice in writing from the United States author-ities. The staff member would then have ten daysfrom the receipt of that notice in which to executethe waiver of his privileges and immunities. Somestaff members holding permanent residence visaswere faced with the decision before the time ofthe general notification, for example, if they ap-plied for a re-entry permit before proceeding ontravel outside the United States.

According to an opinion by the Attorney Gen-eral of the United States on the effect of thesewaivers, the Secretary-General stated, a UnitedNations staff member who signs the waiver canenjoy, under United States law, the same privilegesand exemptions as are available to a United Statescitizen employed by the United Nations, but can-not assert privileges not available to a UnitedStates citizen. In illustration, the staff memberwould remain immune from suit and legal pro-cess in relation to his official United Nationsfunctions, but he would become liable to UnitedStates income taxation on his income derived fromthe United Nations.

Following receipt of the text of the UnitedStates Act, the regulations adopted by the UnitedStates authorities in its implementation, and theopinion of the United States Attorney General,the Secretary-General on 26 June 1953 had issueda circular to the staff (ST/AFS/SER.A/214) inwhich he said in part that as far as the UnitedNations was concerned, the signature of thewaiver might have consequences which wouldhave to be carefully studied and might call forspecial rulings by the General Assembly or him-self. In the meantime, the Secretary-General, whohas exclusive authority to waive privileges andimmunities enjoyed by United Nations staff mem-bers, was prepared to consider the request of anystaff member for authorization of his signatureof the waiver, with the understanding that thiswaiver did not constitute a limitation of the im-munities related to official acts of the staff member.

The Secretary-General reported that, of some3,356 staff members at Headquarters, some 1,755

were not citizens of the United States; 461 being,on 1 October 1953, in permanent residence status.Assuming that all these staff members elected toretain their permanent residence status in theUnited States, the amount of income taxation thatwould be reimbursable was estimated to beroughly $360,000 for the first full taxation year.Of the 461 staff members, 231 were then entitledto the benefits and entitlements associated withinternational recruitment, of which home leavewas the most considerable, amounting to an es-timated annual cost of $280,000 per annum. Forthe purpose of geographical distribution of thestaff, some 178 of these staff members werecounted as being internationally recruited.

While the financial consequences were impor-tant, the Secretary-General said, there might also beother implications in the case of staff memberswhose nationality was an important feature oftheir selection for employment with the UnitedNations. If such staff members elected to becomepermanent residents of another country, theremight be an implication of an intention not tomaintain ties with the country of their nationality.A question might therefore arise with regard tothe application of the principle of geographicaldistribution.

It was proposed by the Secretary-General, andconcurred in by the Advisory Committee in itsobservations (A/2581) on the second part of thereport, that a staff member opting for permanentresidence status in the country of his duty station,and thereby rendering himself liable to nationalincome taxation on salary and other emolumentsreceived from the United Nations, should receivereimbursement of such taxation, subject to thedecision of the General Assembly to appropriatefunds annually for this purpose. On the otherhand, it was recommended that such staff mem-bers should:

(1) lose any eligibility for home leave;(2) lose any entitlement to payment of non-resident's

allowance from the date on which the staff rules werechanged or from the end of the month in which hesigned the waiver, whichever was later;

(3) lose any entitlement to education grant after thecompletion of the 1953-1954 academic year, the staffmember concerned, however, retaining eligibility forone-way travel for the dependent child between thehome country and duty station on the completion of the1953-1954 academic year;

(4) lose any entitlement to repatriation grant; and(5) lose any eligibility for return transportation for

himself or his dependents, and for removal of house-hold effects, which was based on "place of home leave"

The Advisory Committee in its observations,in addition, while concurring in the transitionalmeasure recommended by the Secretary-General


as regards a staff member's entitlement to theeducation grant, considered as unwarranted theSecretary-General's proposal that staff memberswho would otherwise have been eligible for homeleave during 1953 or 1954 should be permittedto take one final home leave during the year inwhich it would have fallen due.

The Advisory Committee further recommended:(1) that persons in permanent residence status should

in future be ineligible for appointment as internation-ally recruited staff members unless they were preparedto change to a G-4 (or equivalent) visa status; and

(2) that, except in the case of the present staffmembers who were in permanent residence status andtherefore affected by the United States Immigrationand Nationality Act of 1952, any internationally recruit-ed member of the Secretariat who asked and receivedauthority to change from a G-4 (or equivalent) visastatus to a permanent residence status should not there-by acquire any entitlement to reimbursement of nationalincome taxes. This latter recommendation of the Ad-visory Committee was subsequently modified for thepurpose of enabling the Secretary-General, in excep-tional and compelling circumstances, to grant per-mission to a staff member to change his status withoutlosing entitlement to tax reimbursement.

The Advisory Committee expressed the viewthat a decision to remain in permanent residencestatus in no way represented an interest of theUnited Nations and that, on the contrary, to theextent, if any, that it might weaken existing tieswith the countries of nationality, it was undesir-able from the United Nations point of view.

The Fifth Committee, at its 419th meeting on3 December, turned its attention to the problemsand policy suggestions dealt with in the secondpart of the Secretary-General's report (A/2533).Discussion was directed for the most part to theproblems resulting from the application to UnitedNations staff members of the relevant provisionsof the United States Immigration and NationalityAct of 1952, on the basis of the observations andproposals outlined in the Secretary-General's re-port and the recommendations set forth in thereport of the Advisory Committee (A/2581).

The Fifth Committee was informed that thenumber of staff members who were in permanentresidence status and therefore affected by theabove Act, had been reduced, by 17 November1953, to 453. Of this total, 121 had been author-ized by the Secretary-General to sign a waiver ofprivileges and immunities, including 49 who wereentitled to benefits associated with internationalrecruitment.

The specific recommendations of the AdvisoryCommittee received a wide measure of supportin the Fifth Committee. A number of representa-tives, however, including those of Egypt, France,India and Poland, recorded their strong opposition

to any extension of the policy of national incometax reimbursement to a further group of staffmembers; they said they would not be able tosupport the appropriation of additional funds forthis purpose.

The recommendation of the Advisory Commit-tee that present staff members who opted for per-manent residence status in the country of theirduty station should, subject to annual appropria-tion of funds, receive reimbursement of nationalincome taxes, on being put to the vote, was ap-proved by 27 votes to 11, with 12 abstentions.The recommendations relating to loss of entitle-ment to various benefits associated with interna-tional recruitment were approved by 47 votes tonone, with 2 abstentions.

In the light of an explanation given by therepresentative of the Secretary-General, the FifthCommittee accepted, by 25 votes to 12, with 12abstentions, a proposal by the representative ofDenmark that the transitional arrangements, asrecommended by the Secretary-General, shouldapply in the case of home leave, as well as in thecase of the education grant.

The Fifth Committee, having been informedthat the Secretary-General would in future refuseto recruit persons in permanent residence statusfor posts subject to international recruitment, con-curred, by 48 votes to 1, with 1 abstention, in therecommendation of the Advisory Committee tothe effect that persons in permanent residencestatus should in future be ineligible for appoint-ment as internationally recruited staff membersunless they were prepared to change to a G-4, orequivalent, visa status.

The Advisory Committee's recommendationconcerning the granting of permission to a staffmember to change his status without losing en-titlement to tax reimbursement, as subsequentlymodified, was adopted by 45 votes to 1, with 3abstentions. In connexion with this last recom-mendation, certain representatives, in particularthe representative of Israel, questioned the equityof treating staff members who were already inpermanent residence status differently from thosewho subsequently opted for that status. Doubtswere also expressed as to the equity of makinga distinction between United States citizens, whowould continue to be entitled to the benefits as-sociated with international recruitment, and otherstaff members who were not yet citizens of theUnited States but who had applied for or hadacquired permanent residence status.

The hope was expressed that the Secretary-General would submit definite proposals in due


course for dealing with the problem that hadarisen with regard to the application of the prin-ciple of geographical distribution. The representa-tives of Argentina, Czechoslovakia, Egypt, India,Poland and the Union of South Africa, amongothers, considered that international officials shouldbe true representatives of the culture and per-sonality of the country of which they were na-tionals, and that those who elected to break theirties with that country could no longer claim tofulfil the conditions governing employment inthe United Nations.

The representative of the Secretary-Generalstated that definite proposals had not yet beensubmitted, since the Secretary-General had as yetno clear knowledge of how large the problemwould be. Should any considerable number ofinternationally recruited staff members decide toretain their permanent residence status, the Sec-retary-General would report the matter to theGeneral Assembly at its next session, togetherwith specific proposals for dealing with thesituation.

The representative of Czechoslovakia orally pro-posed that staff members at Headquarters havingpermanent residence status should be excluded, forthe purposes of geographical distribution of thestaff, from the quotas appropriate to their countryof nationality and should be included for suchpurposes within the quota appropriate to theUnited States. He requested that this proposalshould be voted on in two parts. As the first partof the proposal was rejected by 18 votes to 18,with 10 abstentions, it was ruled that the proposalas a whole had failed of adoption.

The Fifth Committee, however, accepted, by 20votes to 16, with 13 abstentions, an alternativeproposal by the representative of Lebanon to theeffect that, for purposes of applying the criterionof equitable geographical distribution as requiredby Article 101 of the Charter, staff members of anationality other than that of the host countrywho acquired permanent residence status in thehost country should be classified in a specialcategory.

It was the understanding of the Fifth Commit-tee that its decisions on the second part of theSecretary-General's report (A/2533) should berecorded in its report to the General Assembly(A/2615) for the guidance of the Secretary-General in giving effect to the policies thus ap-proved through appropriate amendments to thestaff rules.

(5) Resolutions Adopted by the General AssemblyThe report of the Fifth Committee (A/2615)

was considered by the General Assembly at its

471st plenary meeting on 9 December. The onlyrepresentative to comment on the report was therepresentative of Uruguay. He considered thatsome of the changes recommended in regulation9.1 (a) gave the Secretary-General excessive dis-cretionary powers which might open the way forpossible arbitrary action and injustice sometimein the future.

The Assembly adopted the draft resolutions pro-posed by the Fifth Committee as follows: thefirst resolution by 50 votes to 5, with 3 absten-tions; the second by 50 votes to 6, with 2 absten-tions; and the third, unanimously. Their texts(782 A, B and C (VIII)) read:

AMENDMENTS TO THE STAFF REGULATIONS OF THEUNITED NATIONS

"The General Assembly

"Adopts, as amendments to the Staff Regulations ofthe United Nations, the text annexed to the presentresolution. These amendments shall become effectivefrom the date of their adoption."

ANNEX

Staff regulation 1.4 (amended text)

Members of the Secretariat shall conduct themselvesat all times in a manner befitting their status as inter-national civil servants. They shall not engage in anyactivity that is incompatible with the proper dischargeof their duties with the United Nations. They shallavoid any action and in particular any kind of publicpronouncement which may adversely reflect on theirstatus, or on the integrity, independence and impartialitywhich are required by that status. While they are notexpected to give up their national sentiments or theirpolitical and religious convictions, they shall at all timesbear in mind the reserve and tact incumbent upon themby reason of their international status.

Staff regulation 1.7 (amended text)

Staff members may exercise the right to vote butshall not engage in any political activity which is in-consistent with or might reflect upon the independenceand impartiality required by their status as internationalcivil servants.

Staff regulation 9.1 (a) (additional provisions)The Secretary-General may also, giving his reasons

therefor, terminate the appointment of a staff memberwho holds a permanent appointment:

(i) If the conduct of the staff member indicates thatthe staff member does not meet the highest standards ofintegrity required by Article 101, paragraph 3, of theCharter;

(ii) If facts anterior to the appointment of the staffmember and relevant to his suitability come to lightwhich, if they had been known at the time of hisappointment, should, under the standards establishedin the Charter, have precluded his appointment.

No termination under sub-paragraphs (i) and (ii)shall take place until the matter has been considered andreported on by a special advisory board appointed forthat purpose by the Secretary-General.

A


Finally, the Secretary-General may terminate the ap-pointment of a staff member who holds a permanentappointment if such action would be in the interest ofthe good administration of the Organization and in ac-cordance with the standards of the Charter, providedthat the action is not contested by the staff memberconcerned.

Staff regulation 9.3 (additional paragraph to becomesub-paragraph (b))

(b) The Secretary-General may, where the circum-stances warrant and he considers it justified, pay to astaff member terminated under the final paragraph ofstaff regulation 9.1(a) a termination indemnity paymentnot more than 50 per cent higher than that whichwould otherwise be payable under the Staff Regulations.

B

AMENDMENT TO THE STATUTE OF THE UNITEDNATIONS ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

"The General Assembly"Adopts, as an amendment to the Statute of the

United Nations Administrative Tribunal, the textannexed to the present resolution. This amendment shallbecome effective from the date of its adoption."

ANNEX

Article 9 (amended text)

1. If the Tribunal finds that the application is wellfounded, it shall order the rescinding of the decisioncontested or the specific performance of the obligationinvoked. At the same time the Tribunal shall fix theamount of compensation to be paid to the applicantfor the injury sustained should the Secretary-General,within thirty days of the notification of the judgment,decide, in the interest of the United Nations, that theapplicant shall be compensated without further actionbeing taken in his case; provided that such compensa-tion shall not exceed the equivalent of two years' netbase salary of the applicant. The Tribunal may, however,in exceptional cases, when it considers it justified, orderthe payment of a higher indemnity. A statement of thereasons for the Tribunal's decision shall accompany eachsuch order.

2. Should the Tribunal find that the procedureprescribed in the Staff Regulations or Staff Rules hasnot been observed, it may, at the request of the Sec-retary-General and prior to the determination of themerits, order the case remanded for institution or correc-tion of the required procedure. Where a case is re-manded the Tribunal may order the payment of com-pensation, not to exceed the equivalent of three months'net base salary, to the applicant for such loss as mayhave been caused by the procedural delay.

3. In all applicable cases, compensation shall befixed by the Tribunal and paid by the United Nationsor, as appropriate, by the specialized agency participat-ing under article 12.

REVIEW OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS OF THE UNITEDNATIONS. INCLUDING THE PRINCIPLES AND

STANDARDS APPLIED IN THEIRIMPLEMENTATION


"1. Decides to undertake, at its tenth session in

1955, on the basis of a report to be submitted by the

Secretary-General and of the comments thereon of theAdvisory Committee on Administrative and BudgetaryQuestions, including their recommendations as to suchfurther action as may be required of the General Assem-bly, a review both of the principles and standardsprogressively developed and applied by the Secretary-General in his implementation of the Staff Regulationsand of the Staff Regulations themselves;

"2. Requests the Secretary-General to circulate tothe governments of Member States, not later than fourweeks before the opening date of the tenth session ofthe General Assembly, the report and comments re-ferred to in paragraph 1 above."

4. Staff Regulations of the UnitedNations: Question of a

Probationary Period

In resolution 682 (VII)76 of 21 December1952, the General Assembly asked the Secretary-General to submit, through the Advisory Commit-tee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions,a final proposal on the question of a probationaryperiod for consideration by the Assembly at itseighth session.

In his report to the eighth session (A/2591),the Secretary-General stated that he had consultedwith the executive heads and the administrativerepresentatives of the specialized agencies, withwhom agreement had been reached, in principle,that all permanent appointments should be pre-ceded by a trial period of service, either in theform of a specific period of probation or on afixed-term basis, for one or two years. He saidthat the experience gained in the Secretariat dur-ing the past years had led to the conclusion thata period of two years was normally necessary fora proper and accurate assessment of the fitness forpermanent appointment of a newly appointed staffmember. Provision should also be made for thepossibility of extending that period in specialcases for one additional year.

Accordingly he proposed an additional para-graph to be included in staff regulation 4.5, asfollows:

"(b) The Secretary-General shall prescribe which staffmembers are eligible for permanent appointments. Theprobationary period for granting or confirming apermanent appointment shall normally not exceed twoyears, provided that in individual cases the Secretary-General may extend the probationary period for notmore than one additional year."

