[ 1969 ] part 1 sec 3 chapter 2 the situation with regard...

626 TRUST AND NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES

measures had been taken to ensure that theinhabitants of the Territory did in fact havea completely free choice in the matter of theirultimate status He expressed reservations onthe recommendation concerning visiting mis-sions

The representative of the United States ex-pressed reservations concerning the considera-tion of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

by the Special Committee on the basis ofArticles 82 and 83 of the United NationsCharter which, inter alia, provide that functionsof the United Nations relating to strategic areasshall be exercised by the Security Council13

13 For texts of Articles 82 and 83 of Charter, seeAPPENDIX II

DOCUMENTARY REFERENCES

TRUSTEESHIP COUNCIL——36TH SESSION

Plenary Meetings 1347-1354

Twenty-first Annual Report to United Nations onAdministration of Pacific Islands, 1 July 1967 to30 June 1968, transmitted by United States ofAmerica to United Nations pursuant to Article 88of Charter of United Nations Department of StatePublication 8464, International Organization andConference Series 85, United States GovernmentPrinting Office, 1969, Washington, D C

T/1694 (S/9223) Note by Secretary-General trans-mitting report of United States on Trust Territoryof Pacific Islands for period 1 July 1967-30 June1968

T/L 1144 and Add 1, 2 Conditions in Trust Terri-tory of Pacific Islands Working paper preparedby Secretariat

T/L 1148 Report of Drafting Committee, adoptedby Council on 19 June 1969, meeting 1354, by 4votes to 1, with United States not participatingin vote

T/L 1149 Draft report of Trusteeship Council toSecurity Council, adopted by Trusteeship Councilon 19 June 1969, meeting 1354, by 5 votes to 1

T/L 1151 Observations of Council members repre-senting their individual opinions only

T/PV1342-1354/Corr Verbatim records of 1342nd-1354th meetings Consolidated corrigendum

S/9400 Report of Trusteeship Council to SecurityCouncil on Trust Territory of Pacific Islands (20June 1968-19 June 1969)

A/7604 Report of Trusteeship Council to GeneralAssembly, Part I: Chapters I-V

OTHER DOCUMENTST/1701 Letter of 24 June 1969 from Japan

Special Committee on Situation with regard to Im-plementation of Declaration on Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, meet-ings 659, 718, 719

A/7623/Rev 1 Report of Special Committee (cover-ing its work during 1969), Chapter XIX

[See also DOCUMENTARY REFERENCES above, pp612-13, for section on Visiting Mission to Trust Terri-tory of Pacific Islands ]

CHAPTER II

THE SITUATION WITH REGARD TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OFTHE DECLARATION ON THE GRANTING OF INDEPENDENCE

TO COLONIAL COUNTRIES AND PEOPLES

During 1969, the General Assembly's SpecialCommittee on the Situation with regard tothe Implementation of the Declaration on theGranting of Independence to Colonial Coun-tries and Peoples continued to discharge itsmandate as set forth by the General Assembly,and to seek suitable means for the immediateand full implementation of the Declaration1 interritories that had not yet attained independ-ence

The Special Committee held 79 plenarymeetings between 13 February and 2 December1968, during which it examined and maderecommendations on the implementation of theDeclaration with respect to individual territoriesand other related questions

1See Y U N , 1960, pp 49-50, resolution 1514(XV), for text of the Declaration on the Granting ofIndependence to Colonial Countries and Peoples

DECLARATION ON INDEPENDENCE FOR COLONIAL COUNTRIES AND PEOPLES 627In this chapter an account is given of the

Special Committee's work in general during1969 and the consideration of its report by theGeneral Assembly Following that, details aregiven of the Special Committee's and the Gen-eral Assembly's consideration of, and recom-mendations on, special questions relating to theimplementation of the Declaration on grant-

ing independence and to individual territoriesDetails of the action taken in 1969 by the

General Assembly, the Special Committee andother bodies on matters concerning SouthernRhodesia, Namibia, the territories under Por-tuguese administration and Oman will be foundin other chapters (see pp 112-34, 675-701 and702-13)

GENERAL QUESTIONS

SYSTEM OF EXAMINATIONDuring 1969, the General Assembly's Special

Committee on the Situation with regard to theImplementation of the Declaration on theGranting of Independence to Colonial Countriesand Peoples continued to use the methods ofwork developed in preceding years and endorsedby the General Assembly

Under this procedure, it examined specialquestions relating to the implementation of theDeclaration It also examined the implementa-tion in individual territories, the order ofpriority being decided on the basis of recom-mendations made by its Working Group

To assist in its examination of conditions ineach teriitory, the Special Committee normallyhas before it an information paper prepared bythe United Nations Secretariat describing recentpolitical and constitutional developments, aswell as current economic, social and educationalconditions This information is derived frompublished sources and, in relevant cases, fromthe information transmitted by administeringpowers under Article 73e of the United NationsCharter2

In addition, the Special Committee requeststhe administering powers to submit informationon political and constitutional developments inthe territories they administer The Committeehears statements from the administering powers,inviting those not members of the Committeeto participate in its examination of the ter-ritories concerned Petitions are circulated andthe Committee may decide to hear petitionersat its meetings (Reservations concerning theseprocedures have been expressed by the UnitedKingdom and the United States )

The Special Committee adopts its recom-mendations in the form of a consensus for-

mulated by its Chairman or by means of aresolution adopted by vote The Special Com-mittee is empowered by the General Assemblyto send out visiting missions to territories inco-operation with administering powers (Thisprocedure has also been the subject of reserva-tions expressed in the Special Committee bythe United Kingdom and the United States )The Special Committee establishes sub-com-mittees whenever it considers them necessary

Each year, the Special Committee adopts areport to the General Assembly which includesseparate chapters on the situation in eachterritory or group of territories which it hasconsidered, as well as on special questions whichit has decided to take up separately It is on thebasis of this report that the Assembly considersthe implementation of the Declaration in gen-eral, special questions relating to the implemen-tation of the Declaration and implementation ofthe Declaration in individual territories

(For membership of Special Committee in1969, see APPENDIX III )

GENERAL ASPECTSOF IMPLEMENTATIONOP DECLARATION

CONSIDERATION BY SPECIAL COMMITTEE

During 1969, the Special Committee con-sidered the implementation of the Declarationon the Granting of Independence to ColonialCountries and Peoples3 in its general aspectsand also with respect to the following territories:Southern Rhodesia, Namibia, territories under

2For text of article 73e of the Charter, seeAPPENDIX II

3See footnote 1.


Portuguese administration, the Seychelles, St.Helena, Ifni and Spanish Sahara, Gibraltar,French Somaliland,4 Fiji, Oman, the Gilbertand Ellice Islands, Pitcairn, the Solomon Islands,Niue, the Tokelau Islands, the New Hebrides,Guam, American Samoa, the Trust Territoryof the Pacific Islands, Papua and the TrustTerritory of New Guinea, the Cocos (Keeling)Islands, Brunei, Hong Kong, Antigua, Domi-nica, Grenada, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St.Lucia, St. Vincent, the United States VirginIslands, Bermuda, the Bahamas, the Turks andCaicos Islands, the Cayman Islands, Montser-rat, the British Virgin Islands, the FalklandIslands (Malvinas) and British Honduras.

The Special Committee also continued tostudy several special questions, namely: theactivities of foreign economic and other interestsin Southern Rhodesia, Namibia and the ter-ritories under Portuguese administration andall other territories under colonial domination,and efforts to eliminate colonialism, apartheidand racial discrimination in southern Africa(see below, pp. 641-42); the question of theimplementation of the Declaration by thespecialized agencies and international institu-tions associated with the United Nations (seebelow pp. 635-37); the question of militaryactivities and arrangements by colonial powersin territories under their administration (seebelow pp. 629-31); and the question of send-ing visiting missions to the territories (see below,pp. 631-34).

In addition, the Special Committee con-tinued to study the information on non-self-governing territories transmitted under Article73e of the United Nations Charter (see below,pp. 713-15).

To facilitate the work of the Special Com-mittee, consideration of the territories was againdivided among several sub-committees. As inprevious years, Sub-Committee I was responsiblefor the Seychelles and St. Helena and for thespecial economic and military studies; Sub-Committee II for the Pacific territories; andSub-Committee III for territories in the Carib-bean. The Sub-Committees on Fiji and Omanwere also maintained. During 1969, the Sub-Committee on Petitions considered 117 com-munications, 109 of which it decided tocirculate as petitions. These petitions included

18 requests for hearings which were recom-mended to the Special Committee for approval.

The Special Committee held a further seriesof meetings away from United Nations Head-quarters during May. These meetings took placeat: Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of theCongo; Lusaka, Zambia; and Dar-es-Salaam,United Republic of Tanzania. Representativesof the national liberation movements who ad-dressed the Special Committee at these meet-ings furnished information on the situationin southern Africa.

In its report to the 1969 session of the Gen-eral Assembly, the Special Committee notedthat Mauritius, Swaziland and EquatorialGuinea had attained independence; that agree-ment had been reached between the Govern-ments of Spain and Morocco regarding thefuture of the territory of Ifni; and that someconstitutional progress had been achieved incertain of the dependent territories. The major-ity of Committee members nevertheless felt thatthe complete achievement of the goals laiddown for colonial peoples in the United NationsCharter and in the Declaration on the Grant-ing of Independence to Colonial Countriesand Peoples had been delayed and that, inregard to several territories, it was far fromearly or peaceful realization. In particular, sev-eral members felt that the problems afflictingsouthern Africa represented the most seriouschallenge to the collective will of the UnitedNations to eliminate the last vestiges of colonialrule.

The Special Committee gave particular at-tention to the small territories, as requested bythe General Assembly. The majority of Com-mittee members felt that owing to inaction onthe part of the administering powers, littlesignificant progress had been made towardsfull participation by the indigenous inhabitantsin the management of their own affairs. Despitethe problems unique to small territories, suchas population and the prospects for economicviability, the peoples concerned remained

4 The new designation of the territory is "FrenchTerritory of the Afars and the Issas." This designa-tion was introduced in United Nations terminology asfrom 15 April 1968, at the request of the administer-ing power.

DECLARATION ON INDEPENDENCE FOR COLONIAL COUNTRIES AND PEOPLES 629

entitled to self-determination and independencein accordance with the Charter and the De-claration on the granting of independence.

It was the responsibility of the administeringpowers, these Committee members indicated,to encourage discussion on the alternatives opento the people of those territories and to ensurethat any decisions regarding their future politicalstatus be based on the full and free expressionof their views.

The Special Committee reiterated its beliefin the desirability of active participation by theUnited Nations in the processes involved inthe exercise by these peoples of their right toself-determination. In addition, most membersagreed on the need for the administering powersto take action to strengthen the weak economicinfrastructure of these territories and to vigor-ously promote their social and economic devel-opment, in the interests of the indigenouspeople, not for the benefit of foreign economicinterests.

The question of the publicity to be given tothe work of the United Nations in the field ofdecolonization was considered again in 1969by the Special Committee. The Committee feltthat a sharply focused information effort wouldbe of invaluable assistance in mobilizing worldpublic opinion. Members generally agreed toinvite the Secretary-General to ensure that theprogramme of publications and other informa-tion activities envisaged by the Office of Pub-lic Information concerning decolonization shouldbe carried out as soon as possible. The Com-mittee also took preliminary decisions concerningthe documentation to be prepared by it for dis-semination in connexion with the tenth an-niversary, in 1970, of the Declaration on thegranting of independence.

The Special Committee maintained contactwith other United Nations organs—the Secu-rity Council, the Trusteeship Council, theEconomic and Social Council, the Special Com-mittee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Gov-ernment of the Republic of South Africa, theUnited Nations Council for Namibia, the Com-mittee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimina-tion, and the specialized agencies and inter-national institutions associated with the UnitedNations.

In accordance with a General Assembly

resolution of 20 December 19685 asking theSpecial Committee to make more concretesuggestions to assist the Security Council inconsidering appropriate measures under theCharter with regard to developments in colonialterritories likely to threaten international peaceand security, the Special Committee madespecific recommendations to the Security Coun-cil on 19 March, 22 May and 3 July 1969 withregard to Namibia; on 10 June 1969 with regardto the situation in Southern Rhodesia; and on24 June 1969 regarding the deteriorating situa-tion in the territories under Portuguese admin-istration as well as the serious consequences ofthe assistance provided by Portugal to the illegalregime in Southern Rhodesia.

MILITARY ACTIVITIES AND ARRANGEMENTS

During 1969, the Special Committee requestedits Sub-Committee I to continue to study thequestion of military activities and arrangementsby colonial powers in territories under theiradministration which might be impeding theimplementation of the Declaration on the grant-ing of independence. The Sub-Committee'sconclusions and recommendations were adoptedby the Special Committee on 29 October 1969by 16 votes to 2, with 3 abstentions.

The Special Committee thereby concludedthat the structure, objectives and purposes ofmilitary establishments in colonial countriesremained essentially the same as those outlinedthe previous year. It noted with regret thatnone of the States responsible for the administra-tion of the more than 16 colonial territories hadcomplied with General Assembly resolutionsrequesting them to dismantle their military basesand installations in these territories and torefrain from establishing new ones, and thatin fact military activities had actually increased,posing a continuing threat to international peaceand security.

The Special Committee drew particular at-tention to the situation in southern Africa, wherethe Governments of Portugal and South Africaand the illegal regime in Southern Rhodesiawere strengthening their military hold over the

5 See Y.U.N., 1968, pp. 730-32, text of resolution2465 (XXIII).


African territories and peoples under theircontrol, both individually and in co-operationwith each other. The Committee noted thatSouth African forces had joined their Rhodesianand Portuguese counterparts in the fighting onall fronts in southern Africa, creating a formid-able threat to the independence and territorialintegrity of neighbouring African States andgiving further evidence of their military ententeand intensive co-operation against the libera-tion movements. Petitioners who addressed theCommittee in 1969 had stressed that theseregimes were receiving military and economicsupport from various Western countries, all ofwhich were members of the North AtlanticTreaty Organization (NATO).

In the case of the smaller territories, theSpecial Committee considered it obvious thatthe military installations maintained by thecolonial powers went far beyond the defencerequirements of those territories and that theywere directed against third parties in the globalmilitary strategy of the colonial powers and theirallies.

On the basis of the above information, theSpecial Committee wished to emphasize inparticular that military activities, in additionto threatening international peace and security,presented a serious impediment to the imple-mentation of the Declaration and affectedadversely the economic, social and politicaladvancement of the territories. These activitieshad also resulted in considerable alienation ofthe land and natural resources of colonialpeople.

The Special Committee condemned onceagain the military entente between the Govern-ments of South Africa and Portugal and theillegal racist minority regime of SouthernRhodesia aimed at suppressing by armed forcethe inalienable right of the people of the areato self-determination and independence. Itcalled once again upon all States to withhold allsupport and assistance, including the supply ofarms and military equipment, to those regimes.

The Special Committee also deplored theattitude of all States responsible for the admin-istration of colonial and Trust Territories whichhad not complied with General Assembly resolu-tions requesting them to dismantle their militarybases and installations. It requested all States

concerned to comply with these resolutions un-conditionally. The Committee once againrequested the colonial powers to cease forth-with alienating land belonging to the peopleof the territories for the construction of militarybases and installations and to return such landalready alienated to its rightful owners and alsoto desist from utilizing the economic resourcesand manpower of the territories for the further-ance of military activities against the legitimateinterests of the colonial people.

The representative of the United Statesreiterated his Government's serious objectionsto the conclusions and recommendations con-tained in the report of Sub-Committee I. Ad-dressing himself specifically to the Sub-Com-mittee's comments concerning the Trust Ter-ritory of the Pacific Islands, he drew attentionto the Trusteeship Agreement between theUnited States and the Security Council whichclearly set out the right of the AdministeringAuthority to establish such installations as mightbe required for the maintenance of internationalpeace and security.

The United States representative also drewattention to Article 83 of the United NationsCharter which reserved the right to alter oramend the Trusteeship Agreement to the Secu-rity Council.6 Consequently, he stated, neitherthe Special Committee nor the General As-sembly had the right to be seized of any amend-ment affecting a strategic area such as the TrustTerritory of the Pacific Islands. It followedtherefore that any provisions of the report whichran contrary to any agreement between theSecurity Council and the United States concern-ing the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islandswere invalid and without force.

The representative of the United Kingdom,after reiterating that in his Government's viewthe question of military activities in colonialterritories was irrelevant to the main work ofthe Special Committee and outside its com-petence, noted that the report suffered from thesame defects as its predecessors: sweepinggeneralizations, over-statement and distortiondesigned to disseminate the propaganda of a

6 For text of Article 83 of the Charter, see APPEN-DIX II.


Committee member vis-a-vis the Westernpowers.

Italy, Iran, the Ivory Coast and Venezuelastated that they continued to maintain thereservations expressed during debates on thisquestion in previous years.

The representative of the USSR rejected thestatements by the United States and the UnitedKingdom as attempts to undermine the fact thatthe military activities of the colonial powers interritories under their administration impededthe implementation of the Declaration. This wasparticularly apparent in southern Africa butwas also so in the smaller colonial territories.Guam, for instance, he said, was being used asthe main base for bombers operating over Viet-Nam, and other United States Pacific territorieswere being used for military purposes. It wasclear that the United States presence in thoseterritories was subordinated to the single purposeof the maintenance of its military and strategicplans. In this connexion, he drew attention toa statement by a United States military spokes-man that whatever future form of governmentmight be established in the Trust Territory ofthe Pacific Islands, the United States wouldcontinue to bear responsibility for the securityof the area.

The USSR rejected the argument that be-cause the Trust Territory was a strategic areano organ of the United Nations, apart from theSecurity Council, could consider these matters.Other provisions of the United NationsCharter were equally applicable, he said, in-cluding those that spoke of the objective ofpromoting the advancement of the inhabitantsand their progressive development towardsself-government or independence.

VISITING MISSIONS

The question of visiting missions was con-sidered by the Special Committee in 1969 onthe basis of a report by the Chairman on hisconsultations with the administering powers.

The Chairman reported that Australia hadstated that its position on the sending of visit-ing missions by the Special Committee was un-changed. The Australian Government did notconsider it desirable for missions from the Com-mittee to visit territories under its administra-tion. Australia recalled in this connexion that

it had not voted in favour of a General As-sembly decision of 20 December 1968 urgingadministering powers to permit access of visit-ing missions to colonial territories.7

New Zealand had advised that its views onthe question remained unchanged. It had beenthe consistent view of New Zealand that UnitedNations visiting missions could have a con-structive role to play in the development of non-self-governing territories and particularly inverifying acts of self-determination on behalfof the international community. In keepingwith these views, New Zealand authorities hadnot excluded the possibility of a visit, or visits,to Niue and the Tokelau Islands by a UnitedNations visiting mission before the right of self-determination was exercised. In the meantime,however, the New Zealand Government con-sidered that it might appear to be paying undueattention to two of the smallest non-self-govern-ing territories if a mission were to be sent ex-clusively to Niue and the Tokelau Islands. Itaccordingly felt that it would be appropriatefor a mission to visit those territories at thepresent stage only if such a visit were to formpart of a more comprehensive tour of the entirearea.

The representative of the United Kingdomhad stated that, as his Government had pre-viously informed the Special Committee, thequestion of visiting missions raised difficultproblems of principle and the United Kingdomcould give no encouragement to the Committeeto expect any change in its attitude. While hisGovernment could not at the present stage com-mit itself to responding favourably to anyspecific request to permit the sending of a visit-ing mission to any particular territory, it wouldgive the most serious consideration to the viewsof the Special Committee.

The representative of the United States hadstated that his Government had given carefulconsideration to the representations made bythe Chairman on behalf of the Special Com-mittee. However, the United States remainedof the view that visiting missions to the ter-ritories under the administration of the UnitedStates were not warranted at the present time.

7 See footnote 5.


During the Special Committee's discussion ofvisiting missions, the representatives of India,Madagascar, Poland, Syria, the USSR, theUnited Republic of Tanzania, and Yugoslaviaexpressed regret at the negative or qualifiedresponses given by the administering powers.Other Committee members, including Vene-zuela and Iran, shared this view and emphasizedthe importance of visiting missions, not only inenabling the Special Committee to secureadequate and first-hand information about thesituation in a particular territory, but also infacilitating the process of decolonization.

On 15 August 1969, the Special Committee,after noting with deep regret the responses ofthe administering powers and reaffirming theimportance of visiting missions to colonial ter-ritories as a means of obtaining first-hand in-formation on the territories and the wishes ofthe people, expressed regret that its efforts tosend such visiting missions had been persistentlyfrustrated by the administering powers andurged the latter to reconsider their attitudes andpermit access to the territories under theiradministration.

These views were set forth in a resolutionadopted by a roll-call vote of 17 to O, with 4abstentions.

Norway said, that, while it favoured the send-ing of visiting missions, it had abstained in thevote because the draft resolution contained somephrases which might not appear conducive tofuture consultations.

Explaining its abstention, the United Statespointed out that it carried out the administrationof its territories in a completely open manner.The territories enjoyed a free press, thousands ofpeople of all nationalities visited them each year,and their people elected their legislature by dem-ocratic methods. Their progress towards self-determination had been steady and continuing.This had been achieved without any necessityfor the presence of a visiting mission.

The United Kingdom made a similar state-ment explaining its abstention. Its representativechallenged the contention that visiting missionswere essential in order to establish the factsabout a territory. He pointed out that therewas a wealth of information available aboutthe United Kingdom territories, both officialand non-official.

CONSIDERATION BY GENERAL ASSEMBLY

General aspects of the question of the im-plementation of the Declaration on the Grant-ing of Independence to Colonial Countries andPeoples were considered by the General As-sembly at plenary meetings held between 4 and11 December 1969.

The General Assembly had before it the 1969report of the Special Committee on the Situa-tion with regard to the Implementation of theDeclaration on the Granting of Independenceto Colonial Countries and Peoples. Chaptersof the Special Committee's report dealing withthe situations in specific territories were referredto the Fourth Committee. Those relating to themilitary activities and arrangements by colonialpowers in territories under their administrationand to the question of sending visiting missionsto territories were discussed at the plenarymeetings.

In the course of the general debate, all rep-resentatives regretfully agreed that the pace ofdecolonization had been greatly retarded in thepast few years and that the situation in southernAfrica in particular had deteriorated.