The Advisory Committee, in a memorandum(A/2592) addressed to the Secretary-General,agreed with the proposed text subject to certainobservations. These were to the effect that thewords "granting or confirming" were used in the

76

See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 99.


sense that a staff member intended for the careerservice would normally hold a temporary appoint-ment of a probationary nature for an initial periodof two or—in exceptional cases—three years andwould then either be granted a permanent ap-pointment or his temporary appointment wouldbe terminated and he would be separated fromthe service. The phrase "or confirming" it wasunderstood, was inserted for the sole purpose ofcovering any exceptional cases in which a per-manent appointment was granted, subject to con-firmation, either on initial appointment or at anytime during the probationary period. The Ad-visory Committee also noted that the full effectof the proposed addition to staff regulation 4.5was intended to apply to staff appointed after 1January 1954.

The question was considered by the Fifth Com-mittee at its 420th meeting on 3 December, andby the General Assembly at its 471st plenary meet-ing on 9 December. The Fifth Committee, withoutdiscussion, unanimously approved the text pro-posed by the Secretary-General for staff regulation4.5 (b), and on its recommendation (A/2613),the General Assembly, without discussion andwithout objection, adopted the text as resolution781(VIII).

5. United Nations AdministrativeTribunal

a. JUDGMENTS OF THE TRIBUNALOn 21 August 1953, the Administrative Tri-

bunal, in Geneva, rendered judgments (JudgmentsNos. 18-38, AT/DEC/18-38) in the cases of 21former United Nations staff members of UnitedStates nationality who contended that their dis-charge was illegal. Ten of these cases related toterminations of temporary appointments, ten toterminations of permanent appointments and oneto the summary dismissal for serious misconductof a staff member who held a permanent appoint-ment.

The Tribunal sustained the termination actionof the Secretary-General in nine cases involvingtemporary appointments and rejected the claimsof the individual applicants.

The Tribunal decided in favour of the termin-ated staff members in ten cases concerning perma-nent appointments and in one case concerning atemporary appointment. It declared, inter alia, thatwith respect to the cases concerning permanentappointments staff regulation 9.1(a), on termina-

tion for unsatisfactory services, and regulation10.2, on summary dismissal for serious mis-conduct, did not apply. Even if it were admittedthat the plea of constitutional privilege invokedby the staff members in respect of acts outsidetheir professional duties constituted a breach ofstaff regulation 1.4, relating to political activity,this could not be construed as "unsatisfactoryservices", a term used solely to designate profess-ional behaviour within the Organization, norcould it be held to constitute serious misconduct.In the case concerning a temporary appointment,it was ruled that staff regulation 1.4 recognizesthe right of staff members not to give up theirpolitical opinions and that, in this case, the termi-nation decision on the basis of staff regulation9.1(c) represented a misuse of power and wastherefore invalid. Reinstatement was ordered infour cases and payment of compensation in lieuof reinstatement, as requested by the applicants,was ordered in seven cases.

The Tribunal decided with respect to the sum-mary dismissal that the proceedings of the JointAppeals Board in the case had not been valid, thatconsequently the submission of the case to theAdministrative Tribunal was not regular and thatit should be re-submitted to the Joint AppealsBoard.

In the seven cases where compensation wasordered in lieu of reinstatement, the Tribunalawarded: (1) full salary up to the date of judg-ment ($53,798) less the amount paid at termina-tion in lieu of notice ($16,640) and less also theamount of termination indemnity ($32,460);(2) compensation in lieu of reinstatement invarying amounts totalling $122,500; and (3)legal costs totalling $2,100. In one case, an addi-tional obligation estimated at $1,600 representedan award for pension entitlement.

In the case regarding the summary dismissal,the Tribunal awarded legal costs of $300.

Under the Statute of the Tribunal, the Secre-tary-General has the option of refusing reinstate-ment if he considers it inadvisable, in which casethe Tribunal decides on the amount of compen-sation. In the exercise of the powers granted himby the Tribunal's Statute, the Secretary-Generaldecided not to reinstate the applicants in the fourcases (Judgments Nos. 18, 30, 32 and 38) wherereinstatement was ordered by the Tribunal. By aletter of 2 September, the Secretary-General in-formed the President of the Tribunal that he haddecided that it would be inadvisable from thepoints of view which it was his duty to take intoconsideration to reinstate the persons concerned.


Proceedings to determine the amounts of com-pensation in the four cases then took place beforethe Tribunal, and four judgments (JudgmentsNos. 39-42, AT/DEC/39-42) were rendered, inLondon, on 13 October. The Tribunal awarded:(1) full salary up to the date of judgment ($30,-228) less the amount paid at termination in lieuof notice ($6,574) and less also the amount oftermination indemnity ($14,911); (2) compen-sation in lieu of reinstatement amounting to$48,230; and (3) legal costs totalling $1,200.

On 11 December, the Tribunal, at United Na-tions Headquarters, rendered judgments (Judg-ments Nos. 43-50, AT/DEC/43-50) in the casesof eight former United Nations staff memberswishing reinstatement. Six of these cases con-cerned the termination of temporary appoint-ments, and two concerned the non-renewal offixed-term appointments. Rescission of the Sec-retary-General's decision to terminate the employ-ment, reinstatement and compensation, in themajority of the cases, were requested by the ap-plicants.

The Tribunal stated that the staff rules andregulations then in force provided that the Secre-tary-General might terminate temporary appoint-ments if, in his opinion, such action would be inthe interest of the United Nations, and that fixed-term appointments were regarded as temporaryappointments. The Tribunal noted that the Sec-retary-General had, in all instances, accepted therecommendations of the Walters Selection Com-mittee regarding the applicants concerned. TheTribunal explained that the function of theWalters Committee was to make recommendationsto the Secretary-General as to which temporarystaff should (1) be granted permanent appoint-ment, (2) be placed on a further probationaryperiod of one year, or (3) be terminated. TheTribunal noted that the Committee was an in-ternal administrative body, established by, andfunctioning in the way approved by the Secretary-General in order to render him advice; it was notfor the Tribunal to express an opinion on internaladministrative practices adopted by the Secretary-General. The Tribunal rejected all the claims putforward by the applicants.

The Tribunal, also on 11 December, rendereda judgment (Judgment No. 51, AT/DEC/51)correcting a material error in Judgment Number37 of 21 August 1953. In that Judgment theTribunal had awarded the applicant $10,000damages to cover the period from the date of thejudgment until the date on which she wouldnormally have retired on pension, on 12 March1955. The Tribunal in its Judgment of 11 De-

cember stated that it was now clear that the wrongdate of birth and statement as to age was sub-mitted to it by both parties and as it had had noopportunity of being made aware of the true factsprior to its Judgment of 21 August, it had nooption but to correct that Judgment in the lightof accurate facts belatedly produced. The Tribunalaccordingly ordered that the amount of compen-sation provided in Judgment No. 37, which wasspecifically related to age and date of birth, beamended so that for the sum of $10,000 there besubstituted the amended sum of $3,500. The datefrom which the applicant should be paid the pen-sion referred to was amended from 12 March1955 to 12 March 1954. The Tribunal declinedto examine the request of the counsel for theapplicant for a general reconsideration of thequestion of remedial relief.

The fifth plenary session of the AdministrativeTribunal was held at United Nations Headquarterson 3 December.

b. QUESTION OF THE PAYMENT OFCOMPENSATION AWARDEDBY THE TRIBUNAL

In discussing at its eighth session the supple-mentary estimates for the financial year 1953, theGeneral Assembly had before it a report by theSecretary-General (A/2534) which, among otherthings, estimated that an additional $179,420would be required for the awards of compen-sation ordered by the Administrative Tribunal inthe case of some eleven staff members whose ap-pointments had been terminated during 1953.

The Secretary-General stated in his report, interalia, that, as Chief Administrative Officer of theOrganization, he was himself obviously bound bythe decisions of the Tribunal and it was not forhim to discuss the findings of the Tribunal asconcerns the facts or as concerns the interpreta-tions given to the relevant rules. He therefore hadproposed the appropriation of the necessary funds.Since the Tribunal was not set up by the Charter,but by a special decision of the Assembly, it didnot have the position of an organ with constitu-tional origin and independence, he continued.However, the creation of the Tribunal, with thesafeguards from the legal point of view that itoffered to the staff in questions of implementationof the staff regulations, introduced an importantelement in the contractual relations between theOrganization and its employees. For that reason,he stated, the decisions of the Tribunal in thecases which had been submitted to it had as theirbasis, not only the unilateral decision of theAssembly by which the Tribunal was set up, but


also the current contractual relationship betweenthe Organization and its employees as establishedby that decision. Finally, it should be kept in mindthat the administrative authority of the Secretary-General as concerns the employment of staff, ac-cording to the letter and spirit of the provisionsof the Charter, was limited by regulations estab-lished by the Assembly and that, although theAssembly was entrusted with establishing thestandards of employment on the basis of theCharter provisions, the compatibility of thosestandards with the letter of the staff regulationsfell inside the competence of the AdministrativeTribunal.

In its 24th report to the eighth session (A/-2580), the Advisory Committee on Administra-tive and Budgetary Questions concurred in thisproposed appropriation on the grounds that theSecretary-General's action in including this pro-vision was in accordance with the Statute of theAdministrative Tribunal.

During its discussions of the supplementaryestimates, at its 420th to 423rd and 425th to427th meetings from 3 to 5 and 7 to 8 December,the Fifth Committee gave primary considerationto the awards of compensation.

The United States representative declared thatit was the considered judgment of his Governmentthat, in ruling that the Secretary-General hadacted illegally in terminating eleven members ofthe staff and awarding those staff members morethan $185,000 in monetary compensation, theAdministrative Tribunal had made serious errorsprejudicial to the interests of the United Nations.

Under the Charter, the Secretary-General wasresponsible for appointing and maintaining a Sec-retariat of the highest quality and was entitledto the Assembly's confidence in carrying out hisobligations. His powers should not be infringedupon by a subordinate administrative body of theGeneral Assembly.

The concern of the United States Government,its representative said, was all the greater owingto the circumstances of the case. The staff mem-bers involved were United States citizens who hadrefused to answer the questions of a duly con-stituted United States Senate sub-committee con-cerning espionage, subversive activities or UnitedStates Communist Party membership. The Tri-bunal had reversed the Secretary-General's find-ings that their conduct in refusing to answer thequestions warranted dismissal and had decidedthat the United Nations, to whose budget theUnited States made such a large contribution,should pay large sums of money to those indi-viduals.

The fact that the United States was the hostcountry of the United Nations meant that the at-tention of United States citizens were focusedupon their fellow nationals in the United NationsSecretariat. They could not conceive that theUnited Nations could be basically sound if itknowingly employed United States citizens whoflouted the responsibilities of United States citi-zenship and were not prepared to deny underoath their involvement in subversive activities.The United States would therefore oppose theappropriation of funds to make the paymentsawarded by the Tribunal, for the following basicreasons: (1) the General Assembly had the legalright and responsibility to review and to refuse togive effect to decisions of the Administrative Tri-bunal; (2) the Tribunal had misconstrued its roleand exceeded its proper powers; (3) the Tribunalhad made serious errors of law in its applicationof the staff regulations; and (4) the Tribunal hadmade errors of judgment and fact in calculatingthe amount of the awards.

With regard to the first point, the United Statesrepresentative said, among other things, that thedecisions of the Administrative Tribunal were notthe decisions of a court, but of an administrativebody subsidiary to and created by the GeneralAssembly. Under the Charter, the General As-sembly was responsible with the Secretary-Generalfor maintaining a Secretariat meeting the higheststandards of efficiency, competence and integrityand had not intended in creating the Tribunal toevade that responsibility. The Tribunal had beenestablished by the General Assembly to carry outcertain functions assigned to it. It would be con-ceded readily, the United States representativesaid, that the General Assembly could change theStatute of the Tribunal or could abolish it. Surely,then, the General Assembly could take the lesserstep of reviewing the Tribunal's decisions andcould take action to correct the result of thosedecisions if the Tribunal went beyond the limitsof the jurisdiction allotted to it.

A further basis for the right of the GeneralAssembly to review the Tribunal's decisions underdiscussion, the United States representative main-tained, was that the money for the awards hadto be appropriated by the General Assembly aspart of the United Nations budget, which had tobe considered and approved by the Assembly. Inorder to fulfil its responsibility of considering andapproving the appropriation, the Assembly notonly could, but was bound to review the decisionsof the Tribunal; it could not relinquish its powerto make appropriations to a small group of fourindividuals, no matter how carefully they had been


chosen. Thus, it was not only the right, but theduty of the Assembly to review the decisions ofthe Tribunal and decide upon their soundness.

With regard to the second point, the UnitedStates representative stated that it was clear fromthe records that the General Assembly in creatingthe Tribunal had intended it to have authorityto review decisions of the Secretary-General indisciplinary matters in order to determine whetherthey had been taken in accordance with proced-ures set forth in the staff regulations. It appearedalso to have intended it to have authority to re-view those actions for the purpose of determiningwhether there was evidence compelling a conclu-sion that the action by the Secretary-General hadbeen taken in bad faith or had been wholly ar-bitrary without any basis in fact or reason. But ithad not intended the Tribunal to have authorityequal or superior to that of the Secretary-Generalto determine what standards of conduct were tobe applied to staff members or to determinewhether or not staff members had failed to meetthose standards; nor to try disciplinary cases denovo; nor to substitute its judgment concerningthe facts or the assessment of the gravity of anoffence for that of the Secretary-General. TheTribunal was competent to deal with cases involv-ing alleged breach of the staff member's terms ofemployment, including questions relating to theobservance of the terms of contracts or appoint-ments, but was not competent to inquire into thewisdom of the Secretary-General's exercise of hisdiscretionary powers. The Tribunal had invadedthe Secretary-General's jurisdiction and hadsubstituted its evaluation of the facts and its as-sessment of the gravity of the offence for thoseof the Secretary-General. It had made no effort toconfine its consideration to the question ofwhether the Secretary-General had exercised hisjudgment arbitrarily or in bad faith. That usurpa-tion of the Secretary-General's functions had notbeen intended by the General Assembly when ithad established the Tribunal.

With reference to the third point, the UnitedStates representative argued, inter alia, that thedismissed employees had been guilty of seriousmisconduct as charged by the Secretary-General.By refusing to answer questions put by properauthorities of the United States Government con-cerning subversive activities, the dismissed em-ployees had raised a serious question concerningtheir integrity. Both the United Nations Charterand the staff regulations required the higheststandards of integrity for all employees and whenany staff member had so placed his integrity indoubt he could not measure up to the standards

required for United Nations employment. Hisaction in so doing should obviously be classifiedas serious misconduct warranting his immediatedismissal.

In regard to the fourth point, the awards, saidthe representative of the United States, variedfrom a minimum of less than one half of oneyear's salary to a maximum of more than three-and-a-half times one year's salary and the reasonsgiven for the variations were conflicting, incon-sistent and often merely capricious. For example,in some cases the Tribunal had considered the agefactor, and in others not; in some cases it hadtaken into account certain favourable or adversecomments made by the United States State De-partment to the Secretary-General, and in othersnot; and in some cases it had made allowancefor alleged employment expectations, and inothers not.