A number of speakers, including those rep-resenting Hungary, India, Sudan, the UkrainianSSR, the USSR and Yugoslavia, felt thatWestern countries, despite their statements tothe contrary, were responsible for perpetuatingthe situation and were providing military andeconomic support to the Governments of SouthAfrica, Portugal and the illegal regime in South-ern Rhodesia so that their economic interestsand monopolies in the area could continue toprofit.

These speakers urged the General Assemblyto ensure that all Member States complied withUnited Nations resolutions calling for a halt tothe supply of arms to South Africa and Portugal,as well as a severance of all trade and othereconomic relations with those countries.

The representative of India maintained thatarms were being supplied to South Africa andPortugal despite known facts about the use towhich they were put—namely, the suppressionof the African peoples of Namibia, SouthernRhodesia, Angola and Mozambique. He ad-vocated the imposition of sanctions againstSouth Africa as one of the most effective waysof dealing with the problem.


Yugoslavia's spokesman believed that, deplor-able as was the economic oppression of theAfrican population, racialism was the mostpotentially dangerous aspect of the situation insouthern Africa. The African people were beingforced to fight for their legitimate rights througharmed struggle which might lead to a conflictof broader dimensions threatening the independ-ence and territorial integrity of many AfricanStates. He urged that the Security Councilbe encouraged to take a more active role inextending material assistance to the liberationmovements and to prevail upon certain Mem-ber States to refrain from co-operating with thecolonial and racist regimes.

Support for the liberation movements andrecognition of their accomplishment were alsoexpressed by the representatives of Romania andthe USSR. The USSR urged that the UnitedNations increase its aid to these movements and,more important, ensure that the lawfulness ofthe struggle be recognized as an inalienableform of modern international law.

The representative of the United Kingdomfelt that the situation in southern Africa, exceptfor the territories under Portuguese administra-tion, was racial rather than colonial, and thatto regard these problems as merely colonialwould be to fail to comprehend the full measureof their threat to the world. The United King-dom was doing all it could under recentcircumstances in southern Africa, having bannedthe export of arms to South Africa and havingtaken the lead in imposing and maintainingsanctions against Southern Rhodesia.

Regarding the 30 small colonial territories—with a total population of 4 million—17 ofwhich were under British administration, theUnited Kingdom representative believed that togrant immediate independence, irrespective ofpractical and varied difficulties, some of whichmight be impossible to overcome, did not seemto comply with the principle in the UnitedNations Charter that the interests of the in-habitants of non-self-governing territories wasparamount in determining their future. To solvethe problem was a worthy task for the inter-national community.

Somalia argued that the particular problemsof the small territories should not be used asa reason to prevent the peoples concerned from

exercising their right to self-determination. Itbelieved that free and public discussion of thevarious alternatives should be encouraged, sothat when the time came, the people of thesmall territories would be able to exercise theirright to self-determination in full knowledgeof the alternatives.

The representative of Sudan believed thatthe small territories were being used primarilyas military bases in a global strategy deployedby colonialists to strike at liberation movementsoutside and inside the colonial territories.

Indonesia, on the other hand, felt that thepresence of military bases and installations wasoften a reflection of a desire to exercise theinherent right of collective self-defence againstpotential aggressors. Since such bases couldalso be used against national liberationaspirations, however, Indonesia hoped that suchmeasures of collective self-defence would nolonger be necessary.

The lack of direct participation by the UnitedNations in the process of self-determination incolonial territories was raised by India, whichfelt that, while it was not the duty of the UnitedNations to impose any preconceived politicalsolutions on colonial peoples, only the GeneralAssembly, in consultation with the administer-ing power, could determine whether the pro-visions of the Declaration on the granting ofindependence had been carried out or not. Noadministering power should be permitted todecide such an important question unilaterally.

Most Members felt that despite the lack ofprogress during recent years, the end of thecolonial era was inevitable. In this connexion,Indonesia said it was increasingly recognizedthat colonialism and economic progress wereincompatible; gradually, the hostile relation-ships which characterized the past would bereplaced by co-operation towards mutualprosperity and complete independence.

Uruguay also felt that independence wouldbe attained by the remaining colonial countries,and warned that these goals should not be lookedat as an end in themselves, but as a means toachieve political, economic, cultural and spiritualfreedom for each individual.

Pakistan urged Members not to give way tofeelings of impotence regarding decolonizationjust at a time when the specialized agencies

TRUST AND NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES634

were playing an increasing role and advanceswere being made in the development of political,administrative and economic cadres among thesubjugated people.

Other Member States felt that the UnitedNations lack of progress in decolonizationresulted from a general lack of commitment bythe major powers and urged those powers toco-operate more fully with the purposes of theDeclaration on the granting of independence.Thus, said Chile, while some States becameincreasingly convinced that the serious situationwould be solved by harsh words and unrealisticsolutions, those States with the most influence,power and resources remained uncommitted tothe cause.

The representative of Venezuela similarlycommented that while the major powers ad-vocated well-balanced and practical solutions,they hindered such progress by refusing totransmit adequate information on non-self-gov-erning territories or to admit visiting missionsto their own territories.

On 11 December 1969, the General Assemblytook a series of decisions concerning the imple-mentation of the Declaration. The Assemblythereby:

(1) reaffirmed its resolution of 14 December1960 (1514(XV)) and all its other resolutionson the question of decolonization;

(2) approved the report of the Special Com-mittee and its programme of work for 1970;

(3) urged all States, in particular the admin-istering powers, to give effect to the recommend-ations of the Special Committee;

(4) declared that the continuation of colonialrule threatened international peace and securityand that the practice of apartheid and all formsof racial discrimination constituted a crimeagainst humanity;

(5) reaffirmed the legitimacy of the struggleof colonial peoples to exercise their right to self-determination and independence, noted withsatisfaction the progress made by national libera-tion movements, both through their struggleand through reconstruction programmes, andurged all States to provide moral and materialassistance to them;

(6) requested all States, as well as thespecialized agencies and international institu-tions, to withhold assistance of any kind from

the Governments of Portugal and South Africaand from the illegal racist minority regime inSouthern Rhodesia until they renounced theirpolicy of colonial domination and racial dis-crimination;

(7) reiterated its declaration that the practiceof using mercenaries against national liberationmovements was a punishable criminal act andthat mercenaries themselves were outlaws, andcalled upon the Governments of all countriesto enact legislation declaring the recruitment,financing and training of mercenaries in theirterritory to be a punishable offence andprohibiting their nationals from serving asmercenaries;

(8) requested the colonial powers to dismantletheir military bases and installations in colonialterritories without further delay and to refrainfrom establishing new ones;

(9) condemned the policies pursued by certaincolonial powers of imposing non-representativeregimes and constitutions, strengthening theposition of foreign economic and other interests,misleading world public opinion and encourag-ing the systematic influx of foreign immigrantswhile evicting, displacing and transferring theindigenous inhabitants to other areas;

(10) requested the Special Committee tocontinue to seek suitable means for the im-mediate and full implementation of the Declara-tion on the granting of independence in allterritories not yet independent, and in particularto formulate specific proposals for the elimina-tion of the remaining manifestations of co-lonialism ;

(11) requested the Special Committee tomake concrete suggestions which could assistthe Security Council in considering appropriatemeasures under the United Nations Charter withregard to developments in colonial territorieswhich were likely to threaten internationalpeace and security, and recommended that theCouncil take such suggestions fully into con-sideration ;

(12) requested the Special Committee tocontinue to examine the compliance of MemberStates with the Declaration on the granting ofindependence and with other relevant resolu-tions on the question of decolonization,particularly those relating to the territoriesunder Portuguese domination, Southern Rho-


desia and Namibia, and to report to the GeneralAssembly at its twenty-fifth (1970) session;

(13) invited the Special Committee to con-tinue to pay particular attention to the smallterritories and to recommend to the GeneralAssembly the most appropriate methods andsteps to be taken to enable the populationsof those territories to exercise fully their rightto self-determination and independence;

(14) urged the administering powers to co-operate fully with the Special Committee bypermitting visiting missions to the colonial ter-ritories in order to secure first-hand informationand to ascertain the wishes and aspirations ofthe inhabitants;

(15) requested the Secretary-General, as sug-gested by the Special Committee, to continue totake concrete measures through all the mediaat his disposal, including publications, radio andtelevision, to give widespread and continuouspublicity to the work of the United Nations inthe field of decolonization, to the situation inthe colonial territories and to the continuingstruggle for liberation being waged by the co-lonial peoples and requested Member States toco-operate with the Secretary-General in promot-ing the large-scale dissemination of this infor-mation.

(For text of resolution, see DOCUMENTARYREFERENCES below.)

The Assembly took these decisions in adoptingresolution 2548 (XXIV) by a vote of 78 to 5,with 16 abstentions.

The sponsors of the resolution were the fol-lowing 20 Member States: Afghanistan, Alge-ria, Burundi, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iraq,Mali, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, SierraLeone, Southern Yemen, Sudan, Syria, theUnited Arab Republic, the United Republicof Tanzania, Yemen, Yugoslavia and Zambia.

The representatives of Argentina, Greece,Mexico, Spain and Turkey, although voting forthe resolution as a whole, expressed reservationsto certain paragraphs of the text, stating, amongother things, that certain paragraphs interfereddirectly or indirectly with the responsibilities ofthe Security Council.

The representative of Argentina also made ageneral reservation concerning the resolution.He pointed out that the text was not verydifferent from that adopted the previous year

and that the previous resolution had notproduced any changes in the colonial situation.He therefore feared that the present resolutionwas not fully accepted and would not becomplied with by many States, particularly theadministering powers. The end of colonialism,he said, was a legitimate aspiration of the in-ternational community and, therefore, themethod used to put it to an end must be sharedby all if it were to be effective.

IMPLEMENTATION OF DECLARATIONBY SPECIALIZED AGENCIESAND INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

CONSIDERATION BY SPECIAL COMMITTEE

As requested by the General Assembly on 18December 1968,8 the Special Committee on theSituation with regard to the Implementationof the Declaration on the Granting of Independ-ence to Colonial Countries and Peoples againexamined, in 1969, the question of the im-plementation of the Declaration on the grantingof independence by the specialized agencies andthe international institutions associated withthe United Nations.

The Special Committee discussed the ques-tion during the period 3 July to 2 October1969. Among other things, it had before it areport by the Secretary-General which the Gen-eral Assembly had requested. This reportcontained the replies the Secretary-General hadreceived from the following specialized agenciesand international institutions in response to hisrequest for suggestions regarding the best waysand means of achieving the full and speedyimplementation of the relevant Assembly resolu-tions on the implementation of the Declarationon the granting of independence: the Inter-national Labour Organisation (ILO) ; the Foodand Agriculture Organization (FAO) ; the UnitedNations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization (UNESCO) ; the World HealthOrganization (WHO) ; the International Bankfor Reconstruction and Development; the In-ternational Monetary Fund; the InternationalCivil Aviation Organization (ICAO) ; the Uni-



versal Postal Union (UPU) ; the InternationalTelecommunication Union (ITU); the WorldMeteorological Organization (WMO) ; the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organiz-ation (IMCO) ; the United Nations Conferenceon Trade and Development (UNCTAD) ; theUnited Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) ; theUnited Nations Development Programme(UNDP) ; the Office of United Nations HighCommissioner for Refugees; the World FoodProgramme (WFP) ; the League of Arab States;and the Organization of American States.

The Secretary-General reported that, in ac-cordance with a decision reached by the Admin-istrative Committee on Co-ordination (ACC),the United Nations High Commissioner forRefugees had arranged a meeting in January1969 with members of the United Nationsfamily on projects that were being developedfor the benefit of refugees in Africa; the con-clusions and recommendations adopted at themeeting had been endorsed by ACC later in 1969.Also, at the 1969 session of ACC, consultationshad been held on the implementation of theGeneral Assembly resolution of 18 December1968 and other relevant resolutions; a report onthe results of these consultations would be sub-mitted to the Assembly.

On 20 August 1969, the Chairman of theSpecial Committee informed the Committeethat, in accordance with the General Assembly'sdecision of 18 December 1968, he had consultedwith the President of the Economic and SocialCouncil concerning the implementation of theDeclaration on the granting of independenceby the specialized agencies and the internationalinstitutions associated with the United Nations.He had expressed the Special Committee's ap-preciation for the serious efforts made by anumber of specialized agencies and internationalinstitutions to find ways of implementing theDeclaration within the scope of their respectiveactivities. It had been agreed that the Councilmight invite the specialized agencies to par-ticipate fully in the discussion at the Council'smid-1969 session on the question of further co-ordination measures in implementing the rele-vant General Assembly resolutions.

The Chairman had expressed the hope thatthe specialized agencies and international in-stitutions, in co-operation with the United

Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, wouldincrease their assistance to refugees from colonialterritories, including assistance to the Govern-ments concerned in the preparation and execu-tion of projects beneficial to such refugees.

The Chairman reported he had stressed thatin order to facilitate the working out of concreteprogrammes of assistance, as envisaged by theGeneral Assembly, recourse should be had tothe establishment of relationship agreements orother special arrangements with the Organiza-tion of African Unity (OAU).

Finally, the Chairman had suggested that theexecutive heads of the agencies should be in-vited to bring to the attention of their govern-ing bodies any specific problems they might beencountering in their efforts to give effect to therelevant General Assembly resolutions, so as toenable the States members of those bodies totake the necessary action. It had been agreedthat it might be desirable for the Council togive continuing attention to the question andfor the President to maintain contacts with theChairman of the Special Committee.

During the discussion in the Special Com-mittee, the representatives of Bulgaria, India,Syria and the United Republic of Tanzania,among others, said it might be desirable to givethe specialized agencies the necessary clarifica-tions and guidelines to help them decide howbest to give effect to the relevant resolutionsof the General Assembly. In that connexion,since the colonial authorities would oppose anyform of assistance to the peoples of the ter-ritories under their domination, ways had to befound to assist the liberation movements inthose territories. This, they felt, could beachieved through OAU. In any case, the Com-mittee had to be informed of the specific prob-lems the specialized agencies were facing inorder to find a solution and to ensure the uni-form implementation throughout the UnitedNations system of the decisions of the GeneralAssembly.

Speaking on this aspect of the question,Venezuela expressed the opinion that the prob-lem was one of co-ordination, which, since thespecialized agencies were ready to co-operate,could be solved through meetings of the ex-ecutive heads of the various agencies. Con-sequently, the Committee's duty was to achieve


some means of action that would enable theagencies to implement fully the relevant resolu-tions of the General Assembly.

Subsequently, the Special Committee endorsedthe report of the Chairman on his consultationswith the President of the Economic and SocialCouncil, recommending that the specializedagencies and international institutions concernedshould give effect to the suggestions outlinedtherein. The Committee recommended that thespecialized agencies and international institu-tions concerned, as well as the various pro-grammes within the United Nations system,take measures to increase the scope of theirassistance to refugees from the colonial ter-ritories, particularly in Africa, that the bodiesconcerned give all possible assistance to thepeoples struggling to liberate themselves fromcolonial rule, and, in particular, that they workout within the scope of their respective activitiesand in co-operation with OAU and through itwith the national liberation movements, concreteprogrammes for assisting the peoples of South-ern Rhodesia, Namibia and the territories underPortuguese administration.

The Committee also appealed to the special-ized agencies and the international institutionsconcerned to withhold from the Governmentsof Portugal and South Africa financial, eco-nomic, technical and other assistance until theyrenounced their policies of racial discrimina-tion and colonial domination.

Finally, it recommended that, in order tofacilitate the implementation by Member Statesof the General Assembly's resolution of 18 De-cember 1968,9 the Assembly should invite thegoverning bodies or deliberative organs of thespecialized agencies and international institutionsconcerned to consider, on the basis of reports tobe submitted by their respective executive heads,any specific problems they might be encounteringin their efforts to give effect to the relevantAssembly resolutions.

These decisions of the Special Committeewere embodied in a resolution adopted on 2October 1969 by a roll-call vote of 13 to O, with5 abstentions (Italy, the Ivory Coast, Norway,the United Kingdom and the United States).

The resolution was sponsored by Afghanistan,Bulgaria, India, Mali and the United Republicof Tanzania.

A number of reservations were made by Nor-way, the United Kingdom, the United Statesand Italy on the substance of certain paragraphsof the resolution. Norway observed that theresolution was based on certain assumptionswhich were in conflict with Norway's views onthe legal and administrative situations of thoseagencies and institutions to which the resolutionwas directed.

The United Kingdom recalled it had votedagainst certain paragraphs of the resolutionadopted by the General Assembly on 14 De-cember 196710 because, in its opinion, thoseparagraphs raised major constitutional issues forthe specialized agencies and international in-stitutions concerned; for the same reasons, theUnited Kingdom had reservations regarding thesubstance of various paragraphs of the SpecialCommittee's resolution before the SpecialCommittee.

The United States considered that certainparagraphs of the Committee's resolution didviolence to the agencies to which the text wasdirected, and Italy expressed the opinion thatcertain paragraphs contained provisions thatwere not in conformity with the constitutions ofseveral specialized agencies.

CONSIDERATION BY

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL

At its mid-1969 session, the Economic andSocial Council considered the question ofimplementation by the specialized agencies andinternational institutions of the Declaration onthe Granting of Independence to Colonial Coun-tries and Peoples. The Council had before itthe report of its President concerning the con-sultations he had held with the Chairman ofthe Assembly's Special Committee on imple-mentation of the Declaration and also the reportof ACC which included a section on its considera-tion of this question.

Following discussion, the Council took thefollowing action. It expressed its appreciationto the Office of the United Nations High Com-missioner for Refugees and to those specialized

9 Ibid.10 See Y.U.N., 1967, pp. 646-47, for text of resolu-

tion 2311 (XXII).

TRUST AND NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES638

agencies and international institutions that hadco-operated with the United Nations in im-plementing the relevant General Assemblyresolutions and, in so doing, had taken measuresfor the co-ordination of their policies andactivities; and expressed its deep regret thatsome of the specialized agencies and inter-national institutions concerned, particularly theInternational Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment and the International MonetaryFund, had not extended their full co-operationto the United Nations in implementing therelevant General Assembly resolutions.

The Council endorsed the report of its Pres-ident and recommended to the specializedagencies and international institutions concernedthat they give effect to the suggestions outlinedtherein. It also recommended to the specializedagencies and international institutions concernedthat they establish relationship agreements andother special arrangements with OAU, as UNESCOhad done, in order to give concrete assistanceto the liberation movements with a view tobringing about a fuller and speedier implement-ation of the General Assembly's decisionthereon.

Further, the Council recommended that theUnited Nations, in particular the Office ofTechnical Co-operation, the specialized agenciesand the international institutions concerned, in-cluding UNDP and UNICEF, take measures in-dividually and in collaboration with one anotherto increase the scope of their assistance to re-fugees from the colonial territories, particularlyin Africa, including assistance to the Govern-ments concerned in the preparation and execu-tion of projects beneficial to those refugees.

Also, the Council urged the specializedagencies and international institutions concernedto introduce the greatest measure of flexibilityinto the procedures followed by them in thefield of assistance to refugees from the colonialterritories, particularly in Africa, and tostrengthen the existing arrangements for inter-agency co-operation in order to facilitate theplanning and implementation of joint or com-plementary programmes as well as a concertedapproach to problems in that field.

In addition, the Council recommended thatthe governing bodies or deliberative organs, asappropriate, of the specialized agencies and in-

ternational institutions concerned, on the basisof reports to be submitted by their executiveheads, give consideration to the following: (a)the history of the General Assembly's legislationon the question of granting independence tocolonial countries and peoples since the adoptionof its resolution 1514(XV) of 14 December1960;11 (b) the legislative programmes andprocedures so far adopted by the specializedagencies or international institutions concernedto assist the General Assembly in fulfilling itsmandate; (e) the specific difficulties, if any,encountered by the executive heads of the bodiesconcerned in formulating and executing concreteprogrammes and suggestions for assisting in therealization of the mandates of the General As-sembly; (d) what programmes and proceduresmight still be formulated to make more effectiveexisting programmes and procedures, as well asto establishing new concrete proposals for assist-ing the General Assembly; (e) the establish-ment of machinery to supervise and review theimplementation of the measures adopted withregard to the implementation of the relevantGeneral Assembly resolutions; (f) an annualprogress report to the Economic and SocialCouncil on the action taken.

Finally, the Council decided to maintain theitem on its agenda, asked ACC and the Com-mittee for Programme and Co-ordination to doso as well and asked its President to maintaincontact with the Chairman of the Special Com-mittee.

(For text of resolution, see DOCUMENTARYREFERENCES below.)

The Council's decisions were contained inresolution 1450(XLVII) adopted on 7 August1969, by a roll-call vote of 17 to O, with 9abstentions, on the proposal of Bulgaria, Chad,the Congo (Brazzaville), India, Kuwait, Libya,Sierra Leone, Sudan, the United Republic ofTanzania, and Upper Volta.


In 1969, General Assembly discussion on theimplementation of the Declaration on the Grant-ing of Independence to Colonial Countries and

11 See Y.U.N., 1960, pp. 49-50, text of resolution1514(XV) containing the Declaration on the grantingof independence.


Peoples by the specialized agencies and theinternational institutions associated with theUnited Nations took place mainly in the As-sembly's Fourth Committee. The Committeehad before it several reports on the question.

A report by the Secretary-General stated that,at the meetings which the Administrative Com-mittee on Co-ordination (ACC) and its pre-paratory Committee had held in April andOctober of 1969, the Secretary-General had hadan exchange of views and information with theexecutive heads of the agencies and internationalinstitutions concerned regarding the implement-ation of the requests and recommendations ofthe General Assembly. They had agreed thatapplication of the procedures recommended bythe ad hoc inter-agency meeting convened bythe United Nations High Commissioner forRefugees would help in formulating projectsbeneficial to refugees in Africa and would furtherstrengthen inter-agency co-operation for refugeeaid. Also, a number of agencies were makingspecial arrangements with OAU to facilitate actionon its requests.

The report further stated that during theSecretary-General's consultations with the ex-ecutive heads it had been recalled that thelegal, practical and other difficulties experiencedby some of the agencies in their efforts to giveeffect to the relevant General Assembly resolu-tions had previously been brought to the atten-tion of the Assembly's Special Committee, theEconomic and Social Council and the Assemblyitself.

In this regard, the Secretary-General notedthat both the Economic and Social Council andthe Special Committee, by the terms of resolu-tions recently adopted, had recommended thatthe governing bodies or deliberative organs ofthe various organizations should consider, on thebasis of reports to be submitted by their respectiveexecutive heads, any specific problems theymight be encountering in their implementationof the relevant Assembly resolutions.

During the General Assembly debate, a num-ber of Members, including the Byelorussian SSR,Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Libya, the UkrainianSSR, the USSR and the United Republic ofTanzania, deplored the failure of certain inter-national institutions associated with the UnitedNations to comply with the spirit of the Dec-

laration on the granting of independence andthe fact that, in many specialized agencies, theadoption of anti-colonialist measures wasblocked as a result of too strict an interpreta-tion of their functions by the agencies concerned.They said that the International Bank for Re-construction and Development and the Inter-national Monetary Fund in particular, by resort-ing to legal and bureaucratic excuses, hadpractically refused to comply with the As-sembly's recommendations, thus helping tomaintain the colonial system.

In that connexion, the representative of theByelorussian SSR stated that during 1965 and1966 Portugal had received $45 million in loansfrom the International Bank for electric powerprojects; those loans meant that Portugal wasable to devote an equivalent sum to financingits war of repression against the peoples of itsterritories. Such an attitude, he continued, wasnot surprising, however, in view of the fact thatWestern powers held two thirds of the votes inthe Bank.

In the opinion of these Members, the timehad come for the specialized agencies and theinternational institutions associated with theUnited Nations to stop using pretexts for failingto comply with the General Assembly resolutionsasking them to increase their assistance topeoples fighting for freedom, and to adoptconstructive measures to extend such assistanceto the liberated areas of territories under Por-tuguese administration. Moreover, they declared,the General Assembly should supervise morestrictly the implementation by the specializedagencies of the resolutions adopted on the sub-ject and should pay attention to the need toco-ordinate the activities of the specializedagencies in support of the freedom fighters.

Other Members—such as Barbados, the Cen-tral African Republic, Ceylon, the DemocraticRepublic of the Congo, Iran, Lebanon, Sudan,the United Arab Republic and Yugoslavia—stressed the positive role that could be playedby the specialized agencies and other interna-tional organizations towards the implementationof the Declaration, particularly through con-sultations and the signing of agreements withOAU. In this context, they noted with satisfac-tion that some of the hesitation shown by a num-ber of agencies was beginning to disappear and


that several bodies, including the Office of theUnited Nations High Commissioner for Refu-gees, UNESCO, UNICEF, ILO and WHO, had al-ready given considerable moral and materialassistance to the peoples of colonial territories.This demonstrated that their organizationalstructure and other features need not constitutean obstacle to more effective support for theemancipation of the peoples of non-self-govern-ing territories.

A similar position was taken by Algeria, Pa-kistan, Poland, Romania and Senegal, whichstressed that the constitutions of the specializedagencies were not dogma but were intended toserve the purposes that the members wishedthem to serve. It was simply a question ofgoodwill, they pointed out. Consequently, allthe bodies concerned should give all possiblemoral and other assistance to the peoples of thecolonial territories, so that they could continuetheir fight for freedom and prepare themselvesfor the political, administrative, and economicresponsibilities they would have to assume oncethey had achieved self-determination and in-dependence.

In that connexion, Bulgaria expressed theopinion that the activities of UNESCO could andshould serve as an example to those bodieswhich had not yet gone beyond the stage ofgood intentions. The commendable action takenby the UNESCO General Conference in 1968 indeciding that the organization must take allnecessary measures to ensure the effective im-plementation of the General Assembly resolu-tions on the liquidation of colonialism and racismshowed that UNESCO was acting without con-stitutional difficulties, and bodies like the Inter-national Bank for Reconstruction and Devel-opment and the International Monetary Fundshould study the procedure followed by thatorganization.

On 12 December 1969, the Assembly, tookseveral decisions on this question:

(1) It reiterated its appeal to the specializedagencies, the International Atomic EnergyAgency and the international institutions as-sociated with the United Nations to extendtheir full co-operation to the United Nationsin the achievement of the objectives and pro-visions of the resolution setting forth the Dec-laration on the granting of independence and

other relevant resolutions of the General As-sembly.

(2) It expressed its appreciation to the Of-fice of the United Nations High Commissionerfor Refugees and to those specialized agenciesand international institutions which had co-operated with the United Nations in the im-plementation of the relevant General Assemblyresolutions.

(3) It recommended that the specializedagencies and international institutions concernedtake measures to increase the scope of their as-sistance to refugees from the colonial territories,including assistance to the Governments con-cerned in the preparation and execution ofprojects beneficial to those refugees.

(4) It recommended that the specializedagencies and international institutions concernedgive all possible assistance to the peoples strug-gling to liberate themselves from colonial ruleand in particular to work out in co-operationwith OAU and through it, with the nationalliberation movements, concrete programmes forassisting the peoples of Southern Rhodesia, Na-mibia and the territories under Portugueseadministration.

(5) It recommended that all the organiza-tions concerned establish relationship and otherspecial arrangements with OAU and introducethe greatest possible measure of flexibility intheir relevant procedures.

(6) It urged all the specialized agencies andinternational institutions, and in particular theInternational Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment and the International MonetaryFund, to take all the necessary steps to with-hold financial, economic, technical and otherassistance from the Governments of Portugaland South Africa until they renounced theirpolicies of racial discrimination and colonialdomination.

(7) It recommended that all the specializedagencies and international institutions associatedwith the United Nations, particularly the In-ternational Civil Aviation Organization, theInternational Telecommunication Union, theUniversal Postal Union and the Inter-Govern-mental Maritime Consultative Organization,should work out measures aimed at discontinu-ing any collaboration with the Governments ofPortugal and South Africa, as well as with the


illegal minority regime in Southern Rhodesia.(8) It requested all States, through action in

the specialized agencies and international in-stitutions of which they were members, to facil-itate the full and speedy implementation of therelevant General Assembly resolutions.

(9) It recommended that the specializedagencies and the international institutions as-sociated with the United Nations should examineall the problems they might encounter in theirefforts to give effect to the resolutions adoptedby the General Assembly on the question.

(10) It requested the Economic and SocialCouncil to continue to consider, in consultationwith the Special Committee, appropriatemeasures for the co-ordination of the policiesand activities of the specialized agencies inimplementing the relevant General Assemblyresolutions.

(11) It asked the Secretary-General to con-tinue to assist in this endeavour and to reportto the Special Committee; and

(12) It asked the Special Committee tocontinue to examine and report on the question.

(For text of resolution and voting details, seeDOCUMENTARY REFERENCES below.)

The Assembly took these decisions in adopt-ing resolution 2555 (XXIV) by a recorded voteof 76 to 5, with 21 abstentions. The text, whichhad been approved by the Fourth Committeeon 10 December by a roll-call vote of 58 to 4,with 18 abstentions, had been proposed by Bul-garia, Cameroon, the Democratic Republic ofthe Congo, India, Kenya, Liberia, Libya, Mali,Mongolia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone,Southern Yemen, Sudan, Togo, Uganda, theUnited Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Yugo-slavia and Zambia.

When the Fourth Committee voted on thedraft resolution, a number of representatives,including those of Australia, Colombia, Irelandand Spain, stated that, although they agreedgenerally with the principles of the draft resolu-tion which they considered in keeping with theover-all policy the agencies should follow, theirreservations regarding certain paragraphs of thetext compelled them to abstain. In particular,they entertained serious misgivings on thoseparagraphs which called for the assistance ofthe specialized agencies and international in-stitutions associated with the United Nations

in fields which were not exactly their concern,fearing that these provisions might create con-stitutional, technical or practical difficulties forthe agencies and institutions concerned.

The representatives of Greece, Iran, Israel,Madagascar, Mexico, Turkey and Venezuelastated that their affirmative votes did not implyunqualified endorsement of all the provisions ofthe resolution. In that connexion, they referredto the delicate constitutional issues raised bycertain paragraphs whose wording they foundtoo categorical.

The representative of South Africa, explain-ing his vote against the resolution, objected tothe fact that the text sought to introduceextraneous and clearly political matters into thespecialized agencies, which, he said, were askedto act in a manner irreconcilable with theirstatutes. Moreover, the agencies were beingasked to collaborate with movements that werecommitted to the use of force and violence.

ACTIVITIES OF FOREIGNECONOMIC AND OTHER INTERESTS

CONSIDERATION BY

SPECIAL COMMITTEE

In October 1969, the General Assembly'sSpecial Committee on the Situation with regardto the Implementation of the Declaration onthe Granting of Independence to Colonial Coun-tries and Peoples adopted conclusions and recom-mendations on the activities of foreign economicand other interests impeding the implementa-tion of the Declaration on the granting of in-dependence in Southern Rhodesia, Namibiaand territories under Portuguese domination andin all other territories under colonial dominationand on efforts to eliminate colonialism, apartheidand racial discrimination in southern Africa.The Special Committee's decisions were basedon a report of its Sub-Committee I, which theCommittee adopted by 17 votes to O, with 4abstentions.

The Special Committee drew the followingconclusions, among others.

The colonial powers and the States whosenationals were engaged in economic activities incolonial territories had continued to disregardUnited Nations decisions on the question ofthose activities. The monopolies, with the


encouragement of the administering powers, hadfurther consolidated and expanded the processof economic exploitation which deprived thecolonial peoples of the resources needed for aviable independence.

There was a major new development in theCabora Bassa project in Mozambique, whichwas expected to attract a large influx of foreigninterests from Western countries. Among themajor concerns involved in the first phase ofconstruction were the Anglo-American Corpor-ation and two other South African companies.It was clear that these interests were openlyhelping Portugal to retain its control over thepeople of Mozambique, while South Africa,as the principal contractor to purchase power,would henceforth steadily extend its influencein the territory.

The Special Committee approved the follow-ing as its recommendations:

(a) It affirmed that foreign economic andother interests operating in the way they werecurrently in colonial territories constituted amajor obstacle to political independence as wellas to social and economic justice.

(b) It condemned the activities of foreigneconomic and other interests which were imped-ing the implementation of the Declaration onthe Granting of Independence to Colonial Coun-tries and Peoples.

(c) It deplored the attitude of the colonialpowers and States concerned which had nottaken any action to implement the relevantprovisions of General Assembly resolutions onthe item.

(d) It requested the colonial powers andStates concerned whose companies and nationalswere engaged in such activities to comply fullywith the provisions of the General Assembly'sresolutions of 7 December 1967 and 18 De-cember 196812 and also to adopt effectivemeasures to prevent new investments, particular-ly in southern Africa, that seemed counter to theabove-mentioned resolutions.

(e) It requested all States to take effectivemeasures to stop the supply of funds and otherforms of assistance, including military equip-ment, to colonial regimes which used such as-sistance to repress the national liberation move-ments.

The first of the above recommendations (af-

firming that foreign economic interests con-stituted a major obstacle to independence) wasvoted on separately by the Special Committee,at the request of the United Kingdom. It wasadopted by 16 votes to 2, with 3 abstentions.The representatives of the United Kingdom andthe United States entered reservations to theremainder of the recommendations stating thatthey did not regard them as applicable to theircountries or to the territories they administered.

During the discussion of the Sub-Committee'sreport, the representatives of the United King-dom and the United States disagreed with theconclusion that foreign investment was an im-pediment to the achievement of self-determina-tion and independence. They felt that dependentnon-self-governing territories needed all the out-side investment they could attract—subject tosafeguards to protect the interests of the peo-ple—if they were to go forward to independenceon sound foundations. The Ivory Coast rep-resentative said that while his Government wasconvinced that the operations of foreign in-vestors represented a certain element of forcefor the colonial powers in their territories, itwas not convinced that all activities and allinvestments represented a "major obstacle," asstated in the recommendations. He suggestedthat the Special Committee should ask the co-lonial powers to orient their economic activitiesso as to allow the territories to gain the maxi-mum possible benefit.

Italy reiterated its view that the Special Com-mittee was not qualified to make the kind ofcomplex study called for by such a highly tech-nical question.

The USSR stated that the evidence presentedin the Sub-Committee's report was so convinc-ing that there could be no doubt that theactivities of foreign monopolies in colonial ter-ritories were one of the basic obstacles to thegranting of independence to them.


The question of the activities of foreign eco-nomic interests and colonial territories wasconsidered by the General Assembly mainly in

12 See Y.U.N., 1967, pp. 648-49, text of resolution2288 (XXII) and Y.U.N., 1968, pp. 735-36, text ofresolution 2425 (XXIII).


the Fourth Committee and on the basis of thereport of the Special Committee.

The majority of the Members that took partin the debate, including Algeria, Ceylon, Ghana,India, Pakistan, Romania and Senegal, wereof the opinion that the activities of foreign eco-nomic interests were impeding the implementa-tion of the Declaration on the granting of in-dependence in many of the colonial territories,particularly in southern Africa.

Some Members drew attention to the closelinks that they said existed between the mono-polies and the colonial regimes whereby theforeign firms were given privileges in returnfor financial and material assistance. This en-abled the colonial regimes to maintain them-selves in power and to suppress the nationalliberation movements. Among those expressingsuch views were the Byelorussian SSR, theDemocratic Republic of the Congo, Czechoslo-vakia, Mongolia, Sudan, the United Republicof Tanzania, and Yugoslavia. It was also statedthat the foreign firms were engaged in activitiesthat deprived the indigenous inhabitants of theirfertile land, minerals and other natural resourceswhile at the same time reducing the people topoverty and forcing them to work for wagesthat were sometimes ten or fifteen times lowerthan those paid to foreigners. The DemocraticRepublic of the Congo, Czechoslovakia, Mon-golia, the USSR, the United Republic of Tan-zania, and Yugoslavia shared this view.

The representative of the Ukrainian SSR wasamong those who drew attention to the partici-pation of foreign firms in the construction of theCabora Bassa dam in Mozambique and theCunene dam in Angola, where it was intendedto settle foreigners. The execution of theseprojects, it was pointed out, could not but leadto the further exploitation of the indigenouspeople.

The representative of Sudan, among others,said it was necessary to draw a distinction be-tween the role of foreign capital and investmentin independent developing countries and in-dependent territories, where the policy anddirection of that investment was not controlledby the people.

In this connexion, the United Kingdom rep-resentative said it was surprising that economicdevelopment before independence should be

regarded as wrong since after the actual momentof independence it became not only respectablebut avidly sought after. It was, of course, neces-sary to ensure that suitable benefits accrued tothe community at large and that there wereprovisions for training and employment of localpersonnel. The United Kingdom would continueto welcome foreign investment in the territoriesunder its administration, subject to suitablecontrols and safeguards to protect the interestsof the indigenous peoples.

The representative of Venezuela said it wasclear that the activities of certain foreign eco-nomic interests interfered with the exercise ofthe right of self-determination. The administer-ing powers should determine the scope of suchactivities to ensure that they were profitable tothe people concerned.

On the recommendation of the Fourth Com-mittee, the Assembly took the following actionon the question.

(1) It approved the report of the SpecialCommittee on the Situation with regard to theImplementation of the Declaration on theGranting of Independence to Colonial Coun-tries and Peoples relating to foreign economicinterests.

(2) It reaffirmed the inalienable right of thepeoples of dependent territories to self-deter-mination and independence and to the naturalresources on their territories, as well as theirright to dispose of those resources in their bestinterest in the light on the preambular paragraphof General Assembly resolution 1514(XV) of 14December 1960 which affirmed that peoplesmight, for their own ends, freely dispose oftheir natural wealth and resources, withoutprejudice to any obligations arising out of inter-national co-operation based on the principle ofmutual benefit and international law.13

(3) It affirmed that foreign economic andother interests operating in colonial territorieswhich were exploiting those territories con-stituted a major obstacle to political independ-ence as well as to the enjoyment of the naturalresources of those territories by the indigenousinhabitants.

(4) It declared that any administering power,

13 See footnote 11.


by depriving the colonial peoples of the exerciseof their rights or by subordinating them toforeign economic and financial interests, violatedthe obligations it had assumed under ChaptersXI and XII of the Charter of the UnitedNations14 and impeded the implementation ofthe General Assembly's resolution of 14 De-cember 1960 on the granting of independence.

(5) It condemned the exploitation of thecolonial territories and peoples and the methodspractised in the territories under colonial domin-ation by those foreign economic, financial andother interests which were designed to perpetuatecolonial rule.

(6) It deplored the attitude of the colonialpowers and States concerned which had nottaken any action to implement the relevantprovisions of General Assembly resolutions.

(7) It requested the administering powers andStates whose companies and nationals wereengaged in such activities to take immediatemeasures to put an end to all practices whichexploited the territories and peoples undercolonial rule, in conformity with the GeneralAssembly resolutions, in particular by preventingnew investments, especially in southern Africa,which ran counter to the objectives of the above-mentioned resolutions.

(8) It requested all States to take effectivemeasures to cease forthwith the supply of fundsor other forms of economic and technical assist-ance to colonial powers which used such assist-ance to repress the national liberation move-ments.

(9) It requested the Special Committee tocontinue to study this question and to reportthereon to the General Assembly at its twenty-fifth (1970) session.

These decisions were taken with the adoptionof resolution 2554(XXIV) on 12 December1969, by a recorded vote of 80 to 2, with 18abstentions. The Fourth Committee approvedthe text on 9 December by a vote of 94 to 2,with 17 abstentions. (For text of resolution andvoting details, see DOCUMENTARY REFERENCESbelow.)

The United States, explaining its abstentionin the vote, said that the draft resolution wasbased on the false assumption that, by defini-tion, foreign investments were harmful to theinterests of the territories concerned. The United

States rejected the absurd theory that foreigninvestments were beneficial only after theachievement of independence.

Australia said that it had abstained becausethe resolution ran counter to the real interestsof the peoples concerned.

Other representatives stated that they hadvoted in favour of the draft resolution but hadreservations about some of its provisions. Therepresentative of Madagascar stated that hehad voted in favour in order to register supportfor measures to help dependent peoples toachieve independence and to express disapprovalof the activities of foreign interests which wereimpeding that movement. However, he hadreservations concerning a number of paragraphsof the draft resolution. Others expressingreservations included Chile, Colombia, Greece,Guatemala, Ireland, Japan, Mexico, Spain andTurkey. They did not believe that the activitiesof foreign interests in dependent territories wereall harmful. Each case should be judged on itsmerits and a distinction should be drawn be-tween those that were harmful and those thatwere not. They therefore had reservations onprovisions of the paragraphs numbered aboveas 1, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8.

Commenting on these reservations, the UnitedRepublic of Tanzania said that perhaps notall foreign economic interests impeded decoloniz-ation, but who was to distinguish the "good"from the "bad." When an independent Stateenlisted the services of a foreign company, thedecision was made by the Government, on be-half of the people, but in the case of a colonialterritory, it was the administering power whichtook such a decision on its own initiative. Thesponsors of the resolution believed that onlythe people could judge what was in their in-terests. It was not for the administering powerto say whether a particular activity served thepeople's interests. It was not a question ofdistinguishing between those activities of foreignmonopolies which were detrimental to the peo-ple's interests and those which were beneficial;the mere fact that the administering powerconcluded an agreement with a foreign com-

14 For text of Chapters XI and XII of the Charter,See APPENDIX II.


pany, without consulting the people, was damag-ing to the latter's interests.

The sponsors of the text in the Fourth Com-mittee were: Cameroon, the DemocraticRepublic of the Congo, Kenya, Liberia, Libya,Mali, Mongolia, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone,Somalia, Southern Yemen, Sudan, Togo, theUnited Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Yugo-slavia and Zambia.

TENTH ANNIVERSARYOF DECLARATION

CONSIDERATION BY PREPARATORY COMMITTEE

The Preparatory Committee for the TenthAnniversary of the Declaration on the Grant-ing of Independence to Colonial Countries andPeoples—established by the General Assemblyon 20 December 196815—submitted its reportto the General Assembly in September 1969.

The Preparatory Committee thereby recom-mended to the General Assembly a programmeof activities, including activities at the inter-national, regional and national levels intendedto expedite achievement of the objectives setforth in the Declaration on the granting of in-dependence.16

The Preparatory Committee stated in itsreport that the commemoration would be anappropriate occasion to evaluate the activitiesundertaken over the previous 10 years to im-plement the Declaration, determine shortcom-ings, and, in the light of that evaluation andtaking fully into account the various obstaclesto decolonization, formulate specific proposalsfor measures designed to eliminate the remain-ing manifestations of colonialism.

Activities proposed at the international levelwould include a commemorative meeting to beorganized in co-ordination with the celebrationof the twenty-fifth anniversary of the UnitedNations. The Preparatory Committee thereforesuggested that October 1970 and United NationsHeadquarters might be considered as the mostconvenient time and place for a solemn com-memoration of the tenth anniversary of theDeclaration. The commemorative meetingshould conclude with the adoption of a declar-ation or programme of action aimed at deal-ing effectively with the remaining colonial prob-lems. The task of preparing a draft declaration

or programme of action might be entrusted tothe Assembly's Special Committee on the Situa-tion with regard to the Implementation of theDeclaration on the Granting of Independenceto Colonial Countries and Peoples.

Other activities at the international levelwhich the Preparatory Committee suggestedincluded: special studies and seminars, to beundertaken by units of the United Nationsfamily, on various aspects of colonialism; andthe provision of assistance to refugees from co-lonial territories and to national liberationmovements.

The Preparatory Committee also recom-mended that the Assembly's Special Committeebe requested to prepare a succinct analyticalstudy on decolonization with a view to mobiliz-ing public opinion towards the full implementa-tion on the Declaration.

The Preparatory Committee also reportedthat it had established liaison with the Com-mittee for the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of theUnited Nations.


The report of the Preparatory Committee forthe tenth anniversary of the Declaration on thegranting of independence was taken up atplenary meetings of the General Assembly on4 December 1969. Following debate, the As-sembly endorsed the recommendations of thePreparatory Committee and requested theSecretary-General to transmit those recommend-ations to all Member States, the specializedagencies and other international organizationsconcerned for appropriate action. It alsorequested the Special Committee, in its prepar-ation of a draft declaration or suggested pro-gramme of action, to co-operate with otherUnited Nations bodies concerned and, in addi-tion to carrying out the other specific tasksassigned to it, to follow, in consultation with theCommittee for the Twenty-fifth Anniversary ofthe United Nations, the implementation of thePreparatory Committee's recommendations.