The representatives of Argentina, Australia,China, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Liberiaand Turkey also opposed the appropriations. Theyexpressed the view, broadly speaking, that theGeneral Assembly had the authority to declineto accept the findings of the Administrative Tri-bunal or to vary the amount of compensationawarded by the latter. They argued that the Tri-bunal had been established not under the provi-sions of the Charter, but by a special decision ofthe General Assembly. The Tribunal was thereforenot in the position of an organ with constitutionalorigin and independence, and could not, as asubsidiary organ, create obligations binding uponthe General Assembly. The Tribunal was subjectto the Assembly's control; if the Assembly con-sidered the Tribunal had exceeded its competence,it had a duty to put the matter right, and it could,in particular, refuse to pay certain compensationawarded by the Tribunal. They stated that itwould be inadmissible for decisions of the chiefadministrative officer of the Organization, onwhom the Charter conferred considerable respon-sibilities, to be subject to control by a subsidiaryorgan. If the Tribunal's competence were to beso far extended that it could deal with any dis-ciplinary action taken by the Secretary-Generalin the interests of the Organization, the Secretary-General would be obliged to submit the adminis-tration of his staff to the Tribunal's scrutiny,which was obviously not the General Assembly'sintention in establishing the Tribunal.

Those representatives felt that the decisions ofthe Administrative Tribunal were based on errorsof fact and law. Some of the awards, they argued,were manifestly excessive, and if effect were givento them serious inequality of treatment amongst


the applicants would result. The decisions, besidestrespassing on the disciplinary powers of theSecretary-General, exposed the host country toserious risks and obliged it to contribute to thepayment of compensation to persons lacking theimpartiality and integrity required of internationalcivil servants. The terminations to which the Tri-bunal's decisions related had been effected inorder to protect the international civil service.The case of the staff members in question mightbe compared with that of those conscientious staffmembers who, after many years of service, re-tired on small pensions; such a comparison sug-gested that the Tribunal had placed a sort ofpremium on serious misconduct. Such judgmentshad a lamentable effect on public opinion andwere harmful to the fundamental interests of theUnited Nations.

Other representatives, including those of Bel-gium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Czechoslovakia,Denmark, France, India, Lebanon, Mexico, theNetherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland,Sweden, Syria, the USSR, the United Kingdom,Uruguay and Yugoslavia, considered that the Ad-ministrative Tribunal's judgments when given inaccordance with its Statute were final and withoutappeal and that the General Assembly was boundto pay the awards fixed by the Tribunal.

The Administrative Tribunal, they said, was anindependent tribunal established by the GeneralAssembly to ensure for staff members the securityof employment and relief from political pressurewhich were essential if the Organization were tohave international civil servants possessing theoutstanding qualifications required by the Charter.By its very nature, the Tribunal was more like anindependent judicial body than an ordinary organof the General Assembly. For example, the Tri-bunal, inter alia, was the only organ which didnot have to submit an annual report to the Gen-eral Assembly, and its competence had been ex-tended to the specialized agencies.

In the opinion of these representatives the Tri-bunal had not, in the cases in question, exceededits competence and its judgments were in accord-ance with the staff regulations and rules in forceat the time the judgments were given. It was truethat the Assembly could amend those regulationsand also the provisions of the Tribunal's Statute,but so long as the regulations and provisions re-mained in force they formed part of the staffmember's terms of employment.

The Tribunal, they held, had not acted on falseevidence, misinterpreted the staff regulations norsubstituted its discretion for that of the Secretary-General. Any interference with the Tribunal's de-

cisions would impair its position irretrievably,undermine the morale of the staff and affect thecontractual relationship between the staff and theOrganization.

There was no principle of law, it was argued,that could justify a refusal to pay compensationalready awarded by the Administrative Tribunaland, for the sake of the prestige of the UnitedNations, the General Assembly could not butcomply with the Tribunal's judgments. To refuseto do so would set a precedent dangerous to themoral authority of the United Nations, and onewhich might influence the future attitude ofMember States or individuals when judgments ofinternational or national judicial bodies wentagainst them.

As regards the financial implications, no onewould contest the power of the General Assemblyto approve or to refuse appropriations, but thepower to appropriate funds could hardly be ad-duced as ground for refusing to fulfil a financialobligation devolving on the United Nations byvirtue of one of its statutes.

Some representatives, including those of Canadaand Colombia, while supporting the principle ofpayment, nevertheless expressed misgivings as tothe size of the awards. However, they held thatthe questions involved should be referred to acompetent judicial body.

In view of the diversity of opinion, the repre-sentatives of Canada, Colombia and the UnitedKingdom proposed (A/C.5/L.263) that the As-sembly should ask the International Court ofJustice for an advisory opinion on the followinglegal questions:

"(i) Having regard to the Statute of the UnitedNations Administrative Tribunal and to any otherrelevant instruments and to the relevant records, hasthe General Assembly the right on any grounds torefuse to give effect to an award of compensation madeby that Tribunal in favour of a staff member of theUnited Nations whose contract of service has beenterminated without his assent?

"(ii) If the answer given by the Court to question(i) is in the affirmative, what are the principal groundsupon which the General Assembly could lawfullyexercise such a right?"

The representatives of China, Turkey and theUnited States spoke against the draft resolutionas unnecessary on the ground that there was noquestion of the Assembly's powers, but abstainedin the vote. The representatives of Czechoslovakiaand the USSR also opposed it since, in theiropinion, the Statute of the Tribunal was clear onthe issues involved and the Tribunal had actedin accordance with its Statute. The Argentinerepresentative expressed the view that the Courtshould also consider whether a subsidiary organ


could impose final decisions upon the Assemblyand whether the Assembly was empowered to dealwith the form and substance of any appropriationto be included in the United Nations budget Hesubsequently voted for the draft resolution on theunderstanding that these points would be takeninto consideration.

The representative of France submitted twoamendments (A/C.5/L/267) to the joint draftresolution:

(1) to delete from question (i) the words "on anygrounds"; and

(2) to add as a part (b) to the second question thefollowing: "do these grounds, whatever they may be,apply to any of the decisions which have led to therequest for the appropriation?"

The representative of France further proposed(A/C.5/L/268/Rev.1) to add to resolution Bcontained in the draft report of the Fifth Com-mittee on the budget estimates for the financialyear 1954 (A.C/5/L.264) a sub-paragraph (g)which would have authorized the Secretary-Gen-eral to enter into commitments to meet unforeseenand extraordinary expenses for the sums neededfor payment of the compensations awarded bythe Administrative Tribunal, and referred to inthe request by the General Assembly for an advi-sory opinion from the International Court ofJustice, if the Court were of the opinion thatthe General Assembly had not the right to refuseto give effect to the said awards.

At the Committee's 427th meeting on 8 Decem-ber an oral USSR proposal that the Committeeshould first vote on the proposal of the Sec-retary-General and the Advisory Committee forthe appropriation of the funds in question wasrejected by a roll-call vote of 29 to 6, with 14abstentions.

The Committee rejected the first French amend-ment to the joint draft resolution by a roll-callvote of 28 to 19, with 6 abstentions, and thesecond amendment, also by roll-call, by 22 votesto 15, with 17 abstentions. The joint draft resolu-tion was adopted (A/2624 A) by a roll-callvote of 35 to 7, with 12 abstentions.

The French proposal concerning resolution Bwas voted upon in two parts by roll-call. The firstpart, which concerned the sums needed for thepayment of the compensations awarded by theAdministrative Tribunal, was adopted by 23 votesto 22, with 12 abstentions. The second part wasrejected by 28 votes to 20, with 9 abstentions. TheFrench proposal, as a whole, was then rejected bya roll-call vote of 25 to 19, with 13 abstentions.

The draft resolution recommended by the FifthCommittee (A/2624, resolution A) was adopted

by the General Assembly, at its 471st plenarymeeting on 9 December 1953, by a roll-call voteof 41 to 6, with 13 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Argentina, Belgium, Bolivia,Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Denmark,Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,France, Greece, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, Iran,Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Liberia, Luxembourg, Nether-lands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Peru,Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Thailand, Union ofSouth Africa, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Venezuela,Yemen.

Against: Burma, Byelorussian SSR, Czechoslovakia,Poland, Ukrainian SSR, USSR.

Abstaining: Australia, China, Costa Rica, Ethiopia,Guatemala, Indonesia, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay,Sweden, Turkey, United States, Yugoslavia.

In plenary session the representatives of Franceand New Zealand stated that they supported theprinciple of recourse to the Court in the caseof legal disputes and had therefore voted infavour of the resolution, despite the deficienciesthey considered the resolution contained as a resultof the rejection of the French amendments. Therepresentatives of Mexico, Uruguay and Swedenexplained their abstentions on the grounds thatthe questions submitted to the Court were tooabstract and that, in their opinion, the Tribunal'sfindings were final.

The resolution adopted (785 A (VIII)) read:"The General Assembly,"Considering the request for a supplementary appro-

priation of $179,420, made by the Secretary-Generalin his report for the purpose of covering the awardsmade by the United Nations Administrative Tribunalin eleven cases numbered 26, and 37 to 46 inclusive,

"Considering the concurrence in that appropriationby the Advisory Committee on Administrative andBudgetary Questions contained in its twenty-fourth re-port to the eighth session of the General Assembly,

"Considering, nevertheless, that important legal ques-tions have been raised in the course of debate in theFifth Committee with respect to that appropriation,

"Decides"To submit the following legal questions to the

International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion:'(1) Having regard to the Statute of the United

Nations Administrative Tribunal and to any otherrelevant instruments and to the relevant records, hasthe General Assembly the right on any grounds torefuse to give effect to an award of compensationmade by that Tribunal in favour of a staff memberof the United Nations whose contract of service hasbeen terminated without his assent?

'(2) If the answer given by the Court to question(1) is in the affirmative, what are the principalgrounds upon which the General Assembly couldlawfully exercise such a right?'"

77 See p. 98.

77


6. Joint Appeals Board and JointDisciplinary Committee

During 1953, the Joint Appeals Board reportedto the Secretary-General on 20 cases of appeals,most of them relating to termination of temporaryindefinite appointments. The Joint DisciplinaryCommittee considered two cases in 1953.

These two bodies, established in accordancewith General Assembly resolution 352(IV),78 toadvise the Secretary-General in cases of appealagainst administrative decisions or concerningproposed disciplinary action, respectively, are eachcomposed of three members of the Secretariat,one appointed by the Secretary-General, oneelected by the Staff Committee, and a Chairmanappointed by the Secretary-General after consul-tation with the Staff Committee.

7. United Nations Joint StaffPension Fund

a. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE UNITEDNATIONS JOINT STAFF PENSIONBOARD FOR 1952

In pursuance of article XXXV of the regula-tions of the United Nations Joint Staff PensionFund, the United Nations Joint Staff PensionBoard (composed of representatives appointedby the Staff Pension Committees of the memberorganizations of the Joint Fund) presented tothe eighth session of the General Assembly of theUnited Nations and to the governing bodies ofall organizations which are members of the JointFund, an annual report (A/2421) on the oper-ation of the Joint Fund for 1952. The followingorganizations participated in the Joint Fund dur-ing the year: the United Nations, the Inter-national Labour Organisation (ILO), the Foodand Agriculture Organization of the UnitedNations (FAO), the United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO),the International Civil Aviation Organization(ICAO), the World Health Organization(WHO) and the World Meteorological Organi-zation (WMO), the latter being admitted to theJoint Fund on 1 January 1952.

The report indicated that on 31 December1952 the total active membership of the JointFund was 8,165. The number of withdrawalbenefits paid in 1952 was 765 and, in addition,25 retirement benefits, twelve widows' benefits,eighteen children's benefits and two disabilitybenefits were authorized. The total expenditure

on benefits during the year was $726,733, of whichwithdrawal benefits amounted to $634,744.

The principal of the Fund at the end of 1952was $29,153,966. The investments at cost, adjustedfor amortization of premiums and discounts,amounted to $28,730,196. The income frominvestment in common stocks was estimated at4.87 per cent, and the average yield on UnitedStates Government Bonds and corporate bondstaken together was 2.73 per cent. (The rate ofyield assumed in the construction of the Fund was2.50 per cent per annum.)

The annual report was considered by the FifthCommittee at its 379th meeting on 30 Septem-ber. The representative of Argentina pointed outthat the highest yield of the Fund's investmentsin bonds was on bonds of the International Bankfor Reconstruction and Development, but thatless than 1 per cent of the total value of its invest-ments were in bonds of the Bank. He wished thatthe Fund would invest larger sums in Bank bonds,as it would obtain a higher yield with completesecurity. He also hoped that it might be possibleto include in the next annual report additionaldata concerning the Fund's investments.

At the end of the discussion the Fifth Com-mittee adopted, without objection, a draft resolu-tion proposed by the Committee Chairman. TheGeneral Assembly at its 458th plenary meetingon 27 November adopted, without objection andwithout discussion, this draft (A/2564) as reso-lution 770(VIII), taking note of the report ofthe Joint Staff Pension Board for 1952.

b. AMENDMENTS TO THE REGULATIONSOF THE UNITED NATIONS JOINTSTAFF PENSION FUND

Under the terms of resolution 680(VII)79 of21 December 1952, amendments which had beenproposed by the United Nations Joint Staff Pen-sion Board to articles XI (concerning summarydismissal for serious misconduct) and XVI (con-cerning contributions on account of participantson leave without pay) of the regulations of theJoint Staff Pension Fund were referred back to theBoard for reconsideration at its next session, inthe light of the observations presented by theAdvisory Committee on Administrative and Budg-etary Questions and of the views expressed in theFifth Committee on 6 December 1952. The Boardwas requested to consider, at the same time, therecommendation of the Advisory Committee con-cerning article XXVII to the effect that expenses

78

79 See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 104. See Y.U.N., 1948-49, p. 919.


incurred in administering the regulations shouldbe charged to the United Nations Joint Staff Pen-sion Fund, and to report to the Assembly.

These questions were considered by the FifthCommittee at its 379th meeting on 30 September.With respect to article XI, the Board, in its reportto the Assembly (A/2422), stated that it hadunanimously adopted a text under which a partici-pant would be entitled to full benefits unless theBoard should decide otherwise on the recom-mendation of the administrative head of the mem-ber organization concerned, instead of the partic-ipant being entitled only to reduced benefits unlessthe administrative head of the organization recom-mended otherwise. The Advisory Committee, how-ever, in its observations on the Board's report(A/2489), expressed the opinion that article XIshould be retained in its present form for atleast two years, after which the revised proposalof the Board might be reconsidered in the lightof the experience meanwhile acquired of thecircumstances in which summary dismissals wereordered in the United Nations and other mem-ber organizations.

Certain representatives, including those ofArgentina, Chile, the Netherlands and Uruguay,while agreeing that the situation might be recon-sidered in the light of further experience, arguedthat the Board's revised text should be adoptedsince it would afford staff members a greater feel-ing of justice and security than that currentlyenjoyed and was in keeping with current legisla-tion in many of the more socially advanced coun-tries. While agreeing that the Board should notpass judgment on an administrative decision, theyconsidered that it was entitled to concern itselfwith the effects of such a decision on the pensionrights of a staff member and his family.

The representatives of, among others, Belgium,Iraq, Pakistan, the Union of South Africa, theUnited Kingdom and the United States, oppos-ing the Board's revised text, argued that, underit, the Board would be obliged to deal with admin-instrative matters outside its jurisdiction. Theypointed out that the benefits under discussion werenot social insurance benefits but those earned asa result of service rendered. These representativessupported the Advisory Committee's recommenda-tion, particularly in view of the fact that theSecretary-General of the United Nations wasgiven discretion, should he consider that the cir-cumstances so justified, to recommend the pay-ment to dismissed staff members of a sum equiva-lent to the whole or part of the amounts by whichthe benefits had been reduced. It would be advis-able moreover, they said, to defer any far-reach-

ing amendment until such time as further exper-ience had been gained.

At the conclusion of the discussion, the FifthCommittee decided by 41 votes to 4, with 4abstentions, to recommend to the Assembly theretention of article XI in its present form, asrecommended by the Advisory Committee.

With respect to article XVI, the principalchanges in the revised version, as explained bythe Chairman of the Joint Staff Pension Board,were to make explicit the rights of a participantin the Fund when on leave without pay, includ-ing leave for reasons of the performance ofmilitary service. The Advisory Committee in itsobservations to the Assembly had recommendedacceptance of the Board's proposal. The revisedtext, together with consequential changes in arti-cles V (concerning disability benefits) and VII(concerning death benefits), was approved by theFifth Committee without objection.