These decisions were set out in resolution2521 (XXIV), adopted on 4 December 1969,by a roll-call vote of 90 to 2, with 1 abstention.

15 See footnote 5.16 See footnote 11.


The resolution was sponsored by Afghanistan,Algeria, Dahomey, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia,Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Madagascar,Mali, Mauritania, Nigeria, Sierra Leone,Southern Yemen, Sudan, Tunisia, the UnitedRepublic of Tanzania and Yugoslavia.

(For text of resolution, and voting details seeDOCUMENTARY REFERENCES below.)

During the Assembly's discussion of this mat-ter, the representative of Panama emphasizedthe importance of applying the Declaration onthe granting of independence so that all peoplesof Europe, Asia, Africa and America could befree and so that complete self-determinationcould be enjoyed.

Poland's spokesman emphasized the historicalimportance of the Declaration on the grantingof independence and stated that Poland deemedit necessary that the celebration of the tenth an-niversary should be marked by new and strongeraction by the Organization. The programmeproposed by the Preparatory Committee pro-vided for such an approach and therefore Po-land supported it.

Tunisia also supported the programme pro-posed by the Preparatory Committee and saidthat the anniversary should not be a mere com-memoration but, rather, an opportunity fordeep thought as to the real causes of the persist-ence of colonialism, in order to make it possibleto foresee realistically the prospects for futureaction.

The representative of Portugal recalled thatPortugal had abstained in the vote on theadoption of the Declaration on the granting ofindependence on 14 December 1960. Now, how-ever, Portugal saw no alternative but to voteagainst a proposal to commemorate the Dec-laration's tenth anniversary because the actionstaken in the intervening years in the name ofthe Declaration had confirmed the doubtsPortugal felt originally. The Portuguese spokes-man said that, in particular, there had beena double standard in the application of theAssembly's resolution of 14 December 1960 con-taining the Declaration. He also stated that,under the influence of ideas such as thosepropagated under the auspices of that resolu-tion, the accepted norms and rules that regulatedthe conduct of States had been discarded. Hementioned, in particular, the training and

equipping of professional revolutionaries dedi-cated to violence, and interference in thedomestic affairs of other countries.

The representative of France recalled therole his country had played in the process ofdecolonization and its efforts to put intopractice the major principles referred to in theAssembly's resolution of 14 December 1960 onthe granting of independence. That resolutionhowever had gone beyond a reaffirmation ofthe major principles mentioned in it and haddiscarded certain provisions of the UnitedNations Charter. He also expressed the viewthat the recommendations of the PreparatoryCommittee contained paragraphs whose com-patibility with the Charter was doubtful, be-cause they either advocated violence or sug-gested interference in the internal affairs ofMember States. France, therefore, could notsupport the resolution endorsing those proposals.

The Byelorussian SSR said that on the oc-casion of the tenth anniversary of the Declara-tion, the United Nations should make a worthycontribution towards the complete and un-conditional implementation of the provisions ofthe Declaration. To that end, the Assemblyshould adopt a progress report on the im-plementation of the Declaration by States whichshould propose appropriate measures for theelimination of colonial regimes. The reportshould also give special attention to the ques-tion of halting the activities of foreign mono-polies in colonial territories; envisage measuresfor the elimination of military bases and the ces-sation of military activities by colonial powersin those territories; and name and condemnthose that were guilty of continuing failure tocomply with the Declaration, in particular, thekey Western powers which assisted and sup-ported colonial and racist regimes.

Australia, the Netherlands, Mexico, theUnited Kingdom and the United States, all ofwhich voted in favour of the draft resolution,expressed reservations concerning certain recom-mendations of the Preparatory Committee.

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONALAND TRAINING PROGRAMMEFOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

On 18 December 1968, the General Assemblyrequested the Secretary-General to establish an

Advisory Committee on the United NationsEducational and Training Programme forSouthern Africa.17 This Committee was toadvise him on strengthening and expanding theprogramme, including in particular, promotingof contributions, and on granting of subventionsto appropriate institutions in Africa to enablethem to provide places for persons who cameunder that Programme.

On 21 August 1969, the Secretary-Generalannounced that the Advisory Committee wouldbe composed of representatives of Canada, theDemocratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark,India, the United Republic of Tanzania, Vene-zuela and Zambia. He recommended that theCommittee provide for participation in its work,in an observer capacity, of the United NationsCouncil for Namibia and the Special Com-mittee on the Policies of Apartheid of the Gov-ernment of the Republic of South Africa.

REPORT OF SECRETARY-GENERAL

Reporting to the General Assembly on 31October 1969 on the progress of the Programme,the Secretary-General stated that during theperiod 1 January-30 September 1969, 21 Stateshad pledged $458,446, with payments totalling$387,390. Although these payments, when com-pared with the $360,997 paid in the same periodin 1968, showed an encouraging trend, the totalwas far short of the target of $3 million original-ly envisaged for the period 1968-70.

As a result of the improved financial situation,it had proved possible to expand the Programme.New scholarships had been awarded to 182applicants, while 272 students had received ex-tensions of their awards. There were 454 currentscholarship holders as compared with 390 in1968.

From the outset, the Programme had followeda general policy of placing scholarship holdersin educational and training institutions inAfrica. Closer co-operation with Governmentsconcerned had resulted in improvements withrespect to the placement of candidates; a gen-eral upgrading of the quality of education of-fered to scholarship holders could also be noted.However, the Secretary-General indicated theproblem of finding suitable placements for lessqualified and over-age students or those havinglanguage difficulties still existed.

647

With respect to the legal status of applicantsand/or issuance of travel documents, improve-ments had been noted. The United NationsHigh Commissioner for Refugees had offeredhis good offices in helping to deal with questionsarising from the often difficult legal status ofscholarship holders; he had been largely in-strumental in solving such problems as hadbeen encountered.

Since the funds available remained far fromadequate in meeting the objectives of the Pro-gramme, the Secretary-General suggested thatthe Assembly might consider, pending receiptof additional voluntary contributions, again in-cluding an amount of $100,000 in the regularUnited Nations budget (financed from mem-bership contributions) to ensure the continuityof the Programme.


The report of the Secretary-General on theUnited Nations Educational and TrainingProgramme for Southern Africa was consideredby the Fourth Committee at the General As-sembly's twenty-fourth session, in 1969.

On the recommendation of the Fourth Com-mittee, the Assembly, on 12 December 1969,expressed its appreciation to all those who hadcontributed to the Educational and TrainingProgramme for Southern Africa and appealedanew to all States, organizations and individualsto make generous contributions to the Pro-gramme.

The Assembly also requested the Secretary-General, in consultation with the AdvisoryCommittee on the Programme, to take all pos-sible measures for the promotion of adequatecontributions to the Programme. It also decidedthat, as a further transitional measure, provisionshould be made, under the regular budget for1970, for an amount of $100,000 to ensurecontinuity of the Programme pending the receiptof adequate voluntary contributions.

These actions were set forth in resolution2557(XXIV), adopted by 103 votes to 2. TheFourth Committee approved the text of theresolution, by 97 votes to 2, on 9 December.

17 See Y.U.N., 1968 pp. 736-37, text of resolution2431 (XXIII).

DECLARATION ON INDEPENDENCE FOR COLONIAL COUNTRIES AND PEOPLES


(For text of resolution, see DOCUMENTARY REFER-ENCES below.)

The sponsors of the resolution in the FourthCommittee were: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bu-rundi, Cameroon, the Democratic Republic ofthe Congo, Finland, Ghana, India, Iran, Kenya,Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco,Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Senegal, SierraLeone, Southern Yemen, Sweden, Togo, Tunisia,the United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta.Venezuela, Yugoslavia and Zambia.

TABLE I: UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONALAND TRAINING PROGRAMME

FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

APPLICATIONS AND AWARDS(1 October 1968-30 September 1969)

CurrentApplica- Scholar-

tions New Awards shipReceived Awards Extended Holders

Namibia 41 20 29 49South Africa 170 42 161 203Southern

Rhodesia 140 36 7 43Territories under

Portuguese Ad-ministration 151 85 75 160

TABLE II: CONTRIBUTIONS PLEDGEDAND PAID*

(1 January-31 September 1969)(U.S. dollars)

CountryBurmaCambodiaCanadaDenmarkGabonGhanaGreeceIndiaIranIrelandItaly

JapanKenyaLibyaNetherlandsNorwayPhilippinesSwedenTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited Republic

of Tanzania

Pledged1,0001,000

25,00080,000

4081,5003,5001,0002,0005,000

12,46712,50020,0002,0025,000

27,77850,000

50080,0005,000

119,990

2,801

458,446

Paid1,000

25,00080,000

—1,5003,5001,0002,000

12,467

2,0025,000—

50,000500

80,000—

119,990

2,801

387,390

Balance

370

408—

__

5,000

12,50020,000

—27,778

———

5,000—

—

71,056

* Including contributions pledged in prior yearsTotal 502 182 272 454 and still outstanding, amounting to $141,875.


GENERAL ASPECTSIMPLEMENTATIONOF DECLARATION

OF

CONSIDERATION BY SPECIAL COMMITTEESpecial Committee on Situation with regard to Imple-

mentation of Declaration on Granting of Independ-ence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, meetings652-724.

Sub-Committee on Petitions, meetings 138-154.A/AC.109/L.534, L.540, L.554, L.560-L.565, L.567,

L.577, L.589, L.590, L.595, L.614, L.615. Reports(135th-150th) of Sub-Committee on Petitions.

CONSIDERATION BYGENERAL ASSEMBLY

GENERAL ASSEMBLY—24TH SESSIONGeneral Committee, meeting 181.Fourth Committee, meetings 1816, 1842, 1844, 1845.

1848, 1850, 1851, 1853-1860, 1862, 1864-1866,1868-1870.

Fifth Committee, meetings 1347, 1348.Plenary Meetings 1821, 1822, 1824-1826, 1829, 1835,

1838, 1869-1870.

A/7623/Rev.l. Report of Special Committee on Situ-ation with regard to Implementation of Declarationon Granting of Independence to Colonial Countriesand Peoples, covering its work during 1969.

A/7601. Annual report of Secretary-General on workof the Organization, 16 June 1968-15 June 1969,Chapter V A.

A/7601/Add.1. Introduction to annual report ofSecretary-General, September 1969, Chapter VIII.

A/7754. Co-operation between United Nations andOrganization of African Unity. Manifesto on South-ern Africa. Letter of 7 November 1969 from Kenya.

A/L.581 and Add.1,2. Afghanistan, Algeria, Burundi,Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Mali, Mauritania,Nigeria, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Southern Yemen,Sudan, Syria, United Arab Republic, United Re-public of Tanzania, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia:draft resolution.

A/C.5/1291, A/7865. Administrative and financialimplications of 20-power draft resolution A/L.581.Statement by Secretary-General and report of FifthCommittee.

RESOLUTION 2548(xxiv), as proposed by 20 powers,A/L.581, adopted by Assembly, 11 December 1969,meeting 1829. by 78 votes to 5, with 16 abstentions.


The General Assembly,Recalling the Declaration on the Granting of Inde-

pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples con-tained in its resolution 1514(XV) of 14 December1960,

Recalling its resolutions 1654(XVI) of 27 Novem-ber 1961, 1810(XVII) of 17 December 1962, 1956(XVIII) of 11 December 1963, 1970(XVIII) of 16December 1963, 2105 (XX) of 20 December 1965,2189 (XXI) of 13 December 1966, 2326 (XXII) of16 December 1967 and 2465(XXIII) of 20 December1968,

Recalling also its resolution 2425(XXIII) of 18December 1968 concerning the item entitled "Activi-ties of foreign economic and other interests which areimpeding the implementation of the Declaration onthe Granting of Independence to Colonial Countriesand Peoples in Southern Rhodesia, Namibia and Ter-ritories under Portuguese domination and in all otherTerritories under colonial domination and efforts toeliminate colonialism, apartheid and racial discrimi-nation in southern Africa",

Recalling further its resolution 2426(XXIII) of18 December 1968 concerning the implementation ofthe Declaration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Countries and Peoples by the specializedagencies and the international institutions associatedwith the United Nations,

Noting with grave concern that nine years after theadoption of the Declaration many Territories are stillunder colonial domination,

Deploring the refusal of the colonial Powers, espe-cially Portugal and South Africa, to implement theDeclaration and other relevant resolutions on thequestion of decolonization, particularly those relatingto the Territories under Portuguese domination, Na-mibia and Southern Rhodesia,

Bearing in mind that the continuation of colonialismand its manifestations, including racism, apartheid andactivities of foreign economic and other interests whichexploit colonial peoples, and the attempts of somecolonial Powers to suppress national liberation move-ments by repressive activities against colonial peoplesare incompatible with the Charter of the United Na-tions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights andthe Declaration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Countries and Peoples,

Deploring the attitude of certain States which, indefiance of the pertinent resolutions of the SecurityCouncil, the General Assembly and the Special Com-mittee on the Situation with regard to the Implemen-tation of the Declaration on the Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, continueto co-operate with the Governments of Portugal andSouth Africa and with the illegal racist minority re-gime in Southern Rhodesia,

Recalling its resolution 2446(XXIII) of 19 Decem-ber 1968 relating to the measures to achieve the rapidand total elimination of all forms of racial discrimina-tion in general and of the policy of apartheid in par-ticular, especially paragraph 8 thereof,

Recalling the Manifesto on Southern Africa, adoptedby the Assembly of Heads of State and Government

of the Organization of African Unity at its sixthordinary session,

Recalling that the year 1970 will be the tenth anni-versary of the adoption of the Declaration,

1. Reaffirms its resolution 1514 (XV) and all itsother resolutions on the question of decolonization;

2. Approves the report of the Special Committeeon the Situation with regard to the Implementation ofthe Declaration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Countries and Peoples covering its workduring 1969, including the programme of work en-visaged by the Special Committee during 1970;

3. Urges all States, in particular the administeringPowers, and the specialized agencies and the interna-tional institutions associated with the United Nations,including the various programmes in the UnitedNations system, to give effect to the recommendationscontained in the report of the Special Committee forthe speedy implementation of the Declaration and therelevant United Nations resolutions;

4. Declares that the continuation of colonial rulethreatens international peace and security and that thepractice of apartheid and all forms of racial discrimi-nation constitute a crime against humanity;

5. Reaffirms its recognition of the legitimacy ofthe struggle of the colonial peoples to exercise theirright to self-determination and independence, noteswith satisfaction the progress made in the colonialTerritories by the national liberation movements, boththrough their struggle and through reconstruction pro-grammes, and urges all States to provide moral andmaterial assistance to them;

6. Requests all States, as well as the specializedagencies and international institutions, to withholdassistance of any kind from the Governments of Por-tugal and South Africa and from the illegal racistminority regime in Southern Rhodesia until they re-nounce their policy of colonial domination and racialdiscrimination;

7. Reiterates its declaration that the practice ofusing mercenaries against movements for nationalliberation and independence is punishable as a crimi-nal act and that the mercenaries themselves are out-laws, and calls upon the Governments of all countriesto enact legislation declaring the recruitment, financ-ing and training of mercenaries in their territory to bea punishable offence and prohibiting their nationalsfrom serving as mercenaries;

8. Requests the colonial Powers to dismantlewithout further delay their military bases and installa-tions in colonial Territories and to refrain from estab-lishing new ones;

9. Condemns the policies, pursued by certain co-lonial Powers in the Territories under their domina-tion, of imposing non-representative regimes andconstitutions, strengthening the position of foreign eco-nomic and other interests, misleading world publicopinion and encouraging the systematic influx offoreign immigrants while evicting, displacing and trans-ferring the indigenous inhabitants to other areas;

10. Requests the Special Committee to continueto seek suitable means for the immediate and fullimplementation of the Declaration in all Territories


which have not yet attained independence, and inparticular to formulate specific proposals for theelimination of the remaining manifestations of colo-nialism;

11. Requests the Special Committee to make con-crete suggestions which could assist the Security Coun-cil in considering appropriate measures under theCharter of the United Nations with regard to develop-ments in colonial Territories which are likely tothreaten international peace and security, and recom-mends the Council to take such suggestions fully intoconsideration;

12. Requests the Special Committee to continueto examine the compliance of Member States with theDeclaration and with other relevant resolutions on thequestion of decolonization, particularly those relatingto the Territories under Portuguese domination,Southern Rhodesia and Namibia, and to report thereonto the General Assembly at its twenty-fifth session;

13. Invites the Special Committee to continue topay particular attention to the small Territories and torecommend to the General Assembly the most appro-priate methods and also the steps to be taken to enablethe populations of those Territories to exercise fullytheir right to self-determination and independence;

14. Urges the administering Powers to co-operatefully with the Special Committee by permitting theaccess of visiting groups to the colonial Territories inorder to secure first-hand information concerning theTerritories and to ascertain the wishes and aspirationsof the inhabitants of those Territories under their ad-ministration ;

15. Requests the Secretary-General, having regardto the suggestions of the Special Committee, to con-tinue to take concrete measures through all the mediaat his disposal, including publications, radio and tele-vision, to give widespread and continuous publicity tothe work of the United Nations in the field of de-colonization, to the situation in the colonial Territoriesand to the continuing struggle for liberation beingwaged by the colonial peoples;

16. Requests Member States, in particular the ad-ministering Powers, to co-operate with the Secretary-General in promoting the large-scale dissemination ofinformation on the work of the United Nations in theimplementation of the Declaration;

17. Requests the Secretary-General to provide allthe facilities necessary for the implementation of thepresent resolution.

OTHER DOCUMENTSA/7507. Letter of 28 January 1969 from Australia.S/9203. Letter of 9 May 1969 from Secretary-

General to President of Security Council (trans-mitting extracts of resolutions III and VIII adoptedby International Conference on Human Rights,Teheran, Iran, 22 April-13 May 1968).

IMPLEMENTATION OF DECLARATIONBY SPECIALIZED AGENCIESAND INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

CONSIDERATION BY SPECIAL COMMITTEESpecial Committee on Situation with regard to Im-

plementation of Declaration on Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, meet-ings 704-706, 710-717.

CONSIDERATION BY ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL—47TH SESSIONPlenary Meetings 1627, 1635.

E/4712. Implementation of Declaration on Grantingof Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoplesby specialized agencies and international institu-tions associated with United Nations. Report ofPresident of Council.

E/L. 1276. Chad, Congo (Brazzaville), India, Kuwait,Libya, Sierra Leone, Sudan, United Republic ofTanzania, Upper Volta: draft resolution.

E/4668. Development and co-ordination of activitiesof organizations within United Nations system.Thirty-fifth report of Administrative Committee onCo-ordination, paras. 10-14.

RESOLUTION 1450(xLvii), as proposed by 9 powers,E/L.1276, and as orally co-sponsored by Bulgaria,adopted by Council on 7 August 1969, meeting1635, by roll-call vote of 17 to O, with 9 abstentions,as follows:

In favour: Bulgaria, Chad, Congo (Brazzaville),Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kuwait,Libya, Mexico, Sierra Leone, Sudan, United Repub-lic of Tanzania, USSR, Upper Volta, Uruguay,Yugoslavia.

Against: None.Abstaining: Argentina, Belgium, France, Ire-

land, Japan, Norway, Turkey, United Kingdom,United States.

The Economic and Social Council,Having considered the item of its agenda entitled

"Implementation of the Declaration on the Grantingof Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoplesby the specialized agencies and the internationalinstitutions associated with the United Nations",

Recalling the Declaration on the Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples containedin General Assembly resolution 1514(XV) of 14 De-cember 1960,

Recalling further General Assembly resolutions 2311(XXII) of 14 December 1967 and 2426(XXIII) of18 December 1968, and other relevant resolutions ofthe Assembly,

Taking into account the report submitted by thePresident of the Economic and Social Council, inaccordance with the decision taken by the Council atits resumed forty-fifth session and paragraph 7 ofGeneral Assembly resolution 2426 (XXIII), on theconsultations with the Chairman of the Special Com-mittee on the Situation with regard to the Implemen-tation of the Declaration on the Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples,

Taking into account also the statements made tothe Council by the representatives of the executiveheads of a number of the specialized agencies and


international institutions associated with the UnitedNations,

Bearing in mind the urgent need of the peoples ofseveral colonial territories, particularly in Africa, forassistance from the specialized agencies and interna-tional institutions concerned, particularly in the fieldsof education and training, health and nutrition,

Recognizing the need for further measures to betaken for the co-ordination of the policies and ac-tivities of the specialized agencies and internationalinstitutions concerned in implementing the relevantGeneral Assembly resolutions,

1. Expresses its appreciation to the Office of theHigh Commissioner for Refugees and to those special-ized agencies and international institutions that haveco-operated with the United Nations in implementingthe relevant General Assembly resolutions and, in sodoing, have taken measures for the co-ordination oftheir policies and activities;

2. Expresses its deep regret that some of the spe-cialized agencies and international institutions con-cerned, particularly the International Bank for Recon-struction and Development and the InternationalMonetary Fund, have not extended their full co-operation to the United Nations in implementing therelevant General Assembly resolutions;

3. Endorses the report of the President of theCouncil and recommends to the specialized agenciesand international institutions concerned that they giveeffect to the suggestions outlined therein;

4. Recommends to the specialized agencies andinternational institutions concerned that they establishrelationship agreements and other special arrange-ments with the Organization of African Unity, as theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization has done, in order to give concreteassistance to the liberation movements with a view tobringing about a more full and speedy implementationof paragraph 3 of General Assembly resolution 2426(XXIII);

5. Recommends the United Nations, in particularthe Office of Technical Co-operation, the specializedagencies and international institutions concerned, in-cluding the United Nations Development Programmeand the United Nations Children's Fund, to takemeasures individually and in collaboration with oneanother to increase the scope of their assistance torefugees from the colonial territories, particularly inAfrica, including assistance to the Governments con-cerned in the preparation and execution of projectsbeneficial to those refugees;

6. Urges the specialized agencies and internationalinstitutions concerned to introduce the greatest meas-ure of flexibility into the procedures followed by themin the field of assistance to refugees from the colonialterritories, particularly in Africa, and to strengthen theexisting arrangements for interagency co-operation inorder to facilitate the planning and implementation ofjoint or complementary programmes as well as a con-certed approach to problems in that field;

7. Recommends the governing bodies or delibera-tive organs as appropriate of the specialized agenciesand international institutions concerned, on the basisof reports to be submitted by their executive heads.

to give consideration to the following:(a) The history of the General Assembly's legisla-

tion on the question of granting independence tocolonial countries and peoples since the adoption ofits resolution 1514(XV) of 14 December 1960;

( b ) The legislative programmes and proceduresso far adopted by the specialized agencies or interna-tional institutions concerned to assist the GeneralAssembly in fulfilling its mandate;

( c ) The specific difficulties, if any, encountered bythe executive heads in formulating and executingconcrete programmes and suggestions for assisting inthe realization of the mandates of the General As-sembly ;

(d) What programmes and procedures might still beformulated to make more effective existing programmesand procedures, as well as to establishing new concreteproposals for assisting the General Assembly;

( e ) The establishment of machinery to superviseand review the implementation of the measuresadopted with regard to the implementation of therelevant General Assembly resolutions;

(f) An annual progress report to the Economic andSocial Council on the action taken;

8. Decides to maintain the item on the agendaof the Economic and Social Council and requests theAdministrative Committee on Co-ordination, the Com-mittee for Programme and Co-ordination and theJoint Meetings of the Committee for Programme andCo-ordination and the Administrative Committee onCo-ordination to give separate and continuing con-sideration to this item;

9. Requests the President of the Economic andSocial Council to maintain contact with the Chair-man of the Special Committee on the Situation withregard to the Implementation of the Declaration onthe Granting of Independence to Colonial Countriesand Peoples.


GENERAL ASSEMBLY—24TH SESSIONFourth Committee, meetings 1842, 1844, 1845, 1848,

1850, 1851, 1853-1860, 1862, 1863, 1865, 1867-1869.

Plenary Meeting 1831.

A/7601. Annual report of Secretary-General on workof the Organization, 16 June 1968-15 June 1969,Chapter V A3.

A/7603. Report of Economic and Social Council toGeneral Assembly, 3 August 1968-8 August 1969,Chapter XIII C.

A/7623/Rev.l. Report of Special Committee (cover-ing its work during 1969), Chapter V.

A/7725. Implementation of Declaration on Grantingof Independence to Colonial Countries and Peo-ples by specialized agencies and international insti-tutions associated with United Nations. Report ofSecretary-General.

A/C.4/L.945 and Add.l. Bulgaria, Cameroon, Demo-cratic Republic of Congo, India, Kenya, Liberia,Libya, Mali, Mongolia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal,Sierra Leone, Southern Yemen, Sudan, Togo,


Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen,Yugoslavia, Zambia: draft resolution, approved byFourth Committee on 10 December 1969, meeting1867, by roll-call vote of 58 to 4, with 18 absten-tions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Barbados, Bul-garia, Burma, Byelorussian SSR, Cambodia, Cam-eroon, Chile, China, Congo (Brazzaville), Demo-cratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Ethi-opia, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Hungary,India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Jamaica, Kenya,Laos, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali,Mauritania, Mexico, Mongolia, Nepal, Niger, Ni-geria, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Romania,Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sudan, Syria,Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey,Uganda, Ukrainian SSR, USSR, United Arab Re-public, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela,Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against: Portugal, South Africa, United Kingdom,United States.

Abstaining: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Can-ada, Colombia, Denmark, Finland, France, Ireland,Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Lesotho, NetherlandsNew Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden.

A/7871. Report of Fourth Committee.

RESOLUTION 2555(xxiv), as recommended by FourthCommittee, A/7871, adopted by Assembly on 12December 1969, meeting 1831, by recorded voteof 76 to 5, with 21 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Barbados, Bul-garia, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian SSR, Cam-bodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Ceylon,Chad, Chile, China, Democratic Republic of Congo,Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Dahomey, Dominican Re-public, Ethiopia, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guyana,Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Ja-maica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon,Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives,Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia,Morocco, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru,Philippines, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, SaudiArabia, Senegal, Singapore, Southern Yemen, Su-dan, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago,Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian SSR, USSR,United Arab Republic, United Republic of Tan-zania, Upper Volta, Venezuela, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against: Argentina,* Portugal, South Africa,United Kingdom, United States.

Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia,Botswana, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France,Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Lux-embourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,Spain, Swaziland, Sweden.

* Subsequently the representative of Argentina in-formed the Secretariat that his delegation had in-tended to abstain.

The General Assembly,Having considered the item entitled '"Implementa-

tion of the Declaration on the Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples by the

specialized agencies and the international institutionsassociated with the United Nations",

Recalling the Declaration on the Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples con-tained in its resolution 1514(XV) of 14 December1960,

Recalling its resolutions 2311 (XXII) of 14 De-cember 1967 and 2426 (XXIII) of 18 December 1968and other relevant General Assembly resolutions,

Taking into account the relevant reports submittedby the Secretary-General, the Economic and SocialCouncil and the Special Committee on the Situationwith regard to the Implementation of the Declarationon the Granting of Independence to Colonial Coun-tries and Peoples concerning the implementation ofthe Declaration by the specialized agencies and theinternational institutions associated with the UnitedNations,

Noting that some of the specialized agencies havetaken steps, including the establishment of relation-ship agreements or other special arrangements withthe Organization of African Unity, designed to in-crease the scope of their assistance to refugees fromthe colonial Territories in Africa, and have initiatedprocedures aimed at facilitating the formulation ofjoint or complementary projects beneficial to thoserefugees,

Noting with regret that some of the specializedagencies and international institutions concerned havenot extended their full co-operation to the UnitedNations in the implementation of the relevant Gen-eral Assembly resolutions,

Mindful of the urgent need of the peoples and thenational liberation movements of several colonial Ter-ritories for assistance from the specialized agenciesand international institutions concerned, especially inthe fields of education, training, health and nutrition,in their struggle to attain freedom and independence,

Recognizing the need for further and more effectivemeasures to be taken for the speedy implementationof the Declaration and other relevant General Assem-bly resolutions by the specialized agencies and theinternational institutions associated with the UnitedNations,

Considering that by virtue of the Charter, in par-ticular Chapters IX and X, the United Nations shallmake recommendations for the co-ordination of thepolicies and activities of the specialized agencies,

1. Reiterates its appeal to the specialized agen-cies, the International Atomic Energy Agency andthe international institutions associated with theUnited Nations to extend their full co-operation tothe United Nations in the achievement of the ob-jectives and provisions of General Assembly resolu-tion 1514(XV) and other relevant resolutions;

2. Expresses its appreciation to the Office of theUnited Nations High Commissioner for Refugees andto those specialized agencies and the internationalinstitutions which have co-operated with the UnitedNations in the implementation of the relevant GeneralAssembly resolutions;

3. Recommends that the specialized agencies andinternational institutions concerned, as well as thevarious programmes within the United Nations sys-


tern, should take measures individually and in collab-oration with one another to increase the scope oftheir assistance to refugees from the colonial Terri-tories, including assistance to the Governments con-cerned in the preparation and execution of projectsbeneficial to those refugees;

4. Recommends that the specialized agencies andinternational institutions concerned, as well as thevarious programmes within the United Nations system,should give all possible assistance to the peoplesstruggling to liberate themselves from colonial ruleand in particular to work out, within the scope oftheir respective activities and in co-operation withthe Organization of African Unity and, through it,with the national liberation movements, concrete pro-grammes for assisting the oppressed peoples of South-ern Rhodesia, Namibia and the Territories underPortuguese administration;

5. Recommends that, in order to assist in the fulland speedy implementation of paragraphs 3 and 4above, all the organizations concerned should estab-lish relationship and other special arrangements withthe Organization of African Unity, and should intro-duce the greatest possible measure of flexibility intheir relevant procedures;

6. Urges all the specialized agencies and inter-national institutions, and in particular the Interna-tional Bank for Reconstruction and Development andthe International Monetary Fund, to take all thenecessary steps to withhold financial, economic, tech-nical and other assistance from the Governments ofPortugal and South Africa until they renounce theirpolicies of racial discrimination and colonial domi-nation;

7. Recommends that all the specialized agenciesand international institutions associated with theUnited Nations, particularly the International CivilAviation Organization, the International Telecom-munication Union, the Universal Postal Union andthe Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Or-ganization, should work out, within the scope of theirrespective activities, measures aimed at discontinuingany collaboration with the Governments of Portugaland South Africa, as well as with the illegal racistminority regime in Southern Rhodesia;

8. Requests all States, through action in the spe-cialized agencies and international institutions ofwhich they are members, to facilitate the full andspeedy implementation of the present resolution andother relevant General Assembly resolutions;

9. Recommends that the specialized agencies andthe international institutions associated with theUnited Nations, in order to facilitate the efforts ofMember States to comply fully with paragraph 8above, should examine, on the basis of reports to besubmitted by their respective secretariats, all the prob-lems which they might encounter in their efforts togive effect to the present resolution and to otherGeneral Assembly resolutions;

10. Requests the Economic and Social Council tocontinue to consider, in consultation with the SpecialCommittee on the Situation with regard to the Im-plementation of the Declaration on the Granting ofIndependence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, ap-

propriate measures for the co-ordination of the poli-cies and activities of the specialized agencies inimplementing the relevant General Assembly resolu-tions ;

11. Invites the Secretary-General:(a) To continue to assist the specialized agencies

and international institutions concerned in workingout appropriate measures for implementing the pres-ent resolution and to report thereon to the GeneralAssembly at its twenty-fifth session;

(b) To obtain and transmit to the Special Com-mittee for its consideration information on the actiontaken by the specialized agencies and internationalinstitutions concerned in accordance with the pro-visions of the present resolution;

12. Requests the Special Committee to continueto examine the question and to report thereon to theGeneral Assembly at its twenty-fifth session.

ACTIVITIES OF FOREIGNECONOMIC AND OTHER INTERESTS

Special Committee on Situation with regard to Im-plementation of Declaration on Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, meet-ings 659, 720.


GENERAL ASSEMBLY—24TH SESSIONFourth Committee, meetings 1842, 1844, 1845, 1848,

1850, 1851, 1853-1860, 1862-1864, 1866, 1867.Plenary Meeting 1831.

A/7601. Annual report of Secretary-General on workof the Organization, 16 June 1968-15 June 1969,Chapter V A 3.

A/7752 and Add.l. Activities of foreign economicand other interests which are impeding imple-mentation of Declaration on Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples inSouthern Rhodesia, Namibia and territories underPortuguese domination and in all other territoriesunder colonial domination and efforts to eliminatecolonialism, apartheid and racial discrimination insouthern Africa. Report of Special Committee.(Annex: Report of Sub-Committee I.)

A/C.4/L.944 and Add.l. Democratic Republic ofCongo, Kenya, Liberia, Libya, Mali, Mongolia,Sierra Leone, Somalia, Southern Yemen, Sudan,Togo, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Yugo-slavia, Zambia: draft resolution.

A/C.4/L.944/Rev.l and Rev.1./Add.l. Cameroon,Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Liberia,Libya, Mali, Mongolia, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone,Somalia, Southern Yemen, Sudan, Togo, UnitedRepublic of Tanzania, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia:revised draft resolution, approved by Fourth Com-mittee on 9 December 1969, meeting 1866, by 94votes to 2, with 17 abstentions.


RESOLUTION 2554(xxiv), as recommended by FourthCommittee, A/7858, adopted by Assembly on 12December 1969, meeting 1831, by recorded voteof 80 to 2, with 18 abstentions, as follows:


In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina,Barbados, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelo-russian SSR, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central AfricanRepublic, Ceylon, Chad, Chile, China, DemocraticRepublic of Congo, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia,Dahomey, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, Ghana,Greece, Guinea, Guyana, Hungary, India, Indo-nesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Japan,Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Libya,Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania,Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal,Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland,Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singa-pore, Southern Yemen, Sudan, Syria, Thailand,Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey,Uganda, Ukrainian SSR, USSR, United Arab Re-public, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta,Venezuela, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against: Portugal, South Africa.Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil,

Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, IvoryCoast, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand,Norway, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom, UnitedStates.

The General Assembly,Having considered the item entitled "Activities of

foreign economic and other interests which are im-peding the implementation of the Declaration on theGranting of Independence to Colonial Countries andPeoples in Southern Rhodesia, Namibia and Terri-tories under Portuguese domination and in all otherTerritories under colonial domination and efforts toeliminate colonialism, apartheid and racial discrimi-nation in southern Africa",

Having examined the report of the Special Com-mittee on the Situation with regard to the Implemen-tation of the Declaration on the Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples relatingto this question,

Recalling its resolution 1514(XV) of 14 Decem-ber 1960 containing the Declaration on the Grantingof Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples,in particular the eighth preambular paragraph thereof,and its resolution 2425 (XXIII) of 18 December 1968,

Convinced that any economic or other activity whichimpedes the implementation of resolution 1514(XV)and which obstructs efforts aimed at the eliminationof colonialism, apartheid and racial discrimination insouthern Africa and other colonial Territories violatesthe political, economic and social rights and interestsof the people in these Territories and is therefore in-compatible with the purposes and principles of theCharter of the United Nations,

Recalling that the administering Powers have theobligation to ensure the political, economic, social andeducational advancement of the inhabitants of theTerritories under their administration and to protectthe population and the natural resources of theseTerritories against abuses, in accordance with ChaptersXI and XII of the Charter,

1. Approves the report of the Special Committeeon the Situation with regard to the Implementation of

the Declaration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Countries and Peoples relating to this ques-tion;

2. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples ofdependent Territories to self-determination and inde-pendence and to the natural resources of their Terri-tories, as well as their right to dispose of these re-sources in their best interest in the light of the eighthpreambular paragraph of General Assembly resolution1514(XV);

3. Affirms that foreign economic and other inter-ests operating in colonial Territories which are ex-ploiting those Territories constitute a major obstacleto political independence as well as to the enjoymentof the natural resources of these Territories by theindigenous inhabitants;

4. Declares that any administering Power, by de-priving the colonial peoples of the exercise of theirrights or by subordinating them to foreign economicand financial interests, violates the obligations it hasassumed under Chapters XI and XII of the Charterof the United Nations and impedes the implementa-tion of resolution 1514(XV) ;

5. Condemns the exploitation of the colonial Ter-ritories and peoples and the methods practised in theTerritories under colonial domination by those foreigneconomic, financial and other interests which are de-signed to perpetuate colonial rule;

6. Deplores the attitude of the colonial Powers andStates concerned which have not taken any action toimplement the relevant provisions of General Assem-bly resolutions;

7. Requests the administering Powers and Statesconcerned whose companies and nationals are engagedin such activities to take immediate measures to putan end to all practices which exploit the Territoriesand peoples under colonial rule, in conformity withGeneral Assembly resolutions 1514(XV) of 14 De-cember 1960, 2288(XXII) of 7 December 1967 and2425 (XXIII) of 18 December 1968, in particular bypreventing new investments, especially in southernAfrica, which run counter to the objectives of theabove-mentioned resolutions;

8. Requests all States to take effective measures tocease forthwith the supply of funds or other forms ofeconomic and technical assistance to colonial Powerswhich use such assistance to repress the national liber-ation movements;

9. Requests the Special Committee to continue tostudy this question and to report thereon to the Gen-eral Assembly at its twenty-fifth session;

10. Requests the Secretary-General to use all thefacilities at his disposal to render assistance to theSpecial Committee in the pursuit of this study.

TENTH ANNIVERSARYOF DECLARATION

CONSIDERATION BY SPECIAL COMMITTEEPreparatory Committee for Tenth Anniversary of

Declaration on Granting of Independence to Colo-nial Countries and Peoples, meetings 1-11 (A/AC.140/SR.1-11).



GENERAL ASSEMBLY—24TH SESSIONFourth Committee, meeting 1862.Fifth Committee, meeting 1334.Plenary Meetings 1797, 1820, 1821.

A/7684. Special programme of activities in connexionwith tenth anniversary of Declaration on Grantingof Independence to Colonial Countries and Peo-ples. Report of Preparatory Committee for TenthAnniversary of Declaration on Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.

A/L.572 and Add.l. Afghanistan, Ethiopia, India,Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania,Sierra Leone, Southern Yemen, Sudan, Tunisia,United Republic of Tanzania, Yugoslavia: draftresolution.

A/L.572/Rev.l. Afghanistan, Algeria, Dahomey, Ethi-opia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast,Liberia, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Nigeria,Sierra Leone, Southern Yemen, Sudan, Tunisia,United Republic of Tanzania, Yugoslavia: reviseddraft resolution.

A/C.1528, A/7790, A/7801. Administrative and finan-cial implications of recommendations contained inreport of Preparatory Committee (A/7684). Re-ports by Secretary-General, Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions and FifthCommittee.

RESOLUTION 2521 (xxiv), as proposed by 20 powers,A/L.572/Rev.l, adopted by Assembly on 4 Decem-ber 1969, meeting 1821, by roll-call vote of 90 to2, with 1 abstention, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina,Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bul-garia, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian SSR, Cam-eroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Ceylon,Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo (Brazza-ville), Democratic Republic of Congo, Cuba,Czechoslovakia, Dahomey, Denmark, Ethiopia, Fin-land, Ghana, Greece, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland,India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy,Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Ku-wait, Laos, Lebanon, Libya, Luxembourg, Malaysia,Maldives, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Neth-erlands, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Pakistan,Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Saudi Arabia,Singapore, Southern Yemen, Spain, Sudan, Swazi-land, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad andTobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian SSR,USSR, United Arab Republic, United Kingdom,United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uru-guay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against: Portugal, South Africa.Abstaining: France.

The General Assembly,Having considered the report of the Preparatory

Committee for the Tenth Anniversary of the Declara-tion on the Granting of Independence to ColonialCountries and Peoples,

Mindful of the need on the occasion of that anni-

versary to evaluate the progress so far made in theimplementation of the Declaration and, taking intoaccount the various existing obstacles, to formulatespecific proposals for the elimination of the remainingmanifestations of colonialism,

1. Approves the report of the Preparatory Com-mittee for the Tenth Anniversary of the Declarationon the Granting of Independence to Colonial Coun-tries and Peoples and endorses the recommendationscontained therein concerning the programme of activi-ties to be undertaken in connexion with the tenthanniversary of the Declaration;

2. Requests the Secretary-General to transmit toall Member States, the specialized agencies and otherinternational organizations concerned the above-men-tioned recommendations for appropriate action and toreport on their implementation to the Special Com-mittee on the Situation with regard to the Implemen-tation of the Declaration on the Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples;

3. Requests the Special Committee, in its prepara-tion of a draft declaration or a suggested programmeof action for consideration at the special commemo-rative meeting, to co-operate as appropriate with otherUnited Nations bodies concerned and, in addition tocarrying out the other specific tasks assigned to it inthe report, to follow, in consultation with the Com-mittee for the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the UnitedNations, the implementation of the above-mentionedrecommendations and to report thereon to the GeneralAssembly at its twenty-fifth session.

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONALAND TRAINING PROGRAMMEFOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

GENERAL ASSEMBLY——24TH SESSION

Fourth Committee, meetings 1842, 1844, 1845, 1848,1850, 1851, 1853-1860, 1862-1864, 1866, 1869.

Fifth Committee, meeting 1348.Plenary Meetings 1816, 1831.

A/7496. United Nations Educational and TrainingProgramme for Southern Africa. Note by Secretary-General.

A/7601. Annual report of Secretary-General on workof the Organization, 16 June 1968-15 June 1969,Chapter V A, pp. 83-84.

A/7624/Rev.l. Report of United Nations Council forNamibia (covering period 13 November 1968-24October 1969), Chapter I F.

A/7735. United Nations Educational and TrainingProgramme for Southern Africa. Report of Secre-tary-General.

A/C.4/L.946 and Add. 1,2. Afghanistan, Algeria,Burundi, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Con-go, Finland, Ghana, India, Iran, Kenya, Liberia,Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Niger, Ni-geria, Norway, Pakistan, Senegal, Sierra Leone,Southern Yemen, Sweden, Togo, Tunisia, UnitedRepublic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Venezuela,Yugoslavia, Zambia: draft resolution, approved byFourth Committee on 9 December 1969, meeting1866, by 97 vote to 2.


A/G.5/1287, A/7873. Administrative and financialimplications of draft resolution II recommended byFourth Committee, A/7872. Statement by Secre-tary-General and report of Fifth Committee.

A/7872 and Corr.1. Report of Fourth Committee,draft resolution II.

RESOLUTION 2557(xxiv), as recommended by FourthCommittee, A/7872, adopted by Assembly on 12December 1969, meeting 1831, by 103 votes to 2.

The General Assembly,Recalling its resolution 2349(XXII) of 19 Decem-

ber 1967 by which the special educational and train-ing programmes for South West Africa, the specialtraining programme for Territories under Portugueseadministration and the educational and training pro-gramme for South Africans were consolidated andintegrated, and its resolution 2431 (XXIII) of 18December 1968 by which, inter alia, the GeneralAssembly requested the Secretary-General to establishan advisory committee of Member States to assist him,among other things, in strengthening and expandingthe United Nations Educational and Training Pro-gramme for Southern Africa,

Having considered the report of the Secretary-General,

Recalling paragraph 14 of its resolution 2507(XXIV) of 21 November 1969 concerning the ques-tion of Territories under Portuguese administration,in which it invited the Secretary-General to developand expand training programmes for the inhabitantsof those Territories, and the relevant section of thereport of the United Nations Council for Namibia,

Noting that, although the financial situation has im-proved during 1969, available funds are still far fromadequate to meet the objectives of the Programme,

Welcoming the establishment of the Advisory Com-mittee on the United Nations Educational and Train-ing Programme for Southern Africa in accordancewith paragraph 2 of resolution 2431 (XXIII),

Strongly convinced that the provision of assistancefor the education and training of persons from theTerritories concerned is essential and that it is there-fore desirable further to strengthen and expand theProgramme,

1. Expresses its appreciation to all those who havecontributed to the United Nations Educational andTraining Programme for Southern Africa;

2. Appeals anew to all States, organizations andindividuals to make generous contributions to theProgramme;

3. Requests the Secretary-General, in consultationwith the Advisory Committee on the United NationsEducational and Training Programme for SouthernAfrica within the terms of paragraph 2 of GeneralAssembly resolution 2431 (XXIII), to take all possiblemeasures for the promotion of adequate contributionsto the Programme;

4. Decides that, as a further transitional measure,provision shall be made, under section 12 of the regu-lar budget for the financial year 1970, for an amountof $100,000 to ensure the continuity of the Programmepending the receipt of adequate voluntary contribu-tions ;

5. Requests the Secretary-General to report to theGeneral Assembly at its twenty-fifth session on theprogress of the Programme.