The Fifth Committee also considered a newproposal put forward by the Joint Staff PensionBoard for an addition to article VII under whichthe same benefits as those provided under thatarticle to the widow of a male participant wouldbe provided to an incapacitated widower of afemale participant. As there were no objections,this proposal was adopted, the additional para-graph to become paragraph 7 of article VII of theregulations.

The Fifth Committee then considered articleXXVII (concerning administrative expenses). Inits report to the Assembly (A/2422), the Boardconcluded that it was premature to decide, on thebasis of the actuarial valuation as at December1951, that the Fund itself should bear the expensesincurred in the administration of the regulationsof the Fund and stated that it was the Board'sintention to reconsider the proposal after thereport on the next actuarial valuation of the Fundhad been received. In its observations (A/2489),the Advisory Committee pointed out that thevaluation as at 31 December 1951 had shown amargin which was more than sufficient to coverthe estimated administrative expenses and thatthe average interest earnings of the Fund hadalways been higher than the figures used in theactuarial calculations and had, furthermore, con-tinued to increase in recent years. It thereforerecommended that article XXVII should beamended to provide for the administrativeexpenses being charged to the Fund and thatsuch amendment should come into force not laterthan 1 January 1955. It further recommendedthat the estimates of the administrative expenses


in question should continue thereafter to be sub-mitted for approval to the Assembly.

The representatives of Argentina and theUnited Kingdom, supporting the recommendationof the Advisory Committee, maintained that itinvolved a principle of sound financial manage-ment, the implementation of which was fullyjustified, having regard to the existing marginbetween the computed and actual rate of con-tribution and to the Fund's generally satisfactoryposition. The representatives of Australia and theUnion of South Africa, on the other hand, opposedthe recommendation, holding that the margin ofsafety was not as great as the Advisory Com-mittee's report suggested. Since an actuarial valua-tion, in their view, was of necessity only anapproximation, an adequate margin of safety mustbe provided for.

The Advisory Committee's recommendation wasapproved by the Fifth Committee by 40 votes to2, with 3 abstentions.

The draft resolution proposed by the Fifth Com-mittee (A/2576) was considered by the GeneralAssembly at its 458th plenary meeting on 27November, and adopted, without discussion, by49 votes to 1, with 2 abstentions, as resolution772(VIII). It read:


"Having considered the recommendations proposedby the Joint Staff Pension Board in pursuance of articleXXXVII of the Regulations of the United NationsJoint Staff Pension Fund, with respect to amendmentsand additions to be made to articles V, VII, XI, XVIand XXVII of the Regulations,

"1. Approves the amendments and additions to ar-ticles V, VII and XVI of the Regulations of the UnitedNations Joint Staff Pension Fund as set forth in theannex80 to the present resolution and decides that thearticles so amended shall take effect as from 1 January1954;

"2. Approves the amendment to article XXVII ofthe Regulations of the United Nations Joint StaffPension Fund as set forth in the annex to the presentresolution and decides that the article so amended shalltake effect as from 1 January 1955;

"3. Decides that article XI of the Regulations ofthe United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund shall beretained in its present form for the time being andrequests the Joint Staff Pension Board to re-examine itsprovisions and to report to the General Assembly at itstenth session."

s annexed toresolution 772(VIII), see General Assembly, OfficialRecords: Eighth Session, Supplement No. 17 (A/2361),pp. 37-38.

c. ACCEPTANCE BY THE SPECIALIZED AGENCIESOF THE JURISDICTION OF THE UNITEDNATIONS ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL INMATTERS INVOLVING APPLICATIONSALLEGING NON-OBSERVANCE OF THEREGULATIONS OF THE UNITED NATIONSJOINT STAFF PENSION FUND

By resolution 678(VII)81 of 21 December1952, the General Assembly recommended thatthe appropriate governing organs of the special-ized agencies which are members of the JointStaff Pension Fund should accept the jurisdictionof the United Nations Administrative Tribunal inmatters involving applications alleging non-observance of Pension Fund regulations, andrequested the Secretary-General to report on thematter.

The Secretary-General reported (A/2463) tothe eighth session that the recommendation hadbeen accepted by WHO, but that decisions werestill pending in the case of the other specializedagencies concerned. Since most of these decisionswould not be taken until late in 1953, and, in thecase of UNESCO not until 1954, the Secretary-General suggested that the Assembly should takenote of his interim report, request a furtherreport through the Joint Staff Pension Board, andconsider that report at its ninth session.

The Secretary-General's report was consideredby the Fifth Committee at its 379th meeting on30 September. The Committee adopted, withoutobjection, a draft resolution recommended by theCommittee Chairman and orally amended by theUnited States.

The Committee's draft resolution (A/2565)was adopted, without objection and without dis-cussion, by the General Assembly at its 458thplenary meeting on 27 November as resolution771(VIII). By it, the Assembly took note of theSecretary-General's interim report and requesteda further report from the Secretary-Generalthrough the Joint Staff Pension Board.

d. ADMISSION OF STAFF MEMBERS OF THEINTERIM COMMISSION FOR THE INTER-NATIONAL TRADE ORGANIZATION TOMEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONSJOINT STAFF PENSION FUND

The United Nations Joint Staff Pension Boardin its report (A/2422) also brought to the Assem-bly's attention a communication from the Execu-tive Secretary of the Interim Commission for theInternational Trade Organization (ICITO) point-ing out that the members of its staff were not

81

See Y.U.N., 1952, pp. 102-103.

80 For text of the revised regulation


participants in the Joint Fund, although ICITOhad always been closely associated with UnitedNations administrative co-ordination schemes, andasking the Board to examine the possibility ofrecommending a procedure which would enableICITO to become a member organization in theJoint Fund.

The Board referred to the Assembly the desira-bility of admitting ICITO since the Fund's regula-tions provide that only specialized agenciesreferred to in Article 57 of the United NationsCharter might become member organizations inthe Fund. It recommended that, in the event ofan affirmative Assembly decision, the mattershould be referred back to the Board for recom-mendation as to consequential changes in theregulations.

The question was considered by the Fifth Com-mittee at its 380th and 402nd meetings on 1October and 5 November. At the 380th meeting,the Committee decided, on the recommendation ofthe representative of Egypt, that, before takinga decision on the principle of extending mem-bership in the Fund, the Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions shouldbe asked to study and report on the matter.

The Advisory Committee reported (A/2524)that, in principle, it considered that membershipin the Fund should be limited to specialized agen-cies fulfilling the conditions of the regulations.While recognizing that ICITO shared several ofthe characteristics of a specialized agency, theCommittee was anxious lest a precedent for future,perhaps less justifiable, admissions should becreated. Apart from this general consideration itwas clear that no actuarial disadvantages wouldresult from ICITO's membership. The AdvisoryCommittee therefore recommended that, shouldthe Fifth Committee find that special circum-stances warranted the admission of ICITO, theconsequential amendments to be drafted in con-sultation with the Joint Staff Pension Board shouldlimit the rights of the Interim Commission to anassociate membership not carrying with it rep-resentation with voting rights on the Joint Board.

The report of the Advisory Committee was con-sidered by the Fifth Committee at its 402nd meet-ing. The Fifth Committee also had before it ajoint draft resolution by Australia and Canada(A/C.5/L.247), which, its sponsors stated, wasdesigned to authorize the admission of ICITO tomembership in the Fund subject to the conditionregarding voting rights as recommended by theAdvisory Committee. They pointed out that theaction recommended would present no financial

difficulties, since the staff of ICITO alreadybelonged to a provident fund financed in thesame manner as the Joint Staff Pension Fund.Moreover, if membership were not authorized, theInterim Commission would be obliged to proceedwith the establishment of a pension fund of itsown—a situation which should be avoided in theinterests of the policy of administrative and budg-etary co-ordination. Membership would also ena-ble the Interim Commission's staff to benefit fromthe experience which the Joint Board hadacquired.

The representatives of Brazil, Cuba, Egypt,France, Israel and the Netherlands supported thejoint draft, expressing similar views.

The representatives of Argentina and theUnited Kingdom stated, however, that it would besetting a dangerous precedent to depart from theprinciple that specialized agencies alone shouldqualify for admission. ICITO, in their view, byvirtue of its temporary character and the uncer-tainty as to its permanent status, clearly did notfulfil the conditions required by Article 57 ofthe Charter. They also expressed doubt as towhether actuarial disadvantages might not in factarise if ICITO, after being admitted to the Fund,were to be dissolved. For these reasons, the rep-resentative of the United Kingdom orally proposedthat further examination of the question shouldbe deferred until the next Assembly session, bywhich time a decision would no doubt have beentaken with regard to ICITO's future status.

The United Kingdom proposal was rejected by20 votes to 16, with 11 abstentions. The jointdraft resolution was then adopted by 30 votes tonone, with 20 abstentions.

The representative of the Secretary-Generalexplained that the necessary amendments to theFund's regulations would first have to be formu-lated for the Assembly's approval at its ninthsession. Admission would, however, be retroactivefrom the date of the first payment of contributionsby ICITO.

The draft resolution recommended by the FifthCommittee (A/2576) was considered by the Gen-eral Assembly at its 458th plenary meeting on 27November, and adopted, without discussion, by48 votes to none, with 10 abstentions, as resolu-tion 773(VIII).

By it, the Assembly decided that, upon requestof the competent authority, ICITO might beadmitted to participation in the Joint Fund, butwithout voting rights. The Assembly requestedthat, upon the receipt of such a request on behalf


of ICITO, the Joint Staff Pension Board prepareamendments to the Fund's regulations whichwould give effect to this decision and that it reportto the Assembly's ninth session.

8. United Nations Interne Programmes

Two United Nations interne programmes wereheld in 1953. The third programme, usually heldduring the General Assembly, was omitted forbudgetary reasons.

The first programme was held from 30 Marchto 22 May. Twenty-five internes from 19 coun-tries participated in the programme, the specificpurpose of which was to study the working

methods and procedures of the United NationsSecretariat.

The second programme was for students, andwas held in New York only; 29 students wereselected from 26 countries; in addition there wasone representative of a non-governmental organi-zation, ten scholarship candidates and nineauditeurs libres, making a total of 49 studentsfrom 32 countries. The work of the group wasagain concentrated on the organization and proce-dures of the Secretariat, but they also had anopportunity to study the functioning of the Gen-eral Assembly.

In the course of seven years, 642 internes from58 countries have participated in these eight-week programmes.

I. BUDGETARY ARRANGEMENTS

1. financial Reports and Accounts andReports of the Board of Auditors

a. UNITED NATIONS: YEAR 1952

At its eighth session, at the 451st plenary meet-ing on 5 October, the General Assembly, by 48votes to 1, with 5 abstentions, adopted resolution760(VIII), accepting the financial report andaccounts of the United Nations for the financialyear ended 31 December 1952 and the certificateof the Board of Auditors (A/2392). The Assem-bly also concurred in the observations of theAdvisory Committee on Administrative and Budg-etary Questions (A/2403) on the report. Theresolution was adopted on the recommendationof the Fifth Committee (A/2492), which con-sidered the question at its 378th meeting on 24September.

The financial report and accounts stated that obliga-tions incurred in 1952 amounted to $50,270,153 com-pared with total appropriations of $50,547,660, andwere less than income credited for the year by $298,366.The balance on surplus account at 31 December 1952was $1,313,853, of which $260,797 was transferredto the Working Capital Fund in 1953, $340,380 wascredited to Members' contributions for 1953 and$712,676 was available for credit to Members against1954 contributions.

In its observations, the Advisory Committee stated,inter alia, that it took note of the view expressed by theBoard of Auditors, in connexion with adjustments ofaccounts of Member States, that it was undesirableindefinitely to continue a situation in which the financeofficers of a Member were at variance with those of theUnited Nations. (The Board had called attention todiscrepancies resulting from different exchange rates.)Where financial matters were concerned, the Committeestated, there was no established procedure for the

settlement of such divergencies of view, and it suggestedthat the Assembly might wish to consider the desir-ability of adopting a procedure similar, perhaps, toexisting arrangements for the arbitration of internationaldisputes. The Advisory Committee also supported theBoard's suggestion that a study might be made todetermine the most efficient and economical means tocontrol, finance and operate revenue-producing services.

b. UNITED NATIONS CHILDREN'S FUND(UNICEF): YEAR 1952

At the 451st plenary meeting on 5 October1953, the General Assembly adopted, withoutobjection, resolution 761(VIII), accepting thefinancial report and accounts of UNICEF for thefinancial year ended 31 December 1952 and thecertificate of the Board of Auditors (A/2396).The Assembly also took note of the observationsof the Advisory Committee on Administrative andBudgetary Questions (A/2455) on the report.The resolution was adopted on the recommenda-tion of the Fifth Committee (A/2493), whichconsidered the question at its 378th meeting on 24September.

The financial report and accounts of UNICEF showedthat the principal of the Fund on 1 January 1952 was$27,199,237.25. The income from all sources during1952 was $10,271,793.24 and the expenditure during1952 was $13,526,630.52. The excess of expenditureover income, representing decrease in principal of theFund during 1952 was $3,254,837.28, leaving theprincipal of the Fund on 31 December 1952 at$23,944,399.97.

In its observations, the Advisory Committee declaredthat the information submitted in UNICEF's financialreport showed that the administrative costs represented13.8 per cent of the total expenditure. Annual expendi-ture on assistance had shown a progressive and sharpdecrease since 1949 but a proportionate reduction in


net administrative cost had not accompanied thedecreased assistance. This apparent discrepancy was duein part to the change in policy directed by the Assemblyin December 1950; the transition from mass-feeding tolong-range health and welfare programmes had resultedin a considerable increase in the number of countriesaided by the Fund as well as in the number of indi-vidual procurement contracts to be negotiated.

c. UNITED NATIONS RELIEF AND WORKSAGENCY FOR PALESTINE REFUGEESIN THE NEAR EAST (UNRWA):YEAR ENDING 30 JUNE 1953

At the 458th plenary meeting on 27 November1953, the General Assembly adopted, withoutobjection, resolution 766 (VIII), accepting theaccounts of UNRWA for the financial year ended30 June 1953 and the certificate of the Board ofAuditors (A/2491), and taking note of theobservations of the Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions (A/-2541) thereon. The resolution was adopted onthe recommendation of the Fifth Committee (A/-2568), which considered the question at its 404thmeeting on 11 November.

The accounts concerned showed that the total incomeduring the year under review amounted to $49,527,646and the total expenditure to $26,778,934 ($23,400,729being spent for the relief programme and $3,378,205being spent for the projects programme), thus leavingan excess of income over expenditure of $22,748,712.With the addition of the balance of $22,590,729 onhand at 30 June 1952, the amount of $45,339,441 thusremained available for activities after 30 June 1953.

In its observations, the Advisory Committee stated,inter alia, that the new accounting system, which wasintroduced in July 1952, would continue in force forthe financial year 1953-1954. Under this new system,expenditure was broken down into a number of cate-gories in order to ensure, through a more accurateanalysis and classification, that the cost of any functionshould be identified as far as possible with theprogramme for which it was incurred. It was expectedthat, with the completion of this process, the cost ofcommon services would be reduced to a minimum, andthat the amount of such services to be allocated betweenthe two programmes (relief and projects) might ap-proximate to the figure for general administration inthe existing accounts. It followed that the accountingcharges to the relief programme would be correspond-ingly increased, and the Advisory Committee trustedthat this increase would not prove detrimental to theprogramme.

d. UNITED NATIONS KOREAN RECONSTRUC-TION AGENCY (UNKRA): YEARENDING 30 JUNE 1953

At the 458th plenary meeting on 27 November,the General Assembly adopted, by 52 votes tonone, with 5 abstentions, resolution 767 (VIII),accepting the financial report and accounts ofUNKRA for the financial year ended 30 June1953 and the certificate of the Board of Auditors

(A/2487). The Assembly also took note of theobservations of the Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions (A/-2542). The resolution was adopted on the recom-mendation of the Fifth Committee (A/2569),which considered the question at its 404th meet-ing on 11 November.

The accounts concerned showed that total incomefor the period under review amounted to $67,795,963while total expenditure amounted to $52,964,159,leaving an excess of income over expenditure of$14,831,804 available, as of 30 June 1953, for futureoperations.

In its observations, the Advisory Committee, interalia, noted that UNKRA's ratio of administrative coststo programme expenditure had improved, amountingduring 1952-1953 to 3.11 per cent. Account was takenof the exceptional circumstances that had resulted ina long delay between the date of a donation of$100,000 received from the United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for thepurchase of a printing plant to produce textbooks inKorea and the actual undertaking of the project.

2. Supplementary Estimates for theFinancial Year 1953

In a report (A/2534) to the eighth session ofthe General Assembly, the Secretary-Generalestimated that, in addition to the appropriationof $48,327,000 authorized for the financial year1953, an additional net amount of $1,721,170would be required. Of this supplementary provi-sion $179,420 was estimated for the awards ofcompensation by the Administrative Tribunal82

and $1,800,000 for reimbursement of nationalincome taxes. Other major items for which budg-etary provision was requested included additionalexpenditures for political missions ($80,800),meetings of Assembly and Economic and SocialCouncil committees, commissions and conferences($57,100) and designations of ad hoc judges ofthe International Court of Justice ($10,000). TheSecretary-General noted that no provision wasincluded for expenses which might be incurredby the United Nations in connexion with theKorean political conference.

The Advisory Committee on Administrativeand Budgetary Questions in its 24th report to theeighth session of the General Assembly (A/2580)recommended the appropriation of the supple-mentary funds requested by the Secretary-General.The Advisory Committee noted that the Secretary-General planned further negotiations with theUnited States Government regarding the exemp-tion of United States staff members from national

82

For this question, see under AdministrativeTribunal, pp. 80-85.


taxation and recommended that he report to thenext session on these negotiations, as well as onthe general problem of national income taxes.

The Fifth Committee considered the Secretary-General's report and the report of the AdvisoryCommittee at its 420th to 423rd and 425th to427th meetings from 3 to 5 and 7 and 8 Decem-ber. Discussion was concerned primarily with thepayment of awards of compensation ordered bythe Administrative Tribunal.

During the debate, the representatives ofCzechoslovakia, Poland and the USSR referred tothe supplementary request of $1,800,000, rep-resenting the estimated total to be reimbursed tocertain staff members in respect of their incometax liability on 1953 emoluments. They reiteratedtheir strong opposition to the appropriation offunds for this purpose, and considered that theincreasingly heavy charge added to the UnitedNations budget was entirely unwarranted. Inanswer to a question addressed to him by therepresentative of Czechoslovakia, the Secretary-General informed the Committee that no replyhad yet been received to the communication hehad recently addressed to the Government of theUnited States, calling attention to the terms ofrelevant resolutions of the General Assembly andurging that all possible remedial steps should betaken. The Secretary-General further stated thatit was his intention to submit for the considerationof the Fifth Committee and of the General Assem-bly at its ninth session a definite proposal whichhe hoped would go far towards solving existingproblems. The Committee decided that a para-graph to this effect should be inserted in theRapporteur's Report (A/2624).

A separate vote was requested by the Egyptianrepresentative on the proposed provision of$1,800,000 for reimbursement of national incometaxes and the Committee approved, by 27 votesto 7, with 16 abstentions, the inclusion of thissum in the 1953 supplementary estimates.

The Committee noted that the supplementaryestimates under review modified a number ofbudget sections as compared with the appropria-tion for those sections adopted at the seventhsession of the General Assembly. While appreciat-ing the difficulty in estimating with precisionbudget estimates which had to be prepared wellbefore the opening of the financial year to whichthey related, it urged the necessity of ensuring astrict control on expenditure throughout the work-ing year so that transfer actions might be kept toa minimum.

In the light of its decision regarding the pay-ment of compensation awarded by the Tribunal83

the Committee decided, by 46 votes to 5, with 1abstention, to recommend (A/2624 B) to theGeneral Assembly that the amount of $48,327,700appropriated for the financial year 1953 by resolu-tion 674(VII), adopted on 21 December 1952,should be increased by $1,541,750, instead of by$1,721,170.

The draft resolution was adopted by the Gen-eral Assembly at its 471st plenary meeting on9 December 1953, without discussion, by 52 votesto 5, as resolution 785 B (VIII). It read:


"Resolves that the amount of $48,327,700 ap-propriated for the financial year 1953 by resolution 674(VII), adopted on 21 December 1952, is increased by$1,541,750 as follows:

(See table on pp. 93-94)

3. Budget of the United Nations

for 195484

The Secretary-General submitted to the eighthsession of the General Assembly budget estimatesfor 1954 and information annexes (A/2383 &Add.1) totalling $48,123,400, with an incomeestimated at $6,463,200, leaving a net estimatedexpenditure for the year of $41,660,200. The grossestimate of $48,123,400 for 1954 compared withan approved budget of $48,327,700 for 1953 anda total expenditure of $50,270,153 for 1952.

The total number of posts proposed amountedto 4,099, compared with 4,095 the preceding year.Thus, the Secretary-General stated, the intentionof achieving stability in the regular internationalSecretariat and of working, together with otherUnited Nations agencies, to complete assignedtasks without necessarily increasing staff was beingcarried forward progressively.

The main features of the 1954 estimates werereflected in the following table, which showed acomparison, part-by-part with the 1953 appropri-ations:

83

84 This section covers discussions and resolutions onUnforeseen and Extraordinary Expenses and the Work-ing Capital Fund, considered separately in previousissues of the Yearbook.

1953

$ 1,014,500

2,686,900

29,990,700

1954

$ 866,500

2,566,300

30,282,500

I. Sessions of the Gener-al Assembly, the Coun-cils, Commissions andCommittees . . . . . . .

II. Investigations and In-quiries . . . . . . . . . . .

III. Headquarters,New York . . . . . . . .

(Continued on p. 95)

See p. 85.

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1953{See resolution 785 B (VIII) on p. 92}

93

AMOUNT

APPROPRIATED

UNDER

RESOLUTION

674(VII)AS ADJUSTED

A. UNITED NATIONSIn dollars (US)

PART I. SESSIONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,THE COUNCILS, COMMISSIONSAND COMMITTEES

Section1. The General Assembly, Commissions and Com-

mittees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. The Security Council, Commissions and Com-

mittees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. The Economic and Social Council, Commissions

and Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(a) Permanent Central Opium Board and Narcotic

Drugs Supervisory Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(b) Regional Economic Commissions . . . . . . . . .

4. The Trusteeship Council, Commissions and Com-mittees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART II. INVESTIGATIONS AND INQUIRIES5. Investigations and inquiries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(a) United Nations Field Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART III. HEADQUARTERS, NEW YORK6. Executive Office of the Secretary-General . . . . . . .

(a) Library . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7. Department of Political and Security Council

Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8. Military Staff Committee secretariat . . . . . . . . . . .9. Technical Assistance Administration . . . . . . . . . . .

10. Department of Economic Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11. Department of Social Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12. Department for Trusteeship and Information from

Non-Self-Governing Territories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13. Department of Public Information . . . . . . . . . . . . .14. Department of Legal Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15. Conference and General Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16. Administrative and Financial Services . . . . . . . . . .17. Common staff costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18. Common services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19. Permanent equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART IV. UNITED NATIONS OFFICE AT GENEVA20. United Nations Office at Geneva (excluding direct

costs, chapter III, joint secretariat of the PermanentCentral Opium Board and Narcotic Drugs Super-visory Body) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chapter III, joint secretariat of the PermanentCentral Opium Board and Narcotic Drugs Super-visory Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(a) Office of the United Nations High Com-

missioner for Refugees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


603,400

263,200

20,00096,000

59,900

1,042,500

2,140,700546,200

2,686,900

375,100471,000

753,200136,900386,700

2,269,1001,685,900

936,0002,734,900

451,4009,614,3501,564,2004,479,5003,854,800

252,050

29,965,100

4,407,800

47,100

650,000

5,104,900

120,000

17,000

4,000

107,000

25,000

25,000

15,90010,000

20,00015,000

140,00020,000

36,00050,000

6,000140,000

29,0001,885,850

76,200

1,417,550

69,200

69,200

723,400

246,200

24,00096,000

59,900

1,149,500

2,115,700546,200

2,661,900

391,000461,000

733,200121,900386,700

2,129,1001,665,900

900,0002,684,900

445,4009,474,3501,593,2006,365,3503,778,600

252,050

31,382,650

4,477,000

47,100

650,000

5,174,100

REVISED

AMOUNTS OF

APPROPRIATION

SUPPLEMENTARY

APPROPRIATION,

INCREASE OR

decrease(italic figures)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .


AMOUNT

APPROPRIATED

UNDERRESOLUTION

674(VII)AS ADJUSTED

In dollars (US)

862,300

862,300

1,030,000866,000

1,896,000

20,000

20,000

752,220

11,780812,800

1,576,800

768,500479,400145,000

1,392,900

649,5001,500,0001,000,000

3,149,500

630,800

630,800

$48,327,700

115,00047,000

68,000

25,000

50,000

75,000

20,000

20,000

$1,541,750

862,300

862,300

1,145,000819,000

1,964,000

20,000

20,000

727,220

11,780762,800

1,501,800

768,500479,400

1,392,900

649,5001,500,0001,000,000

3,149,500

610,800

610,800

$49,869,450

PART V. INFORMATION CENTRESSection21. Information centres (other than information serv-

ices, United Nations Office at Geneva) . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART VI. REGIONAL ECONOMIC COMMISSION(OTHER THAN THE ECONOMIC COMMISSIONFOR EUROPE)

22. Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East ..23. Economic Commission for Latin America . . . . . . .

TOTAL. PART VI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART VII. HOSPITALITY24. Hospitality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART VII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART VIII. CONTRACTUAL PRINTING25. Official Records (excluding chapter VI, Permanent

Central Opium Board and Narcotic Drugs Super-visory Body) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chapter VI, Permanent Central Opium Board andNarcotic Drugs Supervisory Body . . . . . . . . . . . . .

26. Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART VIII .....................

PART IX. TECHNICAL PROGRAMMES27. Social activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28. Economic development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29. Public administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART X. SPECIAL EXPENSES30. Transfer of the assets of the League of Nations to

the United Nations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31. Amortization of the Headquarters construction loan

(a) Headquarters construction costs . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B. THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

PART XI. THE INTERNATIONAL COURTOF JUSTICE

32. The International Court of Justice . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART XI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GRAND TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SUPPLEMENTARY

APPROPRIATION,

INCREASE OR

decrease(italic figures)

REVISED

AMOUNTS OF

APPROPRIATION

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .


IV. European Office of theUnited Nations (in-cluding Office of theHigh Commissionerfor Refugees) . . . . .

V. Information Centres(excluding informationservices at Geneva)..

VI. Regional EconomicCommissions (exclud-ing Economic Com-mission for Europe).

VII. Hospitality . . . . . . . .VIII. Contractual Printing .

IX. Technical ProgrammesX. Special Expenses . . .

XI. International Court ofJustice . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL

Under Part I, sessions of the General Assembly,councils, commissions and committees, the decreaseof $148,000 was mainly a reflection of the econo-mies resulting from Economic and Social Councilresolution 414(XIII) on organization and oper-ation of the Council and its commissions, andwas also due to the permanent transfer of technicalstaff from Headquarters to the Geneva Office,enabling a reduction in staff travel costs.

The total increase of $291,800 under the provi-sion for Headquarters (Part III) reflected addi-tional staff costs, including within-grade salaryincrements, the filling of posts left vacant during1953, the provision of Spanish as a working lan-guage of the Economic and Social Council, andcommon staff costs.

A considerable portion of the increase for theEuropean Office of the United Nations at Geneva(Part IV) was due to the transfer of posts fromHeadquarters and the removal of a 5 per centsalary differential formerly applied to salaries ofstaff at Geneva.

While provision for the Information Centresshowed an increase of $37,500 (Part V), duealmost wholly to the cost of within-grade salaryincrements, the Secretary-General proposed toreduce expenditures for some Centres in order toallow for the opening of two additional sub-centres, one in Greece and the other in Colombia.

Normal salary increments, a rise in local wagescales, rising prices and adverse exchange rateswere the principal reasons for the increase of$181,100 in the estimates for the two regionaleconomic commissions (under Part VI).

Finally, the Secretary-General reported, theincrease of $147,800 in the estimates for theInternational Court of Justice (Part XI) was due

to the proposed establishment of a pension fundfor the judges.

As in previous years, the budget estimatesprepared by the Secretary-General were reviewedby the Advisory Committee on Administrative andBudgetary Questions. In its first, fourth and fifthreports to the eighth session of the General Assem-bly (A/2403, A/2499 and A/2501), the Advi-sory Committee recommended an over-all reduc-tion of $843,800 in the Secretary-General's grossestimates for 1954. It noted that commendableefforts had been made during the past two yearstoward stabilizing the budget at a level to ensurethe orderly execution of essential projects with-out imposing on Members an unduly heavy finan-cial burden. Any major reduction in expenses, theCommittee recognized, could be achieved only inconjunction with a review of future work pro-grammes and with a reorganization of administra-tive services.

The Advisory Committee called special atten-tion to the volume of documentation producedby the Organization and, though recognizing thatsubstantial efforts had been made to reduce this,believed that much remained to be done. It recom-mended a reduction of $200,000 in the estimatefor 1954 printing costs, the largest single reduc-tion proposed by the Committee.

With respect to the number of established postson the Secretariat in relation to work programmes,the Committee felt that a revision of the admin-istrative structure combined with a review ofprogrammes and projects might lead to majoreconomies. It considered that the number of seniorposts in many cases was too large in proportion tothe number of subordinate posts.

The Advisory Committee suggested greater ver-satility among staff members to help overcomehigh expenditures for temporary assistance andconsultants. It suggested that the Secretary-Gen-eral might undertake, prior to the submission ofthe 1955 estimates, a critical examination of suchrequirements.

It concurred with the proposal of the Secretary-General to maintain the Working Capital Fundat the level of $21,500,000 for 1954, and alsowith a related proposal that the provision forunforeseen and extraordinary expenses should con-tinue to be the subject of a separate resolution.

The report of the Advisory Committee itemized,by departments, the various reductions proposedand presented detailed recommendations on eachsection of the estimates.

Also before the Committee were a statement ofthe 1953 budget expenses to 30 September (A/-

1954

5,441,100

899,800

2,077,10020,000

1,649,1001,392,9002,149,500

778,600

$48,123,400

1953

5,104,900

826,300

1,896,00020,000

1,579,2001,392,9003,149,500

630,800

$48,327,700


C.5/547) and revised estimates: (1) reflectingdecisions taken by the Economic and Social Coun-cil at its fifteenth and sixteenth sessions (A/C.5/-542); (2) for the holding of the 1954 session ofthe International Law Commission at Geneva (A/-C.5/555); (3) for the acquisition and operationof radio transmitters at Headquarters and Geneva(A/C.5/559); (4) for the enlargement of thedining room and cafeteria facilities (A/C.5/-557),85 as well as detailed estimates for variousfield missions under section 5 (see below, budgetas adopted) for which only a token global provi-sion had been presented in the original budgetestimates. The Committee had before it thereports of the Advisory Committee on these items(A/2522 & Corr.1; A/2549-A/2552; A/2557;A/2583-A/2585; A/2594-A/2598)—8th, 16th-19th, 22nd, 27th-29th, 31st-35th reports to theeighth session.