QUESTIONS CONCERNING INDIVIDUAL TERRITORIES

The following pages give a brief account ofdecisions concerning various individual ter-ritories taken in 1969 by the General Assemblyand by its Special Committee on the Situationwith regard to the Implementation of the Dec-laration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Countries and Peoples. (See also

pp. 112-34, 675-701, 702-13 and 609-26 fordetails on questions concerning Southern Rho-desia, Namibia, territories under Portugueseadministration, Papua and the Trust Territoryof New Guinea and the Trust Territory of thePacific Islands.)

Falkland Islands (Malvinas)

The Falkland Islands (Malvinas) are situatedin the South Atlantic, some 480 miles off CapeHorn. The population, almost entirely of Britishorigin, numbered 2,098 at the end of 1968. Theterritory, which is administered by the UnitedKingdom, is claimed by Argentina as an integralpart of Argentina.

The economy of the Falkland Islands (Mal-vinas) depends on the wool industry. Nearlyall revenue is derived from sheep-farming.

The Special Committee on the Situation withregard to the Implementation of the Declara-tion on the Granting of Independence to ColonialCountries and Peoples did not consider theterritory in 1969. On 25 September, it decidedto transmit to the General Assembly the work-ing paper on the territory prepared by theSecretariat and to consider the item in 1970.

By letters dated 21 November 1969, thePermanent Representatives of Argentina and of


the United Kingdom informed the General As-sembly that negotiations had continued betweentheir respective Governments for the purposeof settling as soon as possible the dispute con-cerning sovereignty over the Falkland Islands(Malvinas).

They added that although divergence re-mained between the two Governments, it hadbeen agreed that special talks would take placeearly in 1970 with a view to reaching agreementon practical measures to promote and implementfree communications and movement in bothdirections between the mainland and the Is-lands. Both Governments would continue theirefforts towards a definitive solution of thedispute and would report further to the Secre-tary-General in due course.

On 16 December, the General Assembly notedwith satisfaction the progress achieved innegotiations between the United Kingdom andArgentine Governments and urged the partiesto continue their efforts to reach a definitivesolution of the dispute as soon as possible.

These decisions were embodied in a consensus,proposed by Uruguay and Venezuela and ap-proved by the Fourth Committee on 12 De-cember. The consensus as adopted by the Gen-eral Assembly read as follows:

"The General Assembly, having regard toits resolution 2065 (XX) of 16 December196518 and to the consensuses which it ap-proved on 20 December 196619 and 19 De-cember 196720 concerning the question of theFalkland Islands (Malvinas), takes note ofthe communications dated 21 November 1969

from the Permanent Representatives of Ar-gentina and the United Kingdom of GreatBritain and Northern Ireland to the UnitedNations addressed to the Secretary-General.

"In this connexion, the General Assembly,bearing in mind the report of the SpecialCommittee on the Situation with regard to theImplementation of the Declaration on theGranting of Independence to Colonial Coun-tries and Peoples, takes note with satisfactionof the progress achieved in the negotiationsmentioned in the notes presented on 21 No-vember 1969, and urges the parties, bearingparticularly in mind resolution 2065(XX)and the consensuses of 20 December 1966 and19 December 1967, to continue their effortsto reach, as soon as possible, a definitive solu-tion of the dispute as envisaged in the notesreferred to, and to keep the Special Com-mittee and the General Assembly duly in-formed during the coming year about the de-velopment of the negotiations on this colonialsituation, the elimination of which is of inter-est to the United Nations within the contextof General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of14 December 1960"21 (containing text ofDeclaration on granting independence).

18 See Y.U.N., 1965, pp. 578-79, text of resolution2065 (XX).

19 See Y.U.N., 1966, p. 577, text of consensus of 20December 1966.

20 See Y.U.N., 1967, p. 659, text of consensus of 19December 1967.

21 See Y.U.N., 1960, pp. 49-50, text of resolution1514(XV).


Special Committee on Situation with regard to Imple-mentation of Declaration on Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, meet-ings 659, 715.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY——24-TH SESSION

Fourth Committee, meetings 1844, 1850, 1851, 1853-1860, 1862, 1869-1870.

Plenary Meetings 1765, 1835.

A/7623/Rev.l. Report of Special Committee (cover-ing its work during 1969), Chapter XXXI.

A/7691. Letter of 26 September 1969 from UnitedKingdom.

A/7785. Letter of 21 November 1969 from Argentina.A/7786. Letter of 21 November 1969 from United

Kingdom.A/7896. Report of Fourth Committee (on territories

not considered separately), part IV.A/7630. Resolutions adopted by General Assembly

during its 24th session, 16 September—17 December1969. Other decisions, p. 75.

Fiji

Fiji, administered by the United Kingdom, isa group of 844 islands and islets situated in thesouth-west Pacific. Its population, estimated at

512,000 at the end of 1968, consisted of 215,000Fijians, 256,150 persons of Indian origin, andabout 41,000 others (Europeans, part-Euro-


peans, Chinese and members of other Pacificraces). Almost 90 per cent of the total landmass of 7,055 square miles is contained by theislands of Viti Levu and Vanua Levi. Theeconomy of Fiji is dependent on sugar primarily,and on copra, gold mining and tourism.

CONSIDERATION BYSPECIAL COMMITTEE

When the General Assembly's Special Com-mittee on the Situation with regard to theImplementation of the Declaration on theGranting of Independence to Colonial Coun-tries and Peoples considered the situation inFiji in 1969, it had before it the report of itsSub-Committee on Fiji (composed of Bulgaria,Ecuador, India, Norway and the UnitedRepublic of Tanzania).

In its report, the Sub-Committee stated thaton 27 August 1969, its Chairman had addresseda letter to the Permanent Representative of theUnited Kingdom requesting the co-operationof his Government in arranging a visit to theterritory.

In a letter dated 3 October, the PermanentRepresentative of the United Kingdom repliedthat his Government saw no grounds for vary-ing the position it had set out in 1967, when theUnited Kingdom had informed the SpecialCommittee that it did not regard a visit by asub-committee as necessary.

The Sub-Committee regretted that, in viewof this attitude, it had not been able to carryout the tasks assigned to it.

On 21 October 1969, the Special Committeedecided to take note of the report of the Sub-Committee on Fiji and to transmit to the Gen-eral Assembly the working paper by theSecretariat on the territory in order to facilitateconsideration of the item by the Assembly'sFourth Committee. At the same time, the SpecialCommittee decided to consider the matter thefollowing year.


Later in 1969, the situation in Fiji was takenup by the General Assembly.

During the discussion, which took placemainly in the Assembly's Fourth Committee, theDemocratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana andPoland urged the United Kingdom, amongother administering powers, to co-operate withthe United Nations by permitting visiting mis-sions to gain access to Fiji as well as to otherdependent territories so that the Committeecould have first-hand information on conditionsand the aspirations of the people.

The representative of Czechoslovakia believedthat the colonial powers, despite their dis-claimers, were using every means to perpetuatetheir domination in the small territories, in-cluding Fiji. He shared the view that thereshould be a time-table for the granting of in-dependence to colonial territories.

India felt that the consultations between theprincipal parties in Fiji with a view to findinga mutually acceptable basis for the territory'spolitical future were a heartening sign.

The representative of New Zealand said thatbecause of the differences between the smallterritories, no rigid formula could be appliedfor their future political development. In thecase of Fiji, New Zealand's view was that greatadvances were being made which would havean important influence in the neighbouringregions.

The representative of the United Arab Re-public expressed the hope that the process ofthe decolonization of Fiji would be achievedin an atmosphere of harmony and co-operation.

On 12 December, the General Assembly, onthe recommendation of the Fourth Committee,decided to postpone consideration of the ques-tion of Fiji to its twenty-fifth session, due to beheld in 1970.



Fourth Committee, meetings 1842, 1844, 1845, 1850,1851, 1853-1860, 1862, 1865, 1867.



A/7623/Rev.l. Report of Special Committee (cover-ing its work during 1969), Chapter XIII. (Annex



II: Report of Sub-Committee on Fiji to SpecialCommittee.)


A/7630. Resolutions adopted by General Assemblyduring its 24th session, 16 September-17 December1969. Other decisions, p. 75.

French Territory of the Afars and the Issas22

The French Territory of the Afars and theIssas, administered by France as an overseasterritory, is situated on the eastern coast ofAfrica and is bounded by Ethiopia and So-malia. It covers an area of about 8,900 squaremiles and had in 1967 a population estimatedat 125,050, comprising 58,240 Issas and otherSomalis, 48,270 Afars, 8,285 Arabs and 10,255Europeans and assimilés.

Following a referendum held on 19 March1967, in which a majority of the voters of theterritory favoured the idea of the area remain-ing part of the French Republic, the FrenchNational Assembly promulgated a new statutefor the territory on 3 July 1967. The law, whichprovided for the establishment of an electedChamber of Deputies, which in turn electeda Government Council, had as one of its de-clared purposes the granting of a large measureof autonomy in the administration of the ter-ritory's affairs.

By this same law the official name of theterritory was changed.

On 25 September 1969, the General As-

sembly's Special Committee on the Situationwith regard to the Implementation of the De-claration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Countries and Peoples decided with-out objection to transmit to the General As-sembly a working paper on the situation in theterritory prepared by the Secretariat in order tofacilitate the consideration of the subject bythe Assembly's Fourth Committee. The SpecialCommittee also decided that, subject to anydirectives the General Assembly might give inthat connexion, it would consider the questionthe following year.

On 16 December 1969, the General Assemblyendorsed a recommendation of its Fourth Com-mittee that consideration of the question ofFrench Somaliland be postponed to its twenty-fifth session, due to be held in 1970.

22 The name of the territory formerly known asFrench Somaliland is "French Territory of the Afarsand the Issas." This designation was introduced inUnited Nations terminology as from 15 April 1968, atthe request of the administering power.




Fourth Committee, meetings 1842, 1844, 1850, 1851,1853-1859, 1868.


A/7623/Rev.l. Report of Special Committee (cover-ing its work during 1969), Chapter XII.

A/7896. Report of Fourth Committee, paras. 10and 30.

A/7630. Resolutions adopted by General Assemblyduring its 24th session, 16 September-17 December1969, p. 75.

Gibraltar

Gibraltar, administered by the United King-dom, covers an area of 2¼ square miles andhad a population at the end of 1968 estimatedat 26,007, of whom 19,357 were Gibraltarians,4,685 other British and 1,965 aliens.

In 1968, the General Assembly, declaringthat the continuation of the colonial situationin Gibraltar was incompatible with the purposes

and principles of the Charter of the UnitedNations and of the General Assembly's declara-tion of 14 December 1960 on granting independ-ence to colonial countries and peoples,23 re-quested the administering power to terminatethe colonial situation in Gibraltar no later than

23 See footnote 21.


1 October 1969.24 It also called upon the Gov-ernment of the United Kingdom to begin with-out delay the negotiations with the Governmentof Spain provided for in its resolution of 19December 1967 (2353(XXII) ).25


The question of Gibraltar was considered bythe General Assembly's Special Committee onthe Situation with regard to the Implementationof the Declaration on the Granting of Independ-ence to Colonial Countries and Peoples inSeptember 1969.

The Special Committee had before it a reportsubmitted by the Secretary-General to the Gen-eral Assembly, transmitting various communi-cations he had received from the representativesof the Governments of Spain and the UnitedKingdom, including letters dated 1 and 9October 1969 from the Minister of ForeignAffairs of Spain and the Permanent Represen-tative of the United Kingdom, respectively.

In his letter of 1 October, the Spanish ForeignMinister recalled that although the UnitedNations had set a deadline of 1 October 1969for the United Kingdom to decolonize the ter-ritory, the United Kingdom's response had beento ignore this decision and to delay in everypossible way its duty to negotiate. Such actionsas the concentration of large military forces atthe Gibraltar base and the United Kingdom'sconstant military manoeuvres and activitiescould create circumstances propitious for an in-cident to take place in the area at any moment,the letter stated. Because of this attitude andbecause of a series of aggressive acts againstSpain, the letter continued, Spain had had toadopt measures of self-defence in the Gibraltararea, which the United Kingdom was tryingto present to the world as hostile acts.

The letter of the Spanish Foreign Ministerwent on to say that Spain had no intention ofabsorbing the population of Gibraltar by forceand had been prepared for years to negotiatebilaterally; Spain's only demand was therestitution of sovereignty over a territory thatbelonged to Spain on irrefutable geographicaland historical grounds. In the face of the useof force to perpetuate the existence of thismilitary colony, the letter said, the Spanish

Government would uphold, by whatever meansit considered appropriate, respect for its in-alienable right to national integrity and unity.

The Permanent Representative of the UnitedKingdom, in a letter of 9 October 1969, catego-rically rejected the suggestions that Gibraltarconstituted a threat to Spain. British activityin the area was in no wise aggressive and wasnot intended to provoke an incident of anysort, he said. The Permanent Representativestated that the General Assembly resolutions onthe matter constituted recommendations andnot decisions, and his Government's positionon the subject had been clearly stated at thetimes of their adoption.

Furthermore, the letter said, Spain's decisionto sever telephone and telegraph links withGibraltar was not an indication that the SpanishGovernment was willing to approach the prob-lem by seeking to create a better atmosphere.The British Government, for its part, remainedready to talk with the Spanish Government if,by so doing, the Gibraltarians would be helpedand a solution brought nearer.

The Permanent Representative concluded hisletter by stating that his Government rejectedthe statement in the Spanish Foreign Minister'snote that Gibraltar was a Spanish territory, add-ing that the United Kingdom had no doubtwhatever about its sovereignty over the area.He recalled his Government's repeatedly de-clared readiness to submit the legal aspects ofthe question to the International Court ofJustice.

On 25 September 1969, the Special Com-mittee decided, without objection, to transmitto the General Assembly the working paper onthe territory prepared by the Secretariat in orderto facilitate consideration of the item by theFourth Committee of the Assembly, and, sub-ject to any directives the Assembly might givein that regard, to consider the question in 1970.

DECISION BY GENERAL ASSEMBLYAt the General Assembly's twenty-fourth

(1969) session, the question of Gibraltar was

24 See Y.U.N., 1968, p. 750, text of resolution2429 (XXIII).

25 See Y.U.N., 1967, p. 676, text of resolution2353 (XXII).


discussed mainly in the Assembly's Fourth Com-mittee.

In statements made before the Committee,Afghanistan, Barbados, Chad, Ghana, Iran,Sudan, Syria and the United Arab Republic,among others, expressed the hope that theparties concerned would continue their dialogue

and reach a settlement in accordance with therelevant resolutions of the General Assembly.

On 16 December 1969, the General Assemblyendorsed a recommendation of its Fourth Com-mittee that consideration of the question ofGibraltar be postponed to its twenty-fifthsession, due to be held in 1970.


Special Committee on Situation with regard to Imple-mentation of Declaration on Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, meet-ings 659,715.


Fourth Committee, meetings 1842, 1844, 1850, 1851,1853-1859, 1868.


A/7550 and Add.1-6. Report of Secretary-General.A/7623/Rev.l. Report of Special Committee (cover-

ing its work during 1969), Chapter XI.

A/7896. Report of Fourth Committee, paras. 10 and30.

A/7630. Resolutions adopted by General Assemblyduring its 24th session, 16 September-17 December1969, p. 75.

OTHER DOCUMENTSS/9461. Letter of 1 October 1969 from Spain (in-

cluded in A/7550/Add.5).S/9469. Letter of 9 October 1969 from United King-

dom (included in A/7550/Add.6).

Ifni and Spanish Sahara

Ifni, situated on the Atlantic coast of Africaand surrounded on the north, east and southby Morocco, covers an area of approximately580 square miles and has a population of about50,000 inhabitants. Spanish Sahara, also on theAtlantic coast of Africa, covers an area ofabout 108,000 square miles and is bounded onthe north by Morocco and on the east and southby Mauritania (except for a few miles in theeast, where it is bounded by Algeria). At theend of 1966, its indigenous population wasestimated at 33,512.

Both territories were administered by Spainprior to the retrocession of Ifni to the Govern-ment of Morocco on 30 June 1969. SpanishSahara is the subject of territorial claims byMauritania and Morocco.


The questions of Ifni and Spanish Saharawere considered by the General Assembly'sSpecial Committee on the Situation with regardto the Implementation of the Declaration onthe Granting of Independence to ColonialCountries and Peoples at meetings held betweenApril and December 1969.

The Special Committee had before it a work-

ing paper prepared by the Secretariat contain-ing information on action previously taken bythe Special Committee and by the General As-sembly, and on the latest developments concern-ing the two territories. The Special Committeealso had before it a petition dated 17 February1969 from the Secretary-General of the Partyfor Liberation and Socialism, Morocco, demand-ing the return to Morocco of the westernSahara.

The representatives of Algeria, Mauritania,Morocco and Spain participated in the SpecialCommittee's discussion of the questions of Ifniand Spanish Sahara in April 1969.

IFNIThe representative of Spain stated that on

22 April 1969 his Government had ratifiedthe treaty concluded at Fez, Morocco, on 4January 1969, by which the Government ofSpain transferred sovereignty over Ifni toMorocco.

At a Special Committee meeting on 5 June1969, the Chairman drew attention to two lettersdated 14 and 23 May 1969 from the PermanentRepresentatives of Morocco and Spain, respec-tively, stating that the instruments of ratifica-tion of the Treaty of Fez had been exchanged


at Rabat, Morocco, on 13 May 1969 and thatthe transfer of powers to the Government ofMorocco would take place within a period ofthree months from 13 May 1969.

The Chairman subsequently drew the atten-tion of the Special Committee to a letter dated9 July 1969 in which the Permanent Repre-sentative of Spain informed the Secretary-Gen-eral that the retrocession of Ifni to the Govern-ment of Morocco had been effected on 30June 1969. The Special Committee concludedits consideration of the territory of Ifni by takingnote of that development.

SPANISH SAHARA

With regard to Spanish Sahara, the rep-resentative of Morocco pointed out that althoughSpain had given its support to the principleof self-determination for the inhabitants of theterritory, and had stated its acceptance of avisiting mission to Spanish Sahara, these pro-visions of various Assembly resolutions remainedto be implemented by the administering power.In addition, he said, the Spanish authorities inthe territory were taking steps, such as theestablishment of provincial bodies and of a localassembly, which seemed openly designed toestablish a kind of referendum of the peopleof the Sahara in a sort of tete-à-tete with Spain.Such measures, he thought, were in contradic-tion to the spirit of self-determination and tothe measures envisaged by the General As-sembly to ensure that self-determination wouldbe exercised as soon as possible.

Mauritania favoured a solution that woulduphold the rights of the population of SpanishSahara; it was hoped that such a solution couldbe found in harmony with the administeringpower and in co-operation with all countriesinterested in maintaining peace in the area.Mauritania felt that the elements for a satisfac-tory solution of the problem were to be foundin the resolution adopted by the General As-sembly on 18 December 196826—which, interalia, invited the administering power to deter-mine the procedures for holding a referendum.The Government of Mauritania had exertedconsiderable effort in accepting that solution,its spokesman said, but it would continue to holdthe same attitude, respectful of the rights ofthe people of the territory.

The representative of Spain stated that theSpanish Government was deeply concerned bythe annexationist aspirations that were emerg-ing concerning the area and could not fail toheed the appeal for protection it had receivedfrom the elected representatives of the in-habitants. It was not the fault of the SpanishGovernment, he said, that press and radiocampaigns had aroused concern in the peopleof the territory, nor was it its responsibility thatforeign agents were constantly being introducedinto the area. For its part, he said, the SpanishGovernment was doing its best to improve theliving conditions of the people of the Sahara,and it was trying to facilitate the implementa-tion of the General Assembly's resolution of18 December 1968.27

With respect to the visit of a special mission,which the Spanish Government had agreed toreceive, the representative of Spain said thathe had nothing to add to the content of theletter he had sent to the Secretary-General on17 October 1968, which had stated that hisdelegation was ready to start talks with theSecretary-General to discuss the dispatch ofobservers to Spanish Sahara so that they couldobserve, analyse, and form a judgement on thesituation. Finally, he said that the population ofthe Sahara would have complete freedom toexercise self-determination at the proper timeand when Spain was so requested.

In response to the Spanish representative'sstatement that foreign agents were being in-troduced into the Sahara, the representative ofthe United Republic of Tanzania said thatthe only foreigners in the territory were thenumerous Spanish troops, whose presencehindered the implementation of the GeneralAssembly resolution on this territory.

On 25 September 1969, the Special Com-mittee decided to transmit to the General As-sembly the relevant working paper by theSecretariat in order to facilitate the considera-tion of the question by the Assembly's FourthCommittee, and, subject to any directives whichthe General Assembly might give in that con-


27 Ibid.


nexion, to give consideration to the subjectthe following year.

On 2 December 1969, the Chairman informedthe Special Committee that the Secretary-General had received from the Permanent Rep-resentative of Spain a reply dated 17 Novemberto his note of 10 January 1969. In his letter,the Permanent Representative stated that hisGovernment was firmly in favour of applyingthe principle of self-determination to the Saharaand reiterated the offer concerning the pos-sibility of a visit to the territory. He added thatthis offer must, however, be interpreted in thesame terms in which it was made and withoutforgetting that the express desires of the Saharanpopulation ought to take priority over any otherconsideration.


The questions of Ifni and Spanish Saharawere considered by the General Assembly at itstwenty-fourth (1969) session, where the discus-sion took place primarily in the Fourth Com-mittee.

IFNIDuring the discussion of Ifni, Spain and

Morocco noted that Ifni had been returnedin full sovereignty to Morocco as a result of theTreaty of Fez concluded between the twocountries. The representatives of Barbados,Lebanon, Mauritania, Pakistan, Sudan, andTrinidad and Tobago, among others, expressedtheir satisfaction that the question had beenamicably resolved between the two parties.