The Fifth Committee at its 379th to 391st,396th to 401st, 403rd to 406th, 411th, 424th, and426th meetings on 30 September, 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 12to 15 and 26 to 29 October, 2, 3, 6, 11, 16, 18,and 24 November and 5, 7 December 1953 con-sidered the United Nations budget estimates for1954 as submitted by the Secretary-General andreviewed by the Advisory Committee.

Preceding the general discussion on the esti-mates, the Committee heard statements by theSecretary-General (A/C.5/544) and by theChairman of the Advisory Committee (A/C.5/-545). The Secretary-General said that the esti-mates represented a conscientious and informedeffort to gauge the needs of the Organization dur-ing 1954. They were based, he stated, on existinglines of administrative policy, since it was essentialthat major changes should rest on a sound andsolid foundation and could not be safely initiatedpending further careful study. He understood, hesaid, and sympathized with the widespread desirefor early and effective action to simplify the inter-nal structure and functioning of the Secretariatand the concrete proposals which he expected topresent would, he added, point in the directionof economy as well as greater efficiency. Mean-while, he urged the Fifth Committee to proceedwith its review of the estimates on the basis ofthe reports before it and, without any specialpleading on his part, to come to its own con-clusions as to the suitable level of appropriationsfor 1954.

The Chairman of the Advisory Committeeemphasized that none of the recommended cutsin the 1954 estimates were intended to discountwhatever further economy might prove possibleunder the Secretary-General's subsequent plan for

re-organization. He paid a tribute to the wisdomof the Secretary-General in not contesting thefigures recommended by the Advisory Committeeand said that a tight budget was a healthy featurein an administrative structure such as the UnitedNations, and that, should the Secretary-Generalbe confronted with any hardship in maintainingessential activities, the Advisory Committee wouldassist him. He drew attention to the prominencegiven in the Advisory Committee's report to theproblem of documentation, stating that if was thatCommittee's view that the documentation had longsince become excessive, but it was for the FifthCommittee to judge whether this was the case.

In the Committee's general discussion of the1954 estimates (at its 380th to 386th meetings),substantial support was expressed for the recom-mendations of the Advisory Committee. Many rep-resentatives considered that the reductions couldbe achieved without detriment to any essentialactivity or service and that they would contributetowards the principal aim of stabilizing the ordi-nary annual expenditures of the Organization.

A number of representatives, particularly thoseof Brazil, the Byelorussian SSR, Cuba, Czecho-slovakia, the Netherlands, Poland, the UkrainianSSR, the United Kingdom, the USSR, and Yugo-slavia, stressed the need for re-examining currentwork programmes with a view to eliminating non-essential activities and concentrating on a pro-gramme of priorities.

The representatives of the Byelorussian SSR,Czechoslovakia, Poland, the Ukrainian SSR and theUSSR reaffirmed the view expressed previously inmeetings of the Fifth Committee that theobjective should be to operate within a givenbudget ceiling and suggested that an amount of$35,000,000 net should be considered as an appro-priate figure to cover all essential work. Thistarget, they suggested, could be achieved by effect-ing economies in addition to those recommendedby the Advisory Committee, particularly by reduc-ing the excessively high staff costs and by eliminat-ing certain activities which they deemed wereincompatible with the principles and provisionsof the Charter.

Other representatives, including those of Egypt,India, Iraq, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sweden andSyria, though also expressing themselves in favourof reducing the budget to the minimum neces-sary for effective operations, held that it wasneither practicable nor desirable to impose a ceil-ing. They considered that the soundness of theUnited Nations structure, as well as the efficiency85

See under Headquarters of the United Nations.


of its operations, should not be impaired solely onthe grounds of economy.

Most representatives expressed their concernover what they considered the unnecessarily largenumber of documents produced by the Organiza-tion. In their opinion, this not only caused auto-matic expenditures but also tended to lower thequality of the publications. However, the rep-resentatives of Canada, Egypt and Yugoslavia,among others, while agreeing that reasonableeconomies were possible, urged caution in reduc-ing appropriations for what they considered apart of the essential substantive work of theOrganization.

The Committee felt that it was necessary tostrengthen the hands of the Secretary-General onthe problem of documentation by reaffirming aprevious Assembly resolution (593(VI)) on thesubject. To this end, the Committee at its 404thmeeting unanimously adopted a United Kingdomdraft resolution, as amended by Belgium and Den-mark (see resolution "D" below).

During the general discussion, several represent-atives, including those of Denmark, Egypt, France,Iraq, the Union of South Africa and the UnitedKingdom, referred to the necessity of adheringstrictly to the terms of Assembly resolution 694(VII) concerning the programme of conferencesat Headquarters and Geneva. On the other hand,certain representatives, including those of Argen-tina, Belgium, Brazil, Israel and the Netherlands,while not denying the importance of adhering tothe pattern, saw no point in requesting the Assem-bly to confirm a decision it had so recently taken.The Committee, however, adopted a United King-dom draft resolution embodying the views of theAdvisory Committee (see resolution "E" below).

Many representatives also commented on thematter of the reimbursement to staff members ofincome taxes paid in respect of payments fromthe United Nations, noting the heavy charge fortax reimbursement which was added to the UnitedNations budget each year. The representativesof the Byelorussian SSR, Czechoslovakia, Egypt,France, Pakistan, Poland, Syria, the UkrainianSSR, the USSR and Yugoslavia, among others,expressed the view that this charge was unwar-ranted and hoped that all governments—and par-ticularly the United States Government—wouldcomply with the terms of previous Assembly reso-lutions (13(I) and 239 C (III)) so that suchreimbursement would be avoided.

Recurrent references were made to the needfor correcting existing defects in the structureof the Secretariat, bearing in mind the comments

of the Advisory Committee on the high ratio ofsenior to junior posts in a number of departments.In this connexion, the representatives of India,Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan and Syria, amongothers, called attention to the need for a moreequitable geographical distribution of staff, par-ticularly from the under-developed areas of Asiaand the Middle East, and to the desirability ofextending the principle to cover posts at all levelsand grades.

At its 411th meeting on 24 November 1953,the Committee considered the report of the Advi-sory Committee (A/2557) on the proposal by theSecretary-General (A/C.5/559) for the acquisi-tion of radio transmitters by the United Nationsand for their operation at New York and Genevain replacement of the existing system of a rentedteletype circuit. It was noted that, although theproposal would necessitate an increase in the1954 estimates of $43,400, against which offsettingrevenue would amount to $9,000, in subsequentyears the relevant appropriations would be reducedby a total of $17,700 by comparison with the1953 figure, and miscellaneous income would beincreased, as in 1954, by $9,000 per annum.

The Committee approved the proposal toacquire the transmitters on the understanding:(1) that the scheme was consonant with the pro-visions of Section 4 of Article II of the Headquar-ters Agreement;86 and (2) that a strict controlwould be exercised over the nature and length ofcable messages accepted for transmission over thenew system. The Committee approved the neces-sary adjustments in Sections 18, 19 and 20 of thebudget estimates by 39 votes to none, with 5abstentions.

After approving, by varying votes, the individ-ual sections of the budget estimates, the Com-mittee, at its 426th meeting on 10 December 1953,decided by 45 votes to 5, to recommend that theestimates be approved in the total amount of$47,827,110. At the same time, it recommendedthat miscellaneous income for the financial year1954 should be approved at an estimate of$6,760,000, which amount, applied as an offsetagainst estimated gross expenditure for 1954,would produce a net figure of $41,067,110.

The net expenditure amount would be subjectto adjustments in accordance with the terms offinancial regulation 5.2, estimated as follows:

Increase

(a) Supplementary appropriation forthe financial year 1953 . . . . . . . . $1,541,750

86 This Section covers the operation of radio broad-

casting facilities from the Headquarters district.


As a result of these adjustments, assessment ofcontributions from Member States for the finan-cial year 1954, if appropriations were approvedas recommended, would amount to $41,300,000as compared with $44,200,000 for 1953; a decreaseof $2,900,000.

At its 426th meeting, the Committee adopted,by 48 votes to 5, with 1 abstention, a draft resolu-tion relating to unforeseen and extraordinaryexpenses (see resolution "B" below). It alsoapproved, by 50 votes to 5, a draft resolutionrelating to the Working Capital Fund (see resolu-tion "C" below).

The draft resolutions recommended in the FifthCommittee's report (A/2622) on the 1954 budgetestimates were considered by the General Assem-bly at its 471st meeting on 9 December 1953.

In explanation of his vote, the representativeof the USSR said that his delegation would opposethe 1954 budget appropriations because theyincluded provisions for an inflated staff, for UnitedNations bodies which, in his opinion, were estab-lished in violation of the Charter, and also forreimbursement of income taxes paid to the UnitedStates on earnings of United States nationalsemployed by the United Nations. The USSR dele-gation, he added, believed that the 1954 appropria-tion should not exceed $35,000,000 net. The USSRdelegation also believed that the Working CapitalFund would be perfectly adequate at a figure of$20,000,000 rather than $21,500,000, as proposedby the Fifth Committee.

The Assembly approved the five resolutionsrecommended by the Fifth Committee, as follows:

Resolution A (Budget Appropriations for1954): Approved by 53 votes to 5, as resolution786(VIII). It read:

"The General Assembly"Resolves that for the financial year 1954:

"1. Appropriations totalling $US 47,827,110 arehereby voted for the following purposes:

{See table on pp. 99-100}

"2. The appropriations voted by paragraph 1 aboveshall be financed by contributions from Members afteradjustment as provided by the Financial Regulations,subject to the provision of paragraph 1 of the resolu-tion relating to the Working Capital Fund. For this

purpose, miscellaneous income for the financial year1954 is estimated at $US 6,760,000;

"3. The Secretary-General is authorized:"(i) To administer as a unit the following appropria-

tions:"(a) Provisions under section 3 (a); section 20,

chapter III; and section 25, chapter V;"(b) Provisions under section 13; section 20, chap-

ter II; section 21; and in respect of section 26for items relating to public information;

"(ii) With the prior concurrence of the AdvisoryCommittee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions,to transfer credits between sections of the budget;

"4. In addition to the appropriations voted by para-graph 1 above, an amount of $US 13,000 is herebyappropriated for the purchase of books, periodicals,maps and library equipment, from the income of theLibrary Endowment Fund, in accordance with the ob-jects and provisions of the endowment."

Resolution B (Unforeseen and ExtraordinaryExpenses for the Financial Year 1954): Approvedby 50 votes to 5, with 1 abstention, as resolution787(VIII). It read:

"The General Assembly"Resolves that, for the financial year 1954,"The Secretary-General, with the prior concurrence

of the Advisory Committee on Administrative andBudgetary Questions and subject to the Financial Reg-ulations of the United Nations, is authorized to enterinto commitments to meet unforeseen and extraordin-ary expenses; provided that the concurrence of theAdvisory Committee shall not be necessary for:

"(a) Such commitments not exceeding a total of$US 2 million if the Secretary-General certifies thatthey relate to the maintenance of peace and securityor to urgent economic rehabilitation;

"(b) Such commitments not exceeding a total of$50,000 as are required for the United Nations GoodOffices Commission on the treatment of people of In-dian origin in the Union of South Africa;

"(c) Such commitments not exceeding a total of$50,000 as may be required for the United NationsCommission on the Racial Situation in the Union ofSouth Africa;

"(d) Such additional commitments as are requiredfor the Ad Hoc Commission on Prisoners of War;

"(e) Such commitments not exceeding a total of$184,000 as are required for the purchase of Koreanservice medals and ribbons;

"(f) Such commitments, duly certified by the Pres-ident of the International Court of Justice, relating toexpenses occasioned:

"(i) By the designation of ad hoc judges (Statute,Article 31)

"(ii) By the appointment of assessors (Statute, Ar-ticle 30), or by the calling of witnesses and theappointment of experts (Statute, Article 50),

"(iii) By the holding of sessions of the Court awayfrom The Hague (Statute, Article 22),

and not exceeding $24,000, $25,000 and $75,000 re-spectively, under each of the above three headings;

"The Secretary-General shall report to the AdvisoryCommittee and to the General Assembly at its nextregular session all commitments made under the pro-visions of the present resolution, together with the

300,000

1,008,860

$ 232,890

Decrease

(b) Adjustment for an estimated in-crease in miscellaneous incomefor the financial year 1953 . . . . .

(c) Appropriations to be surrenderedunder financial regulations 4.3and 4.4 in respect of the financialyear 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NET ADDITIONAL INCREASE . . .


BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1954

{See resolution 786(VIII) on p. 98}

A. UNITED NATIONS

PART I. SESSIONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,THE COUNCILS, COMMISSIONSAND COMMITTEES

Section1. The General Assembly,

Commissions and Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. The Security Council,

Commissions and Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. The Economic and Social Council,

Commissions and Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(a) Permanent Central Opium Board and Narcotic

Drugs Supervisory Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(b) Regional Economic Commissions . . . . . . . . .

4. The Trusteeship Council,Commissions and Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART II. INVESTIGATIONS AND INQUIRIES5. Investigations and inquiries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(a) United Nations Field Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART III. HEADQUARTERS, NEW YORK6. Executive Office of the Secretary-General . . . . . . . .

(a) Library . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7. Department of Political and Security CouncilAffairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

8. Military Staff Committee secretariat . . . . . . . . . . . .9. Technical Assistance Administration . . . . . . . . . . .

10. Department of Economic Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11. Department of Social Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12. Department for Trusteeship and Information from

Non-Self-Governing Territories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13. Department of Public Information . . . . . . . . . . . .14. Legal Department . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15. Conference and General Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(a) United Nations Postal Administration . . . . . .16. Administrative and Financial Services . . . . . . . . . .17. Common staff costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18. Common services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19. Permanent equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(a) Improvements to premises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL. PART III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART IV. EUROPEAN OFFICE OF THEUNITED NATIONS

20. European Office of the United Nations (excludingdirect costs, chapter III, joint secretariat of thePermanent Central Opium Board and NarcoticDrugs Supervisory Body) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chapter III, joint secretariat of the PermanentCentral Opium Board and Narcotic Drugs Super-visory Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(a) Office of the United Nations High Commis-sioner for Refugees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL. PART IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

164,180

21,40072,000

2,061,000566,300

394,000479,130

758,500136,900386,700

2,263,7001,704,000

938,4002,713,400

460,3009,399,700

143,4001,590,0004,478,0003,786,800

176,400565,000

4,627,200

53,800

541,750

257,580

50,000

873,130

29,501,200

4,681,000

685,000

849,330

2,627,300

30,374,330

5,366,000

Dollars (US)


PART V. INFORMATION CENTRESSection21. Information centres (other than information serv-

ices, European Office of the United Nations) . . . . .

TOTAL, PART V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART VI. REGIONAL ECONOMIC COMMISSIONS(OTHER THAN THE ECONOMIC COMMISSIONFOR EUROPE)

22. Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East . .23. Economic Commission for Latin America . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART VI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART VII. HOSPITALITY24. Hospitality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART V I I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART VIII. CONTRACTUAL PRINTING25. Official Records (excluding chapter V, Permanent

Central Opium Board and Narcotic Drugs Super-visory Body) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chapter V, Permanent Central Opium Board andNarcotic Drugs Supervisory Body . . . . . . . . . . . . .

26. Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART VIII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART IX. TECHNICAL PROGRAMMES27. Social activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28. Economic development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29. Public administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART X. SPECIAL EXPENSES30. Transfer of the assets of the League of Nations to

the United Nations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31. Amortization of the Headquarters construction loan

TOTAL, PART X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B. THE INTERNATIONAL COURTOF JUSTICE

PART XI. THE INTERNATIONAL COURTOF JUSTICE

32. The International Court of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL, PART XI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GRAND TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dollars (US)

877,400

1,123,900958,700

20,000

718,300

12,500

768,500479,400145,000

649,5001,500,000

621,980

877,400

2,082,600

20,000

1,465,770

1,392,900

2,149,500

621,980

47,827,110

circumstances relating thereto, and shall submit sup-plementary estimates to the General Assembly in re-spect of such commitments."