On 16 December 1969, at a plenary meet-ing, the General Assembly on the recommenda-tion of its Fourth Committee took note of theretrocession of Ifni, on 30 June 1969, to theGovernment of Morocco.

SPANISH SAHARA

With regard to Spanish Sahara, the rep-resentative of Mauritania stated that the ter-ritory, which was situated within the geograph-ical limits of Mauritania, was inhabited solelyby Moorish tribes whose culture and customswere similar to those of other tribes living innorth-western Mauritania.

As early as 1957, he observed, reference had

been made to the concept of an economic andspiritual greater Mauritania, a term not incontradiction to the application of the principleof self-determination to the people of the region.

Mauritania urged the administering powerto hold prior consultations in order to determinethe procedures for a referendum in the ter-ritory which, he thought, should take intoaccount all those procedures mentioned in theUnited Nations decisions and, in particular, thedispatch of a United Nations mission toparticipate in the referendum.

The representative of Morocco rejected theMauritanian representative's assertion thatSpanish Sahara was part of a greater Mauri-tania. In fact, he said, Mauritania had putforward territorial claims only after Moroccohad laid claims to the territory. The questionof Spanish Sahara was a dispute that Spain andMorocco were trying to settle by peaceful means,and which Morocco wished to solve withoutwasting time, he said. In this connexion therepresentative of Morocco regretted that theSpanish Government, which had endorsed theprinciples contained in a General Assemblydecision of 20 December 1966,28 had since madeseveral reservations with regard to its im-plementation, in particular with respect to thesending of a United Nations mission to the ter-ritory. In the view of the Moroccan rep-resentative, there was a contradiction betweenSpain's vote in favour of the above-mentionedresolution and the administrative, military,political and legal measures it was taking in theterritory. Consequently, Morocco urged Spainto implement the resolution in good faith andto apply the principles that would ensure theself-determination of the people of the Sahara.

In reply, the representative of Spain said thatsuch measures as had been taken by Spain inthe territory were designed to increase the in-habitants' awareness of their political destinyand to encourage them to play a more activepart in the management of their affairs. To thatend, he said, elections had been held in orderto improve the representative character of pub-lic institutions. The Spanish Government firmly

28 See Y.U.N., 1966, p. 592, text of resolution2229(XXI).


upheld the application of the principle of self-determination and considered the wishes of theindigenous population as decisive. Spain's soleobjective, he said, was to give the inhabitantsof the territory an opportunity, by exercisingtheir right to self-determination, to decide tohave a Government of their own if they sodesired.

During the discussion, Algeria, Ghana, Syriaand Yemen urged Spain to give the people ofthe territory an opportunity to exercise theirright to self-determination. The representativeof Algeria added that interference by outsidefinancial interests would be incompatible withthe rights of the people concerned and that careshould be taken to prevent such interference.

On 16 December 1969, at a plenary meet-ing, the General Assembly, inter alia, reaffirmedthe inalienable right of the people of the so-called Spanish Sahara to self-determination inaccordance with its Declaration of 14 December1960 on granting independence to colonial coun-tries and peoples.29 It regretted that it had notbeen possible for the consultations to take placewhich the administering power was to conductin connexion with the holding of a referendumin the territory.

The Assembly again invited the administeringpower to determine at the earliest possible date,in conformity with the aspirations of the in-digenous people of the territory and in consulta-tion with the Governments of Mauritania andMorocco and any other interested party, the

procedures for the holding of a referendumwith a view to enabling the indigenous popula-tion to exercise freely its right to self-determina-tion. To this end, the Assembly invited theadministering power to create a favourableclimate for the referendum, to take all thenecessary steps to ensure that only the indigenouspeople of the territory participated in it, tocomply with the resolutions of the Assemblyon the activities of foreign interests operatingin colonial countries, and to provide the neces-sary facilities to a United Nations mission sothat it might be able to participate activelyin the organization and holding of the ref-erendum.

Finally, the Assembly requested the Secretary-General to appoint a special mission and toexpedite its dispatch to the to-called SpanishSahara, and it requested its Special Committeeto continue its consideration of the question.

These decisions were embodied in resolution2591 (XXIV), adopted by a recorded vote of110 to O, with 5 abstentions, on the recommenda-tion of the Assembly's Fourth Committee. TheFourth Committee had approved the text on9 December 1969, by a roll-call vote of 89 toO, with 7 abstentions, on a proposal by Ghana,Iraq, Mali, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal,Syria, Tunisia and Yugoslavia. (For text ofresolution, see DOCUMENTARY REFERENCES be-low. )

29 See footnote 21.


CONSIDERATION BYSPECIAL COMMITTEESpecial Committee on Situation with regard to Imple-

mentation of Declaration on Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, meet-ings 659, 668, 670, 695, 715, 724.


GENERAL ASSEMBLY——24-TH SESSION

Fourth Committee, meetings 1842, 1844, 1850, 1851,1853-1855, 1857-1859, 1862, 1864-1866.

Fifth Committee, meeting 1348.Plenary Meeting 1835.

A/7623/Rev.l. Report of Special Committee (cover-ing its work during 1969), Chapter X.

IFNIA/7896. Report of Fourth Committee, para. 29.

A/7630. Resolutions adopted by General Assemblyduring its 24th session, 16 September-17 December1969. Other decisions, p. 75.

SPANISH SAHARAA/C.4/L.948 and Add.1,2. Ghana, Iraq, Mali, Paki-

stan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Syria, Tunisia, Yugo-slavia: draft resolution, approved by Fourth Com-mittee on 9 December 1969, meeting 1866, by roll-call vote of 89 to O, with 7 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina,Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi,Byelorussian SSR, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada,Central African Republic, Ceylon, Chile, China,Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Cuba,Czechoslovakia, Dahomey, Denmark, Ecuador,Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Finland, Ghana,Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq,Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Kenya,


Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya,Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mauri-tania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco,Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria,Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Romania,Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone,Singapore, Somalia, Southern Yemen, Sudan,Sweden, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad andTobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian SSR,USSR, United Arab Republic, United Kingdom,Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against: None.Abstaining: Australia, France, India, Portugal,

South Africa, Spain, United States.

A/C.4/L.949, A/C.5/1290, A/7898. Administrativeand financial implications of draft resolution Irecommended by Fourth Committee, A/7896. Notesby Secretary-General and report of Fifth Com-mittee.

A/7896. Report of Fourth Committee, draft resolu-tion I.

RESOLUTION 2591 (xxiv). as recommended by FourthCommittee, A/7896, adopted by Assembly on 16December 1969, meeting 1835, by recorded voteof 110 to O, with 5 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina,Austria, Barbados, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bul-garia, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian SSR, Cam-bodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, Chile, China,Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, CostaRica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Dahomey,Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salva-dor, Ethiopia, Finland, Gabon, Ghana, Greece,Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary,Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland,Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan,Kenya, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia,Libya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malay-sia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico,Mongolia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nic-aragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Panama,Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania,Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone,Singapore, Somalia, Southern Yemen, Sudan,Swaziland, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trini-dad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrai-nian SSR, USSR, United Arab Republic, UnitedKingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, UpperVolta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia,Zambia.

Against: None.Abstaining: Australia, France, Portugal, Spain,

United States.

The General Assembly,Having examined the chapter of the report of the

Special Committee on the Situation with regard to theImplementation of the Declaration on the Granting ofIndependence to Colonial Countries and Peoples re-lating to the Territory of the so-called Spanish Sahara,

Recalling its resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December1960 containing the Declaration on the Granting ofIndependence to Colonial Countries and Peoples,

Recalling also the decision concerning the Terri-tories under Spanish administration taken by the As-sembly of Heads of State and Government of theOrganization of African Unity at its third ordinarysession, held at Addis Ababa from 5 to 9 November1966,

Reaffirming its resolutions 2072 (XX) of 16 De-cember 1965, 2229(XXI) of 20 December 1966,2354(XXII) of 19 December 1967 and 2428(XXIII)of 18 December 1968,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the people ofthe so-called Spanish Sahara to self-determinationin accordance with General Assembly resolution1514(XV);

2. Approves the chapter of the report of the Spe-cial Committee on the Situation with regard to theImplementation of the Declaration on the Granting ofIndependence to Colonial Countries and Peoples re-lating to the Territory of the so-called Spanish Sahara;

3. Regrets that it has not yet been possible for theconsultations to take place which the administeringPower was to conduct in connexion with the holdingof a referendum in the so-called Spanish Sahara;

4. Again invites the administering Power to deter-mine at the earliest possible date, in conformity withthe aspirations of the indigenous people of the so-called Spanish Sahara and in consultation with theGovernments of Mauritania and Morocco and anyother interested party, the procedures for the holdingof a referendum under United Nations auspices witha view to enabling the indigenous population of theTerritory to exercise freely its right to self-determina-tion and, to this end:

(a) To create a favourable climate for the refer-endum to be conducted on an entirely free, democraticand impartial basis by permitting, inter alia, thereturn of exiles to the Territory;

( b ) To take all the necessary steps to ensure thatonly the indigenous people of the Territory participatein the referendum;

(c) To comply with the resolutions of the GeneralAssembly on the activities of foreign economic andother interests operating in colonial countries andTerritories and to refrain from any action likely todelay the process of the decolonization of the so-calledSpanish Sahara;

(d) To provide all the necessary facilities to aUnited Nations mission so that it may be able to par-ticipate actively in the organization and holding of thereferendum;

5. Requests the Secretary-General, in consultationwith the administering Power and the Special Com-mittee, to appoint immediately the special missionprovided for in paragraph 5 of General Assemblyresolution 2229(XXI) and to expedite its dispatchto the so-called Spanish Sahara for the purpose ofrecommending practical steps for the full implementa-tion of the relevant General Assembly resolutions, andin particular for determining the extent of UnitedNations participation in the preparation and super-


vision of the referendum and submitting a report tothe Secretary-General for transmission to the GeneralAssembly at its twenty-fifth session;

6. Requests the Special Committee to continue its

consideration of the situation in the Territory of theso-called Spanish Sahara and to report thereon to theGeneral Assembly at its twenty-fifth session.

Other Territories

In 1969, in addition to the territories coveredin the preceding sections, the General Assemblyand its Special Committee on the Situationwith regard to the Implementation of the Dec-laration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Countries and Peoples considered thesituations in the following territories: AmericanSamoa, Antigua, the Bahamas, Bermuda, theBritish Virgin Islands, Brunei, the CaymanIslands, the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Dominica,the Gilbert and Ellice Islands, Grenada, Guam,Montserrat, the New Hebrides, Niue, Pitcairn,St. Helena, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Lucia,St. Vincent, the Seychelles, the Solomon Islands,the Tokelau Islands, the Turks and CaicosIslands and the United States Virgin Islands.

The Special Committee, after having referredthese 25 territories to its Sub-Committees I, IIand III for consideration and report, adoptedthe Sub-Committees' reports on all but one ofthe territories and endorsed their conclusionsand recommendations, in most instances on theunderstanding that any reservations made bymembers of the Special Committee would beincluded in the meeting records.

In the case of Brunei, the Special Committeetook note of its Sub-Committee's report anddecided to transmit to the General Assemblythe working paper on the territory and, subjectto any directive that the General Assembly mightgive, to consider the question of Brunei in 1970.

The General Assembly, among several otherdecisions, reaffirmed the inalienable right of thepeoples of the 25 territories to self-determina-tion and independence and urged the admin-istering powers to permit access by visiting mis-sions to the territories under their administration.

The situations in British Honduras and HongKong were considered by the Special Com-mittee at plenary sessions. It decided to transmitto the General Assembly the working papers onthese territories and, subject to any directivesthe General Assembly might give, to considerthe items in 1970.

In addition, during 1969, both the Assemblyand its Special Committee considered the situa-tions in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islandsand in Papua and the Trust Territory of NewGuinea. (For details, see pp. 609-20 above.)


The Special Committee heard the followingpetitioners in 1969: W. G. Brown, concerningBermuda; W. R. L. Friday, concerning Gre-nada; Jeremiah Gumbs, concerning St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla; E. T. Joshua and Frank Rojas,concerning St. Vincent.

ANTIGUA, DOMINICA, GRENADA,

ST. LUCIA, ST. KITTS-NEVIS-ANGUILLA,

AND ST. VINCENT

On 19 March 1969, the Special Committeedecided to take up the question of St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla as a matter of urgency after apetitioner, Jeremiah Gumbs, had informed itthat the people of Anguilla had decided byreferendum on a new constitution which sev-ered connexions with St. Kitts and with theUnited Kingdom (the administering power)and which made Anguilla an independentrepublic. The petitioner also said that theUnited Kingdom had sent warships withparatroopers and police to Anguilla, and herequested the Committee to send a mission tothe island.

The representatives of the United Kingdomand the United States opposed the granting ofa hearing to Mr. Gumbs on the grounds thatSt. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla had achieved a fullmeasure of self-government in 1967; since then,they said, the territory had not fallen withinthe scope of Chapter XI of the United NationsCharter30 and its affairs no longer lay withinthe competence of the Special Committee.

30 For text of Chapter XI of the Charter, seeAPPENDIX II.


Following consideration, the Special Com-mittee decided it was necessary to send urgentlya visiting group of the Special Committee toAnguilla and requested the Government of theUnited Kingdom to provide all necessary facil-ities for this purpose. The Special Committeefurther decided to keep developments concern-ing the territory under review.

The Special Committee's decisions were takenby consensus on 21 March 1969.

The representative of the United Kingdomdid not participate in the meetings on thisquestion, and the representative of the UnitedStates dissociated the United States from theconsensus.

In October 1969, when the Special Com-mittee adopted the report of Sub-CommitteeIII concerning Antigua, Dominica, Grenada,St. Lucia, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla and St.Vincent and endorsed the conclusions andrecommendations contained therein, it re-affirmed that the Declaration on the Grantingof Independence to Colonial Countries andPeoples31 fully applied to the territories.

The paragraph of the report to this effectwas adopted by 18 votes to O, with 3 abstentions.The United Kingdom did not participate inthe vote. The report as a whole was adoptedby 18 votes to 4.

In its conclusions and recommendations, theSpecial Committee, inter alia, expressed its regretthat the administering power had not respondedor acceded to its urgent request to send avisiting mission to Anguilla. It took note of thedevelopments in St. Vincent and requested theadministering power to receive immediately aUnited Nations visiting mission to the territoryand allow its people free expression of viewson their future status before any decision con-cerning the new constitutional arrangementswas made.

The Special Committee also expressed itsregret that the administering power had refusedto co-operate with the Sub-Committee in itsefforts to obtain information concerning devel-opments in the territories, and it reiterated itsrequest that immediate measures be taken totransfer all powers to the peoples concerned,without any conditions and in accordance withtheir freely expressed will. Once again theadministering power was urged to enable the

United Nations to send a visiting mission to theterritories.

In the discussion preceding the adoption ofthese conclusions and recommendations, therepresentative of the United Kingdom outlinedthe constitutional development which had takenplace in St. Vincent whereby it would accedeto a new constitutional status of full-self-govern-ment and association with the United Kingdomon 27 October 1969.

The status of St. Vincent under the newarrangements, he said, would differ from theprevious colonial relationship in three importantways:

First, St. Vincent would have, as from 27October, full and unqualified powers in its owninternal affairs, including the right to amendits own Constitution without even a theoretitcalpower of intervention on the part of the Govern-ment of the United Kingdom.

Second, the United Kingdom Governmentand Parliament would surrender all their powersand responsibilities in relation to St. Vincentexcept in the narrow and carefully definedspheres of external affairs and defence, withinwhich it had been agreed that the United King-dom should retain responsibilities.

Third, St. Vincent would be free at anytime to proceed unilaterally to independenceor to any other status, subject only to theprocedures set out in the Constitution, and there-by to sever association with the United King-dom without the approval of the United King-dom.

He also pointed out that the new arrange-ments for St. Vincent had been worked outthrough the fullest and most exhaustive con-sultations with the people of St. Vincent, in-cluding their elected representatives of allparties; that, despite ample and abundantopportunity for alternative status proposals tobe canvassed and presented to the people ofSt. Vincent, no such proposals had emerged;and that statehood in association with theUnited Kingdom commanded general consensusamong the people of St. Vincent.

Therefore, when St. Vincent attained thisfull measure of self-government on 27 October,

31 See Y.U.N., 1960, pp. 49-50, resolution 1514(XV), containing text of Declaration.


the United Kingdom representative said, therewould have been a full and final discharge ofthe United Kingdom's obligations under Chap-ter XI of the United Nations Charter, and St.Vincent would thereby have been effectivelydecolonized.

The views of the United Kingdom were sup-ported by the representatives of Italy, Norwayand the United States who reiterated theirprevious statements to the effect that Antigua,Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla,and St. Lucia had exercised their right of self-determination, in conformity with the Charter,and that St. Vincent was about to do the same.They would therefore vote against the report.

Most Special Committee members, however,supported the report. Bulgaria, Iran, Mali, theUSSR, the United Republic of Tanzania, andVenezuela pointed out that the United King-dom had not followed the procedures requiredby the United Nations for the decolonizationof territories and that it was not for the UnitedKingdom to decide unilaterally on what pro-cedures should be followed. They had greatdoubts about the wishes of the peoples of theseterritories, and the only way to ascertain themwas for a mission from the Special Committeeto visit the territories.

SEYCHELLES AND ST. HELENA

On 19 June 1969, the Special Committeeadopted the conclusions and recommendationscontained in the report of Sub-Committee Iconcerning the Seychelles and St. Helena. Itregretted that the administering power (UnitedKingdom) had not taken sufficient steps toimplement the Declaration on the granting ofindependence, and called upon it to take thenecessary steps to transfer powers to freely electedrepresentatives of the peoples.

The Special Committee noted that duringDecember 1968 and March 1969 there had beengovernmental crises in the Seychelles created bythe withdrawal of elected members of the Gov-erning Council from the Council's meetings,and that demonstrations had occurred in theterritory to demand an end to colonial rule;it noted also that a Minister of the Governmentof the United Kingdom would visit the Sey-chelles to discuss ideas of constitutional changesand other matters.

The Special Committee reiterated its positionthat any plans by the United Kingdom andthe United States to construct military basesin the so-called "Indian Ocean Territory" wouldheighten tension in Africa and Asia, and iturged the administering power to respect theterritorial integrity of the Seychelles by return-ing the islands administratively detached fromit in 1965.

Deep concern was expressed by the SpecialCommittee at the infiltration of South Africaninterests into certain key economic sectors ofSt. Helena and it noted the action of the admin-istering power in securing an agreement wherebythe government of St. Helena would have acontrolling interest in one of the companiesconcerned. The Committee drew attention,however, to the fact that overriding powersrested not with the government but with theGovernor, who was directly responsible to theUnited Kingdom Government, and it expressedconcern that South African interests would havea substantial share in the company. The Com-mittee called upon the administering power totake more effective steps to prevent infiltrationby foreign economic interests and settlers intothe territories of the Seychelles and St. Helena,particularly those from South Africa.

Finally, it called upon the administeringpower to enter into consultation with the Spe-cial Committee in order to make arrangementsfor a visiting mission to the Seychelles as soonas possible.

Reservations concerning these conclusions andrecommendations were expressed by the rep-resentatives of the United Kingdom and theUnited States.

GILBERT AND ELLICE ISLANDS,

PITCAIRN AND THE SOLOMON ISLANDS

In adopting conclusions and recommenda-tions concerning the Gilbert and Ellice Islands,Pitcairn and the Solomon Islands, on 3 July1969, the Special Committee reiterated its viewthat executive responsibility should be trans-ferred to the representatives of those territoriesand more powers granted to the electedrepresentatives of the people, in accordance withthe Declaration on granting independence.32

32 Ibid.


Recalling that the right of peoples and nationsto self-determination included permanentsovereignty over their natural wealth andresources, the Special Committee expressed thehope that the review envisaged by the admin-istering power (United Kingdom) of the ar-rangements made for extracting phosphates onOcean Island (Gilbert and Ellice Islands) wouldbe undertaken in the very near future and thatit would take account of the interests of thepeople of the territory.

While noting the statement of the admin-istering power that any form of discriminationon the basis of colour was contrary to theConstitution of the Gilbert and Ellice Islands,the Special Committee requested the admin-istering power to ensure that such legislationwas made fully effective in practice.

Finally, the administering power was urgedagain to allow a sub-committee to visit theterritories.


NIUE AND TOKELAU ISLANDS

Also on 3 July 1969, the Special Committeeendorsed its Sub-Committee's report on Niue andthe Tokelau Islands and welcomed the reportof the administering power (New Zealand)that, as at 1 November 1968, at the request ofthe Niue Assembly, a full-member system ofgovernment had been introduced, under whichthe Executive Committee had taken overresponsibility for those government departmentspreviously controlled by the Resident Com-missioner. The Special Committee requestedthe administering power, in consultation withthe people of the territory, to ensure thespeedy implementation of the Declaration onthe granting of independence.

The Special Committee took note of the will-ingness of the administering power in principleto receive a visiting mission in the territories,but did not share the administering power's viewthat the costs involved would not justify thevisit unless it formed part of a wider tour ofterritories in the area. In the Special Com-mittee's view, it was up to the United Nationsto assess the feasibility of such missions.

Also, the Special Committee maintained thatsuch assistance in the economic development ofthe territories as the administering power hadstated was being carried out under the auspicesof the United Nations and its specializedagencies was particularly useful in decreasingthe territories' dependence on the administer-ing power; it expressed the hope that the as-sistance would continue to be sought.


NEW HEBRIDES

The Special Committee, also on 3 July 1969,adopted conclusions and recommendationsconcerning the New Hebrides, and regretted thatFrance, one of the two administering powers ofthat condominium (the other being the UnitedKingdom), had not thus far participated in thework of the Committee concerning the territoryor supplied it with supplementary informationso as to assist it in formulating conclusions andrecommendations. In this regard, the SpecialCommittee appealed to the Government ofFrance to reconsider its position.

Noting the increase in the number of un-official members in the territory's AdvisoryCouncil, the Special Committee neverthelessstated that no fully representative institutionswere in the New Hebrides and progress inconstitutional development was slow. It regrettedthat the administering powers (United King-dom and France) had no proposals for thespeedy implementation of the Declaration onthe granting of independence in the NewHebrides, and urged those powers to providefor such implementation on the basis of theprinciple of universal suffrage by taking im-mediate steps to introduce representative polit-ical institutions and executive machinery inconformity with the principles of the UnitedNations Charter and the provisions of the Dec-laration.

The Special Committee reiterated its recom-mendations that advancement in the economic,social and educational fields be intensified withthe active participation of representatives of thepeople and that the advice and assistance of thespecialized agencies be sought in formulating


and implementing plans. Finally, it urged theadministering powers again to allow a sub-com-mittee to visit the territory.

Reservations were expressed by the represen-tatives of the United Kingdom and the UnitedStates.

GUAM AND

AMERICAN SAMOA

On 3 July 1969, the Special Committee alsoapproved the report of its Sub-Committee IIconcerning Guam and American Samoa andendorsed the conclusions and recommendationscontained therein. It noted the steps being takento expand and diversify the economy of Guam,but considered that the economy continued torevolve around the existence of military basesin the territory, and that this situation affectedthe process of decolonization; it was of the viewthat Guam's dependence on military activitiesshould be brought to an end.

Full participation by the local inhabitants ineconomic development was desirable, if suchdevelopment were to be truly in their interest,the Committee noted, and it stated it wouldwelcome information concerning the ownershipof new industries in both territories.

While recent constitutional developmentsrepresented a step towards self-government,especially in Guam, they tended in both ter-ritories to perpetuate association with the admin-istering power (United States), the Committeefelt. The United States was urged to allow asub-committee to visit the territories.

Reservations were expressed by the represen-tatives of the USSR, the United Kingdom,the United States and Venezuela.

BAHAMAS, BERMUDA, BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS,

CAYMAN ISLANDS, MONTSERRAT, TURKS AND

CAICOS ISLANDS AND UNITED STATES

VIRGIN ISLANDS

On 2 October 1969, the Special Committeeendorsed the conclusions and recommendationsof Sub-Committee III on several Caribbean ter-ritories.

Thus, with respect to the United States VirginIslands, the Special Committee noted withregret that despite certain advances in thepolitical field, no significant constitutionalprogress had taken place in the territory since

its situation was last examined. The SpecialCommittee invited the administering power toensure that the people should exercise theirright to self-determination in full knowledgeof the alternatives open to them in their achieve-ment of the objectives of the Declaration on thegranting of independence, and it again urged theadministering power to enable the UnitedNations to send a visiting mission to the ter-ritory.

With respect to Bermuda, the Special Com-mittee noted with regret that no significantconstitutional progress towards the implementa-tion of the Declaration had taken place, and itexpressed concern over the racial inequalitiesand discrimination prevailing in the territory.It called upon the administering power (UnitedKingdom) to take effective measures, in addi-tion to the legislative measures which had beenintroduced, to ensure that the people of theterritory were given equal opportunities with-out any distinction, and it invited the admin-istering power to encourage public discussionon the various alternatives open to the peoplein their achievement of the objectives of theDeclaration. Once again the administeringpower was urged to enable the United Nationsto send a visiting mission to the territory ofBermuda.

With regard to the Bahamas, the Committeeexpressed its regret that despite some advance-ment in the political field the administeringpower (United Kingdom) had failed further toimplement the provisions of the Declarationwith respect to the territory. It took note of thenew Constitution which had come into effect inMay 1969 and called upon the administeringpower to take immediate measures to transferall powers to the people of the territory, withoutany conditions or reservations, in accordancewith their freely expressed will and desire, inorder to enable them to enjoy complete freedomand independence. Once again it urged theadministering power to enable the United Na-tions to send a visiting mission to the territory.

In the conclusions and recommendationsadopted concerning the British Virgin Islands,the Special Committee noted, with regret, thatno constitutional progress had taken place inthe territory and took note of the statement bythe Chief Minister of the territory that the gov-

ernment of the British Virgin Islands wasopposed to any idea of association with otherCommonwealth Caribbean territories. TheSpecial Committee expressed its concern overthe large flow of immigrants into the territoryand requested the administering power to takeeffective measures in order to control suchimmigration in accordance with the expressedwishes of the people. Again it urged the UnitedKingdom to allow a visiting mission into theterritory.

The Special Committee also adopted con-clusions and recommendations with regard tothe Turks and Caicos Islands, the CaymanIslands and Montserrat, reiterating in particularits request to the administering power (UnitedKingdom) to take immediate measures totransfer all powers to the people and to allowa visiting mission into the territories.

cocos (KEELING) ISLANDSIn adopting the conclusions and recommend-

ations of its Sub-Committee concerning theCocos (Keeling) Islands, which territory wasconsidered in conjunction with Papua and theTrust Territory of New Guinea (see pp. 613-20),the Special Committee, inter alia, urged theadministering power (Australia) to reconsiderits position concerning visiting missions to theterritory.


Later in 1969, at its twenty-fourth session,the General Assembly took up the Special Com-mittee's report on the territories.

On 16 December 1969, the General Assembly,in addition to approving the chapters of thereport of the Special Committee relating tothe territories, reaffirmed the inalienable rightof the peoples of the territories of AmericanSamoa, Antigua, the Bahamas, Bermuda, theBritish Virgin Islands, Brunei, the CaymanIslands, the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Domi-nica, the Gilbert and Ellice Islands, Grenada,Guam, Montserrat, the New Hebrides, Niue,Pitcairn, St. Helena, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla,St. Lucia, St. Vincent, the Seychelles, the Solo-mon Islands, the Tokelau Islands, the Turksand Caicos Islands and the United States VirginIslands to self-determination and independence,

671and called upon the administering powers toimplement without delay the relevant resolu-tions of the General Assembly.

The Assembly expressed its conviction thatthe questions of territorial size, geographicalisolation and limited resources should in no waydelay the implementation of the Declarationon the granting of independence, and itreiterated its declaration that any attempt aimedat the disruption of the national unity and ter-ritorial integrity of the territories and theestablishment of military bases and installationswas incompatible with the purposes andprinciples of the United Nations Charter andthe Assembly resolution of 14 December 1960on the granting of independence.33

In taking these decisions, the General As-sembly expressed deep concern at the policy ofsome of the administering powers in establishingand maintaining military bases in some of theterritories under their administration, deploredthe attitude of those administering powers thatcontinued to refuse to allow United Nationsvisiting missions to visit the territories undertheir administration, and stated that it wasaware of the special circumstances of thegeographical location and economic conditionsof those territories.

Finally, the Assembly urged the administeringpowers to reconsider their attitude towardsreceiving visiting missions, decided that theUnited Nations should render all help to thepeoples of the territories in their efforts todecide their future status, and requested theSpecial Committee to continue to pay particularattention to these territories.

These decisions were embodied in resolution2592 (XXIV), adopted at a plenary meetingof the Assembly on 16 December 1969, bya recorded vote of 88 to 1, with 26 abstentions.It was adopted on the recommendation of theAssembly's Fourth Committee, which had ap-proved the text by a vote of 68 to 1, with 22abstentions, on 12 December 1969, on a proposalby India, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Sudan, Uganda,the United Republic of Tanzania, Yugoslaviaand Zambia. (For text of resolution, see DOCU-MENTARY REFERENCES below.)

33 Ibid.

DECLARATION ON INDEPENDENCE FOR COLONIAL COUNTRIES AND PEOPLES


An oral amendment proposed by the UnitedStates to delete the paragraph declaring thatany attempt aimed at the disruption of thenational unity and the territorial integrity ofcolonial territories and the establishment ofmilitary bases and installations in these ter-ritories was incompatible with the purposes andprinciples of the Charter and of the Declarationon the granting of independence was rejectedby the Fourth Committee by a vote of 51 to 18,with 19 abstentions.

An oral amendment proposed by the UnitedKingdom to delete the references to the ter-ritories of Antigua, Dominica, Grenada, St.Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Lucia and St. Vincentfrom the title and from the text of the draftresolution was rejected by the Fourth Com-mittee by a roll-call vote of 59 to 20, with 17abstentions.

In a related decision, also taken on 16 De-cember 1969, the General Assembly decided totransmit, for the close attention of the SpecialCommittee, the records of the Fourth Com-mittee covering the debate on the question ofAntigua, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Lucia and St. Vincent, and in par-ticular the draft resolution submitted by Bar-bados, Guyana, Jamaica and Trinidad andTobago. The Assembly also requested the SpecialCommittee to consider the views expressed dur-ing the debate and in that draft resolution andto report thereon to the Assembly at its 1970session. (The draft resolution referred to wouldhave had the Assembly recognize that the presentconstitutional arrangements made provision forthese territories to terminate the existing rela-tionship with the United Kingdom and toproceed to full independence as separate States,or in association with independent countries ofthe region, or in a political association amongthemselves. It would also have had the As-sembly affirm its support for any such measuresthat the people of these territories might them-selves choose.)

The decision to transmit the records and thedraft resolution was embodied in resolution2593 (XXIV), adopted by the Assembly by arecorded vote of 90 to O, with 22 abstentions,on the recommendation of the Fourth Com-mittee, which had approved a revised text on12 December 1969 by a vote of 63 to O, with

26 abstentions, on a proposal of Ghana andNigeria. (For text of resolution, see DOCUMEN-TARY REFERENCES below.)

During the Assembly's discussions on thesituation in these territories, which took placemainly in the Assembly's Fourth Committee, anumber of representatives reiterated that nosubstantial progress had been achieved in theprocess of decolonization, owing to the opposi-tion of the administering powers. They criticizedthe refusal of these powers to allow the smallterritories to exercise their right of independ-ence and self-determination, irrespective of size,or of economic, geographical, demographic andother factors.

The "associated status" of certain territorieswas criticized by several members, includingHungary, India, the Ukrainian SSR and theUnited Republic of Tanzania. The represen-tative of Hungary pointed out that the colonialpowers continued to take measures to strengthentheir positions in the small territories, despitethe relevant decisions of the General Assembly.The representative of the United Republic ofTanzania criticized the United Kingdom forgranting associated status to former colonieswithout a real change of conditions in the ter-ritories. The representative of India stated thatit was unfortunate to note that an administer-ing power had changed the status of a territoryfrom that of a colony to that of an associatedstate without allowing the United Nations tosend an observer to the territory, and despitea specific request by the Special Committee tothat effect. In doing so, the administering powerhad left the United Nations in doubt and hadaggravated the problem, which might otherwisehave been satisfactorily resolved.

Several members, including Chile, theDemocratic Republic of the Congo, Czechoslo-vakia, Hungary, India, Sudan, the USSR andthe United Republic of Tanzania referred to theestablishment or continued existence of militarybases maintained by administering powers insmall territories, and called for their removal.The representative of the Democratic Republicof the Congo pointed out in this connexion thatthe presence of military bases in the territoriesled to a lack of diversification of their economiesand tended to imperil the exercise of a freechoice concerning the future of the territories.


Some members, including Barbados, Chile,Hungary, Poland and Romania, reiterated thatthe United Nations had always stressed the im-portance and usefulness of sending visitingmissions to the territories to obtain first-handinformation on the situation and on the viewsof the inhabitants concerning their future. Therepresentative of Romania pointed out that onlya few administering powers were willing toaccept United Nations visiting missions, whereasthe other administering powers were preventingthe General Assembly from gaining a clearerunderstanding of the feelings, aspirations andneeds of the people of the territories.

Speaking in reply, the representative of theUnited Kingdom referred to the considerableexperience of his country in the field of decoloniz-ation, and reiterated the point of view of hisGovernment, according to which the statusof independence was perfectly compatible withcontinued activities by United Kingdom enter-prises in the territories on mutually beneficialterms. He also emphasized that in determiningits policies, the United Kingdom considered thewishes of the people to be of paramount impor-tance. The United Kingdom did not intend todelay independence for the territories thatwanted it, nor did it intend to force independ-ence upon those not wanting it. If there wereterritories under United Kingdom administra-tion not in the process of moving towards in-dependence, it was simply because the indige-nous inhabitants had no desire for independenceat the present time.

During the discussion, three draft resolutionswere submitted to the Fourth Committee. Twowere approved by the Committee and lateradopted by the Assembly at a plenary meeting(see above).

The third draft resolution concerned the ter-ritories of Antigua, Dominica, Grenada, St.Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Lucia and St. Vincent,and was submitted by Barbados, Guyana, Ja-maica and Trinidad and Tobago. By its oper-ative paragraphs, the General Assembly wouldhave recognized that the current constitutionalarrangements made provision for Antigua, Do-minica, Grenada, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St.Lucia and St. Vincent to terminate the existingrelationship with the United Kingdom and toproceed to full independence as separate Statesor in association with independent countries ofthe region, or in a political association amongthemselves; and would have affirmed the As-sembly's support for any such measures that thepeople of Antigua, Dominica, Grenada, St.Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Lucia and St. Vincentmight themselves choose to adopt, pursuant tothese constitutional arrangements, to terminatetheir relationship with the United Kingdom.

The sponsors of this four-power draft resolu-tion decided not to press it to a vote when theFourth Committee approved the draft resolu-tion, later adopted as resolution 2593 (XXIV),which requested the Special Committee to con-sider the views expressed during the FourthCommittee debate and in the four-power draftresolution.


Special Committee on Situation with regard to Imple-mentation of Declaration on Granting of Inde-pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, meet-ings 659-663, 667-670, 699, 700, 702, 704-709,712,716-719.


General Committee, meeting 181.Fourth Committee, meetings 1844, 1850, 1851, 1853-

1860, 1862, 1864-1866, 1868-1871, 1869-1871.Plenary Meetings 1753, 1821, 1822, 1824-1826, 1829,

1835, 1838.


A/7623/Rev.l. Report of Special Committee (cover-ing its work during 1969). Chapter I, sections D-G

and Annex II; Chapter IX: Seychelles and St.Helena; Chapter XV: Gilbert and Ellice Islands,Pitcairn and Solomon Islands; Chapter XVI: Niueand Tokelau Islands; Chapter XVII: New Heb-rides; Chapter XVIII: Guam and AmericanSamoa; Chapter XIX: Trust Territory of PacificIslands; Chapter XX: Papua and Trust Territoryof New Guinea, and Cocos (Keeling) Islands;Chapter XXI: Brunei; Chapter XXII: HongKong; Chapter XXIII: Antigua, Dominica, Gre-nada, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Lucia and St.Vincent; Chapter XXIV: United States VirginIslands; Chapter XXV: Bermuda; Chapter XXVI:Bahamas; Chapter XXVII: Turks and CaicosIslands; Chapter XXVIII: Cayman Islands; Chap-ter XXIX: Montserrat; Chapter XXX: BritishVirgin Islands; and Chapter XXXII: BritishHonduras.


A/7696. Letter of 6 October 1969 from UnitedKingdom.

A/G.4/L.953. India, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Sudan,Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Yugoslavia,Zambia: draft resolution, approved by FourthCommittee on 12 December 1969, meeting 1871,by 68 votes to 1, with 22 abstentions.

A/7896. Report of Fourth Committee, draft resolu-tion IL

RESOLUTION 2592(xxrv), as recommended by FourthCommittee, A/7896, adopted by Assembly on 16December 1969, meeting 1835, by recorded vote of88 to 1, with 26 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina,Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelo-russian SSR, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chad, Chile,Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, CostaRica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Dahomey,Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Gabon,Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Hun-gary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel,Ivory Coast, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Laos, Leba-non, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi,Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius,Mexico, Mongolia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Ni-geria, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Poland,Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, SierraLeone, Somalia, Southern Yemen, Spain, Sudan,Swaziland, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey,Ukrainian SSR, USSR, United Arab Republic,United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uru-guay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia.

Against: Uganda.*Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Barbados, Bel-

gium, Canada, China, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland,France, Guyana, Iceland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan,Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,Paraguay, Portugal, Singapore, Sweden, Trinidadand Tobago, United Kingdom, United States.

* Subsequently the representative of Uganda in-formed the Secretariat that his delegation had in-tended to vote in favour.

The General Assembly,Having considered the question of American Samoa,

Antigua, Bahamas, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands,Brunei, Cayman Islands, Cocos (Keeling) Islands,Dominica, Gilbert and Ellice Islands, Grenada, Guam,Montserrat, New Hebrides, Niue, Pitcairn, St. Helena,St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, Sey-chelles, Solomon Islands, Tokelau Islands, Turks andCaicos Islands and the United States Virgin Islands,

Having examined the chapters of the report of theSpecial Committee on the Situation with regard to theImplementation of the Declaration on the Granting ofIndependence to Colonial Countries and Peoples relat-ing to these Territories,

Recalling its resolution 1514(XV) of 14 December1960 containing the Declaration on the Granting ofIndependence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, andother relevant resolutions,

Deeply concerned at the policy of some of the ad-

ministering Powers in establishing and maintainingmilitary bases in some of the Territories under theiradministration, in contravention of the relevant Gen-eral Assembly resolutions,

Deploring the attitude of those administering Pow-ers which continue to refuse to allow United Nationsvisiting missions to visit the Territories under theiradministration,

Reaffirming the vital importance of visiting missionsas a means of securing adequate and first-hand infor-mation regarding political, economic and social condi-tions in the Territories and the views, wishes andaspirations of the people in those Territories,

Conscious that these Territories require the contin-ued attention and assistance of the United Nations inthe achievement by their peoples of the objectives em-bodied in the Charter of the United Nations and inthe Declaration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Countries and Peoples,

Aware of the special circumstances of the geograph-ical location and economic conditions of these Terri-tories,

1. Approves the chapters of the report of theSpecial Committee on the Situation with regard to theImplementation of the Declaration on the Granting ofIndependence to Colonial Countries and Peoples re-lating to these Territories;

2. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples ofthese Territories to self-determination and independ-ence in accordance with the Declaration on theGranting of Independence to Colonial Countries andPeoples, contained in General Assembly resolution1514(XV);

3. Calls upon the administering Powers to imple-ment without delay the relevant resolutions of theGeneral Assembly;

4. Expresses its conviction that the questions ofterritorial size, geographical isolation and limited re-sources should in no way delay the implementation ofthe Declaration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Countries and Peoples with respect to theseTerritories;

5. Reiterates its declaration that any attempt aimedat the partial or total disruption of the national unityand the territorial integrity of colonial Territories andthe establishment of military bases and installations inthese Territories is incompatible with the purposes andprinciples of the Charter of the United Nations and ofresolution 1514 (XV);

6. Strongly urges the administering Powers to re-consider their attitude towards the receiving of visit-ing missions to the above-mentioned Territories andto permit access by such visiting missions to Terri-tories under their administration;

7. Decides that the United Nations should renderall help to the peoples of these Territories in theirefforts freely to decide their future status;

8. Requests the Special Committee to continue topay special attention to these Territories and to reportto the General Assembly at its twenty-fifth session onthe implementation of the present resolution.

A/7623/Rev.l. Report of Special Committee (cover-

THE QUESTION OF NAMIBIA 675

ing its work during 1969). Chapter XXIII: An-tigua, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla,St. Lucia and St. Vincent.

A/C.4/725. Letter of 28 November 1969 from UnitedKingdom.

A/G.4/L.958 and Rev.l. Barbados, Guyana, Jamaica,Trinidad and Tobago: draft resolution and revision.

A/C.4/L.963. Ghana and Nigeria: draft resolution,as orally revised by sponsors, adopted by FourthCommittee on 12 December 1969, meeting 1871, by63 votes to O, with 26 abstentions.

A/7896. Report of Fourth Committee, draft resolu-tion III.

RESOLUTION 2593 (xxiv), as recommended by FourthCommittee, A/7896, adopted by Assembly on 16December 1969, meeting 1835, by recorded vote of90 to O, with 22 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Argentina, Austria,Barbados, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma,Byelorussian SSR, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada,Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Democratic Repub-lic of Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czecho-slovakia, Dahomey, Denmark, Dominican Repub-lic, El Salvador, Finland, Gabon, Ghana, Greece,Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland,Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan,Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Lesotho,Liberia, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malay-sia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mex-ico, Mongolia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand,Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Pan-ama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania,

Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sing-apore, Somalia, Spain, Swaziland, Sweden, Thai-land, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, UkrainianSSR, USSR, United Arab Republic, Uruguay,Yemen, Yugoslavia.

Against: None.Abstaining: Algeria, Australia, Burundi, Ecua-

dor, Ethiopia, France, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran,Iraq, Portugal, Southern Yemen, Sudan, Syria,Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic of Tan-zania, United States, Upper Volta, Venezuela.

The General Assembly,Having examined the relevant chapter of the report

of the Special Committee on the Situation with regardto the Implementation of the Declaration on theGranting of Independence to Colonial Countries andPeoples and the relevant resolutions of that Committee,

Recalling its resolution 1514(XV) of 14 Decem-ber 1960, containing the Declaration on the Grantingof Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples,and all other relevant resolutions,

Decides to transmit, for the close attention of theSpecial Committee on the Situation with regard to theImplementation of the Declaration on the Granting ofIndependence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, therecords of the Fourth Committee covering the debateon this question, and in particular the draft resolutionsubmitted by Barbados, Guyana, Jamaica and Trini-dad and Tobago, and requests the Special Committeeto consider the views expressed during the debate andin that draft resolution and to report thereon to theGeneral Assembly at its twenty-fifth session.

CHAPTER III

THE QUESTION OF NAMIBIA

During 1969, the question of Namibia was againconsidered by various United Nations bodies—the Security Council, the United Nations Coun-cil for Namibia, the General Assembly and theAssembly's Special Committee on the Situationwith regard to the Implementation of the Dec-laration on the Granting of Independence toColonial Countries and Peoples.

Various aspects of the question were alsotaken up by the Economic and Social Counciland the Commission on Human Rights.

The Security Council considered the questionof Namibia twice during the year—in Marchand in August—and decided, among other things,that the continued occupation of Namibia bythe South African authorities was an aggressiveencroachment on the authority of the United

Nations, a violation of the territorial integrityof the people of Namibia and a denial of theirpolitical sovereignty. The Council called onSouth Africa to withdraw its administrationfrom the territory immediately.

On 31 October 1969 and again on 1 De-cember 1969, the General Assembly condemnedthe Government of South Africa for its refusalto withdraw from Namibia. The Assembly,among other things, drew the Security Coun-cil's attention to the need to take measures inaccordance with relevant provisions of theUnited Nations Charter to solve the situationthat had arisen as a result of South Africa's re-fusal to withdraw and it asked the Council forNamibia to continue to discharge the functionsentrusted to it.

[ 1969 ] part 1 sec 3 chapter 2 the situation with regard...

Documents