Resolution C (Working Capital Fund): Ap-proved by 52 votes to 5, as resolution 788(VIII).It read:

"The General Assembly"Resolves that:"1. The Working Capital Fund shall be maintained

to 31 December 1954 at the amount of $US 21,500,000,to be derived:

"(a) As to $20,000,000 from cash advances byMembers in accordance with the provisions of para-graphs 2 and 3 of the present resolution:

"(b) As to $1,500,000 by previous transfer fromsurplus account as follows:

"(i) $1,239,203 being the balance of surplus ac-count as at 31 December 1950 not alreadyapplied against Members' assessments for1951, in accordance with the General As-sembly resolution 585A (VI) of 21 December1951;

730,800

734,970


"(ii) $260,797 as part of the balance of surplusaccount as at 31 December 1951 not alreadyapplied against Members' assessments for1952, in accordance with General Assemblyresolution 676(VII) of 21 December 1952;

"2. Members shall make cash advances to the Work-ing Capital Fund as required under paragraph 1(a)above in accordance with the scale adopted by theGeneral Assembly for contributions of Members to theninth annual budget;

"3. There shall be set off against this new allocationof advances the amounts paid by Members to theWorking Capital Fund for the financial year 1953under paragraph 2 of General Assembly resolution 674(VII) of 21 December 1952, provided that, should theadvance paid by any Member to the Working CapitalFund for the financial year 1953 exceed the amountof that Member's advance under the provision ofparagraph 2 hereof, the excess shall be set off againstthe amount of contributions payable by the Memberin respect of the ninth annual budget, or any previousbudget;

"4. The Secretary-General is authorized to advancefrom the Working Capital Fund:

"(a) Such sums as may be necessary to financebudgetary appropriations pending receipt of contribu-tions; sums so advanced shall be reimbursed as soonas receipts from contributions are available for thepurpose;

"(b) Such sums as may be necessary to financecommitments which may be duly authorized under theprovisions of the resolution relating to unforeseen andextraordinary expenses. The Secretary-General shallmake provision in the budget estimates for reimbursingthe Working Capital Fund;

"(c) Such sums as, together with net sums outstand-ing for the same purposes, do not exceed $125,000 tocontinue the revolving fund to finance miscellaneousself-liquidating purchases and activities. Advances inexcess of the total of $125,000 may be made with theprior concurrence of the Advisory Committee on Ad-ministrative and Budgetary Questions. The Secretary-General shall submit, with the annual accounts, anexplanation of the outstanding balance of the revolvingfund at the end of each year;

"(d) Loans to specialized agencies and preparatorycommissions of agencies to be established by inter-governmental agreement under the auspices of theUnited Nations to finance their work, pending receiptby the agencies concerned of sufficient contributionsunder their own budgets. In making such loans, whichshall normally be repayable within two years, the Sec-retary-General shall have regard to the proposed finan-cial resources of the agency concerned, and shall obtainthe prior concurrence of the Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions for any cashissues which would increase the aggregate balance out-standing (including amounts previously advanced andoutstanding) at any one time to an amount in excessof $3,000,000 and for any issue which would increasethe balance outstanding (including amounts previouslyadvanced and outstanding) in respect of any one agencyto an amount in excess of $1,000,000, provided that,notwithstanding the above provisions, the InterimCommission of the International Trade Organizationshall be authorized to postpone until 31 December1954 repayment of the outstanding balance of theloans made to the Interim Commission;

"(e) Such sums not exceeding $45,000 as may berequired to finance payments of advance insurance pre-miums where the period of insurance extends beyondthe end of the financial year in which payment is made.This amount may be increased with the prior concur-rence of the Advisory Committee on Administrativeand Budgetary Questions. The Secretary-General shallmake provision in the budget estimates of each year,during the life of the related policies, to cover thecharges applicable to each such year."

Resolution D (Control and Limitation ofDocumentation): Approved unanimously as reso-lution 789(VIII). It read:

"The General Assembly:"Recalling its resolution 593(VI) of 4 February

1952 on the control and limitation of documentation,"Noting the observations and suggestions of the Ad-

visory Committee on Administrative and BudgetaryQuestions in its first report to the eighth session ofthe General Assembly, and the action taken by theSecretary-General, inter alia, by his instruction of 20August 1953, to ensure a more effective control ofdocumentation,

"Noting further the steps initiated by the Economicand Social Council, in its resolution 497 D (XVI) of29 July 1953, to reduce the number and volume ofcertain categories of documents required by it,

"Considering that this reduction can be carried out infull only with the cooperation of Member States,

"Expressing the wish that Member States should co-operate in giving effect to the present resolution,

"1. Invites the Economic and Social Council to pur-sue and intensify its efforts to reduce further the docu-mentation required by it, and also by its functional andregional commissions;

"2. Invites organs of the United Nations likewiseto scrutinize their existing documentation and effectsuch reduction therein as may be feasible, and to co-operate with the Secretary-General in his efforts toreduce the volume and at the same time to improvethe quality of the documentation of the UnitedNations."

Resolution E (Programme of Conferences atHeadquarters and Geneva): Approved unani-mously, as resolution 790(VIII) It read:

"The General Assembly:"Having noted the recommendations of the Admin-

istrative Committee on Co-ordination in its thirteenthreport to the Economic and Social Council to the effectthat the regular four-year pattern of conferences ap-proved by the General Assembly at its seventh sessioncan only fulfil its purpose if it is strictly adhered to byall the organs concerned,

"Noting also the opinion of the Advisory Committeeon Administrative and Budgetary Questions in its fifthreport to the eighth session of the General Assembly tothe effect that the Advisory Committee regards theprogramme as firmly fixed for the period 1954 to 1957and that any variations will presumably be authorizedonly by a special decision of the General Assembly,

"1. Endorses the opinion of the Advisory Commit-tee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions;

"2. Reaffirms its recommendation that all organsof the United Nations arrange their meetings in ac-cordance with the dates and places set forth in the


pattern presented by the Secretary-General and thatthe specialized agencies concerned be invited to givedue consideration to this pattern in drawing up theirown programmes of meetings."

4. Scale of Assessments for theApportionment of the Expenses

of the United Nations

The scale of assessments for the apportionmentof the expenses of the United Nations for thefinancial year 1954 was considered at the eighthsession of the General Assembly, at the 393rd to396th meetings of the Fifth Committee from 20to 26 October and at the 458th plenary meetingon 27 November 1953.

Before the Fifth Committee was the report ofthe Committee on Contributions (A/2461)recommending the following changes in the scaleof assessments of 22 Member States:

Percentage of total contributionspayable by Member States

Official Recommended

Member StateArgentinaBelgiumBrazilByelorussian SSRColombiaEgyptEl SalvadorGreeceGuatemalaIndiaIranLuxembourgMexicoPakistanPhilippinesPolandUkrainian SSRUnion of South

AfricaUSSRUnited KingdomUnited StatesVenezuela

Scalefor 1953

1.451.371.450.430.350.500.050.190.063.450.330.050.700.790.391.581.63

0.8312.2810.3035.120.35

Scalefor 1954

1.401.381.400.500.410.470.060.210.073.400.280.060.750.750.451.731.88

0.7814.159.80

33.330.39

Change-0.05+0.01-0.05+0.07+0.06-0.03+0.01+0.02+0.01-0.05-0.05+0.01+0.05-0.04+0.06+0.15+0.25

-0.05+ 1.87-0.50-1.79+0.04

In framing its recommendations, the Commit-tee applied previous decisions of the Assemblythat the assessment of the largest contributor (theUnited States) should not exceed one third ofthe total assessment and that continued recogni-tion should be given to the position of countrieswith low per capita incomes. In line with Assem-bly recommendations that application of the percapita ceiling principle87 be deferred until newMembers were admitted or substantial improve-ments occurred in the economic capacity of exist-ing Members, it decided to retain the 1953 assess-

ments for those countries to which this ceilingwould apply.

In view of the dollar stringency, the Commit-tee recommended that arrangements for paymentsin currencies other than United States dollarsshould be extended as far as possible.

It considered that a decision to adopt a three-year scale, as envisaged by the Assembly's rulesof procedure, should be deferred and that a furtherreview of the scale should be undertaken in 1954.

The Committee had also reviewed the assess-ments of Switzerland and Liechtenstein for con-tributions to the International Court of Justiceand of non-member States signatories of inter-national instruments relating to the control ofnarcotic drugs.

During the discussions in the Fifth Committee,widespread agreement was expressed with therecommendation that the scale of assessmentsshould apply for one year only, since it was notcurrently possible to remove all divergencies. Itwas hoped that it would be possible to submitproposals to the next Assembly session for a scaleto be valid for at least three years, and manyrepresentatives welcomed the Committee's deci-sion that for such a scale it would base its calcu-lations on relative capacity to pay on a three-yearly average of national income estimates, whilealso having regard to economic trends manifestedin individual countries during the current year.

A number of representatives, and, in particular,those of Canada, New Zealand and Sweden, threecountries affected by the per capita ceiling prin-ciple, stressed the importance which they attachedto this principle. It was pointed out that thedeferment of the application of this principlewould result in an increasing discrepancy betweenthe per capita contribution of certain countriesand that of the United States, the country withthe largest assessment. The fear was also expressedby, among others, the representatives of Belgiumand the Netherlands, that the middle incomegroup of contributors might be called upon to paya disproportionate share of the budget in viewof the reduction of the assessment of the highestcontributor and the special relief given to coun-tries with low per capita incomes.

The representative of the USSR opposed therecommended scale on the grounds that the Com-mittee on Contributions, in proposing increasesfor the Byelorussian SSR, Poland, the Ukrainian

87 The per capita ceiling principle is to the effect

that the per capita contribution of any Member shallnot exceed the per capita of the Member with thehighest contribution, i.e., the United States.


SSR and the USSR, had not given due attentionto the basic criteria for arriving at an equitablescale, namely, the comparative per capita income,the temporary dislocation of national economiesarising out of the Second World War and theability of Member States to secure foreign cur-rency. Since 1951, he maintained, there appearedto be a systematic policy of increasing the assess-ment of the above group of countries and reduc-ing those of another group, particularly theUnited States, the United Kingdom and the Unionof South Africa. The United States, in particular,he said, had not suffered from war damage, bene-fitted from the fact that the greater part of UnitedNations expenditure was made in the UnitedStates and had no difficulty in obtaining dollarcurrency. The views of the Soviet representativewere supported by the representatives of the Byelo-russian SSR, Czechoslovakia, Poland and theUkrainian SSR.

On the other hand, several representatives main-tained the view that the substantial economicprogress admittedly achieved by the USSR and theEast European countries since the end of WorldWar II made it imperative for the contributionsof those States to be brought more closely intoline with their increased capacity to pay.

Some representatives, including those of Egypt,Greece, India, Iran and Iraq, stressed the import-ance of continuing to give special considerationto those countries with low per capita incomes.The representatives of Afghanistan, Bolivia, Chile,Cuba and the Philippines, among others, felt thatthe Committee on Contributions had not givensufficient allowance to this factor of low per capitaincome.

The representative of Greece sought relief fromany increase also because of the damage sufferedin the Ionian Islands as a result of the earthquakesduring 1953, and the Fifth Committee agreed thatthe Committee on Contributions should considerGreece's difficulties when considering the 1955scale, together with the possibility of adopting a"unit system" of assessment rather than the cur-rent percentage system, so as to give greater flexi-bility in applying unforeseen changes in the scale.

Other representatives, including those of China,Colombia, Pakistan and the Philippines, also feltthat the Committee on Contributions had beenover-optimistic in its assessment of their coun-tries' capacity to pay.

The representative of the Philippines proposeda draft resolution (A/C.5/L.245), which wouldhave the Assembly call upon the Committee onContributions to consult with Member Govern-

ments, particularly those whose contributions werelikely to be increased, before a new scale of assess-ments was submitted to the Assembly. However,he withdrew this proposal on the assurance of theChairman of the Committee on Contributions thatall delegations would be informed of that Com-mittee's next meeting so that they could transmitto it any relevant information which they mightwish it to consider in preparing its recommenda-tions. In this connexion, the opinion was expressedby several representatives that the Committeeshould not be transformed into a negotiating body.

A draft resolution (A/C.5/L.244), embodyingthe recommendations of the Committee on Con-tributions, was adopted, paragraph by paragraph,in votes ranging from a unanimous vote to 39votes to 7, with 2 abstentions. It was adopted, asa whole, by 39 votes to 6, with 3 abstentions, atthe Fifth Committee's 396th meeting (A/2577)and by the General Assembly, at its 458th plenarymeeting on 27 November 1953, by 50 votes to 6,with 2 abstentions.

In explaining their votes in the plenary meet-ing in opposition to the proposed scale of con-tributions, the representatives of Poland and theUSSR reiterated arguments adduced in the FifthCommittee. The representative of the UnitedStates expressed his country's gratitude for theproposed reduction of the United States assess-ment to 33.33 per cent, and pointed to variousfactors relating to the Soviet Union's relativecapacity to pay more toward the support of theOrganization.

The resolution adopted by the General Assem-bly (365(VIII)) read:

"The General Assembly,"Resolves"1. That the scale of assessment for the 1954

budget shall be as follows:

Per cent0.081.401.751.380.061.400.130.503.300.335.620.410.040.341.050.780.050.040.47

Member StateAfghanistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Argentina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bolivia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Burma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic . . .Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Colombia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Costa Rica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cuba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Czechoslovakia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Dominican Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ecuador . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Member StateEl Salvador . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ethiopia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Guatemala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Haiti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Honduras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Iceland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Iran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Iraq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Israel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lebanon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Liberia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Luxembourg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .New Zealand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nicaragua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pakistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Panama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Paraguay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Peru . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Philippines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Poland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Saudi Arabia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Syria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Thailand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic . . . . . .Union of South Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Union of Soviet Socialist Republics . . . . . . .United Kingdom of Great Britain and

Northern Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .United States of America . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Uruguay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Venezuela . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Yemen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Yugoslavia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TOTAL

Per cent0.060.105.750.210.070.040.040.043.400.600.280.120.170.050.040.060.751.250.480.040.500.750.050.040.180.451.730.071.650.080.180.651.880.78

14.15

9.8033.330.180.390.040.44

100.00

narcotic drugs shall be called upon to make contribu-tions towards the annual expenses, commencing withthe year 1953, resulting from obligations placed onthe United Nations by those instruments, in accordancewith the following rates:

"2. That, notwithstanding the provision of rule 159of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly,the scale of assessment for the apportionment of theexpenses of the United Nations shall be reviewed bythe Committee on Contributions in 1954 and a reportsubmitted for the consideration of the General Assem-bly at its next regular session;

"3. That, notwithstanding the terms of financial reg-ulation 5.5, the Secretary-General shall be empoweredto accept, at his discretion and after consultation withthe Chairman of the Committee on Contributions, aportion of the contributions of Member States for thefinancial year 1954 in currencies other than UnitedStates dollars;

"4. That Switzerland shall contribute 1.50 per centand the Principality of Liechtenstein 0.04 per cent ofthe expenses of the International Court of Justice forthe year 1954, these assessments having been estab-lished after consultation with the respective Govern-ments, in accordance with the terms of General Assem-bly resolutions 91(I) of 11 December 1946 and 363(IV) of 1 December 1949;

"5. That non-member States which are signatoriesof international instruments relating to the control of

CountryAlbania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Bulgaria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Cambodia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ceylon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Federal Republic of Germany . . . . . . . . . . .Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hashemite Kingdom of the Jordan . . . . . . .Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Laos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Liechtenstein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Monaco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Romania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .San Marino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Viet-Nam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Per cent0.040.340.190.040.134.300.420.040.480.302.201.950.040.040.040.300.600.041.260.17

"6. That, if any non-member States should becomeParties to the Convention on the Declaration of Deathof Missing Persons during 1953, they should be as-sessed retroactively in respect of the 1953 expenses ofthe International Bureau for Declarations of Death inaccordance with the terms of General Assembly resolu-tions 493(V) of 16 November 1950."

5. Appointment of a NegotiatingCommittee for Extra-Budgetary

funds

The General Assembly, at its seventh session,decided (resolution 693 (VII))88 to establishagain a Negotiating Committee for Extra-Budg-etary Funds, on the same lines as in the previousyear, to assist in obtaining funds for the ExpandedProgramme of Technical Assistance, for theUnited Nations Relief and Works Agency forPalestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA),for the United Nations Korean ReconstructionAgency (UNKRA), for the United Nations In-ternational Children's Emergency Fund (UNI-CEF), and for such other special programmesnot provided for in the regular budget of theUnited Nations as might be designated by theAssembly.

The Committee, composed of nine members,89

began its work on 14 November 1952, and sum-marized its activities between that date and 1September 1953 in a report to the Assembly'seighth session (A/2478).

88

89 For membership, see Appendix I. See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 126.


With respect to the Expanded Programmeof Technical Assistance, it announced thatpledges for the calendar year 1953 amounting to$22,393,313 had been received from 69 countriesagainst a target of $25 million. As regardsUNRWA and UNICEF, the Committee statedthat it had invited those governments which hadnot yet contributed to either or both of these pro-grammes to meet with it. For UNRWA, pledgesfor the fiscal year 1952-1953 had been made by39 governments, amounting to an actual total of$67,086,830, and a total sum of approximately$147 million had been pledged against the three-year target figure of $250 million set by theAssembly (resolution 513(VI)). Pledges for thefiscal year 1953-1954 totalling $388,758 from sixgovernments had also been received by Septem-ber, 1953. For UNICEF, pledges for the currentfiscal year totalling $14,206,020 from 47 govern-ments had been made against a target of $20million established by the UNICEF ExecutiveBoard. With respect to UNKRA, the NegotiatingCommittee had called to the attention of govern-ments which had not yet contributed to theAgency the fact that approximately $44 millionstill remained to be pledged to meet the $250million budget for three years. As a result, by 1September 1953, pledges in cash and kind hadbeen made by 33 governments in the amount of$207,518,517.

The Committee considered that it would be ofvalue to continue similar negotiations both for-mally and informally during the Assembly's eighthsession and stressed again the importance of uni-versal support of extra-budgetary programmes. Itrecommended that the Assembly should considermaking early provision for the continuation ofits work by a Committee of Member Govern-ments.

The report of the Negotiating Committee wasconsidered by the General Assembly at the 378thmeeting of its Fifth Committee on 24 Septemberand at the 451st plenary meeting on 5 October1953. Following a brief discussion, in which sev-eral representatives expressed appreciation of thework of the Negotiating Committee, the FifthCommittee unanimously adopted a joint draftresolution by Australia, Canada, Colombia, France,Haiti, Lebanon and the United States (A/C.5/-L.235) providing for the appointment of afurther Negotiating Committee with the sameterms of reference as the previous one. The draftresolution, as recommended by the Fifth Com-mittee (A/2491), was adopted by the GeneralAssembly without objection as resolution 759(VIII).

The President on the same day accordinglyappointed the following Member States to con-stitute the Committee: Australia, Canada, Chile,Colombia, France, Lebanon, Pakistan, the UnitedKingdom and the United States.

J. HEADQUARTERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS

1. Report of the Secretary-General

The General Assembly in resolution 663(VII)90 of 25 November 1952 asked the Sec-retary-General to submit to its eighth session afinal report on the construction of the Headquar-ters. The Secretary-General reported (A/2544)to the eighth session that it would not be possible,during that session, to present a final report due tounforeseen delays in the completion both of thework on the United Nations site itself and of theadditional work which the City of New York wascarrying out on the approaches to it.

Work remaining to be completed on the Head-quarters site, the Secretary-General reported, con-sisted for the most part of some minor phasesof the construction programme; certain adjust-ments in interior and exterior layouts requiredfor the better operation, maintenance and securityof the buildings; portions of the landscaping pro-

gramme; and the installation of artistic objects ofa decorative nature donated by Member States.

All the principal structures, the Secretary-Gen-eral reported, had been substantially completedand both the buildings and the garage areas werefully occupied. The remaining construction itemsincluded, among others: completion of the guardhouses on First Avenue at 43rd and 47th Streets;the installation of numerous illuminated and non-illuminated directional signs and bulletin boards;the installation of a complete security alarm systemproviding proper coverage of the entire group ofbuildings; interior painting; construction andinstallation of revolving doors at the north endof, and at the delegates' entrance to, the GeneralAssembly building; and completion of the podiumin the General Assembly hall. These items, he said,would not be completed until the spring of 1954.

90

See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 128


Work within the general area of Headquar-ters, for which the City of New York had assumedresponsibility, the Secretary-General stated, hadbeen proceeding simultaneously with the con-struction of the Headquarters itself. The FirstAvenue tunnel had been opened in the springof 1953, 42nd Street and 47th Street had beenwidened and beautified and similar improvementshad been carried out in the two park areas northand south of 42nd Street at the west side of FirstAvenue. The reconstruction of First Avenue aswell as the erection of the fence on the boundariesof the site were approaching completion. The Cityof New York had renamed First Avenue between42nd and 47th Streets "United Nations Plaza".The Franklin D. Roosevelt Drive, including theoverpasses from the Drive to First Avenue at 42ndand 48th Streets, had been realigned and rebuiltfrom 37th to 52nd Streets. The completion ofcertain adjacent work on the Headquarters sitewas delayed as a result of the delay in work whichthe City had undertaken, it was reported.

The landscaping of the north area, consistingof the rose gardens (containing some 1,500roses), flowering cherry trees (185), hawthorns,sweet gum and honey locust trees, together withground cover, would, the report stated, be sub-stantially completed in late 1953. The balance ofthe landscape work, namely, the area west of theLibrary at 42nd Street and west of the ventilatorat 43rd Street and First Avenue had been con-tracted for. The property line curbs and fencework, which tied in with the landscape pro-gramme, were progressing and should be com-pleted by the City of New York by the earlyspring of 1954.

The sinking of a cargo ship in the Spring of1953 just off the 46th Street Pier had delayed theconstruction work connected with the removal ofthat Pier. The Secretary-General stated that hehad been advised that the United States ArmyEngineers was preparing another contract forthe removal of the wreck and that it was expectedto complete this operation by the beginning of1954. The removal of the wreck would permitthe United Nations to proceed, early in theSpring of 1954, with the work it was obligatedto undertake with respect to the pier and bulkhead.

The Secretary-General stated that as of 30 Sep-tember 1953, approximately $67,000,000 had beenexpended, obligated or budgeted for the com-pletion of the Headquarters construction pro-gramme. It was anticipated that after the remain-ing work had been completed, an amount of notless than $1,000,000 out of the total of$68,000,000 budgeted for the construction of

Headquarters would be available for surrenderin 1954. These savings, he said, were the resultof determined efforts on the part of officialsresponsible for the construction of the Head-quarters in effecting all possible economies in theexpenditure of the funds available and in secur-ing advantageous settlement of contractors' claimsagainst the United Nations.

The non-interest-bearing loan of $65,000,000,made available by the United States Govern-ment for the construction of the Headquarters,the report stated, had been withdrawn in itsentirety by requisition and expended. A total of$3,500,000 had been repaid by the United Nationsto the United States Government. Withdrawalsagainst the supplementary request of $3,000,000to complete the construction of the Headquartershad been made in the amount of $1,500,000.

The procedure of clearing with the Board ofArt Advisers all matters relating to the selectionof art objects, decorative materials and gift offersremained in effect. A complete list of giftstogether with the names of the donors, would besubmitted in the final report to the Assembly.

The Secretary-General's report (A/2544) wasconsidered by the Assembly's Fifth Committee atits 405th meeting on 16 November 1953. Discus-sion in the Committee was concerned for themost part with the problem of providing moreadequate amenities and facilities for delegates,particularly during Assembly sessions. The rep-resentative of the Netherlands called attention tothe fact that there was no place in the Headquar-ters buildings where delegates could quietly write,read or hold private consultations without seriousdisturbance and interruption. The delegates'lounge, it was stated, had become, to all intentsand purposes, a public area and was thereforewholly unsuited to the working needs of delega-tions. Other representatives, in particular thoseof Chile and the United Kingdom, joined therepresentative of the Netherlands in expressingthe hope that urgent consideration would be givento ways and means of remedying the existingunsatisfactory situation without undue expense.Attention was also called to the overcrowded con-ditions prevailing in the delegates' dining roomand to the difficulty of access to it. The representa-tive of the Secretary-General assured the FifthCommittee that the views expressed and the sug-gestions made would be taken fully into account.

The representative of Belgium, supported by,among others, the representatives of Australia,Iran and the Union of South Africa, suggested thatthe practice, which appeared to have been discon-tinued, of holding regular meetings between rep-


resentatives of the Secretary-General and the Sec-retaries-General of permanent delegations mightusefully be revived. The Fifth Committee wasassured by the Secretary-General that arrangementswould be made to reconvene meetings betweenappropriate officials of the Secretariat and theSecretaries-General of the delegations.

The Committee, by 37 votes to none, with 5abstentions, adopted the draft resolution proposedby the Secretary-General in his report The USSRrepresentative explained his abstention as a protestagainst the fact that the expenditure originallyprovided for had been exceeded.

The draft resolution recommended by the FifthCommittee (A/2614) was adopted by the Gen-eral Assembly at its 471st plenary meeting on 9December, without discussion, by 55 votes to none,with 5 abstentions, as resolution 780(VIII).Under the resolution, the Assembly, after review-ing progress to date, called for a final report tobe submitted for its consideration at the ninthsession.

2. Question of the Enlargement ofthe Dining Room and Cafeteria

As a supplementary budgetary item (19(a)) ,the Secretary-General on 11 November 1953 sub-mitted a request (A/C.5/577) for an appropria-tion in 1954 of $565,000 for the enlargement ofthe dining room and cafeteria and the installationof additional means of access to them.

The need for increasing the capacity of thedining room and cafeteria, the Secretary-Generalexplained, had been apparent for some time, andhad been particularly evident during the Assem-bly's eighth session. In the dining room thedemand from various delegations for reservationshad been in excess of the seating capacities, and

in the cafeteria the serving and seating capacitieshad been found to be insufficient on many occa-sions especially on inclement days. The Secretary-General's proposals provided for an increase inseating capacity from 752 to 1,176 to be distrib-uted as follows: dining room, from 278 to 402;private dining rooms, from 64 to 166; and cafe-teria, from 410 to 608.

The Advisory Committee on Administrativeand Budgetary Questions in its 31st report to theeighth session of the General Assembly (A/2594)suggested possible alternatives to the Secretary-General's proposal, whereby the projected expend-itures might either be reduced in amount or bespread over a longer period.

Both reports were considered by the Fifth Com-mittee at its 424th meeting on 5 December. Mostrepresentatives recognized there was a need toimprove both the seating capacity in the existingdining room and cafeteria and the means ofaccess to them. Certain representatives, in par-ticular those of Belgium, Chile and Cuba, favouredpostponing consideration of the plan until a morethorough study had been undertaken. The Sec-retary-General explained that his proposals hadbeen formulated with the intention of coveringneeds up to the limits imposed by the structureof the part of the building involved. The carry-ing out of the construction work proposed wouldnot affect a more radical approach to the problemat a later date.

The estimate for the appropriation of $565,000under section 19(a), requested by the Secretary-General, was approved by the Fifth Committee by31 votes to 8, with 8 abstentions.

The General Assembly in approving the 1954budget at its 471st plenary meeting on 9 Decem-ber91 accepted the figure of $565,000 recom-mended by the Fifth Committee.

K. UNITED NATIONS POSTAL ADMINISTRATION

The United Nations Postal Administration,established as of 1 January 1951 by GeneralAssembly resolution 454(V)92 of 16 November1950, continued its operations throughout 1953.The working of the postal agreement entered intoby the United Nations and the United States con-tinued to function smoothly and relationshipswith the Universal Postal Union were in line withthe resolution adopted at its Congress on 8July 1953.93

The total gross revenue94 of the United NationsPostal Administration for 1953 was $392.537.23.

The sales counter in the General AssemblyBuilding at United Nations Headquarters during1953—its first full year of activity—handledapproximately 800,000 pieces of mail, and oper-

91 See pp. 93, 99.

93

In accordance with the agreement between theUnited Nations and the United States this revenue isderived solely from the sale of stamps for philatelicpurposes, revenue from stamps used for postage fromUnited Nations Headquarters being retained by theUnited States Post Office.

See Y.U.N., 1950, pp. 172-73. See Y.U.N., 1952, p. 129.

92

94


ated on a seven-day week basis to accommodatevisitors to Headquarters.

On 26 May 1953 a branch office of the UnitedNations Postal Administration was established atRussell Square House, Russell Square, London,W.C.1, England, for philatelic sale to countries inthe sterling area. The sale of United Nationsstamps for philatelic purposes at the EuropeanOffice of the United Nations at Geneva wascontinued.

During 1953, four new commemorative stampsand a 3¢ embossed envelope were issued.

The envelope was issued on 15 September intwo sizes—standard and legal. Its design showsthe emblem of the United Nations surrounded bythe lettering "United Nations Unies Postes—3cent-Postage," the background being blue, and theemblem and lettering white.

On 24 April, a stamp was issued to serve asa reminder of the continuing need for the protec-tion and care of refugees. The design depicts atypical refugee family, with the lettering "Protec-tion for Refugees—Protection des Refugiés". Thestamp was issued in the 3¢ (maroon) and 5¢(blue) denominations.

On 12 June, a stamp was issued in the 3¢(sepia) and 5¢ (blue) denominations in honourof the Universal Postal Union. The theme of thisstamp was an envelope superimposed on a mapof the world, the emblem of the United Nationsbeing used as a seal on the envelope.

On 24 October—United Nations Day—a com-memorative stamp drawing attention to the activ-ities of the United Nations in the field of technicalassistance to under-developed areas, was issued inthe 3¢ (grey) and 5¢ (jade green) denomina-tions. The stamp's design shows three cogwheelsenmeshed, with the central wheel encircling theemblem of the United Nations, and the words"Technical Assistance Technique" curved abovethe wheels.

On 10 December—Human Rights Day—a com-memorative stamp was issued in the 3¢ (blue)and the 5¢ (crimson) denominations. The designshows two hands reaching towards a flame whichis encircled by the words "Human Rights" in thefive official languages of the United Nations—English, French, Spanish, Russian and Chinese.The dates "10.XII 48-53" are shown inside thecircle made by the wording to mark the anniver-sary of the adoption of the Universal Declarationof Human Rights by the General Assembly on10 December 1948.

First day covers for these issues were servicedas follows:Refugee stamp—24 April . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

UPU stamp—12 June . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3¢ embossed envelope—15 September . . . . .United Nations Day stamp—24 October . . . .

Human Rights Day stamp—10 December . .

234,082

231,627102,278

229,211

265,186

In order to identify the cancellation of stampsaffixed to pieces of registered mail deposited atthe United Nations Post Office Station, agreementwas reached with the United States Post OfficeDepartment during 1953 for the use of the iden-tifying letters "U.N." and "N.Y." between theloops of the cancellation stamp used on registeredpieces of mail The first day of use of this can-cellation was 1 July.

The stamp programme for 1954 calls for thefollowing issues:11 February...

10 M a y . . . . . . .

25 October....

10 December..

3¢ and 8¢ stamp in honour of theactivities of the Food and AgricultureOrganization of the United Nations.

3¢ and 8¢ stamp in honour of thework of the International Labour Or-ganisation.

stamps in two denominations in honourof United Nations Day.

stamps in two denominations in honourof Human Rights Day.

I. Structure and Organization of the United...

Documents

Transcript of I. Structure and Organization of the United